Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cryptos" data-source="post: 4377203" data-attributes="member: 58439">I think half-orcs are an artifact of compromise between wanting to play monstrous races and maintaining the heroic fantasy D&amp;D flavor, made somewhat obsolete by increasing ECL options in 3.x and then even more obsolete by the PC race construction in 4e.&nbsp; I don't think they have as much of a place anymore, as if they ever really did.&nbsp; They got my vote.My second choice would have been half-elf.&nbsp; Really, though, all the races have some deplorable aspects to them.&nbsp; Halflings are a direct Tolkien rip-off, and really, what race, even small as they are would accept being called 'halfling'?&nbsp; Tiefling is a cutesy name for a race that started out as people wanting to play a conflicted anti-hero badass, another race that takes the place of having to come up with an original backstory.&nbsp; Dwarves have become somewhat boring and predictable.&nbsp; Regardless of the D&amp;D setting, there are almost always dwarves, and they are almost always the typical dwarves.&nbsp; Dragonborn, again, what kind of name is that?&nbsp; Would humans go around calling saying &quot;Huzzah!&nbsp; We are the Monkeyborn!&quot;?&nbsp; What's with the dreadlocks?&nbsp; And the &quot;we're humanoid mammals, but we lay eggs and look like reptiles&quot;?One problem is that races in fantasy gaming seem to come from a very short list of sources: anthropomorphics, or furries; Tolkien (elves, dwarves, etc); monsters; or the 'badass' race from 'somewhere else' (plane or world) that look suspiciously like humans, but 'cooler' (Giths, etc.)&nbsp; Another problem is that new settings tend to kitchen sink racial options, offering everything that came before, plus their own, making the worlds seem crowded.&nbsp; I wish that someone would have the balls to cut some of the standards out of it every now and then.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cryptos, post: 4377203, member: 58439"] I think half-orcs are an artifact of compromise between wanting to play monstrous races and maintaining the heroic fantasy D&D flavor, made somewhat obsolete by increasing ECL options in 3.x and then even more obsolete by the PC race construction in 4e. I don't think they have as much of a place anymore, as if they ever really did. They got my vote. My second choice would have been half-elf. Really, though, all the races have some deplorable aspects to them. Halflings are a direct Tolkien rip-off, and really, what race, even small as they are would accept being called 'halfling'? Tiefling is a cutesy name for a race that started out as people wanting to play a conflicted anti-hero badass, another race that takes the place of having to come up with an original backstory. Dwarves have become somewhat boring and predictable. Regardless of the D&D setting, there are almost always dwarves, and they are almost always the typical dwarves. Dragonborn, again, what kind of name is that? Would humans go around calling saying "Huzzah! We are the Monkeyborn!"? What's with the dreadlocks? And the "we're humanoid mammals, but we lay eggs and look like reptiles"? One problem is that races in fantasy gaming seem to come from a very short list of sources: anthropomorphics, or furries; Tolkien (elves, dwarves, etc); monsters; or the 'badass' race from 'somewhere else' (plane or world) that look suspiciously like humans, but 'cooler' (Giths, etc.) Another problem is that new settings tend to kitchen sink racial options, offering everything that came before, plus their own, making the worlds seem crowded. I wish that someone would have the balls to cut some of the standards out of it every now and then. [/QUOTE]

Verification