Who prefers a human-centric campaign?

[jbear]

Humans are probably my favorite 4e race. But I like my world to be more cosmopolitan (imagine Luke Skywalker walking into the bar with Obi Wan...). I want the world to feel strange, colourful and totally unlike the world we live in. I also like my players to have the freedom to play whatever race they want to. Years ago I even invented a race for my mother-in-law to play as she wanted to be a tiny river fairie... and she was great. A tiny river fairy sorceress with a powerful Ki shout that left all the big nasties trembling with fear! Good times. And that's what it's all about.

 

[I'm A Banana]

What I want to see is how many want the Human-centric, Humans in Front and Center with demi-humans a small fringe minority and not all that important.

Where's the option for "I want that to be one of the options?"

Or "sometimes?"

I mean, in my mind, there's no reason I can't prefer one today, and another tomorrow, and a third Sunday. I'm not really very dogmatic about my campaign settings.

 

[Rechan]

Where's the option for "I want that to be one of the options?"

Not included. I'm not interested in how many might sometimes be interested in the above on alternate Tuesdays. If you prefer it over all others, then yes. Otherwise, no. If you don't like the yes/no dichotomy, don't vote. It's rather straight forward.

 

[Ariosto]

Where's the option for "I want that to be one of the options?"

Or "sometimes?"

Well, I get what Rechan is after: to tally votes for preferring a human-centric campaign, just as indicated in the thread title.

However, it looks as if he's not using "humanocentric" as in the Gygaxian DMG (p. 21) -- which would be closer to the roughly balanced (humans just another minority type) approach that seems to have become pretty usual. The old class and level limits encouraged greater representation of humans. The most powerful wizards and warlords, those of demigod status, tended by far to be human. Humans, even as just one of seven or more options, might commonly make up the majority even of a lower-level adventuring company (but YMMV).

However, that was still a long way from "demi-humans a small fringe minority and not all that important". What's proposed here appears to be the polar opposite of Rechan's preference for marginalized or nonexistent humans.

If this were a bulletin board focused on Boot Hill or Top Secret, then I imagine the preference might be popular.

It seems to me unlikely, though, at a Dungeons & Dragons oriented site.

I enjoy Bunnies & Burrows, but I would not say that I prefer it -- and the same holds for En Garde.

 

[Ariosto]

So much for my thought that it would be unlikely!

I just checked, and more than half the votes were "Yes" in response to, "Do you prefer or like a setting where humans are almost the only playable PC race?"

Maybe the "or like" confused things, eh?

After all, a lot of people like Call of Cthulhu, or at least one other game that's not about playing nonhuman beings! Even super-powered mutants probably get lumped as human in terms of "playable PC race" in a game about the long-underwear set.

 

[Vegepygmy]

And by "Human-centric setting" where there are "almost the only playable PC race", I mean a game/campaign/whatever where playing a non-human is going to be seen as odd and very out of place, and where human-filled parties are preferred.

I generally prefer humanocentric campaigns, but not that humanocentric. (I voted no.)

 

[Somebloke]

I prefer human-centric campaigns, although this is just part of my low-magic is mysterious, atmospheric magic mania that tends to pervade all of my campaigns. I've played nonhumans in other settings but always felt that the cantina was a little...off, somehow.

When I do run human-only campaigns I always make sure to present mechanical options (races as backgrounds, godtouched traits, etc) to provide choice.

 

[karlindel]

I voted "yes", inasmuch as I do like human-centric settings, even if I do not prefer them.

I think that the question could benefit from specifying the genre, as the answer may vary significantly depending on genre. In fantasy and science fiction, non-human races are more common than in other genres. Superhero games tend to be human-centric by default. Modern day and Horror games are also often human-centric.

 

[Piratecat]

Do I like it? sure. But I don't prefer it.

Fajitas has had great success allowing players to use the mechanics of any race of making them appear human. Thus, the dwarven stats are for shorter, stockier, hard to move humans. I suspect he aligns them with different countries in his campaign world as well.

I'm not a huge fan of doing this in my own game; I really like multiple races, even though they tend to exist in a world with great swathes controlled by humans.

 

[Odhanan]

Yes. I prefer old-school, faux-medieval, humano-centric milieux.