D&D 5E D&D Races: Evolution, Fantasy Stereotypes & Escapism

[Cadence]

The dictionary definitions have not changed as far as I can see, for one, and this is an international forum not even US based. So why, even if the connotation (and I would certainly debate that it's the "primary" connotation that changes) in the US, would we have to abide by it ?

It feels like several of those words are either marked as obsolete/rare or offensive for the definitions that seem closest, or have other common definitions that are derogatory and could easily also have been meant.

----

There are a bunch of definitions for Savage in the OED, but it notes notes that some usages are now avoided as "offensive, except in historical reference to the language or attitudes of the past".

------

Primitive certainly has

but also has

-----------

Exotic has a bunch:

 

[Cadence]

No. The proper definition is "something conforming to a fixed or general pattern".

It has a bit more than that in the OED.

1 - about a method of printing
2 - about the plate used for the stereotype process

 

[Ruin Explorer]

No one here has made the claim that verisimilitude 'reflects human history'.

I am making the claim that it reflects human nature. For you to disagree with me would be for you to commit yourself to the position that humans are not predisposed to us-vs-them/in group vs. out group dynamics, whether based on perceptions of race, social class, nationality, etc.

Is that your position?

That's very different to any position espoused so far, and far more mild and broad so I don't wholly disagree (I do think it often gets exaggerated to the point where it drains verisimilitude c.f. Peter V. Brett and The Expanse again). However it does apply solely to humans, and for it to apply to all human-like beings equally would feel rather off imho.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

That's very different to any position espoused so far, and far more mild and broad so I don't wholly disagree

Wow that's super weird that you were arguing with me about things I didn't say. Maybe you should just read and respond to the words that I write instead of assuming that I'm on or vouch for someone else's team.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Wow that's super weird that you were arguing with me about things I didn't say. Maybe you should just read and respond to the words that I write instead of assuming that I'm on or vouch for someone else's team.

If I only that was what I was doing that would be an awesome point.

 

[Cadence]

From a relatively aimless googling of Versimilitude.

https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-verisimilitude#2-writing-exercises-for-verisimilitude

 

[Bohandas]

Trying to avoid these types of discussions by claiming, "Elves are a different species" is just as bad as the claim, "It's just fantasy, orcs aren't real people."

Which is also a valid point. In fact, it would be prudent to remember that even the human characters in fantasy aren't real people.
"If we shadows have offended,
Think but this, and all is mended,
That you have but slumber’d here
While these visions did appear."
-A Midsummer Night's Dream, Act 5, Scene 1

 

[Umbran]

Wow that's super weird that you were arguing with me about things I didn't say. Maybe you should just read and respond to the words that I write instead of assuming that I'm on or vouch for someone else's team.

If I only that was what I was doing that would be an awesome point.

Mod Note:
Folks, neither one of you looks particularly mature, thoughtful, or constructive at this moment. Please cut out the pointless headbutting.

 

[Cadence]

Which is also a valid point. In fact, it would be prudent to remember that even the human characters in fantasy aren't real people.
"If we shadows have offended,
Think but this, and all is mended,
That you have but slumber’d here
While these visions did appear."
-A Midsummer Night's Dream, Act 5, Scene 1

"Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes and forgot."
- A Midsummer Night's Dream, Neil Gaiman

 

[JThursby]

There's a catch-22 with fantasy stereotypes. If your fantasy species have familiar traits, cultures, aesthetics, etc, then you have created something most find derivative, some find offensive, but it's generally what the public expects and wants from their fantasy role playing. If you deliberately go out of your way to avoid or subvert these stereotypes you create something that the general TTRPG crowd is disinterested in and it becomes a niche product. Eberron is like this. It's perhaps the most contemporary successful rebuking of conventional fantasy stereotypes in the TTRPG space and has been doing so since the mid aughts, but as a consequence many if not most D&D players have no interest playing in the setting. I adore Eberron in part because it finds new and interesting directions to replace the old and tired Tolkien-esque characterizations, but from what I can tell I am an outlier in this regard.

With this dilemma in mind, I think it's important to differentiate between legitimate praise/criticism of fantasy writing and bad faith troll bait. What a fantasy writer chooses to emphasize in their world should be scrutinized, thought about and discussed. For the vast majority of TTRPG stuff this doesn't necessitate declaring it an untouchable classic that should never change, or a degenerate icon of bigotry.