What is your least favorite/most hated PC race?

What is your least favorite/most hated PC race?

  • Dwarves

    Votes: 4 2.9%
  • Elves

    Votes: 33 23.7%
  • Gnomes

    Votes: 46 33.1%
  • Half-Elves

    Votes: 19 13.7%
  • Half-Orcs

    Votes: 30 21.6%
  • Halfllings

    Votes: 25 18.0%
  • Humans

    Votes: 3 2.2%
  • The ever popular, Other

    Votes: 13 9.4%


log in or register to remove this ad

I'll have to go with elves, and other.

Elves because they're impossible for most people I've seen to roleplay, and because the players and DM's who do decide to run them play them as spoiled cheerleaders with kewl powerz, and for such a superior race they're almost hindered by having to be a starting CR race.

And other... well, I've never seen anyone who took a nonstandard race look at it as anything than "look what they get" (must love Complete Humanoids and all those other 2e memories). And while I suppose it's possible, I think that the good players will stick to more normal fare, especially at first, and range out only as the campaign specifically dictates.

But of course, I named myself after my habit of playing humans exclusively, even in 2e, so I'm probably biased.
 

Are you people crazy?
How can you not like gnomes!?
What other race has such tasty insides?
Not to mention they plump when you cook 'em.
Not like those crappy half-orcs, it's not even real orc, only a blend, not to mention the fact you have to go thru all that trouble grindin'em into little bits before they cook evenly, even then they're all gritty tasting, I find the best thing to do is soak the meat in a marinade overnight.
So anyway, I got's to vote the poor stupid good fer nuthin' Half-orc bastards off the island.
 

I personally don't have a least favorite PC race. I think they are all fine. I think the races are as good as the DM and the Players make them.

If the DM and the Players are unimaginative, then there are going to be poor role-playing performances and/or interpretations of the races and their cultures.

I also don't dislike a race because most peole are unable to rise their roleplaying to meet the standard the race requires. I think its nice to have that high challenge presented for those (although rare) who are able to meet it. Not that I think anyone is suggesting on lowering the standard by taking away hard to play races, but its nice that there's a place for those who are really into taking on higher challenges. Even though it sounds like most hardly ever rise to that level of play.


I've played in all kinds of groups. I've done the munchkin style games and I've done the high roleplaying games too and everything in between. Yah, its frustrating when someone picks a race for its game mechanic bonuses and then roleplays it in a cliche. But its truly a lot of fun when you get some great roleplayers in on a game that bring both imaginative takes on old archetypes as well as also doing a great job of representing their race. Hard balance to meet. But its possible. Not all players are powergaming munchkins, sometimes you get great roleplayers involved. I remember one time having a friend who was an actor in on my game. He really loved to practice his acting skills in the roleplaying. And because he raised the bar on roleplaying , all the other players tripled their effort on their roleplaying too. People really got into making their characters three dimensional. It was great. In that game, one of the player's gnome was really great.

So, yes....a gnome can be cool. Even if a game company has written bad or silly race in a Player's Handbook or whatever, a good gaming group can make it cool.
 

Fenros said:

To this, I give my common Munchkin rallying cry; "Can I play a dragon? Please? It'd be a great role-playing stretch for me".

Munchkins are quick to trumpet role-playing to cover their habits. And while I'm not going to go as far as to say that real role-players only stick to first level commoners, in my experience they're more likely to pick a "basic" character than a far out one. And leaving the gates wide open just allows the bad players to give the hard concepts a bad name.

I have a feeling the thread will degenerate after I say this, but my rule on far out races is very much the same as that for playing someone with a different gender, sexual preference, or sometimes even culture than the player. (Before you flame me on that last one, I know someone who after the Ninja's handbook came out, had every character as "you know those asian guys who look white" and acted like any other munchkin out there. I'm far more lenient when culture/ethnicity doesn't bring any kewl p0werz into the mix.)

My rule is pretty simple. Prove to me that you can get into the head of a "normal" PHB character well, and I'll be receptive. Play all your fighter types as "grr me bash" and all your wizards as a pipe, floppy hat, and fireballs, and I won't give you the chance to reduce anyone else into a bad accent, unrealistic genetalia, rampant greed, and/or insulting stereotypes. Deal?

(And I hate to say this, but my default expectation for incoming players is munchkin. I'll just say that I have my reasons.)
 


drnuncheon said:

Oh, and because they're short, players think they have to act like annoying little kids.


Agreed there. I like halflings, but the one halfling player in my campaign does this little squeaky-voiced 12 year old thing. Maddening. I've though of forcing her to watch FOTR oh, say, a thousand times before I let her play again. Just so she can see how halfling could work.

Cullain
 

Remove ads

Top