Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mhacdebhandia" data-source="post: 3512718" data-attributes="member: 18832">I tend to think that nonhuman PC races distract from what's good about settings where there are identifiable analogues of historical human cultures.I don't think it's a good thing when, for instance, we have "European" humans and "European" dwarves over here, both straight out of the Player's Handbook, but over there we have "Asian" humans and "Asian" dwarves. There are two ways you can go: either both races are identical, or the Asian dwarves are korobokuru (or whatever).In the first instance, it would be the rare setting designer or GM who could invent an Asian dwarf culture that was both as distinct from the Asian human culture as the European dwarves were from the European humans, and recognisably similar to that Asian human culture in contrast to the European humans and dwarves.In the second instance, why on Earth are the Asian dwarves so mechanically different from their European counterparts, when the Asian and European humans are identical? Of course, there can be answers to these questions, but the bigger question (in my opinion) is - why bother?Worst of all, as far as I'm concerned, is when humans are European but elves are Asian, orcs are African, dwarves are Arabian . . . eugh.I prefer fantasy settings where either the PCs are human, and various human cultures may be based in whole or in part on historical human cultures, or the PCs are of multiple races, and their various cultures are more original in nature.For one thing, this means that I don't assume any cultures in a multiple-race setting are going to look like 12th-century Europe. I'm freaking sick of it anyway.</blockquote>

Verification