| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's boring, played out, and overdone. And often, it isn't very fantastic.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?
Some people just want the "different" or project what they consider their personal unique persona or traits into a non-standard race.
The irony of course is that pretty much every fantasy race in all the games out there are just humans wearing a rubber monster suit, Go figure.
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sticking every other race with a monoculture is one among many reasons.
Love having fantastic races in my fantasy, and I love them being portrayed as people. Part of that is giving them a wide spectrum of possibilities rather than sticking them with a hat and being done with it.
Personally not at all a fan of the "all the other races are dying out because HUMANS #%€£ YEAH" trope either. Find it equally unappealing as the "elves are just better than you" approach.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Humans are typically the center of game worlds because the audience of the games is (shocker) primarily human!
Some people like fantastic worlds populated by otherworldly creatures, but being a human interacting with all the fantasy. Essentially, playing themselves on an alien world interacting with alien beings.
Most demihumans play like humans with hats on because it would be an intellectual exercise with diminishing narrative returns to develop a race with a sentience unlike humans. Instead, we get beings that think the same, but are culturally different.
When you conceive of the core setting as an entry point for new players, a human-centric setting is a good idea. Experienced players who do not like this generally have the skills to craft their own worlds to suit their own preferences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no problem. For anyone that wants to do something different it takes only minor effort to "homebrew" Golarion and change every human into an elf to get an elfworld or dwarf to get beardworld or cat person to get kittyworld...or you could just give every single race the human characteristics and just change everyone's race/species whenever you want.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?What is the problem with humans being a non-dominant or widespread race in the setting?
Two problems I see:
1) It can be hard for humans to relate to non-humans, so it's a barrier to new readers/players. (not insurmountable)
2) If you have no humans, it can be hard to not make the non-humans "humans in funny masks"
Re: Mikaze: I'll give Golarion credit, between the Forlorn, the kyonin elves and the Mordant Spire elves at least the elves aren't monocultural.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?
Don't have any problem with that. Being a big Star Wars and LotR fan, it's actually my preferred type of fantasy setting.
I also like settings were humans are the underdog, but only when the accent is put on humans as PCs ironically. I also like settings were humans are not present altogether; but one of the races usually acts as the "default-two-arms-two-legs-adaptable-creative-likes-war" race taking the same role that humans take in other settings.
I think its natural to relate to the race that resemble us the most, even if I too have observed a disdain for humanocentric settings on these forums.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's boring, played out, and overdone. And often, it isn't very fantastic.
This. This. This. This. This.
Love having fantastic races in my fantasy, and I love them being portrayed as people. Part of that is giving them a wide spectrum of possibilities rather than sticking them with a hat and being done with it.
Personally not at all a fan of the "all the other races are dying out because HUMANS #%€£ YEAH" trope either. Find it equally unappealing as the "elves are just better than you" approach.
Also this. Lots of times this.
It's taken a lot of effort to trim my own homebrew world down from the assumed human-dominant default to something more of what I want regarding balance between racial presence and historical relevance. Fleshing the other races out is still in the works as well, but it's coming along.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) It can be hard for humans to relate to non-humans, so it's a barrier to new readers/players. (not insurmountable)
2) If you have no humans, it can be hard to not make the non-humans "humans in funny masks"
Both are problems you have regardless of how humanocentric your setting is.
As usual, this is all about personal preference, and there is no problem.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Humans are typically the center of game worlds because the audience of the games is (shocker) primarily human!
Sometimes (usually while reading internet forums) I start to doubt that.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) It can be hard for humans to relate to non-humans, so it's a barrier to new readers/players. (not insurmountable)
2) If you have no humans, it can be hard to not make the non-humans "humans in funny masks"
Both are problems you have regardless of how humanocentric your setting is.
As usual, this is all about personal preference, and there is no problem.
I doubt anyone wouldn't say it was personal preference. just listing two issues, as I see them, about people relating to a non-human setting.
(One of my annoyances with Watership Down, for example was that the characters were using 'bunny talk' in the middle of the written English. just seemed to break it for me that the entire thing wasn't translated for the reader. On the other extreme, by the end of Shogun, I was reading the Japanese phrases and translating them in my head, but I was kind of learning along with Blackthorne.)
I just don't see the reason for 'hate' of either option.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of my annoyances with Watership Down, for example was that the characters were using 'bunny talk' in the middle of the written English. just seemed to break it for me that the entire thing wasn't translated for the reader.
Huh. That was one of the things I liked most about it. Admittedly I made extensive use of the provided glossary, but doing so mid-sentence when I ran into a word I didn't know/recall never bugged me.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually the opposite. I'm kind of glad that Golarion is more humanocentric and accepting of humans and that humanity actually had their own god. I always get tired of settings where humanity is this "new, immature race" that are looked down upon by the haughty elves and dour dwarves. Like they are little children to be humored. So tired of that and I'm glad that finally in Golarion, I feel humans aren't the underdog race to be coddled. That said, I would like more done with the non-human races. Especially dwarves and the Shory Sky Cities. I thought that was the coolest idea and should be expanded upon more.
From a fictional standpoint, I like human dominated settings, but also prefer their to be clear reasons why they are dominant and limited use of monoculture non-humans races. Especially "ALWAYS EVIL" monocultures.
From a story perspective, human dominant societies:
Can be easier to relate to, especially if you want to play up the alien nature of other races
Can be easier to slot in inspirations from existing cultures or model certain time periods.
Can help avoid the "humans with ear prosthetics/short humans/ugly humans" problem.
Can be easier to design, since you have less need to take in account how a setting would vary if most of the population was immmortal, or winged, or whatever.
Emulates a lot of fantasy fiction people read and draw inspiration from.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can be easier to design, since you have less need to take in account how a setting would vary if most of the population was immmortal, or winged, or whatever.
Having those considerations is one of the most interesting parts of a world, to me. It's been immense fun to have to step back and rethink a lot of assumptions about the world when you're building a culture made up of entities that can, for example, fly, or climb like spiders, or breathe water and swim effortlessly, or such like.
Can be easier to design, since you have less need to take in account how a setting would vary if most of the population was immmortal, or winged, or whatever.Having those considerations is one of the most interesting parts of a world, to me. It's been immense fun to have to step back and rethink a lot of assumptions about the world when you're building a culture made up of entities that can, for example, fly, or climb like spiders, or breathe water and swim effortlessly, or such like.
I would agree here myself, although I imagine this might necessitate fairly significant changes that might be hard to deal with in an RPG without modifiying the rules (versus something for a work of fiction).
For instance, if the dominant race is something like spider-like, than spider would probably live in cities that didn't for instance have steps or stairways, which if you are not a spider critter, might make adventuring or visiting in rather difficult.
I am puzzled. Where is your hate coming from Hama?
I haven't seen any. Is it your play group producing this hate?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can be easier to design, since you have less need to take in account how a setting would vary if most of the population was immmortal, or winged, or whatever.Having those considerations is one of the most interesting parts of a world, to me. It's been immense fun to have to step back and rethink a lot of assumptions about the world when you're building a culture made up of entities that can, for example, fly, or climb like spiders, or breathe water and swim effortlessly, or such like.I would agree here myself, although I imagine this might necessitate fairly significant changes that might be hard to deal with in an RPG without modifiying the rules (versus something for a work of fiction).
For instance, if the dominant race is something like spider-like, than spider would probably live in cities that didn't for instance have steps or stairways, which if you are not a spider critter, might make adventuring or visiting in rather difficult.
They do and it does. I personally consider that "working as intended".
One of the major races in my group's homebrew world is a drider-like race. There's a part of the world they are common in that is also home to an avian-esque race, loosely based on the Raptorans from 3.5. As such, among other things, there has developed a clear social distinction - those who can climb or fly (naturally or magically) to the higher-constructed buildings are the literal upper class, while those who cannot live in the lands below as the poorer social strata. Heck, there was a time in that region's history where the lower-realm tried to name their own rulers, since the upper-crust often didn't pay any attention to them; this of course was seen as revolution and quickly squashed, though an uprising of better representation for the low-landers has slowly begun to trickle into the culture as a result, if slowly.
PCs visiting this region either have to find a way up to those higher echelons (being one of those races, flight spells, spiderclimb, polymorph, teleportation, or other methods) or deal with being considered low-class by the locals and look for one of the local race members to serve as their patron and represent them in the courts of the upper strata.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
My dislike of humanocentric settings is as such: I am playing in a fantasy world, where anything is technically possible. Magic gets flung around, dragons roam the sky, scary creatures swim in the waters (I know some of the real life fish are freaky), etc. I am a human in real life, why would I want to play a human in fantasy life?
Humanocentric settings are done to death. Nearly every fantasy setting is human dominant, with the nonhumans having dwindling populations and influence. Plus, in a large majority, each race is relegated to their own country, with humans having a vast array of countries they rule.
As someone said earlier, humanocentric fantasy settings are old hat. It gets tiresome playing a dwarf or orc and receiving strange looks from the NPCs EVERYWHERE I go because I am not human. Also doesn't help that all everyone ever seems to play, it seems, is humans.
|
|
I am puzzled. Where is your hate coming from Hama?
I haven't seen any. Is it your play group producing this hate?
Not from my group. My group consist of a human supremacist, and people who all play humans most of the time. Sometimes I get a half-elf or a half-orc. Haven't seen a demihuman PC in years.
I just seem to notice on these boards (I cannot give a specific example) that whenever settings are mentioned, and somebody says dominant humans, there is a bunch of people badmouthing that choice, or at least vehemently disagreeing.
Maybe i see things wrong...
My dislike of humanocentric settings is as such: I am playing in a fantasy world, where anything is technically possible. Magic gets flung around, dragons roam the sky, scary creatures swim in the waters (I know some of the real life fish are freaky), etc. I am a human in real life, why would I want to play a human in fantasy life?
Humanocentric settings are done to death. Nearly every fantasy setting is human dominant, with the nonhumans having dwindling populations and influence. Plus, in a large majority, each race is relegated to their own country, with humans having a vast array of countries they rule.
As someone said earlier, humanocentric fantasy settings are old hat. It gets tiresome playing a dwarf or orc and receiving strange looks from the NPCs EVERYWHERE I go because I am not human. Also doesn't help that all everyone ever seems to play, it seems, is humans.
+1 and then some
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?
Answering the OP question: There is no problem.
If the question is WHY this COULD be a problem, then you have a pletora of answers, going to "it's boring" ending in "because i like dwarves" and all the options in between.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sticking every other race with a monoculture is one among many reasons.
Love having fantastic races in my fantasy, and I love them being portrayed as people. Part of that is giving them a wide spectrum of possibilities rather than sticking them with a hat and being done with it.
Personally not at all a fan of the "all the other races are dying out because HUMANS #%€£ YEAH" trope either. Find it equally unappealing as the "elves are just better than you" approach.
Pretty much this. I've run human-centered settings and non-humancentered ones (hcs and nhcs?). My favorites tended to be the second set.
Now, what I do dislike are the misunderstandings--that either interest set plays x or y because they're "lazy." That's silly and we shouldn't say these things.
What I've found instead is that people who play humans do so because they're 1. More comfortable, 2. It allows them to more closely fulfill a fantasy. I am cool with both of those reasons.
The ones who play different races tend to want to: 1. Explore something different and fantastic, or 2. Want that extra separation that allows them to sit back, relax, and enjoy the fantasy tale. I am cool with those reasons, too.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am puzzled. Where is your hate coming from Hama?
I haven't seen any. Is it your play group producing this hate?
Not from my group. My group consist of a human supremacist, and people who all play humans most of the time. Sometimes I get a half-elf or a half-orc. Haven't seen a demihuman PC in years.
I just seem to notice on these boards (I cannot give a specific example) that whenever settings are mentioned, and somebody says dominant humans, there is a bunch of people badmouthing that choice, or at least vehemently disagreeing.
Maybe i see things wrong...
I think it being the boards may have something to do with it. Here on the forums (and on other boards, for that matter) players enjoy many of the other choices that are out there and want to explore them, especially race-wise. There are a number of GMs that are less than thrilled with sentient mud piles or anthropomorphic animals or dragons or whatever as a PC race and do not allow them. This fosters some of the resentment you see, which in turn makes people really dislike those nasty humans and core races that get shoved down their throats. That, at least, seems to be the take from the number of threads about campaign building, allowing races, the ARG and so on.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I had my way it'd be Humans only.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I had my way it'd be Humans only.
It's hard to have Dungeons & Dragons without any dragons.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's boring, played out, and overdone. And often, it isn't very fantastic.This. This. This. This. This.
Love having fantastic races in my fantasy, and I love them being portrayed as people. Part of that is giving them a wide spectrum of possibilities rather than sticking them with a hat and being done with it.
Personally not at all a fan of the "all the other races are dying out because HUMANS #%€£ YEAH" trope either. Find it equally unappealing as the "elves are just better than you" approach.
Also this. Lots of times this.
It's taken a lot of effort to trim my own homebrew world down from the assumed human-dominant default to something more of what I want regarding balance between racial presence and historical relevance. Fleshing the other races out is still in the works as well, but it's coming along.
Yep.
I don't hate humanocentricity; I'm just oversaturated and bored with it. That was always one of my peeves with Star Trek's rubber-forehead "aliens" who just aren't very alien. Star Wars did it better, but Farscape and Dark Crystal and Babylon 5 did it even better. It's why I like Eclipse Phase so much.
Also, my bigger peeve with humanocentricity is too often the humans are painted as the best, the brightest, the center of attention, the saviors... which completely breaks my disbelief and completely undermines the agency and resourcefulness of the "alien" races.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It gets tiresome playing a dwarf or orc and receiving strange looks from the NPCs EVERYWHERE I go because I am not human.
Humanocentricity and segregation/racism are two different things. You can have humanocentric yet racially diverse and accepting settings (Star Wars does a OK job at that). Similarly, you could experience racism in a setting were humans are non-existent (typical elf-dwarf rivalry, or orc in either elven or dwarven land).
I bet that even in a human-only setting, your character will receive strange looks from NPCs EVERYWHERE you go because you are not [insert setting-related dominant culture].
I agree that humanocentric settings have been done... a lot. I cannot comment on your preferences as they are personal, but I don't think that humans are the source of social conflicts.
I would go so far as to say that it's not even possible to create a race that isn't just "human with a hat on" because it isn't possible for us, as humans, to think in a way other than the way we think, just like it's impossible to imagine the color of light in an area of the spectrum we can't see.
I've never really seen any "hate" on the boards for humanocentric settings, but plenty of players that never play humans in-game because they feel it's boring. I don't agree, but I completely understand the desire to go as far afield of real life as one can simply because it's your only chance.
i prefer to play demihumans of the cute variety. i like cute and petite things, like the Tera Elins for example. i really like the cuter fey you wouldn't expect to be the cunning puppeteers of the mind they are. but i like being able to pretend to be human and like being able to pull the strings of a human society from the inside. so i have to play demihumans that can pass for human, are cute enough to make humans sympathize with them, and cunning enough to control a faction from the inside while still having a means to fight off foes to protect their survival.
the concept works better in a humanocentric setting, but i prefer the concept of opening options beyond the human norm. and maximizing the number of allied societies i can infiltrate.
if i could pass for a half elf, as most of my fey blooded PCs could, they could infiltrate human society, elf society, fey society, and any society allied with humans, elves or fey.
but at the same time, i like having something recreational to contribute to combat. even if it takes a while to get it.
I would go so far as to say that it's not even possible to create a race that isn't just "human with a hat on" because it isn't possible for us, as humans, to think in a way other than the way we think, just like it's impossible to imagine the color of light in an area of the spectrum we can't see.
I've never really seen any "hate" on the boards for humanocentric settings, but plenty of players that never play humans in-game because they feel it's boring. I don't agree, but I completely understand the desire to go as far afield of real life as one can simply because it's your only chance.
to me, it's not only humans that are boring, it's the tolkein inspired core PC races too. most of my fun that involves tolkein races, comes from making the elves and dwarves my slaves, from caving in gnome skulls with a blunt object, or from barbequeing halflings and half orcs.
If I had my way it'd be Humans only.It's hard to have Dungeons & Dragons without any dragons.
What I meant was the only PC race being Humans. I'm just partial to them..us...
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Mikaze: I'll give Golarion credit, between the Forlorn, the kyonin elves and the Mordant Spire elves at least the elves aren't monocultural.
Yeah, credit where it's due, it's less of a problem for the elves. (need moar Ekujae tho) And I'm really glad they went the cultural/ethnicity route with elves rather than subraces.
Unfortunately though, almost every other race still got hit with it. Especially frustrating when some races(orcs) get stuck with a terrible culture(orcs) that does more to negate possibilities rather than open them up(orcs and half-orcs). But personal preferences and all that. :)
To be honest, I'm really happy the dwarves finally had their monoculture broken up. Pahmet and Ouat dwarves? yes plz!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Star Wars mentions: I would play a fantasy setting that replaced humans with twi'leks in a heartbeat.
but not with the assumption that males have to look like bib fortuna though. no goiter plz. more like The Old Republic
Suddenly also want to see a PC race that looks like it was designed by H.R. Giger, with an unconventional life cycle.
Dammit, now I want to run/play a Distant Worlds campaign even more. Where the core PC options are Vercite, Triaxan, Ilee, Sarcesian, Lashunta, etc...
Also, really wish the ARG had more support for unconventional body-types and themes that didn't skyrocket their RP cost. No options for serpentine-bodied races? :(
my favorite part of star wars, was that the setting wasn't dominated by humans, but had a variety of species with a variety of cultures for each. golarion gaves elves a few cultures, but didn't give many to the other races with the exception of humans.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?Don't have any problem with that. Being a big Star Wars and LotR fan, it's actually my preferred type of fantasy setting.
I also like settings were humans are the underdog, but only when the accent is put on humans as PCs ironically. I also like settings were humans are not present altogether; but one of the races usually acts as the "default-two-arms-two-legs-adaptable-creative-likes-war" race taking the same role that humans take in other settings.
Kind of taking a bit of inspiration from one line said in Mass Effect 2 about the adaptability of humans being why they are so quickly becoming #1 in the galaxy after only 30-40 years, I recently developed a campaign setting (for GURPS) where all of our mythology, gods, stories, it's all true. But, anything supernatural is an alien. They all visited Earth because they wanted something from us. The adaptability of our DNA could help them in some way. So, for example, they "greys" (which I took this part from Stargate, I admit) want us because they are dying so they are hoping through experimenting on us, they can figure out how to save their own species. Plus, some species are able to breed with humans and get crazy results. For example on that, Jesus was half human, half-Elohim (the species that is angels and demons) The aliens are very hard to kill, but they stay dead. However, the resulting hybrid is no harder to kill than a human, but they regenerate and cannot die. They will always resurrect. Most aliens are also either unaging or very long lived. So, humans with our super-short life spans, they don't understand. To most of them, we are just toys for them to experiment on, like rats. Now, most of them do tend to be nice about it as they aren't the scientists, but the campaign is set as kind of a gritty cyberpunk world with these "gods" walking around... Some humans still have faith, but most are atheist because they've essentially met the "gods" so cybernetics and even robot bodies to live forever (if your mind lives on, are you still alive? Is there a soul?) and such things, desperate not to die. There is also a LOT more humans, for various reasons. They greys? They are dying. The Elohim? They are so long-lived that they only have children if they want to, so they generally don't. The Sidhe and Bane-Sidhe are actually an anomoly as they are unaging, yet there is a lot of them. They're the species that the characters are most likely to run into, and the Bane-Sidhe tend to head up criminal organizations and keep the humans under their heels.
Sorry that was long-winded, but your mention of "humans as the underdog" kind of made me think of that campaign :D
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
my favorite part of star wars, was that the setting wasn't dominated by humans, but had a variety of species with a variety of cultures for each. golarion gaves elves a few cultures, but didn't give many to the other races with the exception of humans.
Then you haven't watched Star Wars carefully. Humans are the dominant race in the galaxy. They are the most numerous and have the most political power. Especially the Empire which was very humanocentric.
my favorite part of star wars, was that the setting wasn't dominated by humans, but had a variety of species with a variety of cultures for each. golarion gaves elves a few cultures, but didn't give many to the other races with the exception of humans.Then you haven't watched Star Wars carefully. Humans are the dominant race in the galaxy. They are the most numerous and have the most political power. Especially the Empire which was very humanocentric.
Yep. Play Star Wars Old Republic as a non-human and you will see. Even Republic side there is times where an alien will be like "It's because I'm not human, isn't it? That's why you won't help me?" or if your charater is not human then instead he'll be like "Come on, we aliens need to stick together... you gotta help me" because for every alien there is 10 humans.
In the Empire, pretty much most non-Humans are at best second-class, if not slaves. On Dromund Kass random conversations you'll hear stuff like "I didn't do it!" "Shut up, alien scum. Speak only when spoken to."
Best case of an alien is to play a Chiss Agent, at which point when the aliens are like "Wow, so great to see another alien, sucks how the humans hate us so much" if you are a Chiss you can pretty much say "Actually, not that bad." because Chiss are the one species the Empire doesn't totally hate. They are allies with the Chiss Ascendancy, so they don't speak badly about you nearly as much as they would if you chose another alien species.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get it. What is the problem of humans being the dominant or most widespread race in the setting?
Also, I feel it to be self-delusional to assume that humans are the glorious master race in a world where there are races that do things better than humans ever could, like the average orc easily overpowering a human, a dwarf (or a gnome) being more durable or elves out-doing humanity when it comes to magic as well as having the luxury of outliving them.
Those who throw the "humans breed faster" argument usually forget that both orcs and hobgoblins (the latter of which are just as smart as humans or sometimes even more so) breed faster and are both very expansionist, which would lead to the national borders on the maps being very different if people who write settings didn't play favourites or come up with some Deus Ex Machina to save humanity all the time. At least with Golarion the god of humanity is dead and gone, so a steady downhill for humanity (which in turn will put the other races in the spotlight they deserve) wouldn't really be out of the question with all these things considered.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's nice to try new ideas. You get tired of the same ol' same ol'.
"What's that? There's a new fantasy world? I wonder who the dominant race will be...? Oh. Humans. The usual then."
That's why one of my homebrew campaigns had an elf/human war instead of elf/dwarf or 'good' races (elves/dwarves/humans) versus 'evil' races (orcs/goblins).
I remember lots of films from my childhood where the protagonists discovered a lost civilisation. It was either dead, or the protagonists helped to destroy it! I always wished that the filmmakers had made a film about this civilisation at its height!
The old 'magic is rare and wonderful' thing is boring. With the rules as is, with magic being reliable, reproducible and predictable, it's hard to imagine it not being as all-pervasive as technology! I once did another campaign where magic was as ubiquitous as tech, with crystal ball relay stations manned by apprentice wizards (instead of telegraph stations), continual light was everywhere, etc. etc.
In that campaign the hero was a dual classed human (2nd ed) who started out as a transmuter, who had a boring job repairing stuff. He was a specialist wizard, but a boring repairman. What he really wanted to be was a swashbuckler! Those guys got all the fun! So he cashed in a few favours and joined The King's Own Wanderers, a Musketeer-like lot who's name didn't come from wandering around, it came from their habit of putting magic wands inside their metal parrying batons while using the rapier/baton TWF style.
Point being, there are so many possibilities in this game, why are we seeing the same old tired tropes over and over and over and over....?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of the major races in my group's homebrew world is a drider-like race. There's a part of the world they are common in that is also home to an avian-esque race, loosely based on the Raptorans from 3.5. As such, among other things, there has developed a clear social distinction - those who can climb or fly (naturally or magically) to the higher-constructed buildings are the literal upper class, while those who cannot live in the lands below as the poorer social strata. Heck, there was a time in that region's history where the lower-realm tried to name their own rulers, since the upper-crust often didn't pay any attention to them; this of course was seen as revolution and quickly squashed, though an uprising of better representation for the low-landers has slowly begun to trickle into the culture as a result, if slowly.
Having already been intrigued by the various lore snippets provided in your campaign journals, now I would really like to see an overview of your homebrew campaign setting somewhere!