RPG Evolution: Do We Still Need "Race" in D&D?

The term "race" is a staple of fantasy that is now out of sync with modern usage. With Pathfinder shifting from "race" to "ancestry" in its latest edition, it raises the question: should fantasy games still use it?

“Race” and Modern Parlance​

We previously discussed the challenges of representing real-life cultures in a fantasy world, with African and Asian countries being just two examples. The discussion becomes more complicated with fantasy "races"—historically, race was believed to be determined by the geographic arrangement of populations. Fantasy gaming, which has its roots in fantasy literature, still uses the term “race” this way.

Co-creator of D&D Gary Gygax cited R.E. Howard's Conan series as an influence on D&D, which combines Lovecraftian elements with sword and sorcery. Howard's perceptions may have been a sign of the times he lived in, but it seems likely they influenced his stories. Robert B. Marks explains just how these stereotypes manifested in Conan's world:

The young, vibrant civilizations of the Hyborian Age, like Aquilonia and Nemedia, are white - the equivalent of Medieval Europe. Around them are older Asiatic civilizations like Stygia and Vendhya, ancient, decrepit, and living on borrowed time. To the northwest and the south are the barbarian lands - but only Asgard and Vanaheim are in any way Viking. The Black Kingdoms are filled with tribesmen evoking the early 20th century vision of darkest Africa, and the Cimmerians and Picts are a strange cross between the ancient Celts and Native Americans - and it is very clear that the barbarians and savages, and not any of the civilized people or races, will be the last ones standing.

Which leads us to the other major fantasy influence, author J.R.R. Tolkien. David M. Perry explains in an interview with Helen Young:

In Middle Earth, unlike reality, race is objectively real rather than socially constructed. There are species (elves, men, dwarves, etc.), but within those species there are races that conform to 19th-century race theory, in that their physical attributes (hair color, etc.) are associated with non-physical attributes that are both personal and cultural. There is also an explicit racial hierarchy which is, again, real in the world of the story.

The Angry GM elaborates on why race and culture were blended in Tolkien's works:

The thing is, in the Tolkienverse, at least, in the Lord of the Rings version of the Tolkienverse (because I can’t speak for what happened in the Cinnabon or whatever that other book was called), the races were all very insular and isolated. They didn’t deal with one another. Race and culture went hand in hand. If you were a wood elf, you were raised by wood elves and lived a thoroughly wood elf lifestyle until that whole One Ring issue made you hang out with humans and dwarves and halflings. That isolation was constantly thrust into the spotlight. Hell, it was a major issue in The Hobbit.

Given the prominence of race in fantasy, it's not surprising that D&D has continued the trend. That trend now seems out of sync with modern parlance; in 1951, the United Nations officially declared that the differences among humans were "insignificant in relation to the anthropological sameness among the peoples who are the human race."

“Race” and Game Design​

Chris Van Dyke's essay on race back in 2008 explains how pervasive "race" is in D&D:

Anyone who has played D&D has spent a lot of time talking about race – “Racial Attributes,” “Racial Restrictions,” “Racial Bonuses.” Everyone knows that different races don’t get along – thanks to Tolkien, Dwarves and Elves tend to distrust each other, and even non-gamers know that Orcs and Goblins are, by their very nature, evil creatures. Race is one of the most important aspects of any fantasy role-playing game, and the belief that there are certain inherent genetic and social distinctions between different races is built into every level of most (if not all) Fantasy Role-Playing Games.

Racial characteristics in D&D have changed over time. Basic Dungeons & Dragons didn't distinguish between race and class for non-humans, such that one played a dwarf, elf, or halfling -- or a human fighter or cleric. The characteristics of race were so tightly intertwined that race and profession were considered one.

In Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, the changes became more nuanced, but not without some downsides on character advancement, particularly in allowing “demihumans” to multiclass but with level limits preventing them from exceeding humanity, who had unlimited potential (but could only dual-class).

With Fifth Edition, ability penalties and level caps have been removed, but racial bonuses and proficiencies still apply. The Angry GM explains why this is a problem:

In 5E, you choose a race and a class, but you also choose a background. And the background represents your formative education and socio-economic standing and all that other stuff that basically represents the environment in which you were raised. The racial abilities still haven’t changed even though there is now a really good place for “cultural racial abilities” to live. So, here’s where the oddity arises. An elf urchin will automatically be proficient with a longsword and longbow, two weapons that requires years of training to even become remotely talent with, but a human soldier does not get any automatic martial training. Obviously, in both cases, class will modify that. But in the life of your character, race happens first, then background, and only later on do you end up a member of a class. It’s very quirky.

Perhaps this is why Pathfinder decided to take a different approach to race by shifting to the term “ancestry”:

Beyond the narrative, there are many things that have changed, but mostly in the details of how the game works. You still pick a race, even though it is now called your ancestry. You still decide on your class—the rulebook includes all of the core classes from the First Edition Core Rulebook, plus the alchemist. You still select feats, but these now come from a greater variety of sources, such as your ancestry, your class, and your skills.

"Ancestry" is not just a replacement for the word “race.” It’s a fluid term that requires the player to make choices at character creation and as the character advances. This gives an opportunity to express human ethnicities in game terms, including half-elves and half-orcs, without forcing the “subrace” construct.

The Last Race​

It seems likely that, from both a modern parlance and game design perspective, “race” as it is used today will fall out of favor in fantasy games. It’s just going to take time. Indigo Boock sums up the challenge:

Fantasy is a doubled edged sword. Every human culture has some form of fantasy, we all have some sort of immortal ethereal realm where our elven creatures dwell. There’s always this realm that transcends culture. Tolkien said, distinct from science fiction (which looks to the future), fantasy is to feel like one with the entire universe. Fantasy is real, deep human yearning. We look to it as escapism, whether we play D&D, or Skyrim, or you are like myself and write fantasy. There are unfortunately some old cultural tropes that need to be discarded, and it can be frustratingly slow to see those things phased out.

Here's hoping other role-playing games will follow Pathfinder's lead in how treats its fantasy people in future editions.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don’t think anyone would argue that REH was more racist than HPL.

...but despite that, I prefer HPL’s fiction to REH’s.

Ohhhh, the irony.

 

[pemerton]

Ironicly enough, in a thread about the word race and the connection to racism, Tower of the Elephant is one of the most Cthulhu mythos-like stories with the “elephant” at the end, and I have far more issue with the racism that HPL exhibited than I do REH. Both were racist, but I find HPL’s to be worse.

I don’t think anyone would argue that REH was more racist than HPL.

...but despite that, I prefer HPL’s fiction to REH’s.

Ohhhh, the irony.

I find HPL almost unreadable - not because of the racism, but because of the prose. Whereas I find that REH generally keeps it moving at a good pace, with vibrant exposition and interesting (if often not terribly profound) situations.

But on the racism I agree that HPL is generally worse. The Call of Cthulhu is exhibit A in this respect.

 

[Lanefan]

First, there's no straightforward connection between "players retained" and "fun had", because a game can retain players for a range of reasons that don't pertain to fun (eg existing market penetration, with reputation as one significant factor in that respect).

I'd say that over the long term "fun had" is going to directly affect "players retained" in that as goes the first, so will go the second.

Second, if 10 people each get 10 utiles of fun from a game, then it produced more fun - and so by your metric was more successful - then a game which gave 50 people each 1 utile of fun, even if it sold only 10 rather than 50 copies.

Again, there's the time element. If those 10 people spread the word then maybe more will join and eventually the game that gives each of its players more fun will surpass the one which does not.

That said, different people find fun in different ways. The game that gives each of its 10 players 10 utiles of fun might only have 10 players because the other 40 tried it, had no fun at all, and left.

Third, as a player it is of no concern to me that a game is fun for others, except in the very abstract sense that I'm happy for them that they're having a good time doing whatever it is they're doing over there. The fun that matters to me is my fun. If a game produces 100 utiles of fun but none of them are mine, I'm not inclined to judge it a fun game (although obviously it's a game that others had fun playing).

Axis and Allies has doubtless produced a great many utiles of fun for a great many people over the years. My fun total from playing it has been exactly 0 utiles, as I have never played it. But I'll still assume it's a fun game based on what its players say, until and unless I play it and for some reason find it holds no fun for me.

Lan-"and I'm getting a utile or two of fun just out of using the term utile without really knowing what it means"-efan

 

[Lanefan]

I find HPL almost unreadable - not because of the racism, but because of the prose.

In my limited exposure to his writing this is pretty much my take as well.

One chapter can come across as brilliant and the next come across as the aimless ramblings of a madman.

 

[pemerton]

Ahhhh, “utiles.”

What other unit would one use to measure and quantify fun?!

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Ironicly enough, in a thread about the word race and the connection to racism, Tower of the Elephant is one of the most Cthulhu mythos-like stories with the “elephant” at the end, and I have far more issue with the racism that HPL exhibited than I do REH.

If Cthulhu mythos entities are supposed to represent a terrifying alien "other", then the comclusion of "Tower of the Elephant" indicates a profound difference in attitude between Howard and Lovecraft.

See also: "Rogues in the House" and the ape-man trope.

 

[Shasarak]

It's a change that frankly costs nothing and makes people happy. Why wouldn't we do it?

Since we are changing words can we do something about "Paladin"?

That one really would make me happy if it could be changed.

 

[Zardnaar]

To cut to the chase and what has perhaps been lost over the last dozen pages, the short story is this: race carries unnecessary social, cultural, political implications and baggage that we can do without in D&D (and other games). For some people, it may be seen as a roadblock to enjoying the game.

Using an alternative term "Ancestry" or "Species" or "Kind" or some such can eliminate that baggage and remove a roadblock for people.

Seems overly sensitive though,ancestry is stupid and the other options are worse (species or whatever).

Next someone will claim D&D is racist because it was designed by a person of European descent and is based on European myths, legends and literature (with bits of other cultures as well).

You're not going to please everyone all of the time and I do not see the Paizo thing catching on and that company was also the one who invented a child abuse demon.

Generally I think there is a right and a wrong way to be inclusive and promote diversity. Movies like Force Awakens, Black Panther, Wonder Women, are the way to do it vs trying to force cultural change which tends to initiate blowback.

Explanation may not be the best but the more you tend to lecture people the more they dig their heels in in my experience is kind of my point.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

Since we are changing words can we do something about "Paladin"?

That one really would make me happy if it could be changed.

Maybe we could change it to "Warlord"...

 

[Shasarak]

One chapter can come across as brilliant and the next come across as the aimless ramblings of a madman.

That is the effect of Cthulhu working as intended I am afraid.