>The campaign includes an elite guard of dragon riders
>The GM won't allow any of the party to learn how to ride dragons
>There isn't even an in-game reason, the GM just says no
For what purpose?
>>44203817
See if NOBODY rode dragons, that would be one thing... but when there's lore precedent for dragon riding, a DM should allow players to put in the effort to learn, and perhaps even have the goal of JOINING that elite order.
>>44203887
It's pretty much the huge sore point for our entire party. We thought it'd be some special circumstance where dragon and rider have been bonding since both of them were children, but nope. They go through a program and pop out the other end knowing how to ride dragons. We all want to learn. Hell, even if we just end up doing one quest/mission on dragon back we'd be happy, but the GM's stuck on a no.
>>44204116
Has the GM given an out-of-game reason of any kind?
>>44204189
He thinks it'll derail the campaign.
>>44204224
So the question becomes, "do the players WANT a campaign on rails?"
Because if not, then the GM isn't really justified in trying to give the players something they don't want.
>>44203817
Well, does your party own a dragon? That's kind of important.
>>44204224
It's not de-railing. It's throwing a track switch and getting aboard the Dragon line.
>>44205390
>>44205734
It's as much the GM's right too. GM isn't responsible for catering to the players every whim.
If there was no plot reason for them to want to join & it's just the players' impulses, then I'd say no too.
Your characters aren't going to set aside the time sensitive mission to save the mcguffin or w/e just because it'd be cool to ride a dragon.
>>44205783
>Your character wouldn't do that
Shit GM detected.
>>44204224
Problem is, if everyone wants it, at this point he derailed it harder by denying it.
I think you would've gotten bored with it or he could have figured out a way to tie it back into his overall plot. His unwillingness to compromise on this doesn't really bode with for him as a GM, because this is something all the players want.
This sort of thing is the reason you come to tabletop gaming. When someone says you can climb that mountain, you actually can. If they're deciding you can't without resolving it through rolls, why the hell would you bother with them?
>>44203817
Sometimes, I'll do things like that. but I'm usually just upfront about my honest opinion on the subject.
>Player "Why can't I learn to ride dragons?"
>DM "It's honestly just not a direction I would care to take the plot in, and if I made the attempt, it would be very pitiful and half-assed. I want to focus the campaign in another direction and keep the dragon-riders as a background element to the campaign."
Usually, they're pretty okay with this. Though I try not to limit a situation like learning how to be an active part of an elite guard.
>>44203817
>Not riding wyverns instead.
Shit taste detected.
Even though I find the whole "dragon riders" cliche to be stupid as fuck, if you guys really want to do it, just do it.
DM says no? Just all mutually agree to jump one of the riders coming out of the barracks and tie him up and go try and ride the dragon. Even if you die.
Or just refuse to progress the story by going to the guard and signing up and repeatedly doing the training until you get to ride dragons.
You can play hardball too.
>>44205995
>You can play hardball too.
Please no one take the emotionally stunted manchild route of conflict resolution
>>44205981
that isn't a wyvern though
>>44205981
That's a dragon.
>>44206249
>>44206250
Oh shit, you're right!
Well, I stand corrected.
Anyway, riding dragons is awesome and it should be encouraged in every game.
>>44206228
GM had a campaigne where we were going to war. Sleeping in the tents, our npc captain guy with decked out armor and shit with us.
Our rogue wanted to stay awake so we all left the room. Came back, woken up by a bloodsoakes halfling who had just coup-de-gras'd our captain. Little fucker rolled really, really well apparently. He wanted the loot. (He was new... his alignment shifted towards chaotic, maybe evil but we never found out, I think he initially put neutral good but again, he was new)
So we hauled ass out of there, and we are still going to save the kingdom, albeit a different way. Our DM was a bit baffled but he went with it, and progressed the gameworld accordingly.
Pretty fun game tbqh.
>generic fantasy
>party is joined by moderately powerful NPCs (arguably DMPCs) who weaken relative to the PCs as they progress
>DMPC1 dies
>DMPC2, shaken, wants to go to camp to mourn
>steals everything while there
fuck elves
>>44203817
Well, there's valid reasons you can't just let players be ANYTHING the setting has to offer. Ask him if he'd be willing to run a dragon rider campaign later, then go on with your current thing. Not everybody likes throwing all their notes away.
>>44206249
>>44206250
>implying every setting has the same definitions for wyverns vs dragons
>>44206481
Definition of WYVERN
: a mythical animal usually represented as a 2-legged winged creature resembling a dragon
You probably think you're smart subverting tropes like that, making elves dwarves and vice versa. But let me tell you: you're not.
The purpose of language is to make it easier for someone to understand what you're talking about immediately and it completely defeats the purpose of it if you give it a new definition in your setting and then write about it on the internet, without explaining what exactly the differences are in your setting.
And if you do explain it, you're stupid regardless because it all can be avoided by calling the creatures you made something else.
>>44204224
There's a shitload of ways to give PCs a rideable dragon without giving them the ability to derail anything.
Like, giving ONE player a young dragon who can barely take off with someone on their back, and maybe needs some more training and bonding to completzky obey orders.
That way, no "We all fly to X on the Dragon's back" or "We do [Insert something that would break the campaign] with the Dragon".
If their plan just go against the GMs plans, he could just claim that the dragon is too afraid/undisciplined to do it, and it would give the players a reason for its inability to do it.
Plus, it could backfire on the players, if the dragon decided to fly too far/land when the player is scouting, for example.
>>44206508
It's a useless as fuck distinction that comes from the British Isles' heraldry, which the rest of Europe doesn't even give a shit about. If you want to make Dragons the big lizards and Wyverns the somewhat smaller lizards, or Wyverns unintelligent dragons, or whatever the fuck else, it's valid.
>>44206536
Give them a baby drake and a potion of enlargement. They get to ride it once, and once only.
>>44203817
Fuck that noise, there are ways to force the issue. Charm Monster is 4th level and might be enough, Geas is 6th level and is definitely enough. If arcane magic isn't your thing, hang around a battlefield and wait for a dragon to die. Have the cleric desecrate the area then raise it as a zombie or skeleton. You'll have a dead dragon mount, which is itself pretty cool.
>>44203817
>The setting has fighter pilots
>The GM won't allow any of our party to apply to the air force and spend years finishing pilot training so that in the event of armed conflict we can fly in narrowly defined missions because you don't actually get to keep the plane and do whatever you want with it in your spare time.
>There isn't even an in-world reason, the GM just says so.
>Totally crazy railroading amirite?
Or maybe you're being a dick for wanting to just completely step outside of the expected scope of the game to pick up a skill that requires a time commitment and complete change of lifepath because you think dragons are neat, dummy.
>>44207351
Learning to ride an animal is not the same as learning to fly a combat aircraft
>>44207390
>Missingthepoint.jpg
>>44205783
>Your characters aren't going to
Literally worse than Hitler.
Maybe the NPCs aren't going to let them try it, but fuck off if you want to dictate how PCs feel.
There are dozens of reasons I could list off the top of my head why circumstances could prevent them from doing it; why not use one instead of a blank No?
>>44207351
Meanwhile in the land where people don't get regularly killed by hay fever brought in by your strawmen
>setting has fighter pilots that have no particular special training or vetting, outside their personal skill
>party and the players think they're a neat concept and want to give it a try
>there is nothing stopping the PCs from learning the skill
>not even in setting reasons, because the GM can't be bothered to think of any
>no
There's being the Devil's advocate, then there's being the retard's advocate.
Try being the former, and stop being the latter.
Is there any good dragon companion style settings or homebrews or RPGs?
Something like Eragon but less shit.
Itt: Player entitlement.
>>44206299
>Play Pathfidner
>Start as slaves
>Go through first session doing slave stuff
>NPC Old Man helps us group up and start a riot
>DM intends for us to break out of slavery and go on an adventure
>Intends for the slavemaster to be a recurring villain
>Barbarian murders slavemaster the second she gets a chance to
>DM rolls with it
>We finally reach the exit to the slave camp
>About to step out when we here an off-hand mention about the slavemaster having an escape ship
>Group looks at each other
>Turn the entire crowd of want-to-escape slaves back around, go back into the slave camp
>We steal his boat and become pirates instead
>DM's face when
>he just runs with it
Such a great game
>>44206299
>coup-de-gras
Coup de grâce
"gras" means "fat"
>>44208408
itt: u a faget
>>44208563
