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

[Bedrockgames]

The thing is, elves, dwarves, and humans wouldn’t even be different genera. They wouldn’t even be different kingdoms. They would be entire different trees of life because they don’t share a common ancestor.

I would say that is setting specific. And a lot of scientific categorizing probably falls apart in a fantasy setting where you have magic, you probably don't even have natural selection (or at least it might not exist) and origins are often mythic rather than biological. But either way, I just think the basic point of having a term people grasp as meaning the difference between creatures like Neanderthals and humans in our planet, is one that works for what demihumans are meant to be. Species seems to do that. I guess my point here is elves and humans aren't different in the way existing human groups are different on earth, they are more like the difference between a chimpanzee and a gorilla. The issue is we don't live in a world where there are multiple sapient humanoid species. It is something of a creative leap to imagine what that means. I think race had become the established term for what that was, though I always saw it as separate from the real world meanings of race (clearly an elf isn't meant to be something like a different human racial or ethnic group as we've historically thought of). So if the idea is race is an issue and they need a new word, species seems the closest approximation. The issue with words like ancestry is then you are just basically drawing on a fairly minor and superficial difference between human groups (like the difference between being born in Italy versus England, or China versus Spain). To me that doesn't quite capture how different elves are meant to be than humans.

 

[Cadence]

I stand by parentage meaning exactly the way race was used. But I do think ancestry sounds better. People also works pretty perfectly.

Ancestry sounds better to me in terms of actual sound. But I wonder if it's common use in genealogy (going with nationality or ethnicity) will end up being problematic. And so I wonder if that's one the sensitivity readers will nike.

Parentage is growing a tiny bit on me, but things can share being an Elf or Dwarf or Human without having common parents anywhere along the way. (Unless Moradin just made two dwarves to start. I know that's not how it worked in Tolkien).

People sounds better than parentage to me, and has the benefit of seeming like it grants a moral status. (Although it then leaves non-people not having that). Is people often used for ethnicities too?

 

[Xamnam]

Parentage also gets a little thorny the second you start thinking about adoption or found families. There are people who would not want that word to intrinsically mean biological.

 

[Bedrockgames]

People sounds better than parentage to me, and has the benefit of seeming like it grants a moral status. (Although it then leaves non-people not having that). Is people often used for ethnicities too?

People or people is used for ethnicities and national groups usually, and can also indicate tribes or people who live in a particular area.

 

[glass]

Species is so awkward for any use other than its noun form. "Special" is the adjective form, but referring to "special abilities" would get confusing really quickly

"Species" itself works fine as an adjective form. "Species traits" etc.

The thing is, elves, dwarves, and humans wouldn’t even be different genera. They wouldn’t even be different kingdoms. They would be entire different trees of life because they don’t share a common ancestor.

Maybe in you campaign, but that is not universally true. And even if it was, it would still be irrelevant, because you are focusing on one highly technical (and probably slightly outdated) sense of the word "species", when there are other senses that fit exactly.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Species is fine. It sounds a tad too modern, but it actually isn't and we'll get used to it. And whilst not perfect, it actually communicates pretty well what we are talking about. Heritage, ancestry, lineage, bloodline, parentage etc all communicate far narrower concept, and connote some sort of human ethnicity or cultural group which is the exact thing we are trying to avoid.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Species is fine. It sounds a tad too modern, but it actually isn't and we'll get used to it. And whilst not perfect, it actually communicates pretty well what we are talking about. Heritage, ancestry, lineage, bloodline, parentage etc all communicate far narrower concept, and connote some sort of human ethnicity or cultural group which is the exact thing we are trying to avoid.

And I don't have any issue with those terms or the term race if people can understand the distinction between how they are used in fantasy RPGs and literature versus how they are used in regular speech, but I agree, if the point is race is a problem because it gets confused with real world race, then I don't understand why ancestry, heritage, bloodline, lineage etc would be considered an improvement. Species (or at least a term that broad) seems far more appropriate and more accurate to what demihumans are.

 

[Scribe]

Species is fine. It sounds a tad too modern, but it actually isn't and we'll get used to it.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I don't want any 'jargon' to replace it. I will be content with a word.

 

[Bill Zebub]

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.

What about:

"What's the actual difference between elves and dwarves?"
"It's specious."