D&D 5E Humans!?

[Hriston]

The Elves and Dwarves of D&D are, in practical terms, Homo dryadales and Homo nani, not Dryadales sapiens and Nani sapiens. They are us with minor twists. Orcs might be in the Genus Paranthropos or even Australopithecus... but they're still essentially subfamily hominidae. They should be no more alien than Pan troglodyties or Pan pan. Even the untrained eye can make out the motivations of a chimp or banobo (hint: 3F's Feasting, fornicating, and fighting, with a dose of fellowship on the side.)

The elves lifespan is long... up to a millenium... but a young elf in his 30's is likely to be as careless and carefree as a human his own age. It's the ancient ones who should be alien in perspective. And I don't recall 7 year pregnancies (its likely not much longer than humans), but recall a 7 year average between children... tho' I don't have the 2E splat books handy to check. Many of the source mythologies, however, give the gestation time of elves as 10 or 11 months...

The dwarf race of modern fantasy is almost whole-cloth tolkien. The other sources tend to have dwarves as either Homo sapiens nani (in other words, a stable subpopulation similar to the tribes of short humans in PNG and Africa), or as they typically are in modern life, random mutations.

So, really, they aren't the ones that should be all weird. That should be the Dragonborn, the Aasimar, the Deva, etc.

My take on this is that Elves, Dwarves (Dwerrow), Orcs, Goblins (incl. all Goblinoids), possibly Treants and Trolls, and certainly Hobbits (Halflings) are all members of Homo sapiens. I've long suspected that Dwarves should be identified with Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, due to shorter stature but heavier musculature, larger brains, etc., and Elves certainly are the closest relatives, physiologically, to what we call "modern" humans. The difference between Elves and Men is not so much physical, although there are minor differences due to the long sundering of the two lineages, but is rather one of spiritual growth, as if a particular "race" of humans had discovered the secret of living a perfectly yogic existence, transcending the need for sleep, and even death, because of a closer relationship with the gods and a more perfect way of existing on Earth. That's how I conceive of Elves in my worlds, and I've obviously been influenced by Tolkien in that regard, but since he is the sole inventor of the modern concept of the Elf (whereas previous authors mostly considered them as creatures more akin to Tinkerbell) I think that is probably most people's starting point for how the D&D Elf is thought of. I do find these Elves strange, but inherently relatable, because they represent the higher self of mankind, like a race of bodhisattvas, and therefore are an aspirational model for a higher way for humans to live.

 

[Hriston]

Hobbits, on the other hand, are humans, at least culturally, in that despite their obvious physiological differences and the unknown origins of these differences, they run culturally with the majority of humanity, and are in every way as relatable as a human, perhaps more so, in that they represent the comforts of good food, good company, and a warm hearth by which to dry one's toes. These themes are universal to humanity in a way that contrasts with the figure of a human adventurer who is perhaps more alien, more foreign, and therefore more intriguing to us common folk.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

I haven't read all 8 pages...but from the above, it looks like folks are on about what I was going to post. Roughly.

I've been at this playing of RPGs for some 35-odd years now. In that time, I'm finding it really hard to remember a time when someone actually played a non-human as a non-human. It's not really their fault because, at least with D&D, elves, dwarves and all the rest were basically "humans in funny suits" (as many have pointed out in this thread I'm sure). Its almost impossible to find a player that won't get outright upset if I (as DM) try and 'force' them to act/play in a certain way. Players will instantly play the "You're the DM, I'm the Player...you can't tell me how to play my character!" card. Yes, it is true, I can't tell you how to play your character...but I can (and have on many occasion) just outright told players "Only human".

When I play Powers & Perils ( http://www.powersandperils.org ; old Avalon Hill RPG that didn't get much love; amazing game, IMNSHO, and one of my top 3 games of all time)...where was I? Oh yeah, when I play P&P I specifically don't let players play Elf, Dwarf or Faerry until they basically prove they "get it" from the perspective of how those non-human races are. I did let one player have a go at playing a Dwarf. So far...not to-o bad, but still falls back into the old "gruff, dirty, drunk, but loyal and with a heart of gold" stereotype. Dwarves in P&P are similar to that...but they are mostly the first part, without the heart of gold part...and loyalty only counts towards other dwarves; everyone else can go drown in the ocean as far as they are concerned).

Right now, when we get back to our 5e game, we are using my homebrew world of Paeleen ( https://paeleen.obsidianportal.com/ ), the Paladin Wyr needs some tips on how to be more "wyr-like", but the two Cu'Lain brothers are actually being played pretty well, I'm happy to say. I have more on the "roleplaying stuff" of the races in my world book that isn't online (too many pages), but overall I'm fairly impressed by the "racial roleplaying" everyone is putting out.

Oh, as for me? Human is my favorite race. I just really like the variety I can use when RP'ing them (usually as NPC's as I usually DM...bu even when I play...it's human all the way!)

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Herr der Qual]

Pming, I would like you to read post #70 and give me your thoughts

 

[Thyrwyn]

When I play Powers & Perils ( http://www.powersandperils.org ; old Avalon Hill RPG that didn't get much love; amazing game, IMNSHO...

I stopped reading here. Own it; love it; never played it/ran it; borrowed from it often, though....

You, sir, win the internet

 

[MechaPilot]

I used to play humans at first, but I quickly grew tired of them; I can and do play a human every day of my life. After first attempting to play a non-human, I loved it and have very rarely gone back. I see it a lot like ice cream. I like vanilla ice cream. It's not my favorite, but it's not bad. However, I usually only go back to vanilla ice cream after long spans of time of only eating my favorite flavor of ice cream.

Another similarity between playing humans and eating vanilla ice cream is that if I'm going to play a human these days, she needs to have something strange about her. In the same manner, if I'm going to eat vanilla ice cream I'm usually going to put some sprinkles, nuts, or chocolate chips on it instead of eating plain vanilla.

With regard to playing non-humans in games where humans are the predominant race and the humans react as they normally would to non-humans, I have no problem with that. Of course, I think an argument can be made that the same kind of behavior should largely apply even to other humans. In a medieval type of world where most people almost never travel to any other towns, every stranger that comes into town (especially when they come in as armed and armored as PCs do) really should get the "guy in a hoodie who walks into a convenience store at 2 a.m. and spends a long time 'browsing'" treatment.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I have a love/hate relationship with humans in 5e. Barring other concerns, I would tend to play non-humans for the simple reason that I live as a human every day of my life. That feat option though....feats are powerful in 5e and wonderful to play around with. In a way I wish the variant human was mechanically weaker. Not because I think it's necessarily overpowered or anything as is. But because I find it too personally tempting. Of course, I've played a fair slew of other races as well - actually I've had a chance to try out all of the core races except for half-orc. (Not all of the subraces though).

 

[Li Shenron]

From a player's perspective I like human characters because you have to start from scratch. You don't have to be "elfy" or "dwarfy", which might get in the way of your RP.

I also like playing non-humans of course, but then I believe you're supposed to somehow highlight the difference, otherwise they are the same as humans, except for mechanical bonuses and funny voices. Unfortunately I've been seeing this happen all the time, so periodically (as a DM) I get back to the feeling of 'why bother with races?'. If you want those mechanical modifiers, I can grant you them without the need to force you any (bad) RPing.

Playing campaigns where there's humans, elves, dwarves, halflings etc. in the party is 'very D&D', but what periodically bothers me is that it always feels the same. Always this "cosmopolitan" approach to every single fantasy settings, diversity is a good thing within a setting but then the backside is too little diversity between settings.

 

[Celebrim]

Playing campaigns where there's humans, elves, dwarves, halflings etc. in the party is 'very D&D', but what periodically bothers me is that it always feels the same. Always this "cosmopolitan" approach to every single fantasy settings, diversity is a good thing within a setting but then the backside is too little diversity between settings.

I think the real world diversity of settings is far higher than the published setting diversity because published settings have to aim for the consensus. I like how in 5e though, all but 4 of the races are listed as 'uncommon' and explicitly called out as not necessarily being in every setting.

In my experience on the boards, they probably could have added 'halfling' to that list. There are a lot of DMs and players that just love the little races, but there are about an equal number that don't want them in their setting. Neither halflings nor gnomes are available in my homebrew, and I'm far from unique in that.

To give you the idea of the diversity out there, the only races allowed as PCs in my game are humans, elves, dwarves, half-elf, goblin, hobgoblin, half-goblin, orine, idreth, sidhe, pixie, and changling. I guarantee that among DMs that don't allow every published PC race, you'll get a very large diversity of options, from the DMs that are 'only humans' to DMs that only allow a selection of homebrewed races (and maybe humans).

 

[JWO]

I think there are far too many people holding players up to a certain (arguably quite high) standard of improvisational acting.

Ok, it would be awesome if all the players could fully embody the characters they're playing and immerse themselves in their roles like De Niro can, but I don't see what's so wrong with someone who imagines a character, imagines them with pointy ears and the ability to do cool gracefully acrobatic moves and then decides to play an elf based on that with no further depth. Sure, it might break immersion to an extent, but so does looking up from my photocopied bit of paper covered in my pencil scrawls to see a table full of nerdy humans sat there eating crisps and wearing t-shirts and jeans.