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.

 

[Celebrim]

Fair enough, if you make the further assumption that elves are some sort of inhuman alien species, rather than basically just humans with pointy ears.

Personally, I go with the assumption that the different races are all basically human, from the pragmatic perspective that all players are human and it would be nigh-impossible for a human to successfully role-play as a wholly alien fantastic species. If elves don't learn to use a bow through practice, then the elven brain is so far different from anything a human can pretend to be, that there's no point in even trying.

I get where you are coming from, but if I really thought the races were all basically human, I'd consider it pointless and problematic to include them in the game. If all races have to be basically human, then we should just have humans and eliminate the idea of racial diversity (in the since of real racial diversity, and not just ethnic groups). Elves are not just humans with pointy ears. If they were, they'd not only be utterly uninteresting, but I'd find them vaguely racist in their very existence because I'd fear someone might mistake my intention with elves as something like 'whiter than white people' or some other stupidity.

My intention in having non-human races is for the players to attempt to stretch their imagination and attempt to empathize with and articulate something alien from who that they actually are. That's why when someone wants to play a non-human race, I give them a document explaining how different that they are and why their cultures are what they are because of it. As a DM, that's why I have such beings in my game world. I want to attempt the act of thinking as an elf or as a dwarf would think as a matter of my own entertainment. I'm challenging myself to this act of imagination. I'm not making them some sort of stereotype wish fulfillment or vague stand in for some real world racial group. I kind of get where say 'Bright' was trying to go with that, but even as gutsy and delicately as it tried to be about it, I don't think it actually worked. But at least 'Bright' actually made them more different than just humans with bumps on their head, and actually tried to make them something other than direct analogies.

 

[Jester David]

What in the world would those reasons have to do with orcs, elves, merfolk, centaurs and lizardmen? Are you claiming that there are no meaningful differences between orcs, elves, merfolk, centaurs and lizardmen? Why do we have to extrapolate that what applies to humans is true of non-humans?

Should we use “breed” then? Or “type”? Pick your background, breed, and class.
:/

Just because orcs are centaurs are different from humans doesn’t mean we need to use an antiquated term loaded with the baggage of imperialism, slavery, racism, and white supremacy.

English is a robust language. We can find a better word. Heritage. People. Nation. Etc.

 

[Morrus]

Do We Still Need "Race" in D&D?

Political Correctness is nothing more then Marxist gaslighting of Western Culture to give up any social/moral norms. When gaming turns Socialist Justice Warrior, then im out.

Glad to leave.

Allow me to assist. My general policy is that if you loudly proclaim your departure, you don’t get to take it back. We refer to it backstage as the “Golden Flounce”.

 

[Celebrim]

Should we use “breed” then?

Breed? How in the heck is breed less problematic than race? Breed as a term never applies to people; it applies to livestock.

How's that for loaded with baggage. You've just gone from designating the groups as equal to humans to make them subhuman. And you are doing this in in the context of a thread where people are arguing that we need to get rid of race explicitly because it will allow us to have different human "breeds"/"ancestories"/"types" or what ever.

I'll take race thank you very much. It's a lot less insulting.

Just because orcs are centaurs are different from humans doesn’t mean we need to use an antiquated term loaded with the baggage of imperialism, slavery, racism, and white supremacy.

How in the world is calling the choice of 'dwarf', 'elf' or 'human' 'race' carry all that baggage. I mean, if the word itself really is that problematic, how in the world are we going to talk about 'racism' without being equally problematic? I thought just recently we needed to have an honest discussion about 'race', and 'race relations' in this country? Now all the sudden are those statements problematic?

I really get the feeling that consistency or respect for others isn't at the heart of this conversation.

English is a robust language. We can find a better word. Heritage. People. Nation. Etc.

No, we can't. You keep making that obvious at every step.

 

[Ancalagon]

Yes.

If anything, RPGs more accurately use the term "race" than we do in real life.

(I'm known to fill in forms that ask for race with "human".)

Correct. By having all humanity be a single race, it is a denunciation of real-world racism, by showing that the differences some people put so much importance on are meaningless.

 

[DM Magic]

Breed? How in the heck is breed less problematic than race? Breed as a term never applies to people; it applies to livestock.

How's that for loaded with baggage. You've just gone from designating the groups as equal to humans to make them subhuman. And you are doing this in in the context of a thread where people are arguing that we need to get rid of race explicitly because it will allow us to have different human "breeds"/"ancestories"/"types" or what ever.

I'll take race thank you very much. It's a lot less insulting.

Sounds like you missed his point.

 

[Jester David]

Breed? How in the heck is breed less problematic than race? Breed as a term never applies to people; it applies to livestock.

How's that for loaded with baggage. You've just gone from designating the groups as equal to humans to make them subhuman. And you are doing this in in the context of a thread where people are arguing that we need to get rid of race explicitly because it will allow us to have different human "breeds"/"ancestories"/"types" or what ever.

Yes. That was exactly my point, thank you. Breed is a hugely problematic word. One loaded with baggage designed to dehumanize people. That’s literally why I used it.
It’d be super insulting to use “breed” and it is super insulting to use “race”.

I'll take race thank you very much. It's a lot less insulting.

Which is the issue. It’s not. Race and breed effectively have the same negative connotations. One isn’t less insulting. That the whole damn point.

 

[Ratskinner]

Before I get too enraged at any of the responses...

I prefer the term "Heritage" or "Species" depending on what game mechanical weight is in it.

EDIT: Just saw "Origin" another post, love it.

 

[Arilyn]

Should we use “breed” then? Or “type”? Pick your background, breed, and class.
:/

Just because orcs are centaurs are different from humans doesn’t mean we need to use an antiquated term loaded with the baggage of imperialism, slavery, racism, and white supremacy.

English is a robust language. We can find a better word. Heritage. People. Nation. Etc.

I agree. Race isn't a word with meaning. Originally, a more informal synonym with species, it was quickly seized upon to divide humans into "races", because having a European species and an Indian species wasn't going to fly. We don't have dog races and elephant races either, so the two words did quickly come to mean different things, and race was used purely, in well, racist terms. So yes, we should completely flush the term.

Elves are completely different from lizardfolk, of course. They are different species, but species is an awkward term to use. And then what to do with the mixes, like half-elves? You can't have a race or species of half-elves or half-orcs, but saying I have a character whose ancestry includes human and elf just works better. Being called a half-elf is actually rather insulting. "Excuse me, I'm not half of anything!"

Claiming that words are just words is simply not true. Words come loaded with meaning, and need to change continuously as our culture matures (hopefully). Expanding our daily vocabulary to be more inclusive, and changing words that become negatively charged, is a positive result of an ever changing linguistic process.

 

[Ancalagon]

It's a game. Do we need it? It works fine for me and my table. I've decided that ENWorld is just trying to stir the pot to get traffic. And it's working.

.... but why post a reply then? Shouldn't the proper "move" be to *not post at all*?

Seriously speaking, Paizo is doing this, it's why it's now a conversation. EN World didn't pull it out of thin air.

Edit... aaaaand isn't your post implying that the OP is somehow "in league" with the website?