Running this with the ruling that only one player can run a human character?

It struck me that given supposed Imperial Speciesism whether anyone tried running a game with this as a rule?

Nope, although the few games I've run were pretty open-ended, with the last one actually being a Force and Destiny campaign.

I honestly think one of the big strengths of the Alliance is the diversity of its membership, particularly in the EU/Legends. The species offered up so far reflect that diversity as a contrast to the Empire's stark uniformity.

And frankly, I think if you try and force your players to all play human characters, you lose a notable part of what makes Star Wars be Star Wars, and that it starts looking more like any other Humanocentric sci-fi setting, such as Battlestar Galactica or Buck Rodgers.

Apart from a one-shot focused around the Imperial military, no.

why?

Never limit your players, just makes them upset

Apart from a one-shot focused around the Imperial military, no.

This would probably be the only time that the PCs should be restricted to Humans.

That said, there are some small number of "aliens" working within the Imperial military, but their numbers are extremely few and they're generally very exceptional individuals, such as Grand Admiral Thrawn.

Apart from a one-shot focused around the Imperial military, no.

This would probably be the only time that the PCs should be restricted to Humans.

That said, there are some small number of "aliens" working within the Imperial military, but their numbers are extremely few and they're generally very exceptional individuals, such as Grand Admiral Thrawn.

And even in this case I gave the option to allow for alien Irregulars and informants, though none of them took it.

Running this with the ruling that only one player can run a human character?

I think everybody misinterpreted this. He's asking about limiting humans, not running only with humans.

Considering we often end up with the 'token human' anyway. It's not usually an issue. It really depends on the theme of the game, which is a Session 0 thing. If the players go "let's play the non-human brigade!" then that works. If not, it's not a big issue. If you find everyone grabbing human, it might be worth tossing out there why nobody wants to play non-humans - is it the rules or the RP?

My group has no humans. This is making it rather difficult for them to infiltrate Imperial facilities. Currently, they're on a rescue mission to save someone being held on a star destroyer. The Zeltron was able to disguise himself as human, and the Arkanian put on storm trooper armor ("Aren't you a little tall for a storm trooper?") but the rest have to either sneak through the air ducts or do the "captured wookiee" ploy.

I wonder if the speciesism thing will be as strong in the new star wars ... they seem to have moved (somewhat) away from the gender thing that KJ Anderson focused on a lot with Daala, so perhaps the speciesism will be pulled back too? It's not like it's a central thing to Sidious' Sith teachings... from what we know (excluding anything in limbo: i.e. EU/Legends). Of course, I've only recently finished New Dawn of the new books, so there's stuff I don't know from Tarkin and Heir to the Jedi ...

I'm sort of running an AoR thing these days, and I've decided it makes little difference, particularly in remote areas, whether or not there's a human in the group or not. Sure it can help, but Bothans, Sullustans, Twi'leks, most species could have some reason to work for and be loyal to the Empire. The Empire was, as I see it, founded on creating security and stability after beating the Separatists into submission and crushing the Jedi rebellion, neither of these things seems very much based on species, but rather a craving for power ... errr I mean security and stability, and peace...

In the games I've played in, the only time there was more than one human was when only EotE was out and there were limited species choices. Since then, we haven't had more than one in any group and when we do have one it's usually because that player wants to be the party Face and still be able to work with the Imperials to talk our way out of things.

Like stated above, I'm not a fan of limiting player choices. Unless it's important to the story, like running an evil racist Imperial hit squad where they would all be human imperial agents.

I also don't think human heavy groups happen all that often in practice because the rules don't give humans a mechanical advantage, "just" a rank in any two non-career skills. A lot of other species get a rank in a picked skill and a talent, which mechanically is just as good if not better than the human skill ranks. If you're spending most of your starting XP on attributes, then at best it's a wash.

If this was a game like D&D where humans get a mechanical bonus (feats are amazing) and the forums were full of people only wanting to make human characters, then I think this rule wouldn't be terrible for diversity reasons in a game intended to be human light. I feel that in AoR you can get a non-human group just by saying "wouldn't it be cool if none of us were humans?" during the session zero meeting as opposed to a hard rule against it.

I wonder if the speciesism thing will be as strong in the new star wars ... they seem to have moved (somewhat) away from the gender thing that KJ Anderson focused on a lot with Daala, so perhaps the speciesism will be pulled back too? It's not like it's a central thing to Sidious' Sith teachings... from what we know (excluding anything in limbo: i.e. EU/Legends). Of course, I've only recently finished New Dawn of the new books, so there's stuff I don't know from Tarkin and Heir to the Jedi ...

I'm sort of running an AoR thing these days, and I've decided it makes little difference, particularly in remote areas, whether or not there's a human in the group or not. Sure it can help, but Bothans, Sullustans, Twi'leks, most species could have some reason to work for and be loyal to the Empire. The Empire was, as I see it, founded on creating security and stability after beating the Separatists into submission and crushing the Jedi rebellion, neither of these things seems very much based on species, but rather a craving for power ... errr I mean security and stability, and peace...

The Speciesism and the Sexism in the Empire is from the Legends continuity. Truthfully I rather liked that both were scattered throughout various series and novels. I felt it made for powerful motivators for opposing the Empire.

But onto the topic, I don't think you have to make it a ruling that only one PC can be Human. I've played several different RPGs where multiple races were present, usually there was only one or two persons who chose to be human and the rest picked from the various species. A simple suggestion that a multi species group would be beneficial would do nicely rather than a concrete ruling. From experience, a suggestion from the GM carries greater weight than a rule created by the GM.

I have the opposite problem, none of my players will play a human! Makes infiltration a bit trickier.

Honestly I don't think there should be limits on how many players in a party can play a species, especially a common one like Humans are in Star Wars.