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

[Reynard]

For those folks finding themselves feeling insulted by references to Mos Eisley or funny hats, you can be sure I was simply using shorthand, not casting aspersions on your preferences.

 

[Reynard]

For those folks not seeing anyone roleplay race, how often are you seeing anyone specifically roleplaying humans when they play?

I can't even suggest people role play being tired and in need of a warm meal and a hot bath after a long journey without getting shouted down on these boards, so...

 

[Minigiant]

When you decide to run Klassico, let me know!

Can you handle roleplaying Klassico?

Klassico's wood elves are very elfy and love the woods.... biologically.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Which was my point and why I said "most" never travelled more than a few days from where they lived. Most people didn't have the means (as in time and/or freedom) to easily travel greater distances.

But that isn’t true. In medieval Britain, for instance, traveling a few months from home was something at least a plurality of people did at least once in their life.

Ok, so FWIW there is no reason for you to be defensive here (the tone indicates it to me, if I am mistaken--my apologies!). I never said you did say most people travelled afar.


Yep, which is why I said:




Actually, they pretty much were for the most part. The number of "outsiders" to those places was extremely small. Yes, they were there certainly, but probably well less than 10% of the over all population.

Okay, so even about 10% is quite a lot, but also that would only be broadly true if you ignore the people coming and leaving on boats, and other non-permanent travelers.

I'm sorry that bothers you, but for myself (and others I would imagine) having a fantasy world grounded in a more "realistic" pseudo-medieval world actually makes the "fantasy" of the world more interesting because it is directly comparable and we can really feel the differences magic and such makes.

Sure, but what I’m talking about goes way past realism into forced mundanity.

Sure, that all bothers me to when I see it. RAW speed for 5E is fine for "walking" or even jogging, but their desire to keep it simple prevented such options as running (x3 speed) and sprinting (x4 speed) and even using a Strength (Athletics) check to temporary increase speed beyond that.


Again, what I said.

Your preference is for more races, mine is for more cultures.

Sure, because I’m dnd, in the vast majority of games and settings (IME), races are a standin for cultural groups.

Star Wars is a game of many "worlds", not just countries. It is more believable for me that in such a game (with space travel) you are likely to have dozens or even hundreds of species that can intermingle. Many D&D worlds IME are more constrained than that IMO and so have fewer races, because given "human-nature" anyway we tend not to tolerate many rivals.

We do? That doesn’t fit my read of history.

Contrary to the ideas of the previous century, most experts don’t think we exterminated any of the other species of hominid, and extermination of ethno-cultural groups is pretty rare, in spite of how much attention those events get in history books.

Most of history is trade and small skirmishes, not total war or genocides.

We are very, very, good at “tolerating rivals”.

Not to mention that a world having 100 sentient tool using species is…a minuscule number of species filling a given niche, and it’s a broad niche. Humans are much better at sharing geography than lions of wolves, and the world still includes thousands of predator species.

It simply isn’t more realistic to have a few species, it is only a preference. It’s what feels right for you. Any point from Tolkien races only to “every race ever published for D&D” is equally plausible given the basic assumptions of “this is a fantasy world where the biology doesn’t always make sense and there are species that can puke lightning or cast complex spells as part of their physiology”.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I can't even suggest people role play being tired and in need of a warm meal and a hot bath after a long journey without getting shouted down on these boards, so...

Yeah that’s such a weird sticking point, to me. Like…my character is a person traveling in a world. First thing I ask when we get to an inn is if they have baths, and how well kept they are.

As a DM, I’m always describing the food and drink, weather outside and comfort inside, etc.

 

[DEFCON 1]

They essentially are though, but it gets derisively referred to as "humans with funny hats" to basically cast aspersions at others for thinly-veiled bad wrong roleplaying: i.e., "you're not roleplaying 1000 year old elves right!"

So you don't like the fact that some of us are pointing out that these "aliens" (which is essentially what non-humans in D&D are) are played like humans at the table. Fair enough. Nothing I can help you with there.

 

[Incenjucar]

There are different focuses one can have in the game, and they're all valid as long as everyone is having fun. I'm just wondering if the actual concern is "players don't roleplay much at all" rather than anything specific to roleplaying race.

 

[Aldarc]

So you don't like the fact that some of us are pointing out that these "aliens" (which is essentially what non-humans in D&D are) are played like humans at the table. Fair enough. Nothing I can help you with there.

I don't think that they can be played as anything other than humans. It's Thomas Nagel's "What is it like to be bat?" essay but for made-up fantasy races. Fundamentally whether it's aliens in Star Wars or Star Trek, aliens are meant to reveal something about human nature, albeit in a different guise, and we are humans biologically who only know how to think, act, and be humans.

 

[Minigiant]

There are different focuses one can have in the game, and they're all valid as long as everyone is having fun. I'm just wondering if the actual concern is "players don't roleplay much at all" rather than anything specific to roleplaying race.

It's difficulty.

If I the player roleplay my taxabi not as a "furry human with some cat traits" but as a "feline with humaniod limbs and the culture one might imagine a race of felines might create", I'm heavily suggesting that the DMM does as well.

You have to go really human or really alien. The middle requires a lorebook to sort out what they do like humans and what they do like aliens.

That's a lot of work. So a worldbuilder has to be invested in every single race when they due a world with tons of races AND go for the middle.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Can you handle roleplaying Klassico?

Klassico's wood elves are very elfy and love the woods.... biologically.

Yep. Love them tree-huggers!

But that isn’t true. In medieval Britain, for instance, traveling a few months from home was something at least a plurality of people did at least once in their life.

Doing it "once in their life" means MOST of the time, they are "home", not in some exotic location or something.

Okay, so even about 10% is quite a lot, but also that would only be broadly true if you ignore the people coming and leaving on boats, and other non-permanent travelers.

No, it really isn't quite a lot. And I was including travelers as well as more permanent residents.

Sure, but what I’m talking about goes way past realism into forced mundanity.

shrug, I can't say, those are your experiences. I enjoy "mundane" in my fantasy, because it makes the fantasy more fantastic for me.

Sure, because I’m dnd, in the vast majority of games and settings (IME), races are a standin for cultural groups.

IMO that is poor (and or just lazy) world-building then, to my tastes anyway.

We do? That doesn’t fit my read of history.

Then I suggest you re-read history? Human, by-and-large, historically are not very tolerant. For thousands of years humans have been distrusting of outsiders and things they don't understand or feel threatened by. Killing predators to make area cultivated, driving out others for resources, and so on... History is riddled with it.

We are very, very, good at “tolerating rivals”.

Agree to disagree then, because frankly historically we haven't been. You say small skirmishes, but to those peoples/tribes, etc. it is war. It might not be on the grand scale we think of, but it is there.

Anyway, I don't really want to get more into this as it is skirting the lines of forum policy.

It simply isn’t more realistic to have a few species, it is only a preference.

Don't confuse species with playable PC races. My game world have thousands of "species" for PCs to contend with or whatever, simply the vast majority of them are not sentient playable PC races.