Worlds of Design: Same Humanoids, Different Forehead

Fantasy role-playing games, like the Star Trek television series, can sometimes suffer from a lack of differentiation between humanoid species with only slight tweaks to their appearance.

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

From Go to Risk​

Fantasy role-playing games can suffer from a plague of the notion that everyone must be the same. Humanoid species—dwarves, elves, halflings, etc.—are often just funny-looking humans. Alignment becomes a convenience, not a governor of behavior.

Consider games that have no differentiation. All pieces in the game Go are the same and can do the same thing. That’s true in Checkers as well until a piece is Crowned. And all the pieces in Risk are armies (excepting the cards). Yet Go and Checkers are completely abstract games; and Risk is about as abstract as you can find in something that is usually called a war game. One defining feature of abstract games is that they have no story (though they do have a narrative whenever they’re played). They are an opposite of role-playing games, which have a story whether it’s written by the GM or the players (or both).

Differences become more and more important as we move down the spectrum from grand strategic to tactical games and as we move to broader models. Role-playing games like Dungeons & Dragons are not only very tactical games in combat (“skirmish games”), they’re usually meant to model a life we think could exist, though it does not, just as most novels model something we think could happen, in certain circumstances (the setting). As such RPGs encompass far more than an abstract or grand strategic game ever could.

The same applies to RPG species. The appeal of RPGs is that species are not the same, dragons are not like goblins, who are not like hellhounds or even hobgoblins, one species of aliens is not like another and not like humans, and so on. Having species that are different, even if they are humanoid, is a shorthand means of giving players an easy means of creating a character.

Same Actors, Different Makeup​

When it comes to humanoids, species differentiation doesn’t necessarily mean statistical bonuses. From a game design perspective, designers generally want sufficient differentiation to give players an opportunity to implement their strategies. (I’m not talking about parallel competitions, where players follow several “paths to victory” determined by the designer; players are then implementing the designer’s strategies, not their own: puzzles for practical purposes.) At the same time games should be as simple as possible, whereas puzzle-games may be more complex to make the puzzle harder to solve.

If statistics alone don’t differentiate species, then the onus shifts to the game master to make them culturally more nuanced. This goes beyond characters to include non-player characters. Monsters, for example, are more interesting when they’re not close copies of one another. Keep in mind, an objective for a game designer is to surprise the players. Greater differentiation helps do that, conformity does not.

On the other hand, one way to achieve simplicity is to limit differentiation. Every difference can be an exception to other rules, and exceptions are the antithesis of simplicity.

Differentiation Through Alignment​

Alignment-tendencies are another means of differentiating species. Alignment is a way to reflect religion without specifying real-world gods, but even more it's a way to steer people away from the default of "Chaotic Neutral jerk who can do whatever he/she/it wants.” (See "Chaotic Neutral is the Worst") Removing alignment tendencies removes a useful GM tool, and a way of quickly differentiating one character from another.

Keep in mind, any game is an artificial collection of constraints intended to provide challenges for player(s). Alignment is a useful constraint, and a simple one. On the other hand, as tabletop games move towards more a story-oriented and player focus, species constraints like attribute modifiers and alignment may feel restrictive.

Removing these built-in designs changes the game so that the shorthand of a particularly species is much more nuanced … but that means the game master will need to do more work to ensure elves aren’t just humans with pointy ears.

Your Turn: How do you differentiate fantasy species in your game?

 

[Hussar]

Interesting topic. I think its most interesting that people actively think making the various options 'more human' is a good thing. Seems completely contrary any idea to even having them, beyond 'I want to look different.'

Yes it would take more effort to role play them, but to me that's the appeal or even purpose of having PC options beyond Human.

If its all just a different appearance, as noted a few times, most don't even look at the fact these races are long lived. They just play them as Human.

The main issue IMO is that the game has no means to reward play. Why would you expect someone playing a game to do something that has zero impact on the game?

Sure I can role play the shoe in Monopoly but that doesn’t get me out of jail or help me in any way.

If you want players to do something you have to have the game actually acknowledge that it’s been done.

Good grief we don’t even have separate backgrounds for different pc races. The biggest element in the game outside of your class doesn’t even connect in any way to the race you choose. Because, apparently, children of different races all grow up the same.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Okay, let us focus on one species in particular elves what is fundamentally essential to elven identity what is it other than ears that say to us that we are dealing with an elf?

 

[Professor Murder]

For me, the issue is that typically we get humans having a multitude of cultures, while other PC races are monocultures, or a handful of cultures differentiated by subraces. Some settings take the step of outlining human cultures as giving set bonuses or clear cultural cues but its not the norm. Further complicating issues is how to enable players to select a fantasy people they wish to play and embody their own cultural identity to their liking. I think having input from your player audience can be a big part of making the races of a setting come alive. My best suggestion is that racial monocultures should be the norm only in those species that are not going to be player characters, and that said species should originate from a fixed geography or have some other logical justification for why there is only one normative culture for them. A good example of this can be Mind Flayers. No one is playing one, and their alien biology can help explain their not being all sorts of different Mind Flayer cultures. Do you have to do this? No. But do spare a moment to think about how much work coming up with multiple cultural narratives for ever sentient species in your setting will be. It's my experience that as a GM, I try to only deep develop those aspects of a setting that I will expect or encourage the players to explore.

 

[Oofta]

Okay, let us focus on one species in particular elves what is fundamentally essential to elven identity what is it other than ears that say to us that we are dealing with an elf?

That's what I was trying to get at with my entry. I don't have a problem with starting with the entry in the PHB and existing tropes and lore. Then I have to think about how to implement them in my campaign world, how they relate to the world at large, why they think and act like they do.

While there is no elven monoculture, I'm simply not creative enough to come up with a dozen different "cultures" for a dozen different races. If I tried they'd be a grey mish-mash of concepts. So yes, I lean into the tropes at least superficially but then try to put my own spin on it. There will be individuals with their own points of view but if you don't know what the baseline is, how can you have someone that sticks out?

So for example, you have different general tropes. Elves are supposed to be nature loving yet create beautiful architecture and craft wondrous weapons. That requires cities and a decent level of technology. On the other hand they live in tree houses and never settle down. They're xenophobic yet there's an elf setting up shop to sell magic goods in every other city and many groups have at least 1 elf in the party. If you decide to lean into the CG alignment tendency, that to me indicates general compassion and acceptance of differences but they're aloof. Supposedly chaotic yet have kings and queens.

So breaking that down ...

Nature loving architects and crafters of wondrous weapons that live in trees: this is part of why I separate high and wood elves. High elves are more "civilized" crafters and artisans. When you think Rivendell's sweeping architecture, that's a high elf enclave. Wood elves don't care much for permanent settlements but often set up the tree villages to minimize impact on the land. Depending on the region they may instead be nomadic so as to not stress the environment.

Beyond an inherent love of nature, because they live centuries they see the impact of what they do on the lands around them. First and foremost they think of long term sustainability.

Xenophobes that yet are everywhere: wood elves are far less likely to live in cities in my campaign world, tending to actively reject it. High elves are more accepting, but will still likely want to live with other like-minded communities and try to bring nature into the city. Again, because they have a long perspective they have a lot of time to ensure their neighborhood matches their preferences.

Interacting and working with the other races is one of their ways to subtly influence the larger society. Younger elves are encouraged to go into the world to understand their perspectives.

Aloof: this one is pretty simple. While they may interact more when young, as they age they lose more and more friends to the ravages of time.

Chaotic with kings and queens: any functioning society needs some form of organized decision making. Exactly how leaders are selected will vary, but in my campaigns elves care little about title or wealth and luxury. Different roles provide different experiences and boredom along with lack of variation is anathema to elves. Sure it may be fun to be queen for a century or so, but eventually the burdens of leadership get old. Perhaps instead of having all the trappings of royalty and the intrigue that ultimately goes along with it a simple life with simple pleasures would be interesting.

Implementation of the base will be different for different areas, but the base motivations will still be there. Most differences will be largely cosmetic. Let's face it, most of us are not creative geniuses, not novelists, not game designers. That's okay. I try to understand different perspectives from what we are given and embrace it while still putting my own spin on it. Maybe it's boring, but I also find always trying to subvert the tropes every time kind of boring. Subverting the trope is only interesting to me if it's used sparingly, if overused it becomes the new trope.

 

[Hussar]

Okay, let us focus on one species in particular elves what is fundamentally essential to elven identity what is it other than ears that say to us that we are dealing with an elf?

I'd say it's the longevity really. That elf is a couple of hundred years older than everyone else in the party. Now, this isn't reflected mechanically (which is always been the problem) but, for trying to make an elf stand out, it would have to be the big one. The local Baron McEvilton is being nasty to his people? Why would an elf care? Wait ten or fifteen years, Baron McEvilton is dead and the problem sorts itself out.

For the PC, the fact that, unless the elf dies in combat, all of your companions will die long, long before you will would have to have an impact. I mentioned Doctor Who earlier and really, that's not a bad place to start. Elves as Time Lords. Largely uninterested in any event that doesn't have an impact that lasts centuries. Imagine what the art of a people who will actually see stone statues crumble and rot during their lifetime. What kind of art would that sort of people create?

Never minding the past lives stuff which would make them seriously alien. Not only does that elf remember meeting your great, great grandfather, but, they also can remember when your race was first created by the gods.

Elves are seriously weird.

 

[Micah Sweet]

History and culture, as many here already wrote. Plus relationships between the people: the elves once enslaved the orcs, so whenever our half-orc hero is near an elf or even an elven settlement, he totally freaks out, in anger or maybe in fear.

Social structure and its influence on the individual, as Mind of tempest mentioned it, are also very interesting ways to differentiate. Especially when our half-orc hero from above comes home to his fellow greenskins and brings his non-orcish friends…

In the end a DM can give only directions, the players have to make it happen. Like that mistrusting little half-elf-half-goblin in my group who finally found friendship in his co-adventurerers…

But those are setting elements. How do you differentiate them in the core rules?

 

[Hand of Evil]

But WE ALWAYS give the females breast! S

Star Trek explained it away with the galaxy being seeded and that is a good way to explain how you could have half-bloods. Most games have a 'those that came first' and using the seeded backstory has worked for a lot of game. You then just have to use culture for each race, looking at that as a starting point you just build social taboos and habits into the races. This can be done with given the race traits at their creation. Such as a race not having a humor or being too polite or being rude. Also, try to define what a race views as EVIL.

Because of trade most races will equalize in tech after a bit, so think about building in physicals limitations. Such as dwarves muscles and bones make them unable to use a bow or a orc unable to use throwing weapons correctly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But WE ALWAYS give the females breast! S

Star Trek explained it away with the galaxy being seeded and that is a good way to explain how you could have half-bloods. Most games have a 'those that came first' and using the seeded backstory has worked for a lot of game. You then just have to use culture for each race, looking at that as a starting point you just build social taboos and habits into the races. This can be done with given the race traits at their creation. Such as a race not having a humor or being too polite or being rude. Also, try to define what a race views as EVIL.

Because of trade most races will equalize in tech after a bit, so think about building in physicals limitations. Such as dwarves muscles and bones make them unable to use a bow or a orc unable to use throwing weapons correctly.

Sounds Interesting, but those kind of mechanical changes would sadly never fly for modern audiences, because they restrict character options (now I can't play my dwarf archer, etc). People want everyone to be equally good at everything now.

 

[Remathilis]

Okay, let us focus on one species in particular elves what is fundamentally essential to elven identity what is it other than ears that say to us that we are dealing with an elf?

Nothing.

Two years ago, I'd have given you a very different answer. The dexterity. The love of magic. The desire to create art and beauty. The keen senses. The mastery of bows and swords. The unique perspective measuring a lifetime in centuries provides. The lack of dreams. The grace, the beauty, the arrogance.

Now, none of that. An elf means you wear Spock ear tips when you cosplay. I don't even know what criteria you could use to define an elf that isn't problematic. Tall or short, thin or thick, bearded or hairless. Elf means whatever you want it to mean.

 

[Laurefindel]

I differentiate races (and human cultures) by embracing stereotypes. I know this is not a popular methods, but it helps painting a clear and common picture for fantasy races. It makes humanoid races pretty monolithic, but I see this as a good thing.

Players can then decide if they want to play along or against the stereotype, but they know how others will likely react.

For the records, a stereotype doesn’t need to be a popular one, like dwarves have a Scottish accent for example. They can be made up and change from setting to setting, but they remain preconceived ideas until proven wrong.

i never cared much about alignment and good and evil on a societal scale, but I do play national and cultural enmity. The orcs and dwarves are a war not because one is good and the other is evil, but because the are caught up in an ancestral conflict that neither is willing to relinquish.

the world is not a perfect or even a nice place, but I do expect the characters to make it better.