D&D (2024) What new jargon do you want to replace "Race"?

[Scribe]

The strange thing to me, is that in one of these recent threads (generated by the packet) it was actually floated that non-human beings, ARE now seen as stand in's for the various human cultures or groups.

I found that a bizarre shift, from only a few short years ago when everyone was decrying the association of fantasy beings (I'm sorry I cannot type schlorp or whatever over and over) having cultural ties.

To me, the solution would be what we see in approach from MotM, if not in execution. Just give a general overview, and do not make associations with any real group, people, creed, ideology, or doctrine or any other 'self identification' at all.

An Orc is a Green/Grey hulking fantasy being. Full stop.
A Goblin, is a Green, diminutive fantasy being. Full stop.

There is no path forward otherwise, and this 'debate' will go on forever.

 

[Cadence]

I wonder if the most efficient way to stop a thread from derailing when you think part of it that you're involved in will lead it that way is to stop replying to everything after the first time you say you won't be replying anymore about that because you don't want to derail. If that's not doable, I wonder if the second most efficient way would be to start a new thread to deal with it in particular.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

At this point, if I were ever to do the impossible task of designing a fantasy game from scratch, I think I'd just have humans as the sole sapient species.

Modern culture just seems to have moved beyond the point where a set of different 'races' being better/worse at different things is acceptable. Unless they're all identical and basically humans with different 'hats' of course.

Lots of fantasy settings only have humans, so it's exactly unprecidented.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Is modern culture also going to demand that Vulcans not be as strong as humans?

EDIT: It is one thing to say this sentient fantasy people uses real life racial stereotypes in their description and we need to address this, but it is a completely different thing to say I just want to be able to pick my skin with no depth to the creature I'm selecting. At some point modern culture has gone too far IMO.

 

[Scribe]

At this point, if I were ever to do the impossible task of designing a fantasy game from scratch, I think I'd just have humans as the sole sapient species.

Modern culture just seems to have moved beyond the point where a set of different 'races' being better/worse at different things is acceptable. Unless they're all identical and basically humans with different 'hats' of course.

Lots of fantasy settings only have humans, so it's exactly unprecidented.

I dont think its needed, but I think a very flat generic view (again, see MotM) is what is required to pass the bar of acceptance these days. Just compare the Orc text from Volos, to MotM, its so night and day they may as well not be the same species.

 

[codo]

I think the question in each case is whether the persons reaction and interpretation is reasonable. I think most cases with stuff like orcs, they haven't been meant as stand-ins, and seeing them as such is a fairly recent phenomenon that has a lot of traction online, because of how online discourse works, but not outside the online sphere.

They weren't meant as racial stand-ins, except when they where deliberately, incredibly, racist stand-in for minority groups. See The Orcs of Thar and "Chief Sitting Drool". Yep nothing racist there. I don't know how people keep getting the idea d&d monsters are racially coded.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

Is modern culture also going to demand that Vulcans not be as strong as humans?

If vulcans got added to DnD, and had a +2 strength bonus. Then yes that is exactly what would happen.

 

[Bedrockgames]

They weren't meant as racial stand-ins, except when they where deliberately, incredibly, racist stand-in for minority groups. See The Orcs of Thar and "Chief Sitting Drool". Yep nothing racist there. I don't know how people keep getting the idea d&d monsters are racially coded.

And like I said, in specific instances people could use bad stereotypes. I haven't read the product in question but assuming everything I have heard about it here is correct, I would say this is an individual instance (frankly of a product I had never heard of before). But I don't think you need orcs to have negative stereotypes in games in a writer is intent on it and a publisher willing to let it go through.

I do think more broadly the idea that orcs are racially coded is not accurate. I think that is a very advanced media lens people are taking to orcs that most people don't bring to their reading of the creatures.

 

[Cadence]

At this point, if I were ever to do the impossible task of designing a fantasy game from scratch, I think I'd just have humans as the sole sapient species.

Modern culture just seems to have moved beyond the point where a set of different 'races' being better/worse at different things is acceptable. Unless they're all identical and basically humans with different 'hats' of course.

Lots of fantasy settings only have humans, so it's exactly unprecidented.

Lots of fantasy has different groups with particular attributes too - the different cabins in Percy Jackson (although sheesh, the name of the camp), the different bending groups in Avatar, the different animal species in Kung Fu Panda, etc... It feels like having things have some differences is fine. Is the question which ones touch on things we don't like to touch on with people (some group smarter than another?). And I think part of the difficulty is that some of the stats do to many things (why are all strong people good at hitting things? Why are all good archers able to dodge well and vice-versa?

 

[Xamnam]

In light of Cadence's post, and to not re-litigate dozens of locked threads, I will leave this particular topic with: I think there is enormous room for interesting differentiation, that won't lead to criticism, without using locked ASIs. Those are first and worst boring, and barely serve that purpose other than to encourage conformity. That does not mean there's no way for Schmorps to be acceptably different.

Also, D&D is clearly moving away from them, so it's a very moot point.

Back to the point of thread, Schmorp only seems to be gaining steam. How do we actualize this! Also, how do we keep people from losing the c, it's a common typo, but absolutely a fundamental part of the appeal.