The Crazy Character RPG Equation: Which Side of the Screen?

[fba827]

From a player perspective, I've seen fellow gamers on either side:
* some concepts just work better as the ordinary man thrust into extraordinary situations
* others seem to click better as the unique individual (one way to do that is by race) is is handling extraordinary situations above and beyond the common man by virtue of being extraordinary himself

Either works, but it actually works much better if all PCs fit into the same mentality (i.e. all common men to start with, or all freaks) - just makes for easier group focus/mentality and could make for an easier starting/meeting scenario.


As a DM, I have to admit that the 'freak' PCs do make things a little more difficult for me (though, admiedtly, I am probably not the most creative)
* they introduce this element where social encounters should by all rights be reacting to the freak show that is the party...and while it's easy to draw out once in a while, i'd get tired of having the social encounters of every place they visit start with "what in the heavens are you?"
* it can sometimes be hard to weave the uniqueness into the narrative, depending on what that unqieness is. Is this "the tattooed child of destiny who is said to cause X to happen?" great PC concept... now to get it to work in the campaign setting and yet not overshadow other plots or steal an unproportionate amount of focus away from other PCs and their concepts too.

 

[Dausuul]

As a DM, I am unwilling to run a kitchen-sink world; I like focus and theme, and restricting the list of races available is part of that. Kitchen-sink fantasy bores me, and if I'm bored, the campaign isn't going to be fun for anybody.

D&D has inculcated the kitchen-sink mentality from the start, though. Look at 2E. You had an unbelievable wealth of settings--literally dozens of them, spread over many distinct worlds. But go where you would, there you would find elves, dwarves, halflings, and probably gnomes too. It was a rare setting that omitted even one of these races, and I'm not aware of any that got rid of them all. So a lot of people got the idea that a setting has to have all the "standard races" available to play.

As time went on, people wanted to branch out some, try some new races. Nothing wrong with that, nor with WotC catering to them. The problem was, they stuck with the kitchen-sink approach, and the dishes just kept piling up. From a business standpoint, it makes sense; you want all your products to be compatible with each other. But it did mean an accumulation of wahoo.

(As regards making nonhumans rare, I think 3E did the best job of this. Humans are the go-to race in 3E. You can build pretty much any character concept with a human and make it effective. Nonhumans are much more niche. If you like having the occasional elf or dwarf, but prefer a majority human party, it's a good way to go. These days, however, I find it simpler just to ban outright the races I don't want to see.)

 

[Victim]

It's all about deviation from the mean. Creatures that are mostly human or highly familiar are less distracting than ones that aren't... unless you've built that mojo into the campaign. Then it may work really well.

Plus, it gets harder to link commonalities between characters the more they are outliers. The more motley the crew, the harder you have to work bring them together and keep them together.
Today 03:20 PM

What mean?

For instance, in terms of mentality, a weird looking creature with roughly human lifespan and drives seems closer to us than a pretty elf who lives for a 1000 years and doesn't approve of technology or agriculture.

Saying that LotR races are normal, while other races are not is basically arbitrary. Some other fantasy doesn't even have non humans. Others make animal people more standard instead the LotR staples. Your familiar isn't necessarily anyone else's.

PCs, almost by definition, are already outliers. Normal people tend not to kill monsters for their treasure.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm not aware of any that got rid of them all

Lankhmar was human only, but that was a limited, licensed setting.

 

[steeldragons]

What mean?

For instance, in terms of mentality, a weird looking creature with roughly human lifespan and drives seems closer to us than a pretty elf who lives for a 1000 years and doesn't approve of technology or agriculture.

Saying that LotR races are normal, while other races are not is basically arbitrary. Some other fantasy doesn't even have non humans. Others make animal people more standard instead the LotR staples. Your familiar isn't necessarily anyone else's.

PCs, almost by definition, are already outliers. Normal people tend not to kill monsters for their treasure.

Victim, I think the fact that Tolkien created the "fantasy races" of elves, dwarves and halflings/hobbits...even "orcs"...really...as far as we know/knew them in early D&D, cannot be argued.

As far as anyone's "familiar" being the same as anyone elses...no, of course that's not possible. But the fantasy genre in terms of fantasy role-playing games DOES have a starting point and a history.

Before the brilliance that is the LotR, fantasy literature had no specific idea of these peoples as a culture or their specific appearance....Yes, yes, dwarves existed in Norse mythology...Elves existed (in multiple forms) in Celtic/Gaelic/Britanic...but it seems to be an inarguable fact that the "Tolkien" races are the races of, at least, the original (or Gygaxian, if you like) D&D fantasy genre.

If you play in some other fantasy game that is outside of D&D, more power to ya. And you very well may be correct. But I hazard to propose that no FRPG player is not familiar with the Tolkien-based classic races.

If you have "animal" characters as opposed to elves/dwarves/gnomes/halflings...I truly suspect that they probably are broken into a Tolkienesque racial mindframe...probably without your notice. i.e. Elves=Anthropomorphic forest-dwelling Deer, Dwavres=Anthropomorphic rock-digging Badgers, Gnomes=Anthropomophic warren-building Rabbits, Hobbits/Halflings=Anthropomorphic happy-countryfolk...I dunno...Squirrels? Mice?

The races of the fantasy genre were, in essence, created by J.R.R. Other races introduced to be "different"...are just faded or shaded copies of the originals.

And I, personally, as a FRPG fan, player and game master, am fine with that.

--Steel Dragons

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you have "animal" characters as opposed to elves/dwarves/gnomes/halflings...I truly suspect that they probably are broken into a Tolkienesque racial mindframe...probably without your notice. i.e. Elves=Anthropomorphic forest-dwelling Deer, Dwavres=Anthropomorphic rock-digging Badgers, Gnomes=Anthropomophic warren-building Rabbits, Hobbits/Halflings=Anthropomorphic happy-countryfolk...I dunno...Squirrels? Mice?

In all fairness, when you're talking about anthropomorphs, their "roles" are usually defined by their base creature's roles in nature. That they may resemble Tolkien's creations would be an artifact of coincidence or of said creatures' roles in inspiring the legends from which Tolkien drew his inspirations.

Badgers and their relatives are stocky and feisty burrowers...so its natural for us to think of them as being somewhat dwarflike.

OTOH, elf-like anthros have been created from deer, as you suggest, but also from wolves, birds and so forth.

 

[steeldragons]

In all fairness, when you're talking about anthropomorphs, their "roles" are usually defined by their base creature's roles in nature. That they may resemble Tolkien's creations would be an artifact of coincidence or of said creatures' roles in inspiring the legends from which Tolkien drew his inspirations.

Badgers and their relatives are stocky and feisty burrowers...so its natural for us to think of them as being somewhat dwarflike.

OTOH, elf-like anthros have been created from deer, as you suggest, but also from wolves, birds and so forth.

Ummm. Right. Danny...yes...But is it really an "artifact of coincidence" or is it that Tolkien came up with this stuff FIRST and the systems/imaginations that utilize them are actually, and truly, based off of his original premise?

As for the "Wolves" basis...one cannot say that Wendy Pini didn't have/know D&D or, at least, Tolkien, in her back pocket and those didn't influence her conception of "Elves" for the Elfquest saga. (Which I LOVE, btw, and hold near and dear to my heart. BRILLIANT piece of literature and artistry.)

Just sayin'.

--SD

 

[pawsplay]

Really, if you think about it, Bilbo Baggins and all the hobbits in LOTR are weird, gonzo character concepts in an otherwise straight swords-and-sorcery setting. I can hear the GM now: "You want to play a fat, three foot tall tobacco farmer? Sure you don't want to play a Gondorian warrior or something?" And Gandalf... he posed as some sort of loremaster and magician, but in actuality was one of a handful of angelic superheroes active in the world. And elves and dwarves in the same party?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But is it really an "artifact of coincidence" or is it that Tolkien came up with this stuff FIRST and the systems/imaginations that utilize them are actually, and truly, based off of his original premise?

Lets see...pre-Tolkien dwarves are often associated with mining, the working of metals and generally being short of stature and temper. Badgers are associated with digging, and are relatively small creatures with a very territorial attitude and a willingness to stand their ground against creatures many times their size.

It makes sense that Anthro Badgers might strongly resemble Tolkien's dwarves, so yes, I'll stand by my "artifact of coincidence".

Other writers have made the connection as well. The Redwall series features a host of warrior badgers.

Even Trufflehunter, C.S. Lewis' anthro bagder who is more of a scholar has a tough streak and a spine of steel.

As for the "Wolves" basis...one cannot say that Wendy Pini didn't have/know D&D or, at least, Tolkien, in her back pocket and those didn't influence her conception of "Elves" for the Elfquest saga. (Which I LOVE, btw, and hold near and dear to my heart. BRILLIANT piece of literature and artistry.)

Actually, while the Pinis may have been aware of JRRT's work, I'd say that the Elves of Elfquest were decidedly different from his- the ancestors of the Wolfriders and other tribes:

1. Were aliens
2. All had telepathy or the potential for it
3. Were telekinetics
4. Could control their own shapes and metabolisms, and many could do likewise to other beings.

And so forth.

And the connection to wolves is not unique to the Pinis, either. Writers like Charles De Lint and others have made that connection, especially for those who are less...human friendly.

 

[steeldragons]

Lets see...pre-Tolkien dwarves are often associated with mining, the working of metals and generally being short of stature and temper. Badgers are associated with digging, and are relatively small creatures with a very territorial attitude and a willingness to stand their ground against creatures many times their size.

It makes sense that Anthro Badgers might strongly resemble Tolkien's dwarves, so yes, I'll stand by my "artifact of coincidence".

Even Trufflehunter, C.S. Lewis' anthro bagder who is more of a scholar has a tough streak and a spine of steel.

Actually, while the Pinis may have been aware of JRRT's work, I'd say that the Elves of Elfquest were decidedly different from his- the ancestors of the Wolfriders and other tribes:

1. Were aliens
2. All had telepathy or the potential for it
3. Were telekinetics
4. Could control their own shapes and metabolisms, and many could do likewise to other beings.

And so forth.

And the connection to wolves is not unique to the Pinis, either. Writers like Charles De Lint and others have made that connection, especially for those who are less...human friendly.

Can't say I'm familiar with the writings or comics of Mr. de Lint (really? That's really his name?) But regardless!

I stand corrected...Though, for the life of me, I can't recall what it was we were actually arguing over. But fine...you're right.

Elves and dwarves (and other fantasy races) are completely original or "artifacts of coincidence" constructs in whatever system/world/wherever you want to put them



--SD