D&D (2024) bring back the pig faced orcs for 6th edition, change up hobgoblins & is there a history of the design change

[Faolyn]

because they were made that way. But I use them as an allegory for barbarians at the gates of civilization envious of their accomplishments and even if they win they will not have what the people they conquered had because they don’t have the knowledge to maintain such a civilization or city.
I used most races like they were used in fairy tales.. as allegory. There is no Darwin or genetics. Animals talk. Unicorns are in forests.

Why would "barbarians" be envious of "civilized accomplishments"? In the real world, "civilized" people killed off "barbarians" so they could take their stuff and/or get slave labor, which makes the barbarian's retaliation actually rather just.

Most fairy tale non-humans were one-off trickster fey, not whole races. If they were an allegory for anything, it was for the humans to stay on the path, follow the rules, don't take (magical) shortcuts, be kind to people you meet on the road (they could be a fairy in disguise), and don't make bargains with strange people, and if you do, don't break your end of the bargain.

Unicorns were incredibly vicious creatures that impaled elephants on their horns and represented male virility, which is why they liked virgins.

 

[Sithlord]

true they are not real but why should they conform to your belief instead of some else's?

also, they are really bad as ideas of envy and laziness is covered by sloth.
finally sacking cities is not an activity for the lazy it take great effort and planning.

I don’t use wow orcs or Klingon orcs. But you are right in that we can each portray them however we want in our own settings. We can make believe however we want. All this talk about genetics and how species work in the real world is just too sci-fi for a mythological role playing game. Orcs made by Grumsh. Dwarves by Moradin. Halflings by yondalla. Gnolls by yeenog... however you spell it. I’m not even sure dna exists in these worlds.

 

[Maxperson]

Why would "barbarians" be envious of "civilized accomplishments"? In the real world, "civilized" people killed off "barbarians" so they could take their stuff and/or get slave labor, which makes the barbarian's retaliation actually rather just.

You just showed that his barbarians are not based on the real world barbarians?

 

[Oofta]

Uncivilized humans existed among all races. Which race is he using over any of the others?

Those poor downtrodden blue eyed blonde haired vikings would be my guess.

But it depends on who you ask. It could be vikings, mongols, American Indians, Visigoths, black people and so on. It's kind of a Rorsach test, fill in what you want.

Bad words have been used to describe real world people. Some of the same bad words have been used to describe imaginary monsters. But there are only so many words in the English language. Should some of the verbiage be rewritten? I've said before and I'll repeat, yes.

But the basic concept as a default? They fill a niche. Trying to parse which monsters it's okay to be (effectively) always evil just depends on who you ask. Much of our human sense of right and wrong, good and evil is instinctual and bred into us. I have no problem with other fantasy species that are effectively manufactured having different instincts.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Why would "barbarians" be envious of "civilized accomplishments"? In the real world, "civilized" people killed off "barbarians" so they could take their stuff and/or get slave labor, which makes the barbarian's retaliation actually rather just.

The interaction between the nomadic and sedentary civilisations is probably one of the longest and mutually antagonistic rivalries in human history, marred by mutual distrust and misunderstanding. But the relationship was co-dependent in a way. Most conquerors relied on the military strength of nomadic groups to conquer and main control of territory, but without the sedentary population you couldn't get the benefits of ruling over lots of land (ie, wealth) and your armies wouldn't have decent armour or weapons. What finally tilted the balance was the dawn of the industrial age when non-sedentary civilisations were finally completely outmatched.

The Mongols were awesome armies, but they couldn't have got anywhere without the wealth and technology of China or the trade route of the Silk Rode. The Arabs conquered most of Persia and the Roman Empire, but relied on the existing population there to gain wealth. Later Caliphs maintained controlled solely with Turkish slave armies.

Which ties into how i have my goblinoids and orcs, as one large group. Orcs are the nomadic fringe of the "Orschan" population, and goblinoids the sedentary, settled populated. That's why orcs are raiders and hobgoblins fight in armoured units.

 

[Faolyn]

You just showed that his barbarians are not based on the real world barbarians?

Yeah, so why would his barbarians be envious of civilized accomplishments?

 

[AnotherGuy]

that is not how barbarians often worked, it only happened that way to rome for far more complex reasons mostly local economics and other things.

Considering the origins of the classes - that view point of the barbarian would be the most popular.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, so why would his barbarians be envious of civilized accomplishments?

Same reason any country is envious of the accomplishments of its neighbors. People want what others have that's good. Lots of wars have happened over it. Even more have come up with other pretexts to go to war for it.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Same reason any country is envious of the accomplishments of its neighbors. People want what others have that's good. Lots of wars have happened over it. Even more have come up with other pretexts to go to war for it.

It wasn't really envy of such, but people like to live comfortably and have nice things.

One thing shows like Game of Thrones gets wrong about nomadic civilisations is it has them running around in animal skins and devoid of luxuries. That's not exactly true to life. The whole point of raiding was to get wealth you couldn't make yourself.

Compare a Dothraki for instance, to how actual Mongols liked to dress.

 

[Maxperson]

It wasn't really envy of such, but people like to live comfortably and have nice things.

One thing shows like Game of Thrones gets wrong about nomadic civilisations is it has them running around in animal skins and devoid of luxuries. That's not exactly true to life. The whole point of raiding was to get wealth you couldn't make yourself.

Compare a Dothraki for instance, to how actual Mongols liked to dress.

That sounds like envy to me. If you want the nice things of others that you can't make yourself, you are envious of them. I agree about the Dothraki, though. They had quite a bit of wealth from those they conquered and received tribute from.