Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dfuller1138" data-source="post: 8029874" data-attributes="member: 7023044"><p>Absolutely. Orcs have "evolved" since the LotR days.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Within Fiction, orcs are assigned motivations. Motivations that can be interpreted by the reader, however the reader likes. Every character in written works is assigned motivations. Quite different from "sapiency". Orcs are not sapient considering the proper definition of sapience. Use Merriam-Webster. Orcs are the "bad guys" among many who do "bad things" to others. Orcs are the trope.</p><p></p><p>Orcs can be DEPICTED as possessing sapience. It is a depiction only. The portrayal of orcs as is, is the actual objection. Sapience has nothing to do with that. Orcs, by definition, are not sapient. There may be the rare depiction or portrayal.</p><p></p><p>Depictions should not be confused with sapience. It is a very fine distinction.</p><p></p><p>Orcs have no more agency - and much less agency - than the depiction of govenrment. Orcs are represented by The DM, government is represented by actual people. Neither are sapient. Whatsoever. Depictions and portrayals aside.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They still would be orcs. With culture and portrayals of sapience. And better armor, weapons, and assigned motivations. Perhaps. Basically, a human dressed in an orc skin. The only difference being appearance. What would be the difference between playing a High Orc Paladin and a Human Paladin? Appearances. Why bother playing the High Orc at all when a Human does just as well? The differences would be minor.</p><p></p><p>Thus no invention of a new race. The portrayal and desciptions would be the modifications. Been done plenty of times.</p><p></p><p>In the end, if Orcs have to be remediated? Devils & Fiends to. Beholders. Sahuagin. Tharizdun himself. Okay, maybe not Tharizdun. Remediate them all to satisfy REAL WORLD POLITICS. If it is good for orcs? Do the entire Monster Manual and all supplements the same way, with any monster that is portrayed as being capable of thought.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I think it would be interesting to have High Orcs. Since there is a Multi-verse after all. Perhaps the Humans would take the roll of traditional Orcs. I am sure someone would object to that to.</p><p></p><p>In the end, D&D is about Good vs. Evil. Too have evil, you have to have "bad guys". And "bad guys" do "bad things". And bad things are described. Could the descriptions of said "bad things" be more ah... circumspect? Sure. The "bad things" are still going to be there.</p><p></p><p><strong>Arguing for the Rights of a Fictional Race in a Fantasy Game... </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Does the portrayal of a fictional race (bad guys necessary for games) increase abusive behavior anymore than violent videogames produce children who are violent mass murderers?</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>We are now at the point of The PMRC and Elizabeth Dole being right, that D&D promotes abusive behavior (Satanism). This is an example of how far along The Left is in being the The New Right.</strong></p><p></p><p>As to the original topic? There are limitations to inclusiveness. Changing orcs to fit some real world paradigm in order to reinforce real world behavior? IS NOT GOING TO DO IT. The expression of Heritage? That is evolving.</p><p></p><p>D&D is inherently objectionable on every level. Necromancy. Demons & Devils. Violence is integral to the game. Depictions of evil can not be anymore PC than Asmodeus being The Supreme Benevolent Being.</p><p></p><p>Otherwise, turn Dungeons & Dragons into Deliberations & Debates, Robert's Rules 6th Edition.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dfuller1138, post: 8029874, member: 7023044"] Absolutely. Orcs have "evolved" since the LotR days. Within Fiction, orcs are assigned motivations. Motivations that can be interpreted by the reader, however the reader likes. Every character in written works is assigned motivations. Quite different from "sapiency". Orcs are not sapient considering the proper definition of sapience. Use Merriam-Webster. Orcs are the "bad guys" among many who do "bad things" to others. Orcs are the trope. Orcs can be DEPICTED as possessing sapience. It is a depiction only. The portrayal of orcs as is, is the actual objection. Sapience has nothing to do with that. Orcs, by definition, are not sapient. There may be the rare depiction or portrayal. Depictions should not be confused with sapience. It is a very fine distinction. Orcs have no more agency - and much less agency - than the depiction of govenrment. Orcs are represented by The DM, government is represented by actual people. Neither are sapient. Whatsoever. Depictions and portrayals aside. They still would be orcs. With culture and portrayals of sapience. And better armor, weapons, and assigned motivations. Perhaps. Basically, a human dressed in an orc skin. The only difference being appearance. What would be the difference between playing a High Orc Paladin and a Human Paladin? Appearances. Why bother playing the High Orc at all when a Human does just as well? The differences would be minor. Thus no invention of a new race. The portrayal and desciptions would be the modifications. Been done plenty of times. In the end, if Orcs have to be remediated? Devils & Fiends to. Beholders. Sahuagin. Tharizdun himself. Okay, maybe not Tharizdun. Remediate them all to satisfy REAL WORLD POLITICS. If it is good for orcs? Do the entire Monster Manual and all supplements the same way, with any monster that is portrayed as being capable of thought. Personally, I think it would be interesting to have High Orcs. Since there is a Multi-verse after all. Perhaps the Humans would take the roll of traditional Orcs. I am sure someone would object to that to. In the end, D&D is about Good vs. Evil. Too have evil, you have to have "bad guys". And "bad guys" do "bad things". And bad things are described. Could the descriptions of said "bad things" be more ah... circumspect? Sure. The "bad things" are still going to be there. [B]Arguing for the Rights of a Fictional Race in a Fantasy Game... Does the portrayal of a fictional race (bad guys necessary for games) increase abusive behavior anymore than violent videogames produce children who are violent mass murderers? We are now at the point of The PMRC and Elizabeth Dole being right, that D&D promotes abusive behavior (Satanism). This is an example of how far along The Left is in being the The New Right.[/B] As to the original topic? There are limitations to inclusiveness. Changing orcs to fit some real world paradigm in order to reinforce real world behavior? IS NOT GOING TO DO IT. The expression of Heritage? That is evolving. D&D is inherently objectionable on every level. Necromancy. Demons & Devils. Violence is integral to the game. Depictions of evil can not be anymore PC than Asmodeus being The Supreme Benevolent Being. Otherwise, turn Dungeons & Dragons into Deliberations & Debates, Robert's Rules 6th Edition. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity
Top