Them issue with most fantasy race hate is setting/culture specific. People hate gnomes because they are eye-roll enducing and add very little to the setting/story. Same with Kender (Dragonlance's halflings), Giff (Spelljammer's hippo people), Forgotton Relms Drow, and 4E's Dragonborn and Super Elves.
Golarion does a decent job of making tired and annoying fantasy races a little fresher. The Bleaching is a brilliant concept that really should see more exposure and depth in terms of what it means to play a gnome.
In the Midnight setting, Gnomes are smooth talking gypsy-pirate smugglers.
Gnomes, like anything else, can be cool with the right conditions. Basically, as long as they aren't talking to badgers in run on sentences, they're redeemable.
Nah, I'm just sick of describing the reactions the party of a minotaur, shifter, deva, dragonborn, and shardmind get in my 4e campaign. Thats not even a joke. Everybody's gotta be special.
Justin, you just hit on a major pet peeve of mine. My friends and I call it "Entitlement Gaming Complex".
I think it has a lot to do with an increasing lack of a sense of identity among young people today.
Of course, my psychosocial analysis is worth about as much as you pay for it.
|
OH what's Bastards & Bloodlines? That a old 3.5 book you wrote, or Pathfinder? I did a search and Paizo didn't seem to have it.
It's a 3.0 book I wrote for Green Ronin, some of my earliest work for them. The race names and game stats (but not fluff) is open content. Some of the races have been redone for Pathfinder. Rite Publishing's very cool Wyrd of Questhaven has the wyrd. The Genius Guide to Races of Hoof and Horn has lapith (revised versions of B&B's decataurs) and pipers. The Genius Guide to Races of Wind and Wing has aellar and kestrel.
Justin, you just hit on a major pet peeve of mine. My friends and I call it "Entitlement Gaming Complex".
I think it has a lot to do with an increasing lack of a sense of identity among young people today.
Of course, my psychosocial analysis is worth about as much as you pay for it.
It's a huge problem of my games. It seems everybody is either a total freak (like the minotaur who is a battlemind/barbarian multiclassed into paladin, in all fairness, I think the ridiculousness was purposeful) or a "human fighter" who is completely indistinguishable from any of generic character.
Why can't anyone make moderately interesting characters? It's all about having one very interesting quality and a couple somewhat interesting ones.
For example: I had a human wizard who specialized in abjuration because in wizard school he was unpopular so kids threw rocks and magic missiles at him. Done. That was the whole concept, and he was a great character.
Honestly the weirder and more exotic the race the less likely I am to even allow it, much less play it. Justin and Doomed Hero hit it on the head. Everybody has to be the craziest most "unique" type of character these days. About the strangest I've let slide was a goblin rogue because the player was pretty low key about it. I allow different races, but only if the player seems to actually want to play that type for the RP value or just to spice it up without intruding on the pace of the game or story. Not just because it's "Hella Effin' Badass" or any other exclamatory dudeness.
Hell, if you can't make a human fighter interesting no amount of strangeness will help you. Weird races don't excuse lack of imagination at my table. Not saying this applies to all players, but we all know the type.
Only races I have ever played was either Humans or Dwarves. I simply have no interest in any other races
Dwarves are pretty awesome. Robots are cool too.
I propose the Gnomore Gnomes movement. Gnomes are annoying, ugly, encourage horrible roleplaying, and are utterly pointless and boring as a fantasy race. So lets hope come pathfinder 2.0 we will be gnomeless and better for it.
Gnomes!!!
BUT I played a Gnome once in 2nd edition because he was a deep Gnome. At 10th level I think they could summon a Greater Earth Elemental!!!!! What was that all about???
|
Justin, you just hit on a major pet peeve of mine. My friends and I call it "Entitlement Gaming Complex".
I think it has a lot to do with an increasing lack of a sense of identity among young people today.
Of course, my psychosocial analysis is worth about as much as you pay for it.
On the flip side, some people just like fantastic races in their fantasy settings. Some people like getting inside the heads of strange and exotic races.
There's nothing "entitled" or representative of a "lack of identity" in that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Shrugs at Gnome haters*
Haters gonna hate.
Lets see. races I haven't played.... That is a hard one, I think I've done everything that is suitable for a basic character and quite a few that aren't (I have an ogre in one campaign right now).
Never played any sort of planar descended creatures. So no Oread, Ifrit, Fetchling, Aasimar, Tiefling, etc.
I think I've never played a normal halfling, only kender.
Apart from that I played every core race but few monster races.
I have never played a Halfling or Gnome, but as for standard races, I have played the rest.
Honestly the weirder and more exotic the race the less likely I am to even allow it, much less play it. Justin and Doomed Hero hit it on the head. Everybody has to be the craziest most "unique" type of character these days. About the strangest I've let slide was a goblin rogue because the player was pretty low key about it. I allow different races, but only if the player seems to actually want to play that type for the RP value or just to spice it up without intruding on the pace of the game or story. Not just because it's "Hella Effin' Badass" or any other exclamatory dudeness.
Hell, if you can't make a human fighter interesting no amount of strangeness will help you. Weird races don't excuse lack of imagination at my table. Not saying this applies to all players, but we all know the type.
I know I wouldn't play if you were DM then, because I like exotic and weird designs myself, and have even made a few of my own homebrew races that, sadly, not many DMs even let me play (and not because of the stats, but because of them being "weird" and the DM lacking interest which insults me as an artist).
Also, it's kinda funny you instantly assume those people who want to play non-core are all the same. Sure, over half of my character ideas aren't even Human (I prefer Hobgoblins, Changelings and Half-Elves, as well as Aasimar and Tieflings), but even then, I've been fine playing a Human (Taldan, to be specific) Inquisitor of Norgorber. It's not a lack of imagination, but a lack of interest, at least in my case (I'm a Human in real life, why should I be forced to play one outside it too?). Just because a character is of a "weird" race doesn't make them any less imaginative than a human. It's the creator of the character that decides that, not the fact that if it's a human or an elf.
Then I guess you wouldn't. No one says you should be "forced" to play anything. And the last sentence of my post could hardly be assuming all non-core players are the same.
I can understand a player using non-core races to set themselves aside from the norm, but too many times I see it as a "look at me, look at me" tactic and not a tool for good RP. Basically fishing for NPC response and taking time away from other players or focusing the game on their weirdness.
Maybe you arent that type of player, so in that case I wasn't speaking about you. But honestly I see it so much it gets old quick. Play whatever the hell you like, but I keep my games grounded and still stand by what I said. If you can't make a basic race/class combo interesting, then no amount of strangeness can help you.
I didn't say everyone has to play a human fighter, just that many times non-core races are used as an excuse for unimaginative play. At the end of the day, however, this is just one opinion. If your table is different,then by all means, play how you see fit.
I played Elves a lot in 2nd ed but 3.0 on I have played nothing but Humans. I wouldn't mind playing the other core races except Half-Orcs, wich I do not like. But it is the "new"(well non standard) races that pathfinder has introduced that has got me interested such as Catfolk, Aasimar, Dhampir, Gripli, Lashunta, Kitsune, Tiefling, Sylph, etc. I know many of these races were from older editions but now they are more "balanced" since Paizo tweeked the base races. I hope that some day we will get some fey based, giant blooded, dragon blooded, plant based, and law/chaos plaintouched races.
|
|
I havent been playing long. Off and on for 5 or 6 years but not longer than 9 months game time. So it's easier for me to list what I have played.
Elan - from psionics because it fit my character concept of a kind of traveling psionics professor.
Dwarf - my first character. He drank a lot ( naturally )
Goblin - because it was a goblin campaign and I had no choice in the matter.
Strix - because 1) they fly and 2) it fit a character I had stewing in the back of my head for a couple years. Seriously, years. I'm going to start playing him at lvl 17 (cavalier 5/ antipally 2/ Hellknight 10) soon and I just sent my poor DM pages and pages of backstory and even a proposed new faction connected with his Hellknight PrC.
|
I can understand a player using non-core races to set themselves aside from the norm, but too many times I see it as a "look at me, look at me" tactic and not a tool for good RP. Basically fishing for NPC response and taking time away from other players or focusing the game on their weirdness.
Such a player would be disappointed in my games then. Weird and unusual races aren't overly noticed because in my worlds, these races have been around as long as humans and elves, so they aren't any more 'weird' than a dwarf.
A single half-dragon isn't going to raise an alarm, just a brief sounding out of intentions and polite wariness. You'd need a platoon of them marching in to get the town guard mobilized.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OH what's Bastards & Bloodlines? That a old 3.5 book you wrote, or Pathfinder? I did a search and Paizo didn't seem to have it.It's a 3.0 book I wrote for Green Ronin, some of my earliest work for them. The race names and game stats (but not fluff) is open content. Some of the races have been redone for Pathfinder. Rite Publishing's very cool Wyrd of Questhaven has the wyrd. The Genius Guide to Races of Hoof and Horn has lapith (revised versions of B&B's decataurs) and pipers. The Genius Guide to Races of Wind and Wing has aellar and kestrel.
Stephens - I really dig that book, though you haven't updated the cool guys: Lurkers! and the other half-stuff which where rather cool, we whant the Grendels back!
If lurkers are half-gnomes, half-ropers, I have it on good word that they'll be appearing soon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Submarine.
Elves. My first group had three elves. I have been in groups of nothing but elves (and me). Since second edition, I have probably run with more elves than humans. Half-elves, drow aka. dark-elves, forest-elves, aquatic-elves, eladrin aka. high-elves. Am I forgetting some? I probably am cause there are so bloody many! I am tired of all the elves on every single plane! So yeah. No elves for me, thanks.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
I generally prefer humans because they're more interesting. When you play an aasimar or dhampir or what have you, the interesting thing about them is that they are an aasimar or dhampir or what have you. Humans have to be interesting on their own merits and therefore, in the hands of a skilled roleplayer, will have more thorough characterization. All too frequently, but by no means universally, weird races become a crutch for characterization. Although basic races like dwarves, elves, and gnomes suffer from the same problem.
But to answer the OP, I hardly ever play small races because I hate being slow. Inexplicably, dwarves do not trigger my slow hate even though they are slow.
@The Minis Maniac & @ mater arminas - Not that I like gnomes, I am just wondering why you don't like them?
I've never played a gnome or a half-orc. Gnomes just don't appeal to me, their culture just doesn't turn my crank (kinda the same for halflings even though I had one once). I'd like to try a half-orc sometime though, I just haven't got to it yet.
Because gnomes are evil, horrible things!!
Link
Link
Link
You have just proven why Gnomes ROCK!!!
I've only played elves, humans and half-elves.
I never play halflings or gnomes, and until a year ago or so, I had never played a dwarf.
I loathe halflings. I like gnomes, esp the females, but I just never played one. Dwarves mostly bore me, but I made a female (no beard) dwarf wizard I liked, but the game ended.
Other than remaking my female dwarf wizard, I dont see ever making one either.
in 3.0: i played many humans and everything else.
in 3.5 never played humans
i only played demihumans & humanoids but mostly elves, gnomes, and was still open to play all races.
i did play several dwarves myself, but now i cringe at the mere mention of those players who prefer to play dwarves/orcs/halforcs/ogres/half ogres/trolls. dwarven pc's are banned from my future games. (my first true ban in 19 years of gaming)dwarven npc's are common though.
in pathfinder: i had a human cleric dm/pc just to bring up numbers in the party for several sessions but i do not favor humans at all.
so its back to elves until the advance race book.
Pathfinder: I've played all core races and drow.
3.5: Most. Fey-ri was my favorite.
3.0: All but half-elf.
AD&D: there were so many campaign settings...I can't remember every race I've played. I remember wood elves that got a bonus to str instead of dex, and some feral jungle elves...
I've only played Human, Gnome and Half Orc.
Gnomes can reroll a nat 1 once per day, that makes em OK in my book
|
Elves. Yes I'd love to take a -1 to the 2nd most important save in game and to my hp/level. Whats that? you'll pop my dex modifier for it by 1! sounds great!
And don't forget the bonus language and skill point that you may or may not need!
I also don't play elves for the same reason, plus the Cliche fact.
The Gnome in our group is really the heart, the soul of the group. The guy playing her is genuinely funny and is able to easily capture their quirkiness while remaining upbeat.
They're just genuinely fun. I can see how a person might play them wrong and thus play them annoyingly, but hate? Black humor is just awesome in games when done right.
Plus, I just took my group to Kaer Maga. What other race would decide to go parasailing off a cliff?
Edit: Looking back on the thread some more, it's quite... well odd how vitriolic the hate with some people is. From all you haters, I'm genuinely curious why you think them so useless, or one note. How are they different in that regard from the Dwarves, Halflings, Aasimar and all those ultra-broody races like the Tieflings(I love tieflings), Fetchlings or even Half-Elves?
The non-PC races mostly, though I've never played a Suli or any of the elemental races in book 2 (though I dearly want to at some point, most GMs won't allow it, I'm not sure why, they aren't that powerful), and I think there are some humanoids in the bestiary 3 I haven't played.
I never played a half-orc or a hafling. It's not because I hate them, it's more because I was a GM for 80% of my gamer's life, so I can count the PCs I have played on the fingers of my hand. I never played non-core races either.
I could see myslef playing a half-orc thug (rogue or fighter/rogue) or a halfling cleric in Carrion Crown if my elven alchemist happens to die (which is highly probable, given the difficulty of this AP).
Ah, right. Half-cloaker.
|
|
I generally prefer humans because they're more interesting. When you play an aasimar or dhampir or what have you, the interesting thing about them is that they are an aasimar or dhampir or what have you. Humans have to be interesting on their own merits and therefore, in the hands of a skilled roleplayer, will have more thorough characterization.
What's stopping an equally skilled roleplayer from having equal characterization with a non-human character?
Characterization doesn't suddenly take a hit because a character is a half-orc or a strix instead of a human.
Lessee...
Never played a Gnome. Rolled one up once, but just wasn't feelin' it.
Never played a Halfling- even after they got slimmed-down and given shoes in 3rd Ed.
Haven't played an Elf (of any kind) in YEARS.
Only recently played a Dwarf (a dwarf magus named blahblahblahmynewfavoritecharacter)
Never played as anything with racial hit dice- mostly because no concept I've wanted to run demanded it- although back in AD&D 2E I took most of the Complete Book of Humanoids for a spin.
Have yet to play a Tengu, but the desire is there.
Generally play either humans, half-orcs/elves, full-blooded orcs when permitted, or, of course, goblins. Mmmmmm, goblins.
I generally prefer humans because they're more interesting. When you play an aasimar or dhampir or what have you, the interesting thing about them is that they are an aasimar or dhampir or what have you. Humans have to be interesting on their own merits and therefore, in the hands of a skilled roleplayer, will have more thorough characterization. All too frequently, but by no means universally, weird races become a crutch for characterization. Although basic races like dwarves, elves, and gnomes suffer from the same problem.
But to answer the OP, I hardly ever play small races because I hate being slow. Inexplicably, dwarves do not trigger my slow hate even though they are slow.
So you admit that you slack off when making non-human characters?
It's people like you who give people like me a bad name, damn it!! XD
Interesting how in 2nd Edition Humans were not played as much as Elves or other races when compared to 3rd Edition..
I don't understand all the Gnome Hate in this thread... Pathfinder (or Galorian) Gnomes are fun to play..
I've never played a Half Orc or Drow character or 1/2 Drow...
I've pretty much only played gnomes and halflings (generally casters or rogues), though did Warforged and Kobold (with Races of the Dragon kobold feats) when playing 3.5.
I'm very thrown by the general little people hate going on in this thread. Gnomes and halflings both have things going for them, though neither are ideal for typical melee builds.
I'm very thrown by the general little people hate going on in this thread. Gnomes and halflings both have things going for them, though neither are ideal for typical melee builds.
Speaking for myself, anything I want a gnome or halfling for, I can have more fun using a goblin to do.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
What's stopping an equally skilled roleplayer from having equal characterization with a non-human character?
Characterization doesn't suddenly take a hit because a character is a half-orc or a strix instead of a human.
Nothing, but a weird race, like choice of patron deity, is often a crutch for characterization. It doesn't have to be--but often, it is.
Camptown.
