Fantasy Race Survey

Do you have anything to offer instead?

...

>Favorite Race
Orcs. They lend themselves really well to adventures. And they come in so many different colours!

>Perspective
Narrative. If you have big figures and stories in the race's background, their societies and traits become way easier to get into.

>Archetypes
Not my desires, but my expectations: a burly work-oriented group, an enlightened artsy group, a peaceful hidden magic group, a crafty weak group, a few overly-proud nomads, and maybe a spooky persecuted group.

>Fantastical Aspects
Really depends on the mindset. In a lighter game, I often allow a lot of things. Usually, it's when there's a term I don't recognize that seems important to their culture.

>Missing
Cute dragongirls. I'd like to see more like Star Control's Orz: cheerful outsiders who have unclear origins, language problems, and respond very defensively to certain questions. I like secretive races.

>Could do Without
Snobby elf subraces. I don't mind the ideas and themes of dark elves, but I think they can be easily merged in with other elves, as a sort of dark side they're trying to avoid.

>Aesthetic
Maybe a 7/10? I'm instinctively turned off races with long snouts and human proportions, and will shamelessly leap on monstergirls.

>Human-like
There's gotta be something about them that's either human-like, or similar to Earth animals. If they have different moral codes than the typical human/animal, and mix around or exaggerate priorities, that's still great. If they're at a point where human and animal concerns and emotions don't really affect them, I can't really jump on. (This happens with a few "transcended" or "wise" races.)

>Culture
Individuals. This means both that members of the race have distinct characteristics that set them apart from other members; and that the race collectively has a few historic figures who they all know, and can either look up to or look down on.

>- What is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?

Wood elves. Near immortal, down to earth and brutal when needed.

>- Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective? A combination?

Cultural mostly with in setting narrative being important due to story telling.

>- Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting? Not a specific race: an archetype (i.e. "builders", "dreamers", "redeemers", "warriors", etc.)

Martial artists, mages, craftsmen and skill monkeys.

>- Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races? In other words: at what point do you typically decide "I need a more concrete reason for why a race is/operates this way."

Orcs are unsociable savages because their throats are kinda fucked up and thus their communications sucks.
Elves have crazy mating or maturity rituals to cull their numbers to a sustainable group.

Biological impetus is most important.
Magical adaptations come as a part of it.
Everything else needs to be carefully thought out.

>- What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?

Aquatic races and avian races that aren't fap/fur-bait.

>- Which do you think the milieu could do without?

Making Orcs into fantasy-niggers instead of a savage race of marauderers.
It's dumb to bring real life politics into fantasy, and the Green-nigger is a shitty aestetic.

>- How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?

See above.
It should be a distinct biological trait.
Orcs having pig-snout like noses because they have a heightened sense of smell.
Elves having larger irises and ears to go with their better senses.

cont.

>- How important is a given race being human-like to you? In other words: is there a point where a race is so non-human that you cease being able to identify with them or their struggles?

Unless it's slimes and slugs i'm fine with it as long as there's a story explaining their developement.

>- What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.

Their living enviroment and ways to integrate into it.
Everything else becomes a debate on social politics.

>- favorite race
Nerubian right now, for the weird and unsettling and yet familiar feeling. A mix of the unknown and the known. Maybe a bit of the classical "see beyond appearance" where the spontaneous rejection is not totally unjustified and with a truly unsettling race instead of a "noble" animal of something that's actually not that far from human

>- approach
A combination I guess. All those things have to interact and act retroactively on each other, not necessarily going in the same sense as you may have a nice narrative about a race with a culture going explicitly against their nature.
>- Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting?
I don't really get what you're asking here. Depend?
>- Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races?
No idea. I'm afraid I don't really theorise that much about how I create my stuff.
>- What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?
I guess I could say monstrous races, but really everything is fine as long as it's thought out. I like classical dwarves for example, the usual stereotypes doesn't bother me as much as the frequent lack of development. You shouldn't just drop neither elves/dwarves nor unusual races without elaborating.
>- How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?
Quite a lot I guess, but various aesthetics can serve all sort of purpose, or be opposed to them.
>- How important is a given race being human-like to you?
Physically not at all. Psychologically I don't think I've ever encountered that point, though it must exist I suppose. I'm going to be a bit naive and say being relateable has more to do with how you tell your story.
>- What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important?
Again, I don't theorise to that extend. I'm afraid "depend" may be my answer to many of your questions and that isn't very helpful.

>kitsune
>race

Aren't kitsune just foxes? As in, in oriental folklore foxes were believed to be intelligent and cabable of shapeshifting and shit but they were still foxes.

- What is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?
Kenku and Lizardfolk, have major differences from humans.

- Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective? A combination?

Physiological/psychological which certainly can have an effect on cultural traits

- Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting?

Don't really care as much.

- Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races? In other words: at what point do you typically decide "I need a more concrete reason for why a race is/operates this way."

It really depends on the fantasy elements in the rest of the setting, in low fantasy settings I tend to lean more towards no supernatural elements in most races, while high fantasy you can go nuts.
- What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?

Non-Anthropomorphic races, could be exceptionally clever species of animals, like worgs or giant crows, or it could be like...insect people or something.

- Which do you think the milieu could do without?

Species who live for very long time, 500 years would be ok, 2000 year olds can cause problems.

- How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?

Somewhat, as long as they look a bit nonhuman (assuming they aren't very closely related to humans)
- How important is a given race being human-like to you? In other words: is there a point where a race is so non-human that you cease being able to identify with them or their struggles?

Rarely.
- What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.

The methods of communication, how they think, what emotions they experience. some things they deal with that humans dont. some things that humans deal with that they dont for whatever reason.

Whats a nerubian? they sound interesting.

Noticing a theme of "heroes in culture"- well said

Brutality in elves is something I think needs more exploration, definitely.
"Living Environment" is an excellent term.

I have been considering "not-quite-people" elves, they are mostly solitary creatures that live in the woods, look graceful, have magical abilities but dont really communicate.

When they do speak its basically mimicry, they dont think about the words they say just the reaction they bring about. Clever animals.

"interacting retroactively" gives me a writing boner, thank you.
Again echoing "intent over trope,"- very good to know.
The answer "it depends" is surprisingly helpful. It can mean that I'm asking the wrong questions or that the question is too broad.

Non-anthros are tricky, but ultimately I think you're right. The problem really comes in when you're trying to write a setting for a game. Writing for biped players is easy. Writing for biped players and their sentient worg companion is difficult. But as far as NPC races go- I'm on board with what you're saying.
Could you elaborate on your "rarely" answer? Were you thinking in terms of physiology, psychology, sociology, etc.?
I love your last response, thank you.

Thanks, anyway, I'm not really sure of the point where they become too alien for me. if a species is composed of agents that gather information from the environment and perform actions that are at least somewhat based on information acquired...if they can learn. that makes them relateable.

Basically the actions they perform must not be completely random or completely instinctual.

>- What is your favorite fantasy race?
Goblins. I felt in love with them when I read The Hobbit as a kid, because they were described as being technologically advanced, and I had a boner for that back then. Then I asked my parents to buy me a box of Warhammer goblin for my birthday, whom I never painted and used as action figures. They were the good guys, of course, protecting their mountain from evil Lego minifigures who wanted to level it to build a shopping mall.
>- Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective?
I kind of try to touch upon all three, but I avoid going too much in depth. Once you go in depth, you're bound to discover logical holes in your original ideas.
>- Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting?
I try to create something that doesn't actually exist: merchant priests, necromancer surfers, piratic chefs, etc.
>- Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects?
I prefer not to. Rather, I sometimes have trouble thinking of aspects which are fantastical enough for me to like them. Then, once I like the concept, I think of a justification why the resulting race is like this.
>- What do you think is missing in terms of fantasy races?
I think Goblins and Orcs should be standard player races.
>- Which do you think the milieu could do without?
All of the halfbreed "races" - from Half-Orcs to Tieflings.
>- How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?
Extremely important, too bad I'm a terrible artist. Paying an artist for commissions is not an issue at all, but finding a good artist who's willing to do commissions and negotiating the terms is a royal pain in the arse.
>- How important is being human-like to you?
Not important at all, but I find that I still prefer human-like races.
>- What is the aspect of a race's culture that is the most important?
Their "national character" - you can derive much of the rest of the culture from it, and it helps with roleplaying.

>Kitsune
Thread ruined

Only if made for furry-bait/waifu-bait

Any race made for waifu-bait is doomed.

...

>- What is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?
At this juncture of tiem dwarves. As a teenager I liked elves, then around 20s I had a period of love for strange fucked up races (myconids, Mothfolk etc.) and now came back to dwarves. I like their aesthetics and some traits easy to roleplay with my current group.

>- Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective?
I'm more interested in physiology. How does thei body function, what special characteristics do they have.

>- Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting?
I expect western RPG archetypes: Humans, crude and barbaric warriors, grumpy resilient ones, agile and beautiful rogues, Sometimes an ancient race but not always.

>- Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races? In other words: at what point do you typically decide "I need a more concrete reason for why a race is/operates this way."
Never? I love trying to find explanations to all of races traits.

>- What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?
Wish I knew. I find that young, new, happy short lived races are rare.

>- Which do you think the milieu could do without?
Gnomes. Always thought gnomes and dwarves should be one race.as in WHFB. Also hobbits. I never see the point of them.

>- How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?
A lot. Not that they should be beautiful but they have some well defined easily recognizible traits

>- How important is a given race being human-like to you? In other words: is there a point where a race is so non-human that you cease being able to identify with them or their struggles?
Interesting question. Now that I think about it having human like limbs is what does it for me. I can live with a mosquito eyes and a beak, but add also tentacles and it goes from playable to stuff I kill in the woods.

>- What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.

No idea. Usually I just reskin real world culture.

On a side note I'm making a setting with humans and 2 other minor races, I need some ideas and pointers for them. Are you willing to discuss?

>- What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.
That it not exist. Earth humans don't have a single culture, and fantasy humans rarely do. There's absolutely no reason that any fantasy races should be monocultural. They should have just as much breadth and depth as the human race does, or else they should just be replaced with a human ethnicity.

Nerubian are a race from Warcraft, but I use the term to refers to a specific morphology of spider-folk (as opposed to sentient spiders, man-spiders (2 legs, 6 arms) or a "4 legs, 4 arms" morphology...)
My homebrew not-nerubian (I call them Aranean for now) are less inherently evil and less dead though. But coming from (usually) not social animals make them kind of fucked up. When I was talking of culture sometime going against nature, I was thinking of my Aranean who are spontaneously inclined to be asocial and those who have a culture have one that try to counters, often authoritatively, those natural inclinations with mixed results.

>"interacting retroactively" gives me a writing boner, thank you.
To be fair, I'm not a native speaker and wasn't sure if I was saying what I thought I was saying.

A species biology might have an effect on culture, sure they would likely be multi-cultural, but a species that is eusocial is likely to be very different from one that only tolerates others of its kind during mating season.

>Favorite race
Elf (High or Grey), I play a lot of 1st and 2nd Ed. I like that they are a versatile race in terms of multiclass choices.

>Approach
Combination, mostly cultural and narrative, with a little physiological.

>Archetypes
Don't have expectations, different settings have different concepts, and homebrews can spawn a different beast entirely.

>Draw the line
I have learned that most DMs will reveal pieces of pertinent information about a race as the game progresses. Very rarely have I encountered a race which was introduced or drastically altered, that provided little to no informative details even over the course of the game.

>Missing from fantasy
Like I said I play mostly 1st and 2nd Ed. I'd say monster races as playable especiall if designed well (not anime style monsters). A few good examples would be something akin to the lizard men of warhammer or the centaurs from warcraft. I realize that may have something to do with Gygax being very humancentric and insisting that monster races could not do well in D&D in general

>Do without
In terms of fantasy races I'd say halfling, they were a hold over from when Gygax ripped off Tolkein wholesale. In B/X (BECMI, etc.) They were the weakest of all classes. Highest level attainable was eight, nothing mabe the lass special or unique to other classes. They didnt have subskills like elves, were stronger then humans like dwarves. Only in 2nd Ed did they really start developing into better than average thieves.

>Physical aesthetic
I don't place as high a value on physical aesthetic. I look more at the functionality of a race, what benefits and deficits a race has in terms of play-ability.

>How human-like
In terms of mentality, I've never encountered a race that was designed in such a way that I would say that I can't understand the race's motivations.

>Important aspect
History, a race's history will explain culture, mentality, art, etc.

Go for it, although I rarely if ever suggest reskinning real-world cultures for a myriad of reasons.

Every group of people has a rhythm to their actions. Delineate between subgroups as much as you like, but the rhythm exists and has a profound effect on the way people live their lives.

"retroactively" implies a chronology to the building process. In your words it would work something like:
>build the physiology
>build the culture based on that physiology
>build narrative themes based on culture
>alter physiology based on narrative intent
>alter culture based on new changes
>etc.
It's a weird but interesting way to look at worldbuilding.

>favorite race
Dwarves, just because there's a lot you can do with them. Miners, warriors, artificers, rune-carvers, whatever. And they remind me of like, real-world folkloric creatures moreso than Tolkienesque elves.
>approach
I guess a combination, but generally more concerned with cultural aspects and such
>archetypes
I like a good set of seafarers or other nomad types, or anything where it's like a group of folks who fit into a tough-to-fill niche (like they all live inside an active volcano or something like that. maybe less extreme)
>where do I draw the line
No need, I mean, it's a fantasy world. If there's a bunch of guys with peacock heads and frog legs, no need for much of a reason other than why not
>missing from the fantasy milieu
Cultures that are more alien. Like, everything speaks with its mouth and gestures with its hands. Gimme some more weirdos.
>do without
I'm tired of "they're a warlike tribal society who values physical prowess and skill in arms above all else!" Like, at least put a twist on it if you're gonna do that.
>aesthetics
Like the physical appearance or like the way they dress themselves up? Either way, I couldn't care less
>human-like
Like I said, I think there should be more races that are more alien, so I don't mind them being more non-human
>aspects of culture
I think mostly how they interact with others. Like are they protective of their culture and exclude others or do they accept others and incorporate aspects of other societies and vice versa?

Fun thread

Melniboneans are my favorite fantasy race.

>What is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?
Vampires. They're obscure, classy and fallen out of human society.
>Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective? A combination?
I don't really get it. I like my game to be centered in narrative, but when defining races I think of them as a frame or background in which each character seeks their individuality. So I guess you can call that cultural. (???)
>Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting? Not a specific race: an archetype (i.e. "builders", "dreamers", "redeemers", "warriors", etc.)
The whole point in having different settings is for the "archetypes" to vary. It will depend of the values the Great Backstory posits, as in change vs. eternity, or control vs. individuality.
>Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races? In other words: at what point do you typically decide "I need a more concrete reason for why a race is/operates this way."
It greatly depends on the tone of the game. If it's a comedy, the random mashup of clichés works every time. For more serious games, I want the races characteristics to be logically interrelated with the conditions of the setting, and for them to be able to exist in a concrete social form, even if this means isolation.
>What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?
You normally can only play creatures in a certain range of proportions. What about tiny fairies and forest spirits? What about giants and dragons? Why do they only get to be npcs?
>Which do you think the milieu could do without?
Humans are lame in most games.
>How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?
It can add a bit of flavor at times, but all in all it's secondary.

I never made the connection between seafarers and nomads- very interesting, thank you.
Thanks, I try to contribute something other than memes from time to time.

>a frame in which to seek out individuality
Light behaves like a wave until observed, then it is a particle. You're on to something big there, dig deeper.
I like your top-down perspective; it meshes with my own.
Hadn't considered size- will investigate. I do like GW2's Norns because "people, but big" appeals to me because of that sincere simplicity.
Unfortunately, humans are necessary from a marketing perspective. If you don't want to be a weirdo, you can always be human.

Do any race even homebrew ones would work for this , or what?
Either way, going with classic ones:

> What is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?

I like minotaurs. Big, strong, and I always liked greek mythology. If kept on a more neutral stance, they can make great adventurers, aid, or even interesting NPCs.

> Do you approach fantasy races from a physiological, cultural, or narrative perspective? A combination?

Mostly physiological and cultural. Narrative tends to have little influence in them upon creation. The body and circumstances tend to change how they behave, their behavior changes how their politics is, and so on.

> Which archetypes do you expect out of a setting? Not a specific race: an archetype (i.e. "builders", "dreamers", "redeemers", "warriors", etc.)

I guess that the most classic archetype for any fantasy setting, is the classic 'warrior race' of sort. Orcs are fuckin' everywhere. But outside of that, I presume that most races tend to be humans with a different skin and quirks.

> Where do you usually draw the line on more fantastical aspects of races? In other words: at what point do you typically decide "I need a more concrete reason for why a race is/operates this way."

I rarely ever end at that point as I manage to fluff it, or rework their society to adjust to said circumstances. So I'm unsure.

> What do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?

Something that isn't a fucking human looking just slightly different. Enough of elves , dwarves, halflings, and whatnot. Even orcs looks like muscular humans with green or gray skin.

(cont...)

> Which do you think the milieu could do without?

See above.

> How important is the physical aesthetic of a race to you?

Very. I like races to be pleasant to see and therefore to play or meet. Or fitting to their own race standard at least.

> How important is a given race being human-like to you? In other words: is there a point where a race is so non-human that you cease being able to identify with them or their struggles?

I don't particularly care, although I presume I might draw the line when a race is a metaphysical incarnation of a concept in abstract form.

> What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.

Whenever it's diplomatic or not, is a big point to them. Plus, any psychological "issues" they might have. For example, I like to make so that doppelgangers aren't evil, but rather suffering of a sociopath psychology. Furthermore what they do in their free time counts a lot as well. It really gets them detailed in-depth-

>MFW comment too long

>How important is a given race being human-like to you? In other words: is there a point where a race is so non-human that you cease being able to identify with them or their struggles?
All the contrary. I wish there was more space for non-anthropomorphic creatures. All I need them to have to be playable is a certain level of intelligence and free will.
>What is the aspect of a race's culture that you think is the most important? In this case, "culture" is simply defined as "what the race does." You can think of "culture" as "society-as-verb" if that helps.
As said, I like to have lore and material to play with that will create a series of expectations around the character, but from which an individual story is motivated to depart. So it's mostly a mythical background open for play.

I love relations of fundamentally different species and making traditionally evil concepts neutral.

Things like nercomancers rising skeletons to plow the fields or psionic parasites living together with humans and feeding on extreme emotions during their festivals.

What I don't like is million variations of same humanoid form. Elves and dwarves are boring if they aren't clearly superhuman feys and underworld smiths. Though I'm more forgiving of beastmen because they can have so much variation between individuals.

I don't like fixed allignments for major races. Demon from hell can be always chaotic evil but if there is a race of devils they shouldn't be. Even if they have a different morality their end goal should be screwing other over if they are supposed to function as a society.

>Go for it,
Ok it is a cyberpunk spin on an ancient Egypt setting (mind transfer with magic etc.).
I have humans, most dominant race.
Snakefolk, live in tunnels, can intermarry with humans producing infertile hybrids (nagas, lizardmen, medusas).. Are mostly despised by humans. Rumors say they rise human slaves and eat human flesh.

Elves, persian merchants. Travel with human caravans. Have an affinity for cats.

I need:
>A name for the Snakefolk
>Reason of why sand elves are associated with cats and cats often follow them.
>Persian elves are the magical race. What innate magical abilities should they have in a setting with magic beign centered about information, illusions, mind fuckery?
I need a culture for Sneks. How is their society is organized etc.

>Cats

Obvious answer is to copy Lovecraft's Dreamlands. Cats fight or guard something at night and the elves made a pact with them in the past even if they don't remember it.

>>Reason of why sand elves are associated with cats and cats often follow them.
Cats can detect underground snakefolk, so elves nourish them so they follow them?

>>Persian elves are the magical race. What innate magical abilities should they have in a setting with magic beign centered about information, illusions, mind fuckery?
Cast mirage?

Information magic they use to obscure themselves, your brain processes what they want you to process, they use this as a method of communication.

>All those answers
Either I've walked into the twilight zone and seen my reflection, or you're my Kushite brother.

1. Elves. They can be portrayed in so many interesting ways.
2. Cultural.
3. I don't expect anything. I can see archetypical races coming from a mile away but I don't expect them to be there.
4. I don't draw lines because of fantasticalness, but rather player/reader comfortness.
5. Can't really say. Maybe another race of basically humans, humanoids that don't have any special archetype attached to them. They would carry themselves through their actions and ideas, rather than just single traits. Basically a mirror to humans themselves rather than a mirror to aspects of humanity.
6. Gnomes can fuck off, we've already got halflings and dwarves. When I think of "general fantasy milieu", I think of Tolkien. Sue me.
7. Details aren't all that important to keep the same but major features are. For example, what's the point of calling dwarves dwarves if you describe them looking like goblins?
cont.

cont.
8. Depends. As a player, I want to play a humanoid but as a reader I don't really mind. All fantasy is made by a human mind after all... For now.
9. Formation of the society itself. Divisions of labor and classes. What values does the race hold? How do they interact with themselves and others?

My first suggestion would be to figure out what kind of story you're wanting to tell. Not the genre, but what is the actual narrative conceit behind the whole thing.
Tell God's story
then tell the farmer's story
and finally ask what the dog thinks

>mirror humans
Interesting, will investigate.
>general fantasy milieu as Tolkien
well you're not wrong

...

...

...

Beast races that dont quite look like any particular animal, but still look beastial would be cool, especially if they werent made the "savage" race

>That it not exist.
The races don't exist.
>Earth humans don't have a single culture, and fantasy humans rarely do.
They're not earth humans.
>There's absolutely no reason that any fantasy races should be monocultural.
They're fantasy races. there's no reason they shouldn't.
>They should have just as much breadth and depth as the human race does, or else they should just be replaced with a human ethnicity.
A human ethnicity that can see the future and glow?

>as opposed to sentient spiders, man-spiders (2 legs, 6 arms) or a "4 legs, 4 arms" morphology.
Those are stupid. Spider people should have eight legs and two arms like real spiders.

>what is your favorite fantasy race? What about them appeals to you?
Elves. No shit.
The thing about elves is that over time they've been given more different variations and tones than basically any other fantasy race there is, and each one of those variations has made it into the consciousness of fantasy readers and long-time RPG players. So there's actually a lot of different facets to their archetype, which lets a GM play off of any of them for their given setting, and (the most important thing about an RPG race) a player will automatically be able to improvise that race's personality going just off of their fantasy-reader background. Compare to dwarves, which as a race have always been slightly too inscrutable to invite such variations and have them stick in a reader's mind. I think elves are fairly weak as a race in fantasy literature, since literature can just show you a fully-made race and gives you a novel or three to learn what they're about, so the familiarity is a bad thing. But in roleplaying games you can't just use a one-page blurb about your New and Interesting fantasy race and expect players to be able to roleplay that with any nuance.
>what do you think is missing from the general fantasy milieu in terms of fantasy races?
I think fantasy races are generally treated as ethnic supergroups, which is horribly boring. I'd like to see more Greek myth or animist takes on humanlike beings that show obvious archetypal traits, but without the expectation that there's a whole nation-state or two made up of them, with tax policies and landed nobility and all that human-specific nonsense.

1) I love Unagi, which are like mermaids but with eel and human body parts. They just flow to me.
2) I consider physiological traits first to categorize races, but I think it's interesting to think about societies which consider themselves homogeneous but only through cultural connections.
4) More sea creatures, less humanoid races, definitely less humanoid races.
5) I could do without stereotypes within races, like obviously str bonuses and all that, but power to you if you want to make an orc mage.
6) Physical aesthetic is the second most important trait to be considered, right next to how the race is portrayed most commonly.
7) I don't consider humanoid characteristics that relatable, compared to having human motives.
8) A race's most important cultural aspect is how they treat knowledge. I consider knowledge to be so so important, but I can see why some races would naturally be more faith orientated, or worldly want orientated.

Faith and knowledge are not mutually exclusive. Faith and how one treats and values knowledge are likewise not mutually exclusive.

You have a point, and I think id like to reconsider what I find most important culturally. Maybe that the culture is dictated by causes, through the environment, economy and such. So that nothing exists in a vacuum.