Hi, I’m a D&D player and DM. I’m currently making a campaign for my D&D group that’s fairly low fantasy/magic that takes place modern day. 2 of the players for the campaign want to be a tabaxi and owlin respectively. I normally wouldn’t have any issue with that so I initially said yes.
The issue with that is I’ve made the setting for this campaign with humanoids in mind rather than any anthropomorphic races and only now have I realized how much that character choice bothers me, so I’m thinking of heavily asking them to change their characters’ races to something like shifter and/or siren respectively instead, but I feel like it would be a bit of a bitch move, so yeah, WIBTA?
Please feel free to ask for more details, I don’t really know what would be relevant or not to this that I haven’t said
Edit: Ok, I think I know what to do now, I’ll talk to them and ask them if they would be fine with changing their characters’ races or not, as well as explain my reasoning entirely as in the gameplay issues as well as the personal issue, after that if they say they’re fine with changing then great and if they say they aren’t then I ask them if there could be a compromise, if not then I’ll just have to deal with it, is that all good?
You should ask this in a d&d group
It depends, how much *would* allowing it break the game?
I recently had this happen to me. Made a character, fell in love with the *aesthetic,* got it approved…until the DM actually read the whole module and then changed his mind. I was really frustrated until he explained that it would basically turn my character into the main character of the game if I went through with it.
Right now, NAH. Expect some frustration, try to find a compromise. The game should be fun for *everyone,* players and DM both.
Have you explained the low-fantasy/contemporary setting to them? Maybe they’ll agree it clashes. Does it clash? Would it actually make a difference or are you just being picky?
NTA. It’s your game, your world, and you set the parameters for character gen. You probably could have been clearer during the initial conversation about the limits of character gen, but it doesn’t make you an assholw.
But honestly? DnD isn’t the best system for a low-fantasy, human/human adjacent only setting. It’s just not really designed for that. Try looking for some other systems that do this setting better – World of Darkness in its various forms is a good option.
I think it depends. How much would not changing it impact your campaign? Is this just something that bothers you, or does it have a legitimate negative impact on your plans for the events of the campaign? Have they already rolled up their characters and are they ready to go? Or is it still in the initial planning stages?
I think if you had set that rule from the start, it’s fine to enforce it and require certain races. However, you already told them they could run characters as those races, and if those players have already rolled up their characters, I wouldn’t make them redo it.
If it really is a campaign breaking thing to have them play the races you told them they could, and it could realistically ruin the campaign for some reason, then I think you can kinda justify it. If it just doesn’t complete the image in your mind of what their party should look like, and it impacts nothing, and you just want to force them to change for a somewhat arbitrary reason, then I would say YTA.
Is there something about the game mechanics that would be affected, or is this an aesthetic issue where you just don’t want to/can’t envision those races in your setting?
If the former… I suggest tweaking or homebrewing as necessary to adjust the problematic abilities, involving your players in the process so they’re not blindsided.
If the latter… I mean, I would say that was reasonable if you had created the restriction up front, but having approved their characters and then going back on it… it has the potential to create resentment. You’re worried about your creative vision, but what about theirs? I know it’s fun to show your players the cool world you made, but this is ultimately a collaborative activity — otherwise you’d be writing a book. So you’ve got to be a little flexible.
Maybe there’s room for other races in your setting after all? Or you said you’re okay with shifters — what if there’s a Masquerade situation and these characters have human disguises? Or, talk to the players about why they want to play those races specifically — maybe they want certain abilities more than anything, and you could keep the mechanics and reskin them as human? Try to be both flexible and creative so everyone can have fun.
But if nothing works — I would err on the side of letting them have this. And if you can’t bring yourself to, then apologize for approving the idea prematurely, maybe have them keep those characters in their pockets for a future game or a side story, and give them something else good in this game to make up for it.
NAH yet.
“I’ve thought about this and while I wanted to accommodate your request it really won’t work in the campaign. You need to pick a race that at least APPEARS human that could fit in with society.”
You can explain that you wrote this campaign for humans in a human setting, and definitely have them hold onto those characters for another game that can have all the furry shit they want.
Maybe they meet a gang of Harengons who call themselves The Masked Lords of Watership Down.
If you’re this afraid of conflict on stuff that a DM *needs* to have the last word on, it will be hard to keep sessions and campaigns from getting completely derailed.
Is your group really so obnoxious and stubborn that you’re asking us if this is going to set them off?
NAH Talk to your damn players. D&D only works if everyone communicates well.
Tell them that, as you’ve continued to work on preparing the campaign, you’ve realized that there are some potential problems with what you’d previously okayed. Apologize for putting them in this position, and ask them how they would feel about going back and changing their characters to something more human-looking. If they don’t mind, no big deal. If they do mind, figure out what compromise you guys can make work. (Can you tweak the mechanics and the roleplay elements to minimize the problems? Can you rewrite part of your story to make it work? Can the characters they’ve built be put aside for a different game?)
Healthy conflict resolution is an invaluable part of the DM’s toolkit, so here’s your opportunity to exercise it. Communicate your concerns, listen to *their* concerns, and find a way forward that honors both. If they’re not super immature, they should appreciate your effort and work with you on this.
I’m gonna go with YTA for the way you worded things. Saying it “bothers” you. If you don’t change the wording and approach the players, I’d be upset if I were them. You can say that you thought more about it and that you would struggle to keep the module consistent without solely humanoid characters. But to approach the players and imply they’ve done something bothersome is wrong.
Kinda?
So, limited species/races for the campaign – NTA. Totes fine.
Allowing something then asking for the change afterwards? – Sorta but barely. Mistakes happen, it’s fine. As a DM there can be a lot of this particularly with some ‘rules as fun’ moments, or when rules get confusing so you just say yes and hope it works out and retcon if it doesn’t. So normally this is NTA but this only gets a very light “sorta” because this is something you should have been more clear about in advance. No big deal, though. Especially if the game hasnt started yet.
Forcibly changing something like tabaxi/owl which are basically like humans with animal features to shifters that are also just basically humans with animal features would, indeed, be a YTA situation because your justification is invalid. They are, as determined by the books, still humans with animal features. They can still have large eyes, pointed ears, fur, long teeth and nails, etc. Visually very similar – shifters in unshifted forms are only **slightly** more “human looking” than tabaxi (although a fair bit more than owlin). At this point it still seems very arbitrary. Also, tabaxi and owlin are humanoids – not just by the game as a creature type but also by the real world definition of humanoid.
So, requesting they change to something with big difference, like to Human, Dwarf, Halfling etc, is understandable. But changing from one “humanoid that looks human with animal features” species to another “humanoid that looks human with animal features” on the basis of “looks human” is weird. If one “humanoid that looks human with animal features” species works for your world, then so should the other “humanoid that looks human with animal features”. Making a distinction seems less about “world building” and more like being finicky and pedantic.
Even saying that, however, still not a big thing. If I was the player I’d just say you’re weird but then shrug and make a new character. So, YTA, but not enough for it to really matter at all. If that makes sense.
I’m not sure if my rambling makes sense or not. 😂Sorry if it doesn’t. I’m tired and hungry and headachey and seriously, massively craving, Thai food for some reason but the Thai place won’t open for another hour!! 😭 I’ve also had *wayyyy* too much sugar this morning. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
YWBTA
A good DM would roll with it. If it’s a fairly anthropomorphic world then these characters might raise eyebrows interacting with the NPCs in the world. DND is a creative game and this is an opportunity for you to get creative as a DM! You can maybe handle this via prejudice from the NPCs. Does your campaign start the classic way in a tavern? Maybe a fight breaks out from NPC patrons not vibing with a giant owl man and cat guy trying to mingle with them. Maybe there are certain physical challenges they need to overcome in a creative way due to their races. The world you’ve created may be hostile towards non-humanoid characters and that’s fine. I would personally be cheesed about having race limitations imposed in a game
INFO: It’s hard to assess this without knowing how in-depth the pregame discussion was. Did you tell them this was low fantasy/ magic and takes place in the modern day before character creation? Because just from how it sounds, you are using the D&D game mechanics for a more Earth based reality homebrew. If you’d said “modern day” did you clarify you meant standard Earth, or could they have thought it was your own imagining of a modern version of Faerun?
Were you too vague? I know as DM you don’t want to give the plot away in the pregame, but you still have to clearly define the World, because that ties into character creation too. If someone wants to be a tabaxi or an owlin, their backstory has to fit within your world. They need to be able to explain how they grew up actively living in your world. Not like they stepped through a Portal from Somewhere Else, or grew up on a hidden secret island and only just arrived.
Also for consideration, if this world is “low magic” then than needs to be reflected in the magical capability and capacity of not just your Owlin or Tabaxi players, but ALL of them. It’s not just about how they characters appear, but what they can really DO and have it make sense in the World without them being the equivalent of Alien superheroes from Krypton. So your wizard can’t be throwing fireball left and right….but with enough concentration, he can light a candle from across a room without touching it.