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

[Bedrockgames]

Also I am just going by the wikipedia page here, so take with the appropriate grain of salt, but this the section on classification of neanderthals and common ancestors with humans and denisovans. Just so people have a point of reference:

Neanderthals are hominids in the genus Homo, humans, and generally classified as a distinct species, H. neanderthalensis, although sometimes as a subspecies of modern human as H. sapiens neanderthalensis. This would necessitate the classification of modern humans as H. sapiens sapiens.[8]

A large part of the controversy stems from the vagueness of the term "species", as it is generally used to distinguish two genetically isolated populations, but admixture between modern humans and Neanderthals is known to have occurred.[8][129] However, the absence of Neanderthal-derived patrilineal Y-chromosome and matrilineal mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in modern humans, along with the underrepresentation of Neanderthal X chromosome DNA, could imply reduced fertility or frequent sterility of some hybrid crosses,[86][130][131][132] representing a partial biological reproductive barrier between the groups, and therefore species distinction.[86] In 2014 geneticist Svante Pääbo summarised the controversy, describing such "taxonomic wars" as unresolvable, "since there is no definition of species perfectly describing the case".[8]

Neanderthals are thought to have been more closely related to Denisovans than to modern humans. Likewise, Neanderthals and Denisovans share a more recent last common ancestor (LCA) than to modern humans, based on nuclear DNA (nDNA). However, Neanderthals and modern humans share a more recent mitochondrial LCA (observable by studying mtDNA). This likely resulted from an interbreeding event subsequent to the Neanderthal/Denisovan split which introduced another mtDNA line. This involved either introgression coming from an unknown archaic human into Denisovans,[89][90][128][133][134] or introgression from an earlier unidentified modern human wave from Africa into Neanderthals.[135]

 

[Bedrockgames]

Right. I understood that you weren't advocating it and didn't intend to misrepresent your view.

I quoted you because you stated one of the common usages of 'people' in a very clear way--it just so happens that that usage, which (if I understood correctly) you think is a reason 'people' shouldn't replace 'race', is also a reason that I think it should.

Fair enough. I think I object to people on a few grounds. One it humanizes orcs and elves, but they aren't meant to be human. The magic of fantasy is that you have non-human races. Doesn't mean they aren't sapient and don't have internal interesting lives as species but I always loved the thought experiment aspect of fantasy and science fiction of you have humanoids and intelligent sapient species with different biology, drives, etc than humans and the writers thinking those through logically to develop different cultures, etc. The other reason is I do think if the point here (and not saying I agree with the point as I think most people can make distinctions like race is used one way in a game and another in real life, or that race has multiple meanings in general and D&D is relying on one of those meanings not the other), is to avoid the problems inherent in the term race, then terms like peoples also are bogged down with those problems (probably even more than race because with terms like ancestry, bloodline and peoples you can really get into that kind of blood and soil problem that connects a lot more directly to the kind of thinking that was going on in nazi germany but also in a lot of the racialist science of the early 20th century (because that was often about this idea of human bloodlines and peoples being able to be breed like dog-breed, and some of us were categorized as poodles or pugs, others as German shepherds or bloodhounds). Again, I think most people can see the term people and not assume that is the implied use, but if the concern is people do that sort of thing, then you probably want to pick a more neutral term. And the last reason would be that I don't think peoples captures what demihumans are. Peoples are just differences of culture and ancestry: you are from this place and belong to this nation or have this culture or are part of this tribe so you belong to the X peoples. There is no real difference, besides superficial ones there. But the differences between a dwarf and elves are deep, more like the difference between species.

Now that said, you can change that. You can make races/species in fantasy just different shades of human (like someone said elves are just slender humans with pointy ears), so the differences are no more than human differences like eye color, skin color, hair color, etc. And if you did, sure peoples would be accurate. I just think that would be very dull for a fantasy setting, and especially dull for D&D (where the point of choosing race and class at the start is both for flavor but also for game purposes of having simple but mechanically meaningful choices during character creation).

 

[Scott Christian]

While I like origin, I can already see the next sunrise, where that word too, will create a problem.

Like most, species is great for sci-fi, but not fantasy. That goes for many of the words, like taxonomy, that are on the list.

Kin to me is too related to family; therefore, it doesn't seem broad enough. This also is true for parentage and family.

Pedigree sounds like you are breeding dogs.

Type and form are way too vague to carry any connotative meaning. This is especially damaging, since the game relies heavily on connotation.

 

[Hriston]

I am no scientist and I don't think the involved scientific debate about it is terribly relevant (especially since it looks like there are scientist who would classify them as a distinct species). But just looking it up it does appear that they are more typically thought of as a separate species but there is still some ongoing debate. Either way, species or a subspecies, to me that distinction between neanderthals and humans, and between those two and denisovans, seems comparable enough to the kind of difference you have in fantasy worlds between demihuman races for it to basically be species. Again, I think race works too and probably sounds better for fantasy (because I don't think it is being used in the way we use it when we talk race among humans) but if the word is an issue and needs to be changed, species seems to most accurately capture the difference to me between a dwarf and human or a human and an elf. Obviously though it isn't going to connect cleanly to a scientific classification because these are worlds with magic that often rely on mythic explanations of things.

I was responding to an assertion that they are separate species which was made as if it was a settled fact. It is not, as evidenced by the ongoing debate.

 

[Scribe]

I want this:

Creature Type: Humanoid (Mountain Dwarf)

That's it. Same for NPCs and PCs.

I'd actually prefer this, or even "Type" to species. It still feels super clinical, but whatever.

Species is just not it.

 

[Bedrockgames]

While I like origin, I can already see the next sunrise, where that word too, will create a problem.

Like most, species is great for sci-fi, but not fantasy. That goes for many of the words, like taxonomy, that are on the list.

Kin to me is too related to family; therefore, it doesn't seem broad enough. This also is true for parentage and family.

Pedigree sounds like you are breeding dogs.

Type and form are way too vague to carry any connotative meaning. This is especially damaging, since the game relies heavily on connotation.

I think part of the problem here is if you want a flavorful real world term that connotes fantasy (which really just means it feels vaguely ancient, vaguely medieval, not modern, etc), you are going to have a hard time finding one that isn't laden with issues at some point in this discussion. They will all likely have the same problem that the word race has in some form. If you choose a more scientific then you have the issues that people have brought up with that not cleanly connecting to a fantasy world of magic and myth. If you choose a term like type those are accurate but have no feel to them (they aren't especially evocative). That is the thing about evocative language, it often has other connotations and associations. Same with colorful and punchy language. My personal view is it is better for individuals to be able to critically understand the intent and the meaning, so we don't have to always have these conversations (rather than for the the designers and writers to constantly vet and critique the terms until they find something no one can possibly object to). But if they are committing to it never being misconstrued for a real world term that has the potential to be seen through that kind of lens, they probably need to stick with neutral terms or scientific ones (and even those are going to be objected to by some folks).

 

[Charlaquin]

Again this is setting specific. You can easily have a world where all the demihumans have a common ancestor. Some worlds will operate that way, some will be more mythic (i.e. the god of dwarves made the dwarves in some kind of creation myth). Again these are fantasy worlds they aren't going to connect cleanly to scientific terms that describe how life evolved on earth (since every fantasy world is essentially its own thought experiment in that respect).

Well since we’re talking about the PHB, I’m going with the lore written there.

 

[Yaarel]

Except for the part where there are only minor cosmetic differences between then and they can make babies together.

Hypothetically, near future transhumanism:

A consciousness could exist in a virtual reality − a thought construct without flesh and blood. Then print out a body, and transfer the consciousness from the virtual reality to the new body.

The material body can have a human DNA, and be a human-species construct, and sexually reproduce offspring with natural humans.

But the virtual reality consciousness would be a nonhuman species.

In other words, a conscious mind can immigrate from one species to become a member of a different species.

A more competent scientific understanding of how consciousness itself works might come with its own implications about what a lifeform is.



This hypothetical transhumanism is actually closer to how Norse animism works.

The natural world is conscious. Just like a human body is a feature of nature that has its own consciousness, every phenomenon of nature is its own body with a consciousness. A mountain is conscious, a field, a lake, the sky, the sun, etcetera.

It is possible for a member of one kind of nature being to emigrate to become an other kind of nature being. For example, at death, the consciousness of a human nature being immigrates to become a member of the corpse nature beings. But it is also possible to become a member of the æsir nature beings in the sky as one of the einherjar among the clouds. There are examples of humans becoming vanir, jǫtnar becoming humans, and so on. Immigration from any species of nature being to become a member of any other species of nature being is possible. Essentially, this is a transfer of consciousness.



This Norse animistic worldview influences my perception of D&D fantasy settings. For example, the original Elf is a Celestial thought construct, whose consciousness translated into Fey force, and even Material body. The High Elf is an example of a Material Elf culture. The High Elf body is humanlike and can even sexually reproduce with humans. In other words, the body that Elf materializes actually is a human body with human D&D. The High Elf actually transfers the Elf consciousness into the human genepool. At the same time, the Elf maintains an affinity with the other modes of consciousness, including Fey and Celestial. The Elf consciousness has the potential to revert back to the nonhuman species. Perhaps the Elf Trance feature is a method to maintain the immaterial aspects of Elf consciousness.

Likewise, it is possible for a human consciousness to immigrate to an immaterial species, to become a Fey spirit-force consciousness among the Eladrin Elf, or a thought construct among the Celestial Elf. Perhaps an aspect of this Human-to-Eladrin consciousness maintains an affinity with the material species of humanity.



I like the One D&D approach. A character can be an entanglement of any combination of magical creatures. But pick one of these species for the mechanical stats for the character.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Well since we’re talking about the PHB, I’m going with the lore written there.

I am not familiar with the 5E demihuman entries (I don't play 5E). Does it specify things like elves don't come from a common ancestor?

Either way though, and maybe this is my 2E era showing, I tend to look at the PHB as starting points but see the demihumans and classes always being subject to the specifics of the individual world.

 

[Cadence]

Well since we’re talking about the PHB, I’m going with the lore written there.

Since they're talking about a potentially substantial revision to the books they could change the lore written there ;-)

But seriously, I'm not imagining they will, but I assume they will give everything a fresh run through by the sensitivity readers and with a look to their future design goals. And going with the current as the default for other things, like you did, is certainly the most parsimonious for discussion.