D&D General elf definition semantic shenanigans

[Corinnguard]

Now we have Orcs like these ones from Level Up:

Orcs are not inherently evil but tend to follow their impulses and instincts—which often gets them into trouble. They are passionate and tend to pity the comparatively demure, tame emotions of their neighbors. An orc in love burns with unbridled passion, a terrified orc experiences the primordial horror of the end of days, and an enraged orc can see a minor slight as an insult and challenge to their very being. Any and all of these emotions can get them into trouble, but it’s the rage that’s most remembered.

Easily rallied to a cause, many tyrants over the millenia have roused orcs into fearsome war hordes. Once a rallying cry goes out it can keep building momentum and growing in number until dozens of orcish tribes work themselves into a frenzy. A war horde is less of an army and more of a solid wall of passionate orcish anger. Once the object of their rage has been obliterated and their instigator reaps the rewards, most simply lay their weapons down and return home.

Orc | Level Up

a5e.tools

 

[Remathilis]

okay but like, you recognise that the two situations aren't the same thing right? yes it was absolutely terrible that those peoples were treated as lesser or other, and the choice to use 'race' to describe the fantasy species was wildly inaccurate and has been used to draw unfortunate comparisons, but it is not 'bad science' to say that these different creatures with genuinely different biological makeups who are all presented as sapient can actually have differently developed brains and bodies and be genuinely more adept in different areas at certain types of learning or thinking or doing.

it is quite possible for us to see that different creatures can have differently developed brains suited for different ways of thinking, even if the species we learn that from are not as inteligent as humans are.

those historical peoples were all humans, regardless of what they were called or the ways they were treated, and these species are all different from humans, regardless of how we refer to them, we can gladly move away from the 'all orcs are savage barbarians' mentality while still recognising that they could be built differently in ways that makes them better or worse at certain things in comparison to other species who are also built differently in their own ways.

The issue, of course, is a very complicated question of biology and evolution. If an orc was an aberration spawned out of a magical pool and an elf an immortal fey spirit given flesh, you might be able to justify the alien intellect that would make their mental ability different. But in D&D, they are all humanoids who are created though natural procreation, and capable of interbreeding with humans. They have to be similar to humans to allow that, and thus they have to be within the same mental capabilities as humans. We're not comparing dragons, angels or elementals to humans, we're comparing humanities kissing cousins, which makes the comparison start looking more like that outdated science yet again.

Honestly, the amount of delicate subject matter you need to thread to make that happen isn't worth it. Not when it's easy to just allow the floating ASI to represent luck, skill, natural talent, genetics or whatever you want.

 

[Corinnguard]

They have to be similar to humans to allow that, and thus they have to be within the same mental capabilities as humans.

Thus making the other races easier to relate to us humans and vice versa. Would we know how to role-play an Elf if we couldn't relate with them somehow?

 

[CreamCloud0]

The issue, of course, is a very complicated question of biology and evolution. If an orc was an aberration spawned out of a magical pool and an elf an immortal fey spirit given flesh, you might be able to justify the alien intellect that would make their mental ability different. But in D&D, they are all humanoids who are created though natural procreation, and capable of interbreeding with humans. They have to be similar to humans to allow that, and thus they have to be within the same mental capabilities as humans. We're not comparing dragons, angels or elementals to humans, we're comparing humanities kissing cousins, which makes the comparison start looking more like that outdated science yet again.

Honestly, the amount of delicate subject matter you need to thread to make that happen isn't worth it. Not when it's easy to just allow the floating ASI to represent luck, skill, natural talent, genetics or whatever you want.

i don't see a need to define their mental abilities as totally alien or abberant to still be baseline different from human's to a noticable degree, there are many observable differences in human individuals capacities to process different types of information and it's not like those people are biologically incompatable so why wouldn't the same be true across humans, elves and orcs? even if one is between baselines and the other is between variance around the baseline.

 

[Remathilis]

Thus making the other races easier to relate to us humans and vice versa. Would we know how to role-play an Elf if we couldn't relate with them somehow?

There is that too. We only can understand sentience from the framework of our own understanding of it.

 

[Remathilis]

i don't see a need to define their mental abilities as totally alien or abberant to still be baseline different from human's to a noticable degree, there are many observable differences in human individuals capacities to process different types of information and it's not like those people are biologically incompatable so why wouldn't the same be true across humans, elves and orcs? even if one is between baselines and the other is between variance around the baseline.

We are not talking about an individuals capacity for certain intelligences, but an entire species. We are saying that there are groups of people who are born with a higher degree of musical ability or capacity for math as a biological truth of their existence.

 

[FrozenNorth]

So, this is already other threads. But. I honestly dont understand why a Halfling isnt a Human.

What is the "essence" of a Halfling species? What makes it not a Human?

Because a Halfling is both extremely sneaky and prone to thieving but also shows little inclination for adventure.
shrug

 

[Tonguez]

I don't think anyone is arguing that an aggregate population can't demonstrate strengths and weaknesses (at least I don't think anyone is arguing that).

The difference in opinion comes with whether or not you feel those distinctions needed to be embedded in the character creation rules to be meaningful within the fiction.

For me personally, I have no problem saying "Dwarves are tougher than most humanoids, are martially inclined, and excellent at all sorts of crafts involving earth and stone." And as a DM, I can represent that by the stats I give my dwarven NPCs (most will have between 14-16 Con), and giving those NPCS a diversity of martial abilities, as well as some excellent craftspeople.

But, I don't think the toughest dwarf is obviously tougher than the toughest human, or that the frailest dwarf is still more robust than the frailest human. I just think dwarven Con scores aren't a classic bell curve, instead, they have a bias towards scores in the 12-16 range. Giving a "+X" bonus is a poor model for their actual narrative in the setting (as I envision it.)

The thing is I do think the toughest dwarf is tougher than the toughest human, The rules reflect those as Dwarven resilience and Toughness. And imc Dwarfs have much denser muscle mass, bigger hearts, better lung capacity and better overall endurance.

Equally Orcs have powerful builds, endurance and Tasha’s adrenaline spikes, Elfs have their Fey ancestry and magic.

Those I think are a better model that stat mods

The issue, of course, is a very complicated question of biology and evolution. If an orc was an aberration spawned out of a magical pool and an elf an immortal fey spirit given flesh, you might be able to justify the alien intellect that would make their mental ability different. But in D&D, they are all humanoids who are created though natural procreation, and capable of interbreeding with humans. They have to be similar to humans to allow that, and thus they have to be within the same mental capabilities as humans. We're not comparing dragons, angels or elementals to humans, we're comparing humanities kissing cousins, which makes the comparison start looking more like that outdated science yet again.

Honestly, the amount of delicate subject matter you need to thread to make that happen isn't worth it. Not when it's easy to just allow the floating ASI to represent luck, skill, natural talent, genetics or whatever you want.

Of course there is the option of Neanderthals as a comparison and model of alternative humanoid who can interbreed with humans. Neanderthals were shorter and more robust than modern humans (adult males averaging less than 5’5” and weighing 177lbs), with broader shoulders and chest, barrel-shaped ribcage, curved limbs with thicker joints, larger hands and longer feet adapted to hiking through uneven, hilly forest. They were probably stronger than humans, had better endurance and they had larger crania capacity.

Infact Neanderthals remind me of Dwarfs a lot

 

[Corinnguard]

What is the "essence" of a Halfling species?

DM: You discover that it is a potion called Essence of Halfling. What do you do with it?

Player 1: I roll for an Arcana check to see what I can recall about this potion. rolls a d20 and adds his INT modifier. I got an 18

DM: You remember that this potion endows whoever drinks it the racial abilities of a Halfling as well as a change in perspective.

Player 2: What do you mean by a change in perspective?

Player 1: Essence of Halfling is a brand of Polyjuice. You drink it and for an hour, you'll be a Halfling.

 

[CreamCloud0]

We are not talking about an individuals capacity for certain intelligences, but an entire species. We are saying that there are groups of people who are born with a higher degree of musical ability or capacity for math as a biological truth of their existence.

my point was that if the difference in mental capacities exists because of mental variance within the one species and they're still compatible then why would it mean that if the differences in mental capacities comes from being different species why it would mean they're incompatible?