D&D as humanocetric ... or not?

[Zardnaar]

My own preference was not on the list of choices.

I prefer that my players choose a group concept and then create characters that fit that concept.

Typically, this means that the group consists primarily of one specific race, usually with one exceptional outsider included. Two outsiders at most, because once the exceptions outnumber the "normals" then you tend to lose the feel for the original concept.

For example, a group of humans all from the same small town, perhaps with a Half-Orc or a dwarf included. Or members of a group of Elves with one half-elf.

Of course, sometimes the group concept is some sort of random collection of mercenaries or slaves or some such menagerie, in which case much of their trials involve finding a acceptance within the setting. When this is the case I tend to prefer that players pick primarily traditional PH races, with maybe one exotic race.

Yeah this is s what I prefer as well. 1-2 outsiders are fine but not the majority.

Assuming you're doing a regional type game.

Wouldn't matter in Sigil I suppose.

"I'm a traveling Samurai". Ok fine. "I'm a traveling Viking". Ok fine. "I'm an elf from far away". Erm sure. My Kender from Krynn came via Spellhamming". In some cases I would just end the campaign session 0 and tell everyone to roll new characters.

Failing that no game.

 

[JeffB]

Those of you who are dismissing that side of RPGs and trying to say those who enjoy that part of it should seek actual therapy....you are coming across poorly.

That's not what any of us are saying. That is what some people in this thread would like you to think though..

1) If D&D is your therapy (singular), that's a bad choice for you -you really should get some professional help. Nobody is saying you shouldn't also play D&D because you have issues. That's a erroneous conclusion others apparently want o come to, despite what has been said.

2) It's also bad form to project your therapy needs/entitlement upon the DM and rest of the group. If the whole group plays that way and it's intended, that's fine- but please re-read #1.

That's it.

 

[5atbu]

Plus: EGG came across as much a pompous ass (IMHO) when he wrote that as he does now. He spent so much trying to make others compliant and prevent bad wrong fun.

 

[Zardnaar]

Interesting to note that in our Curse of Strahd campaign, all characters are demi humans or full non humans. Seems to going well.

I like playing non humans, although I realise that most are really alternative human archetypes.

However I come from a strong T&T and Runequest background.

I limit my players to the races in the PHB and Volo's since that's what I own. My players seem very happy to predominantly choose non humans. Whether they play them as actually alien is up to them and the table.

You're not doing anything wrong at all. If that's what you're happy with and want to play sure. IDK the details if your world, campaign etc.

80-90% of the time I run generic. Over 25 years that gets boring and I've run Darksun it Drow game. Right now it's Midgard which is very diverse but there's also 7 regions and each region is almost a theme by itself.

 

[hawkeyefan]

The post was implicating that you might have issues in real life ergo I get to play what I like.

That's just gonna run people the wrong way. I'm running a themed game (Egypt) if the players got to play what they liked it would be frustrating big they turned up with 2 elves, a gnome, halfling, bearfolk none of which exist in the area or gave any built in ties to the campaign.

I literally had someone ask to play a Samurai. Did they miss the Egypt part of the pitch?

Well not for nothing but a samurai in ancient Egypt sounds like a potentially cool story. Clash of cultures, stranger in a strange land....plenty to work with.

My comment was more for the posters who assume that anyone who plays with some different creative angle than what they’re used to is in need of help and should’t be looking to D&D for that help, because that stance is absurd.

When it comes to the question of racial choice and all that, I think in most cases it can be worked out one way or the other because people are adults. The player can choose to find another option that allows him to do what he likes but that still fits with what the DM has set up. Or the DM can realize that his setting is strong enough to retain its themes even in the presence of an element that may not fit perfectly.

 

[hawkeyefan]

That's not what any of us are saying. That is what some people in this thread would like you to think though..

1) If D&D is your therapy (singular), that's a bad choice for you -you really should get some professional help. Nobody is saying you shouldn't also play D&D because you have issues. That's a erroneous conclusion others apparently want o come to, despite what has been said.

2) It's also bad form to project your therapy needs/entitlement upon the DM and rest of the group. If the whole group plays that way and it's intended, that's fine- but please re-read #1.

That's it.

No one said that they think of D&D as their therapy. Or as a replacement for needed therapy.

They stated that they like to play games as a form of escapism. And that restrictions on how they do so my inhibit what makes them enjoy the game.

Then, in response, people have said “D&D isn’t your therapy session” and the like.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well not for nothing but a samurai in ancient Egypt sounds like a potentially cool story. Clash of cultures, stranger in a strange land....plenty to work with.

My comment was more for the posters who assume that anyone who plays with some different creative angle than what they’re used to is in need of help and should’t be looking to D&D for that help, because that stance is absurd.

When it comes to the question of racial choice and all that, I think in most cases it can be worked out one way or the other because people are adults. The player can choose to find another option that allows him to do what he likes but that still fits with what the DM has set up. Or the DM can realize that his setting is strong enough to retain its themes even in the presence of an element that may not fit perfectly.

Problem is when the whole group or majority are in a strange land.

Say the DM run a Drow game. You're in a Drow city. You would expect all Drow with maybe a Kobold, Minotaur, Duergar, Goblin something like that.

What if all the players just pick random crap or if you have 0 Drow in your drow themed game where the DM has planned out inter house warfare.

I'm a big fan of player guides that Paizo produced for their APs that generally explains the main tropes of the AP, things to expect and what's in the local area.

 

[Zardnaar]

No one said that they think of D&D as their therapy. Or as a replacement for needed therapy.

They stated that they like to play games as a form of escapism. And that restrictions on how they do so my inhibit what makes them enjoy the game.

Then, in response, people have said “D&D isn’t your therapy session” and the like.

And their desires to play whatever might conflict with the DM.

Unhappy player leaves easy replacement. Unhappy DM leaves no game.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Problem is when the whole group or majority are in a strange land.

Say the DM run a Drow game. You're in a Drow city. You would expect all Drow with maybe a Kibikd, Minotaur, Duergar, Goblin something like that.

What if all the players just pick random crap or if you have 0 Drow in your driw themed game where the DM has planned out inter house warfare.

I'm a big fan of player guides that Paizo produced for their APs that generally explains the main tropes of the AP, things to expect and what's in the local area.

Then I don’t run a drow themed game because my players have pretty much told me that’s not what they want. I adapt what I’ve prepared to fit the characters the players have made.

 

[MGibster]

I have an odd view of D&D races in that I don't think they matter for the most part. You could run Tyranny of Dragons, Curse of Strahd, or Rage of Demons with PCs of almost any race and it won't have a significant impact on the game. So I tend to allow almost any "official" PC race in my games based on my odd belief. I find that players tend to to have the expectation that they're free to play almost any race and who am I to disappoint them? (I did limit the available races in Curse of Strahd to those found in the PHB just because I felt like it.)