Worlds & Monsters: humans are boring??

[Matt Black]

I brought up this quote from Worlds and Monsters in another thread, but I wanted to start its own because I think this point deserves some thought.

A human-populated empire that resembles ancient Egypt, but with mummies in control, is less interesting than a realm ruled by salamanders, lizardfolk, or even dwarves.

We all know that the implied setting for 4th ed. D&D assumes that civilization is restricted to small 'points of light' in a largely untamed wilderness. That sounds great to me. It will make the world seemed much larger and more mysterious, and in fact is truer to the perspective of a person living before the modern era.

But now, according to W&M, even in these small regions of civilization humans are no longer the dominant race. The world is not only wild, but also quite alien. Humans are a small fraction of the many races (species?) in a big fantasy melting pot. The reason? Apparently humans are more boring than non-humans.

There's an extremely good reason why humans are most often the dominant race in fantasy worlds: A familiar baseline is critical.

It's necessary to have a viewpoint from which a world's fantasy elements are actually fantastical. If everyone in a fantasy world has pointy ears or horns or scales, then humans become equally out of place for not having these things, and in the end nothing is particularly exotic at all. You have a fantasy hodge-podge with no place to ground your perspective.

Stories about humans ARE interesting, because they're stories about ourselves. They're even more interesting if you carefully introduce weird and wonderful elements into otherwise familiar settings. Mummies ruling an Egyptian-esque culture? Cool! Lizardman mummies ruling an Egyptian-esque culture of dwarves? Um... not cool anymore.

I think that WoTC has gone in the wrong direction here. There's no need to insist that humans are the dominant race, but explicitly stating the opposite is a poor move.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, I really thought this was a bit lunatic, myself.

I mean, every really interesting fantasy culture I can think of? Pretty much all humans or quasi-humans. All the most interesting fantasy characters? Again with the mostly humans.

Hell, most popular race in any given MMORPG? Humans (even if they're ugly).

Though I do think Lizardmen ruling an Egyptian culture of humans would potentially be very interesting! Because humans are involved, and the interaction is what makes it.

Oh well, a dumb designer or two doesn't ruin things if there's no setting book! I kind of feel like we've dodged a bullet on that one. Unless they completely dehumanized the FR, but that seems unlikely.

 

[DandD]

Lizardmen mummies ruling an aztec-like empire? Totally cool, and found in Warhammer Fantasy.
Whole nations ruled by little mogries? Found in Final Fantasy Tactics, and one of the game I most adore especially for its wonderful setting.
So yes, having less human-dominated worlds and more of the fantasy-creatures is a good idea, and something I hope that my GM won't oppose at all when we go 4th edition.
What's the point of having other fantasy races if all you encounter are simply other humans? It's not like we already have too much human-types, what with humans breeding with orcs, elves, snake-people and such, and small-humans called halflings.

 

[MGibster]

There's an extremely good reason why humans are most often the dominant race in fantasy worlds: A familiar baseline is critical.

That familiar baseline is why dwarves, halfings, elves, orcs, and most other humanoids aren't all tha alien. They're just humans with funny names and skins.

Marc

 

[Doug McCrae]

Egypt is kind of cliché doncha think?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Egypt is kind of cliché doncha think?

I agree, but it's merely an example. Frankly, to me, as someone familiar with history and ancient history, virtually every culture is a "cliche" if you use it near raw, or in a yawnsome "This is how American/European pop culture thinks of it!" way, but if you mash in a bit of other cultures, and give it a large dose of fantasy, aaaaand think about the implications of things, it becomes more interesting.

 

[LostSoul]

I think the sentiment is that fantasy cultures that = real world cultures with the serial numbers filed off are less cool than, say, Dark Sun.

I don't really agree - either setting can be interesting or boring depending on how gripping the conflicts are.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the sentiment is that fantasy cultures that = real world cultures with the serial numbers filed off are less cool than, say, Dark Sun.

I don't really agree - either setting can be interesting or boring depending on how gripping the conflicts are.

Isn't an interesting setting with a gripping conflict more interesting than a very generic setting with a gripping conflict?

Shouldn't WotC strive to create the most interesting settings possible?

 

[rounser]

That quote is really shortsighted and gimmicks-over-story. I really hope that was just a brain fart involved in doling out advice to newbies, and not something they really believe.

What's the context? When you get a clanger of a soundbite like that, often the context is important.

 

[chitzk0i]

It will make the world seemed much larger and more mysterious, and in fact is truer to the perspective of a person living before the modern era.

I think there's quite a lot of Romans and (perhaps) Han Chinese who would disagree with you.

The world is not only wild, but also quite alien. Humans are a small fraction of the many races (species?) in a big fantasy melting pot. The reason? Apparently humans are more boring than non-humans.

I like dwarves or gnomes or halfling PCs a hell of a lot more than human PCs--I like special abilities, seeing in the dark, trap sense, or being small or whatever.