gin said:
Okay I am really tired of the whole its based on european fantasy so it can't be modified even a little bit or it would loose flavor argument.
Well then I think people have misunderstood your point, or you've misstated it. Nobody is saying it can't be modified. Quite the opposite - we're saying it can and we do. We're explaining why it IS what it currently IS. Many of the responses then go on to explain just how they HAVE modified it.
I guess thats okay, but god forbid that my elf isnt fair skinned with green eyes. Would it really hurt for WoTC to change the description so that my elf can be dark skinned,(and not mistaken for a drow).
Why "god forbid"? Did somebody tell you it was a BAD thing to make an elf with dark skin that isn't a Drow? Nothing in the rules is preventing it - and in fact for the DM, making adjustments to what is presented in the rules to suit his needs and tastes is repeatedly encouraged. Although the rulebooks may give a "standard" range of skin, hair, and eye colors there's a good reason why it doesn't say more on the subject of skin color - it's irrelevant to running a character. The only limitations placed on players create for their PC's is what the
DM will allow. If there's something about the game that you as DM don't like - change it. There's no reason your game can't have black, non-drow elves except if you don't want it to.
Once again I'm not asking for an "African" elf, I'm not african. What I'm asking for is more diversity in appearance of the non-human PC races. I thought the difference between an elf and a human was culture, lifestyle, beliefs. If this is the case what does their traditional appearance have to do with it.
Because then you don't have an elf - you have a HUMAN with differing culture, lifestyle and beliefs. To have an elf - a D&D elf - you at least need the pointy ears. No, you don't need the fair skin and golden hair, that just happens to be traditional because D&D elves are derived heavily from fictional sources that depict them that way.
Sometimes I wonder if it would be hard for white gamers to suspend their disbelief and support something like this.
I haven't seen anyone YET disagree with you on this. Can those descriptions change? Certainly. And in fact probably WILL because the rules themselves have begun to move away from the pseudo-medieval European stereotypes of fantasy because they are increasingly perceived as being limiting of the potential of the game.
When the game was first created it was based on the fantasy stereotypes that the authors had read in fiction. Successive versions have changed, albeit slowly and subtly, based on an ever increasing and changing body of fantasy fiction being drawn upon by its revisors. Case in point: the dual-wielding ranger was introduced in 2E based on Drizzt - the LG, dual-wielding drow ranger of fiction. But, one of the biggest reasons that that default range of physical appearance remains in the PH is that the PH is NOT a replacement for a detailed game setting. It provides a default because a default is NEEDED - just as the Greyhawk gods are provided as defaults. In a game where polytheism is the norm and deity choice affects player characters you NEED a default range of deities.
Its funny though that anytime a black gamer or asian gamer, or native american player, or indian player selects a demihuman they are expected to.
Expected by who? I don't know that there's anyone on the boards who is both bigoted and foolish enough to say such a thing. They wouldn't expect an Asian gamer to play a demihuman any more than they would expect them to always play an Asian Human, and no more than they would expect me - an old, white guy - to play only old, white guys. I play male and female characters, black, white, asian, hispanic, native american, young and old, and of all other shapes, colors, and sizes. Doubly so because as DM I play everbody who is not a PC. With few exceptions you'll get the same response from everyone else.
In fact, you're probably preaching to the choir here. As a group, roleplayers are almost undoubtedly going to be the least bigoted, racist, or biased people you're likely to find. That's
because they regularly assume the role of people of other races, cultures, ethnicities, and physical appearances. They are EXPERIENCED at putting themselves in someone elses place and understand more readily how our attitudes and assumptions affect behavior towards others. It is not by accident that counselors and mental health professionals use roleplaying - even D&D itself - for that purpose.
I guess what I'm trying to say is for 4th edition who would this really hurt and why? As opposed to making a wider group of gamers able to relate to the game and their characters better.
No reason it would hurt and no reason whatever NOT to change it unless people think that the pseudo-medieval European variety of fantasy is endangered and needs legal protection to be saved. I guess I learned too much from MLK - I don't judge gamers - or their characters - by the color of their skin but by the content of their "character." Skin color for a PC is as irrelevant as it is for a player and therefore I don't have a problem with certain non-human races being described as they traditionally have been since the inception of the game. But changing that is no skin off my teeth either.
!), and I'm neither short nor do I have dark tan or woody brown skin, fair hair or blue eyes.
