D&D General DnD Stereotypes In The Home Game

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[doctorbadwolf]

1. What do you mean ... old? THEY ARE TIMELESS!

2. You said ... records. Hehehehehehehe.

"Ima get my 8 Track out now!"

In regards to 2, see 1.

 

[Tony Vargas]

What, does no one catch Stone Temple Pilots allusions anymore?????

It crashed and, well, didn't burn, but made a Holy mess...
… the black box indicates pilot error.

if you enter a "traditional" gnoll encampment with a primarily human party, what is the reaction likely to be?

Prettymuch like some gazelles paying a neighborly visit to band of hyenas. It should be...
...welcoming.

Okay, let's take this another step. Same traditional gnoll encampment, but you have a mixed party, that includes "monstrous races" but also includes a traditional elf (not a drow). How will the gnolls react to the elf?"

Probably figure it's a prisoner. Depending on local cuisine, variations, possibly offer to trade a halfling, or maybe two sheep, for it - or maybe just have a laugh over a tired 'ranch dressing' joke ("no, too heavy - for an elf, always use vinaigrette")

As for your other point- maybe you don't like tropes, but that doesn't mean you call something a stereotype, and you get to decide what is good and bad. You aren't the boss of values. Just like I'm not.

Words have connotations, we can't go policing every connotation of every word, not without going crazy....

'trope' vs 'stereotype?' I think stereotype fit what the OP was looking for.

They come up in threads all the time, but I have a wonder.
That is, how often do the various stereotypes of DnD actually play out in your home games?
Now, that’s a very broad question, so I’ll throw out some examples of what I mean.
1) Dwarves and Elves are racist toward each other

Can't say I've ever subverted that one. ;P

2) Half-orcs whose parents love each other are a rare exception, or even just nonexistent.

OK, in one setting I ran for a bit, there was a harsh, 'frontier' region where the human settlers preferred orcish wives, because they had a reputation for being strong, loyal, and surviving childbirth.

3) Halflings are just hobbits.

Heck, if anything, I've tended to make them /more/ Hobbitish.

4) Villagers will literally attack “ugly” races on sight, even if they aren’t doing anything threatening and are well groomed and dressed. Ugly here means “monstrous” or otherwise very very not human (anything from Gnolls to Dragonborn)

Not so much. It's a fantasy world, your typical villager could barely hope to take a kobold. They might run away from anything that looks out of the ordinary, though...

Likewise, how have you rejected or subverted the stereotypes in your games?

...come to think of it, I had more than a few twists in that same setting. The only prominent order of paladins in that world were the mysterious "Bald Ones," shaved, tattooed, and widely feared as indiscriminate, unstoppable, serial killers (Detect Evil + total conviction + secret mystery cult). Hobgoblins were not just militaristic but civilized, and bureaucratic rather than evil (not that that's a lot better). Gnolls were still savage, tribal, hunters, but because of ingrained religious dogma that included a taboo horror of all the trappings of agriculture, and an origin myth that, similarly, required uncompromising hatred of humans. In general, the 'evil' races weren't really evil, at least, not in their own minds. Evil was reserved for 'elder races' - mindflayers and giants and the like (which is plenty stereotypical, too, I suppose).

 

[FXR]

Obviously, the answer to the OP's question will vary depending on the setting we're playing. In my current homebrew world:

i) Dwarves and elves don't really hate each other. Some dwarves are isolationnists to the point of being xenophobics but they mistrust all races and hold no special hatred for the elves. Elves, on the other hand, tend to see dwarves as a sub-type of stubborn humans and treat them as such.

ii) There are no orcs in my setting, so no half-orcs.

iii) Halflings use to be like hobbits but their ancestral homeland was forever lost. Most became nomadic, traveling like large gypsy bands while a few others settle in mountainous areas where they eke a rought living, being more like quasi-scotsmen.

iv) Villagers will Indeed be very suspicious of strange races. They might attack at first sight or flee.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

My use of stereotypes varies from campaign to campaign. I’ve runs some where they’re nonexistent, others where they played out harsher than normal- when the Dwarves and Elves were ACTUALLY at war, the only way you’d see them in a party together was under duress, and Elves got abused in Dwarven settlements while Dwarves suffered likewise near Elves.

Halflings, though? Except in Dark Sun, almost every one I’ve seen others play in my campaigns or in others’ has been very Hobbitesque.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Okay, jokes about ancient musical modes aside, I said I’d give my game’s take on this stuff today, and I’ve got a solid half hour before work.

In general, how far from the stereotypes I go depends on whether I’m running homebrew or a published world.

In FR: I don’t “respect” the FR canon all that much, in terms of trying to stick to it in a given campaign. I like the novels, even when they’re not so good, but my group’s game belongs only to us. So, I change a lot, while working from a base of the 4e era Realms.

My dwarves don’t much resemble the Scottish stereotypes of a Salvatore novel, my halflings aren’t quite as underestimated, my forest gnomes aren’t nearly as secluded and insular, and my “monstrous races” are nearly all fully capable of being Good and of having cooperative cultures that trade with the their neighbors.

But, I don’t completely rewrite the world, so orcs, goblinoids, etc, aren’t well liked or trusted by most folk outside their cultures. The only places that a PC of those races is in danger by virtue of their race are in places that are meant to be presented as Bad Guy run places, though. Villagers are smart enough to see 5 travelers of various races, recognize adventurers or mercenaries or the like, and know that they’re about as much of a danger as humans. So, potentially a lot, but no reason to assume they will be.

In Eberron: The setting itself doesn’t use traditional takes all that much, so it isn’t much of a worry here. That said, since the Eberron take tends to be fun and interesting, I tend not to wildly change them up.

My homebrew: I tend to create these from scratch, starting with finding a home for one of my favorite races, or for a cultural concept I’ve had at some point. My world of islands has fisher-nomad Dragonborn modeled partly after Pacific Islanders, Fey goblinoids, a Persian-influenced old elf empire, and kobolds and halflings and Goliaths sharing a mountainous kingdom with airships called The Cloudlaw.

My buddy’s gnomes are mountain-folk and river-nomads, split between the great trade river where they are a big part of the riverboat workforce, a Swiss Alps-esque mountain where gnomes run banks and mercantile financing operations, and a northerly mountain range where the gnomes are Celtic inspired polytheistic animists whose culture partly revolves around the Great Trees that were broken during the Demon Wars 1000 years ago, but whose legacy lives on in town sized tree stumps and hollows that serve as clan-holds, town walls, and holy sites.

Another stereotype I avoid when I can is that of the small folk being easy to push around, or only avoiding invasion by luck and hiding. Nah. Halflings are scary as well when roused. Better at hiding means better at ambushing. Small and nimble means better at finding cover and sweeping into and back out of enemy formations. Imagine them mounted on goats. Good luck.

Now imagine gnomes doing a lot of the same stuff, but add in better tech than anyone else, natural illusion magic, and the ability to speak to squirrels and birds and whatever else.

You can walk through a forest gnome town without even seeing it’s there, huh? Imagine walking through a Gnomish army in the same way. The trap is sprung from within your ranks, and they’re gone before you can even recover enough to try to vaguely counter attack.

 

[Oofta]

They come up in threads all the time, but I have a wonder.



That is, how often do the various stereotypes of DnD actually play out in your home games?

By and large I embrace the stereotypes. In part because I've been running a more-or-less-continuous campaign since the 70s. That's great for depth and history where the player know that in a decade if I'm still running a campaign whatever group I'm running for may come across legends of their actions.

But it also means that I continue the tropes of the past. I don't have a problem with running monsters as they are written in the book though so I don't see a problem. Gnolls in my world are evil, period.

Now, that’s a very broad question, so I’ll throw out some examples of what I mean.



1) Dwarves and Elves are racist toward each other

They have different philosophies of what works best (chaos vs law) and are very long lived races. There are a lot of opportunities for conflict. Not racist per se, but acknowledge the fact that they approach the world very differently which means they are cautious of each other.

2) Half-orcs whose parents love each other are a rare exception, or even just nonexistent.

It's the exception because orcs are evil. Doesn't mean there's always force involved, but one half of the couple being chaotic evil doesn't tend to lead to long term happiness. There are also communities of half-orcs in certain areas of the world.

3) Halflings are just hobbits.

That's probably the default, but there's a lot of variation. A fair percentage of halflings live in cities where their small size gives them an advantage on certain crafts and occupations (making fine jewelry or chimney sweep for example).

4) Villagers will literally attack “ugly” races on sight, even if they aren’t doing anything threatening and are well groomed and dressed. Ugly here means “monstrous” or otherwise very very not human (anything from Gnolls to Dragonborn)

In a world where the boogeyman is real and drow occasionally wipe out entire towns, there is little reason to accept other races.

Dragonborn, tieflings, other "odd" races don't exist in my world. Most regions have the standard core races and 2-4 other "monstrous" humanoid races.

Likewise, how have you rejected or subverted the stereotypes in your games?

For the most part I lean into stereotypes. Orcs aren't just humans with a bad skin condition, gnolls are basically fiends that will roast you over an open fire if they get a chance. If they bother with the fire.

That way I can add depth in different areas to thing like how I've implemented the norse pantheon and planes of existance or build up other conflicts and interesting aspects of the world. If that makes me old school, so be it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

By and large I embrace the stereotypes. In part because I've been running a more-or-less-continuous campaign since the 70s. That's great for depth and history where the player know that in a decade if I'm still running a campaign whatever group I'm running for may come across legends of their actions.

But it also means that I continue the tropes of the past. I don't have a problem with running monsters as they are written in the book though so I don't see a problem. Gnolls in my world are evil, period.



They have different philosophies of what works best (chaos vs law) and are very long lived races. There are a lot of opportunities for conflict. Not racist per se, but acknowledge the fact that they approach the world very differently which means they are cautious of each other.



It's the exception because orcs are evil. Doesn't mean there's always force involved, but one half of the couple being chaotic evil doesn't tend to lead to long term happiness. There are also communities of half-orcs in certain areas of the world.



That's probably the default, but there's a lot of variation. A fair percentage of halflings live in cities where their small size gives them an advantage on certain crafts and occupations (making fine jewelry or chimney sweep for example).



In a world where the boogeyman is real and drow occasionally wipe out entire towns, there is little reason to accept other races.

Dragonborn, tieflings, other "odd" races don't exist in my world. Most regions have the standard core races and 2-4 other "monstrous" humanoid races.



For the most part I lean into stereotypes. Orcs aren't just humans with a bad skin condition, gnolls are basically fiends that will roast you over an open fire if they get a chance. If they bother with the fire.

That way I can add depth in different areas to thing like how I've implemented the norse pantheon and planes of existance or build up other conflicts and interesting aspects of the world. If that makes me old school, so be it.

Kinda dismissive of other ways of treating, say, orcs (referring to other takes as using them as humans with a skin condition, for instance), but otherwise thanks for the addition!

You say at one point that this leaves you free to add depth in other areas. Do you feel like you need to pick and choose broad areas of the game to add depth? IOW, could you not have both done whatever it is you’ve done with the Norse pantheon and included Gnolls or orcs that are more nuanced?

Not trying to shame your game, that phrase just stuck out to me and made me curious. I know some groups feel that too much different from the standard assumptions makes it harder to just sit down and play, while others have no issue with worlds that are wholly different on every reasonable axis from the PHB lore.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Related to the thread topic:

 

[Lylandra]

I... almost never use any of these tropes.

Villagers will sometimes (verbally) attack other humanoids that look strange if the village had been subject to monstrous attacks in the past, but that's all...