Start a new D&D game

It wasn't even attitude, it was necessity. No children meant nobody to take care of you once you got old and frail.

Doesn't look like you and communicated what each of you wants from the game clearly. Should've been "no social reforms in the game please, it's a pseudo-historical make-believe and I as GM want us to address other themes"

>start a campaign in a new setting
>slavery of non-human races is commonplace
>buy a dwarf who can drive our cart, carry my items, and do campsite chores
>sure beats the hard labour his previous owner had him doing
>rest of the party treats me like i'm a bad guy

Yeah, it's like how they got to have an imbalance of men to women in China. Everyone needed to have male sons, or else they wouldn't have families who could to take care of them in old age.

...

your setting is a square peg, the players are a round hole
either one or both of you are going to have to change their expectations to meet common ground
the bare minimum of being a DM is making sure everyone is having fun, and forcing all of them to meet your idea of fun play and ignoring what they want is going to be un fun

This is a good idea. Remember, D&D is not the real world: Here, trying to pull off shit like that means you get the back of someone's hand.

I mean, Exalted handles this pretty well. It turns out that if you try to reform society - which is only possible through judicious use of magical powers, which the Exalted have - the Exalted end up on top.

I usually preface my games by saying "Look, there's going to be adult content here. Game of Thrones shit. Anyone not comfortable with that should find another game." That gives me carte blanche.

"Wat Tyler" is/was probably a faggot and only faggots like you, OP, would know about historical faggots.

On topic just have them fail dismally and repeatedly. No one will persecute them for what they say because no one will listen. Simply have everyone treat them as if they were saying that the sky is green. Not just he ruler, not just official representatives - everyone, even including the faggots and the slaves themselves will just treat them as if they were obviously deluded. No movement will start because they do not get any followers.
Simple.

I like that!

Sooo...why they'd trust the clearly deluded guys to save the world, then?

I'm genuinely happy to see reasonable responses like this and others like it to OP's bait post.

/thread

If you want to punish your players, run an ERP game.

It's always possible OP is legit. The only thing that repeats itself more than History is Shitty GMs.

>listen up, peons, it is I, your DM. In this setting, which is 100% historically accurate based on my jerkoff sessions to Game of Thrones, queers are outlawed and anyone who isn't white will be burned as a witch
>"Uh, you know I'm gay, right?"
>silence, the historical accuracy has spoken, how dare you want to enjoy yourself in this game, only I may enjoy myself in this game, now watch me jerk off to how smart I am, no homo

>"Uh, you know I'm gay, right?"

Isn't that besides the point? It's a game, man. You can suspend disbelief, right?

Who says they trust them? They're disposable weapons, point and fire. A group of assholes come into town going "Hey, pay us to kill monsters", so you point them at the crypt full of undead. They kill all of the undead, you pay them and they fuck off. They fail, they get eaten.

It's win-win.

>Players attempt to engage the world in a meaningful way.
>Come up with their own unique , achievable goals that allow a campaign of political intrigue, roleplay and not murder-hoboing.
>DM mad because he wants them to kill zombies and stop le world ending threat.

The fuck.

Gay people are already dumped on 24/7 in real life over their sexuality, just let them play a goddamn gay elf for a few hours a week. It's not going to fucking kill you.

>""""historically accurate""""
Know how I know this post is bait?

Looks like your group wants to play an SJW politics game, good luck.

>Gay people are already dumped on 24/7 in real life over their sexuality, just let them play a goddamn gay elf for a few hours a week. It's not going to fucking kill you.
Calm the fuck down, you prima donna.
I've gotten my dick sucked by twinks more manly than you.

Silly user. Didn't you learn about the great zombie uprising of 1528?

This didn't happen. But this 5 will happen.

I'll asum that, for some wild reason, this is not just a weak try to disguise a lich thread.

Maybe you should ask your players if they want to play this social rights game or they just want your setting to have modern standards. In the second case, there's nothing wrong about dealing with their objective as an impossible idealistic crusade. You should warn them beforehand that this campaign will have this pessimistic approach, tho. Lost causes are cool but not for everyone.

You shouldn't punish them for having a different political mindset, you should punish them for not focusing on the main objective. Every day they waste trying to start a cultural revolution, another village is destroyed by undead. Make them waste 5 sessioms converting a town into an all-inclusive safe space, only to have bandits raze it shortly after.
You shouldn't be trying to dissuade your players from what they believe in, you should show them that evil doesn't care.

This. Don't outright quash their fun, just show them the consequences of their shortsighted thinking.

>You shouldn't be trying to dissuade your players from what they believe in
Nah

Is that supposed to prove something happened? Because it doesn't.

depends on the culture my dude, not every where in Europe had the same attitude towards gays that Renaissance Italy did. Not to mention even Renaissance Italy wasn't great because you could still be arrested for being a sodomite, you were just unlikely to be punished very harshly.
Its pop history that gays were just fine and dandy for everyone until those damn Victorians got their hands on history.

Yeah maybe in the 70s. Welcome to 2017 where my dog is more oppressed than a gay man.

>where my dog is more oppressed than a gay man.
Spoken like a true first-world suburbanite unaware of the world outside of his bubble.

Fuck off.

its the only world that matters friend. By our efforts combined we can make the whole world first world

Im gay but i usually play straight characters because im autistic and i know noone else in the group can relate to it. Players should play to the group expectations just as much as the GM should desu

>By our efforts combined we can make the whole world first world
Well yeah, but we aren't there yet. NWO when?

>D&D game
>historically accurate world

As opposed to male daughters?

>Players actually carrying the history´s weight
>Master complains
Nothing new on Veeky Forums

Why should I enable his mental illness?

>Yeah maybe in the 70s. Welcome to 2017 where my dog is more oppressed than a gay man.

You imply that in the 70s dogs were less oppressed than gay men?

I mean, I know the 70s weren't great for homosexuals, but I don't think they were lead around on leashes and had their balls cut off.

>No children meant nobody to take care of you once you got old and frail
Gays just adopt if they really, really don't want to marry and pop one out.

Sucks to be you, OP. My usual crew of players always go full commie and it's a blast to run. Had a great campaign in Eberron where they managed to pull off a successful socialist revolution in Sharn.

some of them were but mostly of their own volition.

For the same reason you enable other illnesses? Which I hope you do. Or are you a guy that laughs at cancer patients and trips up people with broken legs?

No, that's stupid. You don't enable people with illnesses or disabilities, man. You don't ask a crippled guy to riverdance, and you don't offer a cancer patient a pack of smokes. That shit is morally wrong.

If someone likes to dress up in a fursuit, you don't ask him to be a children's mascot. That's called 'enabling'.

>poor DM'ing general

just fucking run with it senpai - they want to focus on abolition of slavery and a liberal agenda, let them - thats the makings of a guerilla campaign right there - the PC's having to win over a populace who view them as fifth columnists caring about irrelevant shit when hordes of the undead are banging on the door.

I think its quite interesting forcing the PC's to deal with the threat of the undead and the ever advancing hordes in a scenario where they must weaken the forces opposing the undead to achieve their goals.

But nah railroad them like shit blud its easier

Best advice here, desu

And of course, the group that is supposed to save the world against the undead hordes is completely incapable of starting a revolution.
But they can take down an army of undead along with the big bad lich.

And, OF COURSE, you're such a good GM that you can't even imagine talking to your players about the type of campaign they want, and you just want to impose what you like on them.

But well, it's not like we don't know it's a stale bait.

Do it, but instead of slaughtering them and ending it, have them enter the fray as shock troops against the evil brujaja or whatever you've cooked up.

We can't. If everyone in the world used as much energy as the average American, we'd raise global temperatures past habitability - and that's not from pollution, but from heat radiation.

Disorder, although homosexuality isn't one. Whether you have a mental disorder or not basically depends on whether the doctor thinks you should have therapy or meds subsidized.

I'm reminded of the vidya Man of Prey (?).
>post-apocalyptic Russia
>slavers appear
>do quest to kill slavers and release prisoners
>all the NPCs want to lynch the unknown faggot who blocked their source of cheap labor
Because the majority is sure gonna appreciate fucking up the economy or their social mores.

>use DnD instead of GURPS
>lel magic
>historical accurate with meat points

I love posting in bait threads as well, fellas.

This. Ignore bait threads, or just post wizard's.

Thankfully in my country homosexuality is still classified as a mental illness, which it is.

Or it will and the world'll be a better place for it.

>>>/tumblr/

>including the faggots and the slaves themselves
This.
>hey help us free all slaves!
>why
>so you can be free
>but if all slaves are free, who's gonna serve us?

Make the best to punish and piss them off and then find decent players. It's the best thing to do.

If your players approach you with plans to make gay rights and equal marriages, with the possibility to upgrade to adoption rights as the game continues, you have NO right to refuse them. Now, I know what you're going to say:

>B-b-b-but muh homos
>B-b-b-but mud medieval morals
>B-b-b-but mommy, alternative lifestyles make me scared

Shut up. You shouldn't be DMing. Your players are trying to make something interesting out of your generic, heteronormative fantasy, and you're throwing it back in their faces. You have NO right to be DMing - just give your notes to one of your players, they can do a better job than you can.

TL/DR, if you can't handle gays in fantasy settings, you shouldn't be a DM.

this post is so underated for being this high in the thread.

Ok, what of the players agreed to fight the undead but made the abolition of anti homosexual laws and promise of equal rights part of their price?

Except everything you just said is wrong. You're just an entitled piece of shit and probably delusional enough that you shouldn't be allowed to play roleplaying games in the first place.

how did your players find out being gay was illegal? did a peasant or noble run out and go U BEST NOT BE BEIN GAY IN MY SWAMP

Never been, just tired of faggots who get pussy about gay people in their setting.

Query: what do you get out of this?

That's an interesting idea. Get to the point where the threat is rising and where your party is considered indispensable, then force the king to the negotiating table. Treasure? Not interested. Princess' hand in marriage? No thanks. But let's talk about abolition.

77 replies and counting.

a lot of societys frowned on slavery in antiquity you sperglord
bait/10, made me reply

I'm just pointing out that trusting disposable heroes to save you from - and I quote OP here - a world-ending threat is pretty dumb.

why is everyone assuming the dm should have to change his story and world hes worked countless hours on for a bunch of twat that want to be uncooperative that spent a solid 20 mins rolling up a char sheet. ditch the players, find new ones.

>his story
I don't think you have any players. Enjoy your novel.

this is some extreme quality of bait or extreme levels of delusions and i cant pick up which.it is.

Oh come on, squashing their accomplishments is just very passive agressive way to dissuade them from their beliefs. You'd be in practice punishing them, and masquerading it as "consequences".

are you implying that their shouldnt be an overarching plot line within a campaign with a clear goal.

...did you even read the post you were replying to?

Bumping a quality thread

>this is some extreme quality of bait or extreme levels of delusions and i cant pick up which.it is.
It's a pasta smarto

shit i was completely duped, guess it did its job.

>which it is.
It is in your country.

>Make them waste 5 sessioms converting a town into an all-inclusive safe space, only to have bandits raze it shortly after.
How is that not petty and passive-aggressive?

I'm implying that you shouldn't put countless hours into a story or world until you know the players are on board.

So you didn't, then.

That's the point. The person you're responding to recommends punishing players for not going along with their precious story. Saying "but you're just punishing your players" is just going to make them go "yep, I'm a shitty DM, thats exactly what I'm doing."

>Its pop history that gays were just fine and dandy for everyone until those damn Victorians got their hands on history.
Thank you.
European tolerance of gays could range from the very tolerant, pre-Christian Viking's "if you even imply I'm a faggot then killing you isn't murder" to the the extremely intolerant, nasty colonialist, Christian Spanish "if I imply you're a faggot then killing you in a brutal fashion isn't a sin"

However, OP is a megafag for not checking his players actually wanted to play his super serious no-modernisms DnD campaign.

/pol/ going out telling everyone what's morally right and wrong again, never gets old.

it's old as fuck and you should just stay in your containment zone, comrade

>undead hordes
>historically accurate
wew lad

Easy. Have the king crush their revolution and have them summarily executed.

but when there is never a lack of players wanting to play a good story that has had countless hours put into it (even though it might not be everyone's cup of tea) do i care? do you think i dm for other people alone?
But i digress, i do it because i like creating worlds and having people who are willing to appreciate them explore them with me. in a way i think you're right with the comparison to a novel but instead of writing the whole story i just create the world and the goal and enjoy as me and the players write the novel together.

AIDS_March.jpg

This, D&D has a long history of americanized level poz, despite it being a fantasy setting
-Age of consent is 18, as is the age of manhood in Faerun
-Sex with Dragons counting as bestiality (BOVD)
-Everything about the vistani
-Removal of sexual dimorphism
And much, much more.