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

[Oofta]

Doesn't change that the resulting attitudes and behaviours on the part of the prejudiced are racist, no matter how they attempt to rationalize it.

So acknowledging that some people would probably be racist ***holes, what, means that it's a reflection of the DM's attitudes? I'm really trying to understand where you're going with any of this.

 

[zarionofarabel]

It's pretty much RAW. Those races are the uncommon ones, some of which are fairly rare.

"Scattered among the members of these more common races are the true exotics: a hulking dragonborn here, pushing his way through the crowd, and a sly tiefling there, lurking in the shadows with mischief in her eyes."

"And there, well out of the sunlight, is a lone drow-a fugitive from the subterranean expanse of the Underdark, trying to make his way in a world that fears his kind."

And from the Uncommon Races section in Dragonborn.

"The dragon born and the rest of the races in this chapter are uncommon. They don't exist in every world of D&D, and
even where they are found, they are less widespread than dwarves, elves, halflings, and humans.

In the cosmopolitan cities of the D&D multiverse, most people hardly look twice at members of even the most exotic races. But the small towns and villages that dot the countryside are different. The common folk aren't accustomed to seeing members of these races, and they
react accordingly."

So there you have it. Even in the largest cities are people what aren't accustomed to the uncommon races. In the small villages they are rare. And this is for the PHB races. For the even more exotic races from the other books, like Tabaxi, they are likely to be completely unknown in the smaller towns and villages that PCs often enter.

Oh, and the bolded portion from the first paragraph even tells the players that they may not be able to play an uncommon race, as that race may not even be in that world.

I haven't read the 5e books, but if they say this, then I am inclined to agree with you. It specifically states that these "exotic" races are truly unique and don't feature in every D&D world. I would be quite likely to point out these sections to a player that demanded that they be allowed to play such a race.

 

[Maxperson]

If you want to start claiming that section as legitimate 'RAW' content, then by RAW, all of the PHB races are present in every world.

You think that since the section says, and I quote, "They don't exist in every world of D&D,..." that it really means that they are present in every world? That's........an interesting interpretation.

 

[Maxperson]

It absolutely is. In real life it would be different because cat people, unlike pumas, are unknown to science and would therefore be an especially outlandish and frightening sight. In a hypothetical world in which cat people existed, it would be different because as sapient beings, they would be capable of conducting themselves according to the social contract, and expected to do so. Granted, they would probably have claws that could easily kill someone, but a closer analogy would be fearing someone with a gun, or like, a black belt.

I would have some fear of someone walking into a bar holding a gun in his hand, yes. A black belt, not so much. Especially in a town that I grew up in where I may never have seen or heard of a cat person holding this gun.

 

[Maxperson]

I haven't read the 5e books, but if they say this, then I am inclined to agree with you. It specifically states that these "exotic" races are truly unique and don't feature in every D&D world. I would be quite likely to point out these sections to a player that demanded that they be allowed to play such a race.

Not unique, but uncommon and even rare outside of a place like Waterdeep or other major city.

 

[Gammadoodler]

You think that since the section says, and I quote, "They don't exist in every world of D&D,..." that it really means that they are present in every world? That's........an interesting interpretation.

I wouldn't when that particular quote appears nowhere in the 'Choosing a Race' section. That particular section appears to be green-boxed under Dragonborn. And I will agree that it is just as much RAW as all the other green-boxed content.

My apologies, it appears you jumped around cherry-picking PHB quotes more than I would have assumed.

 

[Charlaquin]

I would have some fear of someone walking into a bar holding a gun in his hand, yes.

Yeah, me too. But we’re also talking about a fantasy setting where people regularly go about armed. Being more afraid of a cat person with claws than a human with a sword is a bit like being more afraid of a black guy with a gun than a white guy with a gun.

A black belt, not so much.

I think that’s actually a closer analogy to the hypothetical cat person than a gun, because it’s part of their body. Hands as lethal weapons and suchlike.

Especially in a town that I grew up in where I may never have seen or heard of a cat person holding this gun.

touché.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Umm, there are LOTS of 250 pound humans that don't particularly need more sleep or food than anyone else. Have you been to the mall lately?

And, please stop trying to control the conversation. There is more than just you in this conversation and I'm addressing everyone, even if I'm replying to you. Slap me on ignore if you feel that I'm somehow misrepresenting your arguments. But, this is a broader conversation than just you, so, I will continue to link the conversation to the broader conversation if you don't mind. You inserted yourself into a broader conversation, don't complain that the broader conversation is continuing despite your protestations.

No, you’re being rude.

Apparently you don’t care, so I will go ahead and limit my exposure to your BS, though.

 

[Oofta]

I wouldn't when that particular quote appears nowhere in the 'Choosing a Race' section. That particular section appears to be green-boxed under Dragonborn. And I will agree that it is just as much RAW as all the other green-boxed content.

My apologies, it appears you jumped around cherry-picking PHB quotes more than I would have assumed.

Huh? I mean, not @Maxperson and maybe I missed something but you stated that

No, it isn't. It's under a section labeled 'choosing a race' It is player facing guidance regarding what is common to expect in D&D.

If you want to start claiming that section as legitimate 'RAW' content, then by RAW, all of the PHB races are present in every world.

I think we're fine having a discussion about what races we think make sense or don't without planting a RAW flag.

So when the PHB chapter 2 says "The dragonborn and the rest of the races in this chapter are uncommon. They don’t exist in every world of D&D" that means by RAW they exist in every world? Saying otherwise is somehow "cherrypicking"?

 

[prabe]

Why do you, as DM, bring so many hard-line no-debate ideas to the table first? Do you truly never seek out ideas or suggestions from your players on the kind of world they would like to see? It just baffles me that so many think it's patently ridiculous for a player to bring world-building contributions to the table, yet also that it's patently ridiculous for a DM to NOT bring an EXTREMELY DETAILED world that apparently breaks at the slightest addition of something just beyond the horizon, variably known about but not often discussed because it's From Over There.

Does this really happen so rarely? Do DMs really get so attached to a single setting of their creation that they never try anything new or solicit player involvement for new ideas, elements, etc.?

Haven't seen if anyone else has responded to this directly, so ... this is coming from something of a vacuum, potentially.

I ran a game for about a year, where the players had specific input into the setting, both before actual play (there were several sessions zero, effectively) and during. The problems I had with the game were A) the players wanted things in the game setting I didn't like (and still don't, though my feelings at the time are more relevant, I think) and that even if I liked them I'm not sure they worked to make a coherent game setting--there was a lot of handwaving; and B) the additions coming from other people were eventually much harder for me to keep track of to keep the setting relatively consistent, so the players had some sense of the context in which they were operating. Those are both ... really about me as a GM, running the game. If the setting doesn't make sense to me (I was going to say something about having to like the setting, but there are things in the setting I'm running that I don't particularly like--in the sense that the city with debt-slavery is a perpetual thorn in my side, even though it makes sense in context) then I can't manage the suspension of disbelief that I need to run the game.

I'll admit that there are things I've either written out of the setting or not written into it because I don't like them, but if a player has an idea for a character and is willing to cope with being literally the only [X} that practically everyone they meet has ever seen, I'm willing for their character to be from elsewhere. I'd kinda prefer if they could make something native to the world work, but if they're willing to give some I'm willing to give some.

There was some talk about players having characters before they know anything about the campaign. That can be a problem, but for me it's more about not making a character that meshes with what the other players are doing, and given the way I build campaigns, having a backstory that doesn't tie into the world is going to make it difficult to use your character's backstory to tie it to the campaign/world (which is my preferred use). I mean, my campaigns are kinda picaresques--I don't start them with ideas for more than the first couple-three sessions; anything after that usually emerges from play.