No Demi-Humans in D&D?

[@jeddak]

A sense of wonder is really important to my gaming. This is why I like human-centric, low (or nonexistent) magic settings.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@Pharto_Stinkus]

I agree 100% with the "monsters are monsters" statement. Monster's aren't just "humans that look different" they are MONSTERS. Orcs act like orcs, goblins act like goblins... etc. Because that's how they ARE. There are no "nice" orcs that just want to be your friend. Just like there are no wolves that don't want to howl and hunt deer. I could rant about this all day, and I have before, so I'll cut it short before it gets out of hand. I ran a 3.5 game many years ago where the whole party was dwarfs. In that world, the dwarfs were very isolated and xenophobic, but for "reasons", this group had to leave their mountain stronghold and venture out into the world. So the whole game was about them encountering elves, humans, etc. for the first time, and how those species were all different than how the dwarfs had been raised to believe, etc. It was a fun game, lasted about 3 months. but when it was done, we went back to playing a "regular" game. The idea of playing a non-human centric game didn't grab anyone so much that they fought to keep doing it. Regarding the proliferation of non-humans in modern D&D: I started playing D&D (and other Tabletop games) back in 83 or so. Back then I had a friend who liked to play dwarves (and they were always named Thoren it seemed). But other than him, most of the players that I met - up until the mid-90's at least - played humans, with the VERY occasional exception. I've never thought about why that was before. But in retrospect, I think it had to do with what popular fantasy was at the time. Most of the heroes the early players of D&D grew up with were human (with a few exceptions, mostly in cartoon form), with Conan of course being the 800lb Gorilla. I mean, in the fantasy space (besides Conan) we had Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, Bink and all the other humans from Xanth, Han and Luke, Thundar, He-Man, Jon Carter, The kids from the Narnia books, Atreyu, Jack (Tom Cruise from Legend), Krull, Madmartigan, King Arthur and all the Knights in their many incarnations, Larn and Darkwolf (Fire and Ice), not to mention that all the heroes from the Dragonslayer, Princess Bride, and Beastmaster movies were human. I could go on. Obviously there were exceptions. Elric wasn't really human if my memory serves, and there was the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings which of course had some very prominent and famous non-human heroes in them, but back then I would much rather have played Aragorn than Frodo. Fast forward to today, and I think it's fair to say that the opposite is true. Many, if not most heroes today are NOT human. At least it seems that way to me. And of course there's the huge surge in popularity in anime and manga which is rife with non-human, anthropomorphic animal people. So, that's what players these days want to play, because that's what heroes ARE, in their experience. It makes sense. /shrug.

[@BanditsKeep]

Agreed, we like to play our heroes

[@jonwooldridge3766]

I agree with the "human w/ pointy ears." It is very disappointing that so many people play elves as such. I do prefer human-centric games.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure.

[@Arnsteel634]

I do. My players don’t. And what’s the point on forcing them to play something they don’t want to play. They are my friends I Iike hanging with them.

[@Joe-dy7ln]

@@Arnsteel634 Counter-point what's the point of playing something YOU don't want to play? GM's are players too and often put in more time, money and work into the game that any other player. Not saying to be a tyrant but GM's matter and invest a lot more than players and should not feel bad setting boundaries if they are going to run the game.

[@Marshcreekmini]

Before people pile on and say "you play make believe wrong", Your points are valid, and I think those of us who are adding some grey to their wizard's beards kind of feel generally the same. Professor Dungeon Master's video about Tasha's stirred the pot, but his point, like yours (and mine) is totally valid. If everyone can be anything, it gets boring really fast, and you get this grey mud of Characters, that all look like the NPC meme. It might be memorable for the player, but everybody else is just "yeah yeah, you're a water spirit or whatever, and he's a half demon bard with 47 spells and green skin, moving on..." For inexperienced players, it's good to have tropey characters, because they'll understand it. Thief, Fighter, Mage, Cleric. Elf, Dwarf, Halfling. But hey, if the younger crowd wants to play a Tabaxi Necromancer Thief Paladin, if they can figure out how to make it work for everyone playing, more power to em, just not at my table.

[@BanditsKeep]

I mean cats do like to play with dead things so necromancer makes sense 😊

[@edackley8595]

I don't mind elves, dwarves and the like as PC options. The thing people tend to forget is that CONFLICT drives rpg worlds as well as story. The more normalized monsters become, the more tension eases and overall conflict opportunities do as well.

[@BanditsKeep]

Good point

[@matthewkirkhart2401]

I think your “monsters are monsters” thoughts could be a video on its own.

[@BanditsKeep]

That's true!

[@jacobgrimm9475]

I think that is the big thing that so many of the modern players forget. Half-Orcs were introduced as a playable race many years ago. Then full orcs, then goblins, kobolds, ect. And if your fellow player is playing these races or you meet them in town as NPCs, they can't be that bad. But people forget that originally these monstrous demi-humans were all cannibalistic (that is they ate humans and other sentient races). And somewhere along the way, maybe because of Shadowrun and other Urban Fantasy, people starting to think that some of these demi-humans were shorthand for minorities. They are not. Never were. That is why humans are always so versatile in these games. They can't be pigeon holed. Humans are humans. Demi-humans are something else, they are alien, they are other, they are things that don't exist in our world.

[@DanielNortonPhotographer]

@@jacobgrimm9475 I remember playing half Orcs in AD&D I was out of the hobby before you could play goblins etc. pretty sure some players wouldn’t mind playing a race that eats humans 😜 but seriously I would never have that at my table even if we ran a campaign of all “monstrous” type races.

[@nicholascarter9158]

In one edition of Shadowrun, they explained that the species the monster virus turned you into depended on your race before you got infected.

[@SusCalvin]

@@jacobgrimm9475 Shadowrun was rooted out of Earthdawn. There you could play orcs, trolls, little windlings who are three apples high with wings, humans etc. It was a high fantasy setting, magic was everywhere and all classes would routinely use magic-like skills and abilities. Not just the spell-casters. Conflict in Earthdawn was between faiths or nations or tribes, not races. You could be an orc living in the dwarf kingdom of Throal, and when you meet an invading orc from magical-Atlantis you have no special bond with them. It's those slave-raiding twats from that other empire, get 'em with the lightning-cannon! There is no racial gods. There is absolute evil from another dimension. There is no way to ever co-exist with the Horrors, then you get into blood-rivers and body horror. They are clearly weird, like they can barely function in the world without turning it into a weirdo otherworldly hell. I think that continued in Shadowrun. A random bloke in Mexico who turned into a troll or grew up in a troll family in Mexico is not suddenly going to be not mexican. Some places like Japan are still turboracist, imperial Japan puts orcs and koreans and dwarfs in special ghettos. But the conflict is largely between nations, gangs, companies, ideological groups and organizations. An orc working for an Ares Arms security group is going to run out and shoot an orc from a Saeder-Krupp industrial sabotage team.

[@Grimlore82]

Less is more is my philosophy. There is a balance and table buy in is so essential. "Telling a player no." Matthew Colville video. ;-)

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@krystal2423]

On your point of "If I'm going to be 3rd level in a one-shot I'll play an elf" this is exactly why even in my one-shots I have players make their characters with a set limit of XP. That way it gives the game that small bit of extra balance that B/X has.

[@BanditsKeep]

Right, I like that

[@Mannahnin]

I was going to comment on this as well. When I'm running a B/X or OSE one shot, I like giving the PCs 2500 XP to start. That sets everyone at second level except for elves and thieves if I recall correctly.

[@SusCalvin]

I think that is a nice way to show off the different level progression to new players when giving a bunch who wandered in a selection of pregens. You can play this level 3 fighter or thief, or this level 2 magic-user. Or pick between a level 4 fighter and a level 5 thief.

[@brianevans9719]

Back in the day my group played in a campaign without any humans. Humans did not exist in the world. We played elves, dwarves, and halflings. It was a fun and enlightening little campaign. Our DM had enriched cultures for each of the races that we could draw from for inspiration. We learned how to play our characters without any of the stereotypical tropes that are associated with the races. It helped us with our roleplaying immensely and I learned to appreciate the demi-human races and how unique they really are.

[@erikmartin4996]

So what did you learn about Elves dwarves and halflings that you wouldn’t have learned otherwise?

[@brianevans9719]

@@erikmartin4996 ​ @Erik Martin Like I said previously, we learned how to not play them with the stereotypical tropes. They could have more enriching personalities and they didn't all have to have the same typical prejudices. Not all elves are good with archery or connected to nature. Not all dwarves have to live underground, are grouchy drinkers and/or obsessed with craft and gold. Halflings didn't have to be gluttons and most comfortable with the comforts of home and hearth. We learned to expand our minds and imaginations to experiment with the demi-humans and not get bogged down with the same old personalities that so many are familiar or comfortable with. It is a lot easier without the human race being present to accomplish this as the demi-humans are the dominant species in the world.

[@BanditsKeep]

Very cool!

[@erikmartin4996]

@@brianevans9719 I learned all those things with humans in the game when I was a kid. The idea that you have to get rid of humans for you to understand that every individual is unique is racist and ridiculous. For you to say that all dwarves are this and all elves are this is you accepting someone else’s programming.

[@brianevans9719]

@@erikmartin4996 I'm glad you had a more enriching and enlightening gaming experience in your childhood, but everybody has different experiences in life and are exposed to different things that shape them over time. I don't see the logic in your statement that our understanding of demi-humans was racist or ridiculous. That word racist does get thrown around a lot without a clear understanding of the word itself by a lot of people towards other people they know nothing about. We lived in a small town with not many resources or guidance in our game play and our only exposure to other fantasy writings at the time were Tolkien's books (of which I enjoy and have read many times). Those classic troupes were how the races were portrayed back in the 80's in everything we consumed about them later on and due to our age we didn't know there was any other way to play them until this campaign opened our eyes over 30 years ago when we were in middle school. Now from what I am getting from your previous comment is that you really like humans and are somewhat appalled that we removed them from our game. Is that correct? I actually prefer playing fantasy games without humans being present in the game now. It is fantasy after all and every bodies gaming table is different.

[@williamlee7482]

I bought the AD&D's humanoid handbook and used it for an experimental campaign back in 2002 . I switched out the human and demi humans for the humaniod equivalent so orcs took the place of elves and half orcs took the place of half elf , Gnolls to the place of humans , goblins took the place of Gnomes , Kobalds took the place of Halflings and Hobgoblins took the place of Dwarves . I kept the ability scores of the humans and demi humans to use with the corresponding humaniods races and used the humaniods ability bonus to the their ability scores . I worked out pretty good over all . The human and demi humans were the evil ones and the humaniods were basicly the good guys living in villages , towns and cities . I eventually added some more humanoid races like Ogers , Half Ogers and a few other . I had 6 player who joined in my experiment . One player made a Gnoll Paladin , one made. Orc Fighter/Magic-User , one made a Kobald Thief , one made a Hobgoblin Fighter/ Cleric , one made a half Orc cleric and I forgot exactly what race the guy played but he was a Ranger/Druid . My players loved it because it was diffrent from the standard races . I did add a few classes from old dragon magazines to use in the game but I balanced them towards the character base classes . It was a diffrent style of campaign but it did workout in the end and everyone loved it

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice! Did the PCs do the same types of quests as the standard PC races would in your “normal” worlds? Or was the story something different because of this choice of races as the focus?

[@williamlee7482]

@@BanditsKeep Basicly the same but with a humanoid twist to them . I tried to make the adventures have a humanoid feel but they still felt like normal adventures due to the characters being just like normal human and demi humans characters mentally as in how they viewed the world being basicly good .. Of I had made it an evil campaign then the adventures would have been things like raids of villages , bandit type raids or even slaving raids , anything evil adventures do . Even their building had their racial look and feel to them so they didn't just seem like they took over some human city . The world was basicly a reverse of the normal world where all monsters and creatures were reversed of what they were so for instance chromatic dragons were good and metallic dragons were bad .

[@SusCalvin]

Monsters! Monsters! was a Tunnels & Trolls book about playing dungeon-dwellers. You played a sort of reverse campaign where you gathered treasure to add in a pile in a lair and got xp for acting "monstrously". You explored the dungeon parts below your own level and battled competing dungeon factions and adventuring intruders.

[@TheSimpleMan454]

An odd quirk of games I run (especially my most recent) is that every strain of demi-human is a product of their environment, adapted to their surroundings. Everything from how they're able to move, the spells they have access too, etc is geared toward where and how they meet and interact with the setting. A dwarf in the desert becomes like a fish out of water. It's too hot, too dry, too bright, travelling over land takes more time and resources, etc. An elf in a catacomb? Hard to be lithe and nimble when your head keeps hitting the ceiling and you can't see in the dark. And so on...

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@SusCalvin]

One quirk in the webcomic Guilded Age was exiled desert dwarfs. Dwarfs survive harsh climates including desert life better. They dream of the Mountain.

[@SimonAshworthWood]

A kobold, a tiefling and a dragonborn walked into a bar…

[@BanditsKeep]

Good thing they all speak Draconic

[@legofanguyvid]

only the kobold is spared damage

[@DM_Curtis]

Restricting PCs to humans is essentially how I've run for a long time. I only make exceptions for players I know really well (i.e. ones who I know will play demi-human appropriately) and only where it makes sense for the campaign. But, I like the idea of a campaign that starts humanicentric, but as the party explores the world and establishes good relations with other races, those races become available for later PCs. Something similar could be done in a "star trek" type space game where all the races are basically humanoids. Also, one can make distinctions between various cultures of demi-humans. So elves of a certain region may be available to players because they have good relations with mankind, but you can't play "drow" or xenophobic wild elves from the other side of the world. IOW, "domesticated" demi-humans, only.

[@BanditsKeep]

That makes sense, and allows the players to see how the demi-humans in your world generally act so they will not play them in a way that conflicts with the world

[@SusCalvin]

My friends did a bit of both. One of them ran a campaign for the kids where players must find and befriend demihuman settlements in order to be joined by demihumans. You can play an elf from Elftown only once the other characters have reached it. Same with recruiting them as henchmen. Their demihumans were written more openly. They are broad archetypes like "ancient", "undergrounder" or "small folk" where the player and DM define if an ancient means an elf or a red martian. Reskinned humans is an old Trek standby! Or ones where aliens only have a relatively minor quirk to them, but are otherwise human-identical. You had to be a vulcan to be psychic. In Star Wars D6, a rodian has 1D6 higher max strength than a human.

[@austinreed7343]

L&D (Lion and Dragon) is a good example of this in action. EVERYTHING that isn’t a human is effectively a monster.

[@BanditsKeep]

Sounds interesting

[@TKFKU]

Well that's kinda how it would play out in a "real" world. In our own, humans can't even get along well with other humans. So I'd imagine everything not human wouldn't go over that well.

[@austinreed7343]

@@TKFKU Yeah… even some of the regular animals are monsters.

[@CloseingStraw97]

I sorta like it but when the author makes being scottish race as class i'm out.

[@fukcingweeabos3167]

​@@CloseingStraw97what would that be? Fighter/thief hybrid?

[@spartif]

Having Demihumans as PCs gives so much information about the world that I just prefer not to have in my games.

[@BanditsKeep]

Good point

[@ishmiel21]

An Appendix N for you would be super interesting! I'm excited for that.

[@al2642]

I am trying a world where dwarfs and elves are like rare, wise and/or weird hermits that live in isolation and can do nice stuff like bettering armor or giving quests or secrets. Some kind of Tom bombadil XD

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice!

[@florentdemeyere4779]

Dear Bandit, I know you will read this since you seem to read every single comment on your videos. I really really like what you are doing. I'm super new to OSR (planning an OSE sandbox), coming from 3.5 and your videos are super helpful. Not only because you are explaining OSR/B-X concepts which may be new to me, but also because your way of playing is one that I was trying to emulate even in 3.5e and in my personal fantasy writing. This video is yet another example of this. You must get tons of comments like mine, but please, do not stop producing good stuff! When I picked up OSE some weeks ago, I had the feeling that these rules and system were so pure, so balanced that I should not add homebrew to it (stuff I had no problem to do with 3.5) lest I be struck by lightning. You are helping me (and others) understand how old school games are meant to be played and how we can custom our OSR games without fear of breaking the entire thing. Thank you and please go on! QUESTION : which of your "actual plays" would you suggest I watch to get a better sense of how OSE/B-X can or is to be ran? (especially dungeons and explorations). Thanks

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks so much for your kind words. As far as Actual Plays. On this channel the “Winter’s Daughter” series is OSE and I believe a fun ride.

[@ForeverYoungKickboxer]

Have been loving your videos. Started st age 10 with basic and expert. Then AD&d, gamma world, shadow run, for decades. Still play a bi weekly game with most of same table as 90's (3 of the other players being my brothers) and are are currently in Dark Sun where I finally get to play instead of DM. While playing I'm also planning my next campaign and we're going Old School. Back to the Basics. I am really looking forward to it. Your videos are awesome, and you mentioned Prof Dungeon Master, always liked his stuff also! Thank you so much for putting these out!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks for the kind words!

[@michaelwallace6851]

The last fantasy game I ran was human only. Elves, dwarves, etc existed but lived "out there" and were as likely to be lynched if they showed up in a town as anything.

[@BanditsKeep]

Interesting

[@everthingtotal8798]

The "mixed bag of demi humans & million monster types" is only for Wizards of the coast. They have to show you "everything at once" because different DMs buy different merchandise/have different worlds. However, the DMs themselves should be sober and judicious and edit out most of that stuff. Make a world that makes sense together. Edit half the monster types from 'Keep on the borderlands.' Less is more. Less rules, less options, less character types means: More imagination, more possibilities, more depth, more mysterious, more flavor, more realistic, more freedom.

[@BanditsKeep]

Good points!

[@MrReset94]

You're right, less is more and better...so world with no humans and only a couple of monstrous races it is!

[@everthingtotal8798]

@@MrReset94You injected arguments that I did not make. Trying to vilify other people's preferences is ridiculous. If you like thousands of demihumans and monsters as characters in your games, then play that way. There is a million ways to play the game. At the end of the day, how much did you like your own contribution to the game, and how much did others enjoy your company as a playet?

[@SusCalvin]

@@everthingtotal8798 I guess it would be a must if a game is set on a huge crossover hub city like Point Central in Valerian et Laureline, or a place like Sigil where all sorts of dimensional flotsam end up. Star Wars games always take advantage of the huge universe they have expanded on over the years in movies and books. Huge amounts of aliens dot the place. Most of them don't have too far out special rules.

[@everthingtotal8798]

@@SusCalvin An intergalactic hub for the entire universe is an exception to the rule. Clearly. Who is disputing that? But a dungeon packed full of disparate monsters? Any rule (of thumb) can be properly overturned. But as an exception, not the rule.

[@SusCalvin]

Sometimes the race-as-class demihumans show up in a game simply reskinned as humans. One of my friends wanted a setting to have a sort of fighter-wizards wandering around the world. And they just took the race-as-class elf, a more xp-costly magic-user with armour and a better chance to survive a skirmish, replaced a few traits and now we had our pseudo-Elric dudes going around fencing and flinging spells. In EE there are few non-humans in play because the cops bust them. All classes except one are humans, including reskinned race-as-class hobbits (urban explorers) and dwarfs (bodyguards). There is a single class for non-humans (spooks) which gives you inhuman abilities but limit how much you can interact with the surface-city and how the cops will treat you.

[@danfrohlich9387]

we just started a (Basic Fantasy) game riffing on snow white. An elf (soceress) and her dwarf companions...

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome

[@TheArcturusProject]

Excellent! Wonderful explanation of *why* to have human centric. And wonderful meeting players halfway, by making them start as a human and play something else after they’ve encountered it and seen how it actually behaves.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks, it definitely has worked for me, though now always 😂

[@stevekillgore9272]

That is exactly how my campaign is, but a lot of players can't hack it.

[@SusCalvin]

@@BanditsKeep One of my friends uses that method. If the kids' PCs have found the elf town on the map and befriended them, later PCs can be elfs from that place. I guess you could do it with classes too. To play a paladin or a monk, you have to explore and find this monastary and convince the guys inside that you're wholesome and trustworthy fellows.

[@johnmagowan6393]

Oh man I love that ad in Dragon Magazine! I think a couple monster or 'odd' races can give your world its own flavor. Among other things, 5E suffers from the difficulty in curating what you do and don't want to allow in your game.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@falkyrie5228]

I wrote my setting in a way where everything revolves around humans - when they encounter important NPCs in adventures, the NPC will be a human 100% of time. The result? Even though I haven't written a single line about any race other than the humans and even though they won't meet a single important NPC who isn't human, every party I've had until now had only one human in it.

[@BanditsKeep]

So strangers in a strange land? That can also be cool I’d say.

[@hoboogre8023]

I agree about using player input to define the race they want to play. I've run short campaigns and let the players decide what race they wanted, let them totally define the race, and let the Clerics tell me how the church runs and describe their gods. It was fun and showed me that you don't have to have every aspect of your world defined, and the players' help creates some surprising details.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@spikepit1]

Great to hear your story. Similar to mine, DnD class of '81 then back and loving it 2015. I got into wargames and boardgames, in the interim, because they seemed to provide a more straightforward bounded experience. Thanks for sharing.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks for your kind words. I very much enjoy your podcast! I’m just now looking at war games and becoming fascinated with them.

[@spikepit1]

@@BanditsKeep Have you taken a look at the Osprey Wargame series of books. Very reasonably priced and easy to digest. I'd love to hear how you get on with the wargaming, always happy to discuss further.

[@ishmiel21]

It's funny how the balance has shifted the other way. In the game I play the most, Pathfinder 1e, humans are the best race. They get a bonus feat at first level and an extra skill point at every level.

[@BanditsKeep]

Oh, interesting!

[@JS-sy7ym]

Another good video, thanks. I look forward to these videos. Dungeon World talks about how the party should be seen as a microcosm of the setting. If the party contains an elf, then that PC is the definitive elf. In my experience, most people who play non- humans do so for one of two reasons: aesthetics or mechanical advantage. Rarely do the players - at least the ones I’ve encountered - sincerely want to engage with the race’s lore/psyche. Also, I like your observation about how playing monster races humanize them.

[@BanditsKeep]

I have Dungeon World on my shelf, I really need to read it. Seems like a great source of insight.

[@SusCalvin]

One quirk for humans that started in Metamorphosis Alpha (and continued in other post-apocalyptic games) is that the technological systems of the starship Warden are built for humans and humans only. All suits of tech-armour are created for baseline human physiology. An automated medical station has a chance to entirely misdiagnose a non-human. If there are robots with Asimov's laws, these laws do not apply to mutants and weird veggie-people. Drugs for humans have a side effect chance when non-humans use them.

[@BanditsKeep]

Ah yes

[@rpgsandmore7550]

You make a very good point here. I’m all far reskinning’races as different kinds of humans. Especially in Race as Class systems. When I watched the first episode of The Witcher I busted out laughing when I recognized Gerald as a reskinned Elf class from a low magic WhiteBox style game. Made me enjoy the character even more!

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@larsdahl5528]

I divide races up in 3 categories: "Red Zone" / "No go": Elf, Dwarf, Orc, etc. Those races are bad picks; I will normally not allow them. (Unless I have good indication that the player will not play them the way they usually are played.) Problem with these races are they are all played the same way. Some say they are all played as humans are played. - I do not deny that statement, but I do challenge the "human" part of it. I the gaming club there was some consensus to say "orc" instead. - I do get the idea, but... I say this same play style for all these races are: "zombie". Comparison to classic zombie traits: (1) If their environment is quiet, either they stand and do nothing, or they wander around randomly. (2) If there is motion nearby, they wander towards the disturbance. (3) They s-l-o-w-l-y attacks everything that moves. (4) They do not feel a thing, no pain and no remorse. (5) They continue attacking until the environment is again quiet. (6) They do not care if they themselves get destroyed; they just re-spawn another zombie. (7) They drain all brain-activity around them. (8) The zombie disease is infectious, and spread to everyone, except those with enough brain to resist. Ok, I may admit that the loot hoarding is more an orc trait than a zombie trait. "Amber Zone" / "Worth a try": Khajiit, Catfolk, Phurries, etc. A bit unknown here; the good part is you can be quite sure that the player will role play something here. However it is often blurry what "something" is. They have some anthropomorphic idea of a crossbreed between an animal and a human. Though it may be weird, I give them that they actually make an attempt at role play. I see them as having potential, and they may over time become good at role playing "Green Zone" / "Go ahead": Togruta, Ferengi, Minbari, etc. To my experience I can usually trust the players, who can come up with these choices of races, to be able to play them convincing. They have distinct traits separating them from humans, which I trust the player to play out. And with them we are up for good and interesting role play! There are races I am unsure of. Like: Na'vi, Wookiee, Klingon, etc. They worry me a bit, but I guess I will give them the "Go ahead" and see if the player is up to the task.

[@BanditsKeep]

Interesting breakdown. I get the feeling your camping world is quite a diverse menagerie.

[@larsdahl5528]

It is not about mixing races from different settings. It is more about determining how competent a player is, from what races that player prefer. For example in a Session Zero, where the players throw out ideas to what they would like to play. When things get narrowed down to a specific setting, then it will (normally) be races from that setting. Thus groups rarely become a mix of many races. Often people pick "human", so in the end there are not that many non-humans around.

[@WhyYouMadBoi]

Bro your list is just Fantasy races Furries Sci-fi movie races I have zero idea what sort of game you would even be talking about. Like I love me the Star Trek RPG and Star wars Sagas but I wouldn't put the lore/races against both those systems against the forgotten realms for example.

[@davidb4020]

(I'll finish your video later, just a random comment on the subject:) My current OD&D campaign is more than 2 years old, open table/west marches, and humanocentric. I repurposed the races to fit human tribes of my setting (a fantastical Arthurian setting): dwarves are half-giants, elves are "fae knights", halfling are picts, etc. It works well and nobody minded! Next campaign I'm thinking of maybe putting back dwarves, halfling but not elves. I'm too much of a Tolkienist, I want my elves to be NPCs only. I might introduce "half-elf" with being the same class as elves.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool! I’ve have dwarves as “Northmen” In a lamentations of the flame princess game and it worked out well

[@rolanejo8512]

@@BanditsKeep neat. I just finished a campaign set in a Fantasy version of Rome. Romans are human. Britons are halflings, elves are Gauls and they are fighting Germanic Dwarves. It was a blast.

[@BanditsKeep]

@@rolanejo8512 awesome!

[@bearthegenxgm]

I'm literally torn on whether or not I want an all human world. It's something that never used occur to me, but the more and more 5e has become the Cantina from Star Wars, the less interest I have in demi-humans. :shurg: Great video!

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks! if you give it a shot, let me know

[@kaden7443]

Very happy I subbed this channel and then found this video. Cannot agree more Thank you for putting it so well.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You! Welcome

[@spikepit1]

I was actually thinking an all Dwarf OSE game might be fun. Perhaps to they are part of a dungeon maintenance company. No job to small.

[@l.a.wright6912]

dang, I wish I could see that.

[@marcraygun6290]

One of the nice things about stormbringer/elric rpg

[@BanditsKeep]

I’ve heard good things about that game, but haven’t tried it.

[@hobbitonman]

The Colville video was "No" RTG#94. I also love the lion man.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thanks!

[@gommechops]

I think another aspect of the elder races fading away is the mythological point of view of the world becoming less and less magical with time, Man fills in those gaps with time and those two things go hand in hand. The myths of yesterday stay huge but ever more distant, the world tends to be slightly fallen and relics of the past still exist which is what players tend to experience too. I remember my first real introduction to fantasy was reading the hobbit at 11 years of age, even though Bilbo wasn't human he also was very human. he was the naive little person in a bigger, wider world and the magical things and beings he encounters are far more magical because of how normal and simple he is. In one sense he is centre stage and in another he isn't. It is his story but his is only part of a wider story too and that creates so much flavour, pulls the reader in and raises lots of mysterious questions. The elves were so magical and you wanted to know more, but sometimes keeping that bait dangling is the thing that keeps that sense of magic. Once everyone is an elf, it can be cool for certain but you also lose the mystery. I know which I prefer (most of the time). After the Hobbit I read E R Eddison's The Worm Ouroboros and although it was human centric again it was slightly different and very out there in comparison. the humans were larger than life and mythic in proportion. I loved both angles, I definitely prefer to play in the former kind of setup though, with most of the weird and unusual 'outside'.

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@douglasphillips5870]

I like the idea of races as flavor only, no stat block. That way you can tailer your game about being all human where elves are rare mystical people or a more fantastical high fantasy with ogre bartenders. You don't end up with people trying to play a race just to get a fly speed or other bonus.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@graveyardshift2100]

I'm making a setting that replaces the normal d&d tropes, so that there's in world reasons for why a race might be both playable and a monster. But I still have limits. Humans (along with the most human like races) make up one cultural group, the fairy are another (splitting into seelie and unseelie), and the last group is the beasts who were created from dragon blood. Because I'm pulling more from folklore instead of game history, I have a lot more freedom to do whatever I want. I can have the seelie fairy suddenly become the enemy because of some rule that the party unknowingly broke. I can have the beasts reflect lycanthropy and go savage if the see the full moon. There's a lot there for me to make sure the monster races are still monstrous. Although I am also limiting myself to a single kingdom and not a WORLD. It's just easier on me. Might expand it later though.

[@DAEDRICDUKE1]

(binge watching all your videos cus' they are so good) I do something pretty controversial in my circle and that's give no mechanical benefits to race, suddenly 99% of my players just pick human. However those few who do choose to not be human are often those who enjoy the roleplay that can come from that. For context my game is set in 17th century Albion, it only allows PCs who had a parent that was a Fair-folk only inheriting some of their appearance/fairy-tale curses and a slight awareness of the other world, like you said Elves and Dwarves should be interesting, in myth they are practically insane and terrifying by our mortal standards and I don't think most people can roleplay that. (Song of the Sea is a great example of having a half-blood PC)

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank you 😊. I like that approach. At one point when I was running 5e I had considered just using the human “ability mods” for every race, so people would choose what they wanted based on role-play. It actually looks like that is the path forward in 5e so it was not a bad idea 😂

[@DAEDRICDUKE1]

@@BanditsKeep This aged well

[@YearZeroHero]

Probably some of the most fun one can have, but lots of players don’t like the idea.

[@BanditsKeep]

🤔 I think if you are up front about things, players tend to go along.

[@YearZeroHero]

@@BanditsKeep sometimes. But there’s a serious tendency in the hobby to want the elves and dwarves, even if they are played as humans in masks. That’s why players give them the usual stereotypes, because it’s difficult to summon a truly alien culture. But i think that’s a different discussion on how creative gamers think they are vs how creative they truly aren’t.

[@wolfstettler3183]

Normally I prefer to play humans, and I also prefer my players to play humans. But when playing with kids, they have a tendency to prefer demi-humans, which is ok. And once, when playing in 5E, I played a centaur. It was a arena campaign (only combat, gladiator like) and it was great fun. In this peculiar setting, my centaur fighte really had its own flavour, being able to charge with a lance or trample/kick with the hooves. But I am not sure if this would have played out so well with a campaign that involved more role playing (as in involving role-playing at all).

[@BanditsKeep]

That sounds pretty fun for an arena fight though!

[@wolfstettler3183]

@@BanditsKeep It was, but I didn't want to crawl a dungeon with a horse (or pony) sized character.

[@russellharrell2747]

I think a more savage or untamed world that had only humanoid player characters (such as from the Gaz series or the 2E humanoids book). Lizardmen, Minotaurs, aarakocra, etc. everyone mistrusts everyone else and has a definite reason for adventuring: seeking alliances with other tribes and seeking ancient ruins from the previous civilizations (perhaps humans and demihumans existed but went extinct). The survival of the PCs tribes will be fore front, as well as just plain ol PC survival. Or, hey, why not a campaign that’s under the sea? There’s a lot of map space that most campaigns ignore: the blue stuff.

[@BanditsKeep]

Under the sea would be very cool - either with species that exists there or air breathers using specific tools or magic to adventure

[@solomani-42]

My 2c. I go one of two ways. I either mandate everyone starts as a human or I use tables or determine starting race and the majority of entires are human (I specifically use the DCC professions table). I do allow new characters or secondary characters to be Demi human so long as the the PCs have encountered that race. I also like the PCs to be human as they encounter the weird. Not be the weird themselves. YMMV.

[@BanditsKeep]

I’ve done that - start everyone as human, add various other types as discovered

[@MaxUgg]

dwarves as the main race, that's standard in Barsaive the setting of the Earthdawn RPG. give it a read it's a great setting. tacks for the video

[@BanditsKeep]

Oh cool, I’ll check it out!

[@SusCalvin]

Throal is the default starting location for every Earthdawn game I've seen. Throal is fun, it was this dwarf kingdom which has swelled and taken a leading role in holding back the old empire. We found that Throal made a good hub location for other adventures to meet the weirder tribes and polities of Barsaive. If you play a standard adventuring group who opposes slavers and weirdo dimension-invaders, most places around Barsaive are going to tolerate your gang. Then you could go on adventures to gradually learn about the smaller, stranger groups around the place. I think their excuse was social organization. Which faction of Barsaive has the greatest chances to organize a heckin' huge city-state. Well, the guys who already have a social order and a big heckin' city-state protected from the apocalypse inside a mountain.

[@ishmiel21]

Sometimes I like running a human centric campaign or playing a human, but usually not. I've played a human every day of my life so I get bored of it pretty easily. I don't think humanities survivability comes for adaptability. I think it has more to do with the fact that we breed like rodents. We just force everyone else out.

[@BanditsKeep]

This could be true!

[@Arnsteel634]

You don’t tell players that they start at level 4 or whatever. You tell them how many experience points they have. Hey guys we aren’t starting aren’t starting the new game at 1st level, everyone starts with 10000 experience points

[@BanditsKeep]

That’s certainly one way to handle it

[@Joshuazx]

No Thundercats in D&D 😆 I agree with everything you're saying.

[@BanditsKeep]

Unless you are running a Thundercats campaign, that would be interesting…. Of course D&D players would just throw oil on Mumra and be done 😂

[@Joshuazx]

@@BanditsKeep I mean, I gotta give the sword of omens at least one swing

[@krispalermo8133]

@@BanditsKeep As for the Thundercat campaign, Mumra in regards to AD&D2ndE and with 3.5e would be listed as a Greater Mummy with the arcane spell Tesner Transformation or cleric spell Divine Might. Anyway WotC Star Wars source books have a knock off Thundercat species that are also Jedi force sensitives. But in whole you still have to home brew undead for Star Wars cause they lack the rules of force ghost and lich/mummies. Had a group of players running lawful to neutral evil PCs grave robbing, what they though was a basic mummy/wight they set on fire turn out being a greater mummy. Since it was a grim dark gritty horror game they had no problem knowing their PC could die at anytime. They were very surprise at my gaming style were after they lost the combat, the greater mummy healed them, cursed them, and turn the PCs into his henchmen to do side quests. As an undead Skeleton Warrior/lich you don't have to worry about losing constitution point after ever Raised Dead spell cast on your PC. Get defeated and Teleport back to your boss to be raised and set out again.

[@JB0528]

Most of the demi human population in my game world are very much regional creatures. Dwarves are aliens who originate in the area where they first arrived on the world. Halflings are a feral species who come from the jungles in the far South of the main continent. Elves were under a curse for a long time and have only recently returned to the world. Consequently I expect my players to role play their demi human cultures. Most demi-humans are generally distrustful of humans because "everyone knows humans just run rampant and take over everything they can find". These factors make them rare in most of the world. I also disallow Common or Basic languages for demi humans as their native tongue. They can start having learned Common (human common, really) but their native language is always based on their race.

[@BanditsKeep]

So if they don’t get an extra language they cannot communicate with humans?

[@JB0528]

@@BanditsKeep For the most part. If someone came up with a valid reason why their character should I would definitely listen but I see it as mirroring many real world cultures where you're generally inundated with one language in your day to day life. I am also more prone to allow a character to speak another language than speak/read/write. It's not without problems but I try to encourage role play to work it out.

[@priestesslucy]

Regarding Kobolds: 'they're deviant, they're evil, they're going to kill you if you don't kill them first.' Sounds human to me 😋

[@BanditsKeep]

For sure

[@priestesslucy]

@@BanditsKeepto each their own of course, all jokes aside, honestly, as a GM I tend to use evil humans as adversaries more than monstrous humanoids. Monstrous humanoids (aside from Drow anyway) tend to be more primal societies in my games, they want to live freely, and they would rather coexist and collaborate than do battle so long as it doesn't impinge on their collective well-being. They'll go to war for resources or to protect their dignity, but unless something stirred the pot in advance, they're not going to default to behaving like monsters (in my games.)

[@krispalermo8133]

@@priestesslucy Drow, in most ways of play are just another Star Trek alien of the week. Hench a human metaphor for social commentary. Drow in my games are more underground Fae like society, not all are evil Lolth spider worship chaotic evil. But even the neutral ones will keep humans like .. pets .. for twenty or fifty years. Since they are underground, time has little meaning. So any winter quest underground for a single season can turn into decades be it visiting a Drow or deep gnome community.

[@SusCalvin]

@@priestesslucy In low-magic, real history games all your PCs and everyone they meet and talk to is going to be human. Even in games with a little magic off the side like Pendragon and Aquelarre. I like some of the older WFRP adventures where they don't feel obliged to toss in chaos demons all the time. The adversary can be a regular smuggling ring, nobles preparing for a legal duel (using a legal champion each) or a little adventure about stolen plum puddings.

[@SusCalvin]

@@krispalermo8133 The Veins of the Earth drow are weird, nasty buggers. Everything down in the mystical underworld is. Everything s nasty in a surprising, inhuman way. Their quirk is a deep, painful hatred for a world that isn't all them where the memory of things that are not drow will always remain with them. The duergar are insane blood and flesh machines that live for work that produces more work to produce more work. Work that creates work until the world is naught but work. Dero spiral inwards into their insane conspiracies until they conspire against themselves and spread their thought-infections to the world around them.

[@misterschifano]

Regarding starting off at a point beyond level 1, I'd suggest starting players with "+5000 XP" or whatever, rather than "at level n;" doing so better allows the XP differential to function. Regarding demi-humans: Because they are uncommon compared to humans and sized differently, you might rule that most enchanted armor they find won't fit them properly. Resizing such gear might be costly, and doing so has a chance of reducing any bonuses or even disenchanting the item entirely.

[@BanditsKeep]

Good ideas

[@tomasjanco7355]

I love this video. Finaly someone said it.

[@BanditsKeep]

Thank You!

[@ricodetroit]

My philosophy: Play lots of games, and all kinds!

[@BanditsKeep]

Yes!

[@willmistretta]

To sell me on this as a player, I think you'd have to open up humans to multi-classing or the like. From the moment I first started with B/X, I immediately gravitated toward the Elf because they can fight and cast spells. I'm obsessed with "jack of all trades" type characters in (A)D&D. That usually means elves/half-elves. It's not a pointed ear thing, just a means to an end. I see no incentive to cast spells and be squishy or to be tough without magic when I can split the difference. Flavor-wise, humancentricism is still preferred on a macro worldbuilding level. The adventuring party isn't limited to being a strict demographic mirror of the world, though.

[@BanditsKeep]

Right, I think that would be something to consider- astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperboria for instance has a bunch of sub classes that combine things like fighting and magic but the system only has human player characters

[@twilightgardenspresentatio6384]

Humans learn fast, use everything, fight hard and either die for their friends or sacrifice their allies as subclasses!

[@BanditsKeep]

🙌🏻🙌🏻

[@davidmoss9943]

Before watching: Nonhuman characters should have distinct psychological differences from humans that players are interested in embracing to at least some degree. Otherwise it's just a costume.

[@99zxk]

Professor Dungeon Master is F'ing awesome!

[@BanditsKeep]

I agree.

[@robblumenberg5965]

I like demi-humans in my games I always use them if I can.

[@BanditsKeep]

Awesome, are they a major population equal to or exceeding humans or more rare?

[@solomani-42]

15:44 100%. Monsters are monsters. As I tell my PCs (mostly gemZ) my world is a Diablo world. If it’s non-human stick a sword in it.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@chrismcgavin7949]

I play ASSH and like the human only restriction, got tired of magic eyes

[@BanditsKeep]

ASSH is great!

[@andrewmento-matos6692]

For me i'm going for more Gonzo Dying Earth World there is a bit more demi humans but a good chunk of them are offshoots of mankind. Out Side of Elves and Dragonborns being Aliens

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice

[@allenyates3469]

I like to flavor Demihumans as an alternate race. In mythology elves, dwarves, brownies, pixies, bogeys, etc etc are all the same idea of magical little people. We have different classes of humans and different classes of "wee folk" lol. But i agree that a game where a different species is just a human with funny ears and super powers is lame

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@retrodmray]

Great video again!! Thnx for this! Your words, mystery, interesting, unique, and rare, are perfect, and possibly really lacking in current editions! Not saying all do that, but the systems have kinda designed it out of there. Like you said, if they're everywhere, then they're not unique and therefore not possibly fun in the way the game kinda intended when it was humanocentrically written. And Pulp Fiction....wow, who reads that stuff, or anything, before playing? Lol...just being facetious. 🙃 Thnx again! Looking forward to next week.

[@BanditsKeep]

Ha ha, I can say that the more older pulp I read the more the way I play changes, I believe for the better.

[@retrodmray]

@@BanditsKeep Absolutely! Seems to me, like Tim Kask said a few years ago in an interview on KZbin, "Kids aren't really well read anymore like we were.". I don't know if that's a universal, but certainly could be in some cases as to how systems and play has changed by more recent designers. I heard one video where some folks said they never really wanted to play what they already are. Huh? Don't know what I think about that still today. Oh well, thnx again!

[@cameronorwin]

I understand what you are saying, but if you go the monsters are monsters route, doesn't that break the Reaction roll idea of B/X? If goblins always attack, you wouldn't roll on the reaction table.

[@BanditsKeep]

No, just because they are monsters does not mean they will always attack. Does a wolf always attack?

[@cameronorwin]

Right, but in your example you stated that players learn not to talk to goblins because they always attack while they could talk to nymphs because they were friendly. Hence my confusion.

[@BanditsKeep]

​@@cameronorwin I get your point and confusion. Keep in mind that the reaction roll is used when the DM is unsure what a creature will do. SO If I know goblins "always attack" I will not roll, or more likely I will roll but a "friendly result" will just mean that they throw some stones and run vs engage in mortal combat. In the case of the nymphs is I have decided they are "friendly" and roll an attack reaction, they are just rude or dismissive of the PCs. I'm keeping in mind the nature of the monster/animal and not just blindly following the table - And of course the same is true for wolves, they are never going to be friendly in the sense that they sit at your feet and let you rub their bellies but the roll can give me a general disposition within a set idea Dangerous/Friendly/Shy etc is my baseline, the roll helps shape that.

[@brianstevens5547]

@@BanditsKeep this could be a video

[@austinreed7343]

@@BanditsKeep A Wolf is an animal, not a monster. There’s a difference.

[@dobo9150]

Regardless of where the relationships sit on a monsters-or-peoples spectrum, I think the interesting stuff always comes from how the edges of whatever they are butt up against each other. Probably, I am trying to solve the problem you're discussing by drawing on the way Dungeon Mastnrpiece's geopoliticking lines up with thirty years of chewing on oWoD lore, and this theme of physiological and psychological homologues I picked up from studying some embodied psychology. My takeaway from your video here is that, when making elves or clerics a cnrtain way, one oughtn't let players play that culture until they've started to learn who that culture is though the characters it produces, even if that "who" happens to be kobolds or fine young cannibals.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@spudsbuchlaw]

In one PF2 game I'm in, Humans dont exist, and Elves are the standard race. Dwarves are bug people and Goblins grow on trees. I think it's still very possible to have a fantastical game like this. It's like Zeroing a scale, it's all about what you decide is normal.

[@ConspiracyOpossum]

I like what u say .however , my players hate playing humans, I take what races my players play and try to build my world to reflect that.

[@BanditsKeep]

That definitely works!

[@WayneBraack]

My thief always scouted ahead. Best way to stumble across something of value and keep it for yourself on top of your fair share of party loot. In our games human was often the most played race because we came from human kingdoms and settlements. If you wanted to play a different race that often came down to a small percentage chance roll. You know say 15% chance at being an elf or a 10% chance of being a dwarf depending on the the surrounding land in society. If you didn't make that roll you were simply human. The primary reasoning that we saw humans as being so predominant was compared to other races humans breed like rabbits. Just like many short lived creatures and insects in the real world humans breed faster then dwarves are elves who may live for hundreds of years. Therefore just like any other rodent by dent of a higher birth rate we had a much higher population and being so adaptive humans just simply overcame the surrounding societies. Well this was not true for every game we played but it did factor a large part into our various campaigns.

[@BanditsKeep]

Oh, that’s an interesting way to handle it. Though I’m not sure that many tables would be OK with only having a chance of being the car to class they want LOL. But who knows? I’ve never tried it so I can’t say one way or the other.

[@SusCalvin]

Other players usually know that your character does something. Sometimes the group doesn't mind the routine where you always hold the thief upside down and shake them down. I think it's a bad precedent to open up any sort of party conflict. Things grind to a halt when a third of the group thinks they should steal things for themselves. In Earthdawn, dwarfs are the most numerous race of all Namegiver races, including humans. Dwarfs have the best talent for complex social organization and erecting large cities where they feel like it. Humans, trolls and orcs tend to live in smaller, tribal societies. All societies in Earthdawn have some mix.

[@SusCalvin]

A limitation in some editions is attribute requirements. You need Dex 13 and Int 13 to be an elf. Or Con 13 to be a dwarf and Dex 9 to be a duck. Then you can give humans no limitations, everyone can always play a human. This was also done with AD&D 2e classes where some classes like paladins and bards were rarer because of the traits requirements to play them.

[@hopefulhyena3400]

I can never get out of my head the interaction I had that went Me: “I hope goblins don’t become a core race. It’ll be harder to justify using them as enemies” Other (incredulous): “so you’re saying that something is harder for you to murder once you realize it’s a person?” Like, bitch isn’t that what I JUST SAID?

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@SusCalvin]

In human-centric worlds, most of the enemies you meet will also be humans. Human pirates, human cults, human VOC goons etc. WFRP used to have lots of older adventures where they didn't feel a need to constantly throw chaos at the players. Your enemies could be a human necromancer making flying skulls in a dungeon, a human legal duellist representing a rival noble, human smugglers just trying to move booze up the river, human debt collectors out to screw over your human apothecary friend etc. And then occasionally you would run into a dwarf or a pack of wood elfs on some business in the empire.

[@Marcus-ki1en]

I allow Elves, and Dwarves with some personality limitations the player must follow. I also Allow Tabaxi and Wulvers, but with the clear understanding that they will face real prejudice in human towns and cities with the exception of Ports. I love the scene in Star wars when the Droids are prevented from coming into the bar - "we don't serve their kind in here". I don't like the new system where you can basically play anything. I just saw a video on playing a Mind Flayer character (?!!). Sorry, just not my kind of game.

[@BanditsKeep]

What do the PCs who cannot enter the bar do while the others play?

[@Marcus-ki1en]

@@BanditsKeep so far, party sense of justice has prevailed and they go to another establishment, else a split party for a while. Consequence of playing a "non standard". What is fun is the reverse when the party travels to the Tabaxi Enclave and none of the humans are allowed in the bar.

[@patrickrobles1036]

Two things I commonly communicate to my players related to this video: first, imagine you were a noble in the 1300 hundreds, what sort of knowledge would you have of a tiger, would you even recognize one if you saw it?; second, to paraphrase Samuel R. Delany, there is no wonder in a place where anything can happen. Too many players get stuck in the phase of wanting an orgy of options details and features. It is fine for a spell, or on occasion, but long-term it doesn't seem to sustain actual enjoyment of the game. People might provide counter arguments to that, and that is fine, but those are either outliers or exceptions or people in denial. There is no real drama in the spectacle of modern PG13 action movies that feature countless faceless and bloodless pseudo-deaths, and there is no wonder to be found in an endless stream of Star Wars cantinas populated by dozens of species. There is a parallel here, I think, with people that chase the dragon of excitement from the randomness of rolling dice. Again, super fun in moderation and at certain points, but it is not a source of long term fun. The mistake that many people make is that of habitual gamblers. Spending 8 hours tugging on a slot machine arm 4 or 5 days out of the week is not fun, and the endorphin response is minimal after awhile, but the person becomes habituated to the behavior and pursues it endlessly looking for satisfaction that never comes. Contrast this with the compulsive gambler that oscillates between the extremes of denial and excess. Popping into the casino now and again is ok, but spending too much time there, or stopping by and losing your rent and food money are not good. Too many players fall into those latter categories. Stereotyped behaviors that offer no satisfaction other than familiarity. Sadly WotC are following that path, and it won't be sustainable. But, I think that is ok, it'll bring in tons of players, it already has. And, hopefully, once the bubble bursts there will be lots of new players and a drastically improved RPG scene.

[@BanditsKeep]

Some interesting observations there. I think that as long as new and interesting races are added, this will feed those that want that. But I also have seen in my own circle that after gaming for a while people tend to pull back to the “simpler“ styles. Of course this is only a small sampling of players in the world so we could be unusual.

[@marcraygun6290]

My wood elves are xenophobic to all outsiders and wear bodypaints and bone jewellery wheras high elve live in floating cities tending their giant dragonfly spawning pools and dark elves are albino demonologists armoured in spider carapace armour and all make their weapons from sharp but fragile crystal

[@BanditsKeep]

Very cool!

[@thatpatrickguy3446]

When my players take the big chair to run their 5e games, I end up having the only human character at the table. I do make up other characters of other races, not so much for play as just to see how broken and overpowered a character I can legally make at level 1. Sometimes I'll show them to my neophyte DMs and say "This is my next character." just to watch them get all bug eyed when they realize how easy it is to make a completely overpowered 5e character. Then they usually forbid me from playing that character, which is fine because I really didn't want to anyway. 😛 Also: I have no idea why I get called evil. 😲 But, more to the point, I run a game with my own rules which uses only the base AD&D PC races with the most monstrous character might be a half-orc. I also mitigate the demihuman racial powers by giving them drawbacks, and I give humans racial bonuses as well to make them special too. It's not too much, but humans do require 10% less xp for each level, and since I use something closer to the AD&D advancement charts, that can be a significant help. It is difficult to make the 5e races different from each other as they are so often run as humans, but with these alterations. A friend of mine made his different in that he gave each demihuman race a set of stereotypical behaviors based on real world stereotypes. As I recall, the dwarves were based on a stereotypical medieval Japan ethos: a form of Bushido, stylized axes instead of katanas, honor being paramount, and a stratified class system with an effective emperor ruling it all with an iron fist. But they also embraced the artistic side of culture with calligraphy, painting, and formal poetry in a variant haiku form. That and they all shaved their beards. The length of one's mustaches determined how honorable and powerful you were in the culture. Fairly non-typical for dwarves, but at the same time very memorable and it stood out. As I recall the halflings were Germanic/Scandinavian, the gnomes were Spanish (and seeing a gnome matador on stilts taking on a full sized bull was an image to remember, the DM had taken a week to draw the picture for it), and the elves were Inuit and therefore almost never seen in the temperate climes as they often suffered heatstroke in normal temperatures and were viewed as oddities. They were also druid-focused and had no magic-users, illusionists, or clerics (the game was otherwise standard 1e AD&D). Oh, and the humans could choose from the four warring human kingdoms: French, English (cue Monty Python and the Holy Grail behaviors from us 😛), Egyptian, or MesoAmerican. It made everything more interesting and more fun in many ways because it gave us a mindset to focus on for playing our PCs. The game only ran for a little less than a year before the DM enlisted and shipped out, but I've always considered revisiting the concept in my games.

[@BanditsKeep]

Sounds like a very in-depth world

[@EpicoLirico]

I have the same problems with D&D. All players use demi humans races like a human with some feature. Dwarves are short and bearded humans, elves are humans with pointy ears, halflings are little and mischievous humans, etc. To me, demi human races MUST be somethings different, they shouls perceive and feel the reality in a totally different way than humans, so they must have ideas and morale way different, even "bad moral" in a human sense. People mostly doesn't understand that if something magical became common, isn't magical anymore.

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@slushbubs]

Do you ever let randoms play in your actual play games? I'd love to play DCC or B/X. I've never actually gotten to play in any of those.

[@BanditsKeep]

You could try the tabletop one shot Facebook group to find games - right now I’m not looking for any new players, but I look there usually when I am.

[@skidnsf]

I know a lot of people are putting the cause of the endless glut of PC racial options on WOTC and its modern players, but Holmes was as Old school as it gets and his early games and approach were to allow anyone to play whatever they wanted ( within reason). He even discusses how he had a player who was playing a dragon character ( scaled down to fit the low level game more), a centaur, an amazon warrior and a samurai. His approach was that the game allowed for any kind of fantastical character option a player might want to play as long as it was "balanced" and the DM could work with the player to make it happen. I remember when I first learned the game back in 1980, I really wanted to play a lizard man ( having been inspired by the Jeff Dee's artwork of the Lizardman character in the Rogues Gallery ) but it wasn't a playable race. I remember wanting to find a wizard to polymorph me into one, not for any crazy game mechanic, but because I thought it would have been cool to be lizard man fighter or ranger at the time. I was 12, and I now wished I had a DM that was as open to such character options as Mr Holmes who might have opened my mind to more possibilities.

[@BanditsKeep]

I love the idea of seeing an image and being inspired to play that species. It is certainly nothing new. The “Holmes” quote is a copy/paste from the first book of Original D&D. it comes down to your world and the style of any given campaign. Certainly it is not new, 2nd edition had all types of playable “monsters” including minotaurs. Personally I prefer to leave all that up to the table.

[@WhyYouMadBoi]

Ah yes samurai the best racial option

[@Marshcreekmini]

Where is Marissa?

[@BanditsKeep]

👀

[@GeneralTantzu]

I especially agree with the fact that making monsters playable turns mysterious creatures mundane and it really is not interesting to me in the slightest. Human centric world is 100% my preferred way of making a fantasy setting for TTRPG (Conan the Barbarian style usually)

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@johnathanrhoades7751]

My goodness the amount of vitriol this topic brings to comment sections is impressive. Just have fun how you want to, explain why you find it fun, and let other people have fun the way they want to for equally valid but different reasons... I personally enjoy both kinds of games (non-humans as more alien AND non-humans as more human). They're just different kinds of worlds to play in. Also, anyone saying that this is a new thing just hasn't looked at enough early supplements and game reports. It's been around for forever. It's just the mainstream way to play at this point when it might not have been in the past.

[@BanditsKeep]

Great points, early campaigns had all kinds of “monster” PCs

[@RhodesWC]

Eight minutes in and a gaming truth appears. Everyone was be different and then become the same again.. a la 5e D&D. blah. We agree that the demi-humans should be more of a mystery. The monsters belong in the monster manual, not in the players hand book.

[@BanditsKeep]

It’s interesting how what is considered a monster has evolved

[@andrewbriggs2692]

only ever played 5e. i grew up with ninja turtles, thunder cats, cowboys of moomessa, sonic the hedge hog, fievel goes west, and manys other anthropomorphic creatures. i think humans are easier to understand the mindset and cultures because we are. but there is devaint theory that lends to us not all being vanilla flavored. but new players dont alway instill the lore or cultures if they arent as indept as the DM. my favorite races are goblin and minotaur. no campaign has allowed for monstrous races or non-Lord of the rings races.

[@BanditsKeep]

Sure, it’s all world and campaign dependent, I could definitely see a Ninja Turtle game being super fun

[@Vasious8128]

Human race as class in a Demi-Human centric world? Book Conan?

[@BanditsKeep]

Could be interesting 🤔- not sure I understand “Book Conan?”

[@Vasious8128]

@@BanditsKeep oh sorry by Book Conan I mean Conan as presented the books vs as presented in the movies.

[@BanditsKeep]

Oh! I knew I must have missed something. So Conan as the Archetype for human would be pretty awesome actually, he was basically in BX terms I guess a thief and a fighter

[@UsuarioGenerico-li5pf]

Personaly, in my old day only play humans, in real world, videogames and RPG's, but now as an adult... I dislike the idea of only humans in fantasy settings and even when i DMing i encourage to play non-human characters, if my players want to play humans is ok for me, but i love when my players pick a non-human for be special than mechanical. Because in my world humans is the most hated specie, even for other humans, the most abundant but with the most negative cognotations in lore terms.

[@BanditsKeep]

interesting!

[@CruentusV]

humans bred like rabbits. that is the only quality of humanity that mattered, after a few centuries, with regard to dominance. one on one, any other race had advantages over humans that would tilt the scale away from human dominance - including even halflings. however army against army, there were no comparisons because human armies could stand losses better. so humans were dominant. at the chainmail level, everyone wants to be human to have the virtually unlimited replacements for the long campaign game. once players entered D&D which was all the more played at the individual level, the meta shifted. at the D&D player character level, everyone wants to be the x-man, not the human. prior to humanity, there was a sort of parity amongst the other races. but once the humans came into play, these other races inhabiting the world denied your race resources, therefore they threatened your expansion and were evil. Gygax, et al, understood this and the prejudice was based entirely at the resource level. this is over simplified but the logic is intact...

[@BanditsKeep]

Interesting!

[@malkomalkavian]

In an abstract world, humans do not exist

[@BanditsKeep]

I see

[@malkomalkavian]

@@BanditsKeep Ha ha :) I meant because we are made of meat and really detailed in our practical everyday experience. Nobody knows what a cat-man would be like, it is just a superficial idea. So a character like that can work better in our imagination. It's simple and incomplete. I think this is why unreal character 'races' are quite popular. Maybe.

[@SuperFunkmachine]

Why be a human when i can be a funny human with a stat bonus? That is often what demi humans often fall down too with the odd stock traits added, the dwarf is Scottish bearded an a drinker. Second if more odd ball not quite humans you add, the less there odd or stand out. Compare Data from star trek to Gimli from lord of the rings. Data stands out as he's the only one, where as Gimli was just another dwarf to the world.

[@BanditsKeep]

Dwarves are pretty common for sure

[@marcraygun6290]

I played an elf who dissected humans to understand this alien and obviously inferior race

[@BanditsKeep]

Oh! That’s very dark

[@Penfold497]

In my game, which is race-as class (with only six base classes - sorry thief) I have a house rule that only 40% of PCs maximum can be demi-men. The players have to figure out who gets what, and they do a good job of trading off. 1e does a much better job of limiting the demi-men because they have a very limited class selection, and the level caps are meaningful. Furthermore, training times and costs in gold pieces mean it takes a long, long time for a multi class demi-man to level. After several sessions, the single-class demi-man will be superior, but then they will hit the (low) cap and the man will eclipse him. Ultimately at higher levels you get men with several lower-level demi-men as sidekicks (henchmen or retainers), which models the fiction quite well.

[@BanditsKeep]

Good points

[@MrReset94]

I'm actually one of those that is tired of Humans and human-like creatures. I prefer the races that do not look so human, even better if you can get a non-humanoid one. ahahahah

[@BanditsKeep]

Like insects?

[@MrReset94]

@@BanditsKeep YEAH! That would be awesome!

[@BanditsKeep]

If you like a Sci-fi, Star Frontiers has an insect type race as well as an ameboid - super fun!

[@krispalermo8133]

Years ago at a gaming shop I told a group of players that they had twenty minutes to write up multiclass 3rdE D&D PCs. After they were done, I told them they were defending a dungeon from an orc horde of a hundred troops and they were role playing young.. Mimics. Players, .. 1st, " But I wrote up a ranger ?! " Me/DM, " Your mimic can track." 2nd., " But my rogue climb walls ?" Me, " Your mimic can cling to ceilings." Others, " What about spell casters ?" Me, " We will deal with it." Other guy, " My rogue/bard ?" Me, " Your mimic siblings love your stories." I look at the next group, " This is .. Role .. play and ability skill check rolls and you are the orcs, so just don't play dumb, follow the dice rolls." It became a contest as to how silly of a death a given orc could have in play.

[@killerklavvenn]

Now a days there are almost no monsters because everything is being turned into PC. Video gamers have pushed that concept into D&D and that is not D&D. To me you are Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfling or Gnome. I don't list Half-Elf or Half-Orc because just be an Elf or a Human. The variety that's listed has plenty of diversity in abilities and power and lessens the Power creep (not 100%) but has plenty of "power up" in them. You are a Fighter(who fights), Cleric(Heals/Fights), Wizard(Use magic) or Thief(Scouts/gathers info/Fights from the shadows).Only sub classes are Paladins, Bards, Druids(To me is a sub class of Cleric). If someone really wants to be one, a Barbarian or Monk. No Warlocks or Sorcerers(Just be a Wizard because from what I see and hear after being one people end up wanting those classes to do what a Wizard does in the end when it comes up about what people want to "change" about them). NO guns, if you want that, play a Western or Modern times game world. It is D&D so some compromise may be in there but it is my Basic view of what D&D is to me. If you want different play something else that is designed that way. In the end it is what the DM and Player want. It is the DMs game to say yes or no and that is why I do like the concept of a session 0, to talk about what the DMs basic idea of his game is and what the players want and expect. The old expression about Opinions and A-Holes being airplanes, in a lot of the D&D "Communities" are becoming Airports. You will get asked your opinions and told how wrong or idiotic you are. Also Orcs are pig faced monsters that want to eat you.(Guess how long I've been playing. LOL) Not that I am unwilling to change or embrace something different, this is what has always been fun to me, and that is counting the many, many, many PC deaths over the years. Good gaming to all, Run and play what is fun to you.

[@BanditsKeep]

I find it interesting you added gnomes, why are they ok to add but not other races? Just curious.

[@killerklavvenn]

@@BanditsKeep I plated Gnomes early on. A Gnome Illusionist was one of my favorites. Other races are monsters.

[@BanditsKeep]

@@killerklavvenn hmm I wonder what D&D would be like if the first demihumans were goblins and cat people instead of elves and dwarves

[@killerklavvenn]

@@BanditsKeep Who knows. I know it would not be for me, not in my interest zone. Just like The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, King Arthur( and the many stories of him and his Knights), El Cid. I am and would be OK if D&D was just Humans, but with the version I came into worked just fine for variety without making everything else that was there as monsters playable. I find it funny that so many today ask your opinion and a simple answer of what I like is never enough. I like what I like and that's it. People can do and play as they like without needing approval or applause. That is D&D. I also have played the D&D pc games from Pool of Radiance on Commodore 64 up to Testing the new Baldur's Gate lll (Which I choose to play traditional Races). I watch people stream themselves playing and the traditional to the new races are to me just fluff and I choose the traditional races and have fun and accomplish ALL the goals the same. I watch a multitude of online broadcast of D&D games being played and do not dis-like people who play what they want. If someone wants to be a cat person whatever, I just do not find it appealing. I have watched several reviews of new products and I do not like them so I wont buy them or play them. They do not interest me. To me there are people who want to play D&D as AOK area or Pokemon characters. That is not D&D. It is playing THOSE games with D&D rule set. Which is fine for them but I do not have to like it or play it. It seems those who are like me or even somewhat like me are ridiculed or looked upon negatively because we do not buy into the newest Fad of total and up to date "inclusiveness" of a classic game. I wish all good gaming and play what they like as I will do the same.

[@BanditsKeep]

@@killerklavvenn I’m just making conversation 🤷🏻‍♂️ - personally I prefer a more human centric game, but I’m always curious why people like/allow some races and not others. I suspect it had a lot to do with what we learned/fell in love with the hobby with. I mean the creators if the game had non-human PCs including lizardmen PCs so it’s not a new thing by any means - as you say, to each their own.

[@Tysto]

Yeah, i strongly dislike monsters as player characters or even as creatures who can be good instead of evil. 5e parties that are made of random assortments of tieflings & genasi & half-orcs & dragonborn & whatnot make the game super indulgent. You’re no longer playing Medieval fantasy but your personal childish fantasy.

[@BanditsKeep]

Of course original D&D allowed for monster PCs as did Holmes basic and with the supplements Red Box basic, and of course some AD&D worlds … not a new thing by any stretch

[@johnathanrhoades7751]

D&D wasn't originally strict medieval fantasy from what I can tell...not really. It comes off in large part as pulp fantasy. (Though the influences are wide and varied and definitely include some medieval fantasy) Also, calling a blanket genre of fantasy "childish" seems presumptuous to put it mildly.

[@playerextremebr1.027]

Is more like semi-humans, for make non-human races more mystical, i sense

[@BanditsKeep]

Indeed

[@ichisichify]

i think demihumans are fine as long as you have a filter in the game, like minimum ability score requirements. also score bonuses are bad.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool

[@malkomalkavian]

Human as a class in a dwarf world? Calm, forgetful, weak, imaginative. Something like a diplomancer bard. Able to be cool with people and overlook small rudenesses. Not subject to vows, bets, quests, fates, grudges, taboos, greed, or doom to the same extent. Free to move and change and break the rules. Perhaps invisible to the scrying of runes. Shrugs off eldritch horror and bereavement more easily, without staring in drunken abstraction into the rock walls for decades.

[@BanditsKeep]

Nice

[@aaronbarreguin.4211]

get'em outta here

[@BanditsKeep]

🙌🏻

[@kejsarmakten]

Agreed, removed the demi-humans from my B/X campaign.

[@BanditsKeep]

Cool, I’m guessing since you agree, it’s gone well?

[@kejsarmakten]

@@BanditsKeep For sure, players seem to enjoy it a lot! Also want to take my sweet time to introduce the Demi-humans of Dolmenwood. I think it's hard for anyone to properly play an immortal elf for example. So hard to understand how someone that is immortal look at the world, or at humans for that matter. They are more like a dragon or some beast than something you can easily identify with. In other campaigns I've done the same, expect sometimes allowed halflings (since they seem similar enough to humans to identify with/understand).

[@BanditsKeep]

Excellent- I agree, immortal beings by there natural should be played “different”

[@joecoo4615]

Thing is with 5e you are creating all the same characters They're superheroes no uniqueness. It's also got an agenda needs to be squashed. Post Mortem Studios haa a cracking Grim Dark book It's got no other species You get lots of varied humans. Roll on Wightchester. Balance is a huge myth that needs dispelling.

[@BanditsKeep]

Grim Dark? I’ll have to take a look, I gave not been impressed with most “dark” stuff I’ve seen, would be nice to find a good system/setting

[@joecoo4615]

It's 5e( ish) You can pick a hard copy on Lulu.com Or if you want PDF Postmort.com If you get the hardcopy you can pick up the PDF for free The author has plans to release Wightchester Not sure when that comes out but already looking forward to it.

[@BanditsKeep]

I’ll check it out, thanks!