>thing is le popular therefore it’s good and no one should ever try anything original
Holy fricking shit why is this belief so popular in FANTASY of all genres
>so thoroughly BTFO he has to invent a non-sequitur strawman from thin air
Let it be known that OP was not man enough to acknowledge his failure and chose to gnash and wail like a hysterical woman.
Any great setting with elves also tends to have really great elves. You can gauge a settings quality in how well-written their pointy eared folks are. Having elves or any other common fantasy is not a problem.
They are just the most popular fantasy race (sorry, dwarf-gays, but you were always a vocal minority), so if you want to be oh so different, you either advertise yourself via your weird elves or by not having them at all.
Also /thread
No, libshits just hate them for being the "fantasy master race".
Elves can fill versatile roles, in any setting.
>our game is good because it doesn't have [popular thing]
how to make your playerbase nothing but smarky contrarians
It seems to be a setting built just be contrarian out of sheer spite. Might as well remove wizards, clerics dragons etc and just have a historical medieval game. Or make it sci-fantasy and have the elves be aliens or genetically modified humans.
>tired of look alike fantasy games
not really
I like it when the characters have faces that look like a person and not some weird animal
This. People don't want to play weird shit in fantasy. Even freakshit like tieflings still look mostly human.
The whole conversation in the jpg reminds me of this guy I played with, a friend of friends, back in the 90s. Dude was an autistic weirdo. Worked as a machinist and never really cleaned his hands, so they were always almost black with grease. Once, he got athlete's foot so bad he was in a wheelchair. He always played an elven fighter/cleric/mage in every campaign anyone ran. I decided to run a game that didn't feel like Tolkien, so no elves, dwarves, or hobbits. This dude, who I didn't even invite (but he was friends with the guy whose house we were playing at) threw an absolute fit, insisting he had to play an elven fighter/mage/cleric. All of this cumulated into the line: >"But I don't know how to roleplay a human!"
>chuds hate elves because they project libshits onto them >libshits hate elves because they project chuds onto them
Is hating elves a litmus test of someone holding a shitty ideology and therefore shouldn't be played with?
Yup. Exactly. Elves are actually the best part of fantasy because they're idealistic by nature. If somebody hates them, it's because they're culturecucked cynics who can only view an idealized vision of an other as "incorrect portrayal of my political opponent"
Elves are supposed to be haughty and wild, like a lion (see wood elves in the second Hobbit movie). If a setting doesn't portray them as such, they're boring. Also, get rid of the 187 different types of elves, there should only be a single type of elf and they should be closer to wood/wild elves than high elves.
Elves in popular fantasy are kind of a weird hybrid of two archetypes:
one from european folkmyth >frivelous fairy aristocrats from some dreamy otherworld
and the other from tolkien >a tragic race of fallen archons whose glory days sit far in the past
If you can give them more definition, or find the pattern in and between these archetypes and build off of it, you can make elves good for more than just being the female player race.
They're pretty one-note a lot of the time. It contributes to the feeling that most fantasy settings can be safely skipped over because they appear to be the same thing.
It seems to be a setting built just be contrarian out of sheer spite. Might as well remove wizards, clerics dragons etc and just have a historical medieval game. Or make it sci-fantasy and have the elves be aliens or genetically modified humans.
>Might as well remove wizards, clerics dragons
sounds good to me >just have a historical medieval game
elfgays once again showing that they have no imagination
this mattered more 40 years ago when a lot of products were just aping D&D with a generic fantasy setting. there's plenty out there now, so while you don't need to add elves, loudly announcing their absence would come across as needlessly contrarian. yeah, the talislanta website says "still no elves" but at this point i'd hope it's pretty tongue-in-cheek
I find Elves to be conceptually flexible than other elves. You can have magical high elves, you can have nature loving wood Elves. You can have highly Imperialistic and supremist Elves like Elder Scrolls, though often you have highly reclusive and hidden Elven societies. You can have inherently pute Elves like Tolkien, or you could have Elves that are essentially "Greater Fae" that go on great hunts against mankind for sport and fear steel. Yet despite that, all of them are recognizably Elves, not many would argue you on what they are.
Double applies to the dark elf, to the point where no one agrees even on appearance. Warhammer says Pale, Drow are pitch black, Japan says they're just brown skinned elves, and you'll even see Blue skinned dark elves. Despite that, no one argues they are Elves, just evil ones, and even that's not always the case. Some make them evil by nature, others make them evil by culture, some straight up don't make them evil. You could make dark elves that do have a sinful nature and are easily swayed towards wickedness, however they are also inherently guilt-ridden by nature as well, so they turn towards faith to overcome their cruel and suicidal tendencies.
And most people putside of /tg/ will buy that those are Elves. Because really the defining point of Elves is them being "Idealistic Humans", usually along with a beautiful appearance and long lifespans. And pointy ears, especially the pointy ears.
I feel like the Tolkien races have a lot of baggage that limits how creative you can be. If you want to color inside the lines of everyone's preconceived notions on how elves, dwarves, etc. should be, good for you, I hope you have fun. I personally buck against those trends and want races that are more unique in my game - both in terms of appearance and lore/mechanics. I want less elves and more fantastical dudes - shit barely feels fantastical or interesting when it's just the same recycled shit.
I look at the Tolkien staples and wonder why they can't just be weird human cultures, since that's all they usually really are - humans but with trait X. Humans, but they're all scottish craftsmen who live underground. Humans but they're all dicks and live in trees.
>I look at the Tolkien staples and wonder why they can't just be weird human cultures
Primarily to make human cultures feel more human. Also to give them traits that are normally impossible for humans. Traits like longer lifespans, inate magical powers, and the ability to Naruto run up a tree. On the reverse, you can give an Elf a frail physic, and its hard to justify that dor an entire human kingdom unless they all disease ridden, and that doesn't come off as profound or gentle, that comes off as revolting and depressing.
Dwarves however, are there to appeal to manlets and manlet enablers.
To be fair, Elves having frail physiques only exists to appeal to people insecure about them being superior to humans. It's just a spiteful misinterpretation of the idea that they're more beautiful.
I prefer to split the difference. >normal elves are generally superior to humans. Plus whatever personality traits you want to associate with them. >Some subspecies of Elf like Cave Elves or whatever exists as caricature of the elven stereotype. Pale as a ghost, beautiful as a statue, seemingly limitless lifespans. They are fast as lighting and their magical potential is unmatched. However they are as frail as glass, and are extremely rare and solitary, even by elf standards. You will sopner find a unicorn in real life.
Arguably, the most popular fantasy setting of all time doesn't have elves, orcs, or really any recognizable fantasy creatures in its roster outside of dragons, the living dead, giant animals and golems.
>pigs >warrior race >will attack anyone except those who have business with them >very primitive bartering >swarm tactics >cowardly, will flee from the undead
They are basically orcs
Elves are boring. I feel like they're included just to fill out a check list. They also lack an identity. What do elves in fantasy have in common? Pointy ears (a minor detail), magic (sometimes), and not much else. I'd rather see mythology-based elves, even if just a little more faithful, with more "customized" elves being more interesting original demi-human or humanoid species. Although Warcraft elves look cool as hell with their giant ears. Maybe embrace the ambiguity of mythological creature categories.
I like elves and dwarves. I don't care if they're original, making something good is more important than making something new. If you suck at GMing, no amount of "original" or "interesting" worldbuilding is going to save your campaign.
Considering many popular settings contain elves and no one has ever cared about Talislanta, I'm gonna go with "no."
>thing is le popular therefore it’s good and no one should ever try anything original
Holy fricking shit why is this belief so popular in FANTASY of all genres
>so thoroughly BTFO he has to invent a non-sequitur strawman from thin air
Let it be known that OP was not man enough to acknowledge his failure and chose to gnash and wail like a hysterical woman.
>posts chad
>is an incel
have a nice day homosexual.
>continues to invent strawmen to attack
Tragic. Perhaps this (You) will bring some cheer to your life.
normally i wouldn't say this about people who post chads, but you're actually being based
Probably because if something is tried and tested this much and still sticks around, It at least works
Any great setting with elves also tends to have really great elves. You can gauge a settings quality in how well-written their pointy eared folks are. Having elves or any other common fantasy is not a problem.
They are just the most popular fantasy race (sorry, dwarf-gays, but you were always a vocal minority), so if you want to be oh so different, you either advertise yourself via your weird elves or by not having them at all.
Also /thread
Wrong. Trolls are the most common fantasy race.
The best part is that Talislanta has multiple varieties of elves with the serial numbers filed off.
This. People don't want to play weird shit in fantasy. Even freakshit like tieflings still look mostly human.
>he labeled his picture "bait"
oops
The whole conversation in the jpg reminds me of this guy I played with, a friend of friends, back in the 90s. Dude was an autistic weirdo. Worked as a machinist and never really cleaned his hands, so they were always almost black with grease. Once, he got athlete's foot so bad he was in a wheelchair. He always played an elven fighter/cleric/mage in every campaign anyone ran. I decided to run a game that didn't feel like Tolkien, so no elves, dwarves, or hobbits. This dude, who I didn't even invite (but he was friends with the guy whose house we were playing at) threw an absolute fit, insisting he had to play an elven fighter/mage/cleric. All of this cumulated into the line:
>"But I don't know how to roleplay a human!"
fippity bip lel
No, libshits just hate them for being the "fantasy master race".
>chuds hate elves because they project libshits onto them
>libshits hate elves because they project chuds onto them
Is hating elves a litmus test of someone holding a shitty ideology and therefore shouldn't be played with?
Yup. Exactly. Elves are actually the best part of fantasy because they're idealistic by nature. If somebody hates them, it's because they're culturecucked cynics who can only view an idealized vision of an other as "incorrect portrayal of my political opponent"
Everything is bad for a setting.
You shouldn't put anything in your setting
You shouldn't even have a setting.
Elves can fill versatile roles, in any setting.
Please don't reply to it.
I'll reply to whomever I please. For I know the secret word!
As noble superior beings who use human women as their wienersleeves.
>Talislanta
Jesus. That's a name I haven't heard in a long time.
>our game is good because it doesn't have [popular thing]
how to make your playerbase nothing but smarky contrarians
Elves are supposed to be haughty and wild, like a lion (see wood elves in the second Hobbit movie). If a setting doesn't portray them as such, they're boring. Also, get rid of the 187 different types of elves, there should only be a single type of elf and they should be closer to wood/wild elves than high elves.
Please do not drag Talislanta into needless fighting. It doesn't deserve it.
depends on the setting. if it isn't at least partially inspired by european folklore and mythology, than i would say they shouldn't be included.
Elves in popular fantasy are kind of a weird hybrid of two archetypes:
one from european folkmyth
>frivelous fairy aristocrats from some dreamy otherworld
and the other from tolkien
>a tragic race of fallen archons whose glory days sit far in the past
If you can give them more definition, or find the pattern in and between these archetypes and build off of it, you can make elves good for more than just being the female player race.
They're pretty one-note a lot of the time. It contributes to the feeling that most fantasy settings can be safely skipped over because they appear to be the same thing.
It seems to be a setting built just be contrarian out of sheer spite. Might as well remove wizards, clerics dragons etc and just have a historical medieval game. Or make it sci-fantasy and have the elves be aliens or genetically modified humans.
>Might as well remove wizards, clerics dragons
sounds good to me
>just have a historical medieval game
elfgays once again showing that they have no imagination
Did you read the last part? Or would you rather replace them with furries?
>if you think you don't need fantasy races then you're a furry
elfgay moment
this mattered more 40 years ago when a lot of products were just aping D&D with a generic fantasy setting. there's plenty out there now, so while you don't need to add elves, loudly announcing their absence would come across as needlessly contrarian. yeah, the talislanta website says "still no elves" but at this point i'd hope it's pretty tongue-in-cheek
>Black savants
moronic n-words are part of the setting?
You know savant means someone who is learned, wise, or scholarly, right?
No, of course you don't.
Anyone have any sourcebooks to share for Talislanta?
Everything officially published for it is on talislanta.com
They're all free for download on the website except for the newest edition.
>tired of look alike fantasy games
not really
I like it when the characters have faces that look like a person and not some weird animal
The ironic thing is, Talislanta has more than a few races that are basically just elves with the serial numbers filed off.
So fricking spergy.
I find Elves to be conceptually flexible than other elves. You can have magical high elves, you can have nature loving wood Elves. You can have highly Imperialistic and supremist Elves like Elder Scrolls, though often you have highly reclusive and hidden Elven societies. You can have inherently pute Elves like Tolkien, or you could have Elves that are essentially "Greater Fae" that go on great hunts against mankind for sport and fear steel. Yet despite that, all of them are recognizably Elves, not many would argue you on what they are.
Double applies to the dark elf, to the point where no one agrees even on appearance. Warhammer says Pale, Drow are pitch black, Japan says they're just brown skinned elves, and you'll even see Blue skinned dark elves. Despite that, no one argues they are Elves, just evil ones, and even that's not always the case. Some make them evil by nature, others make them evil by culture, some straight up don't make them evil. You could make dark elves that do have a sinful nature and are easily swayed towards wickedness, however they are also inherently guilt-ridden by nature as well, so they turn towards faith to overcome their cruel and suicidal tendencies.
And most people putside of /tg/ will buy that those are Elves. Because really the defining point of Elves is them being "Idealistic Humans", usually along with a beautiful appearance and long lifespans. And pointy ears, especially the pointy ears.
Frick whoops type, meant I find elves to be more conceptually flexible than other races.
You blew it, a wall of text with an illegible first sentence. TL;DR.
I feel like the Tolkien races have a lot of baggage that limits how creative you can be. If you want to color inside the lines of everyone's preconceived notions on how elves, dwarves, etc. should be, good for you, I hope you have fun. I personally buck against those trends and want races that are more unique in my game - both in terms of appearance and lore/mechanics. I want less elves and more fantastical dudes - shit barely feels fantastical or interesting when it's just the same recycled shit.
I look at the Tolkien staples and wonder why they can't just be weird human cultures, since that's all they usually really are - humans but with trait X. Humans, but they're all scottish craftsmen who live underground. Humans but they're all dicks and live in trees.
>I look at the Tolkien staples and wonder why they can't just be weird human cultures
Primarily to make human cultures feel more human. Also to give them traits that are normally impossible for humans. Traits like longer lifespans, inate magical powers, and the ability to Naruto run up a tree. On the reverse, you can give an Elf a frail physic, and its hard to justify that dor an entire human kingdom unless they all disease ridden, and that doesn't come off as profound or gentle, that comes off as revolting and depressing.
Dwarves however, are there to appeal to manlets and manlet enablers.
To be fair, Elves having frail physiques only exists to appeal to people insecure about them being superior to humans. It's just a spiteful misinterpretation of the idea that they're more beautiful.
I prefer to split the difference.
>normal elves are generally superior to humans. Plus whatever personality traits you want to associate with them.
>Some subspecies of Elf like Cave Elves or whatever exists as caricature of the elven stereotype. Pale as a ghost, beautiful as a statue, seemingly limitless lifespans. They are fast as lighting and their magical potential is unmatched. However they are as frail as glass, and are extremely rare and solitary, even by elf standards. You will sopner find a unicorn in real life.
Arguably, the most popular fantasy setting of all time doesn't have elves, orcs, or really any recognizable fantasy creatures in its roster outside of dragons, the living dead, giant animals and golems.
Arguably, the most popular fantasy setting of all time doesn't have orcs,
Piglins are orcs in everything but name.
The only similarity is that both use weapons and both have some connection to pigs.
>pigs
>warrior race
>will attack anyone except those who have business with them
>very primitive bartering
>swarm tactics
>cowardly, will flee from the undead
They are basically orcs
Elves are boring. I feel like they're included just to fill out a check list. They also lack an identity. What do elves in fantasy have in common? Pointy ears (a minor detail), magic (sometimes), and not much else. I'd rather see mythology-based elves, even if just a little more faithful, with more "customized" elves being more interesting original demi-human or humanoid species. Although Warcraft elves look cool as hell with their giant ears. Maybe embrace the ambiguity of mythological creature categories.
I like elves and dwarves. I don't care if they're original, making something good is more important than making something new. If you suck at GMing, no amount of "original" or "interesting" worldbuilding is going to save your campaign.