D&D 5E What’s So Great About Medieval Europe?

[Aldarc]

So you still haven't accepted that orcs do not exist? That they are completely fictional and the fiction is up to the DM? You can read my mind?

See how this goes?

This is less about whether orcs exist or not - one strawman down - and more about the associated racism around orcs as an intentionally crafted fictional construct.

 

[Jester David]

Drow? Make multiple cultures of drow. Show complexity. Revel in moral complexity and diversity. Make evil people of the "good" cultures and good people in the "evil" culture. Show moral complexity for what it is. Again, I don't think that D&D is short of easy villains even if one were to go this route. I suspect that most human cultists of Orcus would be pretty kill on sight for most players. Eberron, for example, shows multiple orc cultures and varieties of orc peoples within those cultures that have differing moral allegiances.

Sure. Because no one would have a problem with religious persecution and find that upsetting....

 

[Aldarc]

Sure. Because no one would have a problem with religious persecution and find that upsetting....

For the cult of the Demon Lord Orcus? Okay... Bit of a stretch there.

 

[Oofta]

This is less about whether orcs exist or not - one strawman down - and more about the associated racism around orcs as an intentionally crafted fictional construct.

Thanks for playing "I'm right you're wrong because I say so neener-neener". Have a good one.

 

[Jester David]

For the cult of the Demon Lord Orcus? Okay... Bit of a stretch there.

At first, sure. But it’s not like there isn’t a long real world history of certain religions and faiths being dismissed as “evil” or “violent”. Someone who has heard all their life that their faith preaches intolerance and hate might be understandably upset to see people killing cultists on sight.

And the you have to ask yourself: how many cultists of Orcus follow him because what what they were taught? Because they were born into the cult. Or because the cult found them while they were hurting and in an emotionally vulnerable state. Or because they were indoctrinated/ brainwashed.

There are lots of wacko cults in the real world, and when the police raid them they seldom kill everyone...

 

[Doug McCrae]

The 5e PHB is explicit that orcish traits of evil and savagery are caused by nature, not nurture:

The one-eyed god Gruumsh created the orcs, and even those orcs who turn away from his worship can't fully escape his influence. The same is true of haIf-orcs. Though their human blood moderates the impact of their orcish heritage...​

​

The evil deities who created other races, though, made those races to serve them. Those races have strong inborn tendencies that match the nature of their gods. Most orcs share the violent, savage nature of the orc god, Gruumsh. and are thus inclined toward evil. Even if an orc chooses a good alignment, it struggles against its innate tendencies for its entire life. (Even half-orcs feel the lingering pull of the orc god's influence.)​

The 1e DMG takes the same view. The text suggests that if a half-orc does not possess negative traits, it is because they favoured the human parent:

Half-Orcs are boors. They are rude, crude, crass, and generally obnoxious. Because most are cowardly they tend to be bullies and cruel to the weak, but they will quickly knuckle under to the stronger. This does not mean that all half-orcs are horrid, only most of them. It neither means that they are necessarily stupid nor incapable. They will always seek to gain the upper hand and dominate those around them so as to be able to exercise their natural tendencies; half-orcs are greedy too. They can, of course, favor their human parent more than their orcish one.​

 

[Aldarc]

At first, sure. But it’s not like there isn’t a long real world history of certain religions and faiths being dismissed as “evil” or “violent”. Someone who has heard all their life that their faith preaches intolerance and hate might be understandably upset to see people killing cultists on sight.

And the you have to ask yourself: how many cultists of Orcus follow him because what what they were taught? Because they were born into the cult. Or because the cult found them while they were hurting and in an emotionally vulnerable state. Or because they were indoctrinated/ brainwashed.

There are lots of wacko cults in the real world, and when the police raid them they seldom kill everyone...

Still think that you're stretching it, so I can't say that I agree with you, but whatever.

 

[Fenris-77]

That’s fine in a vacuum.
But D&D is a social game.
And when I’m playing at a table with your fantasy elf game and my moral reading at odds, them I’m not having fun. And when someone isn’t having fun at the table, that tends to bring other people down, either intentionally or otherwise.

And if said fantasy elf game is seen as racist or offensively dated it it’s portrayals of ethnicity or skin, then it’s detrimental to the hobby as a whole and reflects poorly on all gamers.

You arent required to play in my game. Nor am I required to let you play. Not am i required to treat Orcs with any nuance. Nor is that racist. If I want to treat them like undead instead of humans, if that's the narrative I've constructed, then that's what it is. Fantasy is a genre that admits if black and white. The real world doesnt of course, but fantasy isn't the real world, thank goodness.

The real issue here is that s set of people have constructed a narrative wherein they find treatment X of orcs racist and objectionable. So they reevaluate and construct a different version where orcs are treated like they think humans should be. I'm quite sure they arent lying, and the effort is commendable, but we havent gotten to the actual issue yet.

The issue is that some of that same set of people have decided that, first, all treatments of orcs except their 'solution' are racist and objectionable. Anyone who disagrees with their solution is wrong. That might have some juice in the real world, but it means nothing for RPGs. Why? Because they are pretending that the issue only has a binary solution. Which is nonsense. The reality is that there are hundreds or thousands of different variations on orcs at the table, and those people and their binary reductionist nonsense dont get to speak for the whole hobby.

 

[Oofta]

I would just like to point out as well:

A straw man (or strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".​

​

I fully acknowledge that some people want to treat orcs as having free will to not be CE. That's fine, it's just not my preference. How in the world did I create a fallacy?

• Orcs are fictional. Check.
• Orcs are defined in the MM as CE. Yep.
• If you want to say they have a choice and that it's nurture, not nature in your campaign go ahead. Said that.

Where's the beef straw man?

So when people start throwing out completely unfounded accusations I do not believe we are having an honest conversation any more.

 

[Jester David]

--stuff about to be paraphrased--

Let's rephrase that ever so slightly:

You arent requited to play in my game. Nor am I required to let you play. Not am i required to treat Orcs savage people with dark skin with any nuance. Nor is that racist. If I want to treat them like undead instead of humans, if that's the narrative I've constructed, then that's what it is. Fantasy is a genre that admits if black and white. The real world doesnt of course, but fantasy isn't the real world, thank goodness.

The real issue here is that s set of people have constructed a narrative wherein they find treatment X of orcs savage people with dark skin racist and objectionable. So they reevaluate and construct a different version where orcs savage people with dark skin are treated like they think humans should be. I'm quite sure they arent lying, and the effort is commendable, but we havent gotten to the actual issue yet.

The issue is that some of that same set of people have decided that, first, all treatments of orcs savage people with dark skin except their 'solution' are racist and objectionable. Anyone who disagrees with their solution is wrong. That might have some juice in the real world, but it means nothing for RPGs. Why? Because they are pretending that the issue only has a binary solution. Which is nonsense. The reality is that there are hundreds or thousands of different variations on orcs savage people with dark skin at the table, and those people and their binary reductionist nonsense dont get to speak for the whole hobby.

The issue is the stuff people say about orcs (they're less intelligent, they can't control their anger, they're little more than beasts) is horrible stuff said to real people. It's stuff they've heard all their life and the games they choose to play shouldn't say it back to them.

Is that good for a hobby that should be welcoming to all? Shouldn't we try to make our hobby and game (and even game tables) open and accessible to everyone?