[Rant] Originality for the sake of Originality

[Jürgen Hubert]

Over the years, I've sometimes seen the conviction expressed on various RPG forums that if you use any of the "standard" PC races in your setting - elves, dwarves, halflings and the like - then your setting is no longer original and should be dismissed immediately.

Wrong, I say. Dead wrong.

Originality - bringing in your own ideas into a setting - is good. But there is nothing wrong with using well-known tropes from history, myth and legend, the fantasy genre, and D&D in particular - such as these "standard races". They provide a good starting point for your players to grasp the setting - something they can understand and play with.

On the other hand, if you want to be original for originality's sake and create a race called the "Flummorax" or something and write pages upon pages on their native habitat, social organization, economic system and mating habits, then you've used up a significant amount of the attention span of the people who might have had an interest in your setting - and then what are you going to do with the other new races you want to introduce? It's likely that after a few iterations of this all interest by others is lost and they will throw the whole thing away in disgust.

Of course, you could simplify things by essentially just making these races elves, dwarves or whatever in funny suits - alter their appearance but nothing else. But what would be the point of such races then?

For settings to work, they have to include a good mixture of both the new and familiar - the new to exite the players, and the familiar to ease them in. Of course, you can create wholly alien settings, like MAR Barker's Tekumel - but despite Tekumel's fame, it was never very successful, and while Barker made it work, I doubt you are a professor of Linguistics and Anthropology like he is.

To sum it up, use your novel ideas where they truly matter - either in a few strong themes that can be easily communicated to the players, or in small setting details that neither the players nor the player characters need to know initially.

And keep your hands off my elves.

[Wensleydale]

*nods*

You can be right. In Kalara I kept the basic races, but modified their stats and background a little bit. Not much, however.

[Wormwood]

Lets examine the following:

You meet elves at North Continent, where they live at North Woods in their village. You then travel south, across Central Ocean, crossing The Burning Desert, climbing over The High Mountain and enter The Big Jungle.

In the Big Jungle you meet another elven village and meet elves who are just like elves about 5000 miles north. No variation due the fact that there isn't ounce of metal in entire Big Jungle, no changes in costume/weaponry/speech even if they have never met anyone from North Woods. Why is this you ask? Answer: They are elves!

What I am supposed to do with elves, as they clearly are a single culture, not a race? Stuck them in some wooded plot in my world and wall them in?

I rather develop multitude of elven cultures. People will find the familiarity, but same time it is something different, as it isn't enough to say that he is an elf, but one must say he is Hunag-People or Northlander or similar elven culture that defines them.

[Jürgen Hubert]

Who said that you can't have different elven cultures in your setting? All you have to do is explore different facets of the elves as portrayed in myth and fantasy.

For Urbis, I've got "Elves as Rulers of the Faerie Court", "Elves living on Isolated Islands in the West", "Elves as Stealers of Human Children", and a few honorable mentions of "Elves lording it over Everyone Else".

These are all truly distinct cultures and nations - and yet all are truly elvish.

[Lmns Crn]

Some of the terms that always make me see red at WotC are "sacred cow", "sacred barbecue", and variants thereof.

I'm not shy about making drastic changes when the changes have a purpose. But there's a small but vocal faction that seems to advocate changing things for the self-supporting purpose of changing as many things as possible, or changing things just to mess with people's heads.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

I like change.  In my view so many settings just aren't worth reading because they use all the same concepts: evil warlords threatening the peaceful kingdoms, mystical elves who look down on everyone, mysterious dragons who have great power but appear to spend most of their time collecting treasure, demons always occupied tempting mortals, etc.  "Don't change too much" you say?  I say it's quite easy to change something while still making it simple to understand.   Let's take each of my above examples:
Evil Warlords = how about an amoral villain, someone who doesn't actively do evil.  Or make the villain Lex Luthor-type, the head of a powerful merchant group, and he's not trying to take over the world he just wants to make a profit and he's willing to backstab to do it.
Mystical elves = Keith Baker's Eberron has the Valenar, horse-riding elves with scimitars who might want to chop off your head.
Mysterious dragons who collect treasure = make dragons more prominent.  They rule countries.  They amass vast libraries instead of gold and open universities.  Heck, all monsters with the potential should be integrated into a fantasy world's culture.
Demons = demons, even evil ones, weren't always a detriment.  Pazuzu of Mesopotamia, king of evil wind demons, was also the protector of pregnant women because he scared off other demons.  Give some scary-looking creatures a good role in your setting, you'll see they work.

One thing you said, Hubert: "All you have to do is explore different facets of â,¬' as portrayed in myth and fantasy."  why limit yourself to myth?  If your players know nothing about African myths, does that mean you can't use them?  Sometimes a myth may come up that other people have never heard of, and if you use it you might as well have made it up.  So why not just make things up?  The problem you point out is not one of familiarity but one of excess details, and is as common with "familiar" things as non-familiar ones.

[Wormwood]

Who said that you can't have different elven cultures in your setting? All you have to do is explore different facets of the elves as portrayed in myth and fantasy.

For Urbis, I've got "Elves as Rulers of the Faerie Court", "Elves living on Isolated Islands in the West", "Elves as Stealers of Human Children", and a few honorable mentions of "Elves lording it over Everyone Else".

These are all truly distinct cultures and nations - and yet all are truly elvish.

Do they all have same racial bonuses? Are they all longbowmen? Do they speak same language? Same armour? Can you get same magical items from all cultures? Do all elven cultures manufacture elven boots or armour? If so why? Shouldn't they have different preferences based on the area they live in?

If player makes elven rogue/wizard/whatnot character, how is he able to tell what culture that elf is from? Shouldn't you tweak around the stats and bonuses to reflect the seperation, ie create new races?

Basically I agree with you, there is no need for race of two-headed cat-people, Gato-Ettin or whatever, but what core has wrong is simple assumption that single race would stay the same whereever it lives. This is really bad with elves and dwarves, whose culture is pretty much tied to their race.

Pulling elves out of their woods and putting them into saddle of a some war pony and declaring them nomands while still making them feel close relatives of those few you choose to leave into forrest, now that is a challenge that makes a good setting.

[Jürgen Hubert]

Do they all have same racial bonuses? Are they all longbowmen? Do they speak same language? Same armour? Can you get same magical items from all cultures? Do all elven cultures manufacture elven boots or armour? If so why? Shouldn't they have different preferences based on the area they live in?

If player makes elven rogue/wizard/whatnot character, how is he able to tell what culture that elf is from? Shouldn't you tweak around the stats and bonuses to reflect the seperation, ie create new races?

I don't see why - after all, you can have different human cultures without tweaking their stats. Maybe they have access to different equipment, feats and prestige classes - but why should I change the stats of the base race?

[Lmns Crn]

Do they all have same racial bonuses? Are they all longbowmen? Do they speak same language? Same armour? Can you get same magical items from all cultures? Do all elven cultures manufacture elven boots or armour? If so why? Shouldn't they have different preferences based on the area they live in?

My dear Wormwood,

It is entirely possible to create distinct cultures within a people, fostering a recognizable and seperate attitude within each one, without reinventing the wheel every time you do so.

In fact, there are numerous precedents for this simplified method of culture creation. For example, consider the case of Great Britain and the so-called prodigal colonies, the United States. Both are populated by humans (and would therefore presumably share the same racial features), with no measurable difference in their modern-day longbowmanship. They speak the same language (albeit with dialectual differences), make available the same sorts of goods and services, and in many ways are quite similar. Yet each culture feels unmistakably unique. It would be difficult indeed to vacation in London and believe yourself to be in New York. What is more, the underlying similarities I have mentioned are tied to observable causes in the history of both nations, which we may examine in a future correspondence, however in the meantime I remain:

Your affection uncle,
-Screwtape

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

But you forget that elves have free weapon proficiencies that are, or at least should be, based on their culture.  Should an elf that comes from far away have the same weapon proficienies just because he is an elf?  Should weapon proficiency even be part of racial statistics if it isn't innate?

[Lmns Crn]

But you forget that elves have free weapon proficiencies that are, or at least should be, based on their culture.  Should an elf that comes from far away have the same weapon proficienies just because he is an elf?  Should weapon proficiency even be part of racial statistics if it isn't innate?

The eternal debate. You could do away with it entirely, of course, and use a stat block without socially- or culturally-mandated features.

Or you could do as I have done, and account for it through history. If all your elves trace their roots to a primordial culture, and spread and fragment from there as the centuries wore on, it's easy to conceive of far-flung modern cultures that share common traits-- such as language, a basic and general style of clothing, an affinity for swordplay, et cetera-- despite their differences. That's how real cultures actually work.

Personally, I find it easier, more sensible, and more satisfying to do things this way than to create an entirely new stat block every time I want to talk about a different nation. But maybe that's just me. Regardless, it seems we're moving away from the original point of the thread, and I'd hate to hijack Jurgen Hubert's fine-quality rant.

Edit: I find upon closer examination that I've actually done both-- toned down and flexible-ized a lot of culturally-inspired racial stats, for elves and for others. That's what you get when you rewrite almost everything, it seems.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Then I still stand on my assertion that one can change things and people will still understand them.  I also assert that some could introduce something new if they feel it's a good idea.  Hubert has a point that people might not be able to stomach a lot of detail, but if that's the case then maybe you don't want those people.  It may sound mean, but you can't please everyone, so stick to what you want and those who like it will stick with you.

I do agree with the idea that a setting can still be original even if it includes several familiar core elements, but not if it seems to use those elements as an excuse not to be creative.  You want to leave the core races as they are?  Fine, but don't be surprised if I yawn at your orc hoards, your gruff dwarves, your trickster gnomes, you evil drow.  I can't help it if things that have been done before bore me.  This doesn't mean you have to change their stats, or even the short descriptions I just gave.

@Luminous Crayon: "Personally, I find it easier, more sensible, and more satisfying to do things this way than to create an entirely new stat block every time I want to talk about a different nation."
I mean that elves should be stripped down until their traits can be justified almost anywhere.

[Lmns Crn]

Then I still stand on my assertion that one can change things and people will still understand them. I also assert that some could introduce something new if they feel it's a good idea.

I mean that elves should be stripped down until their traits can be justified almost anywhere.[/quote]Absolutely. Again, I've done this with my races, and with all my "crunchy bits," to the best of my ability.

SilvercatMoonpaw, I am always amused and somewhat bewildered at the way the two of us seem constantly to bicker about small details, when our core philosophies seem to be so similar. Can it be that I have finally met someone as argumentative as myself?

[Epic Meepo]

What I am supposed to do with elves, as they clearly are a single culture, not a race?

Elves aren't a single culture at all. High elves are a single culture, and many other elven cultures exist.

It seems that quite a few people assume that the PHB description of the elf is the Core rules version of the elf, which is entirely false. The Monster Manual is also part of the Core rules, and you'll notice that its description of elves includes several elven cultures, some of which are quite different from the high elf culture described in the PHB.

What's more, there are several official D&D sourcebooks outside of the Core rulebooks that also describe variant elven cultures. (Unearthed Arcana comes to mind as a shining example of the fact that D&D elves are not all identical.)

It is a falacy to say that all Core elves are exactly the same, and even more of one to say that the D&D game as a whole treats elves as a single culture with a single set of racial statistics. When it comes to racial languages, D&D does greatly simplify things, but beyond that, elves are many and varied. One has to read more than just the PHB to see this, but it is, in fact, true.

[Tybalt]

I think that I do somewhat agree with what was being said at the first post, but part of the difficulty of that is that probably most of those posting here are gms or want to be, so we're all looking for stuff to find inspirational or novel for a campaign. So in som cases people might be forgetting the fact that cliches and story staples exist because they touch something in the common consciousness. The setting in a way in a really good game is only as good as the story itself is.

For instance, take what was said about elves. There are a few slants you could use on elves: Tolkien, Elfquest, E.R. Eddison, Lord Dunsany, you name it. You might want something totally unique...the elves of the Darksun setting come to mind...but you can also go for something classic because when it comes down to it you want your elves to fit the story of your world's creation and how you want your players to respond when meeting up with them.

For instance: I am going to have Sea Elves be probably the first elves my human player group encounters. I'm not so much concerned with making the most unique culture of sea elves I can think of as I'm interested in making the encounter interesting and involving for my players. I think that if you want to make a lasting campaign that stretches beyond a few game sessions you need to think of that too, of the possibilities for adventure and intrigue.