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

[Yaarel]

Yes, it would. And our relationship to them
would still be vastly unlike that between elves and dwarves.

Referring to Elf,

The original Celestial Elf is a thought construct.

The Fey Elf is something like a force construct.

Hypothetically, a synthetic artificial lifeform could resemble something like either of these.

These would be "species".

I consider the Halfling to be a Human ethnicity. But suppose the Halfling is more analogous to a hominid species, like Homo floresiensis.

The Homo floresiensis alongside a synthetic force lifeform, would be analogues of a Halfling alongside an Elf. Scientists would taxonomize both as two different species.

 

[Hriston]

Just wanted to mention that, like Chainmail, D&D Vol. 1, Men & Magic seems to use type for what later became race. The first occurrence is on page 6 in the sentence "This will be dealt with in the paragraphs pertaining to each non-human type." Then on page 8, there's a section with the heading "Other Character Types" which is the section stating that a PC can be any kind of creature, even a dragon.

Class is also used in the section under "Languages", on page 12, which speaks of "language particular to a creature class".

The Monster Manual (1977) speaks of the "racial" tongues or languages of bugbears, gnolls, gnomes, and hobgoblins and of the "six major races of giants". Ixitxachitl, ki-rin, locathah, night hags, troglodytes, and xorn are also referred to as races.

The MM also says it's rumored that "leprechauns are a species of halfling with a strong strain of pixie."

 

[Mistwell]

I want this:

Creature Type: Humanoid (Mountain Dwarf)

That's it. Same for NPCs and PCs.

 

[Branduil]

IMO there are two separate uses for a term here, and they don't need to be the same.

1. The metagame term used by players when they are creating or thinking about their characters. In this case, we are thinking about the inherited traits our characters receive from their parents. In this case, Ancestry, Heritage, Lineage, Line, Origin, etc. all work well. It clearly communicates the idea behind the choice, since what we're focused on is what the character we're creating receives from the past.

2. The diegetic term that would be used in the world itself, by both NPCs and PCs. In this case, the aforementioned terms are a bit more awkward, because they could refer to a character's specific circumstances more than a much larger group. In this case, terms like Form, Folk, Kin, Kindred, Kind, Kinfolk, Peoples, etc. all work well and communicate the necessary idea of a large group with similar traits.

I suspect WotC went with a term like "species" because it can work in both cases, and this is technically true, but to me it's a very cold, clinical, and somewhat alien way to think about this. People have pointed out species is a fairly old term, and that's true, but it's commonly used in the context of scientific research. It doesn't feel like a term people would use about themselves, especially in the context of a community. And I don't think it's really necessary to choose a single word for every usage, any more than we need to reduce all words for humanity down to a single every-use term.

 

[Charlaquin]

Referring to Elf,

The original Celestial Elf is a thought construct.

The Fey Elf is something like a force construct.

Hypothetically, a synthetic artificial lifeform could resemble something like either of these.

These would be "species".

I consider the Halfling to be a Human ethnicity. But suppose the Halfling is more analogous to a hominid species, like Homo floresiensis.

The Homo floresiensis alongside a synthetic force lifeform, would be analogues of a Halfling alongside an Elf. Scientists would taxonomize both as two different species.

Except for the part where there are only minor cosmetic differences between then and they can make babies together.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Except for the part where there are only minor cosmetic differences between then and they can make babies together.

You mean exactly like Modern Humans and Neanderthals, two different species?

 

[Hriston]

You mean exactly like Modern Humans and Neanderthals, two different species?

There is no scientific consensus that neanderthals constitute a separate species from moderns. They are classified as Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, either as a separate species within our genus or as a subspecies of our own species.

ETA: IMO, the evidence of successful interbreeding between neanderthals and moderns would point to the correctness of the subspecies classification.

 

[Charlaquin]

You mean exactly like Modern Humans and Neanderthals, two different species?

Which unlike elves and halflings, do share a common ancestor - a fairly recent one at that.

 

[Bedrockgames]

There is no scientific consensus that neanderthals constitute a separate species from moderns. They are classified as Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, either as a separate species within our genus or as a subspecies of our species.

I am no scientist and I don't think the involved scientific debate about it is terribly relevant (especially since it looks like there are scientist who would classify them as a distinct species). But just looking it up it does appear that they are more typically thought of as a separate species but there is still some ongoing debate. Either way, species or a subspecies, to me that distinction between neanderthals and humans, and between those two and denisovans, seems comparable enough to the kind of difference you have in fantasy worlds between demihuman races for it to basically be species. Again, I think race works too and probably sounds better for fantasy (because I don't think it is being used in the way we use it when we talk race among humans) but if the word is an issue and needs to be changed, species seems to most accurately capture the difference to me between a dwarf and human or a human and an elf. Obviously though it isn't going to connect cleanly to a scientific classification because these are worlds with magic that often rely on mythic explanations of things.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Which unlike elves and halflings, do share a common ancestor - a fairly recent one at that.

Again this is setting specific. You can easily have a world where all the demihumans have a common ancestor. Some worlds will operate that way, some will be more mythic (i.e. the god of dwarves made the dwarves in some kind of creation myth). Again these are fantasy worlds they aren't going to connect cleanly to scientific terms that describe how life evolved on earth (since every fantasy world is essentially its own thought experiment in that respect).