This message was deleted by the user at 01:52, Tue 20 Feb.

I'm certainly interested in the concept of a mono-game, especially in terms to taking an archetype and seeing all the different ways it could be interpreted.

Of the four, I'd be more tempted by either the knight or the wizard concepts, both because I think there's a clearer motive within those suggestions, and I suspect I'd find it easier to subvert and explore a class archetype than a species archetype - that being said, I would perhaps be interested in a dwarf or half-orc grouping because I think there's a bit more to get one's teeth into than elves or halflings.

That being said, I would probably want to know a bit more about the nitty gritty of the game before I could give a clear answer about committing to the project - things like tone, mood, scope and the setting do certainly come to the fore.

I have always liked the idea of a mono-class or race campaign. And recently I have really wanted to play a simplified dungeons and dragons game. This sounds like a great idea.

I've seen the all dwarf cleric party before. It was... twisted, with each member following a different god and being a different alignment. Try to keep your players from meta-gaming their builds.

I'd love to play an all wizard or all hobbit game.

This sounds like a great idea. I'm not able to commit to any game; due to health, but depending on when it starts, and what is required to maintain membership, it sounds very interesting.

I won't be available to play until February :(, but if design and "session 0" and introductory reading what takes place as early at the 15th, I can commit to doing that half way into January. I've lost my taste for blood in D&D, and love the story-telling aspects of D&D. I also like homebrew. It means if you don't tell us something, we won't have the wrong idea; and if you do tell us something, as narrator/ST/GM, we know it's "canon" and don't have issue of interpretation. Which I admit, has happened in D&D games I've been in, even rules-lite, that used a campaign setting of the big six, or small two.

I don't have preference for the class, but generally I agree with deadtotheworld22. I will admit my racial preferences first, since they're more minimal.

I like dwarves, and they often have been one of my favorite cultural channels to play. Elves I have done. I love it, but elves will always be seen through the lens of my beloved DM that ran the game (like this) where we were all elves. Hobbits I plain know enough about to know they're not a race I know well ;). Half-orcs I enjoy the dichotomy of, and would (personally) hope the game would be (precisely) mature rated, as to discuss burning issues peppered in with the central plot. Son of Krun, the destroyer is much different than son of Taoth, shaman. The former an orc sire, the latter an orc bearer. I chose son because I'd play a male character. Certainly even more dichotomy would exist with a daughter of the exact same parents, and even more as you make half siblings and even more distant relatives.

As far as classes, wizard, or knight, or here's my idea; druid^* would awesome. I'd also be up for anything else; except for thief or rogue-ish characters. Clerics are fine, even of different faiths. I trust alignment...probably?...won't be an issue though....most HC GMs don't mess around with alignment too much anyway. Really I could list the myriad of classes, and any one would be fine...except thief.

^*I've always had an idea for druid game, and it'd be interesting if something came along that let me play it out. ;)

I hope I'll be considered, despite my limitations. I wish you luck with timing, patience with setbacks, and longevity with passion. Sounds really fun!
This message had punctuation tweaked by the user at 14:22, Thu 23 Dec 2021.

We accidentally ran an all-dwarf game back in the day, turned out a lot of fun but sadly, was just a weekend's amusement and we went back to the long running campaign we needed the break from the next week.

Still, I'd be interested.

Oooh.  How about an all Bard campaign, bringing rock n roll to Faerun!

I would love to be part of this if it starts.

In reply to Alcuin (msg # 8):

↑vote! I'd love to bring some tunes to every battle. We would have to rotate through a playlist we'd each choose for some scenes. This is my new favorite idea! Save for the Faerun part. Since the GM has their own world.

I love the idea, but I'm still cool with another class idea. I just couldn't resist saying how awesome the all bard idea was in a rules lite homebrew. Unlike knights, combat would be so peripheral anyway.
This message was last edited by the user at 07:11, Fri 24 Dec 2021.

I had an idea for a group of all human border guards. All PCs would be non-casting fighters, barbarians, rogues or spell-less variant rangers. They would then go on patrol with various encounters.

From my count, here's where things stand:

knight
2 wizard
hobbit
2 dwarf
cleric
orc
druid
2 bard

I think I might pursue the wizard campaign, as that has the most tallies of the ones that I proposed.

I second that as well.

Sounds good to me

In reply to airellian (msg # 12):

Depending on how many slots you have, I may retract my RTJ intention. If you need players, I'll RTJ next month. If it looks like you've got enough, I'll withdraw my input. A few more concepts came up in the meantime, and you seem to have a good pool already.

Did this ever come to fruition?

No idea.  airellian?  I think you were working on an all wizard campaign?

I don't know anything about OP's homebrew, but I've got some experience with most official/unofficial versions of D&D from AD&D onward.

D&D is pretty aggressively designed as a team-based game and kinda relies on having more than one of the game's "party roles" in play. Prior to 4e, having a party without a healer was rough, especially if the DM didn't compensate for it-- which... most were unwilling, for the exact reason that they were limiting access to PC healers in the first place.

If you want a D&D-adjacent game where "everybody is the same class", what I'd recommend is going with 3.5 or PF1 gestalt rules-- where one "side" of the progression is fixed to that class, and possibly the other side is restricted to a list of "appropriate" classes. (Largely, to maintain the "fixed" class as the PC's primary skillset.)

Mono-race is easier, especially in WotC D&D, but it's easier because it doesn't really change anything. The "race" design space is so much smaller than than "class" design space means the GM has to do all of the work of making the mono-race PC party stand out from other PC parties in other games.

Eh, Matt Colville disagrees with this take. Not having having a cleric or a thief in the party just means that the players have to approach problems differently. In 3E, for instance, if the party doesn't have a healer, they can buy wands, potions, or perhaps magic items. Or there can be a powerful NPC available who can heal the characters if they get beat up too badly. There are lots of ways to deal with this.

In a party with a healer role character, once the healer runs out of healing spells, the party has to approach situations as though they did not have a healer in the party. It becomes a different kind of game, but you can certainly run an all-thieves or all-mages party.

 Having a restrict of one class honestly just slows you down a little depending on the class involved. Really want a mono class game that requires the players to actually role play go fighter. Low skill totals and everyone is fairly similar. You really need to play your character or it becomes a game of I Slash you Slash they all die. Mages have specialist classes. Clerics have different gods. All thieves is honestly as boring or more so than an all fighter group because of the way that you pigeon hole yourself with them. Paladins goes back to cleric as does Ranger honestly. Druid is different based upon wild shape and the potential rp there. Sorceror is just a variant of mages. Bard could be just as bad as Fighter but the guys likely to play bards already do rp and it would devolve into battle of the bands quick. So who did I miss out of the core? Nope think I got them all

"You just have to approach problems differently." - this is true, but it also means that the sorts of scenarios that you can use are considerably more limited than with a broad-based group; the OPs ideas for knight and wizard games essentially acknowledged that.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it does need to be borne in mind.


That said, when you're talking about D&D and class limitations, the version of the game matters a lot too, since they have varying levels of trope-enforcement built into their character mechanics.
This message was last edited by the user at 05:22, Fri 21 Jan 2022.

This message was deleted by the user at 10:14, Fri 21 Jan 2022.

I'm still working on this game, but I've had a bad couple of weeks. Thank you for your patience. :)

I don't know about a mono-species game, but having it set in a city that is, predominantly, a different species than human would be interesting (I'm picturing something like trying to live as a Human in a super-dense D&D Rock Gnome city, for instance).

As for single-class campaigns, that's possible. If, say, you're running a Clerics or Monks only campaign, check out The Church supplement for Ars Magica or Vajra Industries' Tibet RPG- a clerical structure holds a LOT of jobs, enough to provide variety.

As for all-Wizards: I've been tinkering with a sort of "Wizard Versailles" campaign idea. To make it accessible, try this- wizards have, traditionally, been considered separate from the Kingdom itself. (They did their stuff over there, the Court did its stuff over here). But a new King has revived the position of Court Wizard, something that hasn't been done in almost a thousand years. Of course, this means that every duke, baron, and social-climbing-commoner is going to follow the fashion of the Court. This means both a "gold rush" for wizards (meaning some very bad eggs are going to be hired, just to have 'house wizards') and also a bit less fussiness about details (a Druid is totally going to be hired as "Court Wizard" of some rural district, and have to deal with the court politics around that.) This also might lead to problems with the local clerical structure and a sort of "Arms Race" among court factions to have the most magic on their side.
This message was last edited by the user at 16:00, Mon 31 Jan 2022.

One of the best IRL campaigns I ever played in (ran on and off for probably 8-10ish years) was an all wizard game set in Dragonlance. It's a perfect setting for it as there is an established hierarchy (The Wizards of High Sorcery) to provide adventures as well as allowing us to play characters across the alignment spectrum as they were forced to work together by their leadership.

The way our DM ran it was that we all were initially apprenticed to the same wizard until we reached 3rd level and had to take our Test (which is also when you "set" your alignment). After the Test, we were assigned to different mentors/masters (although a couple stayed with our original) but the relationships were already built and we were often called together to go on adventures. It also worked really well as we all went away for college, and sometime only a few of us would be able to get together, making it easy to explain why someone's character wasn't there (they were doing something for their master, or working their own project).

It was a great game and, especially at low levels, required you to tackle problems in different ways.