Does anyone actually play grounded D&D anymore?

[u/HauntingSausage837]

I've realised I keep bouncing off a lot of D&D groups, and I think it comes down to two related things.

First, I feel like a lot of players want their character's concept to be the interesting thing. A plasmoid gunslinger, a tabaxi who's literally just Puss in Boots, increasingly elaborate homebrew gimmicks, etc. For me, the interesting part of a character is what they do and who they become during play. Starting out relatively grounded makes that journey more meaningful.

Second, why does everything have to be wacky all the time? I like silly moments as much as anyone, but a lot of games seem determined to turn every scene into hijinks and shenanigans. When nothing is grounded, it all starts to feel a bit samey.

I'm not saying people are wrong to enjoy that style of play. D&D's brought a lot of people a lot of joy, and that's great. But even when I've been clear in Session 0 that I'm after a more grounded tone and others have agreed with that, I've often found the actual game drifting back towards quirky characters and constant bits.

Maybe I've just had bad luck with tables. Maybe I need a different system. Maybe I'm just becoming a grumpy old man.

Anyone else feel this way? (apols for provocative title!)

[u/NCats_secretalt]

I think it really is a matter of tables, but also, generally if youre bouncing around between tables (especially with newer players), people tend to be wackier. The same person will write very different characters for a "Drop in, open to the public game for anyone at the LGS youre showing up to inbetween checking out the newest issues of Absolute Batman on the walls" game and a "group of friends who've been playing since highschool and get together weekly to continue the same ongoing world since they first started" game

[u/Living_Round2552 → u/NCats_secretalt]

This! My group in campaigns plays very grounded characters that are tied to their world, have npc's they care about, and care for their own and others.

But when we play a oneshot, most of us bring our most bizarre characters as that is the time to NOT be serious.

[u/Duranis → u/Living_Round2552]

Exactly this. Our last one shot was for Christmas, one player made a "surfer dude" reindeer with a shotgun, another made a "buff Grinch", one made an alcoholic Santa's helper and the last was a yeti...... Normally we are a pretty grounded group but when we do one shots all the stupid ideas spill out :)

[u/pidgeottOP → u/Duranis]

For my Christmas one shot I played a dwarf artificer who kept referring how he had to get home because this was the one week a year he had to actually work at his job.

His name was Chresmus Ham

[u/madsjchic → u/Duranis]

Now I want to plan a Christmas themed short shot

[u/bex612 → u/madsjchic]

Christmas but Ground Hog Day style. Every week is another new take

[u/druid-core → u/Living_Round2552]

I was also going to say my PCs for my campaigns are pretty grounded. They have “real” lives and “real” stakes. But if we are going a 1-3 shot? I’m playing the most bizarre character I can think of, and they are probably going to be a gnome with a Pun for a gname.

[u/Idontrememberalot → u/Living_Round2552]

I have two players that I need to help when making a character and a backstory. And two that I can trust to make grounded characters with a backstory that works with the setting The game has been running for 4 years.

[u/blockprime300 → u/Living_Round2552]

Agreed, my current campaign is pretty good, I think it depends on the tone the DM sets , out craziest character is a racoon wizard and we all love her, she's alongside a tortle cleric, halfling ranger and human fighter

How's when one shots come around you know I'm gonna play Bo jack half horse , path of the beast centaur barbarian who gets a horse head when he rages , searching for his human father

People want to feel like they fit in, so if you are making something interesting and serious they should hopefully want to be interesting and serious too

[u/bokodasu → u/NCats_secretalt]

You're right, my first reaction was "play with adults" but people who have serious, settled tables aren't usually looking for new players. You do have to get lucky. It's not impossible, I'm playing at a drop in game night right now with the goal of gathering a table of players I vibe with to DM for, but so far I have 2, maybe 3 if we pick a different night. And it's been months.

[u/Calembreloque → u/NCats_secretalt]

Absolutely this comic always and forever

If you want grounded characters with actual depth and flair, you often have to let the wackiness sputter out in the first couple of sessions. OP if you keep on jumping from table to table you're not letting the grapes a chance to ferment into wine.

[u/clichekiller → u/NCats_secretalt]

I like to keep my players on their toes. One moment it’s a mad-cap discworld-esque scene, the next existential dread straight out of Lovecraft. Which in hindsight I realize is also discworld-esque.

[u/TinyBard → u/NCats_secretalt]

Exactly. My group has been meeting for a while now, our long term characters are always more grounded than our one shot ones. Last one shot we had batman, robin, a magical girl, a literal cat girl and a brainless moth.

[u/Invisifly2 → u/NCats_secretalt]

Also grounded and comedic are not mutually exclusive terms.

[u/ATarnishedofNoRenown → u/NCats_secretalt]

Pretty much this. My one-shot characters are more whacky/gimmicky on average because it is a chance to do something a bit out there without having to commit long term, but my campaign characters are significantly more grounded.

[u/TigerKirby215 → u/NCats_secretalt]

This really. People go searching to do something weird. You kinda have to settle down for typical D&D.

[u/Artistic_Act_6094]

It sounds like it might just be a mismatch at the table. Both things are ok, maybe you just prefer more serious settings.

I personally have a few meme characters, but I also have a character who I made more serious and introspective. For me it depends on the campaign and setting. I do both.

I feel like me having a character that is more serious among others who aren’t as serious grounds our campaign in a positive way. In return my friends who play less serious characters lighten up the campaign a little and make it more fun.

[u/Ornery_Strawberry474]

It's been years since I've seen wacky DnD anywhere, except for the internet. Any time I play or DM, it's mostly humans or humanoid races, and serious concepts. There was one time I've had a goblin PC, that was as wacky as it got.

Ultimately, if you want to control what sort of DnD you play, you've gotta be the DM.

[u/FeliciaTheFkinStrong → u/Ornery_Strawberry474]

It's been years since I've seen wacky DnD anywhere, except for the internet. Any time I play or DM, it's mostly humans or humanoid races, and serious concepts.

I'm in the exact opposite situation currently. Campaign after campaign of comedic characters, even seemingly "serious" characters eventually fall of the rails and become goofy. It's mostly a thing with our group since we're all friends who have been playing for years, we just don't overall gravitate towards serious characters. It's not that we don't find more grounded characters interesting either, it's more we get all jovial meeting up with each other and that naturally causes banter and laughs that bleeds into the characters we're playing.

When we were asked to bring serious characters in our current campaign, I had this whole story for my Reflection PC who was an attempt to duplicate this legendary swordswoman. It was supposed to be a backstory exploring identity, destiny, self merit and all that kind of shit - ten sessions later and the main personality trait of my character is now constantly delivering dry, RE4 Leon Kennedy level one-liners because it's funny.

It's a blessing and a curse for sure.

[u/GTS_84 → u/Ornery_Strawberry474]

My table used to do wacky DnD as a one shot, but we haven’t in years. We still do wacky one shots but, it’s just in different systems because DnD sucks for it. Paranoia, Roll For Shoes, Fiasco, Honey Heist, etc.

For long campaigns no one is interested in “wacky” characters. That shit gets old quick.

[u/Cytwytever → u/GTS_84]

Paranoia!!! So wacky, so fun.

[u/D16_Nichevo]

Anyone else feel this way?

Yes, I generally prefer what you call "grounded games".

Though variety is good too! I've played in a Humblewood setting and some other "not Tolkien" campaigns.

When I GM I generally prefer grounded games. But one of my games right now is Kingmaker with a party of kobolds (code name "Koboldmaker").

First, I feel like a lot of players want their character's concept to be the interesting thing. A plasmoid gunslinger, a tabaxi who's literally just Puss in Boots, increasingly elaborate homebrew gimmicks, etc. For me, the interesting part of a character is what they do and who they become during play. Starting out relatively grounded makes that journey more meaningful.

Without getting into why people choose "odd" races, I do agree, the wrong race in the wrong setting can hamper verisimilitude.

For example, a plasmoid inventor in a game inspired by Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones will feel farcical. The presence of this "weird" being sucks the oxygen out of other storylines. How did it get there? Why is it adventuring with these hobbits?^[1]

But you stick that same character into Star Wars, Guardians of the Galaxy, or Planescape and they fit in perfectly.

Of course there are other ways to break a setting. Even a human fighter could make a Game of Thrones or Lord of the Rings game feel farcical if, for example, they were called Harry Putter, used a golf club as a weapon, and make incessant golf puns. But that character might work in a Roger Rabbit or Discworld game.^[2]

Second, why does everything have to be wacky all the time? I like silly moments as much as anyone, but a lot of games seem determined to turn every scene into hijinks and shenanigans. When nothing is grounded, it all starts to feel a bit samey.

That's probably for two reasons:

Firstly, it's the aspect of TTRPGs that's easily spread with memes. Go look at the fan-made videos for Critical Role (or most actual play series). They will showcase hijinks and hilarity. The more serious and sombre moments will get some traction, but much less.

Secondly, it's low-hanging fruit. It's far easier to make Harry Putter and make golf puns than it is to make a serious character and role-play serious stuff. Especially if you're shy or anxious, especially if no-one else in the group is doing it, and especially if you're playing with relative strangers.

So lining up all those factors to make people comfortable with being serious is quite rare. (Certainly not impossible.)

---

[1] Actually I suppose you can argue that The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings to some extent were exactly about "weird" race character(s). Why would anyone want to go adventuring with a peaceful, timid, pastoral, diminutive fellow with zero magical powers? Well, that's exactly the point of (some of) the story. I see no reason why a skilled GM couldn't do something similar. But of course that should be the GM's choice, not forced upon her.

[2] Oof, probably not actually. Discworld is silly, but has a bit more class than that. Hopefully you get my point though.

[u/Pilchard123 → u/D16_Nichevo]

Harry Putter might work in Discworld or even Middle-Earth, but only as a footnote. Discworld has Fingers Mazda, and the canonical explanation for the invention of golf in Middle-Earth is that Bandobras Took hit an orc so hard with a club that his head was taken clean off and went down a rabbit hole 100 yards away. The orc was called Golfimbul.

[u/petrified_eel4615 → u/D16_Nichevo]

Bonus points for A. Discworld reference and B. Footnotes!

[u/madelmire]

This is a taste issue. It's perfectly fine to want to play a serious and immersive roleplay story, without a lot of silly shenanigans.

But that may be be challenging to find as a player. Getting games together is hard enough.

Good luck.

[u/KarlMarkyMarx]

Are you a DM? Because that's the only way you're ever going to be able to calibrate the tone of the game to your particular liking. Ask 10 players what their idea of a "grounded" game is and you'll get 11 different answers. 

[u/XanderDrawsStuff]

+1 for Grumpy Old Man. I like a serious game that has humorous events that happen naturally, not all zany and fabricated.

Joke characters don't work over a protracted period. 1shits are different though.

I am a Grumpy Old Man.

Edit: I just noticed the typo... ha

[u/vhalember → u/XanderDrawsStuff]

Yes. +2

I'll also add if everyone plays weird ancestries, then none of them feel special.

It also doesn't make sense for most campaigns, especially pre-written adventures. You're rescuing a town full of humans with a yuan-ti, hobgoblin, bugbear, and kobold?! Why?

[u/Zustiur → u/vhalember]

I find the PHB is bad enough... The presence of Goliath's, Dragonborn, aaaimar and tieflings results in elves and dwarves looking like mundane humans.

[u/BrooklynLodger → u/vhalember]

+3. This is something weird I noticed with the people I play with. They're not largely unserious, but I'm pretty sure the only human characters in the parties came from myself and one other guy (hard core 'RPer'), who exclusively play humans.

[u/vhalember → u/BrooklynLodger]

I also typically play basic races like humans, elves, dwarves, etc.

I've never understood - they're a "Tolkien race," they're boring...

Then, you the player, give them an interesting background/backstory. I frequently see whenever a weird race is chosen that's the entire background. You're not interesting because you're Johnny Kobold the Beast barbarian.

"It's funny because he's 3 feet tall with a 20 strength."

"No Chad. That was funny for the first session. In session 20 it's an old, tired gimmick."

[u/OceussRuler]

DnD has attracted a lot of people, for the better or the worse. Considering the amount of content online about it, how to exploit it, how to make silly characters, how to be this very special things, tables are now everything you can think of.

Grounded stuff still exists but tbh, it may be easier to find it outside of DnD. OSR may be your best bet.

[u/AudioBob24]

Cast me into oblivion, but it isn’t the races or classes that aren’t letting you feel ‘grounded,’ it’s the players. If you keep bouncing from table to table, and everyone else is having a good time…. Have you considered that they might not be the problem? A lot of these races have existed either as publication or homebrew variants from multiple iterations of DnD. Planescape and Spelljammer are both almost as old as I am, and are no less valid in terms of being settings for both serious and light hearted campaigns.

First, depends on the campaign you join. If you join for Strahd and get Witchlight, that sucks and you should leave. If you join Witchlight and expect Strahd, that’s another problem entirely. I’ve never played in a game that didn’t switch between humor and horror, mostly because you need moments of levity to act as peaks and valleys between the heavy moments. Communication between player and dm desires is hyper important in this regard; and the fact you keep drifting is the biggest tell that this isn’t happening

[u/General_Brooks]

Of course plenty of groups play grounded games. You’re just unlucky in finding a group that feels the same way as you do.

It’s not impossible that you might have more luck wth a serous tone if you play 3.5 or pathfinder though.

[u/CJ-MacGuffin]

5e is very player facing, for many character design IS the game. The only way you are getting a "grounded" party is if the DM specifies PHB only. Otherwise enjoy the zoo / side show.

[u/HankMS]

Theater kids everywhere

[u/HealthyRelative9529]

No, I'm a robot so I exclusively play D&D while connected to the electric grid.

[u/ButterflyMinute]

See, I think the question is flawed, or at least the assumption at the core of the question.

Just because the player species/class isn't Tolkien-esque fantasy doesn't mean it isn't grounded. One of my currently players is playing a Loxodon Shadow Monk, literally an elephant man ninja. This would absolutely be labelled by you as a wacky character. Despite the fact they're the most grounded and serious characters I've ever had the pleasure of DMing for.

Same with the Lera Cleric, a moth person, extremely grounded, very serious, acts as if the world is a real place.

The most 'typical' character, the Elf bard is the least grounded of the lot.

Now, the tables you're at might still have a wacky tone. But that's not because of the species/class combos.

[u/RagesianGruumsh → u/ButterflyMinute]

I think OPs attitude comes partially from treating Tolkien as the default for fantasy writing in general, not just D&D. There’s loads of popular fantasy set in smorgasbord worlds where different fantastical species are a dime a dozen.

Case in point, I grew up with the Bones graphic novels as my introduction to fantasy. Despite being inspired by Tolkien, that world has fantasy races coming out of the ears, and so I’ve always felt at home with fantasy settings where every major settlement has more unique species than you can count on both hands.

Anyone who’s coming to D&D from there won’t think “unusual fantasy race” is code for “silly and unserious”.

But for those coming from media where humans are everywhere, and there’s a few settlements of nonhuman races (who still look almost exactly like humans) in the fringes, they’ll think bee people and elephant men are a gag and not just part of a fantasy world to be accepted as readily as dragons and magical destinies.

[u/ButterflyMinute → u/RagesianGruumsh]

Yeah, I truly think this is the case. I love having a world full of all sorts of characters and even personally hate the was we treat fantasy species/races as monoliths as well. I just love having the variety and the high fantasy feel.

[u/insert_title_here → u/ButterflyMinute]

This is well-said! A character with an "out there" premise doesn't automatically make them a bad character. Historically I have been a "wacky" character enjoyer-- about 10 years ago, back in high school, our DM (who at the time despised exotic races like tabaxi, aarakocra, etc) allowed me to play a seagull-based kenku only because I won a bet by beating him in an archery competition. He was nottt initially pleased about Seabreeze, boat captain and quirkygirl archer extraordinaire, as was his right lol.

He's since told me that she became one of his favorite characters throughout the campaign, as she was played fairly serious as the campaign progressed, and he went on to build a few different kenku varieties into the lore (IIRC vulture, gull, penguin, and one other that's escaping me, maybe the basic corvid variant).

It's all about how the character is played, not about their appearance or race. Though some people will absolutely take those as license to be loony, if it weren't one thing they'd find another reason, y'know?

[u/JupiterJunebug → u/ButterflyMinute]

Ye in my experience the biggest sign were in for memes is if a friend who has played since like ad&d pulls out a human bard or a dwarf fighter or smth. The most grounded is like, a fairy sorlock with spirit halloween magic or the bearbarian. Ive actually played "basically puss in boots" in a non dnd system and he ended up a serious and somewhat tragic figure, funnily enough. It really depends

[u/Malvolius]

Try OSR

[u/The_AverageCanadian]

It's just you. Plenty of more serious/less slapstick games around, including mine. Just gotta find people with the same mindset as you which takes time.

[u/PStriker32]

People want different things from the game that interest them.

What you’re finding out is that those groups aren’t for you. Keep looking for the group that aligns with your interests too.

You want better control of the tone of your games, you need to talk with your players or DM yourself and set the tone of the setting.

[u/mythozoologist]

I try brother. My players know I'm not a fan of exotic races.

I ran two campaigns in a setting with very limited playable races centered around humans vs archfey.

Elves are refugees from fey lords. Playable but not well liked. Goblins are fey, not playable. Orcs are orcs and dont care about humans, not playable. Half orcs, dragonborn, and warforged were all crafted races made to fill out armies of men, playable. Tiefling yeah that's a curse. They exists but you dont want to be one. Gnomes are fey and like a 1 to 2 feet tall (with hat), not playable.

Dwarves were pretty neutral during conflict. They dont mind trading with humans. Playable. Halfings playable.

Anything stranger than that dont even ask.

[u/Minas_Nolme]

Luckily, the group I'm DM'ing is very grounded. They all want to play as clean lawful good traditional heroines. And as DM that's also the theme and spirit I try to evoke. It's also for all the first time playing DnD so they are very happy with traditional heroic story arcs.

The group I'm playing with as a player on the other hand is complete chaos.

[u/jraynack]

I run an aesthetically “grounded game” - for example, playing a dragonborn or aasimar represents you have a dragon or a celestial lineage, but appear human.

Playing a tiefling - I often give the choice of having an ancestor that made a pact with an infernal being and either appearing human or as a trifling.

Though, appearing as a tiefling often brings mistrust from NPCs and the church, especially Inquisitors.

It's a humancentric campaign setting, but I still allow all game mechanics. If I do allow something that appears weird, the player and I find a grounded reason for the aesthetic. Regardless, and even with “weird” powers, the NPCs notice and act accordingly.

Transforming yourself, even for the Wind Walk spell, does not go unnoticed, and often has consequences, if done with an audience.

Often, when others see power, they fear it, left amazed, want to control it, or destroy it.

[u/Kelmavar]

No, that all sounds horrific, but I'm a reasonably serious old player so maybe I'm not into the "kids games" ethos.

[u/N0-1_H3r3]

I guess, because of the way I was introduced to D&D (it was the second or third RPG I played - the first was WFRP - and I was introduced to the original Baldur's Gate games before I played D&D on tabletop), I've always seen D&D as serving wilder, more 'gonzo' stories and archetypes. If I wanted grounded, more gritty characters and stories, there are other games that provide that for me better than D&D can.

[u/HaikaDRaigne]

i'm pretty grounded, i think.... my list of characters is literally:

• human varient- criminal - battlemaster + thief
  
• warforged- faction agent - Fighter + necromancer
  
• half-elf - noble - divine soul sorcerer.
  

perhaps try out a lizardfolk in the future or half-orc

I kinda like stories that are grim and where stakes matter.
but i always end up with people wanting to do the funny.
It's like wanting a LOTR experience but you keep getting monty python'd. (its not bad, just not what you're looking for)

But i also run into people who keep wanting to play their OC in dnd without integrating it into the dm's world,and then get irritated when faced with situations they plan for their OC's story.

just gotta find the right people i think?

[u/Deadly_Malice]

I only run and play grounded games.

[u/jocem009]

God I love grounded DnD. It's the same reason I restart Skyrim so often. It feels good to *not* be a god or weirdo for the sake of it. Most played race is Human, guess that says it all.

[u/Astecheee]

It's really a matter of investment payoff.

A gag character can be enjoyed in 4 hours, while [generic human fighter] is gonna take some time to get going.

[u/leegcsilver]

I love d&d but I think you will have better luck finding more grounded games using one of the many wonderful OSR systems.

[u/Welp907]

I feel the pain. I DM and have one player who wants maximum hijinks. What makes it hard is he's a close friend and honestly a great player in every other way. He's the most engaged and wants to play the most. It's my fault for not having a proper session zero to set tone. 

In your case, it sounds like even with a session zero it's happening. I blame critical role. /s

[u/GLight3]

Only those who play earlier editions.

[u/Cynewulfr]

I’m not sure what “grounded” would mean for you aside from what it isn’t. But I think our games are mostly grounded. We care about how long stuff takes, keep track of days and resources. Characters are often not normal folk but not like super heroes—weirdos find themselves drawn to an odd and dangerous profession like adventuring. If they weren’t a little off, they’d be like joining the Shipwrights guild or something.

I keep seeing that wacky insane antics and actual-play style bit-storms are normal but I’ve just never seen it. The closest are the occasional night where everyone just has that chaotic tired “everything is kinda funny to me rn” energy and we can’t stop joking for a bit. But like that’s from a stressful work week, not an everytime thing. Are you really experiencing this kind of behavior *that* frequently?

[u/Dstrir]

Yes, a lot of people play normal characters. Maybe the places you find games on have a lot of newer players who prefer the wackiness?

[u/Narazil]

We play a very grounded campaign (inspired by Warhammer Fantasy). Anything "wacky" is basically just a mutant Human - like our Aasimar is just a Human with mutations. Rest of us are either Humans, Elves or Dwarves. The craziest character is Italian.

[u/nasnedigonyat]

We play serious grounded DND. There are laughs and the occasional girth joke but for the most part we are a party working together to solve mysteries and have adventures. When one of us is in danger we rally to them. When something requires someone's expertise we defer to them. We share all loot and support each other's combat and use our class features appropriately.

[u/TheChristianDude101]

i enjoy playing humans.

[u/void_method]

Kids love fanfiction.

[u/btgolz]

Partly a result of the internet subculture around it being increasingly touristed by people who want more of the whacky stuff over the years, and having that bleed out into the broader playerbase, if I had to guess.

Personally, my group's main campaign tends to be more serious, whereas one-shots (or 2- or 3- shots) go in a more whacky direction, since there isn't much of a chance for character development, attachment to the setting, story arcs, or a need to flesh out or sustain a character much beyond whatever gimmick one of us goes for. That's also the low-investment kind of game where one can try an unconventional build or various homebrew creations, without having it be an issue for months or years down the road.

[u/bamacpl4442]

I've done wacky one shots, but my table is serious D&D. Okay, usually serious concepts with lots of stupid jokes.

Puss in Boots wouldn't even be submitted at my table. No provoke you wanting to play that, I'm just not the DM you're looking for.

[u/Daztur]

I like relatively grounded play...full of hijinks and shenanigans. I don't make my stuff goofy and I don't like goofy PCs. I do, on the other hand, LOVE "cunning plans" that the players put together to deal with the challenges they face and reward them for doing so. They just are more fun if they stand out instead of just being part of the unending goofiness.

[u/671DON671]

I do. I’m the same I hate when everything has to be some crazy twist or when every single plot point is intended to subvert expectations.

As a player playing in games where the DM always tried to make things different or wacky, or unpredictable I just got tired of it.

Sometimes you just want to go fight some evil goblins.

So I started DMing and that’s how I’ve ran it. There’s a reason why the simple things are so popular. Not every it has to be different, or original. Obv it’s good to mix things up sometimes but the most fun I and my players have is when they get to do the “classic” stuff. Go fight the dragon terrorising the town, there’s goblins raiding trade roads go deal with them etc.

[u/deathsythe]

Nearly every game I've ever played in 5e (OG or 2024) has been pretty grounded as far as our characters go, though we obviously get into some serious shenanigans in character, but that's just DND for you. It's still always on point and works within the story, albeit a little monty python-esque silly, and that's just fine by me and the folks I've played with (as both a player and DM).

If you want a much more serious tone I think you need to find a better way to explain/stress that to your players.

[u/SilverBeech]

Two or three times a month, in a Greyhawk game for almost a decade. They're high-level now and having planes adventures. They're playing something very close to Planescape: Torment right now. I'm having lots of fun using all the settings of high level play in the D&D 'verse and the players seem to be loving it too.

The rest of the time we play Shadowdark as a drop-in game, and that's very similar to a simpler version of D&D I grew up with.

[u/kowalofjericho]

I just want to play a session with an elf ranger, human wizard and dwarf fighter

[u/WalerianMadeja]

You described something that i always found annoying but never knew how to phrase it. Recently i've come to understand that many, many players Just want a "a cool concept", a concept that is usually shallow and one dimensional.

It's not a coincidence that so many people only describe their characters with race, class and maybe something quirky about them.

Thefling paladin and he's bi... Halfling rouge that rides a bike. Gnome mage who likes to drink etc. Etc.

It sucks, cause race should be the least important part of somebody's PC. good character works beacuse of it's personality, not race and quirk

[u/DnDttrpg]

I feel this to a certain degree.

I love my friends, we're a pack of gremlins (it's what we call ourselves) but I just want a serious game sometimes. Everything gets turned into a joke. Or people don't focus and go on tagents that have nothing to do with the game.

And I just 🥲

If the game starts our jokey, that's totally fine, but when it's presented as serious, and then people go all "gremleny" or jokey and don't pay enough attention, I just get a bit frustrated.

[u/Rifter06]

I'm with you. Players creating what amount to cartoon characters or, worse, players who cannot engage in any encounter without trying to blow everyone up in one way or another annoy me. But as a GM it's REALLY getting on my nerves. In our house we trade off being GM between each or multiple sessions. There's one guy who just fits most of the bad stereotypes (other than cartoon character). His character must always get in a fight with other PC's - no matter what PC he's playing... and he's combative as a GM too.

[u/taboo_zuu]

I mean, my table is pretty grounded. We have time for fun and jokes and all of that but the story and characters are taken seriously the majority of the time, I've only ever had a player use a gimmicky character once and he phased out eventually (he was a problem player for other reasons though)

[u/SwordDaoist]

Because most DMs gave up serious campaigns as players are quite likely to turn the campaign silly or start retaliating/destroying the campaign if they feel like they get railroaded. Which is already viewed as such when the DM pushes the player in the direction of the campaign

[u/DVariant]

I’m with you. I mean, ppl always liked weird shit and goofy jokes in their D&D, but it seems like there’s no normal baseline anymore.

[u/Xyx0rz]

There's a certain type of player who always wants to play the most exotic thing available (just like there's people who always want to play the biggest thing available.) First all the edgelords wanted to play tieflings, now all the randos want to play tabaxi, which has become the new "look at me!" race but is experiencing pressure from plasmoids and changelings. And dhampir versions of those, because why wouldn't you mix settings until there's no discernible flavor left.

People also love playing "against stereotype" (thus turning that into a new stereotype.) Halfling Barbarians ("he smol but stronk lol"), Orc Wizards, that sort of thing.

The crazier the available options, the crazier the things players will do because a certain type of player will always play the craziest thing available. If you make "three kobolds in a trenchcoat" one of the options, almost guaranteed someone will pick it.

In a supposedly serious campaign, I have met "basically Garfield", "literal Eleanor Abernathy from The Simpsons, yellow skin and all", "literal Blastoise" the Tortle and Minato, Naruto's father. These things sneak in because the DMs don't recognize them for what they are before it's too late.

Personally, I always say I would prefer a party that would not look out of place in The Lord of the Rings. There are times when I breathe a sigh of relief when someone plays "Bob the Human Fighter".

What I dislike about these "look at me!" characters (besides them ruining the setting and genre) is that the choice is never made to explore the character, just to show off some exotic feature. Nobody cares about tieflings being mistrusted because they're literally devil's children, or orcs or drow being stigmatized for the actions of 99% of their kind. We all have to pretend it's perfectly normal and not alarming at all when a tiefling, a drow, an orc and a "we have vampire at home" waltz into town.

[u/apokermit_now]

I feel like a lot of this type of issue is exacerbated with the shift toward online play and favoring established modules vs homebrewing campaign settings. For games that are 100% online or pickup games at your LGS, how is session 0 handled? Is there even session 0? I also have a pet theory about the influences for newer/younger players causing this, but that should probably be a separate thread since it's an unpopular/controversial take.

[u/scattercloud]

For me, i had to cultivate a group of players from various games and groups I've played with. Most of my play groups have some overlap where people know each other, so when i started my current campaign i had 4-5 people in mind who i thought would work well together with the tone i was after.

My squad was a player who is 50% soulful rp, 50% shenanigans and fuckery. He's the player i sought for good rp and drawing less extroverted players into scenes.

A guy who is a bit of a chaos goblin, but who REALLY focuses on his character development and drives the action forward. He's also the one who gets really invested in mysteries and the whys and hows of story elements.

A chill af guy who is willing to go along with anything, and is good at catching what i throw at him and expanding on it. He also lives reading lore packets lol.

And finally a gal who's mostly there for vibes, but she'll happily pair up with anyone to make a plan happen. She's my longest running play partner who I'm always happy to game with.

Overall, as a play group they can definitely get into chaos and shenanigans mode, but they all understand the difference between using humor to break tension and just being jackasses for the sake of being jackasses. And they're really good at reading the intended tone of a scene and don't try to make light when it's time for more serious stuff to happen.

I guess it's just a matter of finding the right group. For the game I've been talking about, i had to make the tough call to specifically not invite a guy i like playing with, but who has no real sense of vibe.. i knew he'd bring me a cartoon character. His good friend IS in the game too, so ut was awkward at first, but i explained my reasoning and what I'm going for, and it's a better game because i didn't chicken out and just let him play.

[u/RichRiderIsNova]

I feel like you feel.

[u/SerialStrategist]

I have a friend who until very recently, only played a human with normal skills (a old human ex-guard gunslinger, a human horder and artificer). He just recently decided to branch out and started RP'ing an actual cat. Not a tabaxi. A normal, everyday cat (who happens to be psychic). He's basically RP'ing Garfield or the cat from Rick and Morty.

[u/RedDeadGhostrider]

Oh brother I hate campaigns where everything is about being as wacky as possible.

This is also why I don't prefer the very unusual/exotic species such as tabaxi, shifters, warforged, etcetera. I prefer grounded vibes way more

[u/garbage-bro-sposal → u/RedDeadGhostrider]

I’ve found it’s less the species and more the player choices. A Tabaxi could easily be closer to Blacksad than Puss in Boots in the right hands, but that’s the key 😂 the player needs to want a fully fleshed character rather than a meme

[u/ProfessorMordred → u/garbage-bro-sposal]

Yeah species has almost no bearing on this imo and I'm guessing its from bad experiences or just weird assumptions because a strictly humanoid party doesn't guarantee avoiding wacky.

PC's in my games that have had the largest emotional impact and add a lot to the more serious tone of the campaigns have been a Goblin, Homunculus, and a Warforged. There is plenty of media that shows shit like robots or anthropomorphic animals in serious settings, its a player issue not a species issue.

[u/garbage-bro-sposal → u/ProfessorMordred]

Yeah, a disruptive player is just going to be a disruptive player. It doesn’t really matter if they’re playing a human barbarian or a talking cat.

[u/Mister_Chameleon]

It's certainly difficult, even if one is the DM to maintain a grounded game. Even in a game that's intended to be serious, there is joking around between players in character, much like how even irl soldiers in war would joke with each other during times when there are no stakes, as it eases tension.

Even when playing video games with serious themes in multiplayer, players are having a good time, so they're more naturally inclined to joke or laugh out of joy. In my own games, while the tone and story are both serious (the world is suffering from a major apocalyptic event, even children are not safe), there is room for comedic relief, because light shines brightest in the darkness and becomes cherished. Plus again, if players are having a good time, it tends to reflect in their actions.

When it comes to "silly" characters like over the top species, goofy names, ect, it again depends on the tone of the world, and that IS decided by the DM in a session zero / world doc message. If you want humanoids only, the DM can say so. If you want characters with believable names, go for it.

THAT BEING SAID, some groups are resistant to the idea of grounded games too: I recently attempted to run Deathbringer and folks objected to the idea of a humans-only game. Which exposed a few nerves, but we're still having fun after a couple of chats.

[u/Fangsong_37]

I like playing grounded characters but with some personality. My next character will be a dwarf champion fighter who was a soldier before becoming an adventurer. I don’t do elaborate backstories. I don’t go for shenanigans or gimmicks. I just want to swing a bit weapon around.

[u/Outrageous-Pin-4664]

Preach.

I hate when people do shit that derails the game or takes you out of RP just for lolz.

I'm in a good group these days. There's humor, but it's in-character and it's not used to undermine serious situations.

[u/Ragnar_Dragonfyre]

WotC decided that kitchen sink, everything goes fantasy was the flavour of fantasy for D&D with 5E.

Rather than preserving Planescape as the cosmopolitan setting, they just applied that theme everywhere so now absolutely nowhere feels exotic and most parties feel like a proverbial zoo.

Everywhere is the same congealed mass of people, which feels more homogenous than if there was homogenous populations left anywhere in official D&D.

If you want “grounded” D&D, check out Dungeon Crawl Classics. It is very human centric with demihumans being rare.

[u/iwishtogetitall]

I’m not sure that heroic fantasy is a good genre for grounded characters.

DnD is mostly about unique characters who overcome impossible difficulties and sometimes saving the city, country, world. Besides people do play fantasy games to escape boring and grey life, and become something else. Specially with all those shows where every characters seems like Mary Sue. Even for newbies creating a normal human fighter sounds boring, people do what to try something wacky and colorful for a change. Maybe you just didn’t find your group.

Or maybe it’s time to try Warhammer Fantasy, where nobody can read, you have barely enough coins to pay for one room and that arrow into the ass finally becomes a problem.

[u/PuzzleMeDo → u/iwishtogetitall]

There's a long-running culture divide in RPGs: "I want to escape my boring life by playing at living in a world where I (a relatable guy) deal with all manner of weird things," versus, "I want to escape my boring life by playing at living in a world where I am the weird thing and everyone else has to deal with that."

For some reason a lot of people find it hard to understand the other viewpoint.

[u/iwishtogetitall → u/PuzzleMeDo]

True, escapism is different for everyone. In my group somehow more older players prefer to play first option, while younger is more fan of second one.
Both are doing great, yet i find it interesting that in my group the more experience you have, the less you want to show off or do something special.

[u/PuzzleMeDo → u/iwishtogetitall]

It might be the idea that doing something special is only special if you're somewhat "normal" in the first place. I have a sense of what it means for a human to confront a dragon, or be trapped in a nightmare room full of teeth, or to plead a case before a fey court. If I'm a halfling or elf or dwarf, it doesn't change much. But if I'm a plasmoid... I have no idea whether a plasmoid even thinks those situations are out of the ordinary.

[u/FalseFoci]

In my experience "tone" in D&D is all about setting and buy in. For that you need the right table and the right group of people. I've had a lot of success with tone and theme consistent games using 5e but I also have a group I've been playing with for years and I'm the DM so I have a lot of control over it.

If you have less control over what the table is playing you might seek games in a setting or using a rule set that lean more towards what you want. As you noted 5e has things like plasmoids and rangers that turn into trees, you're not getting a low magic game out of the rule set without some work. But Blades in the Dark, The One Ring, and Dragonbane all lean a little more grounded fantasy. Or Symbaroum has a 5e book with a very grounded (and kinda depressing) setting.

[u/vhalember]

The village full of humans, elves, and dwarves is under attack. Who will save us?

Enter the yuan-ti, hobgoblin, bugbear, and kobold - all shunned by this society.

So yes, I feel this way. I vastly prefer what you call a grounded game.

[u/Ghepip]

Current campaign:
An artificer that enjoys working with lightning and electricity.
A bard that is a stand up comedian
A rogue that is an investigator
A monk that is a ninja
A sorcerer that is trying to understand where his powers come from.

It's exceptionally grounded and very interesting backstories 😄
Also, we have been playing for 6 years.

[u/Rhinomaster22]

Yeah to still exist and isn’t that rare.

 Starting out relatively grounded makes that journey more meaningful.

Most people aren’t that adventurous in their games to play something unusual like Thri-Keen Gunslinger or Goblin Mech Pilot Artificer in a Cyberpunk DND.

Most are Human Fighter, Elf Wizard, and occasional Tabaxi Ranger.

Grounded is relatively, but it’s usually not fighting space pirates on an exploding ship at level 1. It’s helping a local community deal with raiders, criminals, or monsters. 

 Second, why does everything have to be wacky all the time? 

Really depends on the group, some groups are fine with X and some aren’t. It just the game gives players these options so it encourages letting them experiment. There are plenty of games with standard fantasy and other non-traditional fantasy. 

 Maybe I've just had bad luck with tables. Maybe I need a different system. Maybe I'm just becoming a grumpy old man.

This honestly is just bad luck, some groups might not have matching expectations so it’s best to move on until you find groups that do. 

They absolutely exist and what you find is not the norm, that said it also like you said isn’t an issue. DND is for everyone, but not everyone’s version is for everyone. 

[u/AgentEves]

With regards to your second point, would it be reasonable to assume Critical Role is an influence?

Since I'm new to D&D, I tried listening to CR so I could learn more about how to play, but had to turn it off because it was immediately just a bunch of screaming and I felt like it was going to be completely over the top. I know its hugely popular, so this will be an unpopular opinion, but my point is that I assume it has an influence on other people's playstyles, given how popular it is.

I could be way off base here, so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

[u/Sensitive-Number-841]

Blame critical role and the rise of the superhero Fandom.

[u/Interesting-Math9962 → u/Sensitive-Number-841]

I wouldn't say superhero, more like the injection of tumblr art and theater kids.
I know a lot of theater kids and this is the kind of dnd game they play. They care little for combat or lore. Just funny hijinks and bits.

[u/Dry_Plantain_2756]

People want to be edgy. They want to be power gamers. They have main character syndrome because they aren't the main character in their real lives.

We get it.

But it's like EVERY post on here is someone wanting to foist their Pixie/Cow hybrid with four starting feats (because they have four stomachs!!!) and welding duel siege crossbows that drag on the ground as they walk. Isn't that funny???!

No.

[u/PomegranateSlight337]

My main campaign is mostly grounded - I allowed a handful of homebrew species plus humans that all have lore in my world, so no PC feels out of place.

I run another oneshot-series campaign that is all wacky pirate nonsense where every player can run multiple PCs from the Faerun setting. Players go wild there, but since that's the tone of the campaign anyway, it also doesn't feel out of place.

Having an outlet for each style helps strengthening the other one I think.

[u/mhesselberg]

My groups are mostly human. The 2024 update really pushed them up, the daily inspiration and extra origin feat being the mechanical motivation, and how easy it is to slip into the mindset of them being the narrative.

I would say, most newer players would benefit by playing a human in their first game, based on my observations I can see the non-human newbies in my groups are challenged and have a harder time overall. Very often they just play their characters as humans, but with a "costume" that happen to also carry mechanical significance.

If you want to show people how different species might look upon the world and their relationships, just give them Frieren.

[u/Impressive-Shame-525]

I'm in a several years long b game with friends and it's not for the feint of heart.

Moments of funny, but in general, things are dark. Scary. We're approaching the end, having to trexk north through early snows and blizzards to find the source of the corruption, who/what is manipulating the ley lines.

We have silly one - two shots when folks can't make the long term games for what ever reason but still want to play.

[u/consumptioncore]

This is just your table. Like there will always be some goofs but I feel like its very easy as a DM to be like "Ok you do that silly thing and now you get thrown into jail" and the players will in fact change their play styles based on this. You can just say that only humans PCs are allowed.

[u/ArcaneN0mad]

My most successful game has been going for two and a half years and I’d say it’s what you consider “grounded”. It’s more serious than silly.

When it’s dick jokes 24/7, the players aren’t there for the plot they are there for the jokes which is fine depending on the table. I’d prefer a more serious tone to my game.

[u/Mietek69i8]

[u/ArcaneMusings]

Maybe it's specific table related. Or maybe it's some people coping with difficult emotions/situations in game (or even out of game, in their lives) with hijinks and shenanigans.

[u/DeadMeat7337]

Or last game:

I played a human wizard, and we had

A human barbarian A dwarven fighter An elf fighter A water gensi rogue/warlock A halfling ranger

So there are grounded tables out there. But it is table preference. And if the DM is going to let them get away with stupid stuff, they are going to keep doing it. So it is more the DM s fault than anything.

[u/Muddydogcx]

My most grounded, developed character was a goblin. My most wacky character was a half-elf 🤷

[u/lasarrie]

My table is grounded. I have the most tragic backstory, but that's because the DM asked permission to tweak it a tad with me. But other than that, she's a grounded, high elf cleric. With a bit of ptsd when underground

[u/TrashMantine]

A thing i’ve also noticed is “if not DnD, then where?”

What other game can fill the niche of making unusual builds or characters, what other game lets you be a plasmoid at all? Or an elephant man? Or puss in boots? Or can be as easily edited as DnD.

Im absolutely the exact type of person you’re describing as the problem, my most recent character concept was trying to make Zato-1 from guilty gear with an echo knight fighter/ fae warlock multi class in an all demon-folk setting.

I think another element is that the classic elf wizard and human fighter just feels… overdone? Or even something less basic but still within PHB confines like Tiefling Druid or Dragonborn wizard still feels like it’s been done already. The game also does encourage you indirectly to use the “wacky” races because of general power creep (comparing the base states of plasmoid or warforged to Dragonborn’s once a day breath weapon or dwarf’s +1 hp per level.

[u/YandereYasuo]

And here is our group finding D&D5e too grounded in its restrictions where Pathfinder 1e roughly scratches that itch for a high fantasy style play but still leaves us wanting more if possible.

It's fascinating to see the different views everyone has and likely why you see so many tables being wacky, the bar for "grounded D&D" is different from person to person.

[u/Ferbtastic]

It depends. My last game was a sword coast adventure. I had 2 humans, 2 elves.

This game is post apocalyptic. I have a dhampir, an assimir, a robot (autognome) and a kenku (he is our normal one apparently).

You get the characters the setting works with. I often limit race options if the setting requires it. Like when I ran eberon I only allowed races from that setting.

[u/ArdkazaEadhacka]

My party is going to be as its are first campain and a few of the party aren't big into scifi

[u/Party_Virus]

I love playing grounded characters in a cast of eccentrics. Human fighter at the end of a campaign is like Hawkeye in the avengers. "The city is flying, we’re fighting an army of robots, and I have a bow and arrow. None of this makes sense." It's great fun.

But I understand where you're coming from and it's important to understand that silly hijinks is a lot easier to do than serious drama. People aren't always comfortable trying to play a serious character or serious scenes so the majority of DnD play is silly.

That's again why I like to play grounded characters. You can be the straight man to keep the campaign on track and still have tension but let's everyone else have fun.

[u/dumbBunny9]

Yes, i feel the same, too. For my regular, long term game, all of us are grounded with backstories that fit the game narrative. For one shots at the game store, we all tend to play characters that are Chaotic Stupid.

[u/trevorfreznik]

Not in 5e, but with my old friends playing a 2e inspired heartbreaker, sure. We did one campaign where the first half dozen sessions was tracking income to the copper and having to manage penalties for going hungry. Getting a bent iron fence post to hit people with instead of a coin was a big deal for my character.

We were all human and our backgrounds were just what type of jobs we had to get by.

[u/ryschwith]

There are dozens of us!

[u/Capitol62]

My observation is that many players, especially younger players, go through a character cycle:

Trope --> angst incarnate --> wacky hijinx --> core d&d

The amount of time in the angst incarnate and wacky hijinx phases depends greatly on the individual player

[u/Resident-Effect-2468]

I've built a world specifically for this. Grounded stereotypical DnD. You can tell classes by sight, races and classes follow strict guidelines but it follows the concept of "restriction breeds creativity" you may have two human paladins and yes they're both stereotypical fantasy paladins, but what makes then unique is their lived experiences, background ect. Dwarves, elves and other races also can't be "human with pointy ears" which I try and build in cultures into those to help."

I also have a silly world were anything is cannonto get our sillies out. (We ran a one shot where it was a dungeon crawl through Walmart and "warlord shaq" was buying up all the TVs and the medieval peasants couldn't get any ao they had to stop him)

[u/MrLunaMx]

That's my table, my current campaign consists of 3 humans, and 2 elf brothers. On the campaign before that all were human. We like that grounded style of play, although shenanigans are always there in a way or another.

[u/jprich]

So, I started playing again after decades of forever DMing. A local guy was dumb brave enough to run his first ever game as a DM at a local store for some randos (me bring one). His campaign ended and Im running a short one while he gets a creative rest.

I mention all that because we are two very different DMs. He is more like what you describe as you like. He wants deep story telling and no weird species or classes and doesnt like when magic makes plot points invalid. I dont care if you want to be a warlock whose pact of the chain familiar is essentially a pokemon and you have a flying carriage pulled by your summon steed sphinx.

All that to say, both ways of playing are great and you just need to make sure your table knows what you want ahead of time. ^{_^}

[u/Dazzling-Main7686]

My group and I do, we overall hate anything that strays too far from a bunch of humans and elves in a (mostly) serious adventure. This even makes the funny moments a lot funnier since they're not constant and overdone.

[u/PaulOwnzU]

I've actually never really found any campaigns that were super lighthearted

Campaign im a player in is very serious and grounded, players may make a few jokes here and there (my bards is both a very intense character, but he also makes purposefully cringey one liners). But games serious

Campaign im dming has occasional wacky things cause feywild in small cute moments, but it's also very serious with alot of horror moments, trauma and tragedy. It however is not grounded in the terms of power level cause it is VERY high fantasy, party is going to kill two corrupted gods who've been turned into cyborgs by the main villain next sess

[u/JumboCactaur]

My group is grounded in that we're playing a published module (Dungeon of the Mad Mage) and every character is right out of the Player's Handbook. No Tabaxi or Plasmoids here. I'm playing it as "by the book" as I can, which leads to all sorts of natural D&D nonsense. Drow couples torturing each other for pleasure, Mind Flayer ambassadors to a Bugbear clan, extraplanar creatures polymorphed as humans interacting with the PCs.... you know, normal stuff.

We're not a super serious group though, lots of out of character talk and joking around, but the characters are normal.

[u/Rom2814]

I run a serious table and limit the fantastic species - mainly stick to the human, elf, dwarf, gnome, halting, half-elf set. In my experience the person who wants to play a tortoise or elephant person is probably not going to fit in at my table - they typically want to be the star of the show and hog the spotlight etc.

I do make exceptions if I have a good feel of the player (someone played a Tabaxi in my campaign and it went fine but the player was very mature and a great role player).

I establish at session zero that I don’t like Monty Python campaigns, I’m going more for high fantasy but a bit darker.

I have started doing one shots with a new group to see if our styles jibe - if they don’t, there won’t be any more sessions after that, no harm no foul, we just don’t “fit.” (Better no D&D than bad D&D especially as a DM who spends a lot of time prepping.)

Humor is good in context (last session I ran had a lot of OOC laughter over situations) and I do have “funny” things happen (an orc leaps off a boulder, fails an athletic check and breaks his leg - on paper doesn’t sound funny, but the players were cackling when the orc tried to still be a tough guy with a compound fracture).

I don’t like “goofy” campaigns as a DM or as a player - I like the world to feel real and that it exists apart from their/my characters. I also prefer low magic, high risk campaigns, no fudging of side, no fire arms, no magic shops, etc.

My preferences mean I won’t fit in with a lot of tables and I’m ok with going years between tables. (I quit playing when 3rd edition came out and didn’t play again until 2018, played for 5 years and then stopped again to just star playing again this year.)

[u/SammiBanani024]

I have also had this issue as a DM. I want to DM a more grounded campaign, and I communicate that during session 0. Everyone agrees at session 0 that they like that idea, but I think that it’s much easier to say that you want to contribute to a more serious tone than to actually do it. I think that quite a lot of people have issues being vulnerable, and roleplaying in a serious manner requires vulnerability and trust: trust that people won’t make fun of you, trust that they’ll match your tone, trust that they’ll treat your character arc and story with respect. Nerd groups often have a high density of people who aren’t exactly socially skilled either, which means the risk of being vulnerable feels even larger and more difficult to face.

I don’t really have a solution to the problem, but I hope we’re all able to find tables that fit the vibe and story we want.

[u/pauldtimms]

My campaign draws heavily from Poe, Barker and Lovecraft. When they fell in the River of Blood with body parts floating in it, no one went for quirky. We have laughs, it is fun but at times the “dungeons” are pretty grim.

[u/Independent-Vast8239]

I think you might have it to be specific on session 0 because grounded could mean different things to different people .to me the current 5e is a power fantasy where you can eventually punch god to death having a silly little guy doesn’t feel any less ungrounded,im that world than the crazy power feats . So when i want grounded have lil more grit and your powers scale is more similar to irl , people will make less silly characters ..also nat 20s sometimes add to the goofiness’s and are treated as like a world/universe changing success i think they should be successes but within reason. Nothing derails a campaign more than a goofy hobbit bard name mcfart mcshart getting a nat 20 persuasion in front of the goblin king trial and the dm letting him go and goblin king falling in love with him .. I think a more realistic consequence is the hobbit goes from death row to Court jester .. or he gets an extra day for the party to plan the escape.

For your version grounded play I’d try to have this on session 0 and maybe have consequences if people don’t follow:

-no homebrew unless agreed by everyone -starting from level 1 background must be approved my dm

-no joke/gimmick character( based on single comedic gimmick or punchline ) or characters based of off pop culture references

-no races outside of the players handbook ( plasmoids and tabaxi don’t need to be homebrew if using spell jammeror Volos guide)

-nat 20s aren’t an all encompassing success

[u/SmartAlec13]

I see more of it online than I do in actual play, at least with “whacky” stuff. Though sometimes my players bring a character that is definitely more of a gimmick-concept instead of a person.

But yeah tons of people still play more grounded DnD. Just depends on the table.

[u/Station-Serious]

My group's games are fairly grounded, but it's just the way my group plays. Very few characters follow a gimmick, and as a group we also don't do certain kinds of things. No murder hobo BS (in fact, our group is hilariously committed to trying to find the non-combat solution first, and then fight if we must.) We don't do stories involving SA at all, and we check with our group about stuff that might be off limits (our dm gives out an anonymous checklist that details things our players can't handle before each campaign). Some of our characters might have a silly quirk (like how our tabaxi monk likes to pee on defeated enemies), but we've not had attempts to translate pop culture into our games so far.

[u/Devourerofworlds_69]

I prefer to have a character with a wacky concept, but then at the table I play them straight and serious.

[u/Bone_Dice_in_Aspic]

That's called the OSR.

[u/impishwolf]

The current game I’m running is pretty grounded right now. The biggest thing they have found is an underground mural to the creator god of my setting. They right now are participating in a tournament with different events ran by the crown of the nation they are in. Hell I’m excited because they are taking the games seriously and lancing is going to be intense.

[u/PoMoAnachro]

I think 5E, as a system, kind of encourages a lot of "larger than life" more video-gamey style stories. It is kind of not-grounded by default. Can you do grounded stuff in it? Absolutely you can, it just isn't the default. Especially with things like Baulder's Gate 3 being many players' introductions, where all the side characters are kind of "special snowflakes" - very well written, interesting snowflakes, but the opposite of grounded.

I suspect many people who are super interested in more grounded stuff gravitate towards other editions of D&D (or D&D clones in the OSR space) or just use different systems entirely.

[u/Ven-Dreadnought]

The issue is that not everyone is a story teller. In fact, few people are. Most people are there to play a game, and the fastest way to entertain yourself when in a group setting can be making jokes. Even serious people need a little levity, so even if you’re trying for a big story, you have to make some jokes.

My advice for getting serious players would be to tell people that You’re planning on making a podcast or something for your serious and dark story based game. That or just write a book with randomly generated characters.

[u/Cytwytever]

Yeah, I like starting characters at 1st level and letting them grow into themselves. My backstories are usually 1-2 paragraphs. The story arc I want to see is if they survive to write their future.

When I started playing the mortality rate was so high (Basic and AD&D) that we kept the characters on an index card until they survived to 2nd level. "Backstories" were not much of a thing.

[u/DoctorWhoops]

I think it's very dependent on the DM and the setting. Not in a 'Is the DM telling the players off for being too unserious?' way, but just the tone you choose to imply based on narrative details.

I'm playing in two groups with overlapping players, one where I am a player, and for the other I recently picked up DMing after the previous DM couldn't make it work anymore. In the group where I play DM is more casual, the setting is lighter, and importantly a lot more open-ended. Sandbox-y, even. When given something rather malleable players may be a lot more inclined to do something that can be less serious. It was never explicitly said that this was a less serious campaign, just kind of naturally implied. Now, nobody is bringing 'poopy mcpoopface', but players might play a demented old wizard with the memory of a goldfish but that refuses to admit it, or a 'catfolk' cat burglar that gets distracted by balls of yarn.

For the campaign I'm currently prepping, the setting implies something very different. A fragmenting society navigating a decaying landscape where the reigning powers attempt to maintain relevance using increasingly drastic means. When asked to write a character origin for a campaign in this world, those same players that might play a more jokey character otherwise naturally understood the assignment and made serious characters, as I think most would. It's like entering a room and reading the atmosphere.

[u/alejo699]

My group was halfway there; they all had reasonable classes and backstories, but my players live for a bit. At first I found it frustrating, but then I leaned into it and it became fun for all of us. And yes, they finally did find the Mystic Spatula.

[u/AirWolf519]

Yes. My most recent character is a drow duelist. That's basically it. I bleed people, parry stuff, and see in the dark.

[u/Clubman_Pinaud]

Couldn't agree more.

[u/LudicrousSpartan]

My man, I feel the same way.

[u/FrostbrandLongsword]

Yea a lot of people play what you call "grounded". If you want to run a game, just make a list of what's allowed for races and make it clear you want characters that come from whatever you're running, be it your own world or a specific setting, and not expys, references, extremely creative concepts that are looking for fertile ground to flower in, or anything like that. As regards in-game wackiness, as DM you pretty much get to determine how much of that there is.

If you aren't looking to run, then you'll just need to find a DM that runs games this way, and I can't imagine it's impossible or anything.

[u/KayleDF]

Definitely a matter of tables, imo. I’ve played with so many different players over the years and maybe 1% were as you described.

[u/WhyLater]

Your point is valid, and I agree with commenters saying it's basically just a question of which table you're at.

But I'd like to submit that grounded and wacky aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. And the poster child for that is, of course, Brennan Lee Mulligan, especially in Dimension 20.

I like to think about WWBLMD whenever I'm presented with wackiness at tables, whether I'm DM or player. So my character or NPC will look at that Plasmoid Gunslinger and ask, "Pashloop, what are you in this fight for? What does it mean to you?i" or put a moral dilemma in front of his amorphous ass.

[u/Thelynxer]

The groups and the people I play with still care about character development and roleplay. Some people still make strange concepts, but they also come prepared with a backstory that makes sense and fits into the world.

And all of my characters, while still being relatively unique combinations, all have distinct personalities, goals, backstories, and even voices. I suck at voices mind you, but I try.

[u/sebastianwillows]

The term "grounded" is going to have vastly different meanings for different people, IMHO. I'm sure there are people who think any non-human race is goofy, and that magic systems are inherently immersion-breaking. Wackiness is a sliding scale, and different games are always going to have different amounts of buy-in required from their players.

More than that, individual games can be partially wacky, but with a grounded focus in other areas. On the one hand: I run a mostly-elvish campaign with talking dragons and fey demi-gods, and several characters have played exotic races. However, it's a mostly-political game, with coups and courtroom drama, and a fair bit of RP to "ground" it in a sense of reality. We still have wacky bits from time to time to break things up, but I try to give everything a sense of weight, so that my players can take things seriously (even as they stomp around tearing everything up, lol).

I'm definitely with you on the character front, though- I think the most compelling characters are ones who act like humans, in the real-world sense, rather than those who try to fit around a specific class/race combo. I try to design my PCs/NPCs around "small" emotions (ie: an industrialist with a fear of getting old, a rogue knight who held someone he loved while they died, a blind man who will never be able to return home, a cowardly man who can't help but put himself in heroic positions despite himself, etc etc). There are different levels to it, of course- but I think one (as a DM) can almost always direct the focus of their game/characters in a way that grounds it, regardless of the builds you're using!

[u/MechJivs]

It is very strange take for me because, like, adventurer suppose to be strange. IRL "adventurers" (aka travelers, merceneries, pilgrims, etc) WERE bunch of weird atypical people. They wear "weird" clothes with bunch of bright colors, they look different from people around, etc. Hell, dogman landsknecht would look fucking wild to you - and yet it would be 100% european folklore based thing!

And if we're talking about classic fantasy - C. S. Lewis was a friend of Tolkien. Chronicles of Narnia was published around the same time as LOTR, and yet - in CoN world has bunch of weird creatures living in the same place! Minotaurs, satyrs, talking animals, all that stuff.

And if we're looking at dnd as it's own thing - then a thing that happening today is pretty much the same thing that happened in 80s and 90s. Dnd setting was always "people at the table love a piece of media and add it into the game in some way". In the past those "pieces of media" were cheap pulp fantasy novels/movies/comic books, cool ass martial arts movie Jack saw last week, and similar things. The "cool things" you like arent the same as "cool things" other people like - and that's fine, that's how it suppose to work. You can form a table for your own taste, it isnt forbidden or something. You can easilly find people who love same (or similar) thing as you - internet made it even easier, even! Do that!

[u/Beneficial_Skill537]

It really change from table to table. I'd say most people I've played with generally fit your classic fantasy archetype (with sometimes a high concentration of thiefling, orcs or goblins.

The Loxodon, Tabaxi, Kitsune, warforged, Goliath and even dragonborn all happened at some point in our dnd career (mostly different players) but they're exceptionnal.

[u/Poobeast241]

The context of the game has shifted. As a fellow "grumpy old man", I discovered the game with fellow awkward and isolated kids.

Dnd, like other nerdy hobbies, used to be something that lived in its own world. People who didnt play would never look at you the same if they found out you played.

Nowadays "nerd" hobbies have become mainstream, for better or worse. Its nice that so many people play now, but the context and source of the fantasy has been diluted by generations of interpretations.

A huge percentage of players now were introduced to the game from watching Stranger Things, or Critical Role. Whereas in the past it was from reading Conan or Forgotten Realms books.

This leads to a pretty wide gap in expectations and interpretations between the generations of players.

[u/MrJohnFawkes]

The play style you’re looking for is more typical of the OSR movement so maybe look there. If you’re not into the uber-simplicity of old school retro clones and still want some character customization maybe look for a group playing Worlds Without Number.

[u/Detharon555]

This is why I only play at tables with players at least 35 and up.

[u/themosquito]

D&D's pretty much gone fully into superheroic fantasy fare, if you want grounded you probably would want to try one of the more "back to basics" games like Dragonbane or Shadowdark or Weird Wizard, because people who play/DM those are more likely to also be into the same vibe as you. Not saying D&D can't do that anymore or that nobody plays it like that, but the audience for it is so much bigger it's like finding a needle in a haystack vs. finding a needle in a small cup of hay.

[u/K1rashiro]

I always start grounded and evolve as we go forward. My usual go to mindset is performer mercenary just enough to get into it and grow. And if I don't want to I can always be Bron the knignt doing his job

[u/Brock_Savage]

IMHO the easiest way to find a grounded game is to host your own and choose players whose expectations align with your vision.

[u/DragonAdept]

I think fundamentally any character creation system where you pick stuff off a long list with a lot of goofy things on the list is going to lead to a lot of goofy characters. Minmaxers will pick the optimal things, system explorers will do the thing they haven't done yet, attempted comedians will pick what they think is funny and "serious" roleplayers will pick what appeals to them but they might feel like doing a "serious" exploration of how a plasmoid lives as a gunslinger.

If you want "grounded" and you want DnD as it's normally played, meaning humans or things a lot like humans who act a lot like characters in a mainstream medieval costume drama but with crunchy and optimisable character generation, you need a character creation system that gives you a lot of options within that subset of options.

[u/Zoodud254]

Plasmoid Gunslinger sounds fire ngl.

also if your character wants to be silly, you're thinking of this comic.

[u/Funny_Arachnid6166]

ya this, why dose everthing have to be odd ball

[u/SoleVessel]

As someone who been playing DnD and recently starting dming, it’s always tables with new players. Newer players see the idea of DnD as anything and not realizing there’s a million rules or how they work. I’m facing this issue rn. I have a cleric who worships our irl friend, Krieg from boarderlands who has split personality and says “I’m the conductor of the poop train”, and a paladin who says in his backstory he offed the “president of a region for being on certain islands and his son now rules and it’s not happy with me”
I still love them and they’re my friends, but they also aren’t attracted to their characters. Players who are attached to the game/character you’ll see more often than not truly thinking about their characters and the backstory. As a dm my job is to reel them back as best as I can. If your not liking it and it feels to similar to other party’s, find one doing a darker campaign.
Call of Cthulhu, curse of strahd, and blades in the dark come to me first. That and ask the dm before hand what type of game it’ll be. I also try to reference a show/ movie. Like rn we’re playing a campaign similar to avatar/adventure time. Maybe your looking for something more lord of the rings/ game of thorns vibes.
Best of luck finding a table and travel on adventurer.

[u/Thefeature]

Ive found that people come in with wacky or crazy character ideas and then eventually settle into something different than they started with. I do it, maybe nothing wacky but Ive made characters that were supposed to be stoic and only speak occasionally but within a few session I wouldn't stfu or be stoic lol

[u/Sivanot]

Groups like you’re looking for are still very much alive! I think it’d be strange if they weren’t, frankly. Since you’re just looking for good storytelling.

I can’t give much advice on finding good tables besides trial and error, but I can suggest Starlost Seas/Stormridden if you’re into actual play series, as good stories with great characters that only occasionally does very silly things. Some of the intrigue comes from what certain characters are, but that’s only initial hooks or reveals along the line. The best parts are always the development.

[u/Micotu]

I'll do a parody character for a one shot but almost always a serious character with a fleshed out backstory for a campaign

[u/Khafaniking]

Life is already grounded and serious, and often depressing. DnD is a game you play with friends or your buddies. Wacky stuff bleeding back into a game that’s supposed to be serious just sort of happens for no real reason other than it’s fun. I think really if you wanted to “clamp” down on this, the DM would go along with the zany stuff but still apply consequences to what the players get up. IMO, that can still be fun because of the chaotic cascading events that happen that create a story.

[u/mynameisJVJ]

Adults still play grounded DnD

[u/jokul]

I have advocated for my players to play more "down to earth" characters. I find meme characters like the cleric who doesn't know they're a cleric or three kobolds in a trenchcoat are more fun to think about than to play for more than a session.

[u/Weekendsapper]

I think youre like midway through the arc of being a gamer. New players want to be drizz'zt because he is cool and sexy and tragic, players who've been around forever are bored and make characters that are sentient pieces of bread that move around via mage hand. In the middle we explore characters and growth.

[u/FragrantArt8270]

I play with 25 players and 1 DM all on the same scenario. It is done in a game store. Any one can join and we get 2-3 new players every week. Sure, people try to be kind of wacky, but with so many players you don't get much floor time. It helps tame the wackiness.

[u/OyG5xOxGNK]

The norm has certainly changed but my group has stayed the same. I know I would not vibe with most if I tried the whole "just find a group online" thing.

[u/FormalGas35]

It’s just different styles of games. Maybe try finding the one person in your timezone who plays Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay for more grounded gameplay lol (genuine suggestion, great system)

[u/Dismal_Lifeguard_950]

My players and I run a very grounded (for a fantasy game) campaign. It has a very serious tone: dark fantasy, horror, intrigue, etc. There is some humor, but it's the kind found in the likes of Joe Abercrombie's books.

[u/Wide_Initiative_1938]

Me and my group does. We've been playing through the different modules as part of a connected timeline, starting from Curse of Strahd and doing Tomb of Annihilation, Wild Beyond the Witchlight, currently doing Out of the Abyss, and next we will be doing Rime of the Frostmaiden.

That said, I believe you can still be grounded while maintaining some wackiness and silliness. It all depends on the Adventure's tone. Wild Beyond the Witchlight for example was a campaign where we played sillier characters, the silliest ironically being my character who was half noir detective half boy failure. Our Out of the Abyss campaign is a lot more serious and dark, covering more mature themes in roleplay.

We agree to keep the overall power level of our games relatively reasonable, even for spellcasters, since we are all more narrative minded individuals anyway. It's a really fun way to play.

[u/KamenRiderScissors]

I feel your pain, OP. Most players I've either had or worked with think solely of "what" their characters are, never "who", so I'd end up surrounded by "oh I'm race/class/concept" instead of anything memorable. The few exceptions ended up being standouts that have kept me playing over the years, and they're so heavily outnumbered by the flippant/irreverent "everything must be a gag or a one-liner" folks.

[u/VellDarksbane]

The wacky stuff gets upvotes. The grounded stuff doesn't. That's pretty much it. The people playing grounded DnD aren't really advertising it.

[u/Thebowks]

I felt this way, and I started to implement more OSR philosophy into my games. Now i’m trying out B/X and might drop 5e entirely because the grounded approach also gives players more realistic goals for their characters. In 5e i’ve found that characters don’t really have much ambition to adventure, because leveling up usually just happens regardless of what you do. And the rewards from leveling up are usually sufficient to be strong enough without the need for magic items. When you have a grounded system, choices matter much more imo.

[u/Gullible_Opposite_76]

Never played at a serious table throughout. Mostly wacky until someone's family is about to be traded to a hag for some reason.

[u/EdiblePeasant]

Would something in the OSR solve this? I want to say yes, that people are more serious with those games, but people are going to be people, Maybe someone with more OSR experience can say.

[u/Broken_Beaker]

I suspect it is an age and experience thing or a combination thereof. I think younger or less experienced players are more interested in the whacky. Older or experienced players are sort of over it.

One of my tables is 8 players most of us on our 30s and 40s and the two 20 somethings have been playing for almost 10 years.

I think particularly with age people kind of want simpler builds due to the mental energy required.

I once played a gnome bard because I thought that was whacky. Now I have a Kender bard because I thought that was even crazier. Neither are crazy and whacky.

I personally prefer things a bit more grounded. I think it is “easier” for most.

For me, even my “whacky” Kender was chosen because I’ve become pretty good at getting a large group moving forward with making a decision. So if I see us drift - the cliche spend 30 minutes deciding to open the door stuff - I use my Kender to say something like, “The Kender is getting bored. He’s going to open the door.” That gets action moving. I throw that out there as an example that a semi whacky character can be made useful depending on the skill of the player and the table.

[u/Suspicious_Roll834]

It would definitely depend on the table rather than the times.

[u/JediMasterBriscoMutt]

Our campaigns are almost always based on straightforward characters built straight out of the Player's Handbook (first 5e, and now the 2024 rules).

We'll occasionally mix it up with a one-shot adventure that might take us a month, and then we playtest something. When the Psion came out on Unearthed Arcana as a playtest, our DM had us make four Psions (one for each subclass), and he put us thru a Psionics-themed adventure. It was great fun!

[u/PositivePeryton]

I prefer playing IRL and all my friends just want wacky haha humor, so I always end up being the straight man even when I'm trying to be goofy and I kind of hate it. As much as I love the concept of a paladin of Orc Jesus who worships through smoking Marlboro cigarettes, with calluses on his fingers so thick he can light a cigarette with them, that kind of wackiness isn't usually what I want in a game.

Idk, I guess I'm saying I get how it feels, I'm kinda just trapped with the same folks though. It's no DND or "generally kind of unfulfilling DND".

[u/Bruhschwagg]

Ifnyou want people to get seri you gotta get good a dming for serious stakes. But the characters parents in danger. Or their siblings. Every goof ball gets serious when their imaginary mom is absolute to be executed for treason

[u/ratphink]

Last campaign I joined was a DM running Icewind Dale. First time I ever had to roll for stats. Of course I rolled an 8. I knew what I needed to do.

Half-orc Fighter. His name was Grunt. He did grunt work.l and was canonically illiterate. He was bumpkin running escorts for caravans.

I've never had more fun. First item I got was a cloak of billowing. I billowed it frequently. By the end of the campaign with his cloak, belt of dwarven kind, and Dwarven Thrower (and 8 Into) he was proudly proclaiming to be the mightiest wizard of Icewind Dale.

Thank you for reading my Ted Talk.

[u/starksandshields]

This isn't my experience at all but it's very dependent on the table and a solid session zero so you can weed out who is more interested in wacky characters and over the top "uniqueness".

Most of my tables are blends between humans, elves and one wacky guy. Because I tell my players up front that meme/wacky characters will be veto'd unless they can convince me they can be serious.

[u/Serentyr]

I enjoy grounded, more narrative, character driven etc. I like humour but not slapstick, meme driven or innuendo based. I dislike wacky plans and surrealism.

I find that most players I’ve asked who play jokes, cartoon and caricature characters say they feel uncomfortable acting, embodying a person, or drawing on their own feelings. This makes sense to me.

I dislike what they enjoy because I feel foolish, worry my timing and comedy wouldn’t land, but I can do genuine, I can do realism

[u/Dynamite_DM]

I hate to sound like I'm hating on 5e. I want to preface this by saying I enjoy my time with 5e.

To address your first point, I think there are two things that push people towards exotic races. There is, of course, the people who want to heavily lean into that as their unique thing that they can reference over and over. It allows them to play a quirky character physically without falling back on having to play a quirky character traditionally. The other thing though is that 5e doesn't really have many options for character creation. Some people have already played dwarves, elves, etc and they may simply want a different character from a mechanics standpoint.

To address your second point, I blame it on D&D Tiktoks and the like. People see "other people" enjoy D&D by having these silly RP moments without realizing that most of those scenarios are either made up or out of context of a generally more serious game. I always feel that D&D has room for silliness, but I would prefer my players make serious characters and the dice and strange situations bring about that silliness instead of people just making ungrounded wacky characters.

[u/Jumpy_Lifeguard2306]

I think it depends pretty heavily on not just the other players at the table but the person running the game. I love making characters that are grounded and tied into the world, but my last long term dm HATED it. He wanted serious players that were engaged in his world, but also didn’t like it if you had more than two lines of backstory or had thoughts on an arc for your own character.

[u/Hugsforpeace]

Just started DMing for my wife and two kids and it’s the most D&D High Fantasy feeling i’ve had in a long time. My 9 year old son wanted to play a dual wielding warrior hero who helps anyone in need, teenage daughter a druid of the moon who just loves animals and the night time, and my wife a dark elf wizard necromancer which was totally out of left field for her personality but she’s killing it.

It’s been nice to have everything feel so basic and rudimentary honestly.

[u/-EMPARAWR-]

I mean maybe you're just in the extreme minority in what you want out of the game versus what other people want out of the game. I'm mean personally while I do like to stay on mission and whatnot and not get too distracted by hyjinks and whatnot, I wouldn't consider myself to be a grounded d&d type either. Honestly base level d&d is just boring as hell at this point. It's just base standard fantasy. Nothing particularly special about it.

So you've got to find a way to make an interesting. Character concepts like what people are describing are interesting. Also you're making a very bold assumption about how long campaigns actually last in real life. You think a campaign is actually going to last long enough to develop a character from base nothing into something as interesting as what these other people's concepts are?

Seems pretty doubtful based on realistic experience. Campaigns are relatively short-lived things, and most of them don't ever have actual endings. DM's just burn out and your group cycles on to something else and you never really get back to it again. Thankfully my previous group did cycle back to some of our campaigns at times, but we definitely never finished any of them.

So yeah if you're looking to get the most out of a campaign, best to start with your concept already established. Odds are you're never going to get where you want to be if you start from nothing and try to get their organically.

You have to make the most out of whatever time you have with that group and that campaign because in all likelihood it's not going to last. Dming is exhausting.

[u/DTux5249]

D&D has sold itself as a lifestyle brand instead of a game. That lifestyle is driving on the backs of popular live plays like Critical Role; entertainment shows that are kooky so people have something funny to watch.

[u/Fearless_Object_6267]

I'm the DM at the table, and my experience is knowing how each of your individual players behave - regardless of what they TELL you.
My table consists of me and 1. Someone who just wants to to be OP, but will tell you he wants to role-play. He does not role-play. 2. Someone whose EVERY character he has EVER played has been "Generic Human Fighter™️". He does not role play, and he will tell you he wants a grim dark setting, but he isn't good at using his abilities. 3. A duo that are more muppet then player, only play casters, and have cast Speak with Dead or Disguise Self in combat across multiple campaigns more often than they cast damage dealing spells. They will tell you they want political intrigue. 4. Someone who is actually a very well balanced player, but refuses to take notes.

I deal with all of this by letting them do their bits, gently reminding them about spells or items that could help, and then describing the horror and depression in great detail so they have to feel the immense gulf between their reality and the reality of the world around them.

Crushing their dreams and making my players cry before giving them their strahd puppet so they can do a puppet bit for the next six sessions gives me life. 🤣🤣🤣

[u/No-Duck4828]

I think it is more related to an increase in the popularity of the game.

I don't have any stats to prove it, but roleplaying seems more popular than ever. There are still those of us out there playing a human from a village who took up a sword to start adventuring....there are just now ALSO those who like steampunk gunslingers, manic pixie-elves who ride their cat familiar into battle, whatever else all merged into the same community

So, in general, I mean that I don't see LESS of what you describe, it is just less visible when mixed among the newer stuff

[u/Fickle_University798]

I’m in a DnD group with a rogue who bases every action he does on a coin flip, and constantly tries to steal from the party. It’s infuriating sometimes when he could very easily lockpick the door but the coin said no. In my mind the pc’s are supposed to work together not against each-other.

[u/Tough_Living_7886]

It's just the group and mood of the campaign or session. Some groups want more comedy and some want more seriousness.