D&D General "Red Orc" American Indians and "Yellow Orc" Mongolians in D&D

[doctorbadwolf]

Your constant emphasis and re-emphasis of your ethnos doesn't really have any bearing on this, and is getting very boring. It doesn't lend you any special insight into the transmission of cultural processes; processes of which you repeatedly demonstrate your obliviousness.

Also the implication that only gentiles are saying those depictions are antisemitic is laughable.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It didn't, though. It was about phylactery being offensive to Jews and appropriation, even though I've never in my life heard the Tefillin referred to as a phylactery by anyone Jewish.

The phylactery being offensive literally entered the roleplaying discussion sphere because a Jewish guy talked about it on a podcast.

Disagree all you want, but don't try to act like just because you are surprised by an opinion, no one like you actually holds it and it's just outsiders talking out their hinds.

 

[Hussar]

The rabbit-person and the generic fairy are in Witchlight. Just as lacking in lore as the Owlin.

And where is this "massive explosion" of orc and Drow lore? What books is it in?

fAren't there like four different flavors of drow now?

 

[Scars Unseen]

After all, the old Dragon Magazine had an audience in the 3e days of maybe 50000 readers. How many downloads does Dragon+ get? How many people does it reach? And, wouldn't adding something like these Ecologies address the notion that it's a worthless bundle of advertisements?

I admit I'd love to see the tagline, "Dragon+! Now with content!"

Pretty much. I mean, I'd love to see a revival of Dragon and Dungeon magazines proper, but given how the thing with Paizo went, I can't see anyone on either side willing to entertain that kind of arrangement again. But yeah, use Dragon+ as a revival of the kind of content we used to see in Dragon, and let that be an outlet where WotC kind of fleshes out races and monsters without the upfront costs of publishing full books of that nature (which WotC definitely isn't going to do). Maybe bring back the short stories that used to get published as well. Actually make the service worthwhile, and do an annual bundling of material for print on demand for people are justifiably leery of trusting WotC to keep material online long term.

 

[Micah Sweet]

fAren't there like four different flavors of drow now?

I believe that information is confined to a novel or two at the moment. Nevermind how ham-fisted their inclusion has seemed, with non-evil Drow appearing out of thin air in places someone would have noticed long before now. In any case, none of this stuff is in an RPG document of any kind, even as "errata". And that's just Drow. No news about multiple orc cultures outside of pre-existing Eberron stuff yet.

 

[Voadam]

Sorry, my bad. You called it a trope, so, I misunderstood.

We are good.

Tropes are broad. Besides usually benign stock themes like Our Monsters are Different or Third Act Misunderstanding they also include negative ethnic characterizations/caricatures such as the Greedy Jew or Middle Eastern Terrorists or the Arab Oil Sheikh.

 

[Michael Linke]

There's a few things going on here in terms of practicality.

Real world cultural analogs are basically easier for most people to use and get a handle on. There's less to remember. Numenera has "The Steading" for it's far future setting, and for some reason the Steading has about 10 different nations. Damned if I know what the major cultural differences are or how to get a handle on them. Now in a fantasy game if one was fantasy France, fantasy Italy etc then it would be a whole lot easier.

Real world analogs basically allow our real world knowledge to do a lot of the work for us. Sauridyya is fantasy Arabia. I need to make up some stuff quickly for a game session - so I fill it in with oasis, cities with bazaars, bedouin tribes, a magical cave, camels etc. It's much easier in terms of content creation both for developers and for individual GMs who have to make something up when the players decide to go to the blank part of the map.

Of course, the tension here is that it's easier because we draw on real world knowledge, but the problem is that our real world knowledge might be full of cultural stereotypes which then manifest in the game*. Even if the developers have done their research on Arabian history, have individual GMs? And what about their players?

*And of course there is also the problem that if you remove these things, you might lose some of your appeal, because D&D fans (even the progressive ones) are primarily fans of pop culture and pulp and not of say, serious history.. If I'm making a game set in mythic 9th century China, players will probably want to have magical Kung Fu powers and will complain if the game does not in fact, include such. So rpg design has a real minefield to navigate (and this is one reason I don't have much faith in sensitivity readers.)

GW was able to progressively renovate parts of their IP by taking all of their analog-dependent factions, and mixing in a little extra. Over the course of a few years of narrative evolution, the original cultural analog starts to fade into the background and the new original content starts to draw more attention. This was done VERY heavy handedly with Age of Sigmar, but the evolution of the Legions in their Horus Heresy universe is a better example of how to do this right without invalidating old source material.

 

[Voadam]

So WotC apparently just made GAZ9 Minrothad Guilds and GAZ10 Orcs of Thar POD as they continue making older edition PDFs POD and proceed through the GAZ line.

I thought Minrothad was a decent sourcebook for a sea trade based D&D region.

Looking back I am still struck by how fantastic the back cover description of Orcs of Thar sounds.

Orcs? A Gazetteer about Orcs?

Absolutely. And hobgoblins, kobolds, bugbears, gnolls, trolls, goblins, and more! If you think the only good orc is a dead orc, you're in for a surprise. Orcs (and the other humanoids) are more than just anonymous hordes to be slaughtered for easy experience points - they are creatures with personality, culture, likes and dislikes, and a point of view. Find out all about them in The Orcs of Thar.

The Orcs of Thar is the tenth in a series of Gazetteers for the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS game system. It gives you a comprehensive, in-depth look at the orcs and their world, including:

• Orcs and other humanoids as player characters
• A large full-color map of Thar, home of the orcs
• Complete rules for humanoid spell-casters
• The King of the Orcs, and why you don't want to run into him
• Seperate DM and Player's Booklets
• ORCWARS! , a complete boardgame, also included!

 

[CleverNickName]

Looking back I am still struck by how fantastic the back cover description of Orcs of Thar sounds.

I know, right? It was such a let-down when I bought it back in the 80s. It was still in shrink-wrap so I didn't get to thumb through it until I had already paid for it... and it was quite a bit different from the cover art and back cover description. I just wasn't expecting (or even wanting) a "funny" D&D book.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

OF COURSE, if D&D wanted to abandon the multiverse and create a unified D&D setting akin to Golarion (Nentir Vale 2.0) and use the space in the PHB, MM, supplements, and modules to explore various aspects of the setting in great detail, the work would be much simpler. Volo's guide goes over the different types and tribes of orcs in Nerath 2, Fizban's guide goes over the dragons and dragonborn cultures of one setting with great detail rather than try to adapt to a dozen different worlds, you could do it. Of course, no setting right now is in a good place to become the default setting (most 2e era settings are carrying baggage issues, and Eberron is a little too unique to be D&D's default setting unless you want dragonmarks and warforged as core).

Like you said, that'd be Nentir Vale 2.0. That world was a flop.

The Multiverse is inherent to D&D's richness. It'd be like smooshing all the worlds of M:tG into one planet. The "Multiverse" concept just made a huge leap into the mainstream with the recent Spider-Man: No Way Home film. People can handle diverse timelines.

If I were head of the D&D team, for 5.5E or 6E, I would go for a very specific two-prong articulation which was both more generic and more specific:

1) I would make the creation of a homebrew world simply part of the game. I would "gamify" that process by making a World Builder's Guidebook (WBG) a core rulebook (equal to the PHB, DMG, and MM); either that, or fill most of the DMG with that. This WBG would have randomized tables which would truly cover the entire array of world-features which have ever been seen in any D&D product, including Spelljammer. (Of course with the option to intentionally choose features instead of rolling.) So that "rolling up a world" is as much a part of the game as "rolling up a character." There'd even be a World Building Sheet, like a Character Sheet, but for worlds.

There'd even be a random "campaign setting name" table which includes (among many other results) all the name elements that make up the published worlds: e.g. "Grey", "Dragon", "Forgotten", "Dark", "Raven" + "Hawk", "Lance", "Realms", "Sun", "Loft", etc.

D&D Beyond would support World Building in the same way that it supports Character Creation.

AND, AT THE SAME TIME...

2) I would really coherentize the D&D Multiverse in all its diversity, as a single meta-setting.

Through introducing world-hopping as a common feature, even at low levels. Via alternate world gates and cross-world organizations, such as a Multiverse-spanning Adventurers League.

By producing official conversion notes which place every adventure in every published world.

By publishing an Atlas of the D&D Multiverse that provides the phlogistonic and planar equivalent of the Star Wars Galaxy map (which WotC designed), showing exactly where every D&D world and plane ever mentioned, in any edition, is located. And including official world maps for all the D&D worlds, from Toril to Krynn to Mystara to Oerth to Nerath.

By producing a Grand History of the D&D Multiverse, which finally synchronizes the timelines of all the published worlds.

By turning all continuity discrepancies into alternate timelines. And giving those parallel universes ("paraverses") official alphanumeric designations (like how Marvel and DC name their alternate earths).

This Multiverse would serve as a setting for cross-world novels and media events. People can handle it. The M:tG and MCU and Spider-Man films are all introducing the general public to the complexities of alternate worlds and timelines. D&D RPG folk ought to be able to handle it.

***
A two-pronged approach. Both more generic and more specific.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Like you said, that'd be Nentir Vale 2.0. That world was a flop.

What a weird claim. I’d love to hear your reasoning that a world that was never given a distinct setting book and wasn’t meant to get especially developed but did anyway due to player demand…was a flop.

There aren’t even any setting products to use as a measure of success! Lol

 

[Mordhau]

Isn't there a long history of people asking for detailed setting books about campaigns that have previously been hinted at in pieces?

Nentir Vale is just one example (although the setting book never came out). Didn't Greyhawk start that way? Forgotten Realms definitely did with hints given away in Dragon Articles by Greenwood. Frog God Games' the Lost Land is basically the same, the background to adventure/campaign books given out.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Like you said, that'd be Nentir Vale 2.0. That world was a flop.

The Multiverse is inherent to D&D's richness. It'd be like smooshing all the worlds of M:tG into one planet. The "Multiverse" concept just made a huge leap into the mainstream with the recent Spider-Man: No Way Home film. People can handle diverse timelines.

If I were head of the D&D team, for 5.5E or 6E, I would go for a very specific two-prong articulation which was both more generic and more specific:

1) I would make the creation of a homebrew world simply part of the game. I would "gamify" that process by making a World Builder's Guidebook (WBG) a core rulebook (equal to the PHB, DMG, and MM); either that fill most of the DMG with that. This WBG would have randomized tables which would truly cover the entire array of world-features which have ever been seen in any D&D product, including Spelljammer. (Of course with the option to intentionally choose features instead of rolling.) So that "rolling up a world" is as much a part of the game as "rolling up a character." There'd even be a World Building Sheet, like a Character Sheet, but for worlds.

There'd even be a random "campaign setting name" table which includes (among many other results) all the name elements that make up the published worlds: e.g. "Grey", "Dragon", "Forgotten", "Dark", "Raven" + "Hawk", "Lance", "Realms", "Sun", "Loft", etc.

D&D Beyond would support World Building in the same way that it supports Character Creation.

AND, AT THE SAME TIME...

2) I would really coherentize the D&D Multiverse in all its diversity, as a single meta-setting.

Through introducing world-hopping as a common feature, even at low levels. Via alternate world gates and cross-world organizations, such as a Multiverse-spanning Adventurers League.

By producing official conversion notes which place every adventure in every published world.

By publishing an Atlas of the D&D Multiverse that provides the phlogistonic and planar equivalent of the Star Wars Galaxy map which WotC, showing exactly where every D&D world and plane ever mentioned, in any edition, are located. And including official world maps for all the D&D worlds, from Toril to Krynn to Mystara to Oerth to Nerath.

By producing a Grand History of the D&D Multiverse, which finally synchronizes the timelines of all the published worlds.

By turning all continuity discrepancies into alternate timelines. And giving those parallel universes ("paraverses") official names.

This Multiverse would serve as a setting for cross-world novels and media events. People can handle it. The M:tG and MCU and Spider-Man films are all introducing the general public to the complexities of alternate worlds and timelines. D&D RPG folk ought to be able to handle it.

***
A two-pronged approach. Both more generic and more specific.

Ok, a like is not enough. That is an AMAZING idea!

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Ok, a like is not enough. That is an AMAZING idea!

Going all the way forward ... to the original Gygaxian multiverse.

If you live long enough, everything comes back into fashion.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

What a weird claim. I’d love to hear your reasoning that a world that was never given a distinct setting book and wasn’t meant to get especially developed but did anyway due to player demand…was a flop.

There aren’t even any setting products to use as a measure of success! Lol

Even Mearls admitted that 4E was a flop. If 4E was a flop, so was its setting. Commercially and consumer-wise. Not necessarily artistically.

I love Nerath. I think as far as D&D worlds go, it's pretty cool. I always advocate that Nerath be restored to equal stature alongside all the other D&D worlds.

But, as you say, Nerath did away with the Multiverse, its storied history, and all the worlds. (Though some worlds were gradually reintroduced.) In a similar way that 4E sort "did away" with almost everything which was recognizable about D&D as it had developed thus far. And how the GSL did away with the OGL. It all felt like a pressurized push of the D&D consumer to bow down and cram ourselves into a corporate-crafted box: world-wise, system-wise, and license-wise.

Still, I like Nerath. What I didn't like is the implication (which lasted a pretty long while): "There's no other world than Nerath now. Everything is crammed into Nearth. There's nothing more to D&D than Nerath." That felt arrogant and pushy.

I definitely would not want to see that repeated. Might as well just use Garweeze Wurld of Aldrazar!

But I would like to see Nerath featured as full-blown campaign setting in 5E. That'd be swell. It's an awesome world.

 

[Faolyn]

Like you said, that'd be Nentir Vale 2.0. That world was a flop.

The Multiverse is inherent to D&D's richness. It'd be like smooshing all the worlds of M:tG into one planet. The "Multiverse" concept just made a huge leap into the mainstream with the recent Spider-Man: No Way Home film. People can handle diverse timelines.

If I were head of the D&D team, for 5.5E or 6E, I would go for a very specific two-prong articulation which was both more generic and more specific:

1) I would make the creation of a homebrew world simply part of the game. I would "gamify" that process by making a World Builder's Guidebook (WBG) a core rulebook (equal to the PHB, DMG, and MM); either that, or fill most of the DMG with that. This WBG would have randomized tables which would truly cover the entire array of world-features which have ever been seen in any D&D product, including Spelljammer. (Of course with the option to intentionally choose features instead of rolling.) So that "rolling up a world" is as much a part of the game as "rolling up a character." There'd even be a World Building Sheet, like a Character Sheet, but for worlds.

I would definitely do this--I've thought a book (or section in the DMG) would be a great idea for a long time. I would also include a sample world done to show how each section can relate to each other, and then use this as the "default setting" when discussing D&D in general.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Even Mearls admitted that 4E was a flop. If 4E was a flop, so was its setting. Commercially and consumer-wise. Not necessarily artistically.

That doesn’t follow. to be a flop, it would have had to be published. It wasn’t. It wasn’t even recognized as a setting as such.

I love Nerath. I think as far as D&D worlds go, it's pretty cool. I always advocate that Nerath be restored to equal stature alongside all the other D&D worlds.

But, as you say, Nerath did away with the Multiverse, its storied history, and all the worlds.

I said no such thing, nor is it true.

Still, I like Nerath. What I didn't like is the implication (which lasted a pretty long while): "There's no other world than Nerath now. Everything is crammed into Nearth. There's nothing more to D&D than Nerath." That felt arrogant and pushy.

That implication didn’t exist. Each setting’s cosmology was self contained, so you could say that 4e did away with Planescape (and good riddance), but that’s it. Forgotten Realms was supported with a new set of books in year 1 of the edition, IIRC.

But I would like to see Nerath featured as full-blown campaign setting in 5E. That'd be swell. It's an awesome world.

At least we can agree on this.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

I would also include a sample world done to show how each section can relate to each other,

Yes - another D&D world. I'm for it.

and then use this as the "default setting" when discussing D&D in general.

I disagree. Because this is going yet again into the direction of a Core World which gets most of the attention, like Oerth was for 1E and 3E, Mystara was for BD&D, FR was for 2E and 5E, and Nerath was for 4E. This blurs the two-pronged approach I advocate.

I'm all up for a single page or few pages in the World Builders Guide which shows an example of how to apply the worldbuilding principles, with a filled out sample World Builder Sheet. Cool. And then for this sketch to eventually get a single hardcover Worldbook. And be done with it. Also cool.

But to use this world as the Default Setting throughout the rest of the D&D rulebooks? No! That approach is not much different than any other edition's designation of a "Default World". I don't want it.

Instead, for explanatory examples, I prefer the approach which 5E uses, where famous (or interestingly obscure) iconic D&D characters from any world of the Multiverse are used: like Caramon, Raistlin, and Tika, and Morgan Ironwolf, and Aleena and Bargle. In "my 6E", these characters' worlds are all part of a single meta-setting: the D&D Multiverse.

It's not a priority of mine to introduce yet another iconic set of newly-designed characters, from yet another newly-designed world, as the Default/Core Iconics. We already have plenty of Iconics. Show me Aleena, Warduke, Bigby, Melf the Elf, Regdar, Zagyg, Sister Rebecca...gods, even Drizzt and Elminster! That's not to say I'm opposed to seeing new characters in new novel series, etc. -- I just don't need new Default Iconics invented wholecloth yet again.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm just glad WotC has found a new way to make money on this wonderful book. It's a good thing First Nations and East Asian people never experience racism and stereotyping that this definitely doesn't promote.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

That doesn’t follow. to be a flop, it would have had to be published. It wasn’t. It wasn’t even recognized as a setting as such.

I experience that as sophistry and mincing words. It's almost as if nothing could be said about Nerath! At least nothing critical. Since it was a non-published, non-existing, non-setting? The Nerath continental map from the boardgame was a non-map. The Dawn War / World Axis cosmology was a non-cosmology. The Nerath pantheon was a non-pantheon of non-gods. The many, many pages of Nerath-specific history and lore was simply non-history and non-lore, since it wasn't gathered together and published in a single book "as such." Well then, this is a non-interesting non-conversation!

I said no such thing

I mistook you for Remathilis, who did say something like that (here). Sorry about that.

At least we can agree on this.

Yay!