I agree that it’s unlikely for random heroes to fill all the standard roles. That’s one of the reasons I emphasize people playing what they want instead of striving for a standard party. I still think fun of the group comes first, which is my primary motivation on this insistence. When they do want a standard party though, I think it’s better to let the players have it than see them not enjoy the campaign because it doesn’t match their playing style. Besides, sometimes you really do get a group of players where everyone likes something different.

When it comes to meeting up in game or not, I truly think this is simply a matter of style. Having played and run games both ways, I prefer to do the meet and greet as part of character creation so everyone can dig into the main storyline faster. However, the appeal of doing the meet and greet in game is also strong since it can help make it all more detailed since everyone plays through it. In the end, I let the players decide on this too, though I push for having connections beforehand as I feel it pulls everyone together faster and a bit more cohesively.

In the end, I’ve basically outlined my preferences here, which I suggest to my players, but I usually give them final say on how to meet up in game (or before) and always let them decide how they’ll build the party. Past the first few sessions, it doesn’t typically have a lingering effect on the campaign in terms of plot, so letting the players do what they want here usually helps them get into the game faster and brings up the chances that people will enjoy it over the long term. Plus, it often gives me some insight into how much they favor roleplay over hack ‘n slash, and the emphasis they place on mechanics over flavor.

There may be some correlation. However, if there is, I would like to see a study that shows this correlation before we say there is one. After all, violent people come from all walks of life. I could make the claim that another criminal was the quiet type, and therefore portray quiet people in a negative light. This wouldn’t make it the right thing to do though.

Furthermore, even if there is a correlation, the next job the media has is to understand that just because they may be correlated doesn’t mean one causes the other. There would need to be more study about that afterward.

Finally, other commonly beneficial activities, such as reading, can also be means of escapism, and could be just as big (or more accurately, small) warning signs of danger. Singling out D&D simply because it’s less well understood by the public at large is inappropriate. That’s primarily where I’m coming from on this post.

Never doubt the bard.