Humans are a must?

[Abe.ebA]

The problem with non-human intelligent species is that we don't know any.

There are basically two options:
1) All of the things that we equate with being human that aren't purely based on our biology are simply precursors and/or side-effects of developing the capability for sentience or,
2) Intelligence can develop entirely independently of things we consider integral to it like emotions, morality, empathy, curiosity, self-control, etc.

If it's option 1 then any non-human species is going to operate along paths which are at least recognizable to humanity. Their goals and motivations may be completely different or based on a wildly divergent biology, culture, or environment but given knowledge of those things we'll be able to grasp what a given non-human intelligence is doing and why. If their biology etc. are similar we'll probably even be able to liken them to specific humans, albeit possibly ones with mental disorders.

If it's option 2 then we may as well not even bother. It's been shown numerous times in scientific studies that humans are, by and large, incapable of imagining anything that's outside of their experience. Even if trying to imagine something truly alien we just take aspects of things we find distasteful or strange and slap them together (take Cthulhu: he's supposed to be unimaginably alien but is basically a scaly, winged man with a squid for a head). Confronted by something truly outside our range of experience we humans have great difficulty dealing with it. I seriously doubt that we would even be able to communicate with a species that shared no points of similarity with us much less ever understand their thought process.

Dwarves, elves, halflings, draconians, saurians, anthropomorphicised objects and animals, and every other non-human race that appears in 99% of games, movies, and novels are just humans with a difference. You take a few aspects that you want to highlight and slap them onto a human template to make a character. People can identify with it because it is, fundamentally, human. Any alien species which is presented as intelligent but understandable is always going to be basically human because we're the only intelligent species we know anything about.

The only exceptions to the basically-human alien syndrome I can think of are a few of the Lovecraft species and a couple of exampels from sci-fi (like the badguys from Ender's Game). They stayed alien because their authors explicitly state, "We can't understand them. No matter how we try, we can't really even communicate meaningfully with them because they're just too alien."

So yeah, you can have a no-human setting in an RPG campaign. Elves, dwarves, etc. are all just slightly weird humans anyway and they're all being played by real humans who are going to give them human characteristics and personalities anyway. But like someone else said, a setting with nothing but truly alien intelligences would make for incomprehensible viewing.

 

[Aus_Snow]

With a bit of applied imagination (such as that used by fantasy, and - more often perhaps - sci-fi writers) any and all barriers to well. . . imagining and expressing the workings of other types of consciousness can (and do) disappear.

I'm not sure this point can really be argued much beyond that, though perhaps it could be. Suffice to say, I and others have without doubt experienced non-human mindsets during particular RPG campaigns. It's not just possible, it happens. So, whether or not even attempting to do this *appeals* to certain individuals might be rather more the issue at hand.

And if it doesn't appeal, then well and fine. But that by itself does not negate the reality of others.

 

[Andor]

To create a truly inhuman being, one has to use concepts that no human being would truly understand. Once you start understanding this being then it's no longer truly alien. It becomes an exaggerated portrayal of humanity, or a human being dressed up in a funy costume. Basically, you can't portray a truly alien character and yet allow your readers/viewers/players to identify with it. By definition, it's impossible.

The alien in Enemy Mine looked funny, had a strange culture and method of reproduction, but it was still capable of basic human emotions. It found a lot of the same things funny, it got offended, it worshipped higher beings, and it was capable of love. Part of the whole plot in the movie is that slowly the two beings who thought they were impossibly different started to find things they had in common and started to realize they weren't really that different after all. I think part of the whole idea of the movie is that "aliens are really just people who gargle when they talk and asexually reproduce." I mean, you could substitute a Nazi for the alien and an American WWII fighter pilot for the human and have the pretty much the same exact movie.

Imagine a movie where the only characters were Cthulu and a living glob of axle grease. Neither of these characters act as you'd expect a human to act in similar circumstances. It's utterly impossible to understand their motives because they are so truly alien. Would that be a good movie? No, because there's no creature that you can identify with. It would be like watching abstract art, where during the whole two hours you see colors swirling around the screen in random patterns. It might be fascinating, but you probably wouldn't want to see it more than once and sitting through it for more than a half-hour would probably drive you a little closer to Insanityville. Now, if we take the living glob of axle grease and give him a human voice over and play him like a very angry person who has a fetish for toenails then it becomes a little easier to watch. Perhaps not much, but still easier.

Humans, or at least a human-like figure, are essential for a good setting. They don't have to truly be humans, but they have to be there. The Lord of the Rings is a good example. We're actually supposed to identify with the hobbits. Though there are humans in the setting, they play the role of "strong, war-like beings who know what they're doing", while the hobbits are the powerless beings that end up finding that there's no limit to their own potential.

You have to have something in the story to identify with otherwise you'll get bored and/or confused.

Just because something isn't human doesn't mean it has to be so utterly alien that we have nothing in common. You can't RP something you don't comprehend. There is no animal on earth with which we don't share basic experiences like hunger or sex. I'm perfectly capable of understanding the emotions experienced by my cats and dogs and vice versa. The comprehension isn't perfect but it doesn't have to be, common ground exists. It something was so alien that we had no common experiences then meaningful interaction would be impossible. Read 'Solaris' by Stanislaw Lem.

In an RPG you as a human will have some traits in common with any playable creature in the game. You share biology and senses with dwarves, elves, halflings, centaurs, and half-celestial octopi. Outsiders who lack biological processes will still share some commonality in the form of language, thought, goals, etc.

So I disagree that a game needs to feature humans to be playable. World Tree for example has no humans. You do need to be able to sympathize with your characters, but that's simply a facet of the nature of the game. Trying to RP something you can't understand is as meanigful as trying to roll pi.

 

[painandgreed]

I've run an all elven campaign before with success. Not sure how an all Hiver or Centaur Traveller game would go over though.

 

[Glyfair]

This post is prompted by a comment a friend once made that I've never fully believed. He said that a setting (whether for rpgs, a movie or a novel) MUST have humans present.

I would agree if it's changed slightly. If the statement was "a setting MUST have a race with a human mindset present" then it would be in much firmer ground.

Clearly, you don't need that for any setting. I create a setting where the races all have alien mindsets (such as Gloranthan dwarves, or Arduin's phraints). However, I don't think that setting will be successful.

 

[Ranger REG]

What do others think? Would you run or play in a setting with no humans? Would you find a setting that didn't include a human or human-equivalent mental perspective difficult to relate to? If so, why? Why would one require the human baseline to begin their understanding from?

Bah. No matter what nonhuman race you take, you always play that race as if it is human, anyway, because you're hardwired to be human.

For example, you play a long-lived elf, but you're more concerned about reaching level 20 before puberty.

BS or not, you're stuck being human.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Bah. No matter what nonhuman race you take, you always play that race as if it is human, anyway, because you're hardwired to be human.

For example, you play a long-lived elf, but you're more concerned about reaching level 20 before puberty.

BS or not, you're stuck being human.

Quoted for truth.

 

[pogre]

Like many others here, I agree with the basic argument your friend has made. We are stuck with the human mindset.

 

[caudor]

Quoted for truth.

But....I'm not human; I'm an undead clown.

 

[Nellisir]

Just about everything we view gets anthropomorphized (sp). Meerkat Manor is popular because the meerkats are treated and explained as tiny, fuzzy, tailed people.

It's how it goes.

CJ Cherryh has written a number of sci-fi series dealing with alien races, the most prominent being the Chanur saga and the current Foreigner saga. She puts alot of emphasis on aliens as different, with different values and different ways of understanding. The atevi, the alien race from the Foreigner books, are tall, humanoid aliens -- apparently sufficiently like us to have sexual relations. But, unlike humans, they don't feel love, friendship, or affection. Instead, they feel manchi, a sort of biologically-enforced loyalty to their superior. Manchi can compel the atevi to do things a human would find distasteful or unthinkable, since the question becomes not what the atevi wants to do, but where his or her manchi lies, and what the person who holds their manchi desires. Untangling manchi is a major part of atevi politics.

If that's difficult to comprehend, then that's the point. It's not a human way of thinking.