Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Races: Evolution, Fantasy Stereotypes & Escapism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Malmuria" data-source="post: 8531268" data-attributes="member: 7030755"><p>This description doesn't help me very much as a DM for a few overlapping reasons</p><p></p><p>• I think culture- and society-forming humanoid groups ought to be presented as complex and with free will. These orcs hunt, forage, make arts and crafts (and possibly trade), have a way of relating socially (even through violence), and raise young. They should have all the detail in a setting that groups of humans have. This is especially true if this is a playable race; players will want their characters to have free will in order to shape their characters backgrounds (beyond just being another Drizzt). They will probably want their orc character to be able to accompany the party into town without constantly roleplaying hostile interactions.</p><p></p><p>• There is a strong implied setting in the above description, namely a Keep on the Borderlands-style frontier. First, the<a href="https://alldeadgenerations.blogspot.com/2021/07/classic-play-v-aesthetic.html" target="_blank"> frontier setting</a> is strongly reminiscent of the American frontier (vast stretches of <a href="https://blogofholding.com/?p=7182" target="_blank">"free" land</a>, militarized border towns and "homesteads," cash economy, and of course the Others who threaten "civilization"). But it's also very handwavy: there's civilization and then a generic expanse "out there" where orcs, goblins, bugbears, hobgoblins, etc all live. There's no sense of who controls what territory, whose allied with whom, etc. They are simultaneously described as only forming "loose knit" groups and being powerful enough to threaten entire kingdoms. In other words, the king has an orc problem, and somehow 4-6 adventurers are the best way to deal with that problem, and everything else is shunted offscreen. </p><p></p><p>• re: inherent evil: if creatures are formed by demon ichor on the 83rd layer of the abyss and are entering the material plane through a portal opened by a wizard, then sure. I suppose that's covered by the "long forgotten" evil in the description, but again feels handwavy, an excuse to create an inherently evil group without providing any texture to the lore. The effect is to constrain the way PCs might interact with this group of creatures.</p><p></p><p>The above might not be problems when in the context of a specific setting. For example, a points of light setting in which there are not vague "realms" but just this one realm, and not orcs inhabiting a featureless wild, but this one specific group of orcs that occupies the forest to the NE. To be clear, it is likely that this setting would still be at least implicitly colonialist, but it would work from a world building perspective. But when you generalize culture-forming humanoid groups in this way, you sort of get the worst of both worlds: both generic, texture-less world building <em>and</em> creatures that grotesquely resemble colonial fantasies of the "other."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Malmuria, post: 8531268, member: 7030755"] This description doesn't help me very much as a DM for a few overlapping reasons • I think culture- and society-forming humanoid groups ought to be presented as complex and with free will. These orcs hunt, forage, make arts and crafts (and possibly trade), have a way of relating socially (even through violence), and raise young. They should have all the detail in a setting that groups of humans have. This is especially true if this is a playable race; players will want their characters to have free will in order to shape their characters backgrounds (beyond just being another Drizzt). They will probably want their orc character to be able to accompany the party into town without constantly roleplaying hostile interactions. • There is a strong implied setting in the above description, namely a Keep on the Borderlands-style frontier. First, the[URL='https://alldeadgenerations.blogspot.com/2021/07/classic-play-v-aesthetic.html'] frontier setting[/URL] is strongly reminiscent of the American frontier (vast stretches of [URL='https://blogofholding.com/?p=7182']"free" land[/URL], militarized border towns and "homesteads," cash economy, and of course the Others who threaten "civilization"). But it's also very handwavy: there's civilization and then a generic expanse "out there" where orcs, goblins, bugbears, hobgoblins, etc all live. There's no sense of who controls what territory, whose allied with whom, etc. They are simultaneously described as only forming "loose knit" groups and being powerful enough to threaten entire kingdoms. In other words, the king has an orc problem, and somehow 4-6 adventurers are the best way to deal with that problem, and everything else is shunted offscreen. • re: inherent evil: if creatures are formed by demon ichor on the 83rd layer of the abyss and are entering the material plane through a portal opened by a wizard, then sure. I suppose that's covered by the "long forgotten" evil in the description, but again feels handwavy, an excuse to create an inherently evil group without providing any texture to the lore. The effect is to constrain the way PCs might interact with this group of creatures. The above might not be problems when in the context of a specific setting. For example, a points of light setting in which there are not vague "realms" but just this one realm, and not orcs inhabiting a featureless wild, but this one specific group of orcs that occupies the forest to the NE. To be clear, it is likely that this setting would still be at least implicitly colonialist, but it would work from a world building perspective. But when you generalize culture-forming humanoid groups in this way, you sort of get the worst of both worlds: both generic, texture-less world building [I]and[/I] creatures that grotesquely resemble colonial fantasies of the "other." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Races: Evolution, Fantasy Stereotypes & Escapism
Top