Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 8375518" data-attributes="member: 58172">I dont have an opinion about what an &quot;orc&quot; archetype should or shouldnt be. Tolkien coined the term orc from an obscure Old English &quot;orcneas&quot;. The D&amp;D orc seems nonidentical with the Tolkien concept. A D&amp;D orc can be whatever D&amp;D wants one to be.3e suggests the orc spellcasters are as powerful as the orc warrior leaders, who they often ambitiously rival. Since the martial concepts are high level and exceptionally powerful, this Cleric-like concept seems so too.In any case, the orc is one of the concerning D&amp;D races. The D&amp;D traditions employ reallife memes from highly racist stereotypes about a primitive, &quot;savage&quot;, brute, of a less-than-human Intelligence, whose &quot;tribes&quot; are a culture of &quot;chiefs&quot; and &quot;chieftains&quot;. Illustrations often portray their complexion as identical to dark humans. I am uninterested in perpetuating this notion of a orc.4e identified certain orcs with the reallife term &quot;berserker&quot;, but fortunately 5e discontinued this misrepresentation of Norse heritage.The halfling tradition tends to be a nonmagical Small human, much like a precocious child. This is one of the races that &quot;offer you things that are unique and beneficial&quot;, yes, a Rogue, and only a Rogue. Halflings are subpar as Fighter, despite tradition often making them Fighters. They are subpar as spellcasters. Their mechanical design straightjackets the player to be a Rogue, and punishes the player who wants to explore a non-Rogue character concept. I am fond of the 4e halfling whose mechanics are better and whose culture interested me. In 5e, if I want a precocious human kid, I just do that.I find the 5e halfling and the tradition generally to be way too human. It deserves serious rethinking. Maybe associate it with its gnomish fairy origin as a &quot;hob&quot;, &quot;hobbit&quot;, to make it less human. Otherwise, make &quot;Hin&quot; one of the human &quot;cultures&quot;, like the ones that are in the Players Handbook. Some human groups tend to be little.Halflings benefit from floating the ability improvements for the sheer breath of fresh air to not be a Rogue.The wood elf is a grugach with a Strength score +2, and the grugach elf Barbarian is a part of the D&amp;D tradition that merits working well in 5e too.If orc, halfling, and wood elf are supposed to be the &quot;classic examples&quot; of why not to have floating ability score improvements, then I look at these same races with gladness that we now have floating ability score improvements.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Yaarel, post: 8375518, member: 58172"] I dont have an opinion about what an "orc" archetype should or shouldnt be. Tolkien coined the term orc from an obscure Old English "orcneas". The D&D orc seems nonidentical with the Tolkien concept. A D&D orc can be whatever D&D wants one to be. 3e suggests the orc spellcasters are as powerful as the orc warrior leaders, who they often ambitiously rival. Since the martial concepts are high level and exceptionally powerful, this Cleric-like concept seems so too. In any case, the orc is one of the concerning D&D races. The D&D traditions employ reallife memes from highly racist stereotypes about a primitive, "savage", brute, of a less-than-human Intelligence, whose "tribes" are a culture of "chiefs" and "chieftains". Illustrations often portray their complexion as identical to dark humans. I am uninterested in perpetuating this notion of a orc. 4e identified certain orcs with the reallife term "berserker", but fortunately 5e discontinued this misrepresentation of Norse heritage. The halfling tradition tends to be a nonmagical Small human, much like a precocious child. This is one of the races that "offer you things that are unique and beneficial", yes, a Rogue, and only a Rogue. Halflings are subpar as Fighter, despite tradition often making them Fighters. They are subpar as spellcasters. Their mechanical design straightjackets the player to be a Rogue, and punishes the player who wants to explore a non-Rogue character concept. I am fond of the 4e halfling whose mechanics are better and whose culture interested me. In 5e, if I want a precocious human kid, I just do that. I find the 5e halfling and the tradition generally to be way too human. It deserves serious rethinking. Maybe associate it with its gnomish fairy origin as a "hob", "hobbit", to make it less human. Otherwise, make "Hin" one of the human "cultures", like the ones that are in the Players Handbook. Some human groups tend to be little. Halflings benefit from floating the ability improvements for the sheer breath of fresh air to not be a Rogue. The wood elf is a grugach with a Strength score +2, and the grugach elf Barbarian is a part of the D&D tradition that merits working well in 5e too. If orc, halfling, and wood elf are supposed to be the "classic examples" of why not to have floating ability score improvements, then I look at these same races with gladness that we now have floating ability score improvements. [/QUOTE]

Verification