Racial variety

[Jolly Giant]

The core rule books are created to be as generic as possible, so that the system can easily be used in as many different settings as possible. Therefore there is little to no references to culturural or ethnic matters. This is why a lot of people criticize them for being "crunch-heavy" and not having enough "fluff"; they don't realize that by leaving the "fluff" out of the core books they've made the game a whole lot more versatile! Let the various setting-books deal with such matters, surely the game would not improve by having "core fluff"? That's what setting-specific books are for!

How many variants of skintone any one race has does not belong in the core books! Sure, in a campaign setting book it could very well say that humans from that continent have light skin and humans from this continent have dark skin, or the elves from the other continent have golden-brown skin. That's just fine, but it does not belong in the core books! What the core books contain are the core rules. Surely, nobody needs the PHB to tell them that some humans are more pink than others??? It might not even be true for some campaign worlds. Does the PHB even mention skin color when describing races? Not IIRC...

Sure, in the name of political correctness they could have more racial variations in their illustrations. There doesn't seem to be any "native americans" or "asians" in the books, but at least they have the "african" monk, eh?

And please don't put any modern political thinking into why drow have dark skin! They stem from 1500 years old norse mythology, for crying out loud! I seriously doubt the point of that viking myth was to say that anyone with dark skin is evil!

 

[Desdichado]

I wonder if the consumer base of D&D is predominantly white male. And I wonder if that's a cause or effect of the way standard settings portray races.

I don't think you'll get very far with the drow=dark skin debate. Drow are specifically and probably quite deliberately unlike any racial group to exist on our planet, and any connections you try to make will likely be extremely reaching, IMO.

 

[Emiricol]

I wonder if the consumer base of D&D is predominantly white male.

From what I've seen, yes

And I wonder if that's a cause or effect of the way standard settings portray races.

I'd say "neither".

 

[shilsen]

I would like to hear other peoples feelings or oppinions about this lack of racial variety in non-human races. I for one feel like it is way past time for WoTC to step forward in time and realize their game is played by people with a multitude of racial backgrounds. The games above have.

A lot of previous posters have already made the points I would, so I'll just say that I don't think anyone in my gaming group (just for the record, I'm Indian and everyone else is American and white) has a problem with the PHB races not reflecting racial diversity. Nor do they view the PHB races as predominantly white. And that is because the PHB races aren't races - they're species. I can see why you make the analogy you do, but I don't think it can be logically carried very far.

I'm running a Greyhawk game now, and there's very little racism within the individual races IMC. As Terry Pratchett points out in the Discworld series, racism doesn't work very well in a world where numerous intelligent species exist. Black, brown and white live in harmony, because they're all ganging up on green.

 

[kirinke]

gets a bucket and calls the local spell-slinger to cast Quench.
This is devolving into a flame war peoples. Also, this thread is beginning to sound against the rulesish..
i'm reporting the thread. sowwy....

 

[Dirigible]

But I would like to hear other peoples feelings or oppinions about this lack of racial variety in non-human races.

It's simply an aspect of the general lack of cultural diversity amongst non-humans.

There are something like 6,000 languages on Earth... which probably means over 6,000 cultures. A lot of settings at least make an attempt at a nod at a pretense of a reflection of something like this; most kingdoms have a separate culture, for instance.

Non-humans, insofar as I have seen, are lunped with subraces, and that's it. They get little in the say of subgroups or cultures.

 

[kirinke]

thwacks people upside the head with a wake-up stick.
remember, this is just a game. it is only a game.
if it were reality, elves would be toting the virtues of mcdonald's burgers and dragons would be in the army.
^_^
you can have as much racial vareity as you want in a game or as little. Dungeons and dragons is supposed to be versitle and flexible. bogging it down with political correctedness takes away the fun. and now you'll be saying that D&D is the work of the Tanar'ri and all works should be burned and the ashes sown with holy water.

 

[Malk]

i would surely report any thread that caused discomfort but just looking on i think this thread is going quite civily indeed, just my two cents

 

[kirinke]

ach. going overboard. lol
but truth be told, this thread is kinda silly.
i saw a show on the science channel, one in which scientists took blood samples from several people from vastly different origins. A full-blooded american-indian (i forget the tribe), an african and a person from russia (or something like that). Turns out they all had a single common anscestor way back when and are literally cousins (many times removed).

what i'm saying is. we are all human. we are all mutts. black, white, yellow and brown. it's just an absence or abudance of skin pigment. and even white people darken when exposed to sun. ^_^

 

[Dirigible]

Chill out, kirinke. Like Malk said, no-one is getting offended.