Should humans be generically the best race for a class?

[Judging__Eagle]

the last time I played WoW, it has humans as being inherently more likable (bonus to reputation) as well as having surprisingly high recovery (5% bonus to spirit stat, which determines hit point and mana regeneration). they also had some bonuses to a few weapon skills. (I want to say one and two handed swords, but it's been a while)

However, they couldn't be anything they wanted. A human couldn't be a hunter or a shaman. And back when I plaid, you generally didn't play a priest unless you were a dwarf or didn't mind being made fun of and not invited to raids. (Don't know if that's been changed, but back in the day, only dwarf priests had remove fear, and nothing the other priests had was perceived as highly useful. Again, the game changes constantly so what I know is most likely not accurate anymore.)

In WoW Humans are all about:

-Noticing enemies (Human Perception is a temporary buff that negates creatures and players from sneaking up on you; thus human paladins > most rogues)

-being diplomatic (bonus reputation; Masters of Orion had a similar thing, giving humans a bonus to that stuff). This is radically more important than most people can possibly imagine, since you will most likely be grinding reputation for many factions in your career, whether you're a serious and hardcore player that wants mechanical benefits, or a player that's looking to get a cool looking pet penguin or a giant ibex to ride around on.

-Bashing in people's faces (bonus 'skill' with "maces" (1, 2-handed blunt type weapons)

-Chopping people up (same as above, but with swords; this isn't daggers though, so many human rogues run around with dual bastard-sword sized weapons, but so do many other rogues, b/c rogues get more DPS bennies using swords compared to using daggers)

-Humans can be nearly any class; except Shaman, Hunter and Druid (they get: Warrior, Priest, Rogue, Mage, Warlock, Paladin) really, only gnomes get the short end of the class stick (warrior, rogue, warlock and mage for Gnomes) all other races save Tauren (warrior, hunter, priest, druid) get 5-6 class options; every race can get death knights though

-Be Competent end-game spellcasters The most competent and effective priests, mages and warlocks that are played by the "alliance" are going to be human. When you're clocking in with a minimum of "500" in your "regen" stat; +3% (+15) doesn't seem like a lot, until you take into account that you're going to have layers of buffs and probably one other percentage-based buff (and the stat of 500 is... low, my druid who isn't max level can hit over 500 to "regen stat" without buffs, it's probably more like 700 without your classes buffs, and as much as 900-1000 with the last expansion; +30 to a stat is like getting a free, slotless level-appropriate stat-boosting trinket)

So, they're pretty well rounded, but all of the races have specific benefits that work for any that the race can take class.

Yeah, also priests got a 'general' remove fear, however it has a limit on how often it can be used, and I think a limit on how many targets it can affect.

So, dwarf priests can cast their classes fear ward on the Tank, then use their racial fear-ward when it gets popped (unless they have a shared cooldown, which would be fucking lame imo). The DPS can go fuck themselves, since only the tank needs to be fear-warded.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Incendentally, they were also immune to mind control by the main "bad" aliens.

The way I remember, it wasn't that humans were immune per se, it was that human thought was so insanely violent by alien standards that any alien who came into even brief telepathic contact with a human was driven bugfuck. That amused the crap out of me.

[Judging__Eagle]

Also... this shit always pisses me off since it's retardedly human-centric and doesn't asses why we act this way. I only read Count's post before responding, and didn't catch this.

The endurance/toughness/stubborness angle seems a very good concept to make humans unique. "Humans just don't quit" would also fit in with all the worlds and settings that have humans as the race that's encroaching on the older races.

That's an evolution thing. All species must have this it they exist at all. Only an extinct species can not have this trait.

Also, some humans just quit, and die if they're not psychologically tough enough, so it's not always a good guide.

If humans have anything special it has to be something like Buck Godot.

Humans "unique" thing is that the "freeze things, and then eat them."

It's not ninjas, it's not "stubborness to live", or "taste good in oil". It's "you guys make popsicles, they're awesome."

Every fcuking race has ninjas, other races are more friendly and trusted, other races are more awesome at gene-research (but are smug, gloating, assholes), while an other race is energy weapons (but can never show their face anywhere).

Hmm.... maybe that's the ticket. The bigger your benefit, the bigger your penalty has to be.

The energy-weapon race has no hands, is the size of large cats and is considered Kill-on-Sight by every race, since they genocided the race that created (and tortured) them.

The "awesome gene-splicer tech" race is considered a bunch of insufferably smug assholes who everyone wouldn't mind if they had to get spaced.

Humans are tolerated b/c they have awesome snacks. They also have no real problems that relate to their race with respect to other races. Oh, and centaurs and ogre-weight humans (aka people who live on high-gravity worlds) are considered part of the "human" species, just an FYI.

[Username17]

Among the other apes, we are possibly the most group oriented (competing with Bonobos), and definitely not the most individualistic (that's Orangutan). We aren't the gentlest (Bonobos again) or the most violent (Chimpanzee - our closest fucking relative). There are apes that are physically larger and stronger than us (hello mountain gorilla), and those that are much smaller than us (hi Gibbons). There are species of mammals that are substantially more Eusocial than we are (holy shit Mole Rats), and of course there isn't a single Ape as anti-social as a Tiger. The sexual dimorphism of humans is extremely slight compared to the vast majority of other animals.

But what we'd be considered when compared to other sapient species is pretty up for discussion. It seriously depends upon what they are. A sapient race could seriously be based around something that was already Peacocking it - where they were largely physically useless and had huge displays for beauty purposes. They could be efficient clawed hunters who have little use for others of their species. They could be smarter than us, or basically at the level of an orangutan.

Humans don't just get to be the middle because of anthrocentrism. They also get that way because some people want to tell the stories about encountering species that are more gracile and peaceful, others want to tell stories about meeting combative predator species, and so on and so forth. Because the alien is primarily of interest to us in terms of contrast, the end result is that with enough others the human race is defacto in the center of a vast circle.

To have humans be anything approaching a "realistic" position, you have to agree to fucking stop writing in new races after a while.

-Username17

[TavishArtair]

That's an evolution thing. All species must have this it they exist at all. Only an extinct species can not have this trait.

<rant>

That's totally not true. Natural selection only decrees that organisms must pass/fail certain tests at various points in order to continue. Organisms that coincidentally do, do so, and pass on their genes, which may alter how the species is, or create a new species, or whatever, given enough iterations. It doesn't even matter if they're the strongest, toughest, fastest, or smartest. It just matters if they pass/fail a test, which can be as arbitrary as the circumstances prefer, and have little to do with strength or toughness or anything. Accordingly, they only need to be as badass enough as... well, the competition, be that direct competition from another species or from the environment itself. If the competition is a predator, it probably doesn't even matter, since all that predator will do is winnow the herd instead of actually destroying it, meaning that as a species while their genetics are different as a consequence they are not particularly threatened.

As Frank once observed, the person who finishes last in class at medical school? Is still going to be called Doctor. Evolution is pass/fail only, the numeric or letter grades are visible to us ("Holy shit you're big.") but largely irrelevant in the bigger picture. There are species which are ultimately millions of times smaller, weaker, and less resilient than us, which nonetheless are continuously successful species.

You know what we call them? We call them diseases, and they regularly die en masse just trying to reproduce, they're so lame from the "statistical" viewpoint. They aren't tough. In many cases, a difference of a degree or two is the holocaust to them, which our body will gleefully turn on invaders to commit bacterial genocide. They're so weak the Lemmings of the game with the same name are more impressive in their ability to survive.

Even in the Animal kingdom, there are lots of species that merely invest the effort needed and nothing more. Not every animal is a camel and has a million adaptations to survive in a totally inhospitable climate. A lot more are rabbits, and literally die of fright on a regular basis to the point that if a predator surprises them they just keel over from a heart attack. Yes, in a perfectly healthy organism.

</rant>

[Lago PARANOIA]

Say, Frank, compared to other species of apes, how do humans rank on the scales of:

- Horniness
- Imitativeness
- Determination
- Endurance

[Talisman]

Of course, you all realize that the other sapient species on this plant is Brother Dolphin, who will sing to the crystals in the year 2012 and induce humanity to become pacifistic vegan hippies, don't you? Come on! Share the love, Space Brothers!

(Seriously though, dolphins are the only other species known to commit gang rapes. Think about that.)

[Username17]

Say, Frank, compared to other species of apes, how do humans rank on the scales of:

- Horniness

Bonobos win. Like super hard core. They have giant bisexual orgies in order to elect new leaders. I'm not even kidding.

- Imitativeness

Orangutan are perfectly capable of watching us do construction, stealing some hammers and nails, and then putting nails into trees with the hammers. Also they wear clothes, which they will happily steal from clothes lines in order To Be Like You.

That being said, human babies are like rote imitation machines. Much more so than other ape youngsters. A human toddler will happily copy perceived actions exactly, while chimps and other ape toddlers will just watch long enough to get the gist and then try to work things out themselves. There are some fascinating experiments with boxes that require special catches to open, but which there are simpler and more complex ways to do it. Show a chimp toddler and a human toddler how to do it the hard way and they can both do it - swap the box with a glass box that you can see the workings of and the humans will continue to do it the hard way and the chimps will do it the easy way. Make of that what you will.

Humans are much "better" at being taught. This means that we can pass on secrets of engineering more readily than our contemporaries, but it also means that we adhere to religious and cultural traditions even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

- Determination

Humans work longer on projects than any other primate. Than any other animal on the planet. Full stop. Only hive organisms like termites can make comparable claims, and you have to start counting by the hive rather than the individual. And then humans can start making counter claims with nations and empires and it gets into a shouting match again.

- Endurance

A human can walk for literally hundreds of times longer than any other ape. We rank up with camels and whales as animals that have stupidly ridiculous endurance capabilities. And that's before we start cheating and using boats.

-Username17

[JonSetanta]

- Endurance

A human can walk for literally hundreds of times longer than any other ape. We rank up with camels and whales as animals that have stupidly ridiculous endurance capabilities. And that's before we start cheating and using boats.

.. there we go.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Actually, you know what's weird, if you compare the behavior of the core fantasy races against apes and assign bonuses accordingly, you get something totally different than what D&D normally assigns races.

For example, dwarves should have the highest dexterity and intelligence.
Humans should have the highest constitution and wisdom.
Halflings should have pluses to strength and charisma.

[Koumei]

Say, Frank, compared to other species of apes, how do humans rank on the scales of:

- Horniness

Bonobos win. Like super hard core. They have giant bisexual orgies in order to elect new leaders. I'm not even kidding.

I saw a documentary on them. One researcher had spent some time observing them, possibly even living among them, as well as another species of ape.

"So with the Bonobo, given a problem their response is to have sex until they can work out an agreement. If I gave two of them one banana, they'd likely have sex for a bit then split it in half and everyone is happy."

"How about the (other ape type)?"

"They'd fight to the death over the banana."

[virgil]

If a researcher lived among bonobos...*shudder*

[TavishArtair]

Actually, you know what's weird, if you compare the behavior of the core fantasy races against apes and assign bonuses accordingly, you get something totally different than what D&D normally assigns races.

For example, dwarves should have the highest dexterity and intelligence.
Humans should have the highest constitution and wisdom.
Halflings should have pluses to strength and charisma.

I have no problem whatsoever with dexterous and intelligent dwarves. I mean, that's what the Nordic dvergar were. They were supernaturally skilled and impossibly fast workers, able to bang out entire ships in a day, and not honestly that strong, although a few used magical items they forged to make themselves stronger.

[Judging__Eagle]

That's an evolution thing. All species must have this it they exist at all. Only an extinct species can not have this trait.

<rant>

That's totally not true. Natural selection only decrees that organisms must pass/fail certain tests at various points in order to continue. Organisms that coincidentally do, do so, and pass on their genes, which may alter how the species is, or create a new species, or whatever, given enough iterations. It doesn't even matter if they're the strongest, toughest, fastest, or smartest. It just matters if they pass/fail a test, which can be as arbitrary as the circumstances prefer, and have little to do with strength or toughness or anything. Accordingly, they only need to be as badass enough as... well, the competition, be that direct competition from another species or from the environment itself. If the competition is a predator, it probably doesn't even matter, since all that predator will do is winnow the herd instead of actually destroying it, meaning that as a species while their genetics are different as a consequence they are not particularly threatened.

As Frank once observed, the person who finishes last in class at medical school? Is still going to be called Doctor. Evolution is pass/fail only, the numeric or letter grades are visible to us ("Holy shit you're big.") but largely irrelevant in the bigger picture. There are species which are ultimately millions of times smaller, weaker, and less resilient than us, which nonetheless are continuously successful species.

You know what we call them? We call them diseases, and they regularly die en masse just trying to reproduce, they're so lame from the "statistical" viewpoint. They aren't tough. In many cases, a difference of a degree or two is the holocaust to them, which our body will gleefully turn on invaders to commit bacterial genocide. They're so weak the Lemmings of the game with the same name are more impressive in their ability to survive.

Even in the Animal kingdom, there are lots of species that merely invest the effort needed and nothing more. Not every animal is a camel and has a million adaptations to survive in a totally inhospitable climate. A lot more are rabbits, and literally die of fright on a regular basis to the point that if a predator surprises them they just keel over from a heart attack. Yes, in a perfectly healthy organism.

</rant>

Yep, that's all it takes. Investing the effort.

A rabbit will run, and a fox with chase. If I chemically altered their brains so that they were the human equivalent of depressed, then they wouldn't do everything that they had to in order to keep going, and might fail.

I think that you're talking about chinchillas when you talk about rodents that auto-suicide when in a stressful enough situation.

As for bacteria, they're what I was referring to. They get slaughtered en masse, but they're everywhere (from in the earth's crust to comets flying around in space) and try to spread everywhere. It's not like bacteria have suddenly given up from having 99.99% of their total created individuals perish.

Heck, look at crabs. Something like thousands of eggs are laid and fertilized by each female, and only a small few of those will survive to adult-hood. The crabs that don't make it support a large amount of predators, but the crabs aren't going to give up, they're not even going to move. They just keep plugging along and each one of them is trying to grow up, eat, hide and breed as much as each individual crab is able.

When looking at more complex organisms, they have to expend more effort in order to continue as individuals. Which leads to my argument that the ''human'' character set up among ''aliens'' can't have ''won't give up'' as their race's ''special racial quirk''; since it's not a logical one. Every complex and intelligent race of individuals (not hives) is going to have a fairly strong survival drive in its individuals.

[angelfromanotherpin]

I think that you're talking about chinchillas when you talk about rodents that auto-suicide when in a stressful enough situation.

There are a large number of animals which die for what you and I would recognize as no good goddamn reason. Spooking instincts are good for the species (I guess), but crap for individuals.

Have you ever heard of an abortion storm? One pregnant herd animal, like a goat, gets really upset, possibly because she saw sudden movement in the corner of her eye (like an apple dropping) and is now convinced that there's a predator she can't see nearby. This upset causes her to miscarry. Then the smell of her upset and miscarriage upsets other pregnant animals in the herd, and one chain reaction later, half of this year's offspring don't make it. Because an apple dropped.