D&D General Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes and Halflings of Color

[Zardnaar]

Yes and no.

I feel strongly, Custom Lineage must be a core player race option.

On the other hand, a SETTING can and normally will focus on a handful of specific races, and either deemphasize or ban all of the other races. This includes Custom Lineage. If the DM has a vision of a world setting that has specific races in mind, and assuming the players are enthusiastic about this setting, the DM can ban the Custom Lineages along with all of the other inappropriate races.



I am sensing a spirit of the times, players are increasingly inclusive and yet at the same time appreciate specialized settings.

Not every setting needs to be a kitchen-sink pastiche of Forgotten Realms!

People seem to like a focus but don't care to much what they are.

I find a new setting with a tight focus more interesting than anything goes.

Even something like Eberron built as anything goes still spotlights the 3 new races.

 

[Zardnaar]

Egyptian Ptah-worshipping dwarves...cool...

Late to the party there. Midgard.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm in the same position on that issue-- I would be afraid that presenting a member of a species, in which there's a two size difference between male and female, as being transgender would be more likely to be interpreted as mockery. Sexual dimorphism isn't an issue I particularly want to explore in my own work-- except in my eusocial take on dromites-- so it's unlikely to come up.

I only asked, because I always thought that male nymphs were satyrs ... and I'm still deciding how unpleasantly I feel about male valkyries, in relation to my religious beliefs. Probably not terribly, but certainly enough so that I wish people wouldn't.

In D&D, male nymphs already exist in Theros − such as Alseid and Lampad. Likewise female satyrs.

If I recall correctly, certain Greek wind spirits have been interpreted as male nymphs. Something to do with mountains.

The Norse equivalent of a nymph would be nykr − and later a waterfall spirit and similar − who seem mostly males.



The male valkyrie seems appropriate. If I am understanding the unusual grammatical form correctly, the female Valkyrja would be a male Valkyr. But the English term valkyrie works fine for either.

The term "slain chooser" relates to a fate, a norn, determining the fate of a good death. In Norse culture, only women were religious leaders, the Volva, a shaman. Their central responsibility was to foresee fates, Spa, and they tended to know other kinds of mindmagic as well. But men could and did learn these magical skills too, albeit as laypersons. The Norse valued anyone who had the sight of Spa, including men.

Whence, the concept of a male valkyrie who happened to be skilled at fate is not so strange.

 

[DammitVictor]

I am sensing a spirit of the times, players are increasingly inclusive and yet at the same time appreciate specialized settings.

Not every setting needs to be a kitchen-sink pastiche of Forgotten Realms!

It's funny how these contradictory statements can both be so true-- and so many people can still manage to simultanously be wrong on both. Personally... I no longer have any real interest in stake or interest in what WotC does with the official D&D brand, but I still have some small lingering wish to see them stop ripping everything cool out of other settings to put it in the core/Realms, and at the same time, I wish they'd stop saying that everything already in the core has a place in every D&D setting.

Outside of settings like Planescape or Spelljammer, I don't think any setting can have more than 10-12 sentient humanoid lineages, including enemies, without losing cohesion-- but, I don't think they need to be, or should be, the same 10-12 lineages in every. single. setting. year after year after year.

 

[Yaarel]

It's funny how these contradictory statements can both be so true-- and so many people can still manage to simultanously be wrong on both. Personally... I no longer have any real interest in stake or interest in what WotC does with the official D&D brand, but I still have some small lingering wish to see them stop ripping everything cool out of other settings to put it in the core/Realms, and at the same time, I wish they'd stop saying that everything already in the core has a place in every D&D setting.

Outside of settings like Planescape or Spelljammer, I don't think any setting can have more than 10-12 sentient humanoid lineages, including enemies, without losing cohesion-- but, I don't think they need to be, or should be, the same 10-12 lineages in every. single. setting. year after year after year.

Yeah, the number of races is almost the same number as the how many digits a person can easily remember: 4 or 7. 10 starts to get difficult.

The Players Handbook can have 25 races. But a setting should probably focus on only a handful from them.

 

[DammitVictor]

The male valkyrie seems appropriate. If I am understanding the grammar correctly, the female Valkyrja would be a male Valkyr. But the English term valkyrie works fine for either.

The term "slain chooser" relates to a fate, a norn, determining the fate of a good death. In Norse culture, only women were religious leaders, the Volva, a shaman. Their central responsibility was to foresee fates, Spa, and they tended to know other kinds of mindmagic as well. But men could and did learn these magical skills too, albeit as laypersons. The Norse valued anyone who had the sight of Spa, including men.

Whence, the concept of a male valkyrie who happened to be skilled at fate is not so strange.

You're trying to teach your grandmother to steal sheep. Lecturing me about my own religion isn't going to make me more comfortable about something I consider to be an act of appropriation. I've had long conversations about whethere or not valkyries were disir, and thus formerly human... but even if they were men in life, if such a thing were truly possible, they are no longer men or male as valkyries.

Do what you feel in your own work. I support your artistic freedom nearly 100%. But it makes me uncomfortable and I'm going to say so.

 

[Yaarel]

You're trying to teach your grandmother to steal sheep. Lecturing me about my own religion isn't going to make me more comfortable about something I consider to be an act of appropriation. I've had long conversations about whethere or not valkyries were disir, and thus formerly human... but even if they were men in life, if such a thing were truly possible, they are no longer men or male as valkyries.

Do what you feel in your own work. I support your artistic freedom nearly 100%. But it makes me uncomfortable and I'm going to say so.

Norse heritage is my heritage. I am immersed in Norse archeology, texts, and history.

I am Norwegian. I feel hesitant when Non-Scandinavians appropriate our heritage.

 

[Yaarel]

You're trying to teach your grandmother to steal sheep. Lecturing me about my own religion isn't going to make me more comfortable about something I consider to be an act of appropriation. I've had long conversations about whethere or not valkyries were disir, and thus formerly human... but even if they were men in life, if such a thing were truly possible, they are no longer men or male as valkyries.

Do what you feel in your own work. I support your artistic freedom nearly 100%. But it makes me uncomfortable and I'm going to say so.

Regarding the Disir, strictly speaking, any woman in her sacred aspect, is a Dis, including human women.

That said, I agree with the scholars who suggest the Disir were mainly alfar women. Thus the alfablot and the disablot, are for males and females, respectively.

 

[DammitVictor]

I am Norwegian. I feel hesitant when Non-Scandinavians appropriate our heritage.

I guess that leaves us at an impasse, then. I'm only three generations removed from Germany, but my exposure to your ancestral culture has been sorely limited, self-directed, and filtered through multiple non-ancestral worldviews before it could reach me. But to me it is sacred, it is vital to my senses of self and community.

I won't scold you again, and I apologize for mistaking you for someone with no stake in our argument.

 

[Zardnaar]

I guess that leaves us at an impasse, then. I'm only three generations removed from Germany, but my exposure to your ancestral culture has been sorely limited, self-directed, and filtered through multiple non-ancestral worldviews before it could reach me. But to me it is sacred, it is vital to my senses of self and community.

I won't scold you again, and I apologize for mistaking you for someone with no stake in our argument.

Strictly speaking it's a revival there's no continuity between the ancient beliefs and modern practice.

You're both guilty of cultural religiousappropriation.

Yaarel does have a somewhat thin cultural continuation link, yours is even thinner.

From a historical PoV of course.