I prefer humans. By far.

In my homebrew, I tend to cast other fantasy races more as "monsters" than as "PC material." Humanoid and demi-human races are all related varieties of dark and light faeries, and are considered monsters. However, I allow "changeling" PCs (a faery child that was left in the place of a stolen human infant, so raised by humans) and "dwarf" PCs (a human child that was twisted or stunted or "marked" at birth in some way, such that the parents "left it for the dwarfs" so that it was raised by faeries).

In a more standard D&D fantasy setting, I'm tolerant of elves, dwarves, and half-orcs (although I have less patience for the overdone stereotypes for all three of these). I'm less fond of gnomes and halflings. I can't stand kender or gully dwarves or tinker gnomes (and wouldn't allow them in the setting at all). I don't consider tieflings or dragonborn to be playable races: they're firmly in the monster category.

As I get older I prefer human-only campaigns more and more. They seem to have another level of seriousness.

Unless, of course, you're running a non-serious campaign. In my DCC campaign I've had PCs who were fishmen, mutants, and all kinds of other weirdos.

I don't really hate most of the standard races.

I just think they've become too ubiquitous.  I just feel the game has changed now so that it's become less of a toolkit and more of a particular D&D setting which has never been properly explained (it's some kind of weird hybrid of 4E's default setting and Forgotten Realms) and which doesn't interest me and if I want to play it my way I then have to go through and strip out all the things I don't like.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1052967As I get older I prefer human-only campaigns more and more. They seem to have another level of seriousness.

Unless, of course, you're running a non-serious campaign. In my DCC campaign I've had PCs who were fishmen, mutants, and all kinds of other weirdos.

Seriousness and weirdness are not mutually exclusive. Star Trek and Star Wars are treated completely seriously despite being totally weird the moment you start thinking about them.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1052232Yeah, I reluctantly agree.

It's the sign of objectivity:)!

Quote from: RPGPundit;1052967As I get older I prefer human-only campaigns more and more. They seem to have another level of seriousness.

Unless, of course, you're running a non-serious campaign. In my DCC campaign I've had PCs who were fishmen, mutants, and all kinds of other weirdos.

Same here, though I've always preferred them, it was just on instinct.
Of course, the caveat applies;).

Quote from: Joey2k;1046227I hate halflings. Whether the traditional pseudo-hobbit pseudo-short English country gentlemen or WotC's later attempt at reinterpreting them to be some kind of diminutive ninjas, I just don't care for them. Neither fits into the kinds of worlds I want to play in (or run).

I don't like any of the other half races either (half-elf, half-orc). I don't think they should be separate races. Instead, it should be some kind of feat or trait you can take at character creation that modifies your character from the standard version of the race. I think HARP's implementation is fairly elegant.

That sounds interesting.

I've allowed some human PCs to start with a special ability over and above their ability scores and class skills. It could be something like faster movement, sixth sense or whatever. These are then justified because of traces of blood from other creatures. Like all those Greek and Norse heroes descended from gods, giants, elves or nymphs. Adding orcs, ogres, elves, etc to this mix works for me.

Quote from: Gabriel2;1046250I have a legacy dislike of gnomes.  Firstly, they had bad art when I was forming my opinion of them.  Gnomes were typically drawn to look goofy.  Secondly, they seemed so extraneous.  Don't want to play a dwarf or a halfling?  Here's the other short shit race!  Thirdly, my best friend WOULD NOT SHUT UP ABOUT HOW AWESOME HIS GNOME CHARACTER WAS.  I got so damn sick of hearing about his goddamn gnome.

I dislike Kender too.  I love Dragonlance, but Tas is extremely irritating.  There was a player component to this too.  We had a player who loved Tas in the novels and was just as much a klepto.  Whenever we brought up D&D, whether Dragonlance or not, he always insisted on playing Tas.

Not really fond of halflings/hobbits in general, but that's for no particular reason.

And... that's really it.

I like Dragonborn.  Cool reptile races are cool.  Dragons are cool.  Dragon men are double cool.  Lizard men are good, but Dragonborn have that extra oomph.  Plus the potential for wings.  Winged dragon men = triple cool.

I liked Eladrin.  Elves have been so downgraded and downplayed over they years to the point where they're just humans with pointed ears.  I liked the idea of nuElves which restored at least some of the exceptionalism of elves.  I liked the idea that they could do limited teleporting at will as it really emphasized a magic nature.

I like Humans.  Not everyone has to be some other species.

I'd rather keep the gnomes and jettison dwarves and halflings. In my campaign, all the halflings, leprechauns, gnomes, red caps and brownies are lumped together as The Little People. The same basic stats and abilities, with mainly cosmetic differences.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1049764There's still a big difference than that and having every fucking Drow PC being a dual-scimitar wielding good-aligned total-reject from everything his society stands for.

I think that has more to do with DMs and players lacking imagination and just copying Drizzt, than anything to do with the dark elves themselves as described in the modules or the Fiend Folio.

Many years ago when we played Vault of the Drow, our party recruited about a dozen Drow and half-Drow to join the group. The DM didn't want to bother rolling up stats for them, so he let each player roll up one dark elf and one half-Drow and the closest anyone came to one Drow fighter who was a double-specialist with daggers -using one in each hand. The one I rolled up used a pair of hand crossbows like six-shooters.

https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?23940-(D-amp-D)-Drow-PCs&p=580232&viewfull=1#post580232

The lack of novelty you describe is easily cured for any race/class combination.

Quote from: Elfdart;1053526I've allowed some human PCs to start with a special ability over and above their ability scores and class skills. It could be something like faster movement, sixth sense or whatever. These are then justified because of traces of blood from other creatures. Like all those Greek and Norse heroes descended from gods, giants, elves or nymphs. Adding orcs, ogres, elves, etc to this mix works for me.

I like that approach; it also leaves room for discovering additional qualities later. (OK, that could also get out of hand.)

Racial abilities tend to get overshadowed in D&D because they don't (mostly) advance as the character does, so they contribute little to the character in play as they reach higher levels, or they're just a prerequisite for some race-specific overpowered class.

Humans. I like humans.

[video=youtube_share;RwvqXDdIeeM]https://youtu.be/RwvqXDdIeeM[/youtube]