D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[MGibster]

I hardly think the original meaning of the word has any actual use in D&D.

::The Druid, Bard, and Barbarian's eyes shift back and forth furtively::

 

[Incenjucar]

It makes sense to bring in orcs when you want an enemy that charges really effectively or can move ridiculously heavy loads, like hauling in a whole damned ballista for a heist.

 

[Guest 85555]

Though that does leave human bandits as a perfectly good alternative to orc bandits.

And that can and should work too. But I think people can also see the difference, at a sort of gut level reaction, to being attacked by ferocious monsters than human bandits. It just gets at something primal I think

 

[Incenjucar]

And that can and should work too. But I think people can also see the difference, at a sort of gut level reaction, to being attacked by ferocious monsters than human bandits. It just gets at something primal I think

So, human guards?

 

[Chaosmancer]

True it is based on something that tends to work like I said. But I think when it becomes an artificial limit, and perhaps you are not doing this, is when people say protagonists should or must punch up in these kinds of films. I get that you generally want to see a hero going after a worthy foe. My point is a homeless character can be just as worthy as a villain as a white rich baron.

Also there is nothing wrong with showing the humanity of the villain too, and if you explore villains and bad guys who aren't just sitting in a penthouse suite at the top of the food chain, you can get more interesting and villains with pathos sometimes

We might not disagree as much as we think here. I don't know. I am not saying this isn't grounded in something real just that putting some kind of cap on it as a rule is bad (and I am not a huge fan when critics go after a piece of media because they feel the hero or writer isn't punching up----it just doesn't strike me as a good criticism if the set up works otherwise.


The wheel king isn't low class. We don't really know much about him, but he seems to have a lot of resources and influence, and I am guessing he is or was a palace eunuch. I get the rest of what you are saying, I am not saying he is a good guy. But I am saying he is a character who is a victim of people who held greater power over him and I think you can make the case that he is a marginalized figure too (his argument actually does make some sense, the Michelle Yeoh character he is appealing to has only just recently had her own insight against living a life of violence and frankly he almost seems on the cusp of it as well). You can even make an argument I think that had Yeoh's character showed him more compassion during that appeal, the outcome would be very different. That doesn't wipe away his sins of burying people alive (though the woman he buried alive was a raging psycho)---but he clearly has serious serious issues. To be clear though I am not advocating for any changes to the story. It works wonderfully as written and all the themes connect nicely (he is the wheel king after all so he needs to be that role at the end of the movie). I am just pointing out he strikes me as an example of a villain who is a lot more downtrodden (still very much a villain but much more interesting because of the complexity added in with his motivations and background)

So people sitting in penthouse suites can't have their humanity shown? Obviously not. Can they not have Pathos? Obviously not. It is easy to pick and nit at small details and argue the extremes of those statements. It is harder to look at things as moving pieces.

You keep trying to paint this like there are people who hold these inflexible standards, and maybe some do, but that doesn't mean all standards are bad just because some people are inflexible.

I am happy to bring it back to a previous topic if we got steered off course by this tangent. Frankly I don't remember the details of how we arrived here. So I won't push the point further if you don't want me to

OKay

I think there is a difference though between power in the sense of the character being physically more capable and power in the sense of things like wealth, resources, privilege. Robocop isn't a film I would invoke as an example of punching down (except perhaps when he is taking out street level thugs I suppose). In Robocop, the villain is OmniCorp. An organization so powerful they made Robocop (and the president of Omnicorp is practically depicted as God). But to your point you also have villains like Clarence Bodicker and his men who are lower in a way lower I suppose (but Bodicker is still a kingpin).

Is Robocop the monster? I am not so sure about that. I do think he can serve as a commentary on American culture and its love for firearms, but he seems like more of a Jesus figure to me in the film. And a sort of tragic hero who is trying to reconcile his humanity with the transformation OmniCorp has thrust upon him through technology.

I see the man inside the machine as a tragic figure. The Robocop, the machine itself, is a monster. That is why the good man's struggle is tragic.

 

[Minigiant]

This is provably false

I didn't say that they didn't exist.

I said TSR and WOTC never promoted them.

It's not even in 5e

Non-barbaric orcs aren't in the forefront of the main settings. They aren't in the PHB. They aren't in the MM or DMG.

It's always some niche thing. It's never fleshed out. Expansion is so deep most fans won't see it.

Orcs aren't fleshed out.
Half Orcs aren't fleshed out.
Half elves aren't fleshed out.

 

[Guest 85555]

So people sitting in penthouse suites can't have their humanity shown? Obviously not. Can they not have Pathos? Obviously not. It is easy to pick and nit at small details and argue the extremes of those statements. It is harder to look at things as moving pieces.

Of course they can. But sometimes they aren't as relatable as the downtrodden. If I want to make a more relatable villain, I would try to make one with challenges and grievances more people can understand.

You keep trying to paint this like there are people who hold these inflexible standards, and maybe some do, but that doesn't mean all standards are bad just because some people are inflexible.

Fair enough. Again like I said, maybe you have a very relaxed attitude around the whole punching up thing. Whoever I have encountered it before though it is usually used as a way of just saying something is bad without going into any other detail

I see the man inside the machine as a tragic figure. The Robocop, the machine itself, is a monster. That is why the good man's struggle is tragic.

We might be splitting hairs but I tend to see it a little differently which is fine. It is somewhat complex imagery so I don't think you are wrong or anything.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Here I think we have a key point of disagreement. I wouldn't use the term people to describe such beings

Why not? There is nothing about liking humanity required in personhood. We aren't special

I don't think it is. We are talking about fictional races. We aren't talking about applying it to humans in the real world. Maybe it would be a concern if a race of aliens appeared tomorrow and people used it as an argument to annihilate them (but again real world versus not real world). Also I think the concept of person is a very difficult one to nail down, so it is fair to ask if there are any qualities that would make something not a person.

No, we aren't talking about fictional races, we are talking about the definition of personhood. And you are trying to state that people with a drive or compulsion aren't people. I hope I don't need to explain to you why declaring that behavorial compulsions removing personhood are deeply problematic.

 

[Maxperson]

I didn't say that they didn't exist.

I said TSR and WOTC never promoted them.

It's not even in 5e

Non-barbaric orcs aren't in the forefront of the main settings. They aren't in the PHB. They aren't in the MM or DMG.

It's always some niche thing. It's never fleshed out. Expansion is so deep most fans won't see it.

Orcs aren't fleshed out.
Half Orcs aren't fleshed out.
Half elves aren't fleshed out.

They're in Eberron which is a main setting. They are in Wildemount which is a setting(no idea how popular). The SHOULD be in the Realms since they exist in the Realms, but WotC's bad habit of putting out subpar setting books with little real information excised that one.

 

[Maxperson]

Why not? There is nothing about liking humanity required in personhood. We aren't special

No, we aren't talking about fictional races, we are talking about the definition of personhood. And you are trying to state that people with a drive or compulsion aren't people. I hope I don't need to explain to you why declaring that behavorial compulsions removing personhood are deeply problematic.

It's 100% about fictional races unless you can show me a non-human person in the real world. Person=human in the real world.