# Are you bored of human-skinned races?



## Peregrine (Jul 26, 2017)

What does human-skinned mean? (very human-looking)
- dwarf, elf, human...

What does monster-skinned mean? (humanoid, but not human-looking)
- orc, goblin, undead...

In my fantasy there are 4 human-skinned races and 1 monster-skinned race currently.

- Dwarf (human-skinned)
- Ettin (human-skinned; ettin means giant)
- Human (human-skinned)
- Troll (human-skinned)
- Undead (monster-skinned)

Dwarfs = typical dwarfs, but with less stupid stereotypes.
Ettins/Giants = they look like humans, but bigger. They are nomadic barbarians.
Humans = humans...
Trolls = Their physical appearance is based on Neanderthals and they are barbarians, they should not be confused with cavemen because they are civilized in a Gaulish/Old Germanic way, but not as civilized as humans.
Undead = There are no varieties in my undead such as liches, revenants, zombies and other D&D cliches, there are only one UNDEAD, only corporeal undead exist in my fantasy and as the name suggests you are probably imagining a living corpse.

When I made this list I asked myself, is this the best you got? So you made a race of little-people and there is a race of big-people and there are shorter humans that look like Neanderthals and the only race that looks unique are the undead, I thought myself this looks very boring.

The most thing that bothers me are Little-People and Big-People, it takes no effort to create such races and I though to myself, this is pretty lame, why not just make characters that are born with gigantism or dwarfism instead?

Trolls are no exception and the similarity between humans and trolls is like between elves and humans, even though there are obvious physical differences between Neanderthals and humans, trolls still look too human to me and I think they are not worth including.

Trolls were meant to represent a North European barbarian society, I though to myself, humans are just as good at being barbarians as trolls, why the need for a entire race when humans could fill this role too, take Conan for example.

I am thinking of removing all races except the undead, but I still have not decided whether to remove the 4 human-skinned races because I don't know how to fill the gap, I don't know what other races could I have instead.

The undead are not a race in the sense of a biological species, but a life-state when ressurected after death.
And yet the only "race" that seem worth including in my fantasy are the undead.


----------



## CupofJoe (Jul 26, 2017)

Does it work for the stories you have to write?
If so, then go for it.
Personally I wouldn't have put Trolls in the human looking column  but in my last story to involve Trolls, they were a subtype of the goblin  so that isn't unexpected.
And I've always had a soft spot for Ogres too [if you can get past Shrek]
I like it when there is a bit of spin on perceived types...
I was watching a fairly awful film where a group of people were being attacked by Centaurs... except when you got close up, they were humans on horseback wearing armour that made them look like Centaurs... they used the legend and myth of the centaur against their opponents.
In a book, a famine had reduced humans to eating the flesh of the dead, that gave them a disease that made them act like zombies [the slow mindless George A Romero ones, not the newer fast WWZ type]. 
Both of these were human but only when you had time to step back and look at things and in neither case was it explained it was just left there for the reader.


----------



## ThinkerX (Jul 26, 2017)

If it works with the stories, then go for it.  

But for my world....

Elves - human skinned...though their remote ancestors were human, or at least from the same family tree.

Goblins/Hobgoblins...humanoid, with four fingers per hand and four toes per feet, and almost human faces dominated by pig-like snouts.  Skin tends to range from gray to green to rusty red.

Rachasa...three (clawed) fingers on each hand, same for the feet.  Cat-like heads.  Furry, ranging from golden brown to red to black.


----------



## Peregrine (Jul 26, 2017)

> If it works with the stories, then go for it.



I doubt that I'll go for it.

I don't find dwarfs interesting as in the past, the dwarfs were my favorite races, but I am not attached to them as I used to. From my perspective a human could live in the mountains too and have a reputation for being good blacksmiths or whatever associated with dwarfs, humans could take the role of a dwarf. Don't focus if it looks to you like a stereotype, I just want to give a point/example. What does make a dwarf better at blacksmithing than human except *MAGIC* (if the writer attributes magic to dwarfs), a human could be just as good blacksmith as a dwarf.


----------



## SMAndy85 (Jul 26, 2017)

The thing that makes Dwarves better at smithing and building than humans is not always magic.

In most settings, Dwarves are longer lived than humans. That, to me, purely means they have longer to perfect the art. This is also why Elves are often better at magic. They live even longer than dwarves, and so have more time to perfect their art. Dwarves are better at stonework because they usually live in the mountains, where stonework is a necessity.

So in essence, there's no reason why you need them. Have a group of humans that are better at smithing than any other group of humans, because that's what they do on a day to day basis. Have that sub-group of humans develop better dark vision over thousands of years, because they spend a lot of time underground. Refer to them as the deep dwellers or something. All you need to do is avoid the words "dwarf" or "elf" and you'll get around people's expectations.

My world has only humans as a sentient race, but there is one group of them that have built their home above an area of reasonably high volcanic activity, so they use the heat for their smithing. Molten stone is hotter than flames used by other smiths, so they burn out the impurities in metals that weakens them, making their work superior.


----------



## Peregrine (Jul 26, 2017)

I wonder if there is need for a fictional race at all.

The idea that I have only humans and undead and nothing more is simply not enough for me, its either several races or no race at all. I don't like a world where 90% of people are humans while the rest 10% are undead.

I am also worried that my non-humans could have monolithic superculture (A superculture is a culture shared by many ethnicities, for example Far Eastern, Islamic, Graeco-Roman).


----------



## Futhark (Jul 26, 2017)

SMAndy85 said:


> So in essence, there's no reason why you need them. Have a group of humans that are better at smithing than any other group of humans, because that's what they do on a day to day basis. Have that sub-group of humans develop better dark vision over thousands of years, because they spend a lot of time underground. Refer to them as the deep dwellers or something. All you need to do is avoid the words "dwarf" or "elf" and you'll get around people's expectations.



I tend to agree with this sentiment.  If the races are basically human then I would avoid the typical stereotypes.  In my world I have branches of humanity that are similar to elves and dwarves, though they won't be named that, to avoid preconceptions.  Goblins and trolls are more snake-like and have scales.  Ogres are a much older race, descended from a common ancestor of man, and they resemble upright gorillas.

To use your example of dwarves and black smithing, there is the possibility of secret techniques, or access to better ore (such as Spanish Toledo steel, if that was a real thing or not, idk).  English longbow men used a particular wood, and trained since childhood.  This could help to differentiate the human races.

For fantasy races, I have always found the nature to be a great source of inspiration.  Birds, amphibians, and reptiles have a huge variety of adaptions.  Hope this helps


----------



## WooHooMan (Jul 26, 2017)

I think that fantasy races are like any genre convention: you can use them well or poorly.

As much as I don't like using Tolkien as an example: look at his Dwarves.  They're short, bearded and do a lot of metalworking.  The first time you see Dwarves in his works, what are they doing?  Going on a quest to slay a dragon and reclaim their homeland.
It's not the premise of Dwarves that is interesting, it's the lives of Dwarves.  You get what I mean?

I think Tolkien was like "I want a group of people who are industrious, isolated and rugged" and making them a separate race of underground smiths evolved out of that.  Rather than him saying "I want a race of underground smiths".

On a side-note, I like your categorizing of fantasy races in human-skinned and monster-skinned.  
Applying these categories to my WIP-setting; I have two human-skinned, five monster-skinned and one other-skinned.


----------



## elemtilas (Jul 26, 2017)

I guess much will depend on the nature of these races. I agree with you re "a human could do X as well as a Dwarf or Elf, so why bother with Dwarves and Elves?"

So, yeah. What is it about Dwarves and Elves that make them different? So, Dwarves mine and forge. Humans mine and forge. But what makes them different?

Here I think we need to consider how a different species will solve the challenges it faces. What strategies derive from its evolutionary past. How its mindset differs from that of humans. What physical, physiological, magical, social, cognitive, spiritual differences exist.

Perhaps it's just a matter of wonder. Sometimes it's just a matter of that's the way things are. I mean, why bother with Nigerian and Peruvian culture when Japanese and English do just as well?  The splendour of diversity is as good a reason to have Elves and Dwarves and Trolls and Ettins and Undead as any other reason!


----------



## Peregrine (Jul 26, 2017)

I think that hesitating to include races such as dwarfs, elves comes from being overexposed to them in movies, books and video games.

Maybe if I was fresh to fantasy and not overexposed to dwarfs and elves, I probably would treat human-skinned races differently.



> The splendour of diversity is as good a reason to have Elves and Dwarves and Trolls and Ettins and Undead as any other reason!



You're right. There is that feeling us vs. them and that feeling of otherness even if the differences are superficial.

My trolls do indeed look more barbarian than humans and I think that physical differences may accentuate that a lot.
Just labeling them trolls is enough to evoke a feeling of otherness, us (humans) vs. them (trolls) thinking.

In Lord of the Rings, I watched about elves, they look very similar to humans. But they have the same recognizable features such as permanent shave, long hair and leaf-eyes. Even because of these superficial features I felt like they were elves instead of humans, Arwen, Elrond  and Thranduil and even Haldir had a strong elf aura, there is something in them that gives off elven vibes.

I have 5 human-skinned races so far.
But I'm wondering how many human-skinned races are too many, is 5 human-skinned races too many human-skinned races, 
or perhaps I am asking the wrong question? 
Maybe I shouldn't compare how much human-skinned races I have compared to monster-skinned races.

Actually what's so terrible with including those races. Even if they have no role/purpose in my world and are just there for the sake of it, I don't think that somebody's physical differences will ruin a story or make the story worse.


----------



## Mythopoet (Jul 26, 2017)

Peregrine, you seem to be extremely confused in your efforts at worldbuilding. You make assertions and then question and reject them over and over across various threads. You have a lot of ideas. And some very good ideas. But you are constantly second guessing yourself. Perhaps because you don't have a very good sense of how your ideas compare to the fantasy genre at large. And you seem very uncertain about how readers might respond to your ideas which seems to make you feel less confident. What it comes down to is that you don't seem to have any sort of clear vision of what kind of story you want to write. (At least not that I've seen you express.)

And it's extremely important, perhaps the only real important thing, to have a clear idea of what kind of story you want to tell. Everything else flows from that. Setting, plot, characters, themes, they all depend on what your vision for the kind of story you're trying to tell is. Any of the various ideas you've talked about, any combination of races or lack thereof can work and can make for great storytelling but only if you know what kind of story you're trying to tell with those elements. 

There simply are NO definitive answers to many of the questions you're asking. All stories are different. And readers come in a lot of variety. Some may dislike classic fantasy races, but others love them. Different readers want different things out of books and there is no right way to write a fantasy story. You simply write the story YOU want to tell and then attempt to get it in front of the readers who will like it. 

Perhaps you need to stop focusing so much on your races and start thinking about what story you want to tell. And then once you have that in mind you can decide what kinds of races and cultures would best help you to tell that story.


----------



## elemtilas (Jul 26, 2017)

Peregrine said:


> I have 5 human-skinned races so far.
> But I'm wondering how many human-skinned races are too many, is 5 human-skinned races too many human-skinned races,
> or perhaps I am asking the wrong question?
> Maybe I shouldn't compare how much human-skinned races I have compared to monster-skinned races.



In my opinion, the question really isn't "how many" and what's being considered isn't something superficial like "skin". I think you were on the right trail with the "Elven aura". In other words, I think where you're headed there (and I could be wrong!) is deeper differences.

I mean, it's one thing to say Troll's a barbarian because he looks like one, all big and rough looking. (But as you say, humans can also be big, rough looking barbarians...) So, look deeper! What is it about Trolls in your world that make them barbarians? Perhaps there is something in their personalities that simply don't allow them to socialise well. Maybe a hundred Trolls in a camp is about everyone's limit of tolerance before the violence gets too severe. Maybe their cognitive capacities aren't sufficient to deal with farming or agriculture and thus they can't evolve beyond wandering pastoralism.

If there are differences of this sort, then we can start asking questions like world view and what does the "them" look like from their perspective. Perhaps humans who can grow food from the earth are seen as great earth magicians? 

So here we have a Troll that isn't just a "pointy-eared human" or "human-skinned fantasy race". This isn't a world of hats. We have distinct races with distinct personalities and distinct capacities for interacting with their world. I think if you approach fantasy races from this direction, you won't have to worry about being bored with cooky-cutter elves or stock dwarves.



> Actually what's so terrible with including those races. Even if they have no role/purpose in my world and are just there for the sake of it, I don't think that somebody's physical differences will ruin a story or make the story worse.



Of course it won't! And no, there's nothing at all terrible about the existence of those races, whether they take part in your current story or not. Perhaps they'll get a story of their own some time later?

If you read a fairy story set in the primary world, it doesn't mention every possible kind of fairy from every land that ever existed. They're beside the point. Just because one or more of these races exist in your world doesn't mean you have to drop names every time you get the chance.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 26, 2017)

Any race can be made a stereotype, even humans. It's funny, I find the undead completely uninteresting. To me, they are not a separate race, they're whatever race they are, but slower and less interesting than when they were alive. 

As you can tell from this thread, there are many different readers with many different expectations and predilections. First build a world that *you* like. Then write stories that will make other people like it.

But I would not worry too much about stereotypes and tropes at this stage. It's hard to build a world while you have half the planet looking over your shoulder.


----------



## Peregrine (Jul 26, 2017)

> I mean, it's one thing to say Troll's a barbarian because he looks like one, all big and rough looking. (But as you say, humans can also be big, rough looking barbarians...) So, look deeper! What is it about Trolls in your world that make them barbarians? Perhaps there is something in their personalities that simply don't allow them to socialise well. Maybe a hundred Trolls in a camp is about everyone's limit of tolerance before the violence gets too severe. Maybe their cognitive capacities aren't sufficient to deal with farming or agriculture and thus they can't evolve beyond wandering pastoralism.



Unlike humans, they mostly like to live in the woods, therefore they have better survival skills, they are good knappers, trackers and trappers.

Instead of horses they ride moose and unicorns (extremely subverted, not always white and not a horse, looks more like a cross between a woolly rhinoceros and a horse).

Troll magicians are gifted in animal/wild magic. What exactly is animal/wild magic? There are two abilities beast mastery and possession. Beast mastery is the ability to magically tame a wild animal to be utilized as a pet, while possession is the mind control of a animal, its similar to Bran's skinchanging in Game of Thrones.
The troll magicians can even ride their tamed animal, for example some troll magicians ride wargs.

They are at constant war with humans, this conflict is a clash of cultures.

Those that do not hunt are usually reindeer and muskox herders.

They semi-domesticated mammoths and use them as war animals.

They're more robust than humans, more adapted to the harsh wilderness than humans.

They are more immune to freezing weather than humans, they inhabit colder climates.

About the agriculture.
Well I would not condemn an entire race to be stupid, but the trolls do not know any better, they are a mix of hunter-gatherer and pastorial society.
Its probably because of the land they inhabit, because of the Ice Age and permafrost the land in the north is too infertile for crops.



> Peregrine, you seem to be extremely confused in your efforts at worldbuilding.



Strong self-criticism.

What ideas do you consider to be good?


----------



## Mythopoet (Jul 26, 2017)

Peregrine said:


> What ideas do you consider to be good?



It really depends entirely on how you intend to use them in a story. Ideas are a dime a dozen. Tell me how you're going to use the ideas.

I will add, in answer to the thread original question, that no I am not tired of human skinned races. But it really depends on how they're used. Elves can be boring in the wrong hands. But, for instance, I really enjoyed the way Terry Pratchett used them in Discworld.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Jul 26, 2017)

I much prefer the method of starting with characters and then assigning them races. That prevents this expansionist confusion.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 26, 2017)

>this conflict is a clash of cultures

What is troll culture? At what points does it clash with human culture? For that matter, what is human culture? (I've been asking myself that last one; I've spent so much time building dwarf, elf and gnome culture, I realized I've not done the same exercise for humans. How would I characterize us?)


----------



## ThinkerX (Jul 26, 2017)

Peregrine said:


> I think that hesitating to include races such as dwarfs, elves comes from being overexposed to them in movies, books and video games.
> 
> Maybe if I was fresh to fantasy and not overexposed to dwarfs and elves, I probably would treat human-skinned races differently.
> 
> ...



The rule of thumb is 'the rule of three.'  Thing is, more than three 'central' races can be a pain to keep track of.

You've mentioned Tolkien several times in these posts.  Take a look at his races:

Good: humans, dwarves, elves, hobbits, ents - and ents are at the edge of things.

Evil: humans, orcs/goblins, trolls, plus assorted unique or extremely rare critters (dragons, giant spiders)

A bare handful of races, over a massive trilogy plus a couple other tales.  

Suggestion: make one or more of your races extinct, or nearly so.  These would be the people of legend who crafted some great wonder of the world that is still standing ten thousand years later and nobody can duplicate anymore.  A member of one of these races appearing is an *event.* Examples in sources you've cited would be 'ents' from LOTR and the 'Children of the Forest' from Game of Thrones.  

Another suggestion: follow in my footsteps and make one of your 'human skinned' races an actual offshoot of humans (and there have been such branching's in the real world).  Tie this split in with confusing, hotly disputed legends and myths - it is somewhat accepted there is a direct connection between the races, but the nature of it is unclear at best.  An example mentioned in your threads before is giants...and possibly dwarves.

Doing these things not only gives you additional races, it adds to the depth of your world by imbuing it with history and myth.  Have trouble formulating the myths?  I suggest writing it out in the form of a short story.  Put yourself in the shoes of the fourth grunt to the left who was actually there when the old race was wiped out, or the new race spawned.


----------



## Devor (Jul 26, 2017)

I'll preface this by saying I haven't read all of the replies or paid any attention to the other recent thread on the subject.  My apologies if my answer repeats or ignores anybody's contributions.

I see a list of races:

Dwarf
Ettin
Troll

Next to them I see a real-world-ish model that they're based on.

The thing is, there's more to building a race than slapping them with a cultural model. The real question comes in taking the fantasy element that makes them special and extrapolating on it.

Ettins are giants, but doesn't being a giant mean something?  Is it lonely seeing the world and its peoples as beneath you?  Or is it irritating?  Or does it make you feel like a lumbering clog?  Or does it make you feel superior?  Does it make _most ettins_ feel one way, but a particular ettin character feel another?  How does it feel being a human next to an ettin who feels this way?

^ If you don't have any intention of exploring this kind of subject matter in your stories, or in another way making the fantasy element of these races meaningful to the character journey, then cut the races.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Jul 26, 2017)

Peregrine said:


> The most thing that bothers me are Little-People and Big-People, it takes no effort to create such races and I though to myself, this is pretty lame, why not just make characters that are born with gigantism or dwarfism instead?


 If you want to write about humans, dwarves, and giants, than that's all the reason you need 



> Trolls are no exception and the similarity between humans and trolls is like between elves and humans, even though there are obvious physical differences between Neanderthals and humans, trolls still look too human to me and I think they are not worth including.
> 
> Trolls were meant to represent a North European barbarian society, I though to myself, humans are just as good at being barbarians as trolls, *why the need for a entire race when humans could fill this role too*, take Conan for example.


 So that you can see how a story about troll barbarians becomes different than a story about human barbarians would've been 

If you have an idea that you want to use (in your case: trolls, dwarves, and giants), but feel that you're not allowed to use your idea because it feels too similar to something else, then *make* your idea different from the other one in some way


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 26, 2017)

ThinkerX said:


> The rule of thumb is 'the rule of three.'  Thing is, more than three 'central' races can be a pain to keep track of.



Don't read the Malazan books


----------



## elemtilas (Jul 26, 2017)

Steerpike said:


> Don't read the Malazan books



Or Tolkien for that matter!

By the way, Malazan looks interesting! I might have to look into that further! Any particular recommendation as a place to start?


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 26, 2017)

elemtilas said:


> Or Tolkien for that matter!
> 
> By the way, Malazan looks interesting! I might have to look into that further! Any particular recommendation as a place to start?



Gardens of the Moon is the first one, and should give you a pretty good idea of whether you're going to like it before you get into the next nine tomes of the original series


----------



## ThinkerX (Jul 26, 2017)

Steerpike said:


> Don't read the Malazan books



Too late.  I read almost the whole series - something like fifteen books by now. (or was it sixteen?)

It owed a lot to AD&D (could almost hear the dice rolling in places) and I recognized a lot of material drawn from the various rule books (assassins). And, arguably, a fair bit was drawn from Tolkien (immortal elf-like species). That said, many of the races were actually crossbreeds. I also point out that was a massively long series.

And yes, 'Gardens of the Moon' is the first book.


----------



## Steerpike (Jul 26, 2017)

ThinkerX said:


> Too late.  I read almost the whole series - something like fifteen books by now. (or was it sixteen?)
> 
> It owed a lot to AD&D (could almost hear the dice rolling in places) and I recognized a lot of material drawn from the various rule books (assassins). And, arguably, a fair bit was drawn from Tolkien (immortal elf-like species). That said, many of the races were actually crossbreeds. I also point out that was a massively long series.
> 
> And yes, 'Gardens of the Moon' is the first book.



Wasnt it originally an AD&D and then GURPS setting that Erickson and Esselmont created?


----------



## ThinkerX (Jul 27, 2017)

Steerpike said:


> Wasnt it originally an AD&D and then GURPS setting that Erickson and Esselmont created?



Pretty much. I gather some of their campaigns were later transcribed to form various sections of the books.  They do read almost like a game module or campaign book in places.  

But more relevantly, unless you aim to drop the reader straight into a sea of confusion, limiting the number of races down to a mere few is probably a good idea.  Hence, my earlier suggestions:

the OP might consider making one or more of his races all but extinct, the great builders and magicians of legend; and

having two or more races share the same roots.

For trolls...

...the OP describes these as savage hunters with at least some members possessing arcane abilities.  My suggestion: trolls were once human barbarians who managed the near impossible feat of slaying a god or demon.  They dined upon its flesh, and were transformed. Their innate magic stems from this long ago feast. Now, they see themselves as lords of the wilderness.


----------



## Holman (Jul 27, 2017)

ThinkerX said:


> ...the OP describes these as savage hunters with at least some members possessing arcane abilities.  My suggestion: trolls were once human barbarians who managed the near impossible feat of slaying a god or demon.  They dined upon its flesh, and were transformed. Their innate magic stems from this long ago feast. Now, they see themselves as lords of the wilderness.



Oooh this has just reminded me of an old idea I had written down in my little red book - "What if magic could only be passed on by eating the body of the magician?" I hadn't decided how it had all started, but magic was more diluted than it had once been - some dying without being eaten etc - If it started with the fall of the gods that would set up a whole school of magic of different sorts - depending on the god that had been eaten. Thank you very much for that idea!


----------



## D. Gray Warrior (Jul 27, 2017)

One of my worlds essentially has two races: humans and gryphons. The gryphons are sentient and have their own civilization, but their concept of civilization is vastly different from that of humans.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Jul 27, 2017)

D. Gray Warrior said:


> One of my worlds essentially has two races: humans and gryphons. The gryphons are sentient and have their own civilization, but their concept of civilization is vastly different from that of humans.


 I like


----------



## ApaCisare (Jul 29, 2017)

I actually really like the sound of your Neanderthal trolls. I've considered doing something along the lines of a pre historic earth like fantasy with multiple human species in the past. Maybe I'll revisit that someday.
As far as my world is concerned, I decided to go with unnatural skin and hair colour for some of my fantasy 'races.' This was mainly inspired by Bethesda's take on Orcs and Dark Elves in Skyrim, a style I think is unique without being too inhuman.
But just go with what you're most comfortable with. Having something that just isn't quite right nagging in the back of your head is never good for progressing with the story or world building in my experience.


----------



## Maribel (Jul 31, 2017)

I wouldn't say that I'm bored of any particular race or type of race.  Done well, I think that any race, even a more common one such as elves, can really enhance and elevate a story.

That said, I do find stories with sightly less common races to be somewhat more interesting.  For example, D. Gray Warrior's premise of a society involving intelligent gryphons is pretty intriguing to me.  But, personally, I enjoy building worlds with races that have inhuman anatomy... so maybe I'm biased.  Still, I like seeing any non-human race, human-skinned or not.  It keeps things interesting.


----------



## Vadosity (Aug 1, 2017)

I dunno... I think that I am not bored with the common fantasy races rather I am bored with their interpretations. As far as I see there are two main camps when it comes to your Fantasy Races.

Camp One - No magic and or Evil Variations: This is where the magical races are simply portrayed as the opposite of what they are classically shown as. This is in and of itself not soooo bad but... not really wonderful either as I feel it is sometimes done as a bit of a middle finger to the history behind the fantasy genre. 

Camp Two - The Lets Not Change Anything: These are to me more bearable than the above, boring, but bearable. The issue is though that in honouring the traditional roles they can go far too far and become almost a parody rather than something new. 

Although I will say that there are still plenty that are using the Fantasy races well and in new ways.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Aug 1, 2017)

Write a good story and the skins don't matter to me. Whatever works, works.


----------



## Russ (Aug 1, 2017)

Peregrine said:


> I wonder if there is need for a fictional race at all.



It's your story.  You get to decide that.

Do extra races serve your story or not?

Their skin appearance is actually pretty irrelevant to the analysis.

The other thing, that you seem to want to ignore, about other races is that they  have very different cultures than human cultures.  Thus a dwarf may be a far better blacksmith than a human because his culture emphasizes and really values this skill and thus develops it (and this has nothing to do with magic).

The whole point of these other races, which I think many people miss on a superficial analysis, is to teach us something about humanity, because that is what good literature does.  Another race can be used as a comparison to humans, or a mirror for our virtues or flaws.  They can represent an ideal, or an aspect of humanity.

Just looking at them in some bizarre abstract way and trying to figure out whether or not you "need" them outside the context of either your story or their literary or thematic value seems a bizarre and fruitless exercise.


----------

