On the matter of half-orcs

If there is any rational argument for the banning of half-orcs that doesn't apply equally (or even more strongly) to tieflings, I have never seen it. Saying "It's an entirely different situation" doesn't make it so. Indeed, I am very curious as to what difference you think there is? I have to assume that you don't think that infernal beings that personify evil are more capable of loving relationships than primitive mortal humanoids are?
As long as they're a product of a consensual relationship, I don't really care if it's a loving one.

And I don't think anyone on this thread is actually arguing against Half-Orcs as a playable race. We're arguing against the explicit or implicit inclusion of rape in the half-orc origin story.

And let's not pretend that WotC left half-orcs out of the PHB because of the rape issue--While that may have been a factor, it almost certainly had more to do with the fact that half-orcs stepped on the conceptual toes of their two big new races--the Dragonborn and the Tiefling.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

As long as they're a product of a consensual relationship, I don't really care if it's a loving one.

Demons, of course, being famous for their use of "safe words" and requirement of consent..........:confused:

Sorry, but picking at word choice doesn't change that the explicit or implicit inclusion of rape in the tiefling origin story is at least as strong as in the half-orc origin story.

Just tieflings happen to be "cool" right now.

And let's not pretend that WotC left half-orcs out of the PHB because of the rape issue--While that may have been a factor, it almost certainly had more to do with the fact that half-orcs stepped on the conceptual toes of their two big new races--the Dragonborn and the Tiefling.

I'm not sure that either qualifies as "new", but certainly half-orcs step on the conceptual toes of tieflings......they share a watered down version of the tiefling origin story! ;)


RC
 

Eh? Maybe my memory isn't that great, but to my understanding, most tieflings came from couplings with erinyes and succubi. It didn't really have rape implied.
 

Eh? Maybe my memory isn't that great, but to my understanding, most tieflings came from couplings with erinyes and succubi. It didn't really have rape implied.

Except that such couplings are usually via charms and suggestions and other forms of manipulation rather than actual consent...

I notice that WotC sanitized the hell out of the tieflings for 4e.
 


Greetings!


DR. STRANGEMONKEY:

How would my frequent inclusion of rape in my campaigns serve as me making the trauma of rape into a "recreation"?

Well there are a couple of mitigating responses here.

The first is that there is a difference between referencing rape as an event that occurs in the world and referencing rape as a critical component of your character. If you reference rape as an evil to be avoided than that's distinct from referencing rape as a critical and foundational element to a character type.

The second is that you and what you do in your campaign aren't as important as WotC and what WotC does in its core rule books. The ethical implications are distinct. And that's not just a question of scope.

It's part of what I was trying to draw out in establishing the difference between an artist and a teacher. The relationship between rhetor and audience in those cases is very different. The artist is inviting the audience into his rhetoric. The teacher is giving students the means to further performance on the part of the students. The teacher has a greater obligation to make her material available to a wider range of audience members with a larger number of constraints.

You in your campaign are more equivalent to the artist. You don't have to have any players who have any traumatic associations with rape. If you do your ethical responsibility to those players falls more under the aegis of hospitality than it would under mentoring, guidance, or public good.

That said...
Thanks, my friends, for you commentary and input. I hope that my argument for including rape on a rather frequent basis is clearly understood.

Poor choice of words here, but I understand what you're arguing.

My campaigns are quite mature, very medieval, with of course lots of magic involved. The world the campaign is set in is a violent, brutal world of terrifying monsters and hordes of barbaric, savage humanoids--not to mention the vast hordes of dark, unwashed humanity that have been seduced by evil and darkness, and fully embraced the dark whisperings of evil--rape, slavery, murder, brutal torture, and the grinding despair and oppression of millions of human beings is an ongoing, daily reality for many in the campaign world. And the player characters are involved in dealing with these topics and aspects of reality on a frequent basis. It's something of an exaggeration, of course, but players in my campaign could almost easily ask, "Who isn't being seduced, enslaved, raped, brutally tortured, murdered, or otherwise somehow crushed by the evil boot of despair and oppression?":lol:

Right, but see here you are turning the trauma of rape into recreation. Not just rape but many other evils and, indeed, evil itself. Your not starting with a Tolkien-esque initial setting of innocence and embattled nobility contrasted against the possibility of trauma, terror, and oppression. Rather you are starting with a setting that characterizes existence as one of brutalization and aggression, and you are exalting this depiction by calling mature or even medieval in order to heighten the sense that this depiction of social character is made in service to verisimilitude.

And verisimilitude is a pleasure. It helps your recreation achieve its aims. And recreation is clearly your aim as you are selling it here. I've seen your posts in other places and I know you also have an analytical, political, and even ethical bent to your campaigns, but talking about the issue of rape here in this post you finish off the paragraph with a lol emoticon.

Now, certainly, there are ways to use even the grimmest of topics for recreation and pleasure and have it not simply be ethically excusable but also be ethically bold and courageous. Nonetheless, here you are using rape and brutality as a means to establish a better form of recreation, and from the best of cases to the worst that's problematic.

And given the degree to which such a tactic is ethically difficult but not ethically dubious I can certainly say that on the face of things it's not horrible for you to use rape as a reference point in your campaign. It might still be awful or wicked, but that would be because of how you used it in the game not from how you included it in the world. And even there it's potentially controversial. There's plenty of criticism surrounding rape in art or recreation out there and not of all it is going to come down on the side of even this moderate a position.

Given that, though, and WotC's audience and the fact that WotC is more analagous to the teacher providing means than to the artist providing experience doesn't WotC deserve some credit for taking a higher clearer path from the outset?

I mean I don't want WotC to say "No Grimdark for you! Only puppies and sunshine for everyone!" but I do want WotC to say, "Listen, we want people to do what's right and fun for them, but we also know that we have to take this and its implications for our audience seriously and with consideration."
 

That's Garona, of WarCraft fame. IIRC someone at Blizzard made that model for WarCraft III when they needed some cheesecake for a magazine cover (though the character doesn't actually appear in that game--she's from WC1).

It should be noted that Garona is a half-orc. (Though what the other half is isn't especially clear--Garona's Origin story is even more subject to interpretation than the 4e half orc's)
Actually, she's recently been confirmed through the WoW comic (which is Blizzard canon) to be Half-Draenei. And has a son, presumedly by a human. Talk about a mutt. :confused:
 

Right. Because I believe tieflings (or cambions, or Melniboneans, or whatever you call them) are appropriate for a core book. It's an entirely different situation.

Correct. Demons are unquestionably evil, and hence you can be absolutely certain any offspring of them and a mortal creature is the result of something vile. Even if they were created through magical means, it would entail combining a mortal creature with demonic essence. But assuredly, they tend to be the product of rape, deception, possession, curses, mind control, and in some cases, ritualistic torture. In the 4e backstory, tieflings are merely the product of what their ancestors decided to do to their own children by giving them in over in pacts to fiends in an unspecified fashion.
 

Actually, she's recently been confirmed through the WoW comic (which is Blizzard canon) to be Half-Draenei. And has a son, presumedly by a human. Talk about a mutt. :confused:

Well, It's been pretty strongly implied that she was half-draenei since WC2's timeline retcon that made it impossible for her to be half-human. But since draenei went from looking like humans to looking like this, that explanation's becoming increasingly nonsensical for someone who looks as human as she does.
 

Correct. Demons are unquestionably evil, and hence you can be absolutely certain any offspring of them and a mortal creature is the result of something vile. Even if they were created through magical means, it would entail combining a mortal creature with demonic essence. But assuredly, they tend to be the product of rape, deception, possession, curses, mind control, and in some cases, ritualistic torture. In the 4e backstory, tieflings are merely the product of what their ancestors decided to do to their own children by giving them in over in pacts to fiends in an unspecified fashion.

I'd like to put in my two cents on the whole tiefling demon-touched association to the rape argument.

First off, tieflings are products of their ancestors' pact with infernal powers. Now, I haven't delved deeply into Bael Turrath lore, but I'm pretty sure they don't mention rape once. I think concensual relations with devils is entirely reasonable for a group of ancient nobility who sought infernal power. Even such, I am not very well read in this section of the lore, but an important thing to note is that while you can make this association, Wizards does not. The core rules imply that the ancestors made whatever pacts they did out of greed lust, and that there was a magical taint (bodies warped by magic, not genetic interspecies offspring). My mind doesn't really go from there to rape.

But even so, lets say they did. Lets say there was a whole lot of charms and domination going on. What's important is that it's about imagery, and while I'm not trying to say that kind of rape is better or worse than another, I will go out on a limb enough to say that one certainly stands out and offends the senses more. If I hear that a person is a tiefling because their wealthy father fell into the charms of a succubus and impregnated her, only to realize it cost him his soul, I'll think "Wow, that's kinda screwed. Good story". If I hear that my person is a half orc because a tribe came to town, burned down the barns, raised the crops, killed the animals and children and raped the women, a very real part of me goes "Wow, that's a visceral and unneccessary bit of lore that I don't want in my core game world".

I understand other groups find it to be fine. For that, there is nothing wrong. But for me, it is not, and it's completely where draw the line in the sand. It would offend my sensibilities if Wizards included rape as part of the core, not because I expect them to go easy on me, not because I want them to censor their material, but for all of the same reasons that have been explored already in this thread. Why? Because domination and charms do not cross the line for me. Does that mean I condone date rape? Absolutely not. But it's a magical, fantastical kind of element that doesn't make me squeem for the same reason that killing 1000 orcs doesn't make me squeem like killing 1000 innocent villagers.
 

Remove ads

Top