D&D General Do you like LOTS of races/ancestries/whatever? If so, why?

[Dannyalcatraz]

My question is: does that appeal to you? Do you like a campaign world that has dozens or even hundreds of player option races? If so, why? What's the upside?

As a player, I’ve played campaigns with only one playable race; I’ve played campaigns with hundreds. I’m OK with either extreme - and all points in between- as long as what’s available makes sense. And by that, I mean their availability or exclusion makes sense within the game world AND the species themselves are reasonably well done mechanically.

As a GM, I usually land somewhere in the middle, with the number of accessible planets and planes being a major factor in the final count.

The upside, for me, is options. Done right, different races give me different ideas about how to play the game.

 

[Incenjucar]

The more the merrier unless we're playing a campaign where restrictions are important for the feel, such as a Dark Sun campaign. They present unique opportunities and stories, and the more races the more unique possibilities in the world. A game with a kobold, a thri-kreen, a goblin, and an elf will be quite different from one with three halflings and a goliath.

Not all races are interesting to me, but we all have our tastes. As a Planescape fan, I usually keep the games I DM open to the multiverse. I have severe restrictions for my personal fantasy fiction, but would not likely restrict my players without a compelling reason.

 

[Fifinjir]

A curated group of “natural” peoples with the rest available as mutants and anomalies.

 

[delericho]

Depends on the setting.

For Spelljammer or Planescape (or Star Wars or Trek), I prefer as many options as possible. Anything goes.

For most settings, I'd prefer a much shorter list - 5-9 reasonably distinct options. In practice, that mostly means you can choose any of the PHB races and any of the races in the 'main' book for the setting, and nothing else. Though I'd actually prefer new settings to replace most if not all of the PHB races with local alternatives - start with no options and then add in only a handful that are thematically appropriate to the setting.

But there's a big part of me that figures that, since the choice of race is usually irrelevant in how the character is portrayed, the only option should be human.

 

[Aldarc]

For my part, I feel like there's a point where it gets too Mos Eisley or Pirates of Dark Water. Not only does too many races kill the wonder of non-human characters, but I feel like they become mechanical shticks and themes and there's nothing otherwise distinct about the races as cultures. They are just humans with funny hats and stat bonuses.

Thoughts?

You say that if it was a bad thing. However, I have never walked away from watching Pirates of Dark Water feeling that the number of non-human characters killed any of the setting's wonder. Not one bit. Quite the opposite in fact. Pirates of Dark Water continues to inspire me as a setting for that reason. PoDW is probably one of THE main reasons I keep going back to nautical campaigns and alien worlds. I loved it as a kid and I still love it now.

 

[Quartz]

My question is: does that appeal to you?

No, it doesn't. You're bang on with the Star Wars Cantina reference. That's fine for a port city, gateway to other lands, but the land as a whole is going to have very few races.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I generally think options are better than not having options? I don't really need dozens of races for most game settings. But I have no issues with bloodlines, subraces, etc. It IS a little annoying / verisimilitude-breaking when all of the PCs are exotic, obscure, alien creatures in a land of more mundane people.

 

[Minigiant]

D&D replaces many (human) cultures (as in "our" world) with many races.

There are 44 countries in Europe according to Google right now.
There are 50 states in the US.
And that's just humans. On one continent.
D&D flips that by allowing multiple races in a world.

When I design a setting, I try to make at least thirty existing cultural nations in a complete world.

Doing this with a small handful of races just makes more work for little gain as the temptation to lean on overused trope grows fast or repeating yourself.

 

[Minigiant]

Pirates of Dark Water was a super niche cartoon that only had 2 seasons and no reboots.

The fact that it is constantly brought up in nostalgia and mentioned for reboots displays the very high appeal it had despite only being incomplete due to production and cost issues.

That's what you want as a DM. A setting that hooks into players' memories without needing a bunch of sessions to do so.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

I don't know if Hasbro+WotC could talk with Warner for a licenced reimagination of Pirates of Dark Waters. Now there is a lot of trouble within the company after the merger with Discovery.

My opinion is I would rather to can choose among a lot of clothing, but after my own fashion style to be different.

The older settings aren't too ready to add the new PC ancestries created for and after 3rd Ed. Spelljammer and Planescape allow enough flexibility. But when the DMs create their own worlds, then there can be enough space to add lots of new elements.