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

[JamesDixon]

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

The first two editions of Basic D&D lifted a lot of the monsters and races directly from Lord of the Rings. It was so bad that Tolkien's estate issued a cease and desist. That's why in the third edition of Basic had all the races and monster names changed. The caveat is that he also used all the other sources as per AD&D 1E DMG's Appendix N. He only hid the Tolkien influences due to the threat of litigation by Christopher Tolkien who was in control of the estate until his death.

 

[JarlFrank]

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

The first two editions of Basic D&D lifted a lot of the monsters and races directly from Lord of the Rings. It was so bad that Tolkien's estate issued a cease and desist. That's why in the third edition of Basic had all the races and monster names changed. The caveat is that he also used all the other sources as per AD&D 1E DMG's Appendix N. He only hid the Tolkien influences due to the threat of litigation by Christopher Tolkien who was in control of the estate until his death.

That is true, but what was lifted from Tolkien was mostly the bestiary... and let's be honest, D&D's bestiary lifted from literally any source Gygax could get his hands on. Mythology, fantasy, religion, folk tales, classic horror, etc. You have ents and hobbits but also vampires and werewolves and minotaurs and frost giants and even goddamn animated dust bunnies that crawl in your brain and kill you.

Beyond the bestiary, there isn't much of Tolkien in D&D. The intended gameplay sequence is a lot closer to sword and sorcery than Tolkienesque high fantasy. Delving through ancient dungeons left by long forgotten civilizations in order to grab valuable magic artifacts while hordes of undead and eldritch horrors assail your party is pure S&S. I could imagine Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser going on a trip to one of the early D&D modules and having a good time looting the tomb, but I can't really imagine Frodo and Sam doing the same.

 

[JamesDixon]

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.

The alignment system comes from Michael Moorcock's Elric more than anything. The entire Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic and Good/Neutral/Evil axis specifically. Elric was Chaotic Good at best and Chaotic Neutral at worst.

The term races is not just an American thing. Plenty of Europeans used the entire race thing as well to push for eugenics. It's only a problem now because the SJWs are extremely racist and want to hide that racism.

 

[Desiderius]

want to return to their peaceful life again once the adventure is over

They may want to but see Scouring of the Shire. Not getting what you want is the whole point.

 

[Desiderius]

The alignment system comes from Michael Moorcock's Elric more than anything. The entire Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic and Good/Neutral/Evil axis specifically. Elric was Chaotic Good at best and Chaotic Neutral at worst.

The term races is not just an American thing. Plenty of Europeans used the entire race thing as well to push for eugenics. It's only a problem now because the SJWs are extremely racist and want to hide that racism.

I mean eugenics beats malgenetics. Peeps gonna eugenics on the sly whatever you do, might as well get that shit above board.

No the alignment system comes from the whole of human history. Law and the Good predate Moorcock for fuck's sake.

 

[JamesDixon]

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

The first two editions of Basic D&D lifted a lot of the monsters and races directly from Lord of the Rings. It was so bad that Tolkien's estate issued a cease and desist. That's why in the third edition of Basic had all the races and monster names changed. The caveat is that he also used all the other sources as per AD&D 1E DMG's Appendix N. He only hid the Tolkien influences due to the threat of litigation by Christopher Tolkien who was in control of the estate until his death.

That is true, but what was lifted from Tolkien was mostly the bestiary... and let's be honest, D&D's bestiary lifted from literally any source Gygax could get his hands on. Mythology, fantasy, religion, folk tales, classic horror, etc. You have ents and hobbits but also vampires and werewolves and minotaurs and frost giants and even goddamn animated dust bunnies that crawl in your brain and kill you.

Beyond the bestiary, there isn't much of Tolkien in D&D. The intended gameplay sequence is a lot closer to sword and sorcery than Tolkienesque high fantasy. Delving through ancient dungeons left by long forgotten civilizations in order to grab valuable magic artifacts while hordes of undead and eldritch horrors assail your party is pure S&S. I could imagine Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser going on a trip to one of the early D&D modules and having a good time looting the tomb, but I can't really imagine Frodo and Sam doing the same.

No argument there.

As for Tolkien's influence on D&D worlds you have to look no further than Forgotten Realms. That is a Middle Earth knock off with a unique slant. Gary's world is Greyhawk which is Great Britain and the Continent in general that started as low magic, but became high magic through TSR. Gary hated non-humans and wizards with a passion. That's why they are so mistreated from Basic to AD&D.

Arneson's world was a bit more Grimm's Fairy Tales European style dark fantasy world.

 

[JamesDixon]

The alignment system comes from Michael Moorcock's Elric more than anything. The entire Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic and Good/Neutral/Evil axis specifically. Elric was Chaotic Good at best and Chaotic Neutral at worst.

The term races is not just an American thing. Plenty of Europeans used the entire race thing as well to push for eugenics. It's only a problem now because the SJWs are extremely racist and want to hide that racism.

I mean eugenics beats malgenetics. Peeps gonna eugenics on the sly whatever you do, might as well get that shit above board.

No the alignment system comes from the whole of human history. Law and the Good predate Moorcock for fuck's sake.

I'm citing Gary Gygax himself on the alignment system. He got it literally from Michael with Michael's blessing.

 

[Humbaba]

The term races is not just an American thing. Plenty of Europeans used the entire race thing as well to push for eugenics. It's only a problem now because the SJWs are extremely racist and want to hide that racism.

The US is the only country where people are still classified by their "race". There are no such things as historically black colleges or a regional equivalent in Europe. It's just word association to the woke SS numbskulls. They hear the word race, think immediately of black people, then they read that certain races are evil and are subsequently immediately haunted by their country's history.

 

[JarlFrank]

want to return to their peaceful life again once the adventure is over

They may want to but see Scouring of the Shire. Not getting what you want is the whole point.

Your average RPG protagonist doesn't want to retire into a peaceful rural life.
Your average RPG protagonist is a professional adventurer who loves ripping treasure off the hands of dead orcs, and the D&D end-game isn't about retiring but about taking it to the next level and leading a small kingdom of your own (see Birthright).

Completely different motivations and mindsets.

 

[Riddler]

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.

Elves come from a different planet/plane, they aren't the same species even if they breed true with humans.

 

[JamesDixon]

The term races is not just an American thing. Plenty of Europeans used the entire race thing as well to push for eugenics. It's only a problem now because the SJWs are extremely racist and want to hide that racism.

The US is the only country where people are still classified by their "race". There are no such things as historically black colleges or a regional equivalent in Europe. It's just word association to the woke SS numbskulls. They hear the word race, think immediately of black people, then they read that certain races are evil and are subsequently immediately haunted by their country's history.

Dude I can pull up sources from the 19th century where Europeans described blacks etc... as separate races. I don't care what you think other than that. That's why Tolkien used races to describe elves, humans, etc...

It doesn't matter what the US does now in terms of race. When Basic D&D was written race was not a common thing asked on official documents. It only became more common in the 1980s and later.

 

[JamesDixon]

want to return to their peaceful life again once the adventure is over

They may want to but see Scouring of the Shire. Not getting what you want is the whole point.

Your average RPG protagonist doesn't want to retire into a peaceful rural life.
Your average RPG protagonist is a professional adventurer who loves ripping treasure off the hands of dead orcs, and the D&D end-game isn't about retiring but about taking it to the next level and leading a small kingdom of your own (see Birthright).

Completely different motivations and mindsets.

Okay... I guess Gary was doing it wrong when he wrote that most adventurers should retire at 7th level and the players roll up new characters. The Holmes Basic Set only went to level 3. The supplement went to level 6. They kept adding to it to increase the level limit, but Gary always stopped his games at level 7. Your character was supposed to retire and build a building suitable to their profession like castles for fighters.

 

[JarlFrank]

Okay... I guess Gary was doing it wrong when he wrote that most adventurers should retire at 7th level and the players roll up new characters. The Holmes Basic Set only went to level 3. The supplement went to level 6. They kept adding to it to increase the level limit, but Gary always stopped his games at level 7. Your character was supposed to retire and building a building suitable to their profession like castles for fighters.

Well, mostly because Gary thought the game stopped being fun at too high levels. That's why he designed modules like Tomb of Horrors to give players something to test their high level characters against.

And his reasoning was pretty solid because D&D is designed for mid-level adventures, once the level gets too high it just ends in ridiculous bloat.

 

[JamesDixon]

Okay... I guess Gary was doing it wrong when he wrote that most adventurers should retire at 7th level and the players roll up new characters. The Holmes Basic Set only went to level 3. The supplement went to level 6. They kept adding to it to increase the level limit, but Gary always stopped his games at level 7. Your character was supposed to retire and building a building suitable to their profession like castles for fighters.

Well, mostly because Gary thought the game stopped being fun at too high levels. That's why he designed modules like Tomb of Horrors to give players something to test their high level characters against.

And his reasoning was pretty solid because D&D is designed for mid-level adventures, once the level gets too high it just ends in ridiculous bloat.

That philosophy followed in AD&D as well. If you read the class descriptions and the DMG you'll see that it's heavily emphasized to retire the characters between 7-9.

Gary didn't really care for what Metzer did in the Red Box BECMI series. He hated the high level campaigns and saw how the system broke down once you reached 14th level. At 36th level the characters are essentially gods and can destroy the world if they wanted too. That's why they never printed stats for any of the gods to keep players from killing them. LOL

 

[Desiderius]

want to return to their peaceful life again once the adventure is over

They may want to but see Scouring of the Shire. Not getting what you want is the whole point.

Your average RPG protagonist doesn't want to retire into a peaceful rural life.
Your average RPG protagonist is a professional adventurer who loves ripping treasure off the hands of dead orcs, and the D&D end-game isn't about retiring but about taking it to the next level and leading a small kingdom of your own (see Birthright).

Completely different motivations and mindsets.

Your average RPG protagonist doesn't know what the fuck they want. Same with all the Hobbits but Sam, and even he had to fight for the right to knock that waifu up.

You're a dipshit Nahtzee who's fried your own brain with halfwit edgelord garbage.

 

[Desiderius]

I'm citing Gary Gygax himself on the alignment system. He got it literally from Michael with Michael's blessing.

And Michael got it from...

This isn't Rocket Science here for God's Sake. That's like saying he got the English Alphabet from Jack Campbell or some shit.

 

[JarlFrank]

You're a dipshit Nahtzee who's fried your own brain with halfwit edgelord garbage.

Take it out of Gary's mouth then:
http://grognardia.blogspot.com/2010/01/gygax-on-tolkien-again.html

What other sources of fantasy can compare to J.R.R. Tolkien? Obviously, Professor Tolkien did not create the whole of his fantasies from within. They draw upon mythology and folklore rather heavily, with a few highly interesting creations which belong solely to the author such as the Nazgul, the Balrog, and Tom Bombadil. All of the other creatures are found in fairy tales by the score and dozens of other excellent writers who create fantasy works themselves: besides Howard whom I already mentioned, there are the likes of Poul Anderson, L. Sprague de Camp and Fletcher Pratt, Fritz Leiber, H.P. Lovecraft, A. Merritt, Michael Moorcock, Jack Vance, and Roger Zelazny -- there are many more, and the ommission [sic] of their names here is more of an oversight than a slight. In the creation of Chainmail and Dungeons & Dragons the concepts of not a few of such authors were drawn upon. This is principally due to the different aims of a fantasy novel (or series of novels) and a rule book for fantasy games. The former creation is to amuse and entertain the reader through the means of the story and its characters, while the latter creates characters and possibly a story which the readers then employ to amuse themselves. In general the "Ring Trilogy" is not fast paced, and outside the framework of the tale many of Tolkien's creatures are not very exciting or different.

Tolkien includes a number of heroic figures, but they are not of the "Conan" stamp. They are not larger-than-life swashbucklers who fear neither monster nor magic. His wizards are either ineffectual or else they lurk in their strongholds working magic spells which seem to have little if any effect while their gross and stupid minions bungle their plans for supremacy. Religion with its attendant gods and priests he includes not at all. These considerations, as well as a comparison of the creatures of Tolkien's writings with the models they were drawn from (or with a hypothetical counterpart desirable from a wargame standpoint) were in mind when Chainmail and Dungeons & Dragons were created.

Take several of Tolkien's heroic figures for example. Would a participant in a fantasy game more readily identify with Bard of Dale? Aragorn? Frodo Baggins? or would he rather relate to Conan, Fafhrd, the Grey Mouser, or Elric of Melnibone? The answer seems all too obvious.

These are quotes from Gary Gygax himself. I'm not making shit up here.

 

[JamesDixon]

I'm citing Gary Gygax himself on the alignment system. He got it literally from Michael with Michael's blessing.

And Michael got it from...

This isn't Rocket Science here for God's Sake. That's like saying he got the English Alphabet from Jack Campbell or some shit.

As far as I know Michael created it with the rest of the Cthulhu writers as Elric is part of the mythos. I can only speak of where Gary got his ideas from. I make no further claims beyond what he said. If you have a problem with it then get a medium to contact him in the afterlife to explain why he chose the things he did.

 

[Humbaba]

Dude I can pull up sources from the 19th century where Europeans described blacks etc... as separate races. I don't care what you think other than that. That's why Tolkien used races to describe elves, humans, etc...

It doesn't matter what the US does now in terms of race. When Basic D&D was written race was not a common thing asked on official documents. It only became more common in the 1980s and later.

Omg no one was arguing about the origin of racial science and I never once mentioned Tolkien.

Yes it does matter what the US now does in terms of race, because removing inherent alignments is a current development. No one gives a shit about what Gygax may or may not have had in mind back when he invented D&D.

The fact remains that wokism originated in the US and that's for a reason.

 

[JarlFrank]

The fact remains that wokism originated in the US and that's for a reason.

It's because all Americans are inherently retarded. Ask fantadomat for more info.

 

[JamesDixon]

Dude I can pull up sources from the 19th century where Europeans described blacks etc... as separate races. I don't care what you think other than that. That's why Tolkien used races to describe elves, humans, etc...

It doesn't matter what the US does now in terms of race. When Basic D&D was written race was not a common thing asked on official documents. It only became more common in the 1980s and later.

Omg no one was arguing about the origin of racial science and I never once mentioned Tolkien.

Yes it does matter what the US now does in terms of race, because removing inherent alignments is a current development. No one gives a shit about what Gygax may or may not have had in mind back when he invented D&D.

The fact remains that wokism originated in the US and that's for a reason.

It actually didn't originate in the US. It's nothing more than rebranded Frankfurt School communism with the serial numbers filed off.

Nobody gives a shit about your thoughts either. You can have a seat now princess and drink a nice hot cup of STFU.

 

[Desiderius]

These are quotes from Gary Gygax himself. I'm not making shit up here.

Well he's wrong. Happens. He liked to get edgelordy too when he got jealous of Heinlein.

I mean Túrin Turambar? Thorongil? Yeah, Mithrandir was ineffectual. Right.

Tolkien himself talked all kinds of stupid shit about his creation later in life. The Death of the Author is just bullshitters wanting to bullshit but that doesn't mean the author is God either.

All the shit you're looking for is already there in Middle Earth. It isn't High fantasy, like Shakespeare it appeals to both Pit and Box and beyond.

 

[Humbaba]

It's because all Americans are inherently retarded. Ask fantadomat for more info.

It actually didn't originate in the US. It's nothing more than rebranded Frankfurt School communism with the serial numbers filed off.

Nobody gives a shit about your thoughts either. You can have a seat now princess and drink a nice hot cup of STFU.

 

[Desiderius]

As far as I know Michael created it with the rest of the Cthulhu writers as Elric is part of the mythos. I can only speak of where Gary got his ideas from. I make no further claims beyond what he said. If you have a problem with it then get a medium to contact him in the afterlife to explain why he chose the things he did.

You're missing the point. Law vs Chaos and Good vs Evil weren't copyrighted by Moorcock.

 

[Stokowski]

Did people forget the difference between race and species around the same time they forgot the meaning of "literal", or was it before?