D&D 5E (+)What Ubiquitous DnD Tropes Get It Totally Wrong?

[Aldarc]

Not when the characters aren't human. At that point humanizing the characters is the problem.

I agree wholeheartedly with @Oofta and @Bohandas because orcs are not humans.

Saying that "you can't dehumanize orcs because orcs are not human" is trying to get an easy pass on racism on a technicality while also misconstruing how the dehumanization occurs and what function it serves in the wider discourse of fantasy racism. For example, let's take a snippet from the article "Orcs and Otherness" (Race and Popular Fantasy Literature: Habits of Whiteness by Helen Young):

Descriptions of orcs often invoke dehumanizing animal imagery which is reminiscent of colonialist discourses that construct Whites as more evolved than any other people. Comparison to animals, particularly pigs, is common in almost all editions of D&D up to present. According to edition 3.0: "Orcs... look like primitive humans with gray skin, course hair, stooped postures, low foreheads, porcine faces with prominent lower canines,... they have lupine ears." ... The use of animal imagery is dehumanizing, but the common use of apes as a metaphor specifically references colonialist discourses of Blackness.

The book also features an image of orcs from 4th Edition, so she was familiar with that edition as well. So let's see how things differ in 5th Edition:

Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks.

So virtually unchanged? We could keep going, because there is an entire book that discusses this sort of thing. It's dehumanizing. Let's stop pretending that it's not just because "orcs aren't human." We're living in 2020 and not 1970 or even 1920. Let's act like it and do something about it instead of sticking our heads in the sand about the problem.

 

[Oofta]

I get accused of putting words into people's mouths and strawman about orcish culture being problematic because I compare them indigenous people and then we get a long post about the roots of orcs being coloniolism. Another saying (again) that for some reason it's okay for demons to be evil but saying orcs are evil is racism because ... reasons.

But the one I don't get is the repeated insistance that the monster manual claims orcs are "usually" evil. It doesn't. Savage ... constant war and hatred of elves in particular ... bloodlust ... lust for slaughter ... strength and power are the greatest virtues. Check. Usually evil? Not in the book.

But I get accused of lying and ignoring things that don't exist in the Monster Manual. Good grief.

Anyway, just popped in because I keep getting mentioned and accusations keep getting thrown.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

And, that, boys and girls, is why it has taken the better part of half a century for fantasy as a genre to catch up to the rest of the world. Oh, it's not such a big deal. We shouldn't worry about it too much. So what if we are perpetuating stereotypes that led to some of the most horrid episodes in history. It's all just part of the fun right?

For a hobby that prides itself on imagination and being aware of aliens and "others", sometimes I really despair over how conservative and stuck in a rut fantasy fans really are.

Yeah, that's a completely different thing than what the mantra was meant to be.

It's meant to excuse stuff like what the theme song says. If they're on a space ship, how do they get oxygen, food, water, etc.? The answer to that question being "It's not important to the story, don't worry about it". Not to excuse potential unfortunate implications.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

We're living in 2020 and not 1970 or even 1920. Let's act like it and do something about it instead of sticking our heads in the sand about the problem.

Well, 90% of recent things have taken orcs new ways (The Many-Arrows tribe in Forgotten Realms, the basically only line of defense against cosmic horrors in Eberron, there's probably some others that I don't know of in addition to those) so the problem is slowly being solved. There are still problems, but I don't believe it's necessary to bring the unfortunate history of Orcs up anytime Orcs are.

Maybe that's not's what happening here, I dunno, I'm not good at that sort of thing.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Saying that "you can't dehumanize orcs because orcs are not human" is trying to get an easy pass on racism on a technicality while also misconstruing how the dehumanization occurs and what function it serves in the wider discourse of fantasy racism. For example, let's take a snippet from the article "Orcs and Otherness" (Race and Popular Fantasy Literature: Habits of Whiteness by Helen Young):
The book also features an image of orcs from 4th Edition, so she was familiar with that edition as well. So let's see how things differ in 5th Edition:
So virtually unchanged? We could keep going, because there is an entire book that discusses this sort of thing. It's dehumanizing. Let's stop pretending that it's not just because "orcs aren't human." We're living in 2020 and not 1970 or even 1920. Let's act like it and do something about it instead of sticking our heads in the sand about the problem.

Did you even read the rest of my post? It isn't racism because it is a fictional creature in a game. If you draw connections between these creatures and humans, you are humanizing them. From the 3E description, the "look like primitive humans", not they "are". It is like people treating their pets like their children. They are pets and we can love them, certainly, but they aren't humans despite whatever connection we have with them. You are humanizing a creature, the orc, that is not human.

Any connection you see between them and racism in our history is your perception, not mine. I don't see it that way. It is as simple as that. It is a game. You can have orcs be as human as you want, but please don't insist we treat them the same and thank you. I will not reply to you or anyone else further on the subject of racism and prejudice. This forum is not the place for it.

 

[jasper]

Except for their creature type, which literally has the word “human” in it.

GROAN. Two arms thingys. Two leg thingys. a head or two = human NOID. Aka when we make the movie we slap green make up on the extra and call it an Orion um I mean we slap green makeup, two tusks, and a wonder woman bra and call it a female orc. Or game language to help id spell effects. ETC.
I think this orc is people too started with World of Warcraft.

 

[Hussar]

I get accused of putting words into people's mouths and strawman about orcish culture being problematic because I compare them indigenous people and then we get a long post about the roots of orcs being coloniolism. Another saying (again) that for some reason it's okay for demons to be evil but saying orcs are evil is racism because ... reasons.
/snip

Really? After all the verbiage in this thread, you STILL don't understand why.

Ok, try this out. Demons historically have never been used to dehumanize entire peoples. First Nations people and African people were never described as demonic as a justification for the attempted destruction of their culture. They were, on the other hand, described as animalistic and sub-human. Which is, as has been shown, EXACTLY how orcs are described in D&D. You, yourself, identified EXACTLY the problem.

Additionally, when we talk about genre fiction, demons are generally not described as sub-human. Demons are almost always a sort of force of malevolent nature. Engines of destruction. The demons in The Exorcist aren't a stand in for anyone and never really have been.

Then, we have genre fiction with the other sort of demon - a al Lucifer of the comic book and TV show. Again, power fantasy and totally not representative of any group of people.

Saying that orcs are evil is perpetuating a stereotype that has existed in the genre and been repeated over and over again, in genre fiction for hundreds of years. Saying Demons are evil is just like saying rain is wet. OTOH, if you can point me to a significant body of genre fiction where demons are treated as second class citizens where it's perfectly acceptable to strip away their culture, property and their history, then, fair, enough, demons would be problematic too.

Thing is, you can't. Because demons are POWERFUL. They are not stupid, or brutish. Of course you wouldn't use D&D demons to stand in for some minority group. Demons are scary. But, brutish, pig people? Well, they're fine to kill and whatnot. They deserve it right?

 

[Aldarc]

Did you even read the rest of my post? It isn't racism because it is a fictional creature in a game.

Sure, but reading your post doesn't mean that I'm obligated to read, particularly if it follows a suspect premise And I don't think that's a particularly compelling argument, so pass.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well, 90% of recent things have taken orcs new ways (The Many-Arrows tribe in Forgotten Realms, the basically only line of defense against cosmic horrors in Eberron, there's probably some others that I don't know of in addition to those) so the problem is slowly being solved. There are still problems, but I don't believe it's necessary to bring the unfortunate history of Orcs up anytime Orcs are.

Maybe that's not's what happening here, I dunno, I'm not good at that sort of thing.

Even most of the other orcs who dealt with Olbould and followed him didn't understand his decision to sign a treaty with the dwarves. Many still followed him because he was the strongest, not necessaily because they agreed with him. Others even tried to overthrow him because his choice did not follow the will of their god. If I still had the books, I would cite references.

 

[DammitVictor]

Which makes me think of a misconception of a different kind: D&D campaigns and other heroic fantasy adventures do not take place in the European Middle Ages and do not have to use history as a blueprint.

I wish more designers would take that to heart. I honestly do not know which is more stifling to the creativity of the fantasy genre: this bizarre fixation with copying this narrow range of human history, or the unwillingness to do the research to copy it well.

I mean, at this point, how much fantasy literature is based on a xerox of a xerox of a xerox of late 1970s wargame enthusiasts' fading memories of medieval scholarship from the early 1960s?