Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

How Will WOTC New Approach to Races Effect the Future CRPG?

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,182
Location
Bjørgvin
The ironic thing about making all races equal stat wise, is that it will no longer be any point from a game mechanics POV to run a "diversity squad". If all races and both sexes are the same, I can just as well just run a party of male humans.
So making the races equal will (in my case, at least) reduce diversity.
 

Shadenuat

Arcane
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
11,955
Location
Russia
In their blind sense of what they think is simplistic unrealistic or problematic they will iron out everything actually diverse, interesting and exotic, until their setting would become a sterile wasteland.
 

Can't handle the bacon

Guest
The ironic thing about making all races equal stat wise, is that it will no longer be any point from a game mechanics POV to run a "diversity squad". If all races and both sexes are the same, I can just as well just run a party of male humans.
Why wouldn't you do that regardless of stats? Are you some kind of faggot who runs parties of - hahahahaha - FEMALE AND NON-HUMAN adventurers!?

As if such a thing could even exist. Ok, I could maybe buy the non-human part if it's done in good taste (hello, Tolkien), but that's as far as this heresy goes. Women stay home and make food, clean the house, raise babies, and have prophecies of their future with husband while on their sort-of death bed. And whatever it is that Galadriel does when she isn't on screen. That's it.
 

Can't handle the bacon

Guest
Oh, I forgot Eowyn. Sure, an occasional warrior maiden might be appropriate, provided it is a very rare exception which is acknowledged as such in-universe. And let's not forget that Eowyn wouldn't have landed a scratch on the Witch-King if it wasn't for Merry (a MAN... well, a halfMAN) first striking his shin (and thus destroying his invulnerability) with an ancient blade, forged and enchanted by the MEN of the ruined kingdom of Arnor with the specific purpose of being the bane of nazgul.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,182
Location
Bjørgvin
I like characters with diverse skills and stats and items they can use.
I care very little for the superficial diversity of how you look and dress.

It's like when some government agency is so proud of being inclusive and diverse, with members of diverse races and sexual orientations, but they all went to the same schools, have the same background from media and think pretty much the same. It's just superficial.
 

Can't handle the bacon

Guest
It's like when a shitflix show is filled with Black, East Asian, South Asian, Middle Eastern, Latin American, Pacific Islander and Native Antarctican characters, but they all act and talk like generic soulless current_year global citizens and have no personality traits beyond rage against the white patriarchy.
 

Joggerino

Arcane
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
4,472
The ironic thing about making all races equal stat wise, is that it will no longer be any point from a game mechanics POV to run a "diversity squad". If all races and both sexes are the same, I can just as well just run a party of male humans.
Why wouldn't you do that regardless of stats? Are you some kind of faggot who runs parties of - hahahahaha - FEMALE AND NON-HUMAN adventurers!?

As if such a thing could even exist. Ok, I could maybe buy the non-human part if it's done in good taste (hello, Tolkien), but that's as far as this heresy goes. Women stay home and make food, clean the house, raise babies, and have prophecies of their future with husband while on their sort-of death bed. And whatever it is that Galadriel does when she isn't on screen. That's it.
I like to make the priest/healer a woman, She's also eye-candy for the party.
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,464
Location
Frostfell
Good/Evil, Law/Chaos aren't mere concepts in D&Dverse. Are FORCES, spells, magical items and other things are heavily influenced by this forces. Humans living in the Thultanthar(shadow enclave) become vastly different. You can like or hate it but that is how the cosmos in D&D works. Changing it to appease SJW will lead to terrible consequences in the future.

Lastly, I wanna commit Orc Genocides in Gothic 1/2/3!!!
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,189
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
"Making “races” like orcs and dark elves inherently evil does two things. First, it presents a world in which good and evil are so simplistic that an entire culture, race, or species can be inherently evil. If someone were to transpose that way of thinking onto cultures or races today, it could lead to the worst sort of prejudice."


Allowing people with normie mindset into the hobby has been a terrible mistake and I wish there was a way to avoid that. It's not even the problem with them being SJW, their way of thinking is completely retarded at an even more fundamental level. The argument is basically "there are inherenlty evil races in D&D, that's not how evil or race works in real world so it needs to be changed to be more like real world". What these idiots are missing is that fantasy worlds are specifically created to be unlike the real world. Applying more real-world logic takes away all the charm and ultimately ruins it. Orcs aren't supposed to be blacks, they are the weird creatures gods and heroes killed in ancient legends: giants, fomorians, cyclops etc. Just made less epic, so that they could be opponents of low-level adventurers.

You could start from an SJW-viewpoint and arrive at a different conclusion: "people perceive orcs as blacks, this is a problem since they shouldn't be an analogue of a real world population, let's try to make them even more monstrous and alien to stop people from making that mistake". That could be bad for a different reason but at least it would show some love for the genre.

If this is widely accepted in the media we the result would be making all races more down-to-Earth which means changing them to resemble their nearest real world equivalent. So for example Orcs can't breed like rats (offensive to third world countries), can't be naturally stupid (offensive to blacks), can't be inherently evil either (again offensive to black). What they can be is just a group of sentient creatures who rely on raiding and robbery as a mean of survival due to socioeconomic reasons. Which makes them just bandits with different paintjob. Then you can have orcs wandering every major city as normal citizens. I mean why not, since they aren't less intelligent, more savage or more evil than the PC races. Of course all prejudice against half-orcs needs to be removed too. As a result Orcs as they had been known through the ages will simply cease to exist.
This of course can be further applied to all sentient humanoids making everyone indistinguishable. Kinda like Pillars of Eternity where they've decided to remove all the stereotypes associated with fantasy races, as a result you couldn't really tell if a character was an elf, a dwarf, a gnome or whatever. You could just as well make all recruitable NPCs human. The only exception are the Godlikes since fantasy racism makes them special. But racism is bad, even when presented as evil so all prejudice against them will also need to be cut in the future.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,010
I wouldn't really count on anything Wizards of the Coast does outside of the realm of video games having any impact on video games. It's not the '70s and '80s anymore where people developing RPGs are trying to do some take on this new or newish thing called Dungeons & Dragons...WotC doesn't matter when it comes to video games. For the most part the whole thing about stuff like Orcs being inherently evil seems like a pretty moot point given it doesn't seem like that's how other stuff plays it anyways, I feel like doing some kind of play on Tolkien (and D&D) that isn't the norm has been the norm for a long time now. When it comes to stats based on race, whether you see that or don't see it in future video games will have more to do with the audience than anything WotC does.

I'd imagine at this point and time, and going forward, if anyone is drawing any inspiration from D&D it's rule set stuff, (and not even modern rule set stuff) and how D&D drew on other fantasy fiction. I'd expect people pulling more from books, tv, video games, and movies when it comes to creating a setting a game takes place in more than modern table top D&D. When it comes to rules I'd expect future video games will be pulling from past video games and older table top games. There's only three ways I see future games copying D&D rules past, like, 3.5:

- The developer of the game is payed to by WotC
- A game based on whatever these modern rules are is a huge giant success
- Some new edition of D&D comes out and it's either greatly loved, a huge success that can't be ignored, or both
 

Cryomancer

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
14,464
Location
Frostfell
Btw all wypipo ARE evil. Oh, and kill all men too.

The ironic part is. Even if marxists manages to do that. They will just find another "evil oppressor", their ideology is only about oppressor x oppressed hence in soviet union, in less than a single generation the "oppressor" changed from aristocracy to land owners to hoarders(...) to even another communists. In Haiti, after they killed whites, the "mulatto" become the new group to be massacred during the 1804 Haiti massacre. People should be judged by his own merits, not by the color of the skin, class or anything else. Seeing people as oppressor X oppressed only creates tragedies as the history demonstrates.

Orcs aren't supposed to be blacks, they are the weird creatures gods and heroes killed in ancient legends: giants, fomorians, cyclops etc. Just made less epic, so that they could be opponents of low-level adventurers.

I strongly agree with everything that you said and one more thing. The "races" in the fantasy aren't like IRL "races". Are different species, drow are not "african elves", they are a completely different species who is adapted to live in a completely different environment(underdark).

QhD8GOx.png


And what makes this fantasy "races"/species interesting is their unique cultures and peculiarities. A Drow is a intelligent creature and can go against his/her nature? Sure. But that should be RARE!! Like Mind Flayer Arcanists which goes against his own culture. Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn did a amazing job portraying the drow city as a matriarchal cruel society. Same for orcs, half orcs should suffer with that condition. It is what makes then interesting.
 

Can't handle the bacon

Guest
The ironic thing about making all races equal stat wise, is that it will no longer be any point from a game mechanics POV to run a "diversity squad". If all races and both sexes are the same, I can just as well just run a party of male humans.
Why wouldn't you do that regardless of stats? Are you some kind of faggot who runs parties of - hahahahaha - FEMALE AND NON-HUMAN adventurers!?

As if such a thing could even exist. Ok, I could maybe buy the non-human part if it's done in good taste (hello, Tolkien), but that's as far as this heresy goes. Women stay home and make food, clean the house, raise babies, and have prophecies of their future with husband while on their sort-of death bed. And whatever it is that Galadriel does when she isn't on screen. That's it.
I like to make the priest/healer a woman, She's also eye-candy for the party.
Meh, all the best doctors are men. Priests too.
 

Yosharian

Arcane
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
9,420
Location
Grand Chien
Bears possess some of the most disagreeable personalities in the animal kingdom. While the Grizzly Bear immediately comes to mind as the most ferocious and dangerous bruin, it is actually a gentle giant compared to the true black sheep of the ursine rogue’s gallery. Weighing just 65 kilograms and measuring 1.5 meters in length, the Asian Sun Bear is the world’s smallest bear species, and the most ferocious, with the largest teeth in proportion to body size. This small beast is the most fierce bear on the planet, and will attack humans without provocation. A number of fatal maulings have occurred from an animal considered by some to be the most dangerous in the jungle.

Racist. How dare you assume all Asian Sun Bears are like this.

Forget the “Gentle Giant”—The world’s largest reptile also carries the most ferocious disposition. Saltwater Crocodiles reach lengths of over seven meters (23 ft) and may weigh up to 2,000 kg (4,400 lbs). Possessing immense jaws capable of the world’s most powerful bite, the full grown “Saltie” is not only the most physically capable killer among reptiles, but is considered the most aggressive, actively predatory and territorial crocodilian species. This super-reptile tends to view human prey as a simple meal, and they will rather casually consume humans on sight. Salt Water Crocodiles may also destroy boats and kill human and large animal intruders during territorial defense.

How dare you. I'm sure there are plenty of these crocs that are perfectly friendly. This is just bad writing.

“Taming of the Shrew” makes an excellent title for a Shakespearean Comedy, it would be next to impossible to civilize these somewhat bloodthirsty insectivores. Shrews resemble mice, but are in fact related to hedgehogs as a member of the insectivore group. Shrews distinguish themselves by their incredibly high metabolism, which gives them an extraordinarily high strung and vicious disposition. Shrews must eat constantly, and in order to sustain themselves, they savagely attack prey twice their own size, including mice, fish and frogs. Shrews can inject venom when they bite, but they normally kill by crushing the base of the skull. Shrew aggression is extremely hazardous to any animal that approaches, but the tiny beasts are so high strung that they have been known to drop dead from the stress of surprise before they can savage their adversary.

Excuse me? Did you just use the word savage to receive these mostly peaceful creatures? I'm literally shaking right now and you get the idea.
 

Peachcurl

Cipher
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
8,792
Location
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
In the real world, an inherently and unconditionally evil race (like the Drow) couldn't exist for any prolonged time. It would be self-destructive (or paradoxical). The same goes for unconditionally good. Doesn't apply to fictional settings that allow for unrealistic but consistent stabilizing factors (e.g., magic, divine power).
 

Yosharian

Arcane
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
9,420
Location
Grand Chien
In the real world, an inherently and unconditionally evil race (like the Drow) couldn't exist for any prolonged time. It would be self-destructive (or paradoxical). The same goes for unconditionally good. Doesn't apply to fictional settings that allow for unrealistic but consistent stabilizing factors (e.g., magic, divine power).
Depends how you define evil.
 

theLorry

Educated
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
40
The retards say:
1) Orcs are dumb, violent and dark-skinned, so they MUST be analogues for blacks.
2) SINCE orcs are analogues for blacks, they mustn't be portrayed as dumb and violent, because that's racist. Fucking brilliant, I love circular arguments.

Furthermore, that the fantasy genre in general, and D&D in particular, is derived from Tolkien's creation is a fact. Tolkien in his turn drew heavily on old, Norse/Germanic myths and legends, in which evil, dark and traitorous creatures are prevalent (trolls, goblins, dark dwarfs/elves [nibelungen], jötnar, etc -- call them what you will). These serve as the basis for evil creatures, such as orcs, in his Middle-Earth and by extension for orcs in D&D. Since the ancient Scandinavians and Teutons had never even seen a single fucking black person when they envisioned their myths, one should think that it would be a bit illogical to equate dark-skinned people with orcs (or any other fantasy being), but what do I know?
 

Humanophage

Arcane
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
5,032
I strongly agree with everything that you said and one more thing. The "races" in the fantasy aren't like IRL "races". Are different species, drow are not "african elves", they are a completely different species who is adapted to live in a completely different environment(underdark).
The drow can procreate with humans. Half-elves in general and half-drow in particular are a thing. The offspring don't even seem infertile. So yes, the drow are underground elves just like real life blacks are jungle humans (the drow also don't just live underground).

I'm not sure if the whole concept of species and races is applicable to a world where things happen due to magic, whether arcane or divine.

That said, I always thought "race" in fantasy is used in the traditional poetic sense, synonymous with "folk" or "kind". I.e., it's like poetically calling the English or the Slavs or cats a race.
 
Last edited:

Dycedarg

Learned
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
153
Libs get really uncomfortable with anything that suggests that some traits like intelligence and propensity towards violence are innate, especially with any possible correlation with race. So it's only natural that they would bitch about evil races and race related attribute modifiers.

Furthermore, that the fantasy genre in general, and D&D in particular, is derived from Tolkien's creation is a fact. Tolkien in his turn drew heavily on old, Norse/Germanic myths and legends, in which evil, dark and traitorous creatures are prevalent (trolls, goblins, dark dwarfs/elves [nibelungen], jötnar, etc -- call them what you will). These serve as the basis for evil creatures, such as orcs, in his Middle-Earth and by extension for orcs in D&D.

The problem here isn't that Tolkien or the creators of D&D pictured orcs as metaphor for black people, but that other people might. More importantly, the thought have certainly crossed the minds of many wokies since they are obsessed with racism.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,048
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Furthermore, that the fantasy genre in general, and D&D in particular, is derived from Tolkien's creation is a fact.

No:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_and_influences_on_the_development_of_Dungeons_&_Dragons
Gygax maintained that he was influenced very little by The Lord of the Rings, stating that he included these elements as a marketing move to draw on the popularity of the work.[7][8] However, in an interview in 2000, he acknowledged that Tolkien had a "strong impact".[9] According to the original Dungeon Masters Guide in "Appendix N: Inspirational and Educational Reading", the "most immediate influences" were the works of Robert E. Howard, Edgar Rice Burroughs, A. Merritt, H. P. Lovecraft, Fritz Leiber, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Roger Zelazny, and Michael Moorcock.[10] Subsequently, Gary Gygax listed the "major influences" as Robert E. Howard, L. Sprague de Camp, Fletcher Pratt, Fritz Leiber, Poul Anderson, A. Merritt, and H. P. Lovecraft, with "slightly lesser influence" from Roger Zelazny, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Michael Moorcock, Philip José Farmer, and others.

Gygax has repeatedly stated that the influence of Lord of the Rings on the development of D&D was minimal. He only acknowledged the "strong impact" in 2000, decades after the fact... and during these decades, everyone kept claiming that D&D and RPGs in general are primarily influenced/derived from Tolkien.

D&D carries a much heavier legacy of the pulp fantasy of the 30s and 40s, and the later sword & sorcery that developed from there. Conan, Elric, Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, etc. Stories about adventurers who don't set out to save the world, but seek adventure for personal profit or because they got somehow involved in it and now have a personal stake in the matter. Stories that usually follow an episodic formula where the hero or heroine goes from place to place, encountering new dangers everywhere they go. The very structure of a D&D campaign is exactly like that, at least in its original shape. Heroes who want to gather GOLD and EXPERIENCE go and fight bad guys for a REWARD from the local authority, then they move on and seek adventure elsewhere. That's in stark contrast to Tolkien's unwilling heroes who start from humble beginnings and want to return to their peaceful life again once the adventure is over.

D&D heroes are professionals: fighters, wizards, rogues, clerics who trained to be adventurers. This is their profession, and they have personal motivations for their actions: they don't kill the dragon to save the world, they kill the dragon because there's a reward in it (and in original D&D, experience gain was directly tied to the amount of treasure you found). It's sword & sorcery through and through, not Tolkienian high fantasy.

Read this: https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Jeffro-Johnson-ebook/dp/B01MUB7WS6
 

Humbaba

Arcane
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
2,939
Location
SADAT HQ
This issue stems from the fact that in D&D alignment is literally, physically real. It is as real as your blood type, with the difference that alignment can change and it determines where your soul goes after you die. In addition, races like orcs are the creation of objectively evil gods, who have their fixed place as an evil entity within the setting's cosmology. Removing inherent alignments in itself would not be a problem, were it not for the fact that it is an integral part to the D&D multiverse. Now, we all know why they removed them (virtue signalling) but it could theoretically work out if they made some drastic changes to the setting i.e. overhauling the entire cosmology.

Honestly, if they didn't use the incredibly American term "Races" and instead called them "Peoples" or "Species", no one would've ever complained.
 

Humbaba

Arcane
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
2,939
Location
SADAT HQ
The retards say:
1) Orcs are dumb, violent and dark-skinned, so they MUST be analogues for blacks.
2) SINCE orcs are analogues for blacks, they mustn't be portrayed as dumb and violent, because that's racist. Fucking brilliant, I love circular arguments.

Furthermore, that the fantasy genre in general, and D&D in particular, is derived from Tolkien's creation is a fact. Tolkien in his turn drew heavily on old, Norse/Germanic myths and legends, in which evil, dark and traitorous creatures are prevalent (trolls, goblins, dark dwarfs/elves [nibelungen], jötnar, etc -- call them what you will). These serve as the basis for evil creatures, such as orcs, in his Middle-Earth and by extension for orcs in D&D. Since the ancient Scandinavians and Teutons had never even seen a single fucking black person when they envisioned their myths, one should think that it would be a bit illogical to equate dark-skinned people with orcs (or any other fantasy being), but what do I know?

The whole "orcs as black people" argument is also so fucking American but the woke SS wants to make it seem like their specific kind of American racism is somehow universal and so we all have to repent for America's sins.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom