D&D General Greyhawk Humanocentricism?


log in or register to remove this ad

It may be, but it's more common than you think. Just don't go searching Greyhawk in Twitter or Reddit...

1. It's Twitter my advice don't use it.

2. Reddits fun but you generally only hear about the negatives.

I'm not a hard core purist with any setting but prefer things get added organically vs shoe horned in to fit the current rules.
 

Oddly enough, those "curated settings" are usually "just pick from among the Tolkien 4. If you dare to pick anything else, I'm going to bully you for the rest of the game, until either your character is dead or you leave the game."
I'm sorry you feel that way. I've seen a lot more out of curated worlds than that.
 

It's not one without precedent. Most of the posts that discuss "curated" species tend to feature the Tolkien demihumans but you rarely see "every PC is an animal folk" or "every PC is a planetouched".
Talking about popularity doesn't do any good though.

There are other worlds than these...
 


Oddly enough, those "curated settings" are usually "just pick from among the Tolkien 4. If you dare to pick anything else, I'm going to bully you for the rest of the game, until either your character is dead or you leave the game."
Ah, the old 'curated, but I'll let you play something fun only if I can racism you to death' ploy.

I had to deal with one of those once.

Once.

Somehow the random racism stopped after a gentle reminder (in the form of a burning tavern) that my Infernal Rebuke dealt fire damage.
 

Ah, the old 'curated, but I'll let you play something fun only if I can racism you to death' ploy.

I had to deal with one of those once.

Once.

Somehow the random racism stopped after a gentle reminder (in the form of a burning tavern) that my Infernal Rebuke dealt fire damage.

That was a strawman post for the most part.

If racism is a major factor the DM should address it in some way. My Drow (read lolthite) game I banned elves for obvious reasons. Note the players picked Drow and evil alignment restrictions were relaxed.
 


If I went down that path it would be AD&D plus Drow, Gith, Tieflings, Genasi, Lizardfolk.
Out of interest
Why not Aasimar - given you allow Gith, Tieflings and Genasi?

Why not Goblin, Hobgoblin, Orc or Kobold - given you allow Lizardfolk (or would Lizardfolk not be cannibals within that setting?).

I feel anthropomorphic animals, warforged, fungus men ...etc breaks into less traditional territory - so I'm not questioning for those.
 
Last edited:

Out of interest
Why not Aasimar - given you allow Gith, Tieflings and Genasi?

Why not Goblin, Hobgoblin, Orc or Kobold - given you allow Lizardfolk (or would Lizardfolk not be cannibals within that setting?).

I feel anthropomorphic animals, warforged, fungus men ...etc breaks into less traditional territory - so I'm not questioning for those.

Aasimar have no organic way in like Tieflings. There's no celestial equivalent of Iuz. They're kinda human so would be next tier down imho. Tieflings are ahead of them.

Various humanoids fit organically but are getting away from Humanocentric.

Lizardfolk traditionally neutral vs evil and they're near Saltmarsh. You could treat them as evil humanoids.

Plasmoids are near the bottom.

Depends on how strict one is. The traditional humanoids are more organic vs newer stuff. Far off traveller's work but then it's coukd you vs should you.

More stuff you add less stands put. Gith seem a lot more popular now due to BG3 for example.
 

Remove ads

Top