If someone reads about stupid, slobbering, green/grey-skinned, tusked, man-eating monsters that live only for war and are expert torturers and their first thought is "Those are obviously supposed to be black people", that says far, far, FAR more about them than it does the material.

Well, on the one hand, Orcs are not a "race" of humans, per se. Taxonomically, they're a different tribe or sub-tribe or something.

Usually orcs appear in a medieval fantasy world. Real humans in medieval times were willing to discriminate against other humans on the basis of class, religion, family, or even because the Pope had excommunicated a fellow Christian, to the point that people would even attack and loot such people. So the bad rep and violent treatment of orcs seems historically appropriate. So does the idea of monsters in general, even in human form (see trolls, and the historical notion of orcs and goblins).

I do think that sometimes some of modern racial tensions can been seen being mirrored and vented at in some games in the guise of orcs and other monster races. And I have seen (intelligent but dysfunctional in other ways) parents make rules such as "you can't play games where you kill humans, but aliens and monsters are ok - and I can play GTA but you can't - hey let's play some HALO).

Anyway, yes having orcs generally involves strong themes of accepted intolerance and violence towards a group of thinking humanoids. Being overly appalled at games with them and where it's morally ok to kill them... seems likely to be naive, but may also point to some areas worth looking at if it can be done without annoying judgementalism. Certainly though I would rather play or watch a straightforward dwarf vs. orc bloodbath with no moral compunctions, than suffer through a belaboured morality struggle with the possibility of orc reconciliation.

One of my favorite and often-used version of orcs is actually the description in In The Labyrinth, where they're basically just aggression-oriented humans with pointy ears and teeth and more skin color varieties, and who tend to have violent leader-follower cultures, but have the same stats as humans. Just like humans but more so, they have plenty of individuals who are thugs, some more agreeable individuals, and also some smart, likeable, benevolent and civilized ones. This puts the "blame" for bad actions and resentment and prejudice mostly on the shoulders of culture and individuals. Sure there are  discrimination/intolerance issues if one is interested in those, and there's the possibility for condoning what could probably be seen as horrible murderous behavior by players - but I'd say that's actually interesting and can ultimately be a good thing to have in a game because it can actually have players look at their own behavior in an imaginary context rather than towards actual real humans. Stifling and resisting messed up thinking is what has it persist until it explodes in ugly ways.

I'm not going to read the rpgnet thread. Nothing good ever comes from it.

But: it is remarkably easy to read the depiction of orcs as intentionally racist, if you are so inclined. Due to its popularity, Tolkien's work have been and sometimes still are appropriated by hard right escapists. It has happened before, it will happen again. However "can be re-interpreted by racists according to their world view" is not the same as intentionally racist.
However, there is also a premodern literary tradition influencing Tolkien's depiction of the work that is significantly older than classic racism, which can be traced from medieval chronicles to the Lord of the Ring: The depiction of outside raiders and invaders by the raided and invaded, using biblical images and motifs, the more apocalyptic the better. If you are so inclined, yes the prejudices and enmities of medieval times can be interpreted as racist, if you transfer completely modern, contemporary ideas and concepts into a medieval and therefore completely unmodern context.
The combination of real events and biblical motifs of destruction and apocalypse are a distinct trope of medieval reports about these outside forces, often bordering on the supernatural, mostly because the authors of these texts were monks who were familiar with the biblical elements.
So, clearly, the authors of medieval chronicles described the invaders and outsiders of their times, the Normans/Magyars/Turks/Mongols as the descendants of Gog and Magog,  and clearly these enmities therefore must be horrible savages and, as all educated people knew that these invaders were harbingers of the endtime. They are followed by swarms of locusts, you know.
Eventually, the Turkish invasion of the Balkans and eastern Europe combined these already established tropes with a new-found panic throughout Europe after the conquest of Constantinople (including the even then highly anachronistic idea of a renewed crusade movement), new media technology to spread all kinds of texts thanks to the printing press and an audience interested in tales of horror and blood thirst (that was nothing new, nor has it changed significantly). This spawned a whole genre of literature, the Turk letters, and, due to the ongoing presence of the Osman Empire at the fringe of the European border, including the sieges of Vienna, these had various revivals and an ongoing tradition - up to and including World War II propaganda. Its core is basically a mixture of a dehumanization of the enemy with an exaggeration of its military prowess and a focus on these martial aspects. The military strength is interpreted as a result of savagery (instead of simply better educated troops, which is a lot closer to the historical facts).
Now, enter a very well read professor of literature, well versed in medieval literature and prose, trying to emulate medieval literature and its elements in his own universe. And yes, there are elements of Turcica writings in Tolkien's works - some quite obvious- bloodthirst, the feeling of a great danger from the East, even the symbols of hand and eye (hand of fatimah) or some a bit more subtle: from Orkish drums to mehter, the oldest ongoing military music tradition.
So yes, Tolkien's Orks are inspired by the depiction of outside forces, especially Turks. Helm's Deep is actually at the Kahlenberg.

Quote from: soltakss;839359I've just read the thread

Congratulations on being the only person in the thread to do so.

Quote from: Axiomatic;839640Congratulations on being the only person in the thread to do so.

Yeah, the thread title got changed pretty quickly to something more appropriate too, and most seemed to disagree with the OP.

We're a bunch of drama-llamas.

I'm disappointed, as this commentary thread is longer than the offending rpg.net thread.

So, who is easily offended?

Quote from: One Horse Town;839642Yeah, the thread title got changed pretty quickly to something more appropriate too, and most seemed to disagree with the OP.

We're a bunch of drama-llamas.

Oh hey, there's no doubt about it, that thread didn't end up being too bad.  However, part of the reason is the author in question jumped in and did a decent job of defending himself, as well as the fact that the initial notion was pretty off-base from the outset in this case (and the thread starter was actually open to the notion that he was maybe reaching, which of course usually isn't the case with these deals).  Other threads I've seen have been much worse...

Quote from: Zevious Zoquis;839648Oh hey, there's no doubt about it, that thread didn't end up being too bad.  However, part of the reason is the author in question jumped in and did a decent job of defending himself, as well as the fact that the initial notion was pretty off-base from the outset in this case (and the thread starter was actually open to the notion that he was maybe reaching, which of course usually isn't the case with these deals).  Other threads I've seen have been much worse...

I think the recent "How can we improve" thread over there forced a few users to face some of the insanity, and there's been some backing away among the users. Maybe that's just my perception though.

I think this kind of stuff is worth talking about, as someone who voluntarily left rpg.net when things just got too weird. Talking about what was weird and why. The hangover of fandoms and communites over social justice crap.
It's gonna affect people for a while.

Theres only so many times one can have the same debate without it getting boring. And unlike many rpgnetters, echo chambers really disinterest me, and I think we're all pretty much of agreement on the subject, and our occasional trolls for the other side aren't representing at the moment.

Not to stoke the fire, however, but kinda amused Pundit hasnt started a thread about the Dark Albion thread over there where a user blatantly misrepresents him by saying he stated that playing Blue Rose "forces homosexuality" (which links to article in which he says he found the homosexual themes in the game heavy-handed and forced). But maybe even he gets tired of responding to the BS every once in a while.

Quote from: TristramEvans;839689Theres only so many times one can have the same debate without it getting boring.

As opposed to talking about Alignment or Dragonlance?

Everyone say hello to the SA goons stalking this thread!

Hello, goons!

Quote from: thedungeondelver;839720Everyone say hello to the SA goons stalking this thread!

Hello, goons!

Hello, fucktards!

Feel free to join the conversation if your balls ever drop.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;839717As opposed to talking about Alignment or Dragonlance?

Before that thread, I hadnt talked about Dragonlance in 15 years

Quote from: thedungeondelver;839720Everyone say hello to the SA goons stalking this thread!

Hello, goons!

Cool, how did you detect them!? Are they talking about us now somewhere? Can you link or quote any juicy comments from there?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;839728Cool, how did you detect them!? Are they talking about us now somewhere? Can you link or quote any juicy comments from there?

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3698899&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=59

Beware the stupidity and cowardice. Not even laugh-worthy.