How to describe a race?

What term should be used to describe race in D&D?


Roman

First Post
Rich baker posted the following on his blog:

Rich Baker said:
Still at work doing the writing pass on the Player's Handbook. The last couple of days I've been working on Chapter 2, Making Characters, and I hit a roadblock that I've hit before on several projects: How do you define character race without using the word "species"?

We don't like "species" all that much because it sounds rather clinical or scientific, and breaks the mood. But we really can't just say "race" and leave it at that, since some portion of the folks who pick up the Player's Handbook and read it for the first time will automatically think that the phrase "You can choose your character's race" means that they can decide whether their characters have Asian features, or African features, or Caucasian features, or whatever.

You can try something like "the world is inhabited by many different peoples," but now it sounds like you're talking about variations of culture and language. You can try something like "kindreds" but that implies kindreds of what? For someone who isn't familiar with standard fantasy fare, "species" really is the best word for it. But it doesn't look pretty. Such are the trials of the writing team.

Apparently WotC needs some help in coming up with alternate terms for race. These will likely not be used in lieu of race in the texts, but will be employed in the description of the race to clarify the concept for new players and to distinguish it from the real world useage of the word race.

Perhaps we could help come up with an alternate term that can be used to describe a race.

The folks at WotC forums (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=925443) already came up with some ideas on top of those (species, peoples, kindred) that were mentioned in the blog:

kinds
lineages
kin
breed
strains
types
varieties
heritages

What term(s) would you prefer were used as an alternate to the race to describe and define it for new players?

I don't really have a problem with using 'species' for the purpose, or any number of other scientific taxonomic terms such as 'genera', 'orders', 'families', etcetera, or even better 'hominids' or 'hominians', but it is true, as Rich Baker pointed out, that they are not entirely appropriate to the fantasy flavor. 'Species' is probably the least out of place and most familiar to potential readors from all of these 'scientific' options, but even that does not have the fantasy flair.

I would probably go with using "humanoid(s)" as the term to describe what race means. To take the cue from Rich Baker, I would say something along the lines of: "The world is inhabited by many different types of humanoids..."

Another possibility would be to return to the 2E descriptions of other races as "demi-humans", but despite its history it sounds somewhat awkward and probably would not be helpful to new players for whom the description is primarily meant in the first place.

Still another option would be to go along with the time honored D&D tradition and to make up a new term. It should probably sound vaguely similar to existing terms. All I could come up with was "humanid". The problem is that this does not have much descriptive power to new readers, but because it sounds and reads similar to human it evokes some kinship to humans, but without the preconceived notions that existing words would call forth.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, "species" means "a specified type of something" and "Race" means "a lineage."

So I would use the phrase, "Choose a specific lineage for your character, such as human, elf, dwarf, or halfling."
 


I found that a bit odd when I read it in the blog. Has it caused problems in previous editions, or is he looking for a solution to a probem that doesn't actually exist?

"Race" is just fine. If really necessary, "Race (such as human, elf or dwarf"). If that really isn't clear enough, then there's nothing wrong with "species".
 

True, I'd much rather just see "Race" than something "all new and innovative!"

Race works just fine and is something that I think almost anyone would understand at first glance.
 

Race I think is the best term, still. I think they just need to make a distinction that there is Race - human, dwarf, elf etc and that within a Race, further distinctions can be made using Culture. In the human race (often used interchangably with species) culture has a greater influence over the development of a group of individuals than the large classifications we use to define groups as caucasian, asian, etc.
 

Morrus said:
I found that a bit odd when I read it in the blog. Has it caused problems in previous editions, or is he looking for a solution to a probem that doesn't actually exist?

I also found it surprising, but we don't really know. Perhaps WotC has had some feedback on this causing problems in previous editions for a small minority of people.
 

I'm sorry but I have to say this - HOW POINTLESS!!!

Race is an accepted term, already used by all current gamers. OK it sometimes needs an explanation when you're introducing a new gamer, but has anyone ever had a problem with it. Class in D&D doesn't refer to social status - are we going to change that as well?
 

Race works perfectly fine. Here's some definitions that show D&D uses it correctly-

1. a group of persons related by common descent or heredity.
2. a population so related.
5. any people united by common history, language, cultural traits
7. Zoology. a variety; subspecies.
8. a natural kind of living creature: the race of fishes.


from-

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race
 

Unfortunately, it's a valid concern because in our real world the term "race" is loaded with a lot of stupid assumptions. It's largely nonsensical as we use it today, an artificial way originally intended to lump people together by skin color or other superficial features.

Here's a decent Wiki-source point on the topic: "Mainstream scientists have argued that race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from custom, have many exceptions, have many gradations, and that the numbers of races delineated vary according to the culture making the racial distinctions; thus they reject the notion that any definition of race pertaining to humans can have taxonomic rigour and validity."

It would be dandy if "race" were specifically a fantasy roleplaying game term; then we'd have no problem identifying elves vs. dwarves vs. humans vs. whatever as legitimate "races." But real world human racial references sorta seep into the mix unnecessarily. Some folks don't appreciate that.

If I had to write a header in my own roleplaying game book for the character creation process, it would probably be People, Lineage or Heritage.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top