Do you want to play a non-PHB character?

[Kahuna Burger]

I voted for "play a non standard every character". Simply put, I have a lot of character ideas floating around, and there are enough of the "weird race" ones that if I have an opportunity to use those for a while, I can get by purely on those without ever having to stretch for a character idea. (unless of course it was a meat grinder campaign, in which case I would play the same human fighter over and over again named "bob" with the first letter cycling through the alphebet. Once I got to "kob" and realized it sounded the same as "cob" I would quit the campaign. )

Non standard doesn't have to mean ecl of course... and I'd ask for 3rd party player races as well.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Voadam]

I'm in one right now and I'm playing a legacy human character who converted from 2e and then from 3e to 3.5.

However, Pedro Mondragon, a kobold rogue based on an Inigo Montoya fencer concept has a lot of appeal. So does an AU giant warrior type with three levels of giant, but that's going past the 3 core books. I've never had the desire to play a half-orc, but a full orc might be fun. Most high ECL characters are rather fragile for their ECL, but there are plenty that would be fun for a while (the weaker lycanthropes come to mind).

 

[diaglo]

i'd try it for a one-shot.

but i'm game for trying anything once. twice if i like it.

more if it is OD&D

 

[Kesh]

I want to play a gnoll at least once.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Subraces are in the DMG and MM, and I like the extra versitility there. I'd also consider playing an orc, hobgoblin (LA +1), goblin, aasimar/tiefling (LA +1), or even stranger creatures from time to time (bugbear, ogre, troll, etc.).

Normally, I use subraces I designed in preference to the MM subraces, but that's not relevant to the poll.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I do this all the time-- but, now that playing a normal Human does not suck, I find myself doing so quite often.

I've had a lot of fun with non-standard races, especially if the DM plays things to the hilt with my problems in town-- forcing me to earn the acceptance that my normal companions get automatically.

 

[D+1]

Voted for "Would play one at least once". It would have been "MIGHT play one at some time" but I just so seldom seek to run PC's outside of the normal race/class combinations that when informed that the campaign SPECIFICALLY allowed them I'd be sure to run one at least once.

 

[maddman75]

My campaigns are pretty human-centric. Playing an elf of dwarf is something unusual in most areas. Something like a minotaur is going to be killed on sight. I would say 'minotaur or drow' but I've eliminated drow completely.

As far as if I were a player, I'd be in the miffed category. It would bother me to have to try to role-play a serious character with a half-troll ogre or whatever tagging along. Now if that race were part of the society we were adventuring in I'd have no problem.

 

[Trickstergod]

I put I might play a non-standard race, but the truth is, I'd probably just stick to the standard Player's Handbook races. I'm a human kind of guy - and have been since 2nd edition, before they were the best thing since sliced bread.

In general, even if I have all the options in the world, I prefer sticking to something that could reasonably pass for human. Aasimar, tieflings, and various templates that don't drastically alter the appearance of the base creature are fine by me (half-celestials, vampires). I've also the occasional love of gnolls that crops up. But truth be told, I'm not even all that fond of half-orcs.

It really all depends on the type of campaign, though. I'd still likely stick to a semi-human humanoid, but sometimes aasimar are more appropriate than elves, so I might go with something like that. Depends.

 

[Nightfall]

What? No Assathi, Slitheren or even Sutak?!