Ethnic groups

Originally posted by Azure Trance
Personally speaking, I don't see what's wrong with applying racial modifiers to different human groups in D&D as long as their culture justifies being more intelligent, or more wise, or more urbane.

*cough*

I'll give you some real world examples of where that would be very wrong because what you suggest sounds susiciously like...racial stereotypes...

Having been stuck in a few different stereotypes for most of my life, I find them demeaning even when its considered a 'bonus'.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Piratecat said:
This is an incredibly sensitive subject. Tread lightly, folks, and show good judgment.

Thanks!

Definitely. That's why I try to avoid going too close to the real world. When I do base a group on real world inspiration, I try to use the details to break up any stereotypes. And then it's also a good idea to occasionally break the stereotypes of your campaign as well. After all, not all elves use longswords or rapiers, and not all dwarves use hammers and axes.

Also, Kitana's point about culture is a good one. Imagine a dwarf being raised among elves...
 

KitanaVorr, good point.

This is one of the reasons why I shy away from ability score bonuses for human cultures. Sadly, I have seen too much prejudice in this world.

(In the case of fantasy races, the differences between rock gnomes, deep gnomes, and forest gnomes are fairly pronounced. Also, I feel far more comfortable assigning bonuses or penalties to imaginary races than imaginary humans.)

Another way to differentiate cultures is through weapons and equipment. Some items may be strongly tied to a culture, so that other cultures identify it with a given culture. Cultures can and should have a distinctive look for clothing and other equipment. Some nomadic cultures, such as the ancient Scythians, were known for bows designed to be easy to use from horseback.
 
Last edited:

There is NO way I would recommend anybody try to tack different ability bonuses or penalties to any of humankind as we know it today. I've found such attempts to be insulting and inaccurate. With fantasy humanity there is a little more leeway, but there's still a potential for abuse.

I do want my world to be even more diverse than the real world, and that includes physical in terms of skin, eye, and hair coloration and general stature.

Regional templates is an idea I'm trying to stew up for my campaign world. Perhaps if I saw a few examples to work from? ;)
 

Kilmore said:
Regional templates is an idea I'm trying to stew up for my campaign world. Perhaps if I saw a few examples to work from? ;)

What kind of examples are you looking for? I wouldn't mind sharing some of mine, but most of what is done is for elves rather than humans (haven't gotten too far with the humans yet).
 

The WoT game is a great example of how to do this. It makes 3-4 skills "class skills" for anyone coming from a specific area. They also have regional feats - and the bonus human feat must come from one of the 4-5 regional feats that each region has access to. This does a few good things IMO - In the horsemen kingdom everyone has Ride but you could be the odd man out and are not forced to put skill points into Ride. Everyone gets a more or less even shake using this system and it allows you to pick an origin area that will complement the type of PC you want to develop.

Rolemaster also had some good stuff.
 

Kilmore said:
... nobody's wanting to say what the difference is between people of african, east asian and european ancestory, much less any differences that exist between two relatively close ethnic groups such as the Pashtu and the Urdu.

Probably because, as far as I know, there are no pronounced overall physical differences between real world races beyond the tendency to be prone to/resistant to certain diseases or conditions as a result of genetic drift caused by relative isolation way, way back when. In other words, a difference so subtle that it's not worth bothering with in game terms (can't think of a game right off the bat, save perhaps GURPS with it's 'quirk' level disads, where differences that fine can be quantified with any degree of accuracy).

If you're talking cultural differences, like (for instance) 'Chandians are an outgoing people' or 'Every mage from Pardu seems to be an Evoker', look at the way the Forgotten Realms or Dusk handle this: through Regional Feats. Thus, people from the Chandian Basin can take the Chandian Regional Feat, which grants them a +1 to Diplomacy and Bluff checks. The great magical college of Pardu has more Evokers than anything else, so mages that choose the Pardu Regional Feat get an additional +1 DC to saves made with their Evocation magics.

Making things like that a Regional Feat mean that (1) you're not lockstepping everyone from Chandia into being outgoing and (2) it accounts for people that move somewhere and stay long enough to absorb that culture.

Another means of creating difference within an apparently homogenous culture is to have one culture absorb or surround another, so that assimilation occurs or is resisted. When assimilation occurs but is not yet complete (Chandia went on a spree of conquest under the previous King and took over the Pardu homelands a hundred years or so ago) then you might have a people that can choose between Regional Feats.

Where assimilation is resisted (Chandia took over the great city state of Ur-Pardu 100 years ago; now most Chandian cities have a Parduan Enclave) for whatever means, then you just have two separate cultures occupying the same land: they will retain their own regional feats, but it will be easier for adventurers to learn them. (Wys was raised in a Chandian noble house, but his nurse when he was young was from the Parduan section of town; later on in life he decides to take the Parduan regional feat when he gains a Wizard level).

Another way of creating difference is through the use of philosophical systems that are so different that the parties in question have a great deal of difficulty making themselves underrstood to the other.

In my Greatwood campaign, cultural conflict between the Imperials and the Hill People is one of the central themes. Most Imperials are raised in a culture that reveres a set of mostly Lawful gods. The Hill People revere nature, and follow a Druidic outlook. The two have virtually no basis for communications between them: issues that are vitally important to the Imperials (the state of the soul, the nature of the afterlife and how you get there) have no meaning to the Hill People (they all know they will reincarnate and come back again and again; the idea of leaving the world and spending eternity somewhere else is completely alien to them; they don't even have a word in their language that means 'die' in the sense that you and I in the real world understand that concept).
 

KitanaVorr said:


*cough*

I'll give you some real world examples of where that would be very wrong because what you suggest sounds susiciously like...racial stereotypes...

Having been stuck in a few different stereotypes for most of my life, I find them demeaning even when its considered a 'bonus'.

I suppose you really didn't like Birthright since they gave a +1/-1 to the different ethnicities of Cerelia.

I fool around with human stats because I see it more as different responses to their environment. If it's wilderness like, their going to have a better physical ability. If it's urban-centric then they might have a better mental ability. Of course penalties have to be given to balance it out gamewise; the wilderness people don't know much about the world surrounding them, and maybe the urban centrics have a little less common sense - whatever.

If you think a Halfling with a +2 DEX is really that much quicker then a human, other ability modifiers would be just as plausible (Stronger faster better daft punk). Then you have all the other things you can try to make it more immersive such as regional feats.

Stereotypes are common in real life, both positive and negative; you're not sure about something, you refer to a common stereotype. I'd like to encourage both positive and neg stereotypes in game that stays in game. (I only wanted to emphasize that so it nobody thinks I'm a racist freak. I wouldn't even have this conversation with my players cause they would know it's in-game and fine.)

Like: Those people who all hang around the port of Blackwater are all evil scum. All the citizens of the saintly Vasalar Empire are good, upright citizens. Etc. OOG, well Blackwater might get +2 Dex (help with those sneak attacks) and Vasalar might get +2 Wis (for their crusading clerics). Color is never ever a factor in this process, mostly because since it is Pseudo-Medieval everybodys white. Arabic and Oriental requires lots of traveling to meet, pretty much as in the real world.
 

Azure

Kilmore's topic is human racial differences and ethnic differences...not species differences (haflings versus elves) or differences between urban/rural inhabitants.

Kilmore said:
I'm doing some work on my homebrew world, and I'm in the process of researching and if necessary, creating different ethnic groups. I've done some looking at online encyclopedias and such and to be honest, nobody's wanting to say what the difference is between people of african, east asian and european ancestory, much less any differences that exist between two relatively close ethnic groups such as the Pashtu and the Urdu.

I understand the possible concern about "racial profiling" and I understand that ethnicity is a tricky subject to talk about, but I'm just trying to populate my world. This is about the least abusive place I know online, and this is an issue all homebrewers face.

So if anyone has any resources they can help me out with or even advice on making relatively close groups distinctly different (hopefully with real world examples), I'd appreciate it.


So giving someone racial stereotypes are wrong. I'm not talking about the economic stereotypes etc...I'm talking about the stereotypes based on things like "Are you red, yellow, white or black?" kind of things.

You know the stuff that begins with:

All asian people are....
All white people are...
All latino people are....
All etc....are....

That's the stuff that should never be given ability points to. In game or out of game, its basically racist material.

In my GoT game I have an NPC detective who is an out and out racist...but there are several NPC people in there who don't believe they are and are not as loathsome as the out and out racist NPC but they are indeed racist.

For the PC's, I have two african-american men, one hispanic man, one causcasion man, and one asian-african woman. Do you see where giving them "stereotypes" points would be wrong?
 

If the question is how can it be done tastefully, and not offend anyone I would go with the suggestions that use skill bonuses, or class skill additions. One way to model it would be to use proffessions in Modern. Modify the concept so that each culture had a ,ist of "proffessions" that were applicable. Say your horse riding clan has the proffessions Horseman and Hunter-Gatherer. Each "proffession" includes a set number of additional class skills (which may be substituded for skill bonus) or a feat. Horseman comes with Mounted Combat, and ride, and handle animal as a class skills (+2 if already a class skill). Hunter-Gatherer comes with Track, and Wilderness Lore and Knowledge nature as class skills (+2 if already class skill).
 

Remove ads

Top