Klaus
First Post
I avoid having all of them show up in the same region, like every city need a token dragonborn or something. If none of my PCs are tieflings, they could go the entire campaign without crossing paths with one.
How important are fantasy races to you?
- Thread starter invokethehojo
- Start date
pawsplay
Hero
It depends. I like them in my genre fantasy, although I play games with different situations.
Your example is bizarre to me, though... if it weren't for the classic races, I wouldn't even consider Shadowrun, Shadowrun. There's something about its peculier mix of cyberpunk, urban fantasy, and high fantasy that demands there be ork drug dealers. Without elves and dwarves and so forth, I'm not sure what would be left.
I'm not a fan of most fantasy races. I'm especially not a fan of Tolkienspawn, which consists mostly of elves and dwarves, plus the occasional orc or hobbit-by-another-name. Most of the fantasy genre has got rid of Tolkienspawn--it's quite rare to see them in a novel or an original game nowadays--but D&D and its offspring, including computer games built on D&D-inspired IPs *cough*WorldOfWarcraft*cough*, are stuck with them.
I don't object to having nonhuman races per se, but I want them to be there because they really fit with the world and its theme, not plunked in because "It's fantasy, it's got to have elves and dwarves." No, it really, really doesn't. Conan doesn't suffer for not having a dwarf sidekick. Eddard Stark does not walk with the elves*. Very few of the big-name fantasy authors before or since Tolkien have used nonhuman protagonists.
While I love "The Lord of the Rings," its dead hand lies heavy upon D&D, blighting setting after setting with the same tired old collection of races. I yearn to see settings in which neither elf nor dwarf has trod.
[size=-2]*His wife and children do sometimes run up against a cunning dwarf... but an entirely human one.[/size]
I don't object to having nonhuman races per se, but I want them to be there because they really fit with the world and its theme, not plunked in because "It's fantasy, it's got to have elves and dwarves." No, it really, really doesn't. Conan doesn't suffer for not having a dwarf sidekick. Eddard Stark does not walk with the elves*. Very few of the big-name fantasy authors before or since Tolkien have used nonhuman protagonists.
While I love "The Lord of the Rings," its dead hand lies heavy upon D&D, blighting setting after setting with the same tired old collection of races. I yearn to see settings in which neither elf nor dwarf has trod.
[size=-2]*His wife and children do sometimes run up against a cunning dwarf... but an entirely human one.[/size]
invokethehojo
First Post
That is so weird, everyone I have ever played with thought that fantasy races in shadowrun felt very artificial and the explanation behind them was absolute crap and therefore never included them into the game. I guess I just assumed most players felt that way (except the ones who only play elves or those who wanted to power game an orc for his strength bonus).
pawsplay
Hero
Well, except for Terry Brooks, Michael Moorcock, Poul Anderson, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Richard and Wendy Pini, William King, Margaret Weis, Tracy Hickman, China Mieville, Neil Gaman, Rock Riordan, Piers Anthony, Robert Asprin, and a few others.
Well, except for Terry Brooks, Michael Moorcock, Poul Anderson, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Richard and Wendy Pini, William King, Margaret Weis, Tracy Hickman, China Mieville, Neil Gaman, Rock Riordan, Piers Anthony, Robert Asprin, and a few others.
All right, I'll walk back the nonhuman protagonists and replace it with "elves and dwarves."
pawsplay
Hero
Well, that knocks out Riordan, Asprin, and Mievelle, anyway.
cignus_pfaccari
First Post
That's the first I've ever heard that. It's pretty much half the appeal; mages and orcs with shotguns!
And besides, you don't powergame the orc for the Strength, you do it for the Body and no penalty to Willpower. They're actually very cost-efficient.
Brad
Last edited:
KidSnide
Adventurer
I answered "it depends on the setting", but I think that's not quite right. Fantasy races are an integral part of the setting.
The Tolkien races, their history and various homelands are at the core of Tolkein's world, and of the Tolkein-esque derivatives. Similarly, Draconians, Gully Dwarves, Kender and Minotaurs are at the center of what makes Dragonlance what it is. Thri-kreen, muls and half-giants are central to Dark Sun. The various races of China Mielville's worlds are a big part of what makes his vision distinctive fantasy.
Humans are part of most setting because they are accessible and (as humans) it's easy to imagine them in a wide variety of roles. In contrast, fantasy races are written around a narrower concept so it's easier for players and GMs to understand the essence of a race's nature.
There's nothing wrong with using elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs, gnolls etc... -- it's a perfectly valid, if heavily used, fantasy trope. However, I think the editors of D&D (over multiple editions) and other fantasy authors have ill-served the hobby by promoting Tolkein/D&D-esque settings that are built around the standard races. I certainly don't want to see that trope go away forever, but I think the hobby would be stronger if there were more examples of campaigns and campaign settings in which different sets of races were dominant. I'm not a particular fan of Tieflings and Dragonborns, but I think a 4e-esque world would be a lot more interesting if they dominated and elves, dwarves and halflings weren't to be seen.
-KS
Edit - and Shadowrun drives me nuts. If magic comes back into the world, why are those particular D&D-esque races the ones that manifest?!? It always struck me as a spectacular failure of imagination.
The Tolkien races, their history and various homelands are at the core of Tolkein's world, and of the Tolkein-esque derivatives. Similarly, Draconians, Gully Dwarves, Kender and Minotaurs are at the center of what makes Dragonlance what it is. Thri-kreen, muls and half-giants are central to Dark Sun. The various races of China Mielville's worlds are a big part of what makes his vision distinctive fantasy.
Humans are part of most setting because they are accessible and (as humans) it's easy to imagine them in a wide variety of roles. In contrast, fantasy races are written around a narrower concept so it's easier for players and GMs to understand the essence of a race's nature.
There's nothing wrong with using elves, dwarves, halflings, orcs, gnolls etc... -- it's a perfectly valid, if heavily used, fantasy trope. However, I think the editors of D&D (over multiple editions) and other fantasy authors have ill-served the hobby by promoting Tolkein/D&D-esque settings that are built around the standard races. I certainly don't want to see that trope go away forever, but I think the hobby would be stronger if there were more examples of campaigns and campaign settings in which different sets of races were dominant. I'm not a particular fan of Tieflings and Dragonborns, but I think a 4e-esque world would be a lot more interesting if they dominated and elves, dwarves and halflings weren't to be seen.
-KS
Edit - and Shadowrun drives me nuts. If magic comes back into the world, why are those particular D&D-esque races the ones that manifest?!? It always struck me as a spectacular failure of imagination.
Similar Threads
