Recent content by mamba

clear instructions were not given, agreed. Thinking an arctic ranger is unsuitable / not allowed is a misunderstanding however. Do I? The rules say what they are, the DM should know that this means the arctic ranger is a better choice than other rangers for the terrain. If the DM wants to limit...

ok, so a misunderstanding rather than unclear. In that case things get sorted out right then and there, just like in your example discussion any player who thinks an Arctic Ranger is not suitable for an arctic campaign sounds like someone who runs into a lot of misunderstandings ;) I am not...

because it is the normal thing to do… when you ask me for directions and I give them in a way that is unclear to you, do you just head off not knowing where to go or do you ask for clarifications? no they did not, they did not understand the parameters so they have no idea whether their ideas...

I am not saying they don’t exist, only that to me they are not warranted. People have different preferences and priorities, it happens, we all should learn to live with that without being offended

if the instructions are unclear to them, why wouldn’t they ask for clarification instead of shrugging them off and acting as if there weren’t any

there are https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LX_TP1YO2DwlNvLa8XT https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/0ApfDhihFFYV

Maybe Bugbears and Borderlands fits your bill https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/528549/bugbears-borderlands-2e The first edition is available for free, but offers considerably fewer classes https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/409630/bugbears-and-borderlands

the ‘yet’ referred to the genre being the most popular and somehow despite that D&D being the only game in it, which is definitely not the case. For context, see the sentences before and after in any case, we agree that there are a lot more games than just D&D in the same genre

I can see disappointed, but you should not be annoyed over it. That goes both ways, a player can reject the setting or plot idea, the DM can reject a character idea, and if the two cannot agree then they just should find others to play with. No harm, no foul, but it can be disappointing all the same

players being allowed to opt out is not controversial, the DM might have preferred them not to, but I doubt the same DM would say they had no right to

That is what I wrote, they are not outselling anyone else because they are the only ones creating a game in this genre, they do it through name recognition, marketing, and their distribution channel.

I know, that was my point

yes, they cannot stray too far from whatever that is, but that has nothing to do with their IP or their settings (apart from those settings supporting that style of game), it is poorly defined and essentially based on precedent and individual feelings (hence the discussion). 1e/2e, 3e, and 5e...

Except that you cannot call it D&D and do not have WotC behind you with their marketing and distribution channels, apart from that, yes. Pretty sure WotC could push a different version of D&D and be successful, it's not like they haven't done that a few times already I do not think the planes...

I am not sure all the planes and stuff are all that relevant to most players, and FR is mostly just 'generic fantasy', so not sure how much can attribute to simply the trademark name vs the IP itself. I tend to ascribe most of it to the trademark alone. I also read your 'shared world' as not...