D&D 5E Humans!?

[Herr der Qual]

I was just shocked in another thread to hear that my play experience may be vastly different from most other's. See, I do basically anything I can to never play a human character (1 in eight years, in a different system because there was no alternate race). Are my play group and I the only ones that avoid human characters this way? I find it fascinating that human's would want to play humans in a world where you can be the halfbastard spawn of a dragon, or the might under the mountain with greed coursing through your veins! Humans seem so mundane to me in that world.

 

[Wrathamon]

I think that is why I like playing humans ... I like feeling that a human can do great things in a world of halfbastard spawns of dragons ruling the world. A human can be more than he appears to be and if the world sees him as mundane, then look out.

 

[ad_hoc]

Most of the time I play a human. If not, then something close like half-elf or halfling.

The people in my group are similar though some tend toward specific races. Playing dwarfs more often or elves, etc. but not usually just 'non-humans'. No one in any group I have played want anything to do with dragonborn or the like.

Mostly the non-humans are just representing certain human elements to a larger degree and sacrificing other elements. I find this to be limiting. Like you said, it's a fantasy world. Why put limitations on yourself?

I can relate to a human character.

A world entirely populated by dragons is uninteresting to me. Humans are interesting, probably because I am one.

 

[Bolares]

I play the race that fits better in the story I'm trying to tell, if a human fits better than an elf in a orfan kid with no privileges who goes adventuring to show the world he is worth living I will play a human. I prefer to priorize the background in my plays not the race, but I understand people who think its boring to play a human in D&D

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

I think there's so many reasons players might pick human that it's hard to encompass them all. I'll supply two I can think of off the top of my head.

1)Relation. Some people just feel more comfortable picking human because its easiest to relate to what you are. Same principle in stories and movies. We like characters we can more closely relate to, and often feel a sort of kinship to people we view going through similar situations to ourselves. Many players likely pick human because they either can't or don't want to wrap their heads around what it would be like being a different race with often vastly different cultures, mannerisms, beliefs, and norms than ourselves.

2)Feats. I mentioned this in the other thread you're referring to, so I'll only paraphrase this one. If you allow feats in your 5E game, the human variant rule of giving a feat at 1st level is a pretty huge bonus to some that makes humans a very appealing choice. In past editions it was the same, where the bonus feat at 1st level (and the extra skill point if we're talking 3.XE) could be enough to tip the scales towards humans.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't tend to play humans (unless reskinned "humans" that use the mechanical chassis of another race counts).

But I think that's because I like mechanical fobs. I like playing archetype and counter-archetype. Humans as a race don't have much in that light, since they're basically The Mario of any setting that has other races in it. That's natural and fine and a good niche (Humans are my go-to's for my Heroic Protagonists and my Jacks-of-all-Trades), it's just not one that I gravitate to much.

 

[ad_hoc]

The thing I have trouble visualizing is a group that doesn't play any humans at all.

I would jump at a chance to play a human in such a group.

I would also be most likely to play a demihuman in a group that was all humans.

Would Guardians of the Galaxy have been as good or better if Starlord had blue skin and horns? (I realize he is only half human, but for the intents of the movie it counts)

 

[DMZ2112]

I think I tend to use being human as a pressure valve on weirdness. "This woman is weird because X, Y, and Z, but it's okay because she's human." I don't like excessive weirdness -- I hate tieflings as a default race and the fact that I really love dragonborn mystifies me.

There are also some characters that have to be human because being weird would be inappropriate. For instance, I'm in a D&D5 campaign set on the Moonshaes, and in that setting I wouldn't want to play anything other than a Ffolk ranger or druid.

But in most D&D settings I think I tend to think of elves, dwarves, and halflings (at least) as just as mundane as humans. I think that's a central standard D&D conceit. They've got cities and privies and poverty just like anyone else.

 

[Pvt. Winslow]

The thing I have trouble visualizing is a group that doesn't play any humans at all.

I would jump at a chance to play a human in such a group.

I would also be most likely to play a demihuman in a group that was all humans.

Would Guardians of the Galaxy have been as good or better if Starlord had blue skin and horns? (I realize he is only half human, but for the intents of the movie it counts)

You know, this always makes me curious, because I've had nothing but trouble with this concept in the past. A lot of published adventures, modules, and even the bulk of a lot of custom made material often features humans as being the most prolific race. Usually, other races have certain stigmas, prejudices, stereotypes, or other shennanigans attributed to them, either true or untrue.

How often do DM's actually have their populace react logically to a group of demi-humans walking into a town that is nearly 90% human? It's easiest when the demi-humans are the old staples, like dwarves, elves, halflings, etc. However, I often see people list their party, and it's full of tieflings, gnolls, half-minotaurs, pixies, drow (that are totally good), and other more bestial races. Do DM's ever have people run in fear? Do mothers shield their children and usher them inside? Do groups of guards suddenly appear, shadowing the party as it moves through town? Do innkeepers frown and secretly up their rates as the gnoll barbarian slobbers on his countertop?

Sometimes I think a lot of parties fall in love with the idea of playing half-bastard spawn of dragons, but DMs basically just treat them as humans for all the world responds to their presence. I feel like that's really cheating groups out of potentially awesome RP, and also somewhat breaking an internal consistency in campaign logic. It also makes me wonder when people talk about how they can't understand why people would play a human, if that poster plays in a game with bestial races that are treated as human by the campaign world.

In such a case, I totally agree, why play a human if you can play any race you want and be treated as human?

 

[iserith]

I prefer humans by and large unless I'm going for some niche concept. I like variant humans for the extra skill and feat at 1st level.