Humanocentrism is idiotic in real life, let alone in the Der&Ders where there are dozens of sapient nonhuman species one can walk up and talk to - many of which are more accomplished and capable on an individual basis than any human. Let's all be thankful the game is moving past the idea that humanity is somehow special and deserves control of a world where other peoples exist, hn?
How much you wanna bet this will also turn into a debate?
My soul that it will. Any takers?
Why not?
Quite simply, humanocentrism makes no sense in a game world where elves would have an elfocentric view of the world, dwarves would have a dwarfocentric view, goblins would have a gobocentric view, and so on. If one accepts that other sapient species are just that - sapient species - then the idea that humanity has a Just And Natural Right to the whole of the planet is idiotic. Humanity would have what it has managed to take, similarly to every other species. They could exist in harmony with other critters, with each nation comfortable within stable, peaceful borders...or they could be at war with all their neighbors and constantly grabbing for more land and more power, touting "they're inhuman monsters, put them to the sword!" more as wartime propaganda than out of a true and convicted belief that they are the Superior Kind.
Both political situations are perfectly valid, and your players may even wind up invested in the Human Kingdom's war against the Evil Goblin Masses...but it makes for a vastly more interesting game if the EGM are more than just a bunch of XP bags squatting in crude villages waiting to be killed. It's why Eberron or Wildemount are so much more immersive and believable as game realms than Faerun is - everybody has a point. One side's Heroes are another side's war criminals, and morality reaches only as far as the end of your sword.
Even if a species was created as boundlessly bloodthirsty reavers and savages, unable to resist the dark impulses implanted in them by a dark god? How much more interesting might a game be if the players heard rumors of a way the curse might be expunged - a way to steal the dark god's weapons by nullifying the Curse of Ruin? Imagine presenting the players with a real choice - pursue a weapon that could exterminate their ravening enemies once and for all, or pursue these rumors of a way to burn the corruption from their blood and potentially turn them into allies. Wouldn't it be interesting to see which way a party jumped?
Quite simply, humanocentrism makes no sense in a game world where elves would have an elfocentric view of the world, dwarves would have a dwarfocentric view, goblins would have a gobocentric view, and so on.
It would actually make even more sense. When Elves fight for what best for Eves, Dwarves fight for what is best for Dwarves and Goblis fight for what is best for Gonlins, it makes no sense for Humans to go hippie and preach harmony and unity - it would only result in them being overrun and likely extinct by other species who did put their interests first.
You misunderstand. Which is my mistake, I did not explain it as clearly as I could have.
I don't mean that humanocentric views make no sense from humans. Obviously human characters in the world would have a humanocentric perspective. What I mean is that in The Other Thread, as well as in older settings/edition of Der&Der, the world itself had a baked-in humanocentric viewpoint that didn't make any sense. The books and modules and lore all assumed that not only was humanity the dominant species on the planet, but that humanity deserved to be the dominant species on the planet and always would be. That the other species all accepted humanity's dominance as Simply The Way Of It, and because of this even nonhuman species held a humanocentric viewpoint.
Even the Volo's Guide to DM Headaches description of goblins, which was front and center in The Other Thread, described goblins as a fundamentally beaten species. Goblins considered themselves a slave species - they 'knew' they were easily cowed, manipulated, or overpowered by other people and so just accepted it. They only strike out against other species from a sort of spiteful desperation, tormenting and dominating others when they can because they know the opportunity will be fleeting. Those goblins view other species are their superiors - not just physically, but in every other way as well. It's ridiculous, and only one little piece of what makes older D&D worldbuilding so painful.
Humans, human societies, human adventurers, and other in-world human constructs having a humanocentric viewpoint is perfectly fine. The underlying fabric of the cosmos itself having a huamnocentric viewpoint is not.
Going from a more meta point of view, stories where villains have motives and morals are far more interesting than when they don't. Take almost every post-apocalyptic zombie film or novel there is: at the start of the story, the characters are mostly going to be fighting the undead, but by the end the enemies has likely evolved to be other humans. A story is just more interesting that way. Another example of this is the Stormlight Archive series by Brandon Sanderson. If you haven't read it, I would highly recommended it. If you have, look in the spoiler below.
Fairly heavy spoilers ahead, so if you intend to read the series stop now. The Stormlight Archive's main conflict is between humans, and a species called the Parshendi. At the beginning of the series, the Parshendi are slaughtered wholesale and little thought is given to them. As the story develops. Parshmen are given motives, characters and other traits. Are the heroes truly in the right? The story is much more interesting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
What I mean is that in The Other Thread, as well as in older settings/edition of Der&Der, the world itself had a baked-in humanocentric viewpoint that didn't make any sense. The books and modules and lore all assumed that not only was humanity the dominant species on the planet, but that humanity deserved to be the dominant species on the planet and always would be. That the other species all accepted humanity's dominance as Simply The Way Of It, and because of this even nonhuman species held a humanocentric viewpoint.
What setting are you talking about anyways? I for once play almost exclusively Eberron and it's pretty open on that humans are just currently the dominant species on Khorvaire and mostly because they seized the opportunity when everyone else was in shambles after the war against Daleykyr. And on two out of three other continents Humans are either an exotic and rare race or unwashed barbarians living in the shadows of the mighty dragons who rule that land.
Honestly when I was making my homebrew world, I had to actively remember that humans existed and had to try and cram them into places of the world XD. I was much more fascinated and spent more time fleshing out the other single species/races place in the world that I had an "Oh yeah, I guess humans should be somewhere in this place."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
...I couldn't help it.
But no srsly.
It's fine.
Humanocentrism is idiotic in real life, let alone in the Der&Ders where there are dozens of sapient nonhuman species one can walk up and talk to - many of which are more accomplished and capable on an individual basis than any human. Let's all be thankful the game is moving past the idea that humanity is somehow special and deserves control of a world where other peoples exist, hn?
Please do not contact or message me.
Thank you Yurei. Everyone can play their game their own way.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
How much you wanna bet this will also turn into a debate?
: Systems Online : Nikoli_Goodfellow Homebrew : My WIP Homebrew Class :
(\_/)
( u u)
o/ \🥛🍪 Hey, take care of yourself alright?
Soooo... how long ago have you gone vegan? Just to save the time and get it out of the thread, because it would come up inevitably...
Considering the bang-up, crackerjack job we’re doing with the world we got now....
🤔...
🤨
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If I was a betting girl.....
Regardless, my answer is the same as what I replied in the first thread.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
My soul that it will. Any takers?
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Nice.
So why are people still arguing about how they play the game?
: Systems Online : Nikoli_Goodfellow Homebrew : My WIP Homebrew Class :
(\_/)
( u u)
o/ \🥛🍪 Hey, take care of yourself alright?
Because this is a forum on the Internet. Arguing over stuff is what people do.
Please do not contact or message me.
Ah yes.
: Systems Online : Nikoli_Goodfellow Homebrew : My WIP Homebrew Class :
(\_/)
( u u)
o/ \🥛🍪 Hey, take care of yourself alright?
I like how this is much calmer than the other thread
: Systems Online : Nikoli_Goodfellow Homebrew : My WIP Homebrew Class :
(\_/)
( u u)
o/ \🥛🍪 Hey, take care of yourself alright?
Because it's fun.
Why not?
Quite simply, humanocentrism makes no sense in a game world where elves would have an elfocentric view of the world, dwarves would have a dwarfocentric view, goblins would have a gobocentric view, and so on. If one accepts that other sapient species are just that - sapient species - then the idea that humanity has a Just And Natural Right to the whole of the planet is idiotic. Humanity would have what it has managed to take, similarly to every other species. They could exist in harmony with other critters, with each nation comfortable within stable, peaceful borders...or they could be at war with all their neighbors and constantly grabbing for more land and more power, touting "they're inhuman monsters, put them to the sword!" more as wartime propaganda than out of a true and convicted belief that they are the Superior Kind.
Both political situations are perfectly valid, and your players may even wind up invested in the Human Kingdom's war against the Evil Goblin Masses...but it makes for a vastly more interesting game if the EGM are more than just a bunch of XP bags squatting in crude villages waiting to be killed. It's why Eberron or Wildemount are so much more immersive and believable as game realms than Faerun is - everybody has a point. One side's Heroes are another side's war criminals, and morality reaches only as far as the end of your sword.
Even if a species was created as boundlessly bloodthirsty reavers and savages, unable to resist the dark impulses implanted in them by a dark god? How much more interesting might a game be if the players heard rumors of a way the curse might be expunged - a way to steal the dark god's weapons by nullifying the Curse of Ruin? Imagine presenting the players with a real choice - pursue a weapon that could exterminate their ravening enemies once and for all, or pursue these rumors of a way to burn the corruption from their blood and potentially turn them into allies. Wouldn't it be interesting to see which way a party jumped?
Please do not contact or message me.
It would actually make even more sense. When Elves fight for what best for Eves, Dwarves fight for what is best for Dwarves and Goblis fight for what is best for Gonlins, it makes no sense for Humans to go hippie and preach harmony and unity - it would only result in them being overrun and likely extinct by other species who did put their interests first.
You misunderstand. Which is my mistake, I did not explain it as clearly as I could have.
I don't mean that humanocentric views make no sense from humans. Obviously human characters in the world would have a humanocentric perspective. What I mean is that in The Other Thread, as well as in older settings/edition of Der&Der, the world itself had a baked-in humanocentric viewpoint that didn't make any sense. The books and modules and lore all assumed that not only was humanity the dominant species on the planet, but that humanity deserved to be the dominant species on the planet and always would be. That the other species all accepted humanity's dominance as Simply The Way Of It, and because of this even nonhuman species held a humanocentric viewpoint.
Even the Volo's Guide to DM Headaches description of goblins, which was front and center in The Other Thread, described goblins as a fundamentally beaten species. Goblins considered themselves a slave species - they 'knew' they were easily cowed, manipulated, or overpowered by other people and so just accepted it. They only strike out against other species from a sort of spiteful desperation, tormenting and dominating others when they can because they know the opportunity will be fleeting. Those goblins view other species are their superiors - not just physically, but in every other way as well. It's ridiculous, and only one little piece of what makes older D&D worldbuilding so painful.
Humans, human societies, human adventurers, and other in-world human constructs having a humanocentric viewpoint is perfectly fine. The underlying fabric of the cosmos itself having a huamnocentric viewpoint is not.
Please do not contact or message me.
Going from a more meta point of view, stories where villains have motives and morals are far more interesting than when they don't. Take almost every post-apocalyptic zombie film or novel there is: at the start of the story, the characters are mostly going to be fighting the undead, but by the end the enemies has likely evolved to be other humans. A story is just more interesting that way. Another example of this is the Stormlight Archive series by Brandon Sanderson. If you haven't read it, I would highly recommended it. If you have, look in the spoiler below.
Fairly heavy spoilers ahead, so if you intend to read the series stop now. The Stormlight Archive's main conflict is between humans, and a species called the Parshendi. At the beginning of the series, the Parshendi are slaughtered wholesale and little thought is given to them. As the story develops. Parshmen are given motives, characters and other traits. Are the heroes truly in the right? The story is much more interesting.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
What setting are you talking about anyways? I for once play almost exclusively Eberron and it's pretty open on that humans are just currently the dominant species on Khorvaire and mostly because they seized the opportunity when everyone else was in shambles after the war against Daleykyr. And on two out of three other continents Humans are either an exotic and rare race or unwashed barbarians living in the shadows of the mighty dragons who rule that land.
I am a humanist. I view humanity as the measure of all things.
We do rule the planet, because we are that powerful. Our power is accelerating.
Just like it would be dumb to burn down ones own house, it is also dumb to burn down ones own planet.
The plants and animals around us are aspects of our own humanity. When they are healthy, then we are healthy.
he / him
Honestly when I was making my homebrew world, I had to actively remember that humans existed and had to try and cram them into places of the world XD. I was much more fascinated and spent more time fleshing out the other single species/races place in the world that I had an "Oh yeah, I guess humans should be somewhere in this place."