Restricting PCs [Archive] - Wizards Community

Restricting PCs [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants
09-07-07, 05:41 PM I've recently been playing and starting a number of online campaigns and I've decided that I'm running into a problem. This problem is in regards to how the races fit into my world, and where the PCs come from.

In my online campaigns I allowed every race and class in any WotC 3.5 book that I own. This is a lot of them. The campaign was starting in a small village with 90% humans and mostly elves and half-elves as the other races. The NPCs included only Humans, elves, half-elves, 1 dwarf, and a family of halflings. That meant that every "new & interesting" race that somebody wanted to play required me to either have them just show up in the town, which leads to the question of why are all these random things showing up right now, or handwave them as always having been there. Both of these leave a slightly sour taste in my mouth, the first moreso than the second.

What I am thinking of doing in my newest campaign therefore is placing restrictions on which races can start from the city, and then allowing any other races to also exist but not as likely. This means that humans, elves, half-elves, and halflings are open PC races from the beginning. I will also allow anything "mostly" human, things like planetouched, etc, that can "randomly" appear from two entirely human parents.

Anything else that is relatively mundane, that is, well established within the campaign world, will come from some nearby metropolis, with a reason to travel. This includes dwarves, half-orcs, gnomes, goblins, orcs, kobolds, etc.

The final catagory is thsoe unique races that WotC keeps printing, but are never established. Rather than try to justify fitting in all these new races, and trying to explain to everyone where they all are. I will allow "special races" like goliaths, raptorans, etc, to be from small, isolated hamlets that no longer exist. Essentially there would have been only a few hamlets in existence, and the PC does not know where any other ones are. In addition, the PCs reason for leaving the hamlet must be something on par with "it no longer exists." Hopefully this will limit the number of "Why haven't I seen another one?" questions.

Thinking about race like this led me to another question. Where would anybody learn to be a wizard if there are no wizards in town. So I also created a list, based on what can be learned individually or from other town members. I used the PHB, PHBII, all completes, Bo9s, and Incarnum. Within the town Bard, Barbarian, Cleric (of lathander, chauntea, meilikki, auril, talos, tymora, or beshaba), druid, fighter, monk (of lathander), paladin (lathander), ranger, rogue, sorcerer, beguiler, knight, hexblade, warlock, spirit shaman, favored soul (of same as cleric), scout, warblade, swordsage, crusader, totemist, incarnate, & soulborn.

Am I restricitng stuff too much for no reason? Is this ok justification? I am also allowing everyhting else, the player just has to discuss it with me specifically and we have to create a reason.
GoriceXII
09-07-07, 07:35 PM When I do restrictions for a game it is usually because it fits my ideas for the milieu. The way to be cool about it is to be open minded. For instance if a pc of mine had said they really really wanted to play a monk in my game even though I don't really have any ideas about monks in my setting I would consider whether it would mess with things too much to have some kind of order of monks or schools or whatever, and if it did not would sit down with the pc and work that out. This can be really fun--in effect the player could give you a whole new set of ideas, and they get to play the character they want, possibly with more backstory and interest than if they'd just picked the character and run with it.

On the other hand if a character concept just plain doesn't fit, then I would not allow it. For instance in my game there are a lot of mysteries involving elves, and I have made them a lot more mythological than they are often depicted as being. (more out of Irish legend) So I don't allow elves as a player race.

Overall I'd say this: just because it is in the books doesn't mean you have to use it.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants
09-08-07, 12:50 AM I am willing to admit the "random traveler x" but I want to creat some amount of consistency. One problem I see is that if I allow some monastary (for example) to exist that never existed before, then I also have to explain this to the other PCs, which can get confusing, especially in a PbP or introducing new characters.
Neutronium_Dragon
09-08-07, 06:45 AM Erm... this town has all of that - including hexblades, totemists, and swordsages - and not a single wizard to be found? What, did they all leave because it was getting too crowded? ;)

So far I haven't seen much about how this village is situated or what relations it has with others, or what's in the vicinity that might draw the interest of adventuring types (and given all of the classes it *does* have around, something must be bringing them in). That will have at least as much of an impact as the native population as far as who shows up at the place.

You could also look at this from the opposite angle: Given the frequency with which people are asking to play characters who aren't human, elf, half-elf, or halfling, maybe the demographic assumptions of the place could do with some revisions. Why not style it as a crossroads town which is "half way to everywhere" and thus could and would be populated and visited by all kinds of people, including strange ones? It might have a different feel, but it also gives you other opportunities - the politics in a place like that would be rather strange, to say the least.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants
09-08-07, 08:49 AM Its not the fact that the town has all of that, its that most of those don't require any training. How different is the training between a fighter, and most other martial classes? How much training does a beguiler, rogue, or totemist really require? I was trying to be open with allowing a lot of classes from books I own, without allowing everything and the kitchen sink.

The NPC class distribution is all stuff out of the PHB, because I didn't really bother with the others when I made up the town. All of the adepts, monks, clerics, and paladins are a part of the church of Lathander, because there are only 6 of them all together. Thats why I said, if you want to be a monk you have to worship Lathander. I might limit some of the Bo9S, I just like the idea a lot though.

Racially I don't see "I want to play obscure race x" as a small town idea. I think that it can fit within a metropolis, or other large city, and to some extent I will try to accomodate it, but there is something odd about a group that is a werebear, a catfolk, killoren, human, Jermlaine, and a shadow creature.
taradusis
09-08-07, 10:15 AM I would suggest an archipellago of wonder.Have a lot of islands with lost races on them?As a wave of exploration occurs more races enter the area?May I reccomend my random aquatic notes thread,it has a few dozen fantasy islands?771660
Fireclave
09-08-07, 06:02 PM Instead, you might want to try having your players start their adventurers in or near a city that would support such a diverse array of personalities. A large, popular, sea-side trading city in a relatively neutral country would attract all manner of races with all manner of classes for all manner of reasons *coughsharncough*. Or if you prefer not to start your players in such a city, anywhere within a few days or weeks journey would work just as well. Most of the simple village folk would just assume that anyone who is "new & interesting" must have just arrived from the port and have probably seen it all before.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants
09-08-07, 07:45 PM So essentially the answer is "don't" thanks for the help.
queenfange
09-09-07, 10:26 AM So essentially the answer is "don't" thanks for the help.

No, I disagree. Restrictions are necessary- it is your world. As long as you have a justification ("You can't be that race because they simply don't exist on in this nation" as the weakest example), go ahead and cut down their options. I'd just consider allowing a PC who gives very good reasons and backstories to play their chosen race- if they explain why their character would be here even though their race is rare, begin to describe his homeland, and justify why they would be accepted in the town (rather than driven out by people who've never seen their kind before), then they have done enough work to play what they want. Players who just say "winged elves look cool, so I will be one" should not be allowed to push you around.

That's my two copper.
Fireclave
09-09-07, 03:00 PM I agree with everything queenfange said.
Aneutralshadeofblack
09-10-07, 03:36 AM Essentially, it boils down to this: there are two types of campaign settings (from a class/race restriction point of view). There are campaigns which are internally consistent and are looking to develop their own identity and feeling, and then there are melting pot campaigns.

Whether you restrict classes/races has to do with whether you want your world to exist within its own, well-defined cultural space or whether you just want to provide your players with an excuse to play a game. In short, it's world versus setting.

Of course, that's not to say your world can't be a melting pot, as long as there's a logical in-world reason (that isn't trying to explain a billion races and PCs coming from a single country the size of Kent); look at Planescape, which is a brilliant example in how to handle melting pot worlds so they actually look like they're internally consistent.

The point remains that in most worlds, it's impossible to justify the melting pot aspect of certain parts of D&D. That means the only solution to build a quality world is banning certain races and classes because they don't fit in thematically. My personal campaign world uses only the Rogue and the Barbarian from the PHB (everything is homebrew), and the only PHB race is humans, yet this doesn't detract from anything except the possibility for players to drown in options or make broken combos.
annoyinglizardvoice
09-10-07, 10:16 AM Just because it's in a rule book doesn't mean that you absolutly have to use it. There's nothing wrong with saying no to a player when the race/class that they want isn't in your setting.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 09-07-07, 05:41 PM	I've recently been playing and starting a number of online campaigns and I've decided that I'm running into a problem. This problem is in regards to how the races fit into my world, and where the PCs come from. In my online campaigns I allowed every race and class in any WotC 3.5 book that I own. This is a lot of them. The campaign was starting in a small village with 90% humans and mostly elves and half-elves as the other races. The NPCs included only Humans, elves, half-elves, 1 dwarf, and a family of halflings. That meant that every "new & interesting" race that somebody wanted to play required me to either have them just show up in the town, which leads to the question of why are all these random things showing up right now, or handwave them as always having been there. Both of these leave a slightly sour taste in my mouth, the first moreso than the second. What I am thinking of doing in my newest campaign therefore is placing restrictions on which races can start from the city, and then allowing any other races to also exist but not as likely. This means that humans, elves, half-elves, and halflings are open PC races from the beginning. I will also allow anything "mostly" human, things like planetouched, etc, that can "randomly" appear from two entirely human parents. Anything else that is relatively mundane, that is, well established within the campaign world, will come from some nearby metropolis, with a reason to travel. This includes dwarves, half-orcs, gnomes, goblins, orcs, kobolds, etc. The final catagory is thsoe unique races that WotC keeps printing, but are never established. Rather than try to justify fitting in all these new races, and trying to explain to everyone where they all are. I will allow "special races" like goliaths, raptorans, etc, to be from small, isolated hamlets that no longer exist. Essentially there would have been only a few hamlets in existence, and the PC does not know where any other ones are. In addition, the PCs reason for leaving the hamlet must be something on par with "it no longer exists." Hopefully this will limit the number of "Why haven't I seen another one?" questions. Thinking about race like this led me to another question. Where would anybody learn to be a wizard if there are no wizards in town. So I also created a list, based on what can be learned individually or from other town members. I used the PHB, PHBII, all completes, Bo9s, and Incarnum. Within the town Bard, Barbarian, Cleric (of lathander, chauntea, meilikki, auril, talos, tymora, or beshaba), druid, fighter, monk (of lathander), paladin (lathander), ranger, rogue, sorcerer, beguiler, knight, hexblade, warlock, spirit shaman, favored soul (of same as cleric), scout, warblade, swordsage, crusader, totemist, incarnate, & soulborn. Am I restricitng stuff too much for no reason? Is this ok justification? I am also allowing everyhting else, the player just has to discuss it with me specifically and we have to create a reason.
GoriceXII 09-07-07, 07:35 PM	When I do restrictions for a game it is usually because it fits my ideas for the milieu. The way to be cool about it is to be open minded. For instance if a pc of mine had said they really really wanted to play a monk in my game even though I don't really have any ideas about monks in my setting I would consider whether it would mess with things too much to have some kind of order of monks or schools or whatever, and if it did not would sit down with the pc and work that out. This can be really fun--in effect the player could give you a whole new set of ideas, and they get to play the character they want, possibly with more backstory and interest than if they'd just picked the character and run with it. On the other hand if a character concept just plain doesn't fit, then I would not allow it. For instance in my game there are a lot of mysteries involving elves, and I have made them a lot more mythological than they are often depicted as being. (more out of Irish legend) So I don't allow elves as a player race. Overall I'd say this: just because it is in the books doesn't mean you have to use it.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 09-08-07, 12:50 AM	I am willing to admit the "random traveler x" but I want to creat some amount of consistency. One problem I see is that if I allow some monastary (for example) to exist that never existed before, then I also have to explain this to the other PCs, which can get confusing, especially in a PbP or introducing new characters.
Neutronium_Dragon 09-08-07, 06:45 AM	Erm... this town has all of that - including hexblades, totemists, and swordsages - and not a single wizard to be found? What, did they all leave because it was getting too crowded? ;) So far I haven't seen much about how this village is situated or what relations it has with others, or what's in the vicinity that might draw the interest of adventuring types (and given all of the classes it does have around, something must be bringing them in). That will have at least as much of an impact as the native population as far as who shows up at the place. You could also look at this from the opposite angle: Given the frequency with which people are asking to play characters who aren't human, elf, half-elf, or halfling, maybe the demographic assumptions of the place could do with some revisions. Why not style it as a crossroads town which is "half way to everywhere" and thus could and would be populated and visited by all kinds of people, including strange ones? It might have a different feel, but it also gives you other opportunities - the politics in a place like that would be rather strange, to say the least.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 09-08-07, 08:49 AM	Its not the fact that the town has all of that, its that most of those don't require any training. How different is the training between a fighter, and most other martial classes? How much training does a beguiler, rogue, or totemist really require? I was trying to be open with allowing a lot of classes from books I own, without allowing everything and the kitchen sink. The NPC class distribution is all stuff out of the PHB, because I didn't really bother with the others when I made up the town. All of the adepts, monks, clerics, and paladins are a part of the church of Lathander, because there are only 6 of them all together. Thats why I said, if you want to be a monk you have to worship Lathander. I might limit some of the Bo9S, I just like the idea a lot though. Racially I don't see "I want to play obscure race x" as a small town idea. I think that it can fit within a metropolis, or other large city, and to some extent I will try to accomodate it, but there is something odd about a group that is a werebear, a catfolk, killoren, human, Jermlaine, and a shadow creature.
taradusis 09-08-07, 10:15 AM	I would suggest an archipellago of wonder.Have a lot of islands with lost races on them?As a wave of exploration occurs more races enter the area?May I reccomend my random aquatic notes thread,it has a few dozen fantasy islands?771660
Fireclave 09-08-07, 06:02 PM	Instead, you might want to try having your players start their adventurers in or near a city that would support such a diverse array of personalities. A large, popular, sea-side trading city in a relatively neutral country would attract all manner of races with all manner of classes for all manner of reasons coughsharncough. Or if you prefer not to start your players in such a city, anywhere within a few days or weeks journey would work just as well. Most of the simple village folk would just assume that anyone who is "new & interesting" must have just arrived from the port and have probably seen it all before.
Lanky Ogre Baggy Pants 09-08-07, 07:45 PM	So essentially the answer is "don't" thanks for the help.
queenfange 09-09-07, 10:26 AM	So essentially the answer is "don't" thanks for the help. No, I disagree. Restrictions are necessary- it is your world. As long as you have a justification ("You can't be that race because they simply don't exist on in this nation" as the weakest example), go ahead and cut down their options. I'd just consider allowing a PC who gives very good reasons and backstories to play their chosen race- if they explain why their character would be here even though their race is rare, begin to describe his homeland, and justify why they would be accepted in the town (rather than driven out by people who've never seen their kind before), then they have done enough work to play what they want. Players who just say "winged elves look cool, so I will be one" should not be allowed to push you around. That's my two copper.
Fireclave 09-09-07, 03:00 PM	I agree with everything queenfange said.
Aneutralshadeofblack 09-10-07, 03:36 AM	Essentially, it boils down to this: there are two types of campaign settings (from a class/race restriction point of view). There are campaigns which are internally consistent and are looking to develop their own identity and feeling, and then there are melting pot campaigns. Whether you restrict classes/races has to do with whether you want your world to exist within its own, well-defined cultural space or whether you just want to provide your players with an excuse to play a game. In short, it's world versus setting. Of course, that's not to say your world can't be a melting pot, as long as there's a logical in-world reason (that isn't trying to explain a billion races and PCs coming from a single country the size of Kent); look at Planescape, which is a brilliant example in how to handle melting pot worlds so they actually look like they're internally consistent. The point remains that in most worlds, it's impossible to justify the melting pot aspect of certain parts of D&D. That means the only solution to build a quality world is banning certain races and classes because they don't fit in thematically. My personal campaign world uses only the Rogue and the Barbarian from the PHB (everything is homebrew), and the only PHB race is humans, yet this doesn't detract from anything except the possibility for players to drown in options or make broken combos.
annoyinglizardvoice 09-10-07, 10:16 AM	Just because it's in a rule book doesn't mean that you absolutly have to use it. There's nothing wrong with saying no to a player when the race/class that they want isn't in your setting.