Human Master Race Problem

Hey all, AS the name implies I got stuck dming and now my players wont step up and allow me to have a character, so work for me. I love dming, and after our most recent 3.5 adventures we took a break. 4th ed was never in our vocabulary and after a mangled attempt at it, we lost multiple players who felt their beloved classes had lost their meaning. ONTO DND NEXT!

The ability score adjustment that humans get is a little frightening. I know in other additions, they get more skill or blah to show that a human was more squishy then specialty, but the scores is out of control.

Also a problem with the packet, it lists the starting health as 10 plus con mod, it also lists hit dice. Should the ten be referring to the D10 that is the fighters hit dice, it should be listed to cause less confusion.

Lastly, while building a human fighter, it lists that a fighter will gain a +1 to Str, Con or whatever before the creation process informs you of assigning your ability scores. Poor players! Attempting to do this without help would be a bit of a mess.

Also, happy birthday to me! 18 today.

Overall very eager to get my players back together, to see the intersting new look at fighters and clerics and such. Not bad wizards, not bad at all.
I correct myself in the lick of time! The hit dice is a recovery method? Hurm. It reminds me of healing surges or whatever it was that fourth ed had. Still confuzzling though.
Im going to govern this thread like a freak and also begin to complain about the Hp and dying thing. While I understand that a player can die before they realize it, but it feels a little to much to keep track of how many negative hit points you have, its almost double the power.
All I do is bitch, but it lists the requirement to fill out AC with its modifer, before handing out gold.

What the **** happened to the easy xp calculation!?
At first I thought that the ability score bonuses for humans were too much, but humans actually lose out on some other pretty powerful abilities that other races have.

They don't get:

Halfling luck
any weapon specialization (halflng, elven, dwarven)
No dwarven toughness
No keen senses
No naturally stealthy
No poison immunity

I don't mind the bonus to abilities, but the bonuses are actually boring compared to other abilities that they might be able to give to humans.


 

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

Its not about how interesting it is, it's the use and practicality
I think that humans should have extra abilities and traits, like the other races, and a single floating ability score bonus. But giving them +1 across the board makes them as tough as  dwarf, as graceful as an elf, as charming as a halfling, etc. It utterly invalidates what are supposed to be the other races' strengths in the story of the setting. Drop the blanket +1 and bring back some of the neat stuff from past editions: an extra trained skill, an extra feat, heroic effort, etc. Honestly, I'd like to see the ability score bonus dropped from the "base race" for human and put them into "sub-races" like the others. Greyhawk, Kalamar, Conan, etc all have different ethnic groups for humans with their own strengths. I'd like to see this supported.
The problem for me isn't that +1s to everything aren't balanced. They really are considering all the mechanical bonuses other races get...my big thing is whether this is what we want to be the 'thing that makes humans different'? That they're better at everything? Generally humans have always fallen into the 'inferior but generalized' position. Elves are more graceful and intelligent. Dwarves are better workers, tougher, more practical. Halflings are nicer, sneakier, and quicker on the uptake. Now it sort of feels like the stats are saying that if a human applies himself he'll be as good as whatever race in whatever he (or she) chooses to pursue and just naturally a bit better at everything else even without applying himself.

That's interesting, and kind of a fun upbeat take on humans--as opposed to the thrashing they usually recieve in fantasy (Elves: fairest and wisest; Dwarves: Great craftsmen, masters of mountain halls; Humans: who above all things, desire power). While it kinda' puts a smile on my pro-humanist face I can't help but think that's not what the developers meant to do flavorwise, that they didn't really mean it as a story thing.

I guess one way or the other is fine with me, but I'd like the race mods for humans to match the flavor.

Oh and I would really dig seeing a barbarian subrace for humans. It's been a long time coming, but every setting has regular rural/city folk and then those big gnarly tattooed humans that live in the frozen north and wander the badlands of the world. It'd be a nice way to stamp that official and balance the race format for everyone.
Now with 100% more Vorthos!
Greyhawk, Kalamar, Conan, etc all have different ethnic groups for humans with their own strengths. I'd like to see this supported.



Can I say by the way, that the idea in 3e setting books like Ghostwalk and Forgotten Realms to add starting regions to character creation was just inspired! It was just meaty enough to make it feel really meaningful, and it multiplied the number of options for making characters by a ton.

I mean it's really not a base rules thing--but I'd be really excited to see it once we start getting setting specific stuff.

We're doing a Planescape thing for this next playtest and something like this would be a great way to reflect Faction without having to dedicate your whole Background to it. It'd also work nicely for Dragonmarked Houses as well as nations in Eberron.
Now with 100% more Vorthos!
Their intent is to have humans be Good at Many Master of One concept. The +1 to all is just 100% mechanics so that PC humans don't miss weapon training or what have you. Remember PCs are exceptional and my assumption in regular people they only would get the +1 to one, if one thinks mechanically.
Honestly, i agree with the idea of humans being jack of all trades master of none.

perhaps change it to be a floating +2 to a stat, or perhaps 2 or 3 +1's
Their intent is to have humans be Good at Many Master of One concept. The +1 to all is just 100% mechanics so that PC humans don't miss weapon training or what have you. Remember PCs are exceptional and my assumption in regular people they only would get the +1 to one, if one thinks mechanically.



PCs are not exceptional in my games, so what they have is what everyone has. The only exceptional thing about PCs are abilities score above average. And that's on the dice.

I keep supporting stronger bonuses with a malus for non human race, like a +2 -1 to something when humans got only a +1 or a +1 -1 for non humans and nothiung for humans. And also a changed ability cap. So where the top is 20 an elf has a 21, 22 maximum int, or dex and a 18, 19 maximum con.
+1 to any three stats, another +1 to any stat (can be one of the first three, can be a fourth stat).


Carl
Floating +2, pick any one trait from any other race's trait that isn't a stat increase, grant a type of vision, trance or dependent on size. That's what I would do if it were up to me. List would include:

Poison Resilience
Weapon Training with one type of weapon (blades, axes, swords, bow, etc.)
Stonecunning
Toughness
Armor Mastery
Keen Senses
Free Spirit
Cantrip
Grace
Lucky
Fearless
Floating +2, pick any one trait from any other race's trait that isn't a stat increase, grant a type of vision, trance or dependent on size. That's what I would do if it were up to me. List would include:

Poison Resilience
Weapon Training with one type of weapon (blades, axes, swords, bow, etc.)
Stonecunning
Toughness
Armor Mastery
Keen Senses
Free Spirit
Cantrip
Grace
Lucky
Fearless




And - No one will ever play a human.


Carl
Why not?
In my case because that's not human.
And stat bonuses are?
Stat bonuss are scary, but hes right, not human, that's broken too. With no justification as to why they gain those bonuss. The stat increase is just out of control squishy
Stat bonuss are scary, but hes right, not human, that's broken too. With no justification as to why they gain those bonuss. The stat increase is just out of control squishy
PCs are not exceptional in my games, so what they have is what everyone has. The only exceptional thing about PCs are abilities score above average. And that's on the dice.



Woo! I wasn't gonna' be the one to say it--but yeah, the whole idea that PCs are exceptional is pretty lame. I really don't play that way either. It's a conciet that really bugs me. If PCs are better than regular folk from the start and destined for greatness, then it sort of feels like they don't earn their accomplishments. I like the idea that the PCs start out in the same boat as every other person out in the world, but that they go out and get for themselves whatever degree of heroism, villany or mediocrity they aspire to. I'm not telling a Greek myth here, I want real folks full of weaknesses, emotions and foibles--real people in fantastic situations.

For my money I'd like to have different (or tiers) in the game right from the start:

Gritty (PCs are pretty much like everyone else--they adventure rather than farming, but it's their occupation, not their chosen status as folk set apart for awesome at birth)

Heroic (PCs are a cut above--nothing supernatural or verisimilitude breaking, but they are irrationally better at surviving otherwise lethal damage and other silliness. See any action movie especially ones with Arnold Schwartzeneger.)

Legendary (PCs are figures of mythic proportions. See Beowulf. You can fight naked at the bottom of a bog against the queen of monsters for days, convince lions not to eat you by sheer virtue, take out whole armies of badguys while tied up and topple a temple on top of yourself as the big finale...except for the getting blinded and dying part, because in Legendary you're cool enough you grow new eyeballs the next day after you crawl out of the rubble. Booyah!)

I guess my thing is epicness shouldn't be about level, or a basic assumption of the game. Different games have different levels of epic and I think that's okay.
Now with 100% more Vorthos!
For the main part of the thread.  Humans are not really unbalanced mechanically.  At most you are looking at a 5% boost in every roll, but realistically it is more a 5% increase in probably 3-4 attributes and with a cap of 20 non-humans still end up slightly better in their specialty and humans are slightly better in the off specialty stuff. I'd probably give non-humans a +2 in their big stat so they hit 20 at the same time as humans though, but that is a fairly minor tweak.  

As for exceptional Pcs on some levels well duh the are.  By virtue of being an adventurer and having the drive to go out and slay monsters and take their crap and not remain a farmer they are not the average guy.  There is a reason in any campaign why the Pcs are doing things and others are not even though the same catalyst may have occurred in their backgrounds.  Personally I think the whole not having straight 10's in attributes shows that enough though.  If you give everyone the standard distribution though even that wont apply, but that would boggle me even more.  You think average people are that exceptional?  
As for exceptional Pcs on some levels well duh the are.  By virtue of being an adventurer and having the drive to go out and slay monsters and take their crap and not remain a farmer they are not the average guy.  There is a reason in any campaign why the Pcs are doing things and others are not even though the same catalyst may have occurred in their backgrounds.  Personally I think the whole not having straight 10's in attributes shows that enough though.  If you give everyone the standard distribution though even that wont apply, but that would boggle me even more.  You think average people are that exceptional?



I'd argue that the most exceptional thing about an adventurer should be that they're an adventurer. In the same way that most people in our world aren't cops or emergency room doctors or secret agents--but those careers are the most exciting ones, so most of our stories are about them.

I guess put another way, I don't see there being much mechanical difference between having a PC who's a farmer or a merchant versus a PC who's a fighter or a cleric...it's just that a game focused on a farmer PC would be a much duller game.

I like a D&D game where the difference between the PCs and NPCs is less the difference between Aragorn and Butterburr and more the difference between say me and a cop.
Now with 100% more Vorthos!
Their intent is to have humans be Good at Many Master of One concept. The +1 to all is just 100% mechanics so that PC humans don't miss weapon training or what have you. Remember PCs are exceptional and my assumption in regular people they only would get the +1 to one, if one thinks mechanically.

 

PCs are not exceptional in my games, so what they have is what everyone has. The only exceptional thing about PCs are abilities score above average. And that's on the dice.

I keep supporting stronger bonuses with a malus for non human race, like a +2 -1 to something when humans got only a +1 or a +1 -1 for non humans and nothiung for humans. And also a changed ability cap. So where the top is 20 an elf has a 21, 22 maximum int, or dex and a 18, 19 maximum con.



PCs are not exceptional in my games, so what they have is what everyone has. The only exceptional thing about PCs are abilities score above average. And that's on the dice.



Woo! I wasn't gonna' be the one to say it--but yeah, the whole idea that PCs are exceptional is pretty lame. I really don't play that way either. It's a conciet that really bugs me. If PCs are better than regular folk from the start and destined for greatness, then it sort of feels like they don't earn their accomplishments. I like the idea that the PCs start out in the same boat as every other person out in the world, but that they go out and get for themselves whatever degree of heroism, villany or mediocrity they aspire to. I'm not telling a Greek myth here, I want real folks full of weaknesses, emotions and foibles--real people in fantastic situations.

For my money I'd like to have different (or tiers) in the game right from the start:

Gritty (PCs are pretty much like everyone else--they adventure rather than farming, but it's their occupation, not their chosen status as folk set apart for awesome at birth)

Heroic (PCs are a cut above--nothing supernatural or verisimilitude breaking, but they are irrationally better at surviving otherwise lethal damage and other silliness. See any action movie especially ones with Arnold Schwartzeneger.)

Legendary (PCs are figures of mythic proportions. See Beowulf. You can fight naked at the bottom of a bog against the queen of monsters for days, convince lions not to eat you by sheer virtue, take out whole armies of badguys while tied up and topple a temple on top of yourself as the big finale...except for the getting blinded and dying part, because in Legendary you're cool enough you grow new eyeballs the next day after you crawl out of the rubble. Booyah!)

I guess my thing is epicness shouldn't be about level, or a basic assumption of the game. Different games have different levels of epic and I think that's okay.




Hate to break it to you guys, but the moment a player of any race picks a class and goes adventuring (for whatever reason, power, protection of a loved one, saving the kingdom or a myriad of other choices and situations) they ARE special.

They're not staying behind and hoping someone will save them like the rest of humanity tends to do.  They're going out and doing the deeds.  They're the ones wanting to change and shape the world.

Whether or not they actually succeed, is really up to the GM.  But in the end, the fact that the PC characters (if you'll let slip into make believe for just a second, I know, it's tough with this being D&D and all, but you remember being kids, right?)  are standing and facing the dangers ahead, instead of running away from it, or letting it overrun them, makes them 'heroes'.

And Heroes (and I'm using it in the Grecian sense,  not the Saturday Morning Cartoon way) do big things. 
Seriously, the other races suck compared to the Human Master Race.

At high levels, the plus to all abilities is more powerful than ever. Power to attack, power to damage, power to skills, power to save, power to win.

Meanwhile, everything the other races get which is mostly trivial to begin with becomes obsolete. *roll eyes*, a Wizard looses out on an 18 just to get an extra cantrip - when the Wizard alread has cantrips plus a single feat grants three more? Ridonkulous.

The other races suck.



It is broken.
Well, there are certainly some strong emotions running in this thread. I think it would be most helpful (from a playtest point of view) to discuss how common humans are amongst your PC's. Working with a level cap of 20 (per the rules) we had 8 of 10 characters choose human. Now, that might sound good to some of you who don't want non-human pc's to be the norm, but it smacks of a mechanics problem to me. 

We just recently tried capping traits at 18 instead of 20 (which has a number of balancing effects) and we have 3 of 4 non-humans. That seems a hair better from a game balance point of view, but it may not be everything.

We also found that the dex fighter had a lower AC, lower initiative differential and generally seemed balanced with St fighters. 

In fact a 16 in a secondary trait seemed very strong, where when we had 20's  the 16's weren't all that useful (except in con and for certain skills.
Well, there are certainly some strong emotions running in this thread. I think it would be most helpful (from a playtest point of view) to discuss how common humans are amongst your PC's. Working with a level cap of 20 (per the rules) we had 8 of 10 characters choose human. Now, that might sound good to some of you who don't want non-human pc's to be the norm, but it smacks of a mechanics problem to me. 

We just recently tried capping traits at 18 instead of 20 (which has a number of balancing effects) and we have 3 of 4 non-humans. That seems a hair better from a game balance point of view, but it may not be everything.

We also found that the dex fighter had a lower AC, lower initiative differential and generally seemed balanced with St fighters. 

In fact a 16 in a secondary trait seemed very strong, where when we had 20's  the 16's weren't all that useful (except in con and for certain skills.



Humans tend not to be that common among my players. At most there will be 2 PCs in 5 that are human. The reasoning is simple, "You are human in real life, why play one in fantasy?"
I don't know how much that could help in a playtest sense? 

If you look back to older editions and old school games in general humans got a raw deal. They got one bonus. Some cases XP or other times how high of levels they could go. Without level caps in non human races in the new editions things have turned into of a cf of trying to make people want to play humans and now it seems like you want people to not play humans. Its odd to see a thread like this to me haha. But really though level caps aren't a bad option in short term games. But if you do long term ones make the non humans take a tiny bit longer to level up. Don't cap em. No one likes that. 


This reminds me of a debate I once had about non human level caps. I was on the against side. I was saying even if it helps game balance it isn't realistic. Gnomes, Elves, and Dwarves all live longer than humans and therefore should never get a cap. Well the other side said if you do that no one will play humans. You get a more interesting character with different abilities with no drawbacks. Draw your conclusions I think level slow downs are perfect in my games.

A player character is exceptional in the fact that they are insane enough to start adventuring in the first place. Your group's highly skilled fighter probably could  have a gotten a cushy  high paying job protecting some noble, or perhaps he could have joined the military where he would likely be quick to advance in rank. Instead he chooses to run around dank festering monster holes in the hopes that he will find a pile of coins or a magic potion.

Most of the races get a weapon die bonus, which is cool unless you are a wizard or warlock. The one weapon die increase that other races get are nice, although that extra 1 point of damage that you always get for the +2 of being human more than makes up for it. Most of the other abilities just seem situational, unless you are always in a forest or your dm always uses charm effects. A cap of 20 also means that humans will reach it at greater speed than the other races, allowing you to put more points into your secondary and tertiary stats which will already be higher than every other race.

I'm not usually very good at character optimizing or power gaming, (nor do I particularly care to be)  but the advantages to playing a human seem obvious.
Interestingly enough, though, out of my players, only 1 is a human. The special abilities and flavor are what draws people. The abilities they have flesh them out nicely, making them a lot more robust on default than a human is, and that is a small part of the draw.

That said, I'm probably just going to say that humans still cap at 20 in all stats and non-humans can go to 22 in their buffable stat. Either that or I will end up giving my non-humans an extra +1 to their core stat for race out the box to balance their main stat out mechanically. That would make sense to me.
A player character is exceptional in the fact that they are insane enough to start adventuring in the first place. Your group's highly skilled fighter probably could  have a gotten a cushy  high paying job protecting some noble, or perhaps he could have joined the military where he would likely be quick to advance in rank. Instead he chooses to run around dank festering monster holes in the hopes that he will find a pile of coins or a magic potion.



I've often had dicussions with my players about how much a psychologist could make analyzing some of the more civilized adventurer types. Might be hard to treat a barbarian though. lol
Interestingly enough, though, out of my players, only 1 is a human. The special abilities and flavor are what draws people. The abilities they have flesh them out nicely, making them a lot more robust on default than a human is, and that is a small part of the draw.

That said, I'm probably just going to say that humans still cap at 20 in all stats and non-humans can go to 22 in their buffable stat. Either that or I will end up giving my non-humans an extra +1 to their core stat for race out the box to balance their main stat out mechanically. That would make sense to me.



While I'd agree with the non-humans getting the additional +1 starting so the prime stat is at the same level as the humans I'd advise against going to 22 for non-humans.  As is a dwarf will be better at fighting than a human in the long run since both will cap out at 20 and the dwarf has fighter related bonuses. Heck a dwarf in some respects would make a better anything than the human in the long run since +1 to ac or +1 to the hit die helps any class.  The +1 to every stat just makes the human better at doing things outside of their class focus.  If you also gave non-humans a higher cap that would double down on the better at humans in the specialty aspect and humans would go from relatively balanced to weak pretty fast.  

Personally I'd keep races how they are give humans the +2 to one stat and let humans hit 22 in a prime stat to kind of show the 1e-2e idea that humans could reach the highest peak of skill in anything.  Then give humans some other minor benefit to show the ability to focus and get to the top.  If skills were a default and not a module 'd say something like they can pick one skill to have advantage with as a default, though that sounds like too much so maybe not.  Maybe they can would get a static +X to Y number of skills or saves  that way in a skill system you could go with a skill in a non skill game you could go with saves.  
I've often had dicussions with my players about how much a psychologist could make analyzing some of the more civilized adventurer types. Might be hard to treat a barbarian though. lol



I would love to be in one of those groups of yours, sounds extremely entertaining. On a side note, a professional psychologist who follows a group of adventures around to better understand their mindset could make for an interesting character background.

I believe the old D&D cliche is something like five strangers meet in tavern and decide to go kill things together.
I've often had dicussions with my players about how much a psychologist could make analyzing some of the more civilized adventurer types. Might be hard to treat a barbarian though. lol



I would love to be in one of those groups of yours, sounds extremely entertaining. On a side note, a professional psychologist who follows a group of adventures around to better understand their mindset could make for an interesting character background.

I believe the old D&D cliche is something like five strangers meet in tavern and decide to go kill things together.



It is a sort of RPG cliche I'd say.  Unless you have people make their characters together, maybe not as much as the Dresden Files RPG, but together it will happen.  As of DM I've used it a lot just because I want everyone individually to make their own character and not feel pressured to make his background a farmer or brother/employee  etc so he can tie it in with everyone else.  I want them to be happy with the character they made and not feel like other people made too many parts of their character.(oddly as a player I usually wait until everyone has made their character and then fill in a hole, so my character is usually in effect made by others on some level)  Using Shadowrun for example a lot of games start with each of you individually get a call from your fixer for a meet and you are hired to work as a team to do X job.  Which is pretty much the same as you meet in a bar.  
Yup, I tend to use the varient of "You all answer a bill asking for assistance" for the standard "You meet in a bar".

Gives everybody a reason to work together for that first quest until the brothers in arms thing kicks in.
To answer the question asked about PC race composition in the playtest so far we've got:

Humans: (4) Fighter, Cleric, Wizard and Thief (with an air elemental bloodline)

Nonhumans: (2) Fighter (Stout Halfling), Fighter (Elf)

Usually it works out closer to 50-50 but this game we ended up with a lot of humans.
Now with 100% more Vorthos!
Honestly I like humans as the playtest presents them. Humans always seemed like the roaches of the fantasy world. They get everywhere and you just can't wipe them out. Yeah they get a boost to all stats but they are easier to kill than a dwarf. You can control them more than an elf, and they are clods when you look at halflings. Honestly if you wanted to kill a party.of humans you get them in a cave, blow out the torches and let halflings with poison daggers reek havok on the poor sods.
The Playtest Human is broken unbalanced compared to the other races. Unacceptable.

If the goal is to never play a Nonhuman race, then just remove them from the game in the first place.

If that is what the Human is, I will never play a Nonhuman again. I hope the designers have more sense, than for the Human to be Stronger than Ogres, more Intelligent than Elves, more agile than Halflings, tougher than Dwarves, and so on. It is stupid.
Honestly I like humans as the playtest presents them. Humans always seemed like the roaches of the fantasy world. They get everywhere and you just can't wipe them out. Yeah they get a boost to all stats but they are easier to kill than a dwarf. You can control them more than an elf, and they are clods when you look at halflings. Honestly if you wanted to kill a party.of humans you get them in a cave, blow out the torches and let halflings with poison daggers reek havok on the poor sods.



I apologize, but it is frustrating when people have no clue about optimization, and dont know how to evaluate what is more power than what.

At level 20 when the Human gets +3 to their primary ability, and +1 to their secondary, while the High Elf still has the same old level-1 cantrip, the Human abilities prove to be significantly more powerful than anything the other races get.

The Nonhuman traits are trivial, highly situational, and are intended to be balanced for LEVEL 1.

Meanwhile, as the Human advances thru the levels, the improvents in the abilities just keep on getting better, because the extra score point on top of that is just that much closer to the edge of breaking a game that has bounded accuracy.



Think about it. Magic item bonuses have a huge impact in this game. A +1 sword will be noticeably powerful for at least 10 levels. The human abilities are like a +1 magic item for half of the abilities, for absolutely aspect of the game that uses those abilities. And this ability bonus stacks on top of any magic bonuses. It highly distorts the math, compared to the other races.

And the flavor is wrong. If the Human is stronger than an Ogre, it is just idiotic.
I do see Humans as way too powerful at this stage. As a thought though of what to replace it with I had the following line of inquiry. Most of the races get abilities that emphasize what they are the best at. High elves get a free cantrip because they are paragons of magic, Dwarves are resistant to poison and have stonecunning because they are hardy and spend their childhoods in mountain cave cities. What are humans best at? We generally cop out and say they are "good at a lot of things" or genralists instead of specialists. I disagree, compared to all other races humans do have one trait that seems almost unique. We are boundary pushers, explorers, tenacious survivors and colonizers, always seeking to rise higher and spread further. Every other race is portrayed as static in their domains and specialties, but humans are shown expanding. Now as for what exact abilities that should translate to I'm not certain. Most of the things that come to mind are either too powerful, or hard to implement. However, I feel this is a good starting point for redefining humans as something more than "good at a lot of things"

Also, the comparison was made between PC's being more like cops than Grecian heroes. I disagree to an extent. I'd say PC's are more like soldiers, SWAT,  FBI agents or CIA operatives. They are trained and are more exceptional than the average person (That's why we have boot camp and other methods of "weeding out" people who can;t "cut it") Cops are wonderful and brave individuals, but they are more suited to keeping the peace than saving the city. When you have something truly major threatening a city, you don't call the police. You call in the big guns. And a dragon threatening the countryside is a job for PC's, not the town guard.
Compared to all other races humans do have one trait that seems almost unique. We are boundary pushers, explorers, tenacious survivors and colonizers, always seeking to rise higher and spread further.

I strongly agree.

Just today I was thinking something along these lines. What separates the Human race from all other races (and all other reallife species) is, Desire. This Desire expresses itself as both best and the worst that Humans are capable of. It is ambition, the drive to improve, to cooperate, to achieve success. It is also selfishness, criminality, arrogance, and so on.

Desire is what drives the Human to push boundaries.

It reminds me of the archetype of the biblical Tower of Babel. The Humans decided they would build a tower that would reach the heights of heaven. (Probably understood to be some kind of ziggurat temple connecting with the divine.) And the Humans would have succeeded if God didnt actively stop the Human. Saying, anything that a Human can imagine, a Human can eventually achieve.

(On analysis, the “sin” that these Humans were guilty of was the sin of conformity. They were of “one lip”, all saying exactly the same thing, all doing exactly the same thing. All obeying the “canon”. They confused conformity with spiritual authenticity, when actually diversity - the ability to show compassion toward someone that is different that one doesnt understand - is what allows the capacity of transcendence, thus spiritual authenticity. So causing these Humans to speak different languages is a remedy, forcing diversity, albeit the inability of Humans to cooperate was a tremendous loss of power.)

Ultimately, when the Human is able to be both diverse and coordinating and cooperating - acting as one with compassion with people who are different from eachother - the Human will be able to achieve everything. Everything. Every boundary, the Human will be able to overcome.
Sign In to post comments