DM Restrictions Yay or Nay?


 I usually DM D&D all of the time and I very rarely get to play let alone play in a campaign. I am currently running my own game in a low magic world of sorts (compared to normal D&D). I couldn't publish said world due to multiple IP violations (FR, Eberron, Golarion, several 4th ed things borrowed) but anyway I sometimes do put restrictions in should I want to run a game.

Anyway my main restrictions which is almost universal.

1. No Samurai, Ninja, Wu Jen etc. Samurai= fighter, Ninja= Rogue (or multclass rogue), Wu-Jen= wizard. Restriction would go away in a Sppelljammer setting. There is no equivilent of China/Japan on my world.

 Current game of 3.XYZ rstrictions.

1. You cannot start as a primary spellcaster (Sorcerer being an exception) and you can only multiclass into them at level 3. Spell casters are rare and the Red Mantis assassins hunt them down and kill them. Artificers, Bards, Duskblades, Alchemists, Magus etc are fine. Restriction applies to classes with level 9 spells. The assassins are kind of like the Sith in Star Wars.

2. Divine casters are even more rare. in addition to restriction 1 they have to find a divine power source. The gods are dead/absent and the BBEG race (Serpent folk/Yuan Ti) can somehow cast divine spells.

3. Wealth by level guidelines are gone along with most item creation feats. One can't buy magic items easily apart from ones bards, alchemists etc can make.


 With the 2nd rule I told them that if they want to be a divine caster I will work it into the story (Luke becomes a Jedi after fidning Ben).

 Obviously I would not put something like this in a core rule book (expansion book/camapign setting sure).

 Where would one draw the line for the DM. At the end of the day they can do what they like but what in D&DN do you think counts as a restriction and is that restriction a good or bad one (PC's can't fly at level 1, PCs crafting magic items etc).

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

I don't mind the DM setting restrictions as long as it's not so restrictive that I can't find something interesting to play. Our three DMs have different worlds and different uses of our optional rules (we as a group put together our house rules), and in the extremely low-magic custom world (Paarl) mages are so rare that they're never adventurers. Mages MUST join the guild because only the guild teaches them to control the power in their head that otherwise drives them insane. And because it's so rare, magic is contained in a "matrix" that's incorporated into an item to make it magical.

As long as your players are content with what you set out, I don't see a problem.

In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.

At the end of the day they can do what they like but what in D&DN do you think counts as a restriction

YAY!  Restrictions may be options that are allowed beyond the core options also. Take races and classes in D&D Next for exemple, beyond dwarf/elf/halfling/human and cleric/fighter/rogue/wizard its a the DM's discretion wether they can be chosen or not. Some may allow all the races and classes, some may allow only few of them and some may allow no others. A campaign run in Dark Sun could have no Cleric or Paladin for exemple, a no magc world could have no spellcasters etc...

The same should go for certain alignments, magic items, feats and any other game elements. If a DM does not allow PC something in his campaign, its his choice and players wanting to play in his campaign should comply IMO. That is not to say that DM/Player cannot discuss it beforehand though but i am a firm believer that the DM has the right to run games without elements he don't want in.



Choose a Race: The most common playable races in the game are dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans. Other races might be available, at your Dungeon Master’s discretion. (Character Creation PDF pg. 01)


Choose a Class: The most common classes include the cleric, the fighter, the rogue, and the wizard.Other classes might be available, at your Dungeon Master’s discretion. (Character Creation PDF pg. 02)

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough. Saying "no paladins because their orders and faith has been nearly extinct for several centuries and the Gods are quiet" IS a good reason. Also, I do hope the majority of DMs are willing to work with players to come up with ideas as well.

It really depends on the rule and why. A curious reason is the DM not understanding it and thus doesn't want to risk it breaking the game. This was a thing with 3.5 Psionics. I probably asked every time we rolled up characters for a new game and the answer was no 90% of the time. On one hand, a DM should feel comfortable dealing with the power the players have, yet again, is there no trust? :c

So even though that one made me want to explode my head all over their cereal to bloody up their breakfast, I can still see the other side of this issue. So it isn't as simple as a yay or nay.

Depends.

Saying "no, i don't wanna" is bad.
Saying "they don't fit in this campaign" is ok.
Saying "they don't fit in this campaign, how about if we modify..." is best, if not always possible.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I don't mind restrictions. The DM is entitled to them as long as he or she explain his or her setting, campaign, preferences, and playstyle before the game actually starts.

At my table, there are no sane playable dwarves. I inform players of that early and why that is the case.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

I'm generally open on this.

I played an all dwarf adventure that was entertaining to say the least.  Some of the classes were not as suited for a dwarf, but nothing was broken as a result.  Our benefactor was a white dragon that lived in the forest and spent her time appearing as a beautiful brunette human sorceress.  Yes, seriously.

I have no issue with restrictions if they make sense, and do not hinder the "fun" of the game.

"The turning of the tide always begins with one soldier's decision to head back into the fray"

I agree. I always try to be accomodating, but at the same time all my players have my tastes for ceratin things. None of them would ever consider playing anything too alien in the first place. We do place heavy emphasis on role play and find it difficult to play things like thri-kreeen or dragonborne etc...

THe best charchters and games usually happen through restriction, I'vve just never had to enforce restriction because players self moderate. I.e. they want to fit in the world and the game. 

My mind is a deal-breaker.

I agree. I always try to be accomodating, but at the same time all my players have my tastes for ceratin things. None of them would ever consider playing anything too alien in the first place. We do place heavy emphasis on role play and find it difficult to play things like thri-kreeen or dragonborne etc...

IMO, playing a thri-kreen or warforged is much more fun because of the challenge.  Playing a human, or it's varients can easily get boring.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I tend not to restrict based on what does or doesn't exist in the campaign setting - I usually run traditional style settings like Forgotten Realms, Mystara, and Greyhawk. In those world, almost everything in D&D probably exists in some form or other.

When I do implement restrictions on PC's  it's almost always because of the style of campaign I am looking to run. If I'm planning to run an urban campaign with lots of shady dealings with thieves guilds, secret societies, and political intrigue, I usually try to guide the players toward characters that will fit in such a style. In that example, I usually would say no paladins, and no highly lawful characters in general. If I'm looking to run a "knights in shining armor" type campaign then I will probably say no highly chaotic characters.

I almost always say no evil characters, unless I'm planning to run a campaign for villains (something I've always wanted to do but have had a hard time putting the right group together for it). 

I also like to run campaigns that are more old school in feel, so I usually do restrict races to traditional 1st and 2nd edition PHB races, and I do limit magic item creation.

I always, always make sure to make these things clear before people show up to play, so they have time to come up with characters they will enjoy. I also try to put out several options for campaign styles and find out which ones have the most interest among potential players before I decide. After all, I want to make sure that the players are involved and will enjoy the style of the campaign as much as I do.
I agree. I always try to be accomodating, but at the same time all my players have my tastes for ceratin things. None of them would ever consider playing anything too alien in the first place. We do place heavy emphasis on role play and find it difficult to play things like thri-kreeen or dragonborne etc...

IMO, playing a thri-kreen or warforged is much more fun because of the challenge.  Playing a human, or it's varients can easily get boring.



To each is own, I'm not saying any race is bad. I just personally really struggle with 'alien' races. It's easy for me to play a humanoid, because I am one. But an insect? I have tried and it makes me uncomfortable, pondering the intracacies of an insect mind. Especially one with genetic memeories. Even elves can be difficult to get into also, I mean hundreds of years old... but whimsical? I can do it, but I focus on one aspect. It's hard for me to play a 200 year old person, who is ...  young, so I just pick one aspect usually on the 'human' side. 

Most of the time I have players struggling to roleplay, its because they set their roleplay ambitions too high. Sometimes keeping it really easy  allows teh players to establish a much deeper character. How the players start to evolve the character generally defines the feel of the game, serious characters get gritty games. Funny or capricious charachters get wild adventures. 

Either way, I have no problems with people playing a race that exists in the world, if they are a new player I usually urge them to take on a more 'archetypical' charachter tho. 

My mind is a deal-breaker.

i have very few restriction as a DM for my players on the campaing i am running, one of them being a plotpoint (no shardmind, there is a plotpoint for this and it won't work if shardmind were playable characters, because they are basically extinct), the other restriction is preference (no monster race such as bugbear and no darksun weapons).  I also have a restriction on resurrection...a character can only being raised once during the entire campaing and the character must be resurrected within 24 hours from being dead
I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough.

Yes it is.
A DM can do whatever the hell he wants, for any damn reason. The players can then individually choose whether or not to put up with it.
I use restriction only to keep things a little simpler. Since I usually run 3.x games and there are a gazillion splatbooks, I make it clear what players can draw from. As long as restrictions are laid out from the get go, I have no problem, though I will ask why. I personally will accept "because I don't like something" as a reason.
There was one game where the DM decided to wipe out humans from the world, elves viewed them as an out of control plague. Now this was a good concept, with an explanation to it that was completely understandable.
I think DM restrictions are necessary for the flavour of the Setting.

The problem is you will always have those players that want to be a Ninja/Monk/Samurai or just something freaky like a minotaur.

I can't stress this enough... Put your foot down, because those characters will ruin the flavour of your game, however, work with the player to come up with some sort of comprimise.


- - - -  -

Personally I think every Campaign Setting should have its own take on races, with indicated restrictions on classes plus some unique classes, feats and prestige classes.

I don't think a Setting should change to fit a class that just happens to be in the player's handbook... my biggest pet peeve is when 'western' settings try to fit in 'eastern' elements to it... it just doesn't work. Don't get me wrong, I love oriental settings, one of my best characters was a monk... I just don't think a ninja or samurai belong in Middle Earth.
I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough.



Why not?  Why should the DMs fun be sacrificed because you want to play a Paladin and he doesn't like them?

Saying "no paladins because their orders and faith has been nearly extinct for several centuries and the Gods are quiet" IS a good reason. Also, I do hope the majority of DMs are willing to work with players to come up with ideas as well.



It's a better reason, yes.  But what if the DM came up with that reason because he doesn't like paladins?
I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough.



Why not?  Why should the DMs fun be sacrificed because you want to play a Paladin and he doesn't like them?

If  the DM hates paladins and doesn't want them in his game.  And the player loves paladins and enjoys playing them.  Someone isn't going to have fun.

It's generally a better compromise for the DM to give up a little bit of his fun (he still has lot's of other things to do, and other players to play with), then the player giving up all his fun (he only has his character).

Assuming they just don't get new groups.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

What are we all here waiting for?  A Ruleset, and a ruleset is made of restrictions.  You might think it exists to tell you what you can do but it deals just as much with what you can't.  Can you just run up to a goblin and say you hit & kill it without rolling any dice?  Nope.  Guess what, you are being restricted, and with good reason.  Furthermore when you play in a given DMs campaign his/her houserules are MORE important than what's in the book.  He can change/override whatever he wants to.  Of course it's still your decision whether to play in his game, but he made it and it is his game.  That's why this game has a DM.  It requires a referee, and for a referee to be effective he must have final authority within the confines of his campaign.  Now it must be said that it is possible for a DM to abuse his authority, but such DMs usually end up losing their players so it's still not a problem.
I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough.



Why not?  Why should the DMs fun be sacrificed because you want to play a Paladin and he doesn't like them?

If  the DM hates paladins and doesn't want them in his game.  And the player loves paladins and enjoys playing them.  Someone isn't going to have fun.



That probably isn't true in most cases.  It's only true if Paladin is the only class the player enjoys.  If the player has fun with even one more class, the player can choose that class and both can have fun.  I've never seen a player who only had fun with one class and no others would ever do.  I suppose they exist, but are so rare as to not be worth mentioning in this thread.  However, I know tons of people who strongly dislike a class or two. 



I'm fine with restrictions so long as there is a justifiable reason for them. Saying "no paladins because I don't like them" is not good enough.



Why not?  Why should the DMs fun be sacrificed because you want to play a Paladin and he doesn't like them?

If  the DM hates paladins and doesn't want them in his game.  And the player loves paladins and enjoys playing them.  Someone isn't going to have fun.

It's generally a better compromise for the DM to give up a little bit of his fun (he still has lot's of other things to do, and other players to play with), then the player giving up all his fun (he only has his character).

Assuming they just don't get new groups.


What if the DM's fun is ruined by paladins?

Why can't the player have fun with another type of character?
Nay!
I just don't think a ninja or samurai belong in Middle Earth.

Aragorn very well could have MC'd in Samurai immediately after being handed Anduril.

3E's Samurai is little more than "this is my grandfather's sword".  There's no reason why the mechanics can't fit in anywhere.

oh wow look, this is gonna be productive and insightful.


Whether the rules say so or not, the DM can and will restrict things. They could could print YOU MAY NOT PREVENT PLAYERS FROM USING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THIS BOOK on every single page and it won't stop people from preventing players from using things.


That kind of restriction isn't solely the purview of the DM either, but the DM's the one with the last word on things so they tend to get all the attention. Either way, the conversation of "whether or not" is a waste of time.


I'd be a lot more interested in finding out about the things people typically restrict or ignore.

I just don't think a ninja or samurai belong in Middle Earth.

Aragorn very well could have MC'd in Samurai immediately after being handed Anduril.

3E's Samurai is little more than "this is my grandfather's sword".  There's no reason why the mechanics can't fit in anywhere.




LOL  No.  A samurai is a very specific asian themed class.  If your character is not using it like that, then he's not a samurai.  Mechanics =/= class.  Mechanics + fluff = class.  If you change the fluff, you have changed the class. Therefore, no samurai or ninja will ever exist in Middle Earth.
What if the DM's fun is ruined by paladins?

Why can't the player have fun with another type of character?

Depends on the people and exactly how much fun will be ruined.

That probably isn't true in most cases.  It's only true if Paladin is the only class the player enjoys.  If the player has fun with even one more class, the player can choose that class and both can have fun.  I've never seen a player who only had fun with one class and no others would ever do.  I suppose they exist, but are so rare as to not be worth mentioning in this thread.  However, I know tons of people who strongly dislike a class or two.

Depends.

If it's a specific mechanic that hurts the DM's fun (detect evil certainly cound).  Then making the player use a fighter/cleric instead is very likely going to be fine.

If it's a specific character that hurts the DM's fun (lawful-stupid defender). Then making the player play a chatoic-only PC is really going to be bad.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Depends.

If it's a specific mechanic that hurts the DM's fun (detect evil certainly cound).  Then making the player use a fighter/cleric instead is very likely going to be fine.

If it's a specific character that hurts the DM's fun (lawful-stupid defender). Then making the player play a chatoic-only PC is really going to be bad.



Or, if it's the paladin class as a whole, then it's the paladin class.  An example.  I personally cannot stand dragonborn, so they don't exist in games that I run.  It's the race that I cannot stand.  Not breath weapons.  It's the whole package, from looks on up.
@ Maxperson: It's not good enough for me and my senses. In situations where the DMs restrictions and their reasonings do not meet or exceed my expectations then I will happily oblige in the DM seat and start a new campaign that's more inclusive OR I leave. I don't have time or energy to argue about how the right way to play make believe is.
@ Maxperson: It's not good enough for me and my senses. In situations where the DMs restrictions and their reasonings do not meet or exceed my expectations then I will happily oblige in the DM seat and start a new campaign that's more inclusive OR I leave. I don't have time or energy to argue about how the right way to play make believe is.



Awesome.  Me, I believe that everyone needs to have fun and forcing the DM to use a class that he dislikes is unbecoming of an adult playing the game.
I just don't think a ninja or samurai belong in Middle Earth.

Aragorn very well could have MC'd in Samurai immediately after being handed Anduril.

3E's Samurai is little more than "this is my grandfather's sword".  There's no reason why the mechanics can't fit in anywhere.




The mechanics are transferable (to an extent) but this is what I mean by comprimising... However, if the player asks his rohirrim character to wield a katana, nunchakus and know Kung Fu, then you can understand where there is a problem.
And the DM isn't the sole person of the game. His voice is but one of the group and he can be replaced. Its that simple. Now if the whole GROUP hates paldins and one player wants to play one he can leave or play something else. But this idea that all the players bend to the DMs limitationd unconditionally is absurd.
And the DM isn't the sole person of the game. His voice is but one of the group and he can be replaced.



So you'd replace a friend rather than find another fun class to play?


And the DM isn't the sole person of the game. His voice is but one of the group and he can be replaced. Its that simple.

YYMV.  In my experience, DMs are usually in short supply, either because less people have the time to put into it, or because they lack confidence in their ability.

One of the reasons I back the strong-DM system is because it encourages a DM to become invested in his or her world setting, which should hopefully lead to more people taking up the mantle.  More DMs -> more games -> more people can find the game that's right for them.

The metagame is not the game.
My friends don't make contrived or silly restriction without good reasons. We also understand that players enjoy certain classes and at least attempt to accommodate their wishes. But we're friends so there's little problems.
My friends don't make contrived or silly restriction without good reasons.



This class causes me to not have fun IS a good reason.  It's neither contrived, nor silly.

We also understand that players enjoy certain classes and at least attempt to accommodate their wishes.



Granted.  But in a case where the class would cause someone to not have fun, if it's possible for the person wanted to play that class to have fun with a different class, it's incumbent on that person to be the one to concede.  Everyone having fun always trumps everyone but the DM having fun.

But we're friends so there's little problems.



Yep.  None of my friends would ever try to force a dragonborn on me. 
I just don't think a ninja or samurai belong in Middle Earth.

Aragorn very well could have MC'd in Samurai immediately after being handed Anduril.

3E's Samurai is little more than "this is my grandfather's sword".  There's no reason why the mechanics can't fit in anywhere.




LOL  No.  A samurai is a very specific asian themed class.  If your character is not using it like that, then he's not a samurai.  Mechanics =/= class.  Mechanics + fluff = class.  If you change the fluff, you have changed the class. Therefore, no samurai or ninja will ever exist in Middle Earth.



In your opinion... I reflavor stuff all the time in my home game world we have used Minotaurs to represent vikings (just reflavor horn attack to an unarmed charge) I have reflavored Muls many times into really hardy humans. I've also had an unarmed Slayer (mechanically he was wielding a quarterstaff). Fluff is mutable and easily so.
On Essentials: Everyone deserves to play a class they enjoy. Hex Grid UserAndroid UserD&DMapTools
Dungeons & Dragons Compendium
Our House Rules
Index of 4e Errata

In your opinion... I reflavor stuff all the time in my home game world we have used Minotaurs to represent vikings (just reflavor horn attack to an unarmed charge)



Then they weren't really vikings.  You called them that, but since words have meaning and viking doesn't mean walking bull beast, your change didn't cause the minotaurs to become vikings.

I have reflavored Muls many times into really hardy humans.



Right.  They ceased being Muls and became something else.  You called them human, but humans don't have those mechanics.  Words have meaning.

I've also had an unarmed Slayer (mechanically he was wielding a quarterstaff). Fluff is mutable and easily so.



Of course, but changing the fluff changes the class/race/whatever.  A class = mechanics + fluff.


Now, if your players accepted your changes, then for your homebrew it doesn't really matter.  But you cannot come here and give us minotaurs and tell us that they are vikings.  
I look at Roleplaying as a social engagement. DM makes the game, and players are a guest in it. It shoudl be the DM's goal to give the players a good time, like a host. But the DM reserves the right to not allow certain things into his house, and players who don't like are free to go. 

Nothing difficult about this, just pair up with groups that fit up your style, and avoid the ones that don't 

Same problem as having a player or DM that's rude, mean, or selfish. I think restricting characters is actually the minor problem here, bigger problem is DMs favoring certian players, Dm's being antagonistic to the players, DM's who refuse to let the players feel successful. I'd much rather play a class I don't like or have an alignment restriction then feel like the DM is getting his jollies off by just relentlessly screwing the party over.

My mind is a deal-breaker.

(just reflavor horn attack to an unarmed charge)

Even when a pointy viking helmet gets involved?

My friends don't make contrived or silly restriction without good reasons.



This class causes me to not have fun IS a good reason.  It's neither contrived, nor silly.



I don't think i've come across any class in the game that literally made me say "no" based on my own opinions of that class. I've said No due to mechanics being broken or not fitting with the setting, but NEVER because someone else enjoying themselves in a way I cannot comprehend. That stance really has me confused.


We also understand that players enjoy certain classes and at least attempt to accommodate their wishes.



Granted.  But in a case where the class would cause someone to not have fun, if it's possible for the person wanted to play that class to have fun with a different class, it's incumbent on that person to be the one to concede.  Everyone having fun always trumps everyone but the DM having fun.



Yea, and a lot of people are resonable. I think we're mostly talking about possible times in which people might not be gaming with their friends (like at Cons or events). If someone told me no paladins and it's my friends first time at DM then I might try to be a Knight or Fighter/Cleric or Cleric with martial prowess. But, again, that to me is a good reason to switch a class and because he's a friend. If someone is at a Con and says "no sorcerers" then I'd like to know at least why? If it's because "I don't like them" then I just walk away because I can almost see it's "That" Kind of guy and I'd probably not have fun in his games anyways.

But we're friends so there's little problems.



Yep.  None of my friends would ever try to force a dragonborn on me. 



And that's the way your group runs. What if your NOT the DM, though? What if your at the mall playing with people you've only recently met and here comes a guy with a Dragonborn Fighter with a painted miniature and a great backstory and a lot of time and devotion to his roleplay. Do you get up and walk out or do you play through the game?  

And the DM isn't the sole person of the game. His voice is but one of the group and he can be replaced. Its that simple.

YYMV.  In my experience, DMs are usually in short supply, either because less people have the time to put into it, or because they lack confidence in their ability.

One of the reasons I back the strong-DM system is because it encourages a DM to become invested in his or her world setting, which should hopefully lead to more people taking up the mantle.  More DMs -> more games -> more people can find the game that's right for them.




Granted, that's why every regular at my table has had at least 1 or 2 campaigns under their bets as a DM. We rotate DM position as it suits our desires. I often play 4E/v3.5E in the Forgotten Realms (and going to do a Ravnica 4E game) where as my friend does Pathfinder/4E and my wife does v3.5 campaign and another friend does Star Wars: Saga (and has the basis for a Darksun 4E game in mind). Variety is really helpful at the DM seat because it's good to see new faces and new ideas come from my friends.
As a "Forever DM", I pretty much do what I want, and if anyone has a problem with it, we talk about it, and see what we can do.  Rarely am I running anything where characters can't work, though.

As a player, I don't mind restrictions.  But, as a result of my actual play experiences, restrictions that are "Just because I don't like X", or "X doesn't fit in my world, because Y, because I don't like X", and restrictions that show a particular lack of understanding of the mechanics of the game (such as a 3e game with "Only Core books, because Splat books are broken and unbalanced" or "No Psionics, because it's overpowered") all raise major red flags for me.

Again, just bad experiences.
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)