D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[zarionofarabel]

This one is one that is quite easy to google, so no. I don’t do other people’s research for them unless I’ve referenced something difficult to find.

Feel free to read his letters, or any of the thousands upon thousands of articles that have been written about them over the decades that LOTR has been one of the most important works of fiction in the English speaking world.

Well, according to Wikipedia he wrote them for fun. Guess the English lit majors are wrong.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, according to Wikipedia he wrote them for fun. Guess the English lit majors are wrong.

They often are, speaking as one. Academic study of literature lends itself to over-analysis with an eye toward the assumption of allegory, which as JRRT points out in one of his letters, is distinct from intention. I can’t quote it ATM but basically he explains that there is some symbolism, and there are things inspired by his life and beliefs and fears, etc, in his works, but never allegory. He isn’t trying to tell the reader that industrialization is bad, he is just telling a story, part of which is inspired and influenced by his experiences wrt the industrialization of England.

But he had a rather dim view of allegory, a point of contention between himself and his close friend CS Lewis.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also, English Lit Majors, more than almost anyone else, love to have bad hot takes about famous English Literature, and act like their hot take is canon.

 

[zarionofarabel]

Also, English Lit Majors, more than almost anyone else, love to have bad hot takes about famous English Literature, and act like their hot take is canon.

She was hot, how did you know.

 

[ccs]

Well, according to Wikipedia he wrote them for fun. Guess the English lit majors are wrong.

Wouldn't be the first or last time.

 

[dave2008]

Let me think... for 5E we've had (IIRC):

Human: 5
Dwarves: 5
Elves: 5
Tieflings: 3
Dragonborn: 2
Firbolgs: 2
Goliaths: 2
Halflings: 2
Half-Orcs: 2
Aarakocra: 1
Gnome: 1
Half-Elf: 1
Lizardman: 1
Tabaxi: 1
Tortle: 1

If you count Human, Dwarves, Elves, and Halflings only as the "common" races, I think it works out to exactly 50/50. Funny, huh?

That is a nice mix. I definitely don't see as many dwarves in my groups.

Also, just to be clear I was talking about since I started playing in the 80s with 1e AD&D / D&D.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That is a nice mix. I definitely don't see as many dwarves in my groups.

Also, just to be clear I was talking about since I started playing in the 80s with 1e AD&D / D&D.

Yeah, I figured as much, which IME makes your statement even more shocking. While gnomes and half-orcs were certainly few and far between, I've seen them in action. I've even saw a thri-kreen and a wemic in 2E.

 

[dave2008]

Yeah, I figured as much, which IME makes your statement even more shocking. While gnomes and half-orcs were certainly few and far between, I've seen them in action. I've even saw a thri-kreen and a wemic in 2E.

To be fair, I've played for many years, but very few campaigns over those years. I think since starting in the 80s we have played 7 campaigns and maybe the same number of non-related side adventures (with different characters).

1e: 4 campaigns
4e: 1 campaigns
5e: 2 campaigns

We tend to take a long time. We played 4e for the entire run and only got to level 11. My 5e campaign that started from the beginning is only now level 15. We were similarly slow paced in 1e too. I have also only DM'd 3 different groups over that 30+ years.

 

[Crit]

Again, it’s a crutch, a shortcut.

A caricature is still a caricature. It is still demeaning and superficial; slapping a name on something so that you can exaggerate characteristics and speak in an offensive patois is hardly roleplaying.

Show me a table that has mastered rp’ing complex humans, and then I’ll buy the idea that they need an added challenge.

if people want to say that they are in it for the optimizing, or that they just like the dress up aspects (look, I can play a cat person) then that’s cool. But saying that humans are boring just means that they haven’t given much thought to the complexity of our existence. Again, IME etc.

A crutch for what? A shortcut for what?

I don't think that RPing Legolas is an offensive stereotype, lol. While I don't like racism even against fictional races (because it's a sign of something worse in that person), I don't think RPing a stock character is the same. Are there not human archetypes that people play into- aka, the boring fighter, a generic action hero, the edgy rogue, and so on? There's no problem that's limited to alternate Races and no merit that's limited to Humans. And even if it is shallow and exaggerated, it IS role playing. You can't say that it isn't.

I don't have to show you a table that's mastered complex Humans because it doesn't matter. You don't have to graduate the Human tier to play another species- I apologize if I am misinterpreting you, but it seems like you're acting on some sort of rule that someone has to put fleshed Human RP first. "Added challenge" smh. This vibe I'm getting is why I'm trying to say that Humans are just another fantasy hat, and are not more meaningful to play. My argument is that any character that can be played is going to be limited in depth, so playing characters with huge cultural variations is one of the few ways to cut through the mire of laziness with a new perspective. You get something different out of playing an Elf than a Human. The depth of your character does not depend on the race, it's the player. If I showed you a table of borderline Shakespearian Tortles, would you be satisfied?

I can concede humans aren't inherently boring, but "they haven't given much thought to the complexity of our existence" is WAY out of left field. For all intents and purposes, the other races are still people with people problems. Thoughts on life, death, what it means to "be," etc. are universal themes of sapient creatures. You don't have to play a Human race to explore real-world existential perspectives.

 

[Crit]

I wasn't making fun of the height thing, I was being serious, there are 3ft tall humans and 8ft tall humans.

I have never said anything about human centric organization in D&D.

What I said is I see very little evidence that people want to play races other than human for any reason other than mechanical bonuses.

Never do I see long involved essays about what it might actually be like to be an Elf, or Dwarf, or any other Non-Human race. Personally I think that a being that lives for hundreds of years would have a completely alien mindset and viewpoint.

Never do I see long involved essays about what the societies of those alien mindsets and viewpoints would be like. How they would go about conducting themselves within the world, especially one populated by other intelligent speaking beings.

Even the Granddaddy of them all, Tolkien, didn't write his books to examine the minds or lives of these beings he created. He wrote those books as allegory about the industrial revolution.

I claim "humans in funny hats" with cause, in that, all the anecdotal evidence I have leads me to believe that in D&D that's all they are. The D&D forums of this site and others is more than enough evidence in my opinion.

I'm telling you you're looking for evidence that wouldn't be where you're looking, or appear in the way that you'd prefer. I have also explained why there are more posts about the gameplay- it's the only thing that's standardized amongst the whole community, and is the thing that requires the most outreach to understand and discuss. The party's story stays at the table, but a DM watching that story get derailed by a mechanic they don't understand needs a forum post or two. Players handle their stories when they play, because it's not practical or particularly beneficial to make a Reddit post about the whole story of the campaign to ask one question.

I know and have addressed that there are 3ft/8ft tall humans. It is not relevant because Humans don't have attributes that parallel the cultures and all of the other racial characteristics of the alternate species.

Good for Tolkien, and I think that's a valid thing to do too. Fantasy races are a tool for the exploration of ideas.

And I refute your claim due to its innate bias. "Humans in funny hats" is really coming across like standard personhood is not achievable by other species on their own. Races in DnD don't act like Humans with minor variation, they act like people, which is a common ground between all DnD Humanoids. I'm saying, if you take "personhood" as the base of everything rather than "Human," that's how every race is just a hat, even Human. No matter what, you're just picking mechanics and lore, looking to pick an experience. It's fine if Human is your default choice for DnD, but that is very much your choice/preference, not some sort of objective norm. From how I've read your comments, it sounds like you're giving preferential treatment to one option for no reason in your evaluation of the Race options.

If a character is deep, then they're no longer a silly hat. A shallow Human is just as much a costume as is a shallow Tabaxi. It's a bad character that's a silly hat, not specifically an imperfect nonhuman race character. To close, playing a silly hat isn't even a bad thing- I'm only saying it because that's the term you're using to rank PCs.