Would you be willing to play in a campaign setting with none of the core races?

[Wombat]

I played in a "No Humans" Tekumel campaign once. It was fun, but there was always the problem of essentially falling into "human mode" -- most non-human races are best defined when there are humans around to bounce off of.

A friend of mine picked up a confusing, but intriguing looking, game called Mechanical Dreams, a game with no humans. We are trying to figure out if 1) we want to run a campaign of if and 2) what it will be like with absolutely no humans, much less any other traditional fantasy races. Most of the races in the game are very interesting, from what I have read so far, but I'm not sure how they will play out yet.

I believe it is quite possible to have such a game, and even for the game to be fun, but there is always the danger of making the world so odd that no one but the GM really understands it...

 

[Ottergame]

I am currently playing in a game that uses anthromorphic animal races, with no humans or other demihuman races anywhere in sight. It's actually preety good.

I play a gay weasel bard.

 

[kenjib]

If there were some very strong reason in the hook of the campaign that made it work well and completely required it (like a campaign setting that's in the atmosphere of a gas giant planet where everything flies, for example), then I might be willing to try it. If it was like Diamond Throne, however, where the only reason they are there is just for the sake of being different, I would rather not bother.

 

[Aeolius]

So long as the replacement races were locathah, merfolk, tritons, etc etc

I once ran a campaign where the PCs began as larvae. I am working on a campaign concept where the PCs will begin as forest animals. The core races are highly overrated.

 

[johnsemlak]

I just started a campaign and strongly considered only allowing humans, though ended up accepting standard core races. A human only campaign would work easily, IMO, as it has a lot of fantasy literature to draw from.

Not allowing humans or other standard races requires a much bigger change. First, there's so well-known literatury tradition to draw from (that I know of or people I game with know of).

Still, I think a lot of experienced gamers would enjoy the change of pace.

 

[Corinth]

Throwing out everything but humans is a viable option; throwing out humans as well is not because one of the purported non-human races will end up morphing into the "human" race anyway- you might as well keep 'em.

 

[Buttercup]

Ditching elves, dwarves and halflings? Fantastic. Ditching humans? Less enthusiastic (but I'm still open-minded).

This pretty much sums up my feelings. But I insist the gnomes go as well.

 

[Ottergame]

I'm rather surprised more people aren't willing to try things totally new.

 

[Corinth]

I'm rather surprised more people aren't willing to try things totally new.

I'm not; most gamers aren't willing to try things that are totally new- or even appear that way, but aren't.

 

[Liolel]

What really makes or breaks it is if the new races mindsets can be grasped. With Tolkien races those that read the books can grasp the races mindsets easily. Whether the Tolkien races are a good thing is another story (even though I like them). It's hard to play in a world with no races whose mindset you grasp.

So I'll give it a try but I'd be very speculate.