D&D 5E Orc or Half-Orc?

[The Mirrorball Man]

5e, by contrast, has a VERY different mission statement, and so we should not be at all surprised that nothing similar happened. WotC wants people who played half-orcs in previous editions to be excited to play half-orcs in the new edition. The percentage of people who will be stoked to play orcs instead of half-orcs *regardless of whether it's a good idea or not* is a tiny, tiny fraction of a percent.

It's not only true but a perfectly reasonable argument as well. On the other hand, it is based on the idea that D&D can only appeal to people who have played D&D in the past, and that catering to their nostalgia is more important than anything else. I don't subscribe to that point of view - in fact, I'd say that Orcs are a more iconic element of D&D than Half-Orcs.

 

[Minigiant]

One way I handled them and seen them handled before I'd make orcs a mongrel race created by magic. Human for size, ogre for strength, dwarf for fortitude and some loyalty, some hobgoblin for love of battle, an a dash of elf to make them less slow and stupid. Then half orcs and orog are orcs with too much human or ogre, design by design (my dm's setting) or accident (my setting).

The previous edition made orcs too savage, stupid, or instinctively evil to play in multiple ways. So they broke them away with halforcs and the new race was injected into tradition.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Now that I've read the MM, I think a slightly different take on Half-Orcs would make sense, if Half-Orcs really have to be in the PHB: all kinds of Orc hybrids as subraces: Orc-Humans, but also Orc-Dwarves, Orc-Halflings and Orc-Goblins.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Now that I've read the MM, I think a slightly different take on Half-Orcs would make sense, if Half-Orcs really have to be in the PHB: all kinds of Orc hybrids as subraces: Orc-Humans, but also Orc-Dwarves, Orc-Halflings and Orc-Goblins.

My best friend in high school wrote his own half(ling)-orc race, and played an assassin for our major campaign. It was awesome.

(Hi Rick.)

 

[Joe Liker]

This entire discussion hinges on the supposition that Orcs and Half-Orcs are these fixed, immutable quantities, and that when you use either term, everyone automatically knows precisely what you mean down to the tiniest nuance.

In reality, different DMs have very different ideas of what an Orc is. To some, they are irredeemably evil and therefore unsuitable as a PC race. To others, they are merely primitive humanoids with aggressive tendencies but every bit as much potential for heroics as any other sentient being. And to yet others, they are basically just uglier humans with a certain reputation.

The fact that Half-Orcs are a distinct race indicates that the designers of 5e do not see them as identical to Orcs. You may disagree with their design, but if so, you've wandered off into homebrew territory. You might as well ask the forums why unicorns exist or why hags don't dissolve in the rain.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

The fact that Half-Orcs are a distinct race indicates that the designers of 5e do not see them as identical to Orcs. You may disagree with their design, but if so, you've wandered off into homebrew territory. You might as well ask the forums why unicorns exist or why hags don't dissolve in the rain.

That's a very odd thing to say. This is a forum: by definition, everything we talk about here is either our opinions or our ideas about D&D - yes, sometimes we may not completely see eye to eye with the designers, but what should we do? Just quote the PHB at each other? In my opinion, Orcs and Half-Orcs are so similar that it would be more interesting to have Orcs as a playable race, some people agree, others disagree.

 

[Joe Liker]

That's a very odd thing to say. This is a forum: by definition, everything we talk about here is either our opinions or our ideas about D&D ...

No, sometimes we talk about the facts of D&D, and I was pointing out that your opinion runs directly counter to the facts.

By all means, carry on with the discussion if it entertains you.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

No, sometimes we talk about the facts of D&D, and I was pointing out that your opinion runs directly counter to the facts.

I've expressed an opinion about the facts. It's actually pretty common. Everyone can relax.

 

[TrippyHippy]

WotC has been very clear about their goals with this edition, which include better serving fans of previous editions and encouraging them to sample and convert. They deliberately chose to include all of the class/race combos from previous PHBs in order to appeal to the BROADEST possible audience.

If you want to see an edition intended to significantly innovate and carve out new space for the game, you need look no further than 4e. (Where separating out high elves as Eladrin is perhaps a similar innovation to the sort you're proposing.) Some folks liked that, some didn't -- but it happened because it was within the mission statement of the edition.

5e, by contrast, has a VERY different mission statement, and so we should not be at all surprised that nothing similar happened. WotC wants people who played half-orcs in previous editions to be excited to play half-orcs in the new edition. The percentage of people who will be stoked to play orcs instead of half-orcs *regardless of whether it's a good idea or not* is a tiny, tiny fraction of a percent.

And again, folks who actually like the idea of replacing half-orcs with rules identical orcs can totally do that without needing any support from WotC whatsoever.

With respect, I think you are conflating a whole raft of other non related issues in with one very specific issue. The people who disliked 4E, for the main, did not cite the Orc/Half-Orc debate as a major problem…

The point about Half-Orcs/Orcs is that, in a practical sense, they are the same thing. In a culture that explicitly rapes and pillages all the time, the chances are that most of them come from some bastardised background to one degree or another. Why create an artificial division for flatly no reason whatsoever? If people baulk at the idea of playing Orcs as a straight Race, then why single these out and not Teiflings, Drow and Dragonborn? (All of which are listed as optional, or ‘uncommon’ anyway).

 

[steeldragons]

Now that I've read the MM, I think a slightly different take on Half-Orcs would make sense, if Half-Orcs really have to be in the PHB: all kinds of Orc hybrids as subraces: Orc-Humans, but also Orc-Dwarves, Orc-Halflings and Orc-Goblins.

I remember a table somewhere (1e MM?) that had a percentage breakdown of the different "orc + other" combo's. And i did up a more simplified list myself back in the 80s. Haven't had cause to use it in...oh, forever...but this convo is definitely leading me to think it needs to be dusted off.

Now, obviously, Orc-Dwarf & Orc-Halfling wouldn't be on the list. Thems good eatin'!

But stat's for, sy: Orc/Human, Orc/Ogre (which we already have as the Orog), Orc/Goblin would be a cool amount of sub-racey detail I think. Orc/Hobgoblins, Orc/Gnolls, et al., are either redundant or a step too far, methinks...Orc/Troll warrants some consideration, though.