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

[zarionofarabel]

And maybe you won't enjoy it. But just like Green Eggs and Ham, you can't know until you try.

I already tried it and know I don't like it! You telling me I need to try it again every time I meet someone who likes Green Eggs and Ham is simply ridiculous! Instead I'm just going to tell them I don't like it and if they try arguing the point I'll tell them to get bent!

And Steven Universe's Storytelling relied heavily on things that human's cannot do or be.

I just watched Beastar that story literally could not work as a story about humans, though a lot of the allegory and symbolism could.

RWBY would lose massive parts of its stroy without the Faunus

I want to watch Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts. I'm betting there are aspects of that story that are going to rely on non-human characters. In fact, I'll probably turn on the first episode here soon. I've heard good things.

I have no idea what any of these intellectual properties are or what they are about.

Just because Game of Thrones told a good story with an only human cast, does not mean that other stories can't be equally good or better with a cast that includes non-humans. The very concept is wrong to me, because it would imply that somehow any story with a non-human cast is immediately lesser quality than a story with an all-human cast. And that is not true and cannot be true.

Says you.

 

[Zardnaar]

That's one of my fears.
My fear that New DMs will just copy Old DMs and continue the cycle until anexternal source nudges new ideas into the forefront to challenge the old.

For example, I have a campaign idea where the gods have animal motifs and act like the personality people give the animals. Their blessing turn humans, halfings, and goliaths into beastmen. Basically everyone is Yuan ti by for other animals. So the only races are

• Unblessed
  • Human
  • Halfling
  • Goliath
• Blessed
  • Arakocra
  • Changeling
  • Dragonborn
  • Kobold
  • Orc (Pig faced orc)
  • Kenku
  • Leonin
  • Lizardman
  • Loxodon
  • Minotaur
  • Satyr
  • Shifter
  • Tabaxi
  • Yaunti

Many DMs say this race lineup is fine since its my game. However according to a lot of discussions in this thread, it doesn't make sense to some and doesn't appeal to many. Now I'm a veteran confident DM, so that wouldn't affect me. However what about newer DMs just thrusting out their ideas?

That's great though. Not quite my cup of tea but you have a theme and purpose. I would still play because you've made the effort.

If I asked to play anything it would be a ratman or werelion or bearfolk.

It's not just because anything goes. I allowed variants of that in my Egypt game. Minotaurs, Were lions, Gnolls etc were fine.

 

[Zardnaar]

So, you just ignore @zarionofarabel saying literally what I said was being said, and instead want to accuse me of ageism? Sure, go ahead. I'll just keep pushing back against the idea that playing what you like isn't wrong, it doesn't make you an naughty word, and that non-traditional races have value.

If it's not wrong insisting on it after DM says no makes you the naughty word though.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't have Changelings on my world, alas.

OTOH, if part of the idea--the reason they want to play a Changeling--is they ... aren't exactly what they seem, I have a race on my world who are souls kept by the world (which is ... slowly awakening to sentience) who look exactly like (and are in fact born to) humans. If the inside-not-matching-the-outside is the important part of the character, as opposed to the shapechanging part, that might work well--and I'd probably pitch it to a player, if the shapeshifting wasn't the main draw (or if they didn't tell me the shapeshifting was the main draw).

Those sound like a fascinating race to be honest. Do you have mechanics for them. or are they purely roleplay?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's the chip on your shoulder? "Oh, please, won't someone think of the children"? Get real.

The world will not end if your personally preferred DMing style doesn't become the most popular one.

No, that isn't the chip on my shoulder, but when people are arguing that they are showing the new generation they can play like they want.... by telling them that what they want is stupid and has no value, then I'm going to push back against that.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I already tried it and know I don't like it! You telling me I need to try it again every time I meet someone who likes Green Eggs and Ham is simply ridiculous! Instead I'm just going to tell them I don't like it and if they try arguing the point I'll tell them to get bent!

I have no idea what any of these intellectual properties are or what they are about.

So, here is an interesting thing.

"Green Eggs and Ham" was meant to represent "something new" I just provided four things you have never encountered. But, you just told me that you already know you won't like them, because you've tried them before.

Except, you know nothing about them.

Now, I'm sure you will hate them. They aren't for everyone and you don't even get into fiction very much, but, maybe you wouldn't hate them. I don't know. You'd have to try them and see.

Says you.

Considering I am an English Major, have studied literature extensively, and have read a large variety of books... yes, says me. Having an all-human cast does not make your story inherently better quality.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Who cares? If it's an ancient Egypt game and people want to play vikings and samurai I'd be saying "Look, what exactly are you wanting to do here? Do you really want to play an Ancient Egypt game or not?"

If they can't come up with an appropriate character then clearly they are not into it so I should run something else (or find players actually into the idea).

I mean I'd probably take this as a sign that I was just being humoured and that they really don't want to play this game.

This really sounds like passive aggressive dickish behaviour on the part of the players here. The idea that the GM should accede to this is quite bizarre.

If I'd actually put work into this on the understanding that players had agreed to the premise I would not be pleased.

So, your games don’t ever have outsiders to the region?

 

[prabe]

Those sound like a fascinating race to be honest. Do you have mechanics for them. or are they purely roleplay

Thanks. I have mechanics (they're stuff from elsewhere, reskinned), and I have some lore written up for them (alas, my writing-up has fallen much behind my figuring-out). They're included in my "default yes" list.

If that's a request for actual information ... as they say on Twitter, my DMs are open. ;-)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Except for a millennium or two or three...no wait...four maybe.

To quote another poster, who cares?

Zard runs pseudo historical games, not historical games, so it’s not actually Egypt, Scandinavia, or Japan. There is no reason that cultures that resemble these cultures couldn’t exist at the same time.

 

[Minigiant]

If I asked to play anything it would be a ratman or werelion or bearfolk.

Stupid D&D doesn't have Bearfolk.
Bugbears are too stealthy.
Might steal from Midgard.

 

[zarionofarabel]

Unless you are the DM, then it doesn't matter if your ideas reduce people's fun, as long as you are having fun that's all that matters.

Yes! If I'm reducing a players fun they are free to find a different DM that won't reduce their fun.

And, as I said to Oofta. Just because I have three ideas doesn't mean that it isn't frustrating to have my favorite idea nixed.

Life sucks! Get over yourself!

And if they can't, who cares, they aren't at your table making you feel bad anymore.

Exactly! Sorry, but there are so many avenues for gaming that if a player can't find a way to play they aren't trying very hard.

Glad you don't allow selfish people at your table Max, no one is allowed to impact another persons fun, that is completely unacceptable.. unless you are the DM, then you kick out the people who aren't having fun until everyone tells you they are having fun.

Not Max. But...exactly! That's how I end up with a game where both I and the players are having fun. The other way is either, I am not having fun, or the player isn't having fun. I'm not interested in not having fun in a game I'm running! If a player refuses to work with what I find fun, they get the boot.

I mean, you can see the hypocrisy here, right? You can see that saying that you won't stand for selfish people who negatively impact fun, yet at the same time saying the DM is so indispensable that they can negatively impact people's fun and the players just have to deal with that, is hypocrisy.

The players don't have to deal with that at all, they know where the door is!

 

[Zardnaar]

To quote another poster, who cares?

Zard runs pseudo historical games, not historical games, so it’s not actually Egypt, Scandinavia, or Japan. There is no reason that cultures that resemble these cultures couldn’t exist at the same time.

Viking got yes Samurai no.

Midgard has not Vikings and not Egypt.