D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[Sadras]

Yeah, I'm confused. Do the people you're talking about not know what they want?

I do not believe the posters on either side debating about these various issues are 100% united but there are points of agreement/connectivity. So for instance, I do not mind a change here or there, I have the 5e books which speak about the lore on orcs but my personal perceptions about orcs aligns (or has been influenced rather) by the ideas from WoW moreso than Tolkien's. However, I also do not believe that fixing our orcs does anything good for RW people so there is that.
So while I may not mind the changes proposed by @Hussar, I disagree with him on how that does anything for the greater good. Humans are messy.

The important thing is not to paint one side of the argument as monolithic.

 

[Hussar]

Which three sentences are you removing to fix orcs then? (Forgive me if you have said exactly which they are in the last 77 pages, but I missed them).

I mean the SRD only has two sentences to describe them (other than the stat block) so it's not going to leave much.

It's late, I'm tired, so, I'm not going to go with exact quotes if that's okay? I'd remove the bits about half orcs making better orcs than full blooded orcs. I'd remove the bit about Luthic making orcs want to breed with anything. ((Note the Monster Manual and the PHB somewhat contradict each other because the PHB makes it sound like half orcs are the result of consensual pairings, while the Monster Manual most certainly does not)) AFAIR, that's about all that really needs to come out of there. The rest of it is fine by and large. There might be a couple of other things that are slipping my mind right now, but, that's what sticks out.

 

[Scott Christian]

No. It’s more a case of endless speculation and hypothetical situations that have no grounding in actual issues. It’s “orcs are going to be changed so much that they aren’t orcs anymore” when the reality is that stripping out about three sentences solves the problem.

It’s the oh no they are changing X so what about Y and Z? When no one has brought up Y and Z and Y and Z do not contain the same problem.

To be fair Hussar, there have been numerous threads, and the overall language has been one of change. But not just for orcs.

• Oriental Adventures
• Hobgoblins
• Drow
• Duergar
• Gnomes
• Elves
• Humans

These are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head, and I have skimmed half the forums, and read the other half far more closely than I should.

But, you are also right. The changes will not hurt. Hopefully, they help make the game more inclusive. But that has yet to be determined. (Btw, remember in 4e when every halfling looked like a Rastafarian. )

 

[Bagpuss]

It's late, I'm tired, so, I'm not going to go with exact quotes if that's okay?

That's fine. I had to look a lot of this stuff up to and it is a pain, as it is in multiple sources across multiple editions.

I'd remove the bits about half orcs making better orcs than full blooded orcs. I'd remove the bit about Luthic making orcs want to breed with anything. ((Note the Monster Manual and the PHB somewhat contradict each other because the PHB makes it sound like half orcs are the result of consensual pairings, while the Monster Manual most certainly does not)) AFAIR, that's about all that really needs to come out of there. The rest of it is fine by and large. There might be a couple of other things that are slipping my mind right now, but, that's what sticks out.

Interesting, so you'll leave in the stuff about their description which directly parallels racist descriptions of people of color? I personally would have thought that was more if not at least as contentious.

 

[Remathilis]

Sorry, but after 77 PAGES of "spitballing" ideas, it gets a bit tiresome. Is it really that hard to focus on actual issues that people really have?

I count more than three here

D&D 5E - What Makes an Orc an Orc?

To me this shows how effective the language and imagery around orcs have been. Orcs are the archetype of the bestial savage that is going to invade our country and rape our women. The bogeyman that has been invoked for centuries...millennia?...by those who want to vilify another people for...

www.enworld.org

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

• Oriental Adventures
• Hobgoblins
• Drow
• Duergar
• Gnomes
• Elves
• Humans

These are just the ones I can remember off the top of my head, and I have skimmed half the forums, and read the other half far more closely than I should.

Shaman

 

[Derren]

Shaman

Don't forget Mana.

 

[JEB]

Goblins have been suggested to be problematic in these recent discussions as well. (That said, the criticism of Goblins and Hobgoblins was focused on their artwork, not names or lore content.)

I was also involved in discussion of whether of not Barbarians were problematic.

 

[Remathilis]

Goblins have been suggested to be problematic in these recent discussions as well. (That said, the criticism of Goblins and Hobgoblins was focused on their artwork, not names or lore content.)

I was also involved in discussion of whether of not Barbarians were problematic.

Also monks, with a few whatabouts towards paladin and druid.

 

[Oofta]

If I were to change the orc description (and a few others) my comments would be:

Change the images back to green skinned, more like the 3.5 depiction.

Probably substitute a different word for "tribe". Clan is used for groups of dwarves, elves are implied to live in small groups but the word "tribe" seems to be reserved for "monstrous" races.

Get rid of the verbiage that half-orcs live in slums in the PHB.

In Volo's guide they start out with pointing out that Gruumsh created and continues to directly influences orcish behavior. I'm okay with that but then toward the end it's "if raised right they can be good". I'd rather just have something along the lines of "Some orcs have broken away from the influence of Gruumsh." Still not great in some ways but better than wording that seems to promote the re-education campaigns used to "civilize" indigenous peoples.

Last, but not least, emphasize that the alignment in the MM is just a default for any monster. That it can vary depending on campaign and DM.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.