Have you ever run or played in an campaign in which there are no humans?

Here's an example: take your standard fantasy setting, with humans, elves, dwarves, orcs, giants, dragons, whatever other sophonts you may have. Remove the "humans". How does that change things?

Show thread

@acodispo
I feel like I'd be fine with it. I've been in some campaigns where there was a 'humans only' limitation, and it felt like part of the fantasy was just missing. Sometimes half the fun of escapism is being something other than human.

Also, I feel like a 'no humans' anywhere limit would help to build an attitude of racial equality, since there's no humans in the world to have as a baseline for comparison.

@BenKramer Yes, I think this question came up in my mind in response to a blog post about a "humans-only" campaign. Interestingly, I'm running a campaign now where "human" is the default for newly created characters, but new bloodlines & ancestries have been "unlocked" as the party discovers (meets) representatives of these groups in their explorations.

Follow

@BenKramer I guess once I started thinking about it it began to seem exceedingly strange to me that humans should be included in most fantasy worlds at all. What purpose does it serve? what is the rationale? And I do rather like the feeling of "no baseline" that comes about if you remove humans.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Tabletop Social

We are an inclusive Mastodon community for everything tabletop (and more).