Humancentric World

[Desdichado]

Oh, well sure. A lot of published settings are essentially humanocentric, although not human exclusive, including the Iron Kingdoms, Kingdoms of Kalamar, the Wheel of Time d20 game, Rokugan (oriental adventures)...

 

[Gellion]

I have heard a lot about those setting, im just not in a situation where i could check them out.

 

[Geoffrey]

For years now I have ran D&D campaigns where all the PCs must be human. I almost always run my games in a fantasy version of the real world. In other words, there's France, England, China, etc., but magic and monsters are sprinkled in.

What do I do with dwarves, elves, etc? They are rare beings who live in the Nordic countries in isolated enclaves far from human habitations. They have very little contact with mankind, and don't want any. They are much too alien to be considered as possible PC races.

I've never had any problems with all-human PCs. In fact, I think it makes for a more serious game.

 

[diaglo]

what's wrong with Greyhawk?

just pick an area to base your campaign where other races don't mingle or exist in the open.

it makes the PCs have to be human that way. or maybe like hong with a touch of half-breed. but only b/c of something happening to their parent.

 

[Gothmog]

The campaign I have been running for the last 12 years has only ever had human PCs, and its still going strong! I do have dwarves, elves, orcs, etc- but they are supernatural or fey folk, and not that much like D&D stereotypes- more like the myths they were based on in the real world.

However, I will warn of one thing. If you use only humans, do something to make each culture distinct and different. For example, IMC I have 17 different cultures detailed, each with their own abilities, stat modifiers, feats, and magical traditions specific to their culture. A humanocentric world does actually require a bit more work and thought on the DM's part than a standard world, but in the end it is worth it.

 

[Desdichado]

I say pick up the Oriental Adventures book, or the Wheel of Time RPG for a good example of humanocentric settings done right. You don't have ability adjustments, or radically different starting options (which defeats the purpose of them being a single race, IMO) but you do have options that give you a feeling of creating real flavor and differences. Background feats, or even something like the Occupations from d20 Modern modified to represent cultural differences at character creation all would be great mechanics in a humanocentric campaign, I think.

 

[Erekose]

Our campaign just has human PCs. In essence, other cultures kind of fill in for the different races.

i.e. rather than just having a vanilla flavour human and colourful alternative races we have a variety of colourful human cultures.

 

[kenjib]

I say pick up the Oriental Adventures book, or the Wheel of Time RPG for a good example of humanocentric settings done right. You don't have ability adjustments, or radically different starting options (which defeats the purpose of them being a single race, IMO) but you do have options that give you a feeling of creating real flavor and differences. Background feats, or even something like the Occupations from d20 Modern modified to represent cultural differences at character creation all would be great mechanics in a humanocentric campaign, I think.

I agree with the occupations. That's about what I've done with my human-only world. Basically, each culture gets a couple of class skills. However, if the class they start with already has them as class skills, they get a +1 competence bonus in that skill instead. You could also narrow down the favored classes for each culture to compensate for this extra perk.

I think making them a full blown pseudo-race with stat modifiers is a little bit contentious and doesn't really represent the realities of humans very well.

The primary benefit of choosing a culture is character-based and story-based. The traits defined above help define character. As DM, you should also make sure that culture counts in the story. Depending on where they are and who they are talking to, people react differently and apply stereotypes to various cultures. This can have a significant impact on play.

Example: Seafaring gypsy-like culture has bluff, appraise, and profession (sailor). For each of these skills, if they are not class skills at 1st level they become class skills, if they already are then the player gets a permanent +1 competence bonus. Most people will not trust this character, and assume that the character is a thief, swindler, or worse. However, other people of the same culture will instantly accept this person almost as if part of the family.

 

[F5]

Here's something to keep in mind if you're running a humans ONLY campaign (As in, no orcs, goblins or etc):

Your players will know that humans can be good or humans can be bad, but are not always, irredeemably bad or unassailably good. You can't decide it's OK to break into a house, kill a bunch of humans, and take their stuff because they're "evil creatures".

Personally I like this about humanocentric games. But, it will probably add some moral weight to the game, that might not be there otherwise. Whether that's a good or bad thing is up to you and your players.

 

[Lalato]

I had recently been thinking of making an Orc-centric world. The other races would be represented... and in fact all of the other races would have evolved from orcish ancestors... either with divine or magical assistance. Anyway... it's something that has been rolling around in my head for a while.

--sam