If all the opponents in a setting are humans, is this now so "politically incorrect" that it is no longer a viable option.
Certainly couldn't be sold in today's market.
Even the killing of non-humans as stand-ins for "those bad humans" in being brought up as colonialism and genocide.
Who is left to "kill and loot" without ramification? Undead? Are they someone's hallowed ancestors and off limits too?
Independence Games has been selling profitably the Clement Sector setting since 2008 for Cepheus Engine/Traveller and is doing quite well.
Isn't that how cyberpunk RPG settings work? Even Shadowrun, while technically having orcs/trolls/elves/dwarves - they're really just humans who have been altered by the increased flow of magic or some such.
I don't think that Shadowrun 6e has done especially well, but that likely has more to do with the mechanics being a hot mess.
7th Sea seems to be have been rather popular.
I was thinking more along the lines of historical fantasy but Sci-Fantasy and Sci-Fi are still good examples.
Have they not gotten the "Correctness" spotlight or have they passed "inspection"?
Quote from: Greentongue;1143793I was thinking more along the lines of historical fantasy but Sci-Fantasy and Sci-Fi are still good examples.
Have they not gotten the "Correctness" spotlight or have they passed "inspection"?
I think that from that point of view having them be actual humans is better, as there can be a reason to kill those particular humans. While through some lenses, killing near-humans (orcs/goblins/whatever) is "problematic" due the view that they are being used stand-ins for various real-world groups.
So - while I disagree with the viewpoint, you seem to misunderstand it. It's that various groups are inherently arrow-fodder for being what they are, and they're too close to being humans for comfort. MOST people with that viewpoint wouldn't have issue with killing orcs or humans in a D&D game - so long as the players were sure that that particular orc/human was a murdering bandit etc. (Maybe with the addition of making sure that the orc/human wasn't a raider to defend their land from the encroachment of colonization or some such.)
Again - I disagree with that view - but you seem to be strawmanning it.
If your goal is to be SJW compliant the only viable enemies are straight white Christian males, whom they would argue are subhuman.
As to whether all-human settings among the sane and rational can sell... Battletech/Mechwarrior has done okay for quite some time and, in fact, a huge selling point is that humans are the sapient life in the known universe (i.e. no bug-eyed aliens with super-tech are going to turn up. In general it's 3025-era where everyone plays at the same level (and that level was balanced enough you could largely just use tonnage instead needing a more complex Battle Value to determine if sides were matched).
Similarly, while most anime-themed RPGs include options for aliens, specific human-only settings aren't unusual.
Finally, several genres (ex. war, superspies) pretty much require human-only as a core part of their setting.
Quote from: Chris24601;1143805Similarly, while most anime-themed RPGs include options for aliens, specific human-only settings aren't unusual.
I'll quote a section of Mekton Zeta, p119 on this one. Very close to human aliens are common in anime due to, as Mike Pondsmith puts it, romantic sub-plots and pathos are used a lot in anime so the aliens are near human because "Kissing a slug is no fun."
It has and it did. OGL Conan was a purely human setting. And it sold very well.
Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerors of Hyperborea is human only iirc.
Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1143796I think that from that point of view having them be actual humans is better, as there can be a reason to kill those particular humans. While through some lenses, killing near-humans (orcs/goblins/whatever) is "problematic" due the view that they are being used stand-ins for various real-world groups.
So - while I disagree with the viewpoint, you seem to misunderstand it. It's that various groups are inherently arrow-fodder for being what they are, and they're too close to being humans for comfort. MOST people with that viewpoint wouldn't have issue with killing orcs or humans in a D&D game - so long as the players were sure that that particular orc/human was a murdering bandit etc. (Maybe with the addition of making sure that the orc/human wasn't a raider to defend their land from the encroachment of colonization or some such.)
Again - I disagree with that view - but you seem to be strawmanning it.
In D&D, most players I've met wouldn't give two shits about killing anyone, whether they knew they were terrible villains or not, if it meant their PCs earned XP and claimed loot.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143819In D&D, most players I've met wouldn't give two shits about killing anyone, whether they knew they were terrible villains or not, if it meant their PCs earned XP and claimed loot.
There is some that would happily kill their own NPC "mother" if it gave Xp.
I have to assume that the "Vocal Minority" is a minority and doesn't actually effect the majority of game?
Quote from: Slambo;1143813Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerors of Hyperborea is human only iirc.
It's definitely human-oriented and human-dominated (PC races are all various types of humans), but there are still orcs and ape-men and gnolls and such in the setting. Notably, orcs have demonic (swine-daemon) blood.
Harn, but I wouldn't say its sales are hot. Interesting in some ways. Whoops, they have elfs, dwarves, and orcs.
Quote from: Greentongue;1143787If all the opponents in a setting are humans, is this now so "politically incorrect" that it is no longer a viable option.
Certainly couldn't be sold in today's market.
Even the killing of non-humans as stand-ins for "those bad humans" in being brought up as colonialism and genocide.
Who is left to "kill and loot" without ramification? Undead? Are they someone's hallowed ancestors and off limits too?
Is ANTIFA human?
Quote from: Greentongue;1143787If all the opponents in a setting are humans, is this now so "politically incorrect" that it is no longer a viable option.
Certainly couldn't be sold in today's market.
Even the killing of non-humans as stand-ins for "those bad humans" in being brought up as colonialism and genocide.
Who is left to "kill and loot" without ramification? Undead? Are they someone's hallowed ancestors and off limits too?
Yes it can, but who cares? I'll write my games and play my games as I want them not as the wokescolds of the Istophobic Panic deem acceptable, because fuck the authoritarians that's why.
Runequest's Glorantha, with it's cultural focus, is an example of setting where players are all human and the main political conflict is driven by humans, and it works.
*the Orlanthi vs Lunar Empire war (or God Learners vs Dragonfriends in the old age), though there are an assortment of different races spread on the world.
Quote from: Greentongue;1143787If all the opponents in a setting are humans, is this now so "politically incorrect" that it is no longer a viable option.
Certainly couldn't be sold in today's market.
Even the killing of non-humans as stand-ins for "those bad humans" in being brought up as colonialism and genocide.
Who is left to "kill and loot" without ramification? Undead? Are they someone's hallowed ancestors and off limits too?
As long as you call the enemy, "Nazi's"; you can get away with it.
In the real world, all the monsters are humans. Killing monsters can be justified. Killing people because they bear a physical resemblance to someone doing evil is a problem. Having an 'enemy culture' can be okay - that's how wars work - but you can usually see things from the other side's point of view.
As far as can it sell, of course, for some value of sell. Most people like more fantasy in their fantasy settings. More options are usually well received.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1143888In the real world, all the monsters are humans. Killing monsters can be justified. Killing people because they bear a physical resemblance to someone doing evil is a problem. Having an 'enemy culture' can be okay - that's how wars work - but you can usually see things from the other side's point of view.
As far as can it sell, of course, for some value of sell. Most people like more fantasy in their fantasy settings. More options are usually well received.
Fantasy races aren't People (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/people)
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1143878Is ANTIFA human?
flesh golems.
Human enemies are much more Politically Correct than Always Chaotic Evil nonhuman races (Ancestries?) :D - so the OP seems confused. In Politically Correct culture, the Nazis/Kulaks/Alt-Right have chosen to be evil, that's why it's ok to kill them. Like people above hating on Antifa - it's ok to hate them because they've chosen to be Evil. Of course in reality Social Justice tends strongly towards seeing the white 'Ancestry' as inherently Sinful/Evil/Worthy of Destruction - so you can get away with having white humans as your Always Chaotic Evil enemy, but you can't substitute another human or non-human Ancestry.
I do kinda find it amusing that Conanesque Swords & Sorcery is actually more Politically Correct than is Tolkienesque High Fantasy.
Quote from: S'mon;1143910Human enemies are much more Politically Correct than Always Chaotic Evil nonhuman races (Ancestries?) :D - so the OP seems confused. In Politically Correct culture, the Nazis/Kulaks/Alt-Right have chosen to be evil, that's why it's ok to kill them. Like people above hating on Antifa - it's ok to hate them because they've chosen to be Evil. Of course in reality Social Justice tends strongly towards seeing the white 'Ancestry' as inherently Sinful/Evil/Worthy of Destruction - so you can get away with having white humans as your Always Chaotic Evil enemy, but you can't substitute another human or non-human Ancestry.
So you are saying that as long as the humans are doing things that a "clearly Evil" there is no moral issue with killing them and taking their stuff?
Are the classic SINs enough as long as they can be clearly identified as being done?
What about things like caging children and exploiting people? If it is legal in that empire, can the empire's people be killed and looted guilt free?
Is tight movement restrictions and forced servitude enough?
We've had this sort of thread a few times now.
General answer is... of course. Its been done before. TSR did it at least twice if not more with various settings.
Both their Conan games were human only. At least two of their historical D&D settings were human only. Theres been some for other settings as well.
As with everything theres going to be those who like such a premise and others who want more variety in races. Presentation and reasoning help alot. Some settings just work better with a single race like human only or elf only or rabbit only, etc.
Provided that there will be different classes, yes.
Dipping into FantastCraft, and there are tons of options for making an all human campaign, and having each culture or even each character very distinct.
Someone brought up Cyberpunk et al, it also goes without saying Top Secret, James Bond, and any number of modern settings/rules sets have their audience.
Is the real question Can an all human setting compete with the 'big' fantasy games? Probably not to the same level of sales, every snowflake at the table wants to be their distinct kind-hearted tiefling half-dragon.
Quote from: Greentongue;1143925So you are saying that as long as the humans are doing things that a "clearly Evil" there is no moral issue with killing them and taking their stuff?
Are the classic SINs enough as long as they can be clearly identified as being done?
What about things like caging children and exploiting people? If it is legal in that empire, can the empire's people be killed and looted guilt free?
Is tight movement restrictions and forced servitude enough?
Yes, that would be ok. But you should always make the evil humans white, eg Paizo's devil-worshipping Cheliax empire. Or Gygax's Suel - Blond of Evil has been going awhile. :D
My problem is the "evil" and "good" labels. It's either infantile and unrealistic at least, or a tool for bigotry and intolerance at most.
Strip games of these and I'm good.
Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1143796So - while I disagree with the viewpoint, you seem to misunderstand it. It's that various groups are inherently arrow-fodder for being what they are, and they're too close to being humans for comfort. MOST people with that viewpoint wouldn't have issue with killing orcs or humans in a D&D game - so long as the players were sure that that particular orc/human was a murdering bandit etc. (
Those people are going pull nonsense out of their ass to badger and berate white people every chance they get. Fuck 'em!
Quote from: Itachi;1143947My problem is the "evil" and "good" labels. It's either infantile and unrealistic at least, or a tool for bigotry and intolerance at most.
Strip games of these and I'm good.
Houserule it on your table, nobody voted you the taste maker of the hobby.
If you are trying to make your setting safe from SJW attack...
Give up.
No. Really. It can not be done. Ever.
So you have a human only setting? "Well are there nations? Then thats wacist!"
No nations and just factions? "Sorry. Thats wacist too as factions are standins for real nations we hallucinated today! Or better yet standins for minorities!"
Dont even have factions? Just some bandits? "Nope. Not allowed either as that WACIST as bandits are standins for the dienfranchized oppresedededed minorities!"
Ok. Fuck you. There arent even bandits. Its just lone loons! "Sorry. Thats wacist too as the lone individual represents the vast sea of oppressed. You MONSTER!"
Insert-deity-here wept! Ok. Fine. There arent even any human foes. Just animals! "Nice try you Nazi. But wolves are stand ins for the..."
And so on ad absolute nausium.
There is NOTHING these sociopaths can not hallucinate is "problematiic". Nothing.
And I've had the misfortune to see every one of these examples touted. And more!
Undead are standins for the "other". Robots too. Vampired = Rape! Dragons = Beastiality!
And on an on because thats what these nuts do.
Quote from: Omega;1144034And I've had the misfortune to see every one of these examples touted. And more!
Undead are standins for the "other". Robots too. Vampired = Rape! Dragons = Beastiality!
I saw one poster complaining about how Orcs were racist. I noticed that he had a Vampire Avatar and User name and wondered if he realised the irony of supporting Rape! while condemning Racists!
Probably not.
Quote from: Omega;1144034If you are trying to make your setting safe from SJW attack...
Give up.
No. Really. It can not be done. Ever.
I'm afraid you are correct.
My normal insensitivity means even when I try I don't do it right.
(I guess I had a life of Privilege even if I didn't realize it.)
Quote from: Itachi;1143884Runequest's Glorantha, with it's cultural focus, is an example of setting where players are all human...
While most PCs are all human (unlike a lot of D&D parties I've seen), non human PCs have been around since the beginning. Runequest 1 was somewhat unusual in that you could roll up stats for all the species. Trolls, elfs, ducks, baboons...even dwarves are each possible human PCs.