D&D General “‘Scantily Clad and Well Proportioned’: Sexism and Gender Stereotyping in the Gaming Worlds of TSR and Dungeons & Dragons.”

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can I ask what the problem with that is?

Please reconsider this question. Do you actually need to be told what the problem is with saying that most of a game-race of beings is the result of sexual violence?

Imagine turning to a significant woman in your life (mother, sister, romantic partner) and saying, "So, enough people are raped in this fictional world that we need a separate set of game statistics for the children. And I like it that way. It seems realistic to me."

Maybe the imagined reaction will answer your question for you.


Orcs are in fantasy fiction to represent the worst aspects of humanity when in war.

Maybe in the past they were. I don't think it is that simple any more. The orc trope has grown beyond that limited view.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I think your standard is unreasonable. I feel that by your logic I could just conclude that my dogs are basically mentally merely really stupid humans. When I talk about different species having different mentalities, I don't mean they would be constantly having thoughts that no human could possibly conceive. These are humanoids, and often basically hominids. They will have a lot of similarities to humans. But their baselines can be different. A species evolved from small prey animals will probably have rather different outlook than ones evolved from carnivorous apex predators. And we don't need to be perfect about this, but I think it is a big part of appeal of RPGs, that we can try to portray such things.
I think I might not be expressing myself adequately, because to me it’s not a matter of species needing to hit an unreasonably high standard to seem sufficiently non-human. It’s a matter of objecting to the idea that “sufficiently non-human” is a target we should be aiming for in the first place. It is an unattainable goal, yes, but more importantly it’s not a worthwhile goal. Yeah, it’s fun to play with flavor differences like the ones mentioned previously. But being afraid to let orcs (or whatever) have diverse cultures and mentalities and ranges of experience because doing so makes them “too human” is silly, in my opinion. Again, if they need to be homogenous to feel alien, then I don’t want them to feel alien.
 
Last edited:

Maybe in the past they were. I don't think it is that simple any more. The orc trope has grown beyond that limited view.
Again I am fine with both. And D&D needs to strike a balance because it is a game that is the flagship, so I don't expect it to cater to one particular vision of orcs. But I see the appeal of orcs as representations of humanities warmongering and brutality. I think it is a mistake to see one approach as somehow backwards or narrow and another as more advanced. You need the full spectrum of possibilities available to designers and fantasy writers, because these all have their use and function in creative endeavors like world building.
 

I think I might not be expressing what I’m trying to say adequately, because to me it’s not a matter of species needing to hit an unreasonably high standard to seem sufficiently non-human. It’s a matter of objecting to the idea that “sufficiently non-human” is a target we should be aiming for in the first place. It is an unattainable goal, yes, but more importantly it’s not a worthwhile goal. Yeah, it’s fun to play with flavor differences like the ones mentioned previously. But being afraid to let orcs (or whatever) have diverse cultures and mentalities and ranges of experience because doing so makes them “too human” is silly, in my opinion. Again, if they need to be homogenous to feel alien, then I don’t want them to feel alien.

I don't think they need be homogenous, but you do want them to feel very different from human beings at a deep level if this is the aim. That can include a species that is just incredibly violent and warlike. Look at different species of ape for example and the kinds of behavior we see there. I think what people want to imagine when they are thinking this way, provided it isn't orcs being a symbol of something like war or evil, is what life was like for early humans living among other species of humans (but obviously in a fantasy world where differences could be even more stark).
 

Yeah, there's a lot of movies and books like this from really obvious ones like "Fight Club" to stuff that can fly under the radar like "Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World". And often, the main character is meant to be satirical or for the audience to identify with them but still realize how broken they are, and the latter falls completely flat. Mafia movies take the cake here.
Laughs in 'followed recent election results'.
 

I don't think they need be homogenous, but you do want them to feel very different from human beings at a deep level if this is the aim. That can include a species that is just incredibly violent and warlike. Look at different species of ape for example and the kinds of behavior we see there. I think what people want to imagine when they are thinking this way, provided it isn't orcs being a symbol of something like war or evil, is what life was like for early humans living among other species of humans (but obviously in a fantasy world where differences could be even more stark).
I just don’t see “incredibly violent and warlike” as particularly inhuman. Unless you restrict them to only being incredibly violent and warlike, in which case they’re not in their capacity for violence and war, they’re inhuman in their lack of capacity for gentleness and peace. In other words, you are making them more homogeneous for the sake of differentiating them from humans, and you don’t even get any behavior patterns outside the human range for your trouble. No thanks, I say.
 

I just don’t see “incredibly violent and warlike” as particularly inhuman. Unless you restrict them to only being incredibly violent and warlike, in which case they’re inhuman, not in their capacity for violence and war, but in their lack of capacity for gentleness and peace. In other words, you are making them more homogeneous for the sake of differentiating them from humans, and you don’t even get any behavior patterns outside the human range for your trouble. No thanks, I say.

I think it can be a range of things, anything from 'more warlike than man' to 'less warlike than man' to 'they almost always resolve conflict with violence'. This might not interest you. I find this enjoyable in a setting on occasion
 


Star Trek: Picard had a Vulcan named Krinn who was played by Kirk Acevedo, who rationalized and came to the very logical conclusion about why he should be a gangster.
Wouldn't be the first

Star-Trek-Sigma-Iotia-II-Croppedv1.jpg
 

I think I might not be expressing myself adequately, because to me it’s not a matter of species needing to hit an unreasonably high standard to seem sufficiently non-human. It’s a matter of objecting to the idea that “sufficiently non-human” is a target we should be aiming for in the first place. It is an unattainable goal, yes, but more importantly it’s not a worthwhile goal. Yeah, it’s fun to play with flavor differences like the ones mentioned previously. But being afraid to let orcs (or whatever) have diverse cultures and mentalities and ranges of experience because doing so makes them “too human” is silly, in my opinion. Again, if they need to be homogenous to feel alien, then I don’t want them to feel alien.

OK. I absolutely do think that trying to portray non-humans as different from humans is a worthwhile goal. However, I do agree with you that it ideally should not result narrow and flanderised creatures without variety or depth. This is on of the biggest reason why I want limit the amount of intelligent species in my settings. More species there are, more difficult it becomes to keep them different from each other and still have room for internal diversity.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top