D&D 4E 1/2 Orcs in 4E (Rich Baker scoop)

[Sitara]

Swords were copied from real life, not middle earth.

And yeah, I personally could not be more happier if they got rid of orcs and other tolkienistic tropes permanenetly (elves, halflings, etc)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I say leave half-orcs, and orcs, period, where they belong, in Middle-Earth.

I don't know about Half-orcs, but I think there's usually a place for Orcs in my campaign settings. I like the "Savage Barbarian" type.

Though sometimes I wonder if there just aren't to many humanoid species around...

 

[Steely Dan]

Yeah. Let's get rid of Dragons too. And elves. Swords are stupid. Let's replace those with Laser Guns. And I don't like horses either. Let's rplace horses with spaceships.
There. Now D&D is perfect.

Please stop gabbing on with silly exaggerations (I refuse to use the word hyperbole) – and the fact that you got so excited you had to post it twice is embarrassing.

The thing is, elves, dwarves and dragons etc, all have a mythological and historical precedent, whereas halflings and orcs are the work of one man.

 

[Steely Dan]

I don't know about Half-orcs, but I think there's usually a place for Orcs in my campaign settings. I like the "Savage Barbarian" type.

Half-ogres work well for that niche.

 

[Azgulor]

Excuse me?

I have no reason to "deflect". If I wanted to argue about Half-Orcs not being put in the PHB, I would argue about that. But you neglected to make that argument. I read no where in your comment about Half-Orcs not being in the PHB. The objection you made is "Why are they not giving the half-orc a good story", not "Why aren't they in the PHB".

If that's your objection, state it, instead of shoving words in my mouth. There will be none of this "You knew it". I call BS.



Your attempt to attribute non-existent malicious motivation to my words has no baring on my actual post. You said, Yoursef:


If they were choosing to not come up with a more pleasant reason, then they wouldn't be bothering to come up with one. But by Baker's saying, they are.

Now how about you respond to what I said? Or, if my interpretation of what you said is wrong, re-explain yourself so it is clearer. That's a lot more condusive than throwing around false accusations.

I make the comparison of the half-orc and the inclusion of the tiefling as a core race in my first response to this thread. I further elaborate on what I perceive to be a disconnect in that thinking in subsequent posts - all around the inclusion of tieflings and exclusion of half-orcs as core races, i.e. races in the PHB. Mr. Baker talks about addressing the half-orc in DDI. If the DDI is optional, then I don't consider it core.

I've gone back and reread my posts. Unless I wanted to double their length through the addition of extra explanation, I saw little that was confusing. Others have disagreed with my evaluation but understood the basis of the comparison.

I can't tell if you truly misunderstood my point, were being dismissing of it, or just disagreed. However, your post came off with more than a little snarkiness. If I'm reinforcing the half-orc - tiefling comparison I've made since my first post in this thread and we're 3-4 pages deep, your omission or dismissal of my argument appears intentional. I can't see how the comparison I was making couldn't at least be understood at this point, but if I wasn't clear and you were truly seeking clarification then I apologize.

If at this point, you can't see the comparison I was making, then I can't help you. You're free to disagree with the comparison, of course, but I can't justify spending any more time on this.

Peace.

 

[Darkwolf71]

No offense, but I have the feeling that those who find "consorting with demons distasteful" aren't going to be the sorts to play D&D, yes?

No.

I find 'consorting with demons' to be quite distastful. Yet I play D&D every week.

 

[Rechan]

I make the comparison of the half-orc and the inclusion of the tiefling as a core race in my first response to this thread. I further elaborate on what I perceive to be a disconnect in that thinking in subsequent posts - all around the inclusion of tieflings and exclusion of half-orcs as core races, i.e. races in the PHB. Mr. Baker talks about addressing the half-orc in DDI. If the DDI is optional, then I don't consider it core.

I can't tell if you truly misunderstood my point, were being dismissing of it, or just disagreed. However, your post came off with more than a little snarkiness. If I'm reinforcing the half-orc - tiefling comparison I've made since my first post in this thread and we're 3-4 pages deep, your omission or dismissal of my argument appears intentional. I can't see how the comparison I was making couldn't at least be understood at this point, but if I wasn't clear and you were truly seeking clarification then I apologize.

I wasn't keeping track of your extended argument throughout the thread. I just objected to the single paragraph that I saw which I interpreted you were saying WotC doesn't care about Half-Orcs, and thus they aren't trying to give them a pleasant story. I saw someone else make the same argument on either the same page or page before that, and singled your comment out as an example of what I saw as neglecting to read, or ignoring, Baker's comments.

But thank you.

 

[Imaro]

No.

I find 'consorting with demons' to be quite distastful. Yet I play D&D every week.

Right there with you.

Like I said earlier, the issues of rape and demon worship/pacts (as a "heroic" option) are both distasteful to me when presented with the scenario of explaining or leting my son read them so he can play D&D.

 

[Darkwolf71]

I believe both the tiefling's and the half-orc's "default origin" can be easily relegated to backstory and largely ignored/forgotten for gamers who wish to do so.

That's exactly where the half-orcs origin has been for, oh.. 20+ years. Backstory that is rarely (never in my experience) brought up more than once or twice for story reasons and then only in passing.

 

[Azgulor]

That's exactly where the half-orcs origin has been for, oh.. 20+ years. Backstory that is rarely (never in my experience) brought up more than once or twice for story reasons and then only in passing.

That's been my experience also. Some of the replies in this thread had me wondering if I was alone in the wilderness, though.