Yes, today I present a fairly radical perspective on non-human PCs in D&D:

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

Okay, Gary...

Most non-human races are boring cliches but boring cliches can be useful. "Dwarf" or "viking" can convey a whole shit-ton of information with just one word and that kind of efficiency is useful since player's aren't going to pay attention to much so you have to get them stuff they can work with that they'll actually remember. It's generally easier to do a boring cliche and then twist it to make it interesting than to start from scratch. Fantasy cliches like "orc" and "elf" are often better for that than "Medieval France" or "Vikings" since they lack much nuance so it's easier to get everyone on the same page.

Pundy's DCC dark elves description of (to paraphrase) "guys in black spikey skull-covered armor with squeaky voices" is just about perfect. Easy to wrap your head around in a minute and remember.

Most humans are boring cliches. May as well have fun playing our boring cliches.

I'll repeat my YouTube comment.

I agree with this. My current gaming group has played almost exclusively human PC settings for over ten years now and I like it.

One reason I like it so much is that human settings and characters, in practice, end up giving us far more interesting and exotic characters. Instead of some shallow physical differences or powers we have human civilizations with deep cultures, religions, values, histories, etc. Then on top of that are the human characters from those nations who represent their homelands (or not) to varying degrees plus running the gambit if human individuality.

Can that happen in a game with common non-human races? Maybe, but in my experience isn't isn't much compared to human games.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1053840Yes, today I present a fairly radical perspective on non-human PCs in D&D:

The 5th edition con game I ran this last Sunday consisted of:

-A halfling Rogue
-A dwarven cleric
-A half-elf bard
-An elven wizard
-A half-orc paladin

The single bit of interest added from race was the elf wizard: he actually roleplayed his wizard as disdainful and superior, leaning into the elven stereotype.

The other characters could have easily been:

-Crafty human rogue
-Uninteresting human cleric
-Uninteresting human bard
-Stupid human fighter (what fucking happened to Paladins?!)

And really, a human wizard could have been haughty and disdainful; could have made him a noble, maybe. Or just an ass.

People have been conditioned to believe that human=boring. The truth is, they as a player are boring. The players that put some "umph" into characterizing their characters gave them personality and were a joy to play with. The dull players didn't, and their characters were boring.

"Well I'm not just some dull human cleric, I'm a super-dynamic dwarf cleric!" Yeah no. I don't even know what god you follow; some cleric. Same with the "half-elven" bard: is there anything interesting about you? Do you care to share that with the class? No? Okay, so you're dull too, huh?

Tangential rant: are paladins not dedicated to a god's service anymore? Because it really feels like they aren't. The book bloviates about how "holy" they are, but it takes pains to tell you that you don't serve a god if you don't want to. I always thought that "chosen by a god" was the whole purpose of paladin?

Quote from: Azraele;1053883Tangential rant: are paladins not dedicated to a god's service anymore? Because it really feels like they aren't. The book bloviates about how "holy" they are, but it takes pains to tell you that you don't serve a god if you don't want to. I always thought that "chosen by a god" was the whole purpose of paladin?

People wanted all the kewl p0werZZZZ, but without any of the actual restrictions. That's my opinion...also, there's probably some nonsense about not pushing religion on anyone lest they get triggered. Really undermines the whole point of the class.

I also think it's because some in the hobby are anti-religion and think believing in of it is a sucker bet so WOTC trying to pander to everyone. So made it so that one does not need to be in the service or worship at all. The main issue for me was always the human only restriction which was dumb imo. Really A dwarf or a elf can't be called by their God. The alignment restriction which both some players and DMs were clueless about running. Yay another moral quandary designed to make my character fall. Oh look someone yet again wants to play Dirty Harry again.

The character's race doesn't need to be all that central to have an interesting character.  The counterpoint to the idea that players that aren't boring can do just fine with a human is that the same players can do just fine with most races.  Thus, I'll allow races that I and the rest of the group don't mind having, and disallow the ones that annoy us (or at least most of us, no heckler's veto).  The players can make something of the racial interactions or not--I'm fine either way.

On the spectrum of "need" to "want" to "neutral" to "avoid" to "ban", human is the only race in the "need" category.  Doesn't matter to me, since "need" isn't a very interesting question.

Wait...Paladins don't have to serve a god now?? Even if you are anti religion,  one is is a game of pretend and two....play another class?  That is a strange change IMO.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1053889The character's race doesn't need to be all that central to have an interesting character.  The counterpoint to the idea that players that aren't boring can do just fine with a human is that the same players can do just fine with most races.  Thus, I'll allow races that I and the rest of the group don't mind having, and disallow the ones that annoy us (or at least most of us, no heckler's veto).  The players can make something of the racial interactions or not--I'm fine either way.

On the spectrum of "need" to "want" to "neutral" to "avoid" to "ban", human is the only race in the "need" category.  Doesn't matter to me, since "need" isn't a very interesting question.

Some of it is failing of players, but don't let your blame rest there entirely: these races are lame from concept. The dwarf/viking comparison is a just one, because it forces us to ask the question: in what way is a dwarf distinctly alien from a human counterpart?

It's possible to do alien races in a compelling way; take Moorecock's Melniboneans from the Elric series as a prime example. They're not just "haughty nobles" they're inhuman in their decadence, casual cruelties and unearthly expectations. It's a high bar but players can clear it if they're given good material to work with.

One of the places Pundit and I both agree and differ is in our attitudes here: we both clearly agree that creatures which are inhuman should have an alien impact when introduced to a game. Where we differ (and I'm taking only your video as evidence here Pundit, correct me if I'm wrong) is the degree of trust we put in players to roleplay that alienness.

The 5th edition PHB presenting humanoid dragon creatures as just palsy-walsy with human beings could have had the effect of transforming a well-defined setting into a peculiar and alien one. Instead, they chose to remove all the weird spice from the dragons and make them into a bland, flavorless mush for mass consumption: no more alien than having long hair or a mustache. A fashion choice, not a roleplaying experience.

I generally find non-human traditional fantasy races pretty boring overall or at least very lazy and stereotypical...

I can stomach them in WFRP to some degree, but if I had my choice, it would be human only and such creatures would be rare in the world. The more esoteric creatures I just think they are cheesy player wish fulfillment.

When it comes to 'traditional fantasy games' I prefer a low fantasy setting. So this, I'm sure, has a big effect on why I tend to hate such fantastical creatures. I'm not saying that I wouldn't have Dwarfs or Ogres but I'd like to see them as potential heathen threats - that have no interest in humanity other then to eat or fight them. They would also be very rare like some obscure tribe.

But if people want to play Tiefling (ugh!) and the like, that's fine, as long as I don't have to play or GM with them.

I wasn't so much blaming players as giving them credit.  But I don't particularly want every non-human race to be alien, either.  I want them to be more relatable to humans.

Your favourite race sucks! (Unless it is not a human!)

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1053898I wasn't so much blaming players as giving them credit.  But I don't particularly want every non-human race to be alien, either.  I want them to be more relatable to humans.

I then challenge you with this point: if they're so relateable, why make them inhuman?

Why not just play a gruff, hidebound viking: why a dwarf? Why not a haughty, spoiled noble wizard: why an elf? Why not a tribal, honor-bound barbarian: why a half-orc?

Unless there's a reason to make them not human: why not human?