• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E What Makes an Orc an Orc?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hussar

Legend
I think Flamestrike has the right of it. Orcs will be relatively unchanged. All they need to do is get out the magic eraser, clip a couple of sentences, and Bob's your Uncle. Easy peasy.

The monumental tempest in a teacup that people insist on brewing because... CHANGE IS HORRIFYING... is just that. People making all sorts of noise about something that in a couple of years won't even be remembered as being a thing.

The problem is, right now, we have to listen to all the noise about how THEY ARE CHANGING THE GAME!!! when folks have absolutely no evidence, and no reason to think that things will be radically changed other than their own insecurities and fears that they are somehow going to lose something of value.

We got rid of chainmail bikinis and nothing bad happened. We got rid of gender based stat adjustments and nothing happened. We got rid of all sorts of bits and bobs that have clung to the game like used toilet paper and all that has happened is the game and the hobby's popularity has sky rocketed into the stratosphere.

I, for one, welcome the changes. Long overdue.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I think Flamestrike has the right of it. Orcs will be relatively unchanged. All they need to do is get out the magic eraser, clip a couple of sentences, and Bob's your Uncle. Easy peasy.

The monumental tempest in a teacup that people insist on brewing because... CHANGE IS HORRIFYING... is just that. People making all sorts of noise about something that in a couple of years won't even be remembered as being a thing.

The problem is, right now, we have to listen to all the noise about how THEY ARE CHANGING THE GAME!!! when folks have absolutely no evidence, and no reason to think that things will be radically changed other than their own insecurities and fears that they are somehow going to lose something of value.

We got rid of chainmail bikinis and nothing bad happened. We got rid of gender based stat adjustments and nothing happened. We got rid of all sorts of bits and bobs that have clung to the game like used toilet paper and all that has happened is the game and the hobby's popularity has sky rocketed into the stratosphere.

I, for one, welcome the changes. Long overdue.

There was a description written up thread for orcs that I thought was just excellent. Covered everything I would want and made allowances for any and all orcs. Something like that would be just about perfect.
 

delericho

Legend
How much of the difference is cultural and how much is biological? How do you tell? How would you enforce roleplaying a race “correctly”?

The way I handle it is that my setting lore will describe what an orc (or elf, dwarf, etc) 'is' within the context of the setting. However, players are then free to pay as much or as little of that as they want when running their characters - at best, they're a suggestion.

At some future point, if I ever write the "official history" of the world, it is almost certain that their adventures will be at least edited, and I'd correct any discrepancies then. Though the odds of me ever writing such a thing are vanishingly small.

One last thing: my general view is that choosing a character's race (or whatever the eventual term ends up being) should be the quickest decision in character creation - if the player comes to the table thinking "I want to play an elf", then they should play that; if not, they should play a human. And therefore if they do come wanting to play an elf, they should play an elf, and not just a human with pointed ears. But all of that is just my preference - ultimately the character belongs to the player, so the final choice is theirs.
 

Gnomes can already be stronger than orcs. Even with the current +2 strength orcs get, and even if you added a -2 strength to gnomes, it is possible under all three ability score generation methods to get an orc with a strength as low as 10 (or even as low as 5 if you roll for stats) and a gnome with a strength as high as 13 (or as high as 16 if you roll). Racial ability score adjustments don’t prevent characters of certain races from being better than characters of other races in their own area of competence, all they accomplish is to make certain race/class combinations more optimized than others. Which is not, in my opinion, a desirable goal.
That a strong gnome can be stronger than a weak orc is not a huge problem. These are tendencies not absolutes. However, orcs will have higher average strength and more importantly higher starting strength. At the point when the gnome can catch up we're at level 12, and at that point we're already near the 'mythic hero' territory so physical realism becomes less important. Now realistically I'd prefer this difference to be even bigger, to gnomes have a strength penalty. However for balance reasons this probably cannot be the case. I see the current situation as a compromise. Orcs being bigger and stronger has some actual impact in the game, though way less than would be realistic. But it still gives them a niche, and player who chooses to play a big and string orc actually gets to feel big and strong instead of pint sized gnome fighter being just as strong.

I feel you on that. Impulsivity isn’t really physical, but that example aside, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with orcs being bigger and stronger than humans on average or what have you. I do have a problem with orcs being inherently better suited to being fighters and worse suited to being wizards than members of other races are. Racial ability bonuses and penalties (especially penalties) lead to a situation where the latter is the case, and leaving them out does not prevent the former from being the case. So, I’m in favor of their removal.
Yes, penalties are a problem. And too great disparity in bonuses too. But I still feel that the fluff needs to be reflected in the rules. If orcs are bigger than stronger than humans then the rules need to reflect that. This is tricky because D&D classes are so dependent on their main stat. That being said, strength and dex are the best abilities to have big disparities in without making certain classes nonviable, because most fighting classes can be built to run on either strength or dex. And I really have no issue with orcs favouring strength-based modes of fighting and halflings preferring dexterity-based ones. They can both still be equally good, but they will do things differently. This, at least in theory, achieves both diversity and balance.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
That a strong gnome can be stronger than a weak orc is not a huge problem.
Very true. My problem is that the strongest gnome can be as strong as the strongest orc. I don't mind it as far as the modifier is concerned since STR is about your ability to apply raw physical power in 5E as well as how muscular you are. But when it comes to other measures, such as encumbrance, it doesn't make any sense to me. This is another aspect where I feel 5E fell short but whatever... I'm used to it. :)
 

Remathilis

Legend
Yes they will. That will still be the default Orc, because of culture. At least in Faerun and Greyhawk and other places.

It's just the game will go to greater pains to explain that the reason Orcs are (generally) like this is due to their (evil) Gods, and other aspects of their culture.

So the default MM orc will remain exactly what the 5e MM says, but other settings will change (Eberron, Wildemount) or omit (Dragonlance, Birthright) them as sees fit? Oh, and we'll remove that stupid (no pun intended) Int penalty in all further PC race write-ups.

Glad to see we already solved the problem a while ago, and all of this hoopla has been for nothing. :unsure:
 

Remathilis

Legend
The obvious solution is to do away with monolithic racial cultures.

Replace them with poly-racial cultures revolving around regional, religious, or mercantile divisions. You can use generalities like, "orcs tend to act more impulsively than others in their culture," or "orcs are often pushed to the edges of society in culture XYZ."

There is only two ways this works: Explicitly marry D&D to a single setting and explore that setting in enough detail to go over multiple regional differences, or remove any sort of flavor text in the core rules and force the purchase of setting books to understand how anything it put together. I don't see either of those options being popular.

The first example would require D&D to adopt a Golarion-like approach a single world (and lets face it, it will probably be Forgotten Realms) where we no longer talk just about high elves and wood elves in the general, generic sense but of the elves of Silverymoon, Evereska, the High Forest, Evermeet, Yuirwood, the Forest of Amtar, Mezzobarrazan, etc. Lather-rinse-repeat this for orcs, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, goblins, dragonborn, tieflings, etc. Its certainly doable (many RPGs focus on a specific setting with distinct cultures per region, Pathfinder again a great example) but this focus will come at the expense of every other setting, since I don't think WotC could handle this kind of focus for every setting in the multiverse. Settings like Eberron, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Dragonlance and Dark Sun (not to mention newcomers like Ravnica, Exandria and Theros) would be sacrificed to keep this sort of nuance possible.

Alternatively, I guess you could put a generic elf, dwarf, orc, etc in the PHB with a picture, a physical description, and maybe a few words on personality (elves are graceful, dwarves and tough, orcs are aggressive) and leave ALL the flavor text to setting supplements, but that seems to be unsatisfactory as well. Newer DMs won't necessarily know how to create these unique cultures, so you are raising the price of the starting package to PHB/DMG/MM/Setting, and that brings the cost to start in the game to $200 (assuming the current $50/book pricing).
 

Laurefindel

Legend
TL;DR: I used to play orcs as an archetype more than they were a race. I'm not longer sure what they should be.

My opinion on the whole matter is... conflicted.

In my typical Middle Earth or FR campaign, orcs are an archetype. They are the enemy, the other, the unknown, and the little we know about them is their violence, their aggression, their strength, their pillage, and their numbers. And that's what makes them scary. Reasoning and diplomacy can be attempted, but it will be from a position of fear.

The moment we know everything about them, the moment they stop being the enemy; they stop being orcs. Whether this is a good thing or not is where the conflict lies, because this opens-up the whole morality of the representation of xenophobia in fantasy.

Xenophobia is the fear of The Other, of what we don't know or understand. We all are xenophobic, all of us. That is normal, that is human. What we need as a society is review what we define as "The Other", because as soon as we get to know and understand the other (with a small "o"), it ceases to be the Other (big "O") and becomes one of us. Feel free to apply that to racism, homophobia, etc. This doesn't makes us less Xenophobic however. After we have accepted something as part of us, The Other still exists, and it still instil fear in us. Only, it applies to something else.

The whole concept of monster pivots on fear, and xenophobia is one of them. It is the underlying concept behind the beholder and most aberration monsters, The Great Old Ones, and other alien(ish) entities. Speaking of aliens, the xenomorph of the Alien franchise is the perfect example of it. So playing on Xenophobia is something we do in sci fi and fantasy, and are likely to continue doing; the conflict on the subject of orcs is whether or not they should also represent this archetype. And that is a legitimate question because xenophobia is at the root of racism, and while xenophobia isn't something that can be erased, racism is, and it should be.

Fantasy orcs often fill the role of the feared and unknown blood-thirsty barbarian horde. This is an archetype; not a "race". In a way they are convenient because you can use them in lieu of any human-inspired cultures that would otherwise fill this role in fantasy. You can even make them the enemy of any human-inspired "barbarian" culture highlighted in a setting. But I understand how some can recognise their own culture in a game that otherwise depicts orcs as inhuman enemies, an archetype of violence and aggression. The solution is to make the orc "one of us" and therefore remove it from the xeno, but that only leaves an "archetypical vaccum" in most classical settings that will be filled with another species.

For what it's worth, I feel similarly about dark elves.

So as I said; I'm conflicted.
 
Last edited:

The question isn't about whether "diverse" orcs will enable stories: it will enable stories that you could already tell for decades with humans. If orcs are to have a meaningful place in the game, a GM should be able to tell stories with orcs that he couldn't by replacing "orcs" with" "humans from a barbarian, nomadic culture and a long confrontational history with a settled culture".

I don't want to lessen the description I am quoting, because I like it, but there is nothing I see that makes orc "orcs" except two very insignificant points (skin color and lifespan):

Orcs in D&D are human-sized green-skinned humanoids

I don't think it's distinctive enough from human to make them orcs. Human comes in a variety of skin color, why not green in a fantasy setting?


that tend to live in nations, tribes, or clans in the wilderness. Like elves, they prefer nature, and want the world to be covered in forests and wildernesses teeming with life. They generally oppose the kind of organized civilization that humans bring. They see little value in building permanent walled cities, building cultivated fields for farmland, roads, etc. Humans invade a region and tame it to their will. Orcs are much more interested in being the alpha predators of their region, and living with what is there instead of changing it to suit them. Orcs hunt wild game, fish in rivers and lakes, tend groves of wild vegetables, and are famed for producing some of the strongest and most intoxicating liquors and wines. They often hold celebrations that feature games of athleticism or acrobatics or martial skill. Orc martial prowess is legendary in most parts of the world, with some of the greatest swordmasters known being orcs.

While flavourful, it's a depiction that could be made of an animistic, "nature spirit worshipping" human nomadic culture, with en emphasis on alcoholism and a reputation of being fierce warrior --something you often get from being at odds with neighboring cultures.

Most orcs will band together to face a common threat, making orcs powerful allies and deadly foes. Orcish hordes and war bands are legendary for their ferocity and tenacity, and many an army has fled the field before facing a charge from orcs. Some orcs are more hateful than their brethren, and reject the notions of peaceful existence, instead adopting the bloodthirstly ways of Gruumsh, an old, evil god of the orcs with a particular dislike for humans, elves, and dwarves. These "lost" or "dark" orcs may form war bands or hordes intent on looting cities and towns or killing other creatures they see as harming or invading the lands the orcs call home. Most orcs find such behavior distasteful, and reject the teachings of Gruumsh as self-defeating and pointlessly destructive. Unfortunately, because most orcs are disinclined to visit the cities of other races, the memory of these war bands has left a poor impression of orcs on many human nations.

Same here...

As a people, orcs are known for being passionate, proud, athletic, brave, and willing to act decisively and promptly. Orcs may also be brash, arrogant, or short-sighted. They are fiercely loyal to their clan, family, or code, whether that's their own by birth or an adoptive one. They are also known for being unwilling to let go of a grudge, an unfortunate failing they share with both elves and dwarves. In some areas orc feuds with elves or dwarves have lasted centuries, long past when even their longer-lived neighbors can remember the cause.

People in the Balkans recently fought a war with roots going back centuries... even if t's uncommon, century-spanning feuds have existed in human history.

Play an orc if you want to be quick to laugh, good in a fight, and a strong and loyal friend.

In following with their Orcs tend to be chaotic, much like elves. They live much shorter lives, of course, and so they are not patient

That could be a key-point in defining a culture that couldn't be human, if it was short enough to make a culture so focussed on a short time scale to make it unbelievable as a human culture. But the orcs would need to live a few years at most to make it very distinctive compared to a human culture.

or aloof in the ways elves are. Most Orcish settlements tend to appear smaller and blend in with their surroundings. Orc settlements are also often semi-permanent, as they may migrate or travel throughout the year to find better hunting. Though in war they are known for building large forest fortresses and palisades for protection when necessary, orcs like to use the natural geography to protect themselves.

I don't see a lot of thing distinctively "non human" in this description, not enough to justify having them as a non-human race.

So, while this description is cool, it is not enough to make orcs "orcs". In another thread, the idea of a nice mind flayer was toyed with, and as the adventure idea revolved around it's exclusive food habit, the adventure really couldn't be told with a human wearing a mask. For orcs to be narratively useful, they need to fill a niche that human can't.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top