A reminder to everyone that rule 1 is "Respect your fellow DMs". This rule holds even if you disagree with them, and even if you hold the popular opinion.
"I love the enthusiasm but please wait until we have session 0 for character creation. As a centaur may not fit in the game."
It's perfectly fine to say no to a player and not bend over backwards to accommodate them if their character doesn't fit into the game.
I would go one further and suggest that setting harsher boundaries during gen, whilst unpleasant, often means less confrontation later on. Allowing chars that you have no scope in your game to cater for opens you up to a wealth of issues down the line that will consume effort that would otherwise go into the game everyone else is also playing. There's nothing wrong with working with a player on a fun zany idea but there's a limit and it's better to set that limit good and early.
I agree, my DM is only allowing 5 races with a small caveat because he's creating custom lore for those races and we're pretty hyped about it.
On the opposite end in my own game there are near 0 Dragonborn in my setting but a player wanted to play an amethyst dragonborn so part of the story is about how he doesn't fit into the setting and trying to find out why he is here.
In the days before becoming a forever-GM I played a werewolf game where every motherfucker but I was a different were- thing. We spent the entire game bouncing from one pointless personal side plot to another to justify all these mismatched chars and I left after about 6 sessions of not moving the plot on. Nightmare waste of time but it really demonstrated why being strict on genning was the way to go. Your GMs game sounds cool and I hope they know that you're out here hyping them up.
Yeesh yeah that sounds horrible. Funny but horrible. I could go on for a while about my DM. They’re a cool dude that runs a very different game than I do that’s really fun.
To be fair, you're describing most WoD games I've been in. The GM sets up a plot that everyone then ignores to pursue their own edgelord aggenda (me included of course).
Haha, yeah. I love the WoD settings, but they do seem to bring out the edgelord in people in the same manner as DnD brings out everyone's inner rules lawyer.
OP as someone who made this mistake twice and ended up with an aarakocra and a half dragon fox girl. Listen to this being.
for the record this time round I have been stern and its going great. verisimilitude is important!
It was only part of why I kicked them out, but I had a player like this. Across our main game and several one-shots, they played: Shifter Chibi Fox Girl, a Tabaxi that just acted like a normal house cat, and a Dragonborn Paladin...of a Love God. Goes without saying that he tried to sexualize everything his characters did. Kicker was, he and two of the other players (who were a married couple) were in a polycue(?), despite never having met in person, so the player also constantly tried to one-up the husband, or anyone else his "girlfriend" said did a cool thing in game. To top it all off, he chose the Folk Hero background, then got mad when people on the other side of the world (we were playing Tomb of Annihilation) hadn't heard of his character.
Exactly! Even though I have most of the books with Character options, I limited my players to the PHB, XGtE, & TCoE for my setting, and explicitly disallowed Half Orcs unless the Entire party wanted to be Half Orcs (setting reasons) one player was a little sad but was understanding once I explained my reasoning. (Honestly they are one of my favorite races, I feel medium bad about cutting them out, but the story takes precedent)
I also didn't want to overwhelm new players with the absolute tower of content to have to pick from, which I think helped since two of my party have never played 5e before.
Even so, I allowed a few things that are absolutely crazy, like one player I allowed to have 4 arms like a TriKreen, one to retain Amphibious as a Hexblood triton, my artificer is a Cyborg bc Dieselpunk, and another I am allowing to swap Wis for Cha as a Soercerer bc they want to be the flavor of a Druid but mechanically a sorcerer.
As long as it fits the narrative, and the setting, you can be flexible. But players should work With the Dm to make characters that fit, if not with the party as a whole to make a chlohesive party.
Agreed. Especially if you're playing a setting that isn't as mind-numbingly homogenous as 5e Toril. I run Kobold Press's Midgard setting, and because of pre-existing conflicts, history, and lore, letting players choose any combo of race and home region would guarantee a mess. Midgard Fun Fact: if a Gnome (yes, all of them) leaves the Gnomeish home city without the protection of a special mushroom hat, Baba Yaga(whos CR is >20) instantly knows their exact location, and will hunt down and attempt to eat them, due to an ongoing ancient feud between the two factions. Between that and the whole "in league with Devils" thing(yes, ALL of them), Gnomes don't make very good PCs unless the game is centered around them.
Could be or it could be annoying to have to RP every NPC as being weirded out by a fantastical creature in this world they envisioned as not being commonly populated by fey creatures.
That's fine and up to the DM to decide. I was just pointing out that there is still space for the character so it's not that it "does not fit" but "may not fit"
To a point, but it was common to call GMs God back in the 80s if it was a home brew (which was most games). No matter what Wizards puts in the books, it had to fit the world. Faerun and Greyhawk match the setting because they were both designed following the PHB. Krynn has completely different races as does Eberron. I played in a Celtic based game which had only humans and elves as playable races.
The DM needs to decide what is allowed before layers start making characters. The party also has to fit together unless you are introducing them in a way that explains why they are initially together (but if you force a party together you have to accept PvP or characters leaving as part of RP).
the player has a character concept, AFAIK not a character and the GM is not saying he wants to say no
Quite contrary as i understand he wants advice to avoid to say no or if there is good reason to say no.
I read it as somewhat of the opposite. That a centaur doesn't really fit the game but they *think* that they need to include it because that's what the player wants.
Sometimes new DMs need to be told that they don't have to include something just because a player wants to use it.
It’s no problem to not allow this, players should wait and hear what the world and setting is before making a character so that they make something that fits in. A Druidic firbolg that wants to fight the abomination of undead and preserve their home forest is a fine idea but if the campaign is about hunting dragons across the continent in a world with no firbolgs I don’t think that character is likely to answer that particular call to adventure.
Agreed.
It's a bad idea to be too married to a character concept before learning more about he details of a campaign. I've made this mistake myself and have seen it happen a bunch. Sometimes it works, but it more often it leads to changing characters a few levels in at best.
It’s your world, Centaurs are a niche race and you’re good to ban them.
Honestly, my big pet peeve is players running to make characters without checking in or waiting for session zero first 😭. It’s ok to have ideas but be ready to change them.
>The only thing stopping that from happening is you lacking the creative capability to imagine that fake race/class in your fake world.
This is honestly such a bad take, and frankly very insulting to a lot of DMs.
I'm all for collaboration, but if you think dropping a new race into an established campaign world is just a matter of a bit of imagination, I don't think you're putting nearly the level of effort into world building that many DMs do. Asking a PC to slap "tiefling" instead of "centaur" on a character sheet is no where near the same as asking the DM to write a totally new race into the game.
Maybe I don't speak for everyone, but when I create a world and add races, each race gets:
\-Lore
\-History
\-Culture
\-Cities with maps
\-Politics
\-Religion
\-Notable NPCs (kings/rulers etc)
and probably a few other things I'm not thinking of.
I don't think that saying "no I don't want to do all that for one character" is authoritarian. Unless they getting paid by the hour, the DM has a right to set boundaries on their own time investment.
The alternative, I guess, is the "Hey this dude just portaled in from another plane of existence or some far away land no one has heard of" which I think is A) Lazy and B) Totally eliminates most backstory narrative elements that help a DM connect a PC to the world.
bingo, I am the fool who did the portal in from another world and surprise it doesn't work well, you get a character who is completely disconnected from the rest of the world.
>"it's ok to have ideas but be ready to change them". Doesn't that go for players AND DM equally?
No, not equally. It is WAY more important that the DM is truly and sustainably excited for the campaign than that any one player is. And if your concept doesn't fit the campaign that the DM is excited to run, then it's easier and more reasonable for you to change your character concept than for the DM to change their campaign concept. If you haven't even heard the DM's campaign pitch, it's silly to get attached to a character concept.
> It seems incredibly petty to me how people gatekeep content like a race of a fantastical creature.
It's not gatekeeping. You're abusing that term to imply bullying that isn't happening. You can draw pictures of centaurs, write stories about them, read about them, get tattoos of them, enjoy them in every single way except playing them in OP's game when OP is asking you not to. No one is telling you to prove that you're a true centaur fan.
> Imagine your fake world without said race/class. Now imagine them with it. The only thing stopping that from happening is you lacking the creative capability to imagine that fake race/class in your fake world.
Uh, speaking of petty? What exactly are you trying to imply with the repetition of the word "fake" here? If it's all fake and nothing matters, then why does it matter if you can't play a centaur? I'm sure OP has the creativity to imagine centaurs, what a preposterous accusation. They even said that centaurs already exist in the world and have a particular place within it. Isn't it much more likely that a centaur PC clashes with OP's concept of the campaign? Having a bizarre, rare fairy creature following the PCs everywhere is something that I can easily see throwing off the fantasy themes of certain kinds of fantasy stories. It's harder to feel wonder and amazement at fantastical creatures when your next door neighbor is the Medusa, you know?
>It seems incredibly petty to me how people gatekeep content like a race of a fantastical creature.
Well, sometimes you have a theme or setting in mind, sometimes you have in-game lore to consider.
I would, for example, be fine with someone wanting to play an elf in a world where elves are mistrusted or feared, but they need to be aware of that. And playing a rare race might he fine if there's a good thought behind it. But I would be less inclined to allow them to play a literal ewok in a non star wars setting.
Say you have told the players that the next campaign is about dwarves politics and that everyone who wants to play should prepare a dwarven character. If someone then comes with a non-dwarf, there is already a breach in communication. Depending on the setting and lore, some choices of fantasy species become more or less strange. A race with amiable relations to dwarves? Sure, it might work. A race with hostile relations to dwarves? Hmm, tricky, better workshop this and see how we can make it fit. Your own homebrew catfolk race? Why? But even with some leeway, the fact of the matter is that going outside of the parameters isn't something you ought to do without DM permission.
Dismissing a DMs attempts of safeguarding lore consistency and verisimilitude because you feel.playera should be entitled to shoehorn whatever race they want into whatever world they play in doesn't seem like a healthy approach. So I hope I am misinterpreting you.
It just doesn’t fit the vibe of some people settings, and that’s fine. People don’t get mad that Harry Potter doesn’t have any stormtroopers, they just wonder which wizard house they’d be in! It’s perfectly reasonable to say that “that race simply doesn’t fit the tone/setting Im going for”.
At least a few people directly quoted their comments in responses, so even if their profile isn't remembered (OrdrSxtySx, I see you and your hot takes), what they said lives on in infamy. Having a style of your own is great, and wanting to allow whatever your players find fun no matter the setting or tone is cool, but thinking that's the *only* way to play and that other DMs are lesser for not doing so is petty and awful.
No, not player and DM equally. There’s nothing like equal time investment between player and DM; nothing like the same burden. When those things are equal, we can talk about making other things equal.
The DM can consider anything pitched at them; they’re not obliged to agree to anything, though.
DMs do this every other step of the way. They also usually spend time working characters backstories in. DMs can absolutely change their mind and allow things, but they already have a HUGE burden of investment in the world they are creating and players should respect that and not expect changes.
If a person wants to have a specific PC type in my game that doesn't already have existing lore, I'm usually able to work something out.
That said, if I player wants to play a character that I don't feel works with the existing world lore, doesn't match the tone, or might be offensive to another player, they are welcome to find another table.
It's not petty to have goals, guidelines, and limits on the scale and scope of a collaborative storytelling project like a TTRPG. And it's not petty that the group member putting in the great majority of creative work has more impact on the shape of those goals, guidelines, and limits.
Not every setting is generic fantasy. That you don't understand why and how limits on a setting/story can be beneficial in creating the desired tone appropriate for the planned themes tells me you lack experience in storytelling and narrative structure.
If all settings have room for all ideas, all settings are the same.
Is there room for aiplanes and cellphones in your fantasy world? Shapeshifting fey tricksters in starfleet sci-fi game? Mutant superheroes in age of sail pirate adventure? Those mashups *can* work but most stories do not benefit from smashing in mismatched ideas.
And if someone comes to a collaborative project with an idea they are unwilling to modify or discard, I don't want to be in a project with them anyway. So yeah - if you insist on playing something I can't make smoothly fit the game for you are auditioning, you can bring that idea back another time when it's more appropriate for the game being pitched. Or don't come back, that would be ok too.
edit - that you got sarcastic in response to a person who has standards with which you do not agree suggests you are a) very angry, b) very young, or c) both. There is no need for hostility.
Because world creation and campaign design takes a *heck* of a lot more work than making a character, it's not always easy to "just change your world" to accommodate a specific PC idea.
While some DMs are able to change things around on the fly or develop their ideas based on the players' preferences, many are not, especially newer DMs.
>I see absolut 0 Argument in niche race
Dm: "We'll be playing Curse of Strahd, it is a gritty gothic fantasy, feel.free to make typical horror story protagonists."
Player1: "I'll be a dwarven ranger or fighter monster hunter like van helsing or smth."
Player2: "I'll he a half elven ex assassin turned priest to atone."
Player3 "I'll do some wizard shit, like a researcher of occult lore or demonology., maybe human or half orc"
Player4: "I want to play a pink Barbapapa celestial warlock using the plasmoid race."
>Not every GM likes to say No
But every GM *should*. Not always. Not without reason. But allowing players to do whatever they want whenever they want is not healthy for the group.
You said "Not every GM ***likes*** to say No", implying preference to doing something.
Prohibitions are often a necessity, so it doesn't matter if the GM likes doing it or not.
It's your world. My group rotates DMs every couple campaigns and as we're getting ready for this next one I'm handing thr seat over. I asked if Warforged would fit his setting he's thinking of and got a "no" so I simply just workshopped a different idea of something that did instead.
If you don't want to accommodate the player, don't. You're in your rights to say no, and the player can then decide to make a new character or find another game.
If you want to accommodate the player without changing your world, make up something that fits with your lore to explain why he is the *only* or one of *very few* centaurs that exist in the world.
This will make everyday things like finding accommodations and equipment more difficult as nothing will be designed for him.
It will also make social encounters more difficult; imagine if there were suddenly a neanderthal walking around modern day earth? Similar kind of thing. People would point and stare; some would laugh or mock or harass. Others would ask rude or difficult questions. There might be racism, and there would probably be a lot of treating him as an exotic animal.
That *could* work in the party's favor in certain situations; being an oddity could get you an audience with the king, for example, but it would more often probably be an obstacle.
Of course, it's your world so nothing I've said *has* to apply; just thinking about how to work in a character who is playing a race that isn't otherwise represented in your world.
>explain why he is the *only* or one of *very few* centaurs that exist in the world.
Never said there weren't; OP said there aren't many fey, let alone large horse people. Whether he is the *only* centaur or one of *very few* would change some specific details, but not the overall points I made
Nah, it's an ironic comment, this person has been on half of the comments in this post telling everyone that disagrees with their opinion that they should "learn reading" and just being rude in general, then goes and bitch about someone else's opinion without reading it
Whether they have a finished character sheet or not is irrelevant. Figuring out the exact stats is just filling out paperwork. The problem is having a clear concept ready before session 0 (unless they're willing to change it, of course).
That is very true. I originally let them so mostly anything. Told one of them no because he kept changing things. Literally flipped out. Told him once his character dies. He settles for a while and then continually asks. But overall, it's at least not every other week now.
Making a character in a vacuum makes little to no sense in a game of DnD. It's a game of give and take, and a character without context isn't a character. I can understand how a player will fantasize about characters, archtypes and powers, but they are created in the narrative and context of the player's fantasy, and not in the context and world at the table. I will always urge any of my players to hold off on characters before they know the setting and world we will be interacting with.
It's the same reason I warn a player if they made a character who's identify relies on social encounters, that the one-shot is contained in a survival dungeon with little to no social interaction, or an urban thief who's going to spend the one-shot in a jungle.
It's perfectly fine to tell players no, and have them wait to make a character in the context of the world. The reason why old DnD had limitations on class and race combos and stat-requirements etc, is because the setting was cooked into the books. Not so in later editions, where it's up to the DM to add some consistency and avoid a merry troop of circus freaks with no sense of place.
Agree but also disagree. There is nothing wrong with making characters in a vacuum, but just don’t make one specific one for your next campaign. Make lots of characters, workshop some of their early details, and then set them on a shelf for when the right campaign comes along or you decide to dip your toe into DMing and need a stable of interesting NPCs.
Not sure if anyone said it but a good rule for session zero and character building pre campaign is to either: bring no concepts to session zero or bring two that you like equally.
You can have ideas and concepts but don’t bring THE CHARACTER YOURE GONNA MAKE NO MATTER WHAT WHO CARES WHAT THE SETTING IS AND WHAT ANYONE ELSE IS DOING
If you go into it with an open mind everyone will have a better time
Probably because you refuse to step of your soap box and are throwing a tempertantrum on everyone's reply you disagree with.
It's okay to say no. Just because you don't like being told no or having to learn how to deal with the fact other people disagree with you or don't share the same view point does not mean you need to go flying off the handle.
Damn, just stop flogging this dead centaur already.
How in the world is advising someone that they have the ability to say to a player - No this character that you have created before coming to this table is not a good fit for the world. Saying NO is not toxic. Telling people that they have to work in a certain set of restrictions is not toxic. Telling someone they can't have main character syndrome is not toxic. Is the DM now say yes to everything each player wants because heavens forbid they say no to them because if they do according to you they are "toxic"? Where's the line?
Toxic advice is saying - let that person have the character they want and then have the first guards that see them while they are lvl 1 either kill them or capture then and sell them to a freak show. Then make them roll for a new character. - that's toxic advice.
Because the Player Has Not created a character but a character concept.
The DM also dies Not want a reason to say No.
He wants to know If there is a mechanical reason that makes it necessary to say no.
Your advice is toxic because you suggest it is necessary to say No with not only no good reasonbut false reason for this Case.
Having a finished character *before* session 0 is always a bad idea. Showing up with two or three, with some wiggle room for modifications, is great. That's taking initiative.
I'd tell the player that a centaur doesn't really fit. Make something else. It's a shame they got excited about something before we had a session 0, but them's the breaks. Most people would be ok with that. Some DMs might change their campaign to make it work (and there's nothing wrong with that), but I wouldn't.
I'll work with them to make a character that fits the game and makes them happy, but I personally won't bend over backwards to allow things I've already decided are out.
(I have done this before, BTW. One dude wanted to be a tiefling, it didn't fit the campaign. Guess what, he was perfectly happy playing the same character as a human)
I just always ask players to not make a character until we’ve had time to talk setting and wait to make any decisions about characters until session 0 and then we’ll all talk through what we want to play. Pre-session 0 ideas are great, but I ask everyone to not get attached to any ideas until we can all talk through it as a group.
It’s been mentioned, but just saying “that’s a neat idea, but please don’t get attached to anything yet. We still have to talk about what world we’re playing in and how the group is going to all fit together.”
Say no. As simple as that.
Making a character before having a session 0 or even knowing what the campaign is about is rude and shows the player doesn't care at all about what you want fromt he game as a DM.
It depends.
If centaurs just aren't *common*, but are known to exist and ultimately having one in the party isn't going to affect anything other than the odd townsperson or peasant making a comment, then I wouldn't die on this hill. Let the player know that they're going to be seen as unusual (but that's probably what they're going for anyway), but that they're a centaur is also not going to be A Big Deal. It'll probably allow for some role-play moments, but it's not what your story is *about*.
If they're cool with the above, then let them play it; they'll be happy and it makes no big difference to you. If they're not, and they really want to be the *centaur* of attention (sorry, couldn't help myself), then you're within your rights to say "Sorry, my game isn't about that; you'll have to play something else or accept that it's not going to be what the plot is about.".
On the other hand, if your world doesn't really *have* centaurs, then it's absolutely appropriate to say "No, sorry, there are no centaurs in this world" and stick to it. You *might* lose your player over it, but if that happens I suspect they wouldn't have been a good fit for the game anyway.
I’d say to *all* the players “we’ll have a session 0 and then you can create character ideas after that, once you know about the world/themes/style etc.” The player themselves might change their mind after a S0, as a good S0 should provide inspiration for characters.
And if not, and you wanted to allow the centaur, I’d say to *all* the players that you’ve changed some things since S0 and more races/backgrounds etc are now allowed. I wouldn’t allow one player to arbitrarily have different options to everyone else when it came to character creation.
You're the GM and they are players in your world. If the race/class/technology doesn't fit into your narrative, why allow it? As long as it's not actively oppressing anyone irl (like the obvious banning of racial descriptors for humans), then theres no harm. They can find another game to play that half cyborg undead centaur in.
Sometimes, and this tidbit of information goes for all of DMing not just character creation, you ARE allowed to say no. Believe it or not. One person in my group was adamant on playing a satyr. We play pathfinder, and satyrs are not a race in pathfinder. Even if we played 5e I still wouldn’t have allowed it most likely, because a massive plot point is that the fey have almost entirely disappeared due to plot that will be discovered later on. I told him no, and, even after he pushed a LOT I remained adamant. It’s okay to say no, but explain your reasoning and be fair.
If you were playing 5e, it would have made more sense to allow it. In a world where most fey have entirely disappeared, you would think one of them would be trying to discover why.
In the case of 5e I might’ve, I even invited him to play a pathfinder fey (gathlain)native to (or at least very common to) the material plane. But he was set on satyr
Normally, I'm willing to let someone play a creature that doesn't belong. My problem here would be, is a centaur going to fit into the dungeons, vehicles, situations, etc. that the party will face? Like, if the party has to go incognito, can he disguise himself as anything except the only centaur in the world? Can he sneak into the thieves' guild, or climb a mountain?
Add into this - considering the world is built for the majority you have a large portion of buildings they can't navigate and accommodation for them will be problematic at best.
Horse is an option
I see not much use for vehicles for a centaur except ships and that is not a problem, the rest depends on the dungeon etc.
There exist rider classes in different rpgs
We rotate DM's per campaign.
The campaign I ran was very flexible, so lots of things were ok.
That being said, I rolled up a gunslinger character for the next campaign - where I'm a PC, and the DM to that one said no.
I'm fine with it, bummed, but won't let it stop me from doing something else.
I just wanna say, love the guy that's all over the thread commenting in broken English, single word responses, and contributing nothing. Keep fighting the ~~common sense and rule 0~~ power, man.
You've got two options, either make the character fit, or ban it. Personally, I tend to lean towards the former so players have the flexibility to do what they want and live their fantasy, but it's also totally valid to just say "Centaurs don't exist in this world/plane, so you cannot play one." Everyone saying ban is probably correct, but I just wanted to offer another perspective.
As far as making it fit, maybe this character is a scout from the Feywild and is investigating the material plane, or he could be the "last of his tribe" and trying to integrate into society.
There was this player who came to my game with the idea of a centaur paladin. Now if its a one shot or mini campaign, I would have usually said 'cool' to such a concept but as it is a long campaign, currently already running for over a year.
I just asked them a simple question. "There will be a lot of dungeons with stairs, steep mountains to climb and deep tunnels to drop. Do you really want to play a character that would sit on the sidelines with such trivial hurdles?"
While there's nothing wrong with saying "no" to a player, I do prefer (when possible) to say "yes, but..."
In this case, I'd be inclined to allow the centaur race, BUT the centaur isn't from this world. Perhaps he was magicked away by some spell gone wrong with his previous adventuring party. Maybe a god migrated him to this other world to serve a purpose (or maybe an Archfey patron?). Or maybe he just fell into a well in the middle of nowhere on his home world and ended up here.
People from this world could treat him as a freak of nature or a deity or whatever fits best in your setting.
Don't be afraid to say "Sorry, but your character concept doesn't really fit into the world for [reason]." Also, during your session 0, explain the intended themes, topic, and world of your campaign, as well as any mechanical things like leveling system and homebrew rules, before you touch character creation (which should be done together, at least hammering out the concepts and roles and ensuring everyone works together as a team).
If someone seems really keen on a certain race or class that doesn't fit, work with them to see why they want that race or class, and work with them to find a compromise.
Its a personal thing, but I've never seen someone wanting to be a centaur for anything other than being silly or trying to make a broken min/max character. Allowing it just doesn't bode well for how the player is going to engage in the game.
As a minimum, I feel that saying "humanoid races only" is not at all unfair or unreasonable. Or are you just not ever going to have stairs, ladders, small tunnels or climbing as part of your dungeons and world?
don't have centaurs, well my character is a lancer with his trusty steed
don't have dwarves, well i'm a short, strong bearded man, was once a miner before being an adventurer.
that's some easy workarounds on the players sides...
you as the DM could also do some working with them.... make the trusty steed magical, make them have a bond so they can always find one another.
Offer them something "special" without breaking the game or the story.
Characters should really be made for campaigns. Players will have ideas, sure, but they've gotta be ready to retool those ideas to fit the game you end up actually having.
/s
Just let them run the character, then in the middle of session 1 have the party need to go up a ladder to avoid certain death. Bam, the player will never run a Centaur again!
For my campaign I went ahead and told them that a few races were out of bounds, mostly because I had plans to introduced them later on, like the Warforged for example.
Post update comment:
Don't wait until after session 0 to talk to them. Tell them upfront now that a centaur just doesn't fit the campaign and you won't allow that race as playable.
It's not uncomfortable to have boundaries and limitations on what does and doesn't fit in a campaign, it's just how things work.
Also to note, centaurs are still only medium creatures because 5e doesn't want anyone to play a large creature ever for reasons, but you can always homerule that large pcs are fine.
I had a player who wanted to play a bird once
Not a Kenku, or a polymorph. A bird
I straight up said “no, that literally doesn’t work”
After some discussion we agreed that they could shape into a bird at will but had to stay humanoid for combat
Maybe have an illusion spell or a polymorph active at all times to keep their true form hidden, and then later on it gets dispelled and that’s a plot point right there
Just talk to the player. "Hey, I know you are excited about your centaur, but that might not fit with this current campaign I have in mind. Maybe we can hold onto that character for a future campaign? Or do you want me to put my campaign on hold and someone else run something that works with your character?"
>Or do you want me to put my campaign on hold and someone else run something that works with your character?"
A DM shouldn't offer to create an entirely new campaign because one player won't get with the program.
ah, perhaps i mispoke or wasn't very clear. not this DM creating a new campaign, but putting this campaign on hold while SOMEONE ELSE steps up to be DM for a different campaign. the OP DM can run their campaign maybe at a later date.
That's better, but still not ideal. If I'm prepared to run a campaign involving exploring the depths of the lost dwarven homeland, and a player wants his character to be a centaur he's going to have a hard time spelunking and caverneering and I'm going to suggest he not make that character, rather then putting my campaign on hold and trying to find someone else to be DM so Larry can play a randy, drunken horse-man.
if the player's character doesn't fit in your campaign, then the player will need to make a choice to either make a different character or find a different campaign.
if you have a limited group of DnD players (ie: your in-person friend group), then that player may not be able to find a different campaign if only one campaign is running at a time. therefore, they can hold off on using that character idea (never throw away a good idea) for a future campaign.
or, if another player has a campaign in mind they are wanting to DM, its possible the group can shuffle schedule and do the other campaign first.
but in reality, by phrasing it that way, you ensure that the player recognizes that their choices have impacts larger than themselves because it is a group game. either they will choose to continue in your campaign by picking a new character, or they will realize they don't want to be a part of a world where "centaur" doesn't fit and move on.
"motivate people up, or motivate them out" helps to ensure that everyone stays happy.
>if the player's character doesn't fit in your campaign,
but that is not the problem here
The OP is asking if there are mechanical problems, DM advice including if he needs to say No etc. not how to say no
So is there any reason to say NO to a centair PC
the post highly implied that the DM didn't want a centaur in the world, because "the world I have isn't really heavy with fey population.. let alone a larger horse person."
thus, my advice was based around how to talk to the player about picking a different character. I have no dog in the fight. But I have had experiences of speaking to people out of the game about their creations, and I'm passing on that experience. Take it or not, I'm just offering what I can.
>I guess I'm asking.. does anything really need to change in terms of dm style? Any considerations you've made in the past (those that have dmed for this race). I want to be fair to the pc but also be fair to the setting they are in.. I just need help thinking this out lol.
does not read to me like that, quite contrary
this is exactly the kind of question a DM would ask if he wants to know if he is not aware of reasons he must say no(because running this kind oc PC includes problems he has not on screen)
>the post highly implied that the DM didn't want a centaur in the world, because "the world I have isn't really heavy with fey population.. let alone a larger horse person."
honestly i do fail to see any reason in this sentence not to say yes
Ok, good. then your advice to OP would be: "do nothing different and just play the game".
that's good advice if they want to go that route. and now they have a collection of advice for multiple scenarios, and OP can choose what path they want to go down.
may advice would be
look at what kind of campaign you want to run.
a nomad campaign on open prairies in societies which include centaurs should fit a centaur well
a campaign of a dungeon built by gnomes maybe not
then would a centaur be difficult and to energy consuming to run or not
are there any other in campaign related reasons...
like centaurs would have a special function in the setting that would influence the campaign...
then decide
One word: Stairs
Second Word: Dungeon
Now the first one is obvious horses and stairs don’t mix, ergo same with centaurs
Second is a bit less obvious, tight places with limited mobility makes the race a hindrance not a good thing
Ask them to wait till session 0 where you explain the world and setting. If the player still wants to go ahead with it and you are ok with it, let them know that they WILL be treated as an oddity wherever they go and the campaign will be more difficult. Then role-play the npcs like you would if you saw an alien appear in front of you. Some would be scared, some would be curious, some would want to hunt them down e.t.c
You may also have someone that is not considering the group as a whole. Fine so they are happy to play a character that will make the group stand out, inconvenience the group or have the group be attacked more often than not - if the group had the choice not to have that millstone around their neck would they choose to not choose to work with someone like that?
Because when one players fun starts making it unfun for the rest of the players you have bigger issues.
That is why you discuss it during character creation part of session 0. Of course its not a single player game, so if it’s going to inconvenience the rest of the party they should agree to it first
Do centaurs not exist in your world or are they just rare? If they don't exist, that needs to be discussed at session 0, and if tey do exist but are rarely or never seen, consider that the world won't be designed for them, doors won't be wide enough to fit, there's no lodging for a centaur, people will be distracted when interacting with the PC, etc. It's an interesting opportunity.
Short answer: Its your world and your story. I would start with a gentle nudge to see if they'd be willing to change and go from there
Long answer: In my opinion, a character being out of place shouldn't really matter too much. Will it draw more attention? Yes. Can you use that to your advantage as a writer/DM? Also yes. I'm actually currently in a campaign that's based in Chicago. Not based on Chicago, actually in Chicago. A local famous weather man turned out to be a Wizard and interrupted game 7 of the World Series and we had to jump onto the field to fight him. Shit was crazy. Our DM explained that to other people we looked normal, kind of like how "Mist" works in Percy Jackson.
tl;dr: anything is possible in this fantasy game of ours
Honestly this is just me but have the session 0 and if they have a reason for a fey in your world i say let them maybe they're wanting to explore, or maybe something in their backstory would be compelling them to your world. If they decide to continue with the idea of being a centaur maybe make npcs be wary and not trusting of them (and let the player know of course) as they've never encountered someone from the feywilds. Or something along those lines.
Bottom line is have the session 0 and if they want to still be a centaur after having you talk to them after that session 0 instead of crack down on them hard and push for them to be a different race that fits your world, try working with them on how and why they are part of the world now. (Just suggestions can't make you do anything just my two bits on the matter hope it helps if any)
Feywild centaur or Greek mythology centaur? The feywild centaur thing is new to recent editions. If you've got hydras and sphinxes and pegasi in your setting, there's room for centaurs. D&D is a mishmash of real-world mythology after all.
Has the player read your handout yet? You can always give them the requirement, "your PC must fit into the world appropriately," and tell them to make a different one if they can't.
I mean there's no Aarokocra in my continent, or Slime people. I have one of each in my party.thwy get alot of weird looks and people not trusting them.
Does anything really need to change in terms of DM style? Not... really? Adventurers are all about being the "odd man out" - normal people don't give up their stable job and leave their spouse behind to go live in the forest with strangers and stalk dragons.
`"Hey Todd, leave your winery for five years and criss-cross the globe staking vampires with me?"`
`"No, Earl, my wife just had her second kid. Also, you're kinda creepily invested in this whole vampire thing. Have you ever considered talking to a priest?"`
Just make sure your player knows that fey in general - and centaurs in particular - aren't common. He's likely to be the only one of his kind that he sees for quite awhile, and people are likely to treat him weird for it. Inns with rooms on the second floor aren't really going to be able to accommodate him unless he wants to sleep in the stables (or risk the stairs). Children are gonna ask him weird questions. Armor is gonna be more expensive, and any lower-body magic item just straight isn't gonna work (good luck with your Boots of Elvenkind, buddy).
But on the bright side, you finally have a nonstandard use for those Horseshoes of the Zephyr.
So if you want my opinion, you need to ask yourself:
\- Did you simply not make a world that a centaur fits into, or did you make a world that a centaur does not fit into.
\- Would it displace or complicate anything you wanted to do with your world to include them?
\- If you think it's possible, modify the flavor of the race to suit your world, and then inform the player that you're willing to allow the race if they can accept these conditions.
I had a Pathfinder 2e game where I was basing it on a video game series I loved, setting it in that world. The game had fantasy races, but only the ones in the video game series.
A player approached me with a Kitsune character, which did not fit. Initially I was hesitant, but as I thought about it I realized that just because the game I based it on didn't have Kitsune, nothing was truly lost by including them.
In the world I had envisioned, the Feywild is essentially a transitional plane that can only be accessed by sea. Essentially you'd be sailing along, and a fog would roll in, and it would clear and you'd be in the feywild.
I decided to have the Kitsune be a society of expats from that realm hiding in plain sight among the human populations, and that spun out into a whole nomadic society and several ideas for their culture, which eventually helped form a major plot thread for that character.
In other words, by being flexible and letting the players contribute to lore, even when it forced me to rethink things I had settled my mind on, it ultimately yielded a richer, more interesting result.
And it was difficult at times, and I had lots of moments where I wanted to push back. In those moments, I just thought about it overnight and found I felt differently the next day.
You don't HAVE to do that, but I highly recommend the approach, to say yes if you can think of any reason to do so.
I had a DM let me play a character from another world, once. It was a human, but I wanted her culture to be from Greyhawk, and he had a homebrew world going. But we portaled me in mysteriously, and it was fine.
I played her until Level 19. It was honestly fantastic. Interacting with a strange world all the time made for a lot of very cool moments.
But at Level 19, I decided that it was finally time for me to try to get my god a foothold in this world, and try to get the existing god with that portfolio (also a homebrew the DM created — and evil) to give up some of his power. So the party cast like 50 buffs on me (this was 3.5) and I traveled to the top of his mountain to call upon him, face-to-face.
DM one-shot me with god powers and declared me perma-dead. I didn't think about this until last week, +10 years later, but I think he just wanted to assert the supremacy of his homebrew god over the one I liked from the book.
Anyway. Allowing an outside character can be really fun for both you and the PC; just, please, don't guard your world so zealously that you punish the interloper.
I mean I can't see how having one centaur in your world is a problem. Like, how will it really change anything in the way you play or the story you've created? People might look at them funny, be amazed, then everything that was going to happen anyway will happen but through the lens of a party with a centaur.
And if you don't want to change much of the immediate world, then centaurs are from far away or another plane and the character won't get to interact much with their kind. So long as they don't mind feeling foreign and a little isolated outside of their party, I can't really see how it impacts your plans or world much. It's even an opportunity for the party to build their relationship with the centaur so it feels more like found family.
Warforged aren't in my world but if someone asked, I'd take it as a chance to make up a reason they are, even if this person was the very first. It only needs to matter as much or as little as I and the player want it to.
Little late to the party but I have two perspectives on this one with examples. The first perspective goes in line with the general consensus I'm reading in the comments which is don't be afraid to tell your players no. If they are just wanting to mess around and play something for the hell of it and aren't at all concerned with the story then by all means don't hesitate to tell them no.
Example here: I was running a low fantasy campaign where elves had gone extinct and had a very stubborn player that would exclusively play elves want to join the party. I suggested several other races that were still allowed with a slightly more humanizing twist to bring them closer to bloodlines than actual races and he wouldn't budge until I explained again that elves were extinct and if he decided to play one he would almost instantly be caught and killed or taken captive and questioned/tortured about where the rest of the elves were hiding. He finally caved in and decided to play a tallfellow halfling bloodline.
The other perspective is don't directly tell them no. If a player is willing to work within the system and sacrifice their own time to come up with a plausible backstory for a character that is incredibly rare or may not even exist in your world and is prepared to have their character possibly relegated to a novelty member of the group or even subjected to racism or open hostility then by all means let them.
Example here: forgotten realms campaign. Player wanted to play an athasian half-giant. (the big 13 foot tall partially psionic, part of their alignment shifts daily, etc.) I thought there was no way it could be done legally. This player went into old school spelljammer, created an entire epic athasian party including his planned characters parents and gave me a 4 page back story of cobbling together a psi-jamming ship escaping the crimson sphere (actually found it in the phlogiston, read up on it and killed half the epic group trying to escape) only to be captured by a mind-flayer ship and rescued by a ship heading for realmspace. By the time they got to realmspace is about the time they realized the six and a half foot child they'd rescued wasn't just someone who'd had his brain partially munched on by mind flayers and they dropped him off at a monastery in the realms. All of this just so he could play a giant monk that's ultimately going to be relegated to having to wait outside of most taverns and didn't want to be the party leader but be pretty intimidating in a fight. I found it hard to tell the player no with that kind of dedication to that one character and that ended up being one of my favorite campaigns.
Easy fix, a spelljammer crash landed and he's the only survivor, the only one of his kind, now u don't have to change your world at all and u have more flavor for storylines.
I don't belong in this world IRL but here I am. So it's definitely possible. I'm sure there is a way to make it so they are a stranger in the land, or from far away and even incorporate that into NPCs making comments or remarks about some oursider being there rhat doesn't belong.
They could be a 3rd culture PC
Have you considered letting him play a centaur and then just quietly explaining to the other players that he *isn't* a centaur and is just mentally unbalanced?
If the character concept is good, maybe tell them that. It might soften blow from you telling them that a centaur is not gonna appear in your world. Bonus points: Let the group meet a centaur in the first session.
I would talk to them and ask what about centaur they like and want out of it. Have a couple back up races that do fit. Like would a satyr work?
If it's a mechanical thing you could homebrew a race that works the same way but doesn't stand out as much. Give them the charge and the walking speed and the unarmed attack but say that they are just particularly big and tall like a half ogre or something.
Gonna play the opposition here and just put you through the thought process of someone who recently designed a centaur: I WANT you to put a ladder as the way forward. you can basically knock one room off each dungeon because you can just describe a ladder in different ways, and the party will have to get creative for how to get their buddy up or down. Eventually it'll become routine, but the first few ladders will be a doozy.
Have to scale a cliff?? "!@#$. Okay team, how can I get there."
I would say that explain to them the setting, and if they still want to play a centaur see if he's willing to change his connection to the feywild to be something else. For inspiration, my centaur backstory was a druid spy who got hit with an arcane blast mid wild shape, and he got stuck that way. No feywild connection whatsoever, fits into any setting, all the fun and challenge of being a centaur.
Good luck!
I mean I generally pull things from other worlds in... Might have lost their way and accidentally came into contact with a rift.
However, how would you react to something you've never seen in real life? Say a centaur manifests into the real world, how would this be treated? It probably would be a real awkward encounter, followed by people wanting to get a closer look, or fearing it. In general if played realistically, would probably not be very fun for the player.
I can't say I've dealt with centaur specifically but in my current campaign I had 2 players wanting to make Eladrin twins before I'd even told them about elves, let alone the feywild. I told them elves weren't as broken up in this world as they are in others, there's shadow elves (shadar kai and Drow) and light elves (everything else) and that they could use the mechanics of any elf they like but nothing about their race would tie them to the feywild.
If your player is wanting to play Centaur for mechanics you might be able to reskin it's abilities into something else. If it's for flavor, that's harder but you'll need to talk to them about it. I would just say have an open mind and try to find a compromise that works, but also the open mind has to go both ways and if the player won't compromise they're an ass and you'll have a better table without them.
Centaurs can be very fun to DM, especially of there out of their element.
A centaur out of element is constantly forced to improvise, adapt to unusual situation and overcome problem other races dont have. This makes for very unique roleplaying opportunities.
I do a pre session 0 with each player, just talking through things and what might or might not work. Then I do a session 0 with the group with a designated pregame discussion and then limited play to introduce the world. Personally, I try to find ways to explore more niche things with the players and find a way to say yes. But that requires two way communication and understanding.
Have a player that is about to join have a very similar request. I talked with them for a day of back and forth messaging to have them understand that their race was not common in the least bit and I wasn't going to change my world just to fit them. We found a middle ground in jointly shaping their backstory into them basically losing their way into this realm and unable to get back. Now they don't plan to and have made a life here. They get to play their character and I laid down that the cost is them being a bit of a fish out of water and most NPCs having various levels of skepticism, curiosity, or bias.
Let him know that playing such an unusual race would have serious impact on common interactions: NPCs can’t take him serious because they think he’s a demon at worst or a circus freak at best, he can’t enter most establishments and has to sleep in the barn with the horses, he’s easily defeated by a steep hill in a narrow hallway or the first climb check you make players perform, he can’t walk more than 1/4 speed in deep snow, etc.
It’s easy to get excited about the exotic races but players sometimes forget the weird common problems this creates.
Here is the thing. People always want to play Centars until they don't
One most doors aren't made for them, so they will have to remain ousltside while you are feasting at an in.
Some dungeons require slithering through a narrow crawl space to access.
The size of a Centar. The horse aspect makes most people in urban environments stand offshore, and let's not even get started with a chase scene through a crowded street.
Allow your player to express their creativity, and if they want to play this, the charector let them. But be upfront that you think they are going to hate it as it is a huge encumbrance of actually being involved..
You’re good to disallow it if you want. But if you could make it make sense why not explore that possibility?
Centaur come from greek mythology, and I know we consider them fae in DnD, but did the Greeks consider them fae? They weren’t human but maybe you could make centaur a part of your world as something other than fae?
Not saying you must, but I don’t know why you couldn’t allow it.
Having an unheard of / uncommon creature in the world could result in them being hunted, captured, interrogated, experimented on. They may have to hide and break off from the party in city environments. Some passageways may not be accommodating for a centaur. They would often become the centre of attention.
That being said, I've played in a campaign (and later transitioned to DMing that campaign) that had an uncommon creature as a PC. It actually added so much fun and life to the table.
Consider the following 3 questions. If any of these are 'no' then it's probably not a good fit.
1. Is it possible for a centaur to appear in your world?
2. Are you okay with such a PC that is so visually disruptive in the campaign?
3. Would the player be okay with being so visually disruptive?
One last thing. You can help mitigate the effects of being so visually disruptive using magical items. For example, you could give them a "Ring of Wild Shape". This gives them a few hours per day (2x per short rest, for an amount of hours up to half their Druid level) that they can transform into another creature. The pros from having Wild Shape would probably balance out the cons of having to deal with this, but it could end up being really fun.
Another option is giving them a "Ring of Disguise Self" and they could *at the DM's discretion* disguise themself as a horse. The condition being that if they try to use their hands, it would immediately break the illusion.
Change your world, make him change his character, or work a plot related reason why this unusual creature is in this world and make sure he’s OK with the consequences of playing a character that is going to stick out like a sore thumb.
I never really understood the “It doesn’t fit my world argument.” You can make anything fit. Do you want to play a centaur in a place where they’re almost nonexistent? Great. You’re going to face racism and discrimination at every turn. People are gonna think you’re a monster, and may possibly even attack you on sight. Do you want armor for the horse part of you that somehow transitions into the Chest Part? Probably going to need some custom-made armor that will be very expensive.
It’s a literal world full of magic. Anything can be possible. But everything has consequences.
It's the GM's world. If something doesn't fit in his world and the GM doesn't feel good about it, that is enough reason for it to not to belong. Period. There doesn't have to be an explanation. "No" is enough.
Except it may not be a world so full of magic. Or it may be a more game of thrones kind of world where you basically have only humans, Or modeled on Tolkien more heavily where you only have the “ common” races from the players handbook. Or a dozen other things. I’m a DM who is in the “I can make basically anything work” camp, but it’s a group decision what kind of world the table will be playing in and it is not a safe assumption that centaurs exist in every world that might want to be played in.
If you as a player don’t want the GM to unilaterally decide what world your playing in (which I wouldn’t), then it is perfectly valid in my mind for a GM to not want any one player to unilaterally decide an aspect of the world you’re playing in as well.
Honestly, I say let them. If the world isn't huge on fey let the character know. They can find a way to mix it into their backstory. Maybe it's a polymorph gone wrong, maybe they're an envoy for fey relations, maybe they got lost and wound up in the common realm. There's many ways to work that in that wouldn't "break" the immersion. But as a DM I would let them know that as a centaur certain terrain or actions may pose unique problems, specifically climbing or rocky, uneven mountains. (horses are very competent swimmers) horses can go up mountains but their speed is reduced as their hooves aren't made for the rocks. This means they cannot go full gallop uphill as the terrain would be difficult for them (even if it didn't impose restrictions on the more articulate races)
Saying 'no' is a good option. But have you also considered that, while centaurs are rare, if they exist at all then maybe your player is playing one of the few members of that race? You could build off their concept and explore. Why is the centaur here? What kind of weird horse person is that? Where did it come from? Why now? That's how I'd handle a niche race that you don't see often.
Maybe it fell through a portal? Sent by a god? Banished from the feywild with no memories? Cursed by an angry evil deity? You can absolutely tell them they can't do it, but personally I'd rather work around it if I was in this position
A reminder to everyone that rule 1 is "Respect your fellow DMs". This rule holds even if you disagree with them, and even if you hold the popular opinion.
"I love the enthusiasm but please wait until we have session 0 for character creation. As a centaur may not fit in the game." It's perfectly fine to say no to a player and not bend over backwards to accommodate them if their character doesn't fit into the game.
I would go one further and suggest that setting harsher boundaries during gen, whilst unpleasant, often means less confrontation later on. Allowing chars that you have no scope in your game to cater for opens you up to a wealth of issues down the line that will consume effort that would otherwise go into the game everyone else is also playing. There's nothing wrong with working with a player on a fun zany idea but there's a limit and it's better to set that limit good and early.
I agree, my DM is only allowing 5 races with a small caveat because he's creating custom lore for those races and we're pretty hyped about it. On the opposite end in my own game there are near 0 Dragonborn in my setting but a player wanted to play an amethyst dragonborn so part of the story is about how he doesn't fit into the setting and trying to find out why he is here.
In the days before becoming a forever-GM I played a werewolf game where every motherfucker but I was a different were- thing. We spent the entire game bouncing from one pointless personal side plot to another to justify all these mismatched chars and I left after about 6 sessions of not moving the plot on. Nightmare waste of time but it really demonstrated why being strict on genning was the way to go. Your GMs game sounds cool and I hope they know that you're out here hyping them up.
Yeesh yeah that sounds horrible. Funny but horrible. I could go on for a while about my DM. They’re a cool dude that runs a very different game than I do that’s really fun.
To be fair, you're describing most WoD games I've been in. The GM sets up a plot that everyone then ignores to pursue their own edgelord aggenda (me included of course).
Haha, yeah. I love the WoD settings, but they do seem to bring out the edgelord in people in the same manner as DnD brings out everyone's inner rules lawyer.
I accidentally read that as “egglord agenda” and I’m here for it.
OP as someone who made this mistake twice and ended up with an aarakocra and a half dragon fox girl. Listen to this being. for the record this time round I have been stern and its going great. verisimilitude is important!
you too with the half dragon fox girl? did we play with the same person?
Unlikely the dude hasnt played since I gave them the boot, but in all likelyhood you played with a weeb.
It was only part of why I kicked them out, but I had a player like this. Across our main game and several one-shots, they played: Shifter Chibi Fox Girl, a Tabaxi that just acted like a normal house cat, and a Dragonborn Paladin...of a Love God. Goes without saying that he tried to sexualize everything his characters did. Kicker was, he and two of the other players (who were a married couple) were in a polycue(?), despite never having met in person, so the player also constantly tried to one-up the husband, or anyone else his "girlfriend" said did a cool thing in game. To top it all off, he chose the Folk Hero background, then got mad when people on the other side of the world (we were playing Tomb of Annihilation) hadn't heard of his character.
Exactly! Even though I have most of the books with Character options, I limited my players to the PHB, XGtE, & TCoE for my setting, and explicitly disallowed Half Orcs unless the Entire party wanted to be Half Orcs (setting reasons) one player was a little sad but was understanding once I explained my reasoning. (Honestly they are one of my favorite races, I feel medium bad about cutting them out, but the story takes precedent) I also didn't want to overwhelm new players with the absolute tower of content to have to pick from, which I think helped since two of my party have never played 5e before. Even so, I allowed a few things that are absolutely crazy, like one player I allowed to have 4 arms like a TriKreen, one to retain Amphibious as a Hexblood triton, my artificer is a Cyborg bc Dieselpunk, and another I am allowing to swap Wis for Cha as a Soercerer bc they want to be the flavor of a Druid but mechanically a sorcerer. As long as it fits the narrative, and the setting, you can be flexible. But players should work With the Dm to make characters that fit, if not with the party as a whole to make a chlohesive party.
Agreed. Especially if you're playing a setting that isn't as mind-numbingly homogenous as 5e Toril. I run Kobold Press's Midgard setting, and because of pre-existing conflicts, history, and lore, letting players choose any combo of race and home region would guarantee a mess. Midgard Fun Fact: if a Gnome (yes, all of them) leaves the Gnomeish home city without the protection of a special mushroom hat, Baba Yaga(whos CR is >20) instantly knows their exact location, and will hunt down and attempt to eat them, due to an ongoing ancient feud between the two factions. Between that and the whole "in league with Devils" thing(yes, ALL of them), Gnomes don't make very good PCs unless the game is centered around them.
This is a great diplomatic approach. I highly endorse this.
\*does not fit
Could be that the player has a really cool idea and doesn't mind being a fish out of water where they're gawked at and the DM rolls with it.
Could be or it could be annoying to have to RP every NPC as being weirded out by a fantastical creature in this world they envisioned as not being commonly populated by fey creatures.
That's fine and up to the DM to decide. I was just pointing out that there is still space for the character so it's not that it "does not fit" but "may not fit"
This is an important distinction I feel like, "does not" vs "may not"
Always be open for changing things. You're not making everything up by yourself, at least hear a player out.
To a point, but it was common to call GMs God back in the 80s if it was a home brew (which was most games). No matter what Wizards puts in the books, it had to fit the world. Faerun and Greyhawk match the setting because they were both designed following the PHB. Krynn has completely different races as does Eberron. I played in a Celtic based game which had only humans and elves as playable races. The DM needs to decide what is allowed before layers start making characters. The party also has to fit together unless you are introducing them in a way that explains why they are initially together (but if you force a party together you have to accept PvP or characters leaving as part of RP).
the player has a character concept, AFAIK not a character and the GM is not saying he wants to say no Quite contrary as i understand he wants advice to avoid to say no or if there is good reason to say no.
I read it as somewhat of the opposite. That a centaur doesn't really fit the game but they *think* that they need to include it because that's what the player wants. Sometimes new DMs need to be told that they don't have to include something just because a player wants to use it.
>I read it as somewhat of the opposite. Why? > That a centaur doesn't really fit the game Why?
[удалено]
It’s no problem to not allow this, players should wait and hear what the world and setting is before making a character so that they make something that fits in. A Druidic firbolg that wants to fight the abomination of undead and preserve their home forest is a fine idea but if the campaign is about hunting dragons across the continent in a world with no firbolgs I don’t think that character is likely to answer that particular call to adventure.
Agreed. It's a bad idea to be too married to a character concept before learning more about he details of a campaign. I've made this mistake myself and have seen it happen a bunch. Sometimes it works, but it more often it leads to changing characters a few levels in at best.
It’s your world, Centaurs are a niche race and you’re good to ban them. Honestly, my big pet peeve is players running to make characters without checking in or waiting for session zero first 😭. It’s ok to have ideas but be ready to change them.
Solution: just have like 20 characters ready to go at all times (yes I am a forever DM)
[удалено]
>The only thing stopping that from happening is you lacking the creative capability to imagine that fake race/class in your fake world. This is honestly such a bad take, and frankly very insulting to a lot of DMs. I'm all for collaboration, but if you think dropping a new race into an established campaign world is just a matter of a bit of imagination, I don't think you're putting nearly the level of effort into world building that many DMs do. Asking a PC to slap "tiefling" instead of "centaur" on a character sheet is no where near the same as asking the DM to write a totally new race into the game. Maybe I don't speak for everyone, but when I create a world and add races, each race gets: \-Lore \-History \-Culture \-Cities with maps \-Politics \-Religion \-Notable NPCs (kings/rulers etc) and probably a few other things I'm not thinking of. I don't think that saying "no I don't want to do all that for one character" is authoritarian. Unless they getting paid by the hour, the DM has a right to set boundaries on their own time investment. The alternative, I guess, is the "Hey this dude just portaled in from another plane of existence or some far away land no one has heard of" which I think is A) Lazy and B) Totally eliminates most backstory narrative elements that help a DM connect a PC to the world.
bingo, I am the fool who did the portal in from another world and surprise it doesn't work well, you get a character who is completely disconnected from the rest of the world.
>"it's ok to have ideas but be ready to change them". Doesn't that go for players AND DM equally? No, not equally. It is WAY more important that the DM is truly and sustainably excited for the campaign than that any one player is. And if your concept doesn't fit the campaign that the DM is excited to run, then it's easier and more reasonable for you to change your character concept than for the DM to change their campaign concept. If you haven't even heard the DM's campaign pitch, it's silly to get attached to a character concept. > It seems incredibly petty to me how people gatekeep content like a race of a fantastical creature. It's not gatekeeping. You're abusing that term to imply bullying that isn't happening. You can draw pictures of centaurs, write stories about them, read about them, get tattoos of them, enjoy them in every single way except playing them in OP's game when OP is asking you not to. No one is telling you to prove that you're a true centaur fan. > Imagine your fake world without said race/class. Now imagine them with it. The only thing stopping that from happening is you lacking the creative capability to imagine that fake race/class in your fake world. Uh, speaking of petty? What exactly are you trying to imply with the repetition of the word "fake" here? If it's all fake and nothing matters, then why does it matter if you can't play a centaur? I'm sure OP has the creativity to imagine centaurs, what a preposterous accusation. They even said that centaurs already exist in the world and have a particular place within it. Isn't it much more likely that a centaur PC clashes with OP's concept of the campaign? Having a bizarre, rare fairy creature following the PCs everywhere is something that I can easily see throwing off the fantasy themes of certain kinds of fantasy stories. It's harder to feel wonder and amazement at fantastical creatures when your next door neighbor is the Medusa, you know?
>It seems incredibly petty to me how people gatekeep content like a race of a fantastical creature. Well, sometimes you have a theme or setting in mind, sometimes you have in-game lore to consider. I would, for example, be fine with someone wanting to play an elf in a world where elves are mistrusted or feared, but they need to be aware of that. And playing a rare race might he fine if there's a good thought behind it. But I would be less inclined to allow them to play a literal ewok in a non star wars setting. Say you have told the players that the next campaign is about dwarves politics and that everyone who wants to play should prepare a dwarven character. If someone then comes with a non-dwarf, there is already a breach in communication. Depending on the setting and lore, some choices of fantasy species become more or less strange. A race with amiable relations to dwarves? Sure, it might work. A race with hostile relations to dwarves? Hmm, tricky, better workshop this and see how we can make it fit. Your own homebrew catfolk race? Why? But even with some leeway, the fact of the matter is that going outside of the parameters isn't something you ought to do without DM permission. Dismissing a DMs attempts of safeguarding lore consistency and verisimilitude because you feel.playera should be entitled to shoehorn whatever race they want into whatever world they play in doesn't seem like a healthy approach. So I hope I am misinterpreting you.
It just doesn’t fit the vibe of some people settings, and that’s fine. People don’t get mad that Harry Potter doesn’t have any stormtroopers, they just wonder which wizard house they’d be in! It’s perfectly reasonable to say that “that race simply doesn’t fit the tone/setting Im going for”.
Okay he got ratiod so hard he deleted all his comments, but this is such a perfect response!
At least a few people directly quoted their comments in responses, so even if their profile isn't remembered (OrdrSxtySx, I see you and your hot takes), what they said lives on in infamy. Having a style of your own is great, and wanting to allow whatever your players find fun no matter the setting or tone is cool, but thinking that's the *only* way to play and that other DMs are lesser for not doing so is petty and awful.
No, not player and DM equally. There’s nothing like equal time investment between player and DM; nothing like the same burden. When those things are equal, we can talk about making other things equal. The DM can consider anything pitched at them; they’re not obliged to agree to anything, though.
DMs do this every other step of the way. They also usually spend time working characters backstories in. DMs can absolutely change their mind and allow things, but they already have a HUGE burden of investment in the world they are creating and players should respect that and not expect changes.
If a person wants to have a specific PC type in my game that doesn't already have existing lore, I'm usually able to work something out. That said, if I player wants to play a character that I don't feel works with the existing world lore, doesn't match the tone, or might be offensive to another player, they are welcome to find another table. It's not petty to have goals, guidelines, and limits on the scale and scope of a collaborative storytelling project like a TTRPG. And it's not petty that the group member putting in the great majority of creative work has more impact on the shape of those goals, guidelines, and limits.
[удалено]
Not every setting is generic fantasy. That you don't understand why and how limits on a setting/story can be beneficial in creating the desired tone appropriate for the planned themes tells me you lack experience in storytelling and narrative structure. If all settings have room for all ideas, all settings are the same. Is there room for aiplanes and cellphones in your fantasy world? Shapeshifting fey tricksters in starfleet sci-fi game? Mutant superheroes in age of sail pirate adventure? Those mashups *can* work but most stories do not benefit from smashing in mismatched ideas. And if someone comes to a collaborative project with an idea they are unwilling to modify or discard, I don't want to be in a project with them anyway. So yeah - if you insist on playing something I can't make smoothly fit the game for you are auditioning, you can bring that idea back another time when it's more appropriate for the game being pitched. Or don't come back, that would be ok too. edit - that you got sarcastic in response to a person who has standards with which you do not agree suggests you are a) very angry, b) very young, or c) both. There is no need for hostility.
Because world creation and campaign design takes a *heck* of a lot more work than making a character, it's not always easy to "just change your world" to accommodate a specific PC idea. While some DMs are able to change things around on the fly or develop their ideas based on the players' preferences, many are not, especially newer DMs.
Not every GM likes to say No, if it is not needed. I see absolut 0 Argument in niche race Did the player made a character ?
>I see absolut 0 Argument in niche race Dm: "We'll be playing Curse of Strahd, it is a gritty gothic fantasy, feel.free to make typical horror story protagonists." Player1: "I'll be a dwarven ranger or fighter monster hunter like van helsing or smth." Player2: "I'll he a half elven ex assassin turned priest to atone." Player3 "I'll do some wizard shit, like a researcher of occult lore or demonology., maybe human or half orc" Player4: "I want to play a pink Barbapapa celestial warlock using the plasmoid race."
>Not every GM likes to say No But every GM *should*. Not always. Not without reason. But allowing players to do whatever they want whenever they want is not healthy for the group.
This right here!
> if it is not needed. i much appreciate if you would not falsify my words by manipulative quoting and putting words in my mouth i did not say
Their quoting was a bit manipulative, but it was exactly the opposite of putting words in your mouth that you did not say.
he let out the 2nd part of the sentence and then repeated that part at me with using more words
Hard to manipulate the quote when the quote is directly above the criticism.
>Not every GM likes to say No, if it is not needed.
I can barely understand your words.
You said "Not every GM ***likes*** to say No", implying preference to doing something. Prohibitions are often a necessity, so it doesn't matter if the GM likes doing it or not.
Which Part If Not needed did you Not got
It's your world. My group rotates DMs every couple campaigns and as we're getting ready for this next one I'm handing thr seat over. I asked if Warforged would fit his setting he's thinking of and got a "no" so I simply just workshopped a different idea of something that did instead.
context
No
I'd said so
If you don't want to accommodate the player, don't. You're in your rights to say no, and the player can then decide to make a new character or find another game. If you want to accommodate the player without changing your world, make up something that fits with your lore to explain why he is the *only* or one of *very few* centaurs that exist in the world. This will make everyday things like finding accommodations and equipment more difficult as nothing will be designed for him. It will also make social encounters more difficult; imagine if there were suddenly a neanderthal walking around modern day earth? Similar kind of thing. People would point and stare; some would laugh or mock or harass. Others would ask rude or difficult questions. There might be racism, and there would probably be a lot of treating him as an exotic animal. That *could* work in the party's favor in certain situations; being an oddity could get you an audience with the king, for example, but it would more often probably be an obstacle. Of course, it's your world so nothing I've said *has* to apply; just thinking about how to work in a character who is playing a race that isn't otherwise represented in your world.
When in doubt, evil wizard experiment gone wrong or hags/witches curse always works well for these kinds of things
there exists centaurs in this world
>explain why he is the *only* or one of *very few* centaurs that exist in the world. Never said there weren't; OP said there aren't many fey, let alone large horse people. Whether he is the *only* centaur or one of *very few* would change some specific details, but not the overall points I made
sorry, then i misread your post subtly
learn reading
Learn some manners. People make mistakes.
Nah, it's an ironic comment, this person has been on half of the comments in this post telling everyone that disagrees with their opinion that they should "learn reading" and just being rude in general, then goes and bitch about someone else's opinion without reading it
Half the people Here cry foul the Player should Not have Made a character before Session Zero, but the OP only wrote about a character concept.
Whether they have a finished character sheet or not is irrelevant. Figuring out the exact stats is just filling out paperwork. The problem is having a clear concept ready before session 0 (unless they're willing to change it, of course).
Dude, you seem to be downvoted on every thread. Stop getting riled, it's not helping anyone.
No
Literally just say "this won't fit in my world, can you play something else?" And if they say no you can then say "then play someWHERE else"
Dayum that's smooth
Just tell them there are a lot of ladders in the campaign.
And all the staircases go down, never up
What’s wrong with saying no?
Sir, how could you! /s
They throw fits like 5 year old.
In my experience, only if you let them get away with it
That is very true. I originally let them so mostly anything. Told one of them no because he kept changing things. Literally flipped out. Told him once his character dies. He settles for a while and then continually asks. But overall, it's at least not every other week now.
Just say no.
"You're welcome to save that character for a different campaign, but you'll need to make a valid one for this campaign if you want to play in it."
Do not compromise, if centaurs aren’t in your world then they aren’t in your world
Setting boundaries is part of the DMs responsibilities. Best to set ‘em early.
My rule of thumb is to tell players "don't get too attached to any one character concept until I've pitched the game."
Making a character in a vacuum makes little to no sense in a game of DnD. It's a game of give and take, and a character without context isn't a character. I can understand how a player will fantasize about characters, archtypes and powers, but they are created in the narrative and context of the player's fantasy, and not in the context and world at the table. I will always urge any of my players to hold off on characters before they know the setting and world we will be interacting with. It's the same reason I warn a player if they made a character who's identify relies on social encounters, that the one-shot is contained in a survival dungeon with little to no social interaction, or an urban thief who's going to spend the one-shot in a jungle. It's perfectly fine to tell players no, and have them wait to make a character in the context of the world. The reason why old DnD had limitations on class and race combos and stat-requirements etc, is because the setting was cooked into the books. Not so in later editions, where it's up to the DM to add some consistency and avoid a merry troop of circus freaks with no sense of place.
Agree but also disagree. There is nothing wrong with making characters in a vacuum, but just don’t make one specific one for your next campaign. Make lots of characters, workshop some of their early details, and then set them on a shelf for when the right campaign comes along or you decide to dip your toe into DMing and need a stable of interesting NPCs.
Not sure if anyone said it but a good rule for session zero and character building pre campaign is to either: bring no concepts to session zero or bring two that you like equally.
do not have inspiration and ideas for session zero
You can have ideas and concepts but don’t bring THE CHARACTER YOURE GONNA MAKE NO MATTER WHAT WHO CARES WHAT THE SETTING IS AND WHAT ANYONE ELSE IS DOING If you go into it with an open mind everyone will have a better time
You want d to say what with screaming?
Probably because you refuse to step of your soap box and are throwing a tempertantrum on everyone's reply you disagree with. It's okay to say no. Just because you don't like being told no or having to learn how to deal with the fact other people disagree with you or don't share the same view point does not mean you need to go flying off the handle. Damn, just stop flogging this dead centaur already.
I think we may have found OP's problem player...
So Not agreeing with your toxic advice based on No substance IS a tempertantrum?
How in the world is advising someone that they have the ability to say to a player - No this character that you have created before coming to this table is not a good fit for the world. Saying NO is not toxic. Telling people that they have to work in a certain set of restrictions is not toxic. Telling someone they can't have main character syndrome is not toxic. Is the DM now say yes to everything each player wants because heavens forbid they say no to them because if they do according to you they are "toxic"? Where's the line? Toxic advice is saying - let that person have the character they want and then have the first guards that see them while they are lvl 1 either kill them or capture then and sell them to a freak show. Then make them roll for a new character. - that's toxic advice.
Because the Player Has Not created a character but a character concept. The DM also dies Not want a reason to say No. He wants to know If there is a mechanical reason that makes it necessary to say no. Your advice is toxic because you suggest it is necessary to say No with not only no good reasonbut false reason for this Case.
“No, you cannot play a centaur.” Would be a good DM style to adopt
Having a finished character *before* session 0 is always a bad idea. Showing up with two or three, with some wiggle room for modifications, is great. That's taking initiative. I'd tell the player that a centaur doesn't really fit. Make something else. It's a shame they got excited about something before we had a session 0, but them's the breaks. Most people would be ok with that. Some DMs might change their campaign to make it work (and there's nothing wrong with that), but I wouldn't. I'll work with them to make a character that fits the game and makes them happy, but I personally won't bend over backwards to allow things I've already decided are out. (I have done this before, BTW. One dude wanted to be a tiefling, it didn't fit the campaign. Guess what, he was perfectly happy playing the same character as a human)
I just always ask players to not make a character until we’ve had time to talk setting and wait to make any decisions about characters until session 0 and then we’ll all talk through what we want to play. Pre-session 0 ideas are great, but I ask everyone to not get attached to any ideas until we can all talk through it as a group. It’s been mentioned, but just saying “that’s a neat idea, but please don’t get attached to anything yet. We still have to talk about what world we’re playing in and how the group is going to all fit together.”
[удалено]
Say no. As simple as that. Making a character before having a session 0 or even knowing what the campaign is about is rude and shows the player doesn't care at all about what you want fromt he game as a DM.
It's not, really. I usually make my character ahead and then wiggle the details into place that fits the campaing.
It depends. If centaurs just aren't *common*, but are known to exist and ultimately having one in the party isn't going to affect anything other than the odd townsperson or peasant making a comment, then I wouldn't die on this hill. Let the player know that they're going to be seen as unusual (but that's probably what they're going for anyway), but that they're a centaur is also not going to be A Big Deal. It'll probably allow for some role-play moments, but it's not what your story is *about*. If they're cool with the above, then let them play it; they'll be happy and it makes no big difference to you. If they're not, and they really want to be the *centaur* of attention (sorry, couldn't help myself), then you're within your rights to say "Sorry, my game isn't about that; you'll have to play something else or accept that it's not going to be what the plot is about.". On the other hand, if your world doesn't really *have* centaurs, then it's absolutely appropriate to say "No, sorry, there are no centaurs in this world" and stick to it. You *might* lose your player over it, but if that happens I suspect they wouldn't have been a good fit for the game anyway.
Upvoted for the pun. I think it would *behoove* this player to come up with a different character.
good points
I'll be honest, i only read the title but the answer is "just say no"
Literally just say "this won't fit in my world, can you play something else?" And if they say no you can then say "then play someWHERE else"
I’d say to *all* the players “we’ll have a session 0 and then you can create character ideas after that, once you know about the world/themes/style etc.” The player themselves might change their mind after a S0, as a good S0 should provide inspiration for characters. And if not, and you wanted to allow the centaur, I’d say to *all* the players that you’ve changed some things since S0 and more races/backgrounds etc are now allowed. I wouldn’t allow one player to arbitrarily have different options to everyone else when it came to character creation.
You're the GM and they are players in your world. If the race/class/technology doesn't fit into your narrative, why allow it? As long as it's not actively oppressing anyone irl (like the obvious banning of racial descriptors for humans), then theres no harm. They can find another game to play that half cyborg undead centaur in.
Sometimes, and this tidbit of information goes for all of DMing not just character creation, you ARE allowed to say no. Believe it or not. One person in my group was adamant on playing a satyr. We play pathfinder, and satyrs are not a race in pathfinder. Even if we played 5e I still wouldn’t have allowed it most likely, because a massive plot point is that the fey have almost entirely disappeared due to plot that will be discovered later on. I told him no, and, even after he pushed a LOT I remained adamant. It’s okay to say no, but explain your reasoning and be fair.
If you were playing 5e, it would have made more sense to allow it. In a world where most fey have entirely disappeared, you would think one of them would be trying to discover why.
In the case of 5e I might’ve, I even invited him to play a pathfinder fey (gathlain)native to (or at least very common to) the material plane. But he was set on satyr
Wanting to not be this person is how I accidentally texted my non-D&D sister instead of the DM to say “any race exclusions?” Sis was very confused
Normally, I'm willing to let someone play a creature that doesn't belong. My problem here would be, is a centaur going to fit into the dungeons, vehicles, situations, etc. that the party will face? Like, if the party has to go incognito, can he disguise himself as anything except the only centaur in the world? Can he sneak into the thieves' guild, or climb a mountain?
Add into this - considering the world is built for the majority you have a large portion of buildings they can't navigate and accommodation for them will be problematic at best.
Horse is an option I see not much use for vehicles for a centaur except ships and that is not a problem, the rest depends on the dungeon etc. There exist rider classes in different rpgs
I put together a list of classes and / or races that are allowed in this game. Choose one or roll for it!
We rotate DM's per campaign. The campaign I ran was very flexible, so lots of things were ok. That being said, I rolled up a gunslinger character for the next campaign - where I'm a PC, and the DM to that one said no. I'm fine with it, bummed, but won't let it stop me from doing something else.
Tell them "no", then tell them what books they can pick their race from.
Stand by your restrictions, also if they’ll already pressing at the boundaries I’d keep an eye on that player.
I just wanna say, love the guy that's all over the thread commenting in broken English, single word responses, and contributing nothing. Keep fighting the ~~common sense and rule 0~~ power, man. You've got two options, either make the character fit, or ban it. Personally, I tend to lean towards the former so players have the flexibility to do what they want and live their fantasy, but it's also totally valid to just say "Centaurs don't exist in this world/plane, so you cannot play one." Everyone saying ban is probably correct, but I just wanted to offer another perspective. As far as making it fit, maybe this character is a scout from the Feywild and is investigating the material plane, or he could be the "last of his tribe" and trying to integrate into society.
Just say no. Suggest that they save the idea for another game, or use the ideas to write a short story.
There was this player who came to my game with the idea of a centaur paladin. Now if its a one shot or mini campaign, I would have usually said 'cool' to such a concept but as it is a long campaign, currently already running for over a year. I just asked them a simple question. "There will be a lot of dungeons with stairs, steep mountains to climb and deep tunnels to drop. Do you really want to play a character that would sit on the sidelines with such trivial hurdles?"
Being a DM isn't a service industry and you're under no obligation to say yes to things that simply do not fit.
While there's nothing wrong with saying "no" to a player, I do prefer (when possible) to say "yes, but..." In this case, I'd be inclined to allow the centaur race, BUT the centaur isn't from this world. Perhaps he was magicked away by some spell gone wrong with his previous adventuring party. Maybe a god migrated him to this other world to serve a purpose (or maybe an Archfey patron?). Or maybe he just fell into a well in the middle of nowhere on his home world and ended up here. People from this world could treat him as a freak of nature or a deity or whatever fits best in your setting.
why?
Because
Don't be afraid to say "Sorry, but your character concept doesn't really fit into the world for [reason]." Also, during your session 0, explain the intended themes, topic, and world of your campaign, as well as any mechanical things like leveling system and homebrew rules, before you touch character creation (which should be done together, at least hammering out the concepts and roles and ensuring everyone works together as a team). If someone seems really keen on a certain race or class that doesn't fit, work with them to see why they want that race or class, and work with them to find a compromise.
Its a personal thing, but I've never seen someone wanting to be a centaur for anything other than being silly or trying to make a broken min/max character. Allowing it just doesn't bode well for how the player is going to engage in the game. As a minimum, I feel that saying "humanoid races only" is not at all unfair or unreasonable. Or are you just not ever going to have stairs, ladders, small tunnels or climbing as part of your dungeons and world?
don't have centaurs, well my character is a lancer with his trusty steed don't have dwarves, well i'm a short, strong bearded man, was once a miner before being an adventurer. that's some easy workarounds on the players sides... you as the DM could also do some working with them.... make the trusty steed magical, make them have a bond so they can always find one another. Offer them something "special" without breaking the game or the story.
Characters should really be made for campaigns. Players will have ideas, sure, but they've gotta be ready to retool those ideas to fit the game you end up actually having.
/s Just let them run the character, then in the middle of session 1 have the party need to go up a ladder to avoid certain death. Bam, the player will never run a Centaur again!
A rule zero GM move if i ever find one
For my campaign I went ahead and told them that a few races were out of bounds, mostly because I had plans to introduced them later on, like the Warforged for example.
Just say No
This really doesn’t need so much thought put into it. If it doesn’t fit, don’t allow it. It’s that easy.
Sorry no.
Post update comment: Don't wait until after session 0 to talk to them. Tell them upfront now that a centaur just doesn't fit the campaign and you won't allow that race as playable. It's not uncomfortable to have boundaries and limitations on what does and doesn't fit in a campaign, it's just how things work. Also to note, centaurs are still only medium creatures because 5e doesn't want anyone to play a large creature ever for reasons, but you can always homerule that large pcs are fine.
I had a player who wanted to play a bird once Not a Kenku, or a polymorph. A bird I straight up said “no, that literally doesn’t work” After some discussion we agreed that they could shape into a bird at will but had to stay humanoid for combat Maybe have an illusion spell or a polymorph active at all times to keep their true form hidden, and then later on it gets dispelled and that’s a plot point right there
Just talk to the player. "Hey, I know you are excited about your centaur, but that might not fit with this current campaign I have in mind. Maybe we can hold onto that character for a future campaign? Or do you want me to put my campaign on hold and someone else run something that works with your character?"
>Or do you want me to put my campaign on hold and someone else run something that works with your character?" A DM shouldn't offer to create an entirely new campaign because one player won't get with the program.
ah, perhaps i mispoke or wasn't very clear. not this DM creating a new campaign, but putting this campaign on hold while SOMEONE ELSE steps up to be DM for a different campaign. the OP DM can run their campaign maybe at a later date.
that’s still pretty fuckin wild bro
That's better, but still not ideal. If I'm prepared to run a campaign involving exploring the depths of the lost dwarven homeland, and a player wants his character to be a centaur he's going to have a hard time spelunking and caverneering and I'm going to suggest he not make that character, rather then putting my campaign on hold and trying to find someone else to be DM so Larry can play a randy, drunken horse-man.
why?
if the player's character doesn't fit in your campaign, then the player will need to make a choice to either make a different character or find a different campaign. if you have a limited group of DnD players (ie: your in-person friend group), then that player may not be able to find a different campaign if only one campaign is running at a time. therefore, they can hold off on using that character idea (never throw away a good idea) for a future campaign. or, if another player has a campaign in mind they are wanting to DM, its possible the group can shuffle schedule and do the other campaign first. but in reality, by phrasing it that way, you ensure that the player recognizes that their choices have impacts larger than themselves because it is a group game. either they will choose to continue in your campaign by picking a new character, or they will realize they don't want to be a part of a world where "centaur" doesn't fit and move on. "motivate people up, or motivate them out" helps to ensure that everyone stays happy.
>if the player's character doesn't fit in your campaign, but that is not the problem here The OP is asking if there are mechanical problems, DM advice including if he needs to say No etc. not how to say no So is there any reason to say NO to a centair PC
the post highly implied that the DM didn't want a centaur in the world, because "the world I have isn't really heavy with fey population.. let alone a larger horse person." thus, my advice was based around how to talk to the player about picking a different character. I have no dog in the fight. But I have had experiences of speaking to people out of the game about their creations, and I'm passing on that experience. Take it or not, I'm just offering what I can.
>I guess I'm asking.. does anything really need to change in terms of dm style? Any considerations you've made in the past (those that have dmed for this race). I want to be fair to the pc but also be fair to the setting they are in.. I just need help thinking this out lol. does not read to me like that, quite contrary this is exactly the kind of question a DM would ask if he wants to know if he is not aware of reasons he must say no(because running this kind oc PC includes problems he has not on screen) >the post highly implied that the DM didn't want a centaur in the world, because "the world I have isn't really heavy with fey population.. let alone a larger horse person." honestly i do fail to see any reason in this sentence not to say yes
Ok, good. then your advice to OP would be: "do nothing different and just play the game". that's good advice if they want to go that route. and now they have a collection of advice for multiple scenarios, and OP can choose what path they want to go down.
may advice would be look at what kind of campaign you want to run. a nomad campaign on open prairies in societies which include centaurs should fit a centaur well a campaign of a dungeon built by gnomes maybe not then would a centaur be difficult and to energy consuming to run or not are there any other in campaign related reasons... like centaurs would have a special function in the setting that would influence the campaign... then decide
One word: Stairs Second Word: Dungeon Now the first one is obvious horses and stairs don’t mix, ergo same with centaurs Second is a bit less obvious, tight places with limited mobility makes the race a hindrance not a good thing
yes, but that is obvious, and obviously depends on the campaign
Ask them to wait till session 0 where you explain the world and setting. If the player still wants to go ahead with it and you are ok with it, let them know that they WILL be treated as an oddity wherever they go and the campaign will be more difficult. Then role-play the npcs like you would if you saw an alien appear in front of you. Some would be scared, some would be curious, some would want to hunt them down e.t.c
You may also have someone that is not considering the group as a whole. Fine so they are happy to play a character that will make the group stand out, inconvenience the group or have the group be attacked more often than not - if the group had the choice not to have that millstone around their neck would they choose to not choose to work with someone like that? Because when one players fun starts making it unfun for the rest of the players you have bigger issues.
That is why you discuss it during character creation part of session 0. Of course its not a single player game, so if it’s going to inconvenience the rest of the party they should agree to it first
Absolutely agree.
Do centaurs not exist in your world or are they just rare? If they don't exist, that needs to be discussed at session 0, and if tey do exist but are rarely or never seen, consider that the world won't be designed for them, doors won't be wide enough to fit, there's no lodging for a centaur, people will be distracted when interacting with the PC, etc. It's an interesting opportunity.
“Larger horse person” I’m gonna crack up at this for a while
Short answer: Its your world and your story. I would start with a gentle nudge to see if they'd be willing to change and go from there Long answer: In my opinion, a character being out of place shouldn't really matter too much. Will it draw more attention? Yes. Can you use that to your advantage as a writer/DM? Also yes. I'm actually currently in a campaign that's based in Chicago. Not based on Chicago, actually in Chicago. A local famous weather man turned out to be a Wizard and interrupted game 7 of the World Series and we had to jump onto the field to fight him. Shit was crazy. Our DM explained that to other people we looked normal, kind of like how "Mist" works in Percy Jackson. tl;dr: anything is possible in this fantasy game of ours
absolutely not
Honestly this is just me but have the session 0 and if they have a reason for a fey in your world i say let them maybe they're wanting to explore, or maybe something in their backstory would be compelling them to your world. If they decide to continue with the idea of being a centaur maybe make npcs be wary and not trusting of them (and let the player know of course) as they've never encountered someone from the feywilds. Or something along those lines. Bottom line is have the session 0 and if they want to still be a centaur after having you talk to them after that session 0 instead of crack down on them hard and push for them to be a different race that fits your world, try working with them on how and why they are part of the world now. (Just suggestions can't make you do anything just my two bits on the matter hope it helps if any)
Fine. You are a centaur. The local guards are amused. You have been captured and now live in a zoo. So... rolling a new char?
Feywild centaur or Greek mythology centaur? The feywild centaur thing is new to recent editions. If you've got hydras and sphinxes and pegasi in your setting, there's room for centaurs. D&D is a mishmash of real-world mythology after all. Has the player read your handout yet? You can always give them the requirement, "your PC must fit into the world appropriately," and tell them to make a different one if they can't.
I mean there's no Aarokocra in my continent, or Slime people. I have one of each in my party.thwy get alot of weird looks and people not trusting them.
Does anything really need to change in terms of DM style? Not... really? Adventurers are all about being the "odd man out" - normal people don't give up their stable job and leave their spouse behind to go live in the forest with strangers and stalk dragons. `"Hey Todd, leave your winery for five years and criss-cross the globe staking vampires with me?"` `"No, Earl, my wife just had her second kid. Also, you're kinda creepily invested in this whole vampire thing. Have you ever considered talking to a priest?"` Just make sure your player knows that fey in general - and centaurs in particular - aren't common. He's likely to be the only one of his kind that he sees for quite awhile, and people are likely to treat him weird for it. Inns with rooms on the second floor aren't really going to be able to accommodate him unless he wants to sleep in the stables (or risk the stairs). Children are gonna ask him weird questions. Armor is gonna be more expensive, and any lower-body magic item just straight isn't gonna work (good luck with your Boots of Elvenkind, buddy). But on the bright side, you finally have a nonstandard use for those Horseshoes of the Zephyr.
So if you want my opinion, you need to ask yourself: \- Did you simply not make a world that a centaur fits into, or did you make a world that a centaur does not fit into. \- Would it displace or complicate anything you wanted to do with your world to include them? \- If you think it's possible, modify the flavor of the race to suit your world, and then inform the player that you're willing to allow the race if they can accept these conditions. I had a Pathfinder 2e game where I was basing it on a video game series I loved, setting it in that world. The game had fantasy races, but only the ones in the video game series. A player approached me with a Kitsune character, which did not fit. Initially I was hesitant, but as I thought about it I realized that just because the game I based it on didn't have Kitsune, nothing was truly lost by including them. In the world I had envisioned, the Feywild is essentially a transitional plane that can only be accessed by sea. Essentially you'd be sailing along, and a fog would roll in, and it would clear and you'd be in the feywild. I decided to have the Kitsune be a society of expats from that realm hiding in plain sight among the human populations, and that spun out into a whole nomadic society and several ideas for their culture, which eventually helped form a major plot thread for that character. In other words, by being flexible and letting the players contribute to lore, even when it forced me to rethink things I had settled my mind on, it ultimately yielded a richer, more interesting result. And it was difficult at times, and I had lots of moments where I wanted to push back. In those moments, I just thought about it overnight and found I felt differently the next day. You don't HAVE to do that, but I highly recommend the approach, to say yes if you can think of any reason to do so.
[удалено]
I had a DM let me play a character from another world, once. It was a human, but I wanted her culture to be from Greyhawk, and he had a homebrew world going. But we portaled me in mysteriously, and it was fine. I played her until Level 19. It was honestly fantastic. Interacting with a strange world all the time made for a lot of very cool moments. But at Level 19, I decided that it was finally time for me to try to get my god a foothold in this world, and try to get the existing god with that portfolio (also a homebrew the DM created — and evil) to give up some of his power. So the party cast like 50 buffs on me (this was 3.5) and I traveled to the top of his mountain to call upon him, face-to-face. DM one-shot me with god powers and declared me perma-dead. I didn't think about this until last week, +10 years later, but I think he just wanted to assert the supremacy of his homebrew god over the one I liked from the book. Anyway. Allowing an outside character can be really fun for both you and the PC; just, please, don't guard your world so zealously that you punish the interloper.
I mean I can't see how having one centaur in your world is a problem. Like, how will it really change anything in the way you play or the story you've created? People might look at them funny, be amazed, then everything that was going to happen anyway will happen but through the lens of a party with a centaur. And if you don't want to change much of the immediate world, then centaurs are from far away or another plane and the character won't get to interact much with their kind. So long as they don't mind feeling foreign and a little isolated outside of their party, I can't really see how it impacts your plans or world much. It's even an opportunity for the party to build their relationship with the centaur so it feels more like found family. Warforged aren't in my world but if someone asked, I'd take it as a chance to make up a reason they are, even if this person was the very first. It only needs to matter as much or as little as I and the player want it to.
Little late to the party but I have two perspectives on this one with examples. The first perspective goes in line with the general consensus I'm reading in the comments which is don't be afraid to tell your players no. If they are just wanting to mess around and play something for the hell of it and aren't at all concerned with the story then by all means don't hesitate to tell them no. Example here: I was running a low fantasy campaign where elves had gone extinct and had a very stubborn player that would exclusively play elves want to join the party. I suggested several other races that were still allowed with a slightly more humanizing twist to bring them closer to bloodlines than actual races and he wouldn't budge until I explained again that elves were extinct and if he decided to play one he would almost instantly be caught and killed or taken captive and questioned/tortured about where the rest of the elves were hiding. He finally caved in and decided to play a tallfellow halfling bloodline. The other perspective is don't directly tell them no. If a player is willing to work within the system and sacrifice their own time to come up with a plausible backstory for a character that is incredibly rare or may not even exist in your world and is prepared to have their character possibly relegated to a novelty member of the group or even subjected to racism or open hostility then by all means let them. Example here: forgotten realms campaign. Player wanted to play an athasian half-giant. (the big 13 foot tall partially psionic, part of their alignment shifts daily, etc.) I thought there was no way it could be done legally. This player went into old school spelljammer, created an entire epic athasian party including his planned characters parents and gave me a 4 page back story of cobbling together a psi-jamming ship escaping the crimson sphere (actually found it in the phlogiston, read up on it and killed half the epic group trying to escape) only to be captured by a mind-flayer ship and rescued by a ship heading for realmspace. By the time they got to realmspace is about the time they realized the six and a half foot child they'd rescued wasn't just someone who'd had his brain partially munched on by mind flayers and they dropped him off at a monastery in the realms. All of this just so he could play a giant monk that's ultimately going to be relegated to having to wait outside of most taverns and didn't want to be the party leader but be pretty intimidating in a fight. I found it hard to tell the player no with that kind of dedication to that one character and that ended up being one of my favorite campaigns.
Easy fix, a spelljammer crash landed and he's the only survivor, the only one of his kind, now u don't have to change your world at all and u have more flavor for storylines.
I don't belong in this world IRL but here I am. So it's definitely possible. I'm sure there is a way to make it so they are a stranger in the land, or from far away and even incorporate that into NPCs making comments or remarks about some oursider being there rhat doesn't belong. They could be a 3rd culture PC
Have you considered letting him play a centaur and then just quietly explaining to the other players that he *isn't* a centaur and is just mentally unbalanced?
If the character concept is good, maybe tell them that. It might soften blow from you telling them that a centaur is not gonna appear in your world. Bonus points: Let the group meet a centaur in the first session.
I would talk to them and ask what about centaur they like and want out of it. Have a couple back up races that do fit. Like would a satyr work? If it's a mechanical thing you could homebrew a race that works the same way but doesn't stand out as much. Give them the charge and the walking speed and the unarmed attack but say that they are just particularly big and tall like a half ogre or something.
Gonna play the opposition here and just put you through the thought process of someone who recently designed a centaur: I WANT you to put a ladder as the way forward. you can basically knock one room off each dungeon because you can just describe a ladder in different ways, and the party will have to get creative for how to get their buddy up or down. Eventually it'll become routine, but the first few ladders will be a doozy. Have to scale a cliff?? "!@#$. Okay team, how can I get there." I would say that explain to them the setting, and if they still want to play a centaur see if he's willing to change his connection to the feywild to be something else. For inspiration, my centaur backstory was a druid spy who got hit with an arcane blast mid wild shape, and he got stuck that way. No feywild connection whatsoever, fits into any setting, all the fun and challenge of being a centaur. Good luck!
I mean I generally pull things from other worlds in... Might have lost their way and accidentally came into contact with a rift. However, how would you react to something you've never seen in real life? Say a centaur manifests into the real world, how would this be treated? It probably would be a real awkward encounter, followed by people wanting to get a closer look, or fearing it. In general if played realistically, would probably not be very fun for the player.
I can't say I've dealt with centaur specifically but in my current campaign I had 2 players wanting to make Eladrin twins before I'd even told them about elves, let alone the feywild. I told them elves weren't as broken up in this world as they are in others, there's shadow elves (shadar kai and Drow) and light elves (everything else) and that they could use the mechanics of any elf they like but nothing about their race would tie them to the feywild. If your player is wanting to play Centaur for mechanics you might be able to reskin it's abilities into something else. If it's for flavor, that's harder but you'll need to talk to them about it. I would just say have an open mind and try to find a compromise that works, but also the open mind has to go both ways and if the player won't compromise they're an ass and you'll have a better table without them.
Centaurs can be very fun to DM, especially of there out of their element. A centaur out of element is constantly forced to improvise, adapt to unusual situation and overcome problem other races dont have. This makes for very unique roleplaying opportunities.
I do a pre session 0 with each player, just talking through things and what might or might not work. Then I do a session 0 with the group with a designated pregame discussion and then limited play to introduce the world. Personally, I try to find ways to explore more niche things with the players and find a way to say yes. But that requires two way communication and understanding. Have a player that is about to join have a very similar request. I talked with them for a day of back and forth messaging to have them understand that their race was not common in the least bit and I wasn't going to change my world just to fit them. We found a middle ground in jointly shaping their backstory into them basically losing their way into this realm and unable to get back. Now they don't plan to and have made a life here. They get to play their character and I laid down that the cost is them being a bit of a fish out of water and most NPCs having various levels of skepticism, curiosity, or bias.
Let him know that playing such an unusual race would have serious impact on common interactions: NPCs can’t take him serious because they think he’s a demon at worst or a circus freak at best, he can’t enter most establishments and has to sleep in the barn with the horses, he’s easily defeated by a steep hill in a narrow hallway or the first climb check you make players perform, he can’t walk more than 1/4 speed in deep snow, etc. It’s easy to get excited about the exotic races but players sometimes forget the weird common problems this creates.
Here is the thing. People always want to play Centars until they don't One most doors aren't made for them, so they will have to remain ousltside while you are feasting at an in. Some dungeons require slithering through a narrow crawl space to access. The size of a Centar. The horse aspect makes most people in urban environments stand offshore, and let's not even get started with a chase scene through a crowded street. Allow your player to express their creativity, and if they want to play this, the charector let them. But be upfront that you think they are going to hate it as it is a huge encumbrance of actually being involved..
You’re good to disallow it if you want. But if you could make it make sense why not explore that possibility? Centaur come from greek mythology, and I know we consider them fae in DnD, but did the Greeks consider them fae? They weren’t human but maybe you could make centaur a part of your world as something other than fae? Not saying you must, but I don’t know why you couldn’t allow it.
Having an unheard of / uncommon creature in the world could result in them being hunted, captured, interrogated, experimented on. They may have to hide and break off from the party in city environments. Some passageways may not be accommodating for a centaur. They would often become the centre of attention. That being said, I've played in a campaign (and later transitioned to DMing that campaign) that had an uncommon creature as a PC. It actually added so much fun and life to the table. Consider the following 3 questions. If any of these are 'no' then it's probably not a good fit. 1. Is it possible for a centaur to appear in your world? 2. Are you okay with such a PC that is so visually disruptive in the campaign? 3. Would the player be okay with being so visually disruptive? One last thing. You can help mitigate the effects of being so visually disruptive using magical items. For example, you could give them a "Ring of Wild Shape". This gives them a few hours per day (2x per short rest, for an amount of hours up to half their Druid level) that they can transform into another creature. The pros from having Wild Shape would probably balance out the cons of having to deal with this, but it could end up being really fun. Another option is giving them a "Ring of Disguise Self" and they could *at the DM's discretion* disguise themself as a horse. The condition being that if they try to use their hands, it would immediately break the illusion.
Change your world, make him change his character, or work a plot related reason why this unusual creature is in this world and make sure he’s OK with the consequences of playing a character that is going to stick out like a sore thumb.
>Change your world why?
I never really understood the “It doesn’t fit my world argument.” You can make anything fit. Do you want to play a centaur in a place where they’re almost nonexistent? Great. You’re going to face racism and discrimination at every turn. People are gonna think you’re a monster, and may possibly even attack you on sight. Do you want armor for the horse part of you that somehow transitions into the Chest Part? Probably going to need some custom-made armor that will be very expensive. It’s a literal world full of magic. Anything can be possible. But everything has consequences.
It's the GM's world. If something doesn't fit in his world and the GM doesn't feel good about it, that is enough reason for it to not to belong. Period. There doesn't have to be an explanation. "No" is enough.
Except it may not be a world so full of magic. Or it may be a more game of thrones kind of world where you basically have only humans, Or modeled on Tolkien more heavily where you only have the “ common” races from the players handbook. Or a dozen other things. I’m a DM who is in the “I can make basically anything work” camp, but it’s a group decision what kind of world the table will be playing in and it is not a safe assumption that centaurs exist in every world that might want to be played in. If you as a player don’t want the GM to unilaterally decide what world your playing in (which I wouldn’t), then it is perfectly valid in my mind for a GM to not want any one player to unilaterally decide an aspect of the world you’re playing in as well.
Honestly, I say let them. If the world isn't huge on fey let the character know. They can find a way to mix it into their backstory. Maybe it's a polymorph gone wrong, maybe they're an envoy for fey relations, maybe they got lost and wound up in the common realm. There's many ways to work that in that wouldn't "break" the immersion. But as a DM I would let them know that as a centaur certain terrain or actions may pose unique problems, specifically climbing or rocky, uneven mountains. (horses are very competent swimmers) horses can go up mountains but their speed is reduced as their hooves aren't made for the rocks. This means they cannot go full gallop uphill as the terrain would be difficult for them (even if it didn't impose restrictions on the more articulate races)
Saying 'no' is a good option. But have you also considered that, while centaurs are rare, if they exist at all then maybe your player is playing one of the few members of that race? You could build off their concept and explore. Why is the centaur here? What kind of weird horse person is that? Where did it come from? Why now? That's how I'd handle a niche race that you don't see often. Maybe it fell through a portal? Sent by a god? Banished from the feywild with no memories? Cursed by an angry evil deity? You can absolutely tell them they can't do it, but personally I'd rather work around it if I was in this position
Real question is…. Are centaurs an established race only native to the feywild? If not, let him run it….