I hate cat-people, dog-people, lion-people, etc

[demiurge1138]

Why has everyone forgotten about the yak folk? Frankly, they're the best of the random anthro-races in my book. Why? Because they've got an interesting story behind them, with an interesting culture, connections to the rest of the world (their racial pact with the genies) and a wierd, alien psychology.

Because that's what a lot of anthro-races are missing. Culture. Random cat-people that are just humans with pointy ears and whiskers I hate, but give them a good culture and a place in the world (even if it's in the far reaches, unseen by human eyes) and I'm fine with them.

Oh, and with rakshasas, not only are they shapeshifters, but not all of their natural forms have tiger heads in the original stories. Some had ape heads, bear heads, insectile features, etc. It's been referred to in the 2e Monstrous Manual and in the Ecology article a few months ago, but the D&D art has always been of tiger heads.

Demiurge out.

 

[eris404]

They would, of course, have a favored class of sorceror, since they're bred for their skill in magic.

Sweet!

But, back on topic, I'm of the "it really depends on how its done" camp. I suspect that when it gets on my nerves is the whole "furry" thing - that is, I worked at comic book store for a while and the furries would come by every Wednesday for their fix of furry fetish comics and I swear they did it just to annoy me. If someone is creating a race based on an animal because they have a good idea for it, I can usually buy into it. But if it's because....well....you know.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Come to think of it, the Beastmen (goat-people) and skaven (rat-people) from Warhammer don't bother me at all, though -- in fact, I actually quite like them. Maybe it's just cat-people and dog-people that I don't much like, having seen them in all kinds of inappropriate venues (Traveller, the Man-Kzin Wars, etc.) where they really didn't make sense.

Or the fact that skaven and beastmen are more than simply ratmen and goatmen, and are thus more interesting.

Skaven are very, very cool and it isn't because they're rat people. Skaven are cool because there are hordes of them and they have a million game effects that involve a skaven dying to fuel a magical effect that kills humans. They're cool because of all the disease stuff. They're cool because they have guns. They're cool because their own magic can kill them in droves.

It is totally not about the furry.

 

[Afrodyte]

I guess this means I should scrap my hopes of playing in a Narnia-type setting.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The thread perversely makes me want to see Glorantha-style ducks and goat-men (Broo) written up for 3E.

 

[danbuter]

A bit of a rant.....

One thing that uber-annoys me is when I flip thru a d20 book (or any game system for that matter). Is in the list of playable races there are cat-people, or lion people (that one seems popular). Or insect-people, or bird people.....or whatever. I think that this has got to be the most uncreative thing that you could do when designing a race. What makes it even worse is when the authors give attributes to these races that are stereotypical. What I mean is cat-people are dexterious, dog-people are loyal, lion people are proud and honourable. I want something new....IMO using animal-people are lame.

A few exceptions......Minotaurs, yeah I know they're cow people but I like the monster
Rakashas (yes I know I spelled it wrong).
Dog Boys from Rifts (hate the rules/company/owner)

I think why they're exceptions is that that in the case of the first two is that they have nothing to do with the real life animals that they look like. In the case of the dog boy they were genetically engineered to be dog-people....and for some strange reason it worked for me.

Anyhow anybody agree? Disagree? What bugs you about RPGs?

Wow, you sure have a lot of hate built up. If you don't like something, don't use it. I happen to like that kind of stuff, so I want more of it, not less .

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Makes me miss the ... what were they called? ... oozy-rock characters from Star Frontiers. They were somewhat original.

Unless you call them rock-people.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I agree that the proliferation of anthropomorphic animal races is a little silly-- particularly poorly developed or all-too-human varieties, which I'm most of us can name a half-dozen of.

However, when they are well-developed, clearly alien (even if in minor ways), and non-stereotypical, they can be a great addition to a campaign world. Other people have mentioned them as a bad example, but the Thri-Kreen are what I'd consider the best example of a well-done anthropomorphic. They have a distinct culture, distinct mindset, and abilities that tie into the fact that they are not human... Thri-Kreen of Athas was one of the defining books in Dark Sun, so good that I've included Thri-Kreen in nearly every other project I've worked on.

The Dromites in the XPH are another good example of a well-developed anthro, though they're another insectoid race. Their sexlessness, and the combination of insectoid hive hierarchy with democratic principles is intriguing, especially since they elect the persons responsible for all of their reproduction. If their caste system were further expanded, or their cities described, they'd easily be on-par with Thri-Kreen or Skaven as an awesome race.

There are other areas where anthropomorphics aren't so bad. Lizardfolk have suffered from a lack of definition in 3e, and in most campaign settings, but their treatment in Spelljammer made them far more interesting. Bullywugs and Sivs are both indistinct, but the rivalry between the two frogmen species can be a base for interesting development-- though I typically try to avoid an excess of humanoid sentients. Include the Grippli in a three-way frogman culture war, and you could have a fascinating campaign element, as long as your world featured swamps prominently.

The important thing is to make sure that anthropomorphic races aren't just humanoid animals, but are distinct races in their own right.

 

[Finster]

I'm going to make a setting that has two nations. One nation is all Cat-People, the other is all Dog-people. They will always be in conflict. The Cat-people will be ruled by the lion king, and the Dog-People will be ruled by a yapping bickering legislature presided over by The Alpha.

Am I a lazy writer?

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Gundark, for a different take on the catfolk, I recommend that you rent Stephen King's Sleepwalkers. I'm pretty sure you'll like what you see.