Fantasy Stories that only have Humans (no non-human races)

[Greninjaman]

This question popped into my head and I decided to look around for thoughts on it: Could a Fantasy story work if the Human race is the only race (like, there are no dwarves or Elves or anything of that sort)?

I say yes because one could use the term "race" in a very loose manner (like, instead of Dwarves, they are humans that have adapted to living in the mountains and decided to call themselves Dwarves to differentiate themselves from other groups; Elves are humans that have adapted to living in the forests). You can also make the non-human races very not human (Instead of being short bearded humans, Dwarves are rocky golem-like creatures that are not really human in appearence [Legend of Zelda's Gorons come to mind]).

What do you guys think? Could such a story work?

 

[Lord Kyuubi]

I mean, sure, you absolutely could make that work - there are many examples already out there of this being done very well. Different people look for different things in fantasy, of course, but if the story is good then someone's usual favourite fantasy race being missing would be a rather insubstantial criticism. Not to say there wouldn't be someone saying '0/10, no elves', but they wouldn't be someone worth listening to.

I've been very slowly working on a fantasy setting for a good number of years now, and this is one thing I want to do. I don't want to include any elves, dwarves, halflings, or other 'nearly human' fantasy races for a few reasons. Partly because there's plenty of works that already have them included, but I think mostly because many readers have a lot of pre-conceived notions about those races already. Thinking about elves or dwarves out of context, there are a lot of conventions and expectations attached to them. You could play that straight, but that doesn't seem a very interesting option to me. Subverting those expectations is another option - dwarves who live under a mountain not because they're interested in gold and jewels, but because their culture places a lot of value on philosophy and art, and they want to live somewhere quiet and contemplative. That's probably not without its own problems, but it's something to consider. The third option, the one I opted for is to not use the most common non-human fantasy races at all, so the reader has no expectations to fall back on, and therefore has to simply judge the characters only by what they see in the story.

That felt like a bit of a ramble, don't know how useful it is, but hopefully there's something worth considering in there.

 

[Greninjaman]

Subverting those expectations is another option - dwarves who live under a mountain not because they're interested in gold and jewels, but because their culture places a lot of value on philosophy and art, and they want to live somewhere quiet and contemplative.

Could also swap the places of the Elves and Dwarves
Dwarves who live in the forest; Elves that live in the mountain. That would be interesting to write about.

 

[Lord Kyuubi]

Could also swap the places of the Elves and Dwarves
Dwarves who live in the forest; Elves that live in the mountain. That would be interesting to write about.

It's possible to do something like that, though something I didn't properly discuss in my first reply (which was not very well-written, to be honest) is there should still be a good justification to subvert expectations, rather than just doing it for its own sake. So to stick with this example, why do these dwarves live in the forest - what is it about the forest that is important to them? Likewise for the elves and the mountain. Having a good justification is important, so they don't feel like they're just different for the sake of being different, or that can risk feeling like a gimmick. It doesn't need to be anything too fancy, just the regular steps you would take to flesh out a fantasy culture, and let them feel at home there.

I suppose another way to put it is you don't want the audience stopping to question 'Why are these dwarves in a forest?' It's probably better if that just feels normal for the setting.

 

[Greninjaman]

Could a fantasy story get away with only having 3 races?

 

[Dorothy]

Could a fantasy story get away with only having 3 races?

A Song of Ice and Fire almost exclusively features humans. Giants and elves ("the Children of the Forest") appear, but they are explicitly shown to be dying breeds.

 

[Greninjaman]

Here's something that I thought of (I almost made a new thread, but then I remembered this one): Should a race be included only if they are important to the story? I feel like, if a race that lives in the mountains has no bearing on the plot, why bother having them? Also, if a race is human-like enough, why use them over humans?

It's the same with Elves and Dwarves: Why use them, when the story likely would not change if they were replaced by humans?

 

[Emmy]

Here's something that I thought of (I almost made a new thread, but then I remembered this one): Should a race be included only if they are important to the story? I feel like, if a race that lives in the mountains has no bearing on the plot, why bother having them? Also, if a race is human-like enough, why use them over humans?

It's the same with Elves and Dwarves: Why use them, when the story likely would not change if they were replaced by humans?

Such a utilitarian rational is anathema to my style of writing.

To give a broad example, a lot of stuff in the “Lord of the Rings” books have to get either abridged or removed entirely in adaptations because it’s not “relevant” to the immediate story of Frodo going to Mordor. However the people who love the books defend their presence in the books as world-building that makes the setting expansive and really feel lived in, to the point that you can ask one of the IRL Tolkien scholars an inane question about the history of Middle-Earth and genuinely expect an answer. The books might not be everyone’s cup of tea but they endure in popularity across generations for a reason and it’s that Tolkien spent his life writing about this fictional world and never stopped adding layers of backstory to it.

 

[Greninjaman]

Such a utilitarian rational is anathema to my style of writing.

To give a broad example, a lot of stuff in the “Lord of the Rings” books have to get either abridged or removed entirely in adaptations because it’s not “relevant” to the immediate story of Frodo going to Mordor. However the people who love the books defend their presence in the books as world-building that makes the setting expansive and really feel lived in, to the point that you can ask one of the IRL Tolkien scholars an inane question about the history of Middle-Earth and genuinely expect an answer. The books might not be everyone’s cup of tea but they endure in popularity across generations for a reason and it’s that Tolkien spent his life writing about this fictional world and never stopped adding layers of backstory to it.

I mean, why add a race if they serve no purpose to the story? If they are nothing more than background props, why include them?

 

[Nitro Indigo]

Something I like to do in writing is include throwaway lines referencing parts of the world outside of the story, in case I want to expand upon them later.

 

[Greninjaman]

I guess that's one way to do it.