Sort of related to Is it wrong to ask a player to justify their character's actions?
Scenario
- Player 1 wants to be a male drow necromancer that reveres Kiaransalee.
- Player 2 wants to be a male human cleric that reveres Heironeous.
- Player 3 wants to be a female human vampire rogue that reveres nothing.
- Player 4 wants to be a male frost giant monster class that reveres Thrym.
Situation
Before character creation, I asked the players, "How would you all meet? You have a snow loving giant that lives in the Frostfell, a death loving drow that lives in the Underdark, a human cleric that stands for liberty and justice for all, and a human vampire (of all things) that can't walk around in the daytime."
Their response? "Well, you're the DM, you figure it out for us. I don't know how my drow would meet with a frost giant. That is where you come in."
I replied to that with, "So what about the cleric of Heironeous? Did any of you think about what the other was making before writing stuff down? Come on, you all know how this stuff works. Look, I am not figuring all of this out for you whenever I am trying to come up with adventure hooks, plots, NPC's, and everything else. Work with me here a little. I volunteered to be your DM because I enjoy doing it, but if I have to do the fundamentals of roleplaying then I will have to ask all of you to come up with something else."
"Well, if I can't be this…" "This is the character I made…" "If this isn't good enough for you…" "…I will just sit out this campaign."
My final reply was, "Either all of you come up with some very good reasons for group cohesion, common cause, and npc reaction implications now, otherwise the cleric will lose his status amongst his church for consorting with evil, the drow will be hunted as an exile, villagers will attack the giant with torches, and the church that the cleric belongs to will hunt down the vampire."
Question
What am I supposed to do exactly whenever players want to all be something so different? I understand that the stereotypes can be broken, and they simply don't seem to understand – "reality" for a lack of better term. When the entire consensus states, "You are the DM, you can figure it out." Should I?
Best Answer
Don't run the campaign
It is often important (but not always) for the party to have a preexisting, long term reason to stay a party. It is especially important in situations like this, with non-standard parties. Unless that reason is part of your pitch, it is incumbent upon the players to come up with that reason.
Your Options
Make it a One-Shot
So you don't lose a game session you can run the game as is, without a real reason for the party to stick together, until the party inevitably falls apart. This kind of play is usually lighter in tone. The party may actually come up with a background in this throwaway setting.
Have them Re-Roll
You can have them come up with new, more standard, characters for the game and continue as planned.
Go Bowling
Just don't run a game at all. This leaves you open to come up with a new campaign idea, or revisit this one later when the players are willing to collaborate on party design.