D&D 5E What is the appeal of the weird fantasy races?

[Azzy]

HOBGOBLINS!

A whole race of warriors. Not just revering warriors like dwarves but the whole nation is an army.

How does someone not get the appeal of being Army Guy but cranked up to 100? Games Workshop pays their light bills with that appeal alone.

In my homebrew setting, I have a full nation of hobbos that engages in things like trade and commerce (as well as a bit of colonialism and conquest). I haven't been able to buy that hobgoblins wouldn't build their own civilization given that they are as intelligent and capable as humans and other races and are obviously inclined towards law, division of labor, religion, heirarchies, and other building blocks of civilization.

 

[Scott Christian]

I think it's fair to say that if you ask for an example of bad behavior as evidence that people have valid complaints about it, hear an example of bad behavior and recognize it as something you've done yourself, then the complaint probably has some merit, no?

Incidentally though, it was not even you I was referring to.

Except there was no bad behavior. That is the point. Being argued and derailed for a compliment is what was done.

And I did not think you were referring to me at all. I believe I know who you were referring to. However, I think it is important to understand the framework around people's thoughts. It is just like context.

 

[Scott Christian]

If I speak disparagingly of a thing you like, refer to it using terms generally understood to indicate dismissal, and then say, “but you do you”, the “you do you” is utterly meaningless.

First of all: I never said anything despairingly. Nothing. I gave a compliment that had the word cantina in it. A compliment.

Second, your are not accurate. If you like soccer. But someone says, "Yeah, I don't get it. There's not enough scoring for me. And there are so many leagues it seems hard to keep track of. But, it has mass appeal. Just not for me. So you do you and enjoy the game."

Are you telling me you can't take that as a, at worst, neutral statement. You would say that person's criticism of a game you like makes his: "You do you," meaningless?

 

[Oofta]

No. @Oofta, again, you are making baseless comments without any actual support. No one has said this.

WTF are you talking about? One of the posters mentioned the prejudice against tieflings that's in the PHB. I was saying that if a DM is going to play that aspect up, they should be clear ahead of time.

What freaking claim did I make? I was responding to this

I think part of Tiefling is some of the racial discrimination associated to their fiendish insides and how each Tiefling embraces, distances, ignores, or reacts to both the discrimination, the infernal aspects, and the mechanical twists.

The thing is many DMs don't add those icky stuff into their allowed races so Tiefling is often to only way to do it and not feel like one is going overboard and overblowing the situation. Tieflings are a full one race and many DMs and worldbuilders feel anxious about dividing a full on race to make the same level of divide. Tiefling is actually a safer and easy way to do as 4e and 5e fully split them from humans outside of child making rituals.

Please explain how you are not just making naughty word up again.

 

[Remathilis]

As far as tiefling (and most "evil" races) go, I think the discrimination and prejudice the PHB describes something more akin to odd stares, gawking, merchants being rude, and citizens not wanting to talk to or socialize with them. It gets very unfun when it reflects real racist actions like burning down property, harassment, violence and the like.

 

[Scott Christian]

And yet... the other side is fairly clear. He might not have meant it negatively, but since it had been used that way, REPEATEDLY,

And that is where we disagree. Not the fact that Hussar framed my statement negatively when it clearly wasn't. That's fine. It happens all the time. I do it too. It's the fact that people keep insisting that this term is used repeatedly used negatively. Again, I asked for someone to find this REPEATED use of the term negatively in this thread. It hasn't come yet. The reason it hasn't, is because attached to the word cantina is someone saying - It's not for me, but there is no right or wrong. It is frame-working the argument into something it is not.

It is the exact issue I see with trying to lay out the DM/Player dynamic. One side instantly frames the argument outside of what was actually said. We had fifty pages on people debating without framing it around session zero and the DM laying clear expectations - even though it was said over and over that this was how the DM side was referencing character creation.

But what do I know? To me arguing over whether centaurs can climb a rope or not makes more sense than derailing a forward progressing discussion because one frameworks a single word negatively.

 

[Scott Christian]

Because it wasn't "just one post". It is something that has been repeated over and over and over again. As in nearly every single time someone uses the phrase, "cantina scene" in comparison to a D&D game, it is 99.9% of the time, a negative comparison meaning that the game is shallow, stupid, insipid, unbelievable, and a host of other negative words.

I have been on these forums for a few years now. I do not see what you see.

That said. I am willing to not use the term anymore. Do you have a preference for a replacement?

 

[FrozenNorth]

okay anyone still want to talk about tieflings or can we move on gnomes or dragonborn or something?

@EzekielRaiden has a good post about why to play dragonborn.

 

[tetrasodium]

As long as you make it sound like you're talking about players everywhere, you're going to get called out on it.


I don't give a damn about what "fans of FR" supposedly do or do not (there is no try). (I should also note that the fluff for tieflings in the PHB isn't quite the same as for those in the FR—heck, even the fluff in Volo's and Mordenkainen's sometimes contradict the lore of the FR.) Past editions also have fluff information for the races in their PHBs. From 2e, "Dwarves like the earth and dislike the sea. Not overly fond of elves, they have a fierce hatred of orcs and goblins.". Something that is not true of all settings. The PHB presents some basic fluff (you'll note that the fluff becomes more longwinded as each edition is published—fluff that doesn't always fit with all (or any) setting. It's a jumping-off point, something to fall back on if you're not using a published setting and don't want to put in a lot of effort to homebrew a setting. What it isn't is a chain to bind you.

Planescape is Wotc's other pet viral infestation setting that goes hand in hand with FR. As to a poster speaking about "players", not "all players", not "every player", not "100% of players"... just players your interpretation is missing two key points First is that most authors are human & I assume you are also a fellow human rather than suggesting you are some nonhuman incapable of speaking generally of other humans; I apologize if that assumption was made in error but request the same respect if not. Second, that's not the way english works, if we were talking about football chess or anything else with players and I say "damage in player mindsets is done " it takes an extraordinary leap to assume that means all football players all chess players or in this case all d&d players.

 

[Minigiant]

Please explain how you are not just making naughty word up again

This is what the 4e and 5e PHB say. Tieflings are discriminated on and between that and their history, it affects them and their culture.