D&D as humanocetric ... or not?

[Nagol]

I'm unpersuaded what options the players have to pick race determines if the campaign is humanocentric. What matters more is the environment the players are acting in and reacting to. If the world is filled with humans and all the players play more esoteric choices, they are signing up for a fish out of water situation and may have an easier time in some situations and a harder one in many others..

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Leatherhead]

In my homebrew campaign:

The god of humans died fighting off an incursion from the far realm, nobody even remembers their name now. As a result, humans lost their divine protections and most of their rights, and now they are treated as second class citizens or pets, at best. The old races (dwarves, elves, and the other traditional races) imperialistically carve up map, while the new races (who rose from the blood of the fallen god) learn what it means to be a sentient being, while being exploited by the old races.

I even went so far as to ban variant humans explicitly.

And one of my players still wanted to play as a human. It was quite shocking to be honest.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No, I understand your P.O.V. I might respectfully suggest you aren't taking the time to understand my point of view.

It is exceptionally obnoxious for someone to say that I'm doing anything regarding telling them they aren't playing something right when I have done no such thing. You can play however you want, and whatever is fun for you.

But since you are accusing me of being dismissive since I answered you (TWICE) before trying to change the subject, here it is:

You do not want to accept that other people want to play differently than you do. I accept that you might desire to play, say, an UGLY race for RPing reasons, or that you might want to explore some alien aspect or idea that you can only do through the adoption of a "race."

Good for you!

Of course, I could point out, quite easily, that:
1. There are more than enough options to play an UGLY human. You can go back to the original Rogue's Gallery and Lassiviren the Dark as an example of someone exploring that in context. Then again, there have always been plenty of examples, even in a limited number of races, for someone to play an "ugly" race, such as a half-orc.

2. Exploring an alien psyche is really part of the whole concept of roleplaying (or any kind of acting) and will happen as soon as you take on a role. As the excerpted quote that I began the thread indicates, it is very difficult to get people to roleplay well as HUMANS with a full gamut of HUMAN EMOTIONS separate from their own, or, for that matter, separate from "I wanna level and get an ASI." So, yeah, color me somewhat skeptical that a) someone needs to have a particular race in order to roleplay, and b) that person will then explore something they could only do with that particular race that also synergizes with some mechanical abilities that they want.

3. That said, I am more than understanding that some people prefer or need masks; playing something that is, theoretically, alien and "not human"(but is really just a human with some exaggerated quality) could allow someone to truly explore some aspect of a personality in a safe environment; whether it's a Corellon-inspired elf and gender, or a Lizard Folk and autism, there are all sorts of ways that a person can use some characteristic and seize upon it for RP purpose. That's fine; it might not be strictly necessary, but if that's either fun for them or necessary, that's cool too!

You can do what you want. I tend to run humanocentric campaigns for my old group (and my new old group) and PHB-only campaigns for groups I am teaching D&D. That's me. Do what is fun for you.

But stop bugging me about the way I play, and assuming that I don't understand you simply because I CHOOSE A DIFFERENT WAY TO PLAY.

K?THX.BYE!

Deleted. Gonna cool off first

 

[atanakar]

For my current campaign all the characters are human. The players had no choice because we decided before hand that all characters were siblings of the same noble family.

Using other races than human, in my campaigns, is more a question of what campaign we decide to play. I never DM D&D official campaign settings. The only one choices are those that fit the setting.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Honestly, I find the question of the players choices to be a... less interesting one. I myself choose races for a variety of factors, and have played a wide range.

What I find fascinatingly telling, is how much easier it is to run a humanocentric world than anything else, and all because of a few very subtle things in the players handbook.

For example, Humans have no racial language called out. There is no "Humanish" as there is Dwarvish, Elvish, Gnomish, ect. But, they speak "The Common Tongue" which every single race gets, and a bonus language. This implies that the "Human Tongue" is Common, and that the entire world speaks it.

Or, look to the Gods. In most settings, there are no "Human Gods". There are the gods of a thing, like "The God of War" or "The God of the Sun" and then there are the Racial gods, like "The Dwarven God of War" or "The Elvish God of the Sun, Moon, and Stars" And again, this implies that the dieties presented as "The Gods" are actually "The Human Gods"

Most NPC statblocks in the MM are assumed to be human as well.

So, I find, that unless you take incredibly special interest and attention to the world, every world you run is Humanocentric, because the things the game world depict as the "default" or "common" versions are the human versions.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Honestly, I find the question of the players choices to be a... less interesting one. I myself choose races for a variety of factors, and have played a wide range.

What I find fascinatingly telling, is how much easier it is to run a humanocentric world than anything else, and all because of a few very subtle things in the players handbook.

For example, Humans have no racial language called out. There is no "Humanish" as there is Dwarvish, Elvish, Gnomish, ect. But, they speak "The Common Tongue" which every single race gets, and a bonus language. This implies that the "Human Tongue" is Common, and that the entire world speaks it.

Or, look to the Gods. In most settings, there are no "Human Gods". There are the gods of a thing, like "The God of War" or "The God of the Sun" and then there are the Racial gods, like "The Dwarven God of War" or "The Elvish God of the Sun, Moon, and Stars" And again, this implies that the dieties presented as "The Gods" are actually "The Human Gods"

Most NPC statblocks in the MM are assumed to be human as well.

So, I find, that unless you take incredibly special interest and attention to the world, every world you run is Humanocentric, because the things the game world depict as the "default" or "common" versions are the human versions.

Which has...interesting corollaries that can be used to tell stories that speak to many of us, but with a level of removal, that would only be possible for playing a human if human (and it’s very near cousins) were the only sentient bipeds in the game world. But once I can negotiate with a bugbear and play into their laziness and indifference, a different kind of human simply, for many of us, cannot represent “the other”.

the fact that these other peoples exist, but are treated as secondary to the “default” human, makes the fairly objectively more “the other” than any sort of human can ever be.

 

[Vael]

I generally prefer wide open selections for races, I like DnD taverns to be a little Mos Eisley-ish.

 

[Azzy]

I'm fairly open to ideas, but I reserve the right to veto things (especially 3PP stuff) and encourage players to create characters that tie into the setting (I'm soon to run an Eberron campaign and am encouraging characters of Dragonmarked houses, warforged, etc., for example).

 

[Helldritch]

I voted #3. BUT.....

Although I am ready to allow almost any races, players must understand that I will also play on their differences. You want to play a half orc? Sure, but get ready to face racism, fear, hate and unfair prices from vendors (if you are even allowed to get in). A thiefling? No problems, see above. An orc? Sure, first town you get in, most people will try to kill you right on the spot. Of course that depends on the setting. I play in a setting where most non humans are in the minority, rarely seen and distrust (save for elves where everyone wants to be their friends, dwarves because everyone knows that they're filthy rich, halflings because ... because! and gnomes, what's not to like about them.) All other races might get concerned/distrustful looks (Tabaxi, Kenkus to name a few). Some other races like the Aasimars will get either the worship attitude or the holy fear of a celestial if they show their "celestial" side too early.

The better a player will play, the more the player gets known, the less the downside of race (ism) will be. Or if the player is evil, the more it will be exacerbated. Some players are mature enough (and I do not talk about age, I've seen 13 years old boy more mature than their fathers....) to play a monstrous race. But it is not a majority that will be ready to play with the inconvenient related to such a choice. Of course, if you play like the Mos Eisley cantina all over your world, then anything can be acceptable as there are no downside to play an orc, a goblin or whatever you wish. If your world is humanocentric like mine, then be prepared to see what racism and harassment are.

On a funny note, I've had an Elf male player play a particularly handsome elf in 1e days when comeliness was a "thing". Every females in town were after him. The player was over joyed until he met their jealous husbands.... One of the other players (a dwarf) said:"What are you waiting for to get disfigured pretty boy? You get us into trouble with your face alone! Damn f***ing elves...!"