D&D (2024) What new jargon do you want to replace "Race"?

[Charlaquin]

RE: Ancestry

Is "ancestry" also commonly used to describe national origins IRL? So "I'm of German ancestry." But a person of German ancestry (maybe 3/4 of whose ancestors emigrated from Germany a century and a half ago and the rest are from somewhere else) might very well not consider themselves German, but rather whatever their new country is. Saying one is of Elvish ancestry in this context would mean that they actually are an Elf, right? Or maybe Half-Elf I guess? Is the half-Elf of Elvish and Human ancestry? Or are they of Half-Elvish ancestry?

Assuming the term Ancestry were to get adopted, I’d say they’re “mixed ancestry,” but in game jargon terms, their Ancestry would be the one the player chose the ancestry features from.

 

[glass]

That’s exactly the problem. Species means something specific, and the difference between elves and dwarves is not that thing.

It is exactly that thing.

but in game jargon terms, their Ancestry would be the one the player chose the ancestry features from.

This is the issue with all the terms on the list except species; they are jargon. Whereas species is what they are in plain English, which makes it the clear winner IMNSHO. Now I have no problem with jargon, but 5e is supposed to be the natural language edition....

 

[Thunder Brother]

For me, Ancestry edges out Species because it has a good adjective form with Ancestral. And because it sounds a bit more fantastic.

Then again I never really had problems with Race, but I'm not going to mourn it's removal.

 

[Charlaquin]

It is exactly that thing.
This is the issue with all the terms on the list except species; they are jargon. Whereas species is what they are in plain English, which makes it the clear winner IMNSHO. Now I have no problem with jargon, 5e is supposed to be the natural language edition....

Species is also jargon. No matter what term you use, it’s shorthand for “the game element that gives you a particular package of abilities.” And no, the word species, in English, does not mean what they are in the fiction. Again, real-world taxonomy doesn’t apply to D&D.

 

[Cadence]

Species is also jargon. No matter what term you use, it’s shorthand for “the game element that gives you a particular package of abilities.” And no, the word species, in English, does not mean what they are in the fiction. Again, real-world taxonomy doesn’t apply to D&D.

Do any of the words suggested mean exactly what race was used for in D&D? It feels like they don't, which makes me want to ask which is closest.

I get that species sounds too science/sci-fi for some. But I'm still a bit befuddled on what confusion "species" would cause someone playing D&D (assuming they knew that hybridization and interbreeding between some IRL species in the same genus is fairly common IRL)? I get that someone who doesn't know the IRL science would be confused (but then learning some science might be a good thing). And I get that what divisions between some species (or lack of division) are things scientists who specialize in that argue about (which is also something that is probably good if everyone knew).

What are mules in your D&D world and why?

 

[Bedrockgames]

Species I think captures the meaning of race in D&D most. I still think it sounds a little odd in a fantasy setting to me, but stuff life ancestry and bloodlines, that seems to get just as bad as the problems people have with race (personally I think the word race is being used differently in D&D so it doesn't bother me, but I understand where the discomfort around it comes from: I just think if race bothers you other stuff that has been used by racists and racialist science should also be a potential issue for you). Something like bloodline gets very much into the idea of human breeding for example (reminds me of the racist character in the Great Gatsby). But to me the bigger issue than the term is what the term signifies. I have always felt it indicated something more like the different between humans and neanderthals, so having mechanics to back up that difference makes sense and keeps the world interesting. But things seem to be moving it more towards a meaning like culture, where there isn't any kind of real physiological differences that are expressed in a mechanical way, just differences that are more close to cultural differences and vary more from individual groups of elves, dwarves, etc. I don't play 5E so I might be misunderstanding the direction things have gone in the latest announcements. I am sort of looking at this from the outside. But for me, whatever they call it, I prefer it to remain mechanically the way it was before where being a halfling gave you certain modifiers and abilities, being an elf gave you certain modifiers and abilities, etc. Some kind of mechanical distinction that keeps choosing your race and your class as these simple but meaningful choices at character creation.

 

[glass]

And no, the word species, in English, does not mean what they are in the fiction.

You can keep saying that, but it won't make it any more true.

Again, real-world taxonomy doesn’t apply to D&D.

True, but irrelevant. The word species predates "real-world taxonomy" as it is currently understood by centuries. And real-world taxonomies only do not cover things like shardminds and gibbering mouthers because they do not exist. If they did, they would absolutely be called species in plain English, if not in technical cladistic terms.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You can keep saying that, but it won't make it any more true.


True, but irrelevant. The word species predates "real-world taxonomy" as it is currently understood by centuries. And real-world taxonomies only do not cover things like shardminds and gibbering mouthers because they do not exist. If they did, they would absolutely be called species in plain English, if not in technical cladistic terms.

I think its fine. I mean it might have more particular meanings scientifically, but as an indication for a game of large differences between humanoids it seems fine to me (my quibbles about it feeling a bit off for fantasy aside, which are probably more a legacy of its long usage in the genre). Like I said in my last post, I think of dwaves and elves as different from one another and from humans, as humans were from neanderthals. My understanding, which could be wrong as I am not particularly knowledgeable about biology, is humans and neanderthals were the same genus but different species. So it seems to align okay. I do get there is debate around that, and some of it has to do with the definition of species. But I also think for a game that involved scientific debate isn't really that important if we are just trying to find a way of classifying different human-like options

 

[Corinnguard]

I choose Ancestry, Bloodline, Lineage and Heritage. To me, replacing the word Race with Species sounds like a pretty odd to do for a fantasy setting like D&D. The name change is more appropriate for a science fiction setting like Star Trek or a Sci Fantasy setting like Starfinder. As for the four I picked here, they don't just refer to a given population of humans, elves, etc as a whole, they are also more personal for the character. If you are playing a human, then your ancestors were obviously human (given the number of beings humans can breed with in D&D). If you are a Noble person, Bloodline and Lineage mean a lot to you socially and culturally. Ditto if you are a sorcerer with a Sorcerous Bloodline. As for Heritage, it's like Ancestry. It's something you inherited from your parents.

That said, I think One D&D should go for Heritage or Ancestry.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Really? Someone points to a cat and asks you what it's parentage is, you're going to assume they're asking you to differentiate between it and a dog or a bird, rather than between it and other cats?

I'd assume I am asked about his pedigree and I'll show the documentation about it.