What are the advantages/disadvantages of a human-only setting?

Advantage:
>no alien scum
Disadvantage:
>can't kill alien scum

Really digging all the low fantasy/S&S love on teegee these days.

Tolkien might have been a more mythologically sophisticated writer, and his prose was obviously better, but Howard's worldbuilding is just more compelling to me. Hyboria is at once more exotic and more relatable, and the recognition of the inherent darkness in mankind is so powerful... and much needed in the era of capeshit escapism.

Hoping this Low Fantasy Renaissance really takes off.

You can't be a lazy fuck who sums up different countries and cultures by saying
>they are orks
or
>they are dwarves

Agreed. I don't read/watch it at all, but I am kind of thankful that Game of Thrones is introducing people to a darker fantasy alternative to Tolkien.

Thank the OSR, mostly. That's how I was recently exposed to a lot of it.

Congrats, you just created Naruto setting.

I actually like a setting, where humans are demiurges, create new worlds and enjoy while their created fantasy races slaughter eachother
In otherwords, regular fantasy games, where create new worlds and enjoy while their created fantasy races slaughter eachother

What are the advantages/disadvantages of a dwarf-only setting?

Advantages:
>lots of axe-swinging, drinking, and fighting

Disadvantages:
>no furniture over two feet in height

>Advantage
No elf scum.
>Disadvantage
Everyone has small penis.

Is nobody gonna mention some of the ways it affects creating cultures?

Advantages
>Lets you focus more on cultural differences instead of innate differences
>Easier to deal with ideas of cultural exchange, change, mixing, extermination, etc. because cultures aren't tied to innate racial traits.
>PCs (especially nobility) have more power to cause societal change of cultures, create new ideas, wipe out old ones.

Disadvantages
>No extremely alien cultures
>No "unattainable ideal" cultures based on inhuman traits (immortals, hive mind, etc.)
>Harder to exploit common fantasy shorthands (dwarves, elves, demons, angels, birdfolk, fishfolk)

>PCs (especially nobility) have more power to cause societal change of cultures, create new ideas, wipe out old ones.
That is more a question of campaign type.

>No "unattainable ideal" cultures based on inhuman traits (immortals, hive mind, etc.)

>what are vampires and undead monsters.
>what are necromancers.
>what are water shapers/shamans who can breath underwater.
>what are druids and rangers, who preserve nature at all cost.
>what are slavers and how do they live in comparison to other cultures that condone slavery.
>implying any of this is gone the moment other races get thrown out.

>Harder to exploit common fantasy shorthands

Why would you even want to do this besides laziness? Eliminating cliche fantasy shorthands that make a setting bland isn't a negative.

>Advantages
No niggers or Jews

>Disadvantages
No subhumans to enslave and fight, thus the setting ends with white humans fighting each other.

Racism... meaning there are DISGUSTING NON-HUMANS... depending on your region or point of view. Hee hee.

There can't be racism in a homo sapiens only setting tho.

Reducing cognitive load on the consumer. In other aspect this is used as an argument to throw out races too different from humans or not already culturally established.

Really it is a question on which area you want to spend your focus.

Lots of replies already, I didn't expect that. Thanks guys.

I am asking because I have been creating a setting over the past few months with really in-depth human history, such as language groups, genealogical histories, migrations, different names for gods, ect, basically making it feel "real" and diverse.

And I realized elves and dwarves were the most generic thing in my setting, and were basically fucking pointless. I really don't want another Faerun or Middle Earth, I want something that's my own, and elves and dwarves seem way too codified to be unique without going full "subverting tropes" which ends up being uninteresting/nonsensical most of the time.

I think I might cut out elves and make them Melinbonean-like fey humans...

As the saying goes, mate, "murder your darlings." If something in your narrative doesn't add to that narrative, cut it out. If the elves and dwarves are superfluous in your setting, well, time to pull out the culling sheers.

By the end of GoT, they'll be living in a multi-cult magical realm, so I wouldn't be too happy on that score.

As someone living in a homo sapiens only setting, I disagree

Yeah GoT is the best example of S&S done wrong. Tolkien is way better than fatman

George is one of those "write as you go along" writers which is always a disaster when you try to do such a long series

my comrade

>going full "subverting tropes" which ends up being uninteresting/nonsensical most of the time.
> make them Melinbonean-like fey humans...

Might as well make dwarves into literal maggots in the world's body

I'm not going to make them albino sociopathic island dwellers user. The whole "mostly human but slightly fey" makes more sense for me than "elves" because elves just carry along all this extra baggage and create certain expectations

>>lacks overemphasized other to fight (monster races)
How is that a bad thing? And no, you can still easily make it so that there's some other culture or tribe which the PC's culture is on constantly unfriendly terms with.

>>can't use other species as stand in for ethnicity
This is only a disadvantage if you're lazy and don't want to put in the work, and in which case: Why are you making a setting at all?

>>less exoticism, less sense of discovery
There's still plenty of exoticism and discovery in the real world. Again, this is only an issue if you're lazy and don't want to put the work in.

>>character abilities more bound to human possibilities, one less vector for mechanical variety
You can still have different ethnicities in your setting and give them stat modifiers.

>lacks overemphasized other to fight (monster races)

That is literally what evil empires and foreigners are for, you fucken goof

>I'm not going to make them albino sociopathic island dwellers

Englishmen?

>No niggers or Jews
>in a human-only setting

Weird how people project "niggers" and "Jews" onto non-human races when "niggers" and "Jews" are all humans in reality. How delusional are you?

>these days
Dunno about that. Veeky Forums has been riding Howard's dick for a longass time.

>Howard's worldbuilding is just more compelling
Howard's worldbuilding is actually, and I don't really want to say it because I like Conan, pretty shit. All the cultures are very clearly stolen directly from wildly different time periods of the real world, creating a hodgepodge of what Howard believed sounded cool at the time. Now granted, this is part of the pulp appeal in Conan, and I don't think I'd have liked the Hyborian Age as much if it wasn't that.

At the same time, I attempted to read through all of Howard's Conan stories four years back or so, and I lost interest about a third through or so. Meanwhile, I read through all of Lovecraft's stories at about the same time with no problem, so there might actually be something to either his worldbuilding or prose that I just don't like.

>Hoping this Low Fantasy Renaissance really takes off.
Eh, the low fantasy renaissance has been going on for quite a while now. In fact, it's been going on for so long that Veeky Forums are just about ready to stop being contrarian against it because it's already going out of style again, which makes it cool to like it.

It was clearly humour saying that in a imagined setting why would you ever include subhumans like niggers or jews? Much better to create their equivalent in non-human races, so you can still feel good and uphold your morals while genociding them.

Why do you even talk to a wretch infected with /pol/io?

A human only setting will demand more of you as a world builder, because it will be more apparent when you go the lazy route and create a culture of hats.

That said, a human only setting will also demand less of you as a world builder, because your players will also, hopefully, recognize what the NPCs are doing as human activities, and if you're basing them, to some degree on real cultures, there's a good chance players will understand how things work without you having to explain it to them.