D&D General I finally like non-Tolkien species for PCs

[GobHag]

I may be a boring GM when doing fantasy campaigns, but I prefer my players characters to be human, or at most one of the Tolkien races. The reason for this is simply that I have yet to meet a player who can play an ”exotic race” character as anything other than a human with bad makeup and some cultural quirks. I like to think that I can contribute to make my PCs feel special and unique without them having to be a ghost fairie etc.

I realize that I’m old and that the current fantasy paradigm is way more expansive when it comes to race/speices/heritage. I’m not into it.

In my opinion that's perfectly fine and why you should let them be non-tolkiens, if they can't make playing a living tree/crowman/etc/etc differnet than human than just treat them as one with feathers/branches/etc/etc.

 

[Bohandas]

Oh you mean like elves?

And doubly so for drow

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I may be a boring GM when doing fantasy campaigns, but I prefer my players characters to be human, or at most one of the Tolkien races. The reason for this is simply that I have yet to meet a player who can play an ”exotic race” character as anything other than a human with bad makeup and some cultural quirks. I like to think that I can contribute to make my PCs feel special and unique without them having to be a ghost fairie etc.

I realize that I’m old and that the current fantasy paradigm is way more expansive when it comes to race/speices/heritage. I’m not into it.

I'm pretty sure a thousand year old elf is a lot more alien to a human than a goliath is, yet old school players never object when players completely ignore the impact of having been born long before the humans' kingdom was founded.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm pretty sure a thousand year old elf is a lot more alien to a human than a goliath is, yet old school players never object when players completely ignore the impact of having been born long before the humans' kingdom was founded.

Actually, I wouldn't limit that to "old school players". IME, most players of any providence ignore such things in play.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'm pretty sure a thousand year old elf is a lot more alien to a human than a goliath is, yet old school players never object when players completely ignore the impact of having been born long before the humans' kingdom was founded.

Though player elves rarely are that old. Super long lived species are weird in D&D though. You might have live couple of centuries, and still be level one, then gain a bunch of levels in a very short period of time. What have you been doing with you life until that point?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Though player elves rarely are that old. Super long lived species are weird in D&D though. You might have live couple of centuries, and still be level one, then gain a bunch of levels in a very short period of time. What have you been doing with you life until that point?

There is an established idea that adventuring strongly "fast-tracks" the leveling process over anything else a person might do with their time, but I see what you mean.

 

[Scott Christian]

Actually, I wouldn't limit that to "old school players". IME, most players of any providence ignore such things in play.

I would add to this. The players that I have seen do a really good job at playing say, an elf or dwarf, are ones that have been playing them for years and years. Not all, but definitely some players thrive in the deep-dive. They played Galena the dwarf, and through a year of game play, learned about Galena. Then they played Garnet, Galena's cousin. So all the familial characteristics became even more honed. Then they played Grog, Garnet and Galena's son, etc. And with each iteration, they became (in my opinion) a better dwarf. The social quirks, the cultural thought at the forefront of decisions, the descriptions of themselves during gameplay, etc. In the end, it became more than a stocky human with a beard. But it took that deep-dive to do it.

 

[TwoSix]

Actually, I wouldn't limit that to "old school players". IME, most players of any providence ignore such things in play.

Which is why I generally favor not worrying about it and just let people play what they want.

If Carl Casual wants to play a dragonborn because scales are cool and a breath weapon sounds fire, let him.

If Diana Deep-Dive wants to play a tiefling because they want to explore a personal story about struggling with feeling predestined for damnation, even better.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I'm pretty sure a thousand year old elf is a lot more alien to a human than a goliath is, yet old school players never object when players completely ignore the impact of having been born long before the humans' kingdom was founded.

Very much agreed.

Dragonborn are, of course, one of the most obviously non-human races in the game, after all, they've got scales instead of bare skin and ropy scales instead of hair etc. But the only major differences between them and humans (per the 4e lore, as 5e has...kind of avoided much strong lore about non-Tolkien-eque races) are that they eat a larger share of protein (so they need different food sources); they mature earlier than humans, so they can have slightly faster generation turnover (assuming sufficient food); and because they lay eggs, women can be warriors just as much as men, especially when paired with wet-nursing. In terms of sociology, economics, and warfare, dragonborn are basically identical to humans.

A single elf being able to collect wealth for ten bloody times the amount of time a human could? An enormous economic difference. Sociologically, can you imagine how different politics would be if we had to deal, not with the politics of people born in 1940, but people born in 1340? These are people who might be annoyed that the government stopped using French...because they remember that the Parliament of England used French after 1066's invasion by William the Conqueror. They lived through the Wars of the Roses. For them, Shakespeare was a provocative newcomer that these damned kids have normalized. For them, the greatest conflict would probably be Christendom vs Islam, for goodness' sake! Their grandparents would've been Roman citizens!

We've handwaved the incredible alienness of elves (and to a lesser extent dwarves; remember that since they live 200-300 years, for them, the US Civil War is still in living memory) simply because we think we know them well due to Tolkien. Dragonborn and tieflings, in looking more different and not having the titanic juggernaut of Tolkien behind them, can easily feel more alien despite practically being much more similar to regular ol' humans.

Or, to put it differently: We became so obsessed with the rubber foreheads, we overlooked how alien "actually 700 years old" would be.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I may be a boring GM when doing fantasy campaigns, but I prefer my players characters to be human, or at most one of the Tolkien races. The reason for this is simply that I have yet to meet a player who can play an ”exotic race” character as anything other than a human with bad makeup and some cultural quirks. I like to think that I can contribute to make my PCs feel special and unique without them having to be a ghost fairie etc.

I realize that I’m old and that the current fantasy paradigm is way more expansive when it comes to race/speices/heritage. I’m not into it.

I think some of it is more that many are ill-defined, we know elves and dwarves very well.

other parts is that some are fundamentally human offshoots and thus are mostly us in the ways that matter like tiefling