What is the most despised race?

[Samuel Leming]

I voted drow because of close to twenty years of putting up with players saying, "I wanna play a drow".

The whole lolth thing is a dead horse that was zombified and beaten to death again and what could I say about a certain angsty ranger that hasn't been said a hundred times already. In my next campaign drow will worship Yeenoghu or Orcus

A close second, third & fourth would be tinker gnomes, gully dwarves & kender from Dragonlance. At least nobody wants to play those.

Sam

 

[Malic]

Oh, a new trick! Let me try this sblock thing.

[sblock] First let me say, I am not arguing that drow *are* evidence or racism or sexism in anyone, and I can see the differences between drow and 'black' people, and the way you can get drow by reversing many of the preestablished elf stereotypes.

One evil race among who knows how many is an exception and as such indicative of nothing.

All I'm saying is, we're not looking at one evil race among many. We're looking at one matriarchal race among one. Women governments? They're all evil. (Black governments? Maybe not.)

I don't have a bugbear about the drow, and just posted because your statement doesn't recognise that.

If, and this is not necessarily the case with the drow (I did ask), there is only a single example of a thing, and it is a negative portrayal, the overall portrayal of that thing is negative.

If that resonates with negative portrayals elsewhere in society, it is likely to become an uncomfortable example (for some people), irrespective of the intention of the creator.

This is not 'absence of evidence'. One data point is not a trend, sure. But it's a damn uncomfortable little single data point, to me.

Add that to the drow's portrayal in earlier art, and my discomfort is compounded.

Now if you have both good and evil examples, no worries.

Ok, have to sign off now and give the phone back. Cheers!

[/sblock]

 

[Darkness]

Gez wins.

[sblock]Anyway, one general observation - the standard D&D world is kinda xenophobic, isn't it? The most prominent good races are humanoid (I count gnomes and halflings as generally on the side of good here) - which can't be said for just about any evil race besides the 'evil twins' of the aforementioned good races. Lots of evil races are ugly and/or brutish, too, for that matter.

Or heck, just look what you get when you compare intelligent races in the sea.
On the good side, we have the pretty merfolk. Evil gets the nasty sahuagin.

Sure, sure - I get it. Evil races are there to be fought by the PCs and enemies to be slaughtered without a thought work better when they're ugly pig-men (orcs) and not cute fluffy bunny-men. But that's kinda black and white, isn't it? To each their own, I guess. Me, I like shades of gray...


Heh. I see in Preview Post that Malic has written something. I'll get to it in a sec... [/sblock]

 

[Gez]

Yup, it's a cool trick. I'll try to not overdo it!
[sblock]

All I'm saying is, we're not looking at one evil race among many. We're looking at one matriarchal race among one. Women governments? They're all evil. (Black governments? Maybe not.)

To put it another way, we're looking at one sexually-discriminating race among one. How many strictly patriarchal societies are there? None, even the dwarves aren't described as being such. All races have kings and queens, high priests and high priestesses, and so on. Except the drows. The fact that they discriminate to the detriment of males is a red-herring -- the real point is that they discriminate, period.

If, and this is not necessarily the case with the drow (I did ask), there is only a single example of a thing, and it is a negative portrayal, the overall portrayal of that thing is negative.

It reminds me of the Englishman that arrives at Calais, and the trainstation is nearly desert. The only persons he sees are two red-haired women, probably sisters, chatting together in French. Our Englishman draws the logical conclusion: "All French women are redhead."
[sblock]

Spoiler

Am I a bad person for wishing it was true?

[/sblock]

Gez wins.

That's for the dryad & nymph joke, heh? On the other hand, somebody could point out hags and harpies and medusas and lamias.

Anyway, one general observation - the standard D&D world is kinda xenophobic, isn't it? The most prominent good races are humanoid (I count gnomes and halflings as generally on the side of good here) - which can't be said for just about any evil race besides the 'evil twins' of the aforementioned good races. Lots of evil races are ugly and/or brutish, too, for that matter.

Or heck, just look what you get when you compare intelligent races in the sea.
On the good side, we have the pretty merfolk. Evil gets the nasty sahuagin.

Sure, sure - I get it. Evil races are there to be fought by the PCs and enemies to be slaughtered without a thought work better when they're ugly pig-men (orcs) and not cute fluffy bunny-men. But that's kinda black and white, isn't it? To each their own, I guess. Me, I like shades of gray...

Good point, but there are counter-examples.
Lizardfolk, although frequent antagonists, are not evil. Their alignment is the same as humans' own one. Likewise for the ugly locathah, and the creepy aranea. Pics:
[sblock]

[/sblock]

Heck, flumphs are Lawful Good!

On the other hand, evil gets to have succubi and erinyes. Oh, and among the giants, the evil frost giant has a nobler bearing than the neutral rock giant.
[sblock]

[/sblock]

[/sblock]

 

[rounser]

[sblock]

Sure, sure - I get it. Evil races are there to be fought by the PCs and enemies to be slaughtered without a thought work better when they're ugly pig-men (orcs) and not cute fluffy bunny-men. But that's kinda black and white, isn't it? To each their own, I guess. Me, I like shades of gray...

I read in a book called "The Blank Slate" which was about the evolution of the human mind that people innately attribute virtue to beauty, and the opposite to ugliness....just as weirdly as we attribute "filth" to lack of virtue. It makes no intuitive sense, but this is human nature, which often isn't designed to make sense. The author cited the examples of how easy people find it to believe Michael Jackson is a monster because he now looks like one, and how overrated Princess Diana's virtuousness was due to her prettiness (yes, she worked at charities, but as a princess that's basically your job - compare her to the rather homely Charles who did similar work).

So this makes drow stand out even more, as you've pointed out - they're pretty and evil.

I suppose most monsters are black hat/white hat encounters, and slaying them without remorse is part of the "license to kill" that D&D's alignment system grants the game - a troll isn't likely to mend his ways any time this existence. For moral ambiguity and grey areas, you can't go past humans.

As for slaughtering bunnies, that's what al-mi-raj are for. And to think some people don't like the Fiend Folio/Tome of Horrors...
[/sblock]

 

[Darkness]

[sblock]

we're not looking at one evil race among many. We're looking at one matriarchal race among one. Women governments? They're all evil. (Black governments? Maybe not.)

Yeah, I can't recall any other matriarchies offhand either.

If ... there is only a single example of a thing, and it is a negative portrayal, the overall portrayal of that thing is negative.

Heh. Now, I still say that one example proves nothing.

But let's assume it did. So what does our example really say?

The drow are fallen elves, corrupted by a demoness, whom they worship.
Even without adding further details, we can already see that they are evil; the causal relationshop is clear.
Obviously, matriarchy is not the cause of their evil. Thus, the drow are not an example of a society based on the evils of matriarchy - rather, they are an example of an evil society that just happens to be ruled by women.

Now, why are they ruled by women? Yep, because Lolth told them so. And because she's their goddess, they obeyed. Lolth, meanwhile, doesn't represent the evils of matriarchy - she represents (among other evils) the evils of sexism. Of course, evil deities can be sexist - orc women don't get much power either.
For one reason or another, we consider male-dominated societies the norm in D&D (or a norm among a few; humans, halflings, gnomes and elves, among others, often practice sexual equality). Maybe it's because many leaders are warriors and many warriors are male, or because we view fantasy warrior societies through a medieval lens (even though we let the humans generally have equality). So Lolth naturally draws attention - she's exceptional (though not unique, except maybe in influence). If the drow were ruled by a macho guy god, we probably wouldn't even think much about it.
Now... What if Lolth and the drow were Neutral or Good? Would they still revere women? I'd say it's not too unlikely - cultures who are predominantly worshipping one 'father deity' or 'mother deity' tend to have a lot of respect for the gender in question.[/sblock]

 

[Zweischneid]

We dig dig dig dig dig dig dig in our mine the whole day through
To dig dig dig dig dig dig dig is what we really like to do
It ain't no trick to get rich quick
If you dig dig dig with a shovel or a pick
In a mine! In a mine! In a mine! In a mine!
Where a million diamonds shine!

We dig dig dig dig dig dig dig from early morn till night
We dig dig dig dig dig dig dig up everything in sight
We dig up diamonds by the score
A thousand rubies, sometimes more
But we don't know what we dig 'em for
We dig dig dig a-dig dig

Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
Heigh-ho

Chorus
Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
It's home from work we go
(Whistle)

Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho

(Chorus)

Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
(Whistle)

Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
Heigh-ho, Heigh-ho
Heigh-ho hum

(Chorus three times)

Heigh-ho (until fade)

 

[Darkness]

Hey Gez.

[sblock]

Good point, but there are counter-examples.
Lizardfolk, although frequent antagonists, are not evil. Their alignment is the same as humans' own one. Likewise for the ugly locathah, and the creepy aranea.

Now, true, lizardmen are not evil - but their job is still to get slaughtered by the PCs. Halflings aren't generally good either - but they generally are on the side of the good guys, just like lizzies are on the side of the guys who get slaughtered by the good guys.
Locathah are Neutral. Which is fitting, considering that they're uglier than the good merfolk and prettier than the evil sahuagin.
Aranea are not very common in most campaigns. They're also neutral and probably a little more often enemies than allies of the PCs (which good guy wants to work with spiders?). They're also shapechangers, so they can look good when they want.
Harpies are common, though. And undead. And 4 kinds of dog-shaped outsiders - but belongs in another thread.

Heck, flumphs are Lawful Good!

And a joke race. Did WotC even convert them to 3.5?

On the other hand, evil gets to have succubi and erinyes.

If you want to compare outsiders, go ahead. Both LE and CE each have one appealing, humanoid fiend. How many do the good guys have and how nice do the other fiends look?
Besides, the evil seductive tempter role has to be filled by somebody and that somebody better look the part.

Oh, and among the giants, the evil frost giant has a nobler bearing than the neutral rock giant.

Yeah, ever since 3e. Besides, artists want to make cool pictures - not accurate pictures. The text says:

A frost giant’s hair can be light blue or dirty yellow, and its eyes usually match its hair color. Frost giants dress in skins and pelts, along with any jewelry they own. Frost giant warriors add chain shirts and metal helmets decorated with horns or feathers. [snip size] A frost giant's bag ... Everything in a frost giant's bag is old, worn, dirty, and smelly ...

Stone giants prefer thick leather garments, dyed in shades of brown and gray to match the stone around them. [snip size] ... A stone giant's possessions are neither particularly clean nor particularly dirty ...

[/sblock]

Hello rounser.
[sblock]

I read in a book called "The Blank Slate" which was about the evolution of the human mind that people innately attribute virtue to beauty, and the opposite to ugliness....just as weirdly as we attribute "filth" to lack of virtue. It makes no intuitive sense, but this is human nature, which often isn't designed to make sense.

It's true. Maybe it's because we react better to pretty people - and when we like somebody more, we're less likely to think they're bad people.

For moral ambiguity and grey areas, you can't go past humans.

Yeah. Most other neutral races also can work for that - whether it's evil halflings and gnomes or nice lizardmen and aranea. But for humans, being on all sides comes naturally.

As for slaughtering bunnies, that's what al-mi-raj are for. And to think some people don't like the Fiend Folio/Tome of Horrors...
Hehehe. Gotta love evil furries.

[/sblock]

 

[Klaus]

Kender.

 

[Gez]

Flumphs

And a joke race. Did WotC even convert them to 3.5?

In a way, yep!