Are Drow considered "Fey".....? Why or why not?

Tuzenbach said:

Voadam, how are we defining "supernatural abilities".....? Is that akin to innate (inborn) spell abilities? If so, that's my argument for why the Drow might be considered "Fey".....


Thank You!!!

Click to expand...

In d20 supernatural has a specific meaning for monster powers, they are denoted with a (Su), do not provoke Attacks of Opportunity, and cannot be dispelled by dispel magic unlike spells or spellike abilities. This definition is not strictly enforced for classifying creatures as fey though. There are fey such as the nixie which have spell like and extraordinary abilities but no technically supernatural abilities. Fey is mostly a term for fairies and such (including some nature spirits like nymphs and dryads and satyrs). Elves and dwarves are classified as humanoids under a more Tolkien view of them than a fairy tale one.

Drow could have been classified as fey easily, many creatures could fit into multiple categories under the creature type classifications or through a change or choice in background stories.

I ran a 3e game where I houseruled all elves and gnomes to be fey and not humanoid for creature type.

Tuzenbach said:

Voadam, how are we defining "supernatural abilities".....? Is that akin to innate (inborn) spell abilities? If so, that's my argument for why the Drow might be considered "Fey".....


Thank You!!!

Click to expand...

Whether or not a creature has innate spell like abilities varies from edition to edition. Gnomes, for example, which you insist are humanoids, have spell like abilities in 3e and deep gnomes have always had these abilities since their introduction in 1e. Yet you seem to insist that Gnomes are humanoids.

Additionally, an ability can be supernatural but not be a spell-like ability.

Tuzenbach said:

On a side note, it's intriguing to me that the Kenku, clearly derived from "Tengu", have simply been described & statted as "Crow people". Meanwhile, the creature from which the Kenku originated (Tengu) are CLEARLY "Fey", yet nobody in all the years of D&D has bothered to give the Tengu a proper write-up. Shame.....

Click to expand...

Sure there is, called Rite Publishing In the Company of Tengu, which is completely written from translated Japanese folklore resources directly, completely excising all wrong interpretations in the D&D Monster Manual and Oriental Adventures of every edition of D&D. As a half-Japanese, amateur historian and amateur folklorist, and the creator and primary developer/technical advisor for the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG) - being more authentic and putting concepts back into their original folklore context was one of the primary motivations in its development.

Of couse fey is not its racial background, rather being one of the yokai (and in Kaidan yokai is a monstrous humanoid subtype), or from the Japanese point of view - what the heck is a fey? (answer: another European concept that has no place in Japanese folklore...)

Celebrim said:

Yet you seem to insist that Gnomes are humanoids.

Click to expand...

I distinctly remember using the expression "demi-human" in reference to Gnomes, though I could have used the phrase "humanoidish" (which I'm taking to mean "roughly human-shaped, though not necessarily human-sized"......).


Do you know who you are? You're one of these individuals.....

Mod Edit: Folks, don't make it personal. Don't be insulting. ~Umbran

gamerprinter said:

Sure there is, called Rite Publishing In the Company of Tengu, which is completely written from translated Japanese folklore resources directly, completely excising all wrong interpretations in the D&D Monster Manual and Oriental Adventures of every edition of D&D. As a half-Japanese, amateur historian and amateur folklorist, and the creator and primary developer/technical advisor for the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG) - being more authentic and putting concepts back into their original folklore context was one of the primary motivations in its development.

Of couse fey is not its racial background, rather being one of the yokai (and in Kaidan yokai is a monstrous humanoid subtype), or from the Japanese point of view - what the heck is a fey? (answer: another European concept that has no place in Japanese folklore...)

Click to expand...

Are you saying you wrote it, or am I assuming too much?


Thanks!!!!

Tuzenbach said:

Are you saying you wrote it, or am I assuming too much?


Thanks!!!!

Click to expand...

Jonathan McAnulty wrote it, I was developer/technical advisor (I share copyright and own the IP, as Kaidan is my homebrew, published as an imprint under Rite Publishing).

gamerprinter said:

Sure there is, called Rite Publishing In the Company of Tengu, which is completely written from translated Japanese folklore resources directly, completely excising all wrong interpretations in the D&D Monster Manual and Oriental Adventures of every edition of D&D. As a half-Japanese, amateur historian and amateur folklorist, and the creator and primary developer/technical advisor for the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG) - being more authentic and putting concepts back into their original folklore context was one of the primary motivations in its development.

Of couse fey is not its racial background, rather being one of the yokai (and in Kaidan yokai is a monstrous humanoid subtype), or from the Japanese point of view - what the heck is a fey? (answer: another European concept that has no place in Japanese folklore...)

Click to expand...

???
So then why is the one on the cover on a red-skinned humanoid with a long rounded nose, a tall hair with yukata, geta and a big fan like all Japanese depictions of the creatures I have ever seen?
Its that same crow furry that is in pathfinder. I have almost never seen that depiction used by Japanese people.

If you couldn't be bothered fixing that, I have to be skeptical about what you did fix.

TheHobgoblin said:

???
So then why is the one on the cover on a red-skinned humanoid with a long rounded nose, a tall hair with yukata, geta and a big fan like all Japanese depictions of the creatures I have ever seen?
Its that same crow furry that is in pathfinder. I have almost never seen that depiction used by Japanese people.

If you couldn't be bothered fixing that, I have to be skeptical about what you did fix.

Click to expand...

That long nosed human version of the tengu is an Edo Period derivation (post 1600), sometimes attributed to a daitengu (tengu king), while the original tengu was a crow based humanoid. The folklore used by Kaidan is generally the older, original traditions from the start of the feudal period up to the Sengoku Period (1185 - 1590) retold in hyakumonogatari kaidan kai - a ghost story-telling game from the 15th century. I've been to Japan on more than one vacation (visiting family) and I've always been a tengu fan. Strictly speaking the tengu tradition has always been popular, and artists depictions of the human-looking tengu was a modern derivation to modernize the concept, first appearing in Japanese folk art in 1700's (so very late in cultural development). Tengu were often considered fallen monks, who reincarnate into the crow version of tengu in the next life as a kind of social punishment.

Actually the modern humanoid tengu (red faced man with long nose) came from their use for Noh dance theater, which was an 18th century invention.

Doing tengu as the more humanoid version is a step away from its Japanese folklore origins. The crow based tengu, is the truer form by tradition, sometimes called karasu tengu - karasu literally means "crow".

Tuzenbach said:

I distinctly remember using the expression "demi-human" in reference to Gnomes, though I could have used the phrase "humanoidish" (which I'm taking to mean "roughly human-shaped, though not necessarily human-sized"......).

Click to expand...

Can you clarify the difference between a "humanoid" and a "demi-human"?

Also, that distinction aside, what is the difference between a "demi-human" with innate spell abilities, such as gnomes (in at least some editions), and a "fey"? Does this mean there is more to the "fey" definition than simply being "humanoidish" and having innate spell abilities, since gnomes (apparently) meet both conditions but fail to be "fey" in your eyes?

To be honest though, I feel like your pursuit of one, universal, definitive answer which applies to all players of D&D everywhere is...unreasonable? The game changes far too much, simply from one table to another, to say nothing of one edition to another or even other systems (e.g. retroclones). DMs should have the freedom to call their game "D&D" as long as they play by more-or-less the same rules, even if it means that there cannot be a universal taxonomy of races. I say, if you'd prefer to have Drow be fey, declare them fey, and see to it that they have the necessary qualifications (fiction is creationist, after all). If you'd prefer that they not be fey, then I recommend you declare them so and ensure they fail to meet the requirements in some way. If you truly have no opinion yourself, and would prefer to hear the community's opinions...debate seems, to me, like an inefficient way to gather those opinions.

And if you're seeking a discussion to determine a definitive answer, I don't think you're going to have much luck, since there are definitely some people whose favorite way of doing things is one you consider anathema.

EzekielRaiden said:

To be honest though, I feel like your pursuit of one, universal, definitive answer which applies to all players of D&D everywhere is...unreasonable? The game changes far too much........

Click to expand...

BINGO!!!!!!!



IMHO, it's the constant, "throw everything out every seven years and have all players buy more stuff & have more arguments" that is ........"unreasonable"......