As the title says, they have "progressed" from race to species:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1393-moving-on-from-race-in-one-d-d
Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on December 01, 2022, 01:06:39 PM
As the title says, they have "progressed" from race to species:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1393-moving-on-from-race-in-one-d-d
How specieist. This is a game with half-dragons and centaurs and half-drow and half-orcs and etc and etc. Species does not work at all as a descriptor of the various critters and people.
Don't care; wouldn't play.
I'm ok with having the Race and species be different and follow more in line with how they break down animals Genus: Kingdom, Phylum, Class, etc. etc.
Species=Half-Dragon
Race=Red, Blue, Gold, Green, etc.
Species=Elf
Race=Drow, Forest, Aqua, etc.
Basically it's a BASE and then an ADD-ON.
It's going to be be a bunch of logical hoop jumping to get the fee fee's "right".
All in all it doesn't matter jack shit when you can click "Custom Lineage" and pick whatever the fuck you want to be if you think you are an elf with hooves and swim speed.
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Except humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs aren't separate species as they can all interbreed without issue. Race or Breed are the only accurate terms for what they are.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Except humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs aren't separate species as they can all interbreed without issue. Race or Breed are the only accurate terms for what they are.
Genos? Ancestry?
First they fixed racism in advertising by removing a black lady from a pancake box, now they've fixed racism in roleplaying games by renaming races "species". Bravo, WotC!
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Except humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs aren't separate species as they can all interbreed without issue. Race or Breed are the only accurate terms for what they are.
I don't really agree. I have to go from 1E, which is what I remember best, but there were halforcs and halfelves and no other crossbreeds, implying that the other combinations don't work. Also no quarter elves or orcs implying that the crossbreeds are sterile, which means the parents are separate species like horses and donkeys make sterile mules.
Of course it depends on which edition or what piece of fiction you're going from. It isn't really possible to make a generalization over all the stories.
I was also on a really long discussion of this topic at enworld or rpgnet a long time ago, and someone pointed that species boundaries aren't as simple as the "can produce fertile offspring" rule. There are a lot of weird cases with things like arctic birds.
(edited because I can't spel)
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
This is the main issue. Why don't they go ahead and change to metric distances and weights while they are at it? Maybe make up some kind of microbiology in the blood to explain how magic works, too.
That's sarcasm, in case someone was unsure.
okay good enough, i like this.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:44:03 PM
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Except humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs aren't separate species as they can all interbreed without issue. Race or Breed are the only accurate terms for what they are.
I don't really agree. I have to go from 1E, which is what I remember best, but there were halforcs and halfelves and no other crossbreeds, implying that the other combinations don't word. Also no quarter elves or orcs implying that the crossbreeds are sterile, which means the parents are separate species like horses and donkeys make sterile mules.
Of course it depends on which edition or what piece of fiction you're going from. It isn't really possible to make a generalization over all the stories.
I was also on a really long discussion of this topic at enworld or rpgnet a long time ago, and someone pointed that species boundaries aren't as simple as the "can produce fertile offspring" rule. There are a lot of weird cases with things like arctic birds.
Ring species are a strange example. They look like one species, except when they look like two species. But who needs that complexity for an RPG?
My take on quarter elves and the like would be to vastly oversimplify it and have a single gene determine species. Everyone has two copies. If you are human, you get HH alleles. If you are an elf, it's EE. When babies are conceived, they get one copy from each parent, so if the parents are a human and an elf, they are HE, i.e. a half-elf. If that half-elf goes on to have a child with a human, there's a 50-50 chance of the child being HH (i.e. human) or HE (another half-elf).
But if they are separate species, as OneD&D appears to have decided, then none of that makes sense.
I wonder how long until someone tells them they're claustrophobic and so they have to remove the word "dungeons" from their game's name to avoid triggering them.
I like how they say they're never going back to the term "race" and then immediately say how important it is to have a free and open discussion about this.
Typical leftist bullshit: Let's have an open discussion about how wrong you are.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2022, 04:23:11 PM
I like how they say they're never going back to the term "race" and then immediately say how important it is to have a free and open discussion about this.
Typical leftist bullshit: Let's have an open discussion about how wrong you correct we are.
Because it's all about them and how correct they are.
Just want to, once again, point out the superiority of B/X D&D. Your class is "Elf" so there is no need to choose between any problematic terms.
Oh wait, I just realized that "class" has racial overtones as in "lower class". Guess that's next to go.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 04:33:27 PM
Just want to, once again, point out the superiority of B/X D&D. Your class is "Elf" so there is no need to choose between any problematic terms.
Oh wait, I just realized that "class" has racial overtones as in "lower class". Guess that's next to go.
WOTC can't change the clones created under the OGL. They could re-release BX or BECMI, or AD&D hardcovers themselves, via a retcon; and announce that the new cleansed updates are official offerings for anyone curious about older editions.... But they can't edit OSE, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, etc. Clean alternatives to WOTC's maneuvers to outwit their competition, would still exist. I'm sure they are kicking themselves, over the existing OGL legacy.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 04:33:27 PM
Just want to, once again, point out the superiority of B/X D&D. Your class is "Elf" so there is no need to choose between any problematic terms.
Oh wait, I just realized that "class" has racial overtones as in "lower class". Guess that's next to go.
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160 (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160)
Some half orcs can pass as human, some have pig-faces. That doesn't seem like they are the same mix.
would say 1/4 elves and 1/8 elves are all known as Half Elves. Genological records are untrustworthy in most fantasy worlds (except Westeros).
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 01, 2022, 07:01:35 PM
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160 (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160)
If someone had to guess, where about are we on the timeline to 100% 1984?
From D&Done:
"Having an open conversation around the term "race" is both important and challenging."
Which is why we're cleansing the word "Race" from our lexicon, and shutting down anyone who, in the conversation, criticizes of our decision.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:44:03 PM
I don't really agree. I have to go from 1E, which is what I remember best, but there were halforcs and halfelves and no other crossbreeds, implying that the other combinations don't work. Also no quarter elves or orcs implying that the crossbreeds are sterile, which means the parents are separate species like horses and donkeys make sterile mules.
AD&D, according to the PHB Halflings may have elven or dwarven blood. Thunder Rift has an elf-dwarf hybrid.
2e though was where they went wild. Half-gnolls, half-kobolds, half-dragons, half-dwarves, half-infernal, half-celestial, half-elemental, half-ogre, and those are just the ones I can recall. BECMI had a centaur-pegasus hybrid race.
Quote from: Brad on December 01, 2022, 08:43:52 PM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 01, 2022, 07:01:35 PM
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160 (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160)
If someone had to guess, where about are we on the timeline to 100% 1984?
Comrade, D&DOceania has always been at war with the
racesspecies of Eastasia.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
On the surface, the change is reasonable. The problem is context is everything and in the context of OneDnD it has nothing to do with better terminology and everything to do with culture war crap.
And given the fight against "biological determinism" in D&D, species won't satisfy anyway.
Does that mean we get our "species" based ability modifiers back?
Quote from: Brad on December 01, 2022, 03:37:55 PM
First they fixed racism in advertising by removing a black lady from a pancake box, now they've fixed racism in roleplaying games by renaming races "species". Bravo, WotC!
Quote from: Cathode Ray on December 01, 2022, 08:58:13 PM
From D&Done:
"Having an open conversation around the term "race" is both important and challenging."
Which is why we're cleansing the word "Race" from our lexicon, and shutting down anyone who, in the conversation, criticizes of our decision.
Can't be racist if there's no races (https://archive.ph/Vxx2L).
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 01, 2022, 07:01:35 PM
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 04:33:27 PM
Just want to, once again, point out the superiority of B/X D&D. Your class is "Elf" so there is no need to choose between any problematic terms.
Oh wait, I just realized that "class" has racial overtones as in "lower class". Guess that's next to go.
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160 (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160)
For fucks sake! Literally they won't be happy until every character is a grey goo. Next - 7th edition to be titled "Somethings & Somethings" so no one offended?
Most annoying thing to me is my own Thundarr the Barbarian inspired system (post-post apocalyptic mix of superscience and sorcery) used species because it did better fit the setting.
Now I don't want it to because it'll look like I'm agreeing with WotC's garbage.
So, I dunno, maybe I'll use Ancestry (even though I hate it) so it can be the ABC's of Character Creation (Ancestry, Background, Class)?
Quote from: Brad on December 01, 2022, 08:43:52 PM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 01, 2022, 07:01:35 PM
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160 (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/one-d-d-cleric-class-and-revised-species.905009/post-24605160)
If someone had to guess, where about are we on the timeline to 100% 1984?
101%
RQ used species, but as someone above pointed out, it sounds too Sci-fi.
Marketing hype aside, it seems like a reasonable choice to me. It's something that quite a few people in their audience have been asking for for a while. If they think it'll deflect the lefty criticisms though, they're wrong. The complaint was never about fantasy races. It was about the idea that they're coded references to real-world races. Changing the name isn't going to change that.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 04:33:27 PM
Just want to, once again, point out the superiority of B/X D&D. Your class is "Elf" so there is no need to choose between any problematic terms.
Oh wait, I just realized that "class" has racial overtones as in "lower class". Guess that's next to go.
Nobody questions it anymore, just because D&D has so proliferated the term, but "class" is a weird choice when you compare it to something like "profession" or "archetype". No one in the real world would say "my class is welder". I assume it's another artifact of wargaming, where you would talk about classes of ships and soldiers. (e.g. the Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carrier).
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 01, 2022, 03:31:56 PM
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:14:39 PM
I've always thought that species was a better term than race for demihumans, the only problem being that it sounds to sciencey for a fantasy game.
Except humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs aren't separate species as they can all interbreed without issue. Race or Breed are the only accurate terms for what they are.
I thought this as well, but after the topic came up in another thread, I went and looked it up and there are a surprising number of species that actually can interbreed with each other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_hybrids. Many of them have genetic problems of one kind or another, but there are more viable hybrids out there than I ever realized.
That said, I think you raise a problem with the change. By switching from the more nebulous and literary term "race" to the more scientific "species", they invite this kind of questioning. Not sure it's a great idea to make a change to your fantasy world that encourages people to debate the evolutionary genetics of its inhabitants.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2022, 08:10:40 AM
Most annoying thing to me is my own Thundarr the Barbarian inspired system (post-post apocalyptic mix of superscience and sorcery) used species because it did better fit the setting.
Now I don't want it to because it'll look like I'm agreeing with WotC's garbage.
So, I dunno, maybe I'll use Ancestry (even though I hate it) so it can be the ABC's of Character Creation (Ancestry, Background, Class)?
Don't let them dictate to you, even when they do something stupid that on the surface makes you look in their camp. That's letting them make decisions for you.
I dropped alignment in my system because it really didn't have any purpose for what I was doing (and I intend to eventually put something else where it would go). Decision made couple of years ago, and done on its merits.
Quote from: ForgottenF on December 02, 2022, 08:16:23 AM
Nobody questions it anymore, just because D&D has so proliferated the term, but "class" is a weird choice when you compare it to something like "profession" or "archetype". No one in the real world would say "my class is welder". I assume it's another artifact of wargaming, where you would talk about classes of ships and soldiers. (e.g. the Nimitz-Class Aircraft Carrier).
Not exactly. There is a wargaming element to it, which probably did affect the choice of the term initially. However, it would be going too far to assume that a D&D class is nothing more than a profession, archetype, or some other term you might use, such as "template". Part of the reason "class" sticks is because the widget sits in this weird intersection of mechanics, setting, and character activity that doesn't have an exact word for what it is. Depending on their preferences in play, some people bend the idea into 95% archetype or profession or whatever, but that's not the whole picture.
This entire thing is semantic masturbation, cuz not even "science" has a clear definition on WTF these terms. Any claim or implications to the contrary is just self-assured BS from armchair authorities in the internet—and not just SJWs obsessed with associating "race" with RaIcIsM, but also people making hardline declarations about where the line is drawn in regards to WTF constitutes a "species", such as "different species can't interbreed" which is something that gets contradicted with actual science. And all the whining in the internet that if different species CAN interbreed that maybe they need to change these terms cuz they're just confusing isn't gonna change the fact that they haven't been changed and that such decisions can't be decided by random posters in an internet forum.
Insisting that "Species/Race" just means this or that is just you imposing your own preferred usage in your own tiny corner of the internet where the rest of humanity can't benefit from your supreme understanding of language, so it's all pointless even if we assume that you have a valid point.
In terms of the existing or historical scope of what these terms mean/have meant, however, the term "Race" is a perfectly serviceable term for different categories of being for purposes of a game based on fictional worlds. Race has been used to mean not just ethnic groups, but also nations of people, etc. Its a pretty broad term that can be easily adapted for different uses, and it's association with rAiCiSm has been basically willed into existence by race obsessed imbeciles who want to control language. But in the vast majority of cases "race" is just a neutral term used as a shorthand to mean different groups of people.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on December 02, 2022, 08:18:49 AM
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2022, 08:10:40 AM
Most annoying thing to me is my own Thundarr the Barbarian inspired system (post-post apocalyptic mix of superscience and sorcery) used species because it did better fit the setting.
Now I don't want it to because it'll look like I'm agreeing with WotC's garbage.
So, I dunno, maybe I'll use Ancestry (even though I hate it) so it can be the ABC's of Character Creation (Ancestry, Background, Class)?
Don't let them dictate to you, even when they do something stupid that on the surface makes you look in their camp. That's letting them make decisions for you.
I dropped alignment in my system because it really didn't have any purpose for what I was doing (and I intend to eventually put something else where it would go). Decision made couple of years ago, and done on its merits.
Yeah, as others pointed out, the usage of "species" in fantasy and sci fi has been around for decades. Nobody is going to think the decision was influenced by WOTC. It's the same thing with alignment. People have been talking about ditching it for as long as I can remember, and there are perfectly good non-PC arguments for doing so.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2022, 08:10:40 AM
Most annoying thing to me is my own Thundarr the Barbarian inspired system (post-post apocalyptic mix of superscience and sorcery) used species because it did better fit the setting.
Now I don't want it to because it'll look like I'm agreeing with WotC's garbage.
So, I dunno, maybe I'll use Ancestry (even though I hate it) so it can be the ABC's of Character Creation (Ancestry, Background, Class)?
I ended up using the term "Race" in my own system, cuz "Species" and "Ancestry" are imprecise terms as well, and "Class" (another term I considered) has become associated with "professions" in RPGs. And "Race" is a good enough term anyways that had become standard in RPGs till recent years, before the Culture War hysteria, plus it pisses off the right people. So "Race" it is.
But really you should just use whatever term is appropriate to your own game and the type of "feel" you're trying to invoke. I prefer "race" cuz it's a generic term and I'm making a generic system.
I like the ABC thing.
Quote from: Brad on December 01, 2022, 03:37:55 PM
First they fixed racism in advertising by removing a black lady from a pancake box, now they've fixed racism in roleplaying games by renaming races "species". Bravo, WotC!
"Oriental" is racist. "Asian" is not.
They hate Romans, but not Greeks.
Quote from: mightybrain on December 02, 2022, 03:12:31 AM
Does that mean we get our "species" based ability modifiers back?
Nope, because that's not what this is about. In fact, people saying "well, if they are different specifies then abilities modifiers make sense" will be used as proof we're all racists and orcs are black people and we need another change.
Because the people driving this aren't about clean language, but about making you kowtow to them. You do it once and they'll find the next way to make you do it.
I dislike using the term "race" in RPGs. A dragonborn, warforged, or even dwarf is an entirely different creature.
I also dislike the term being used for people, there is only one humanity, we are all the same, unlike dwarves and elves.
I use "ancestry" because it sounds more "fantasy" than "species".
(PF 2 uses ABC, I treid doing AABCDEF for fun: ancestry, abilities, background, class, detailes, equipment, and final touches... but that might be pushing it)
Quote from: tenbones on December 02, 2022, 10:16:09 AM
"Oriental" is racist. "Asian" is not.
They hate Romans, but not Greeks.
Well...Greeks were more into buttsex so it makes sense I suppose.
Why stop here? Other "problematic" words:
Advantage/Disadvantage - Check your privilege!
Monster - Ableist!
Dwarf - Ableist!!!
Hit - Domestic abuse is no joke.
Carousing - Triggering to recovering addicts.
Homebrew - Alcoholism!
Murderhobo - Denigrating to the homeless.
Wizard - What is this? A chapter of the KKK?
Race was actually a better word, at least historically speaking.
The reason was that "race" as used in the 1800s, and continued by Tolkien (who was often deliberately old fashioned), to mean any population with some sort of distinguishing characteristic. Hence, "the human race" (still used today), but also "various human races" could be used at the same time. So, since we don't know exactly what fantasy races are in "scientific" terms, but they seem to interbreed (both in myth and Tolkien's work) "race" was entirely appropriate but "species" was not.
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
The grifter is trying to get back into the game now that WOTC has moved off of the Asian projects.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
Quote from: Brad on December 02, 2022, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
It's an attempt to Use Big Words to Sound Smartest
Codifying that a half elf is different than a Dwarf is apparently Racist and Problematic.
This goes back to the fact that some people will never be happy, have nothing else in their lives to bring happiness too, and will do everything in their power to shit on other people's joy as they are dead in their heart.
Strange how people can agree on something for completely different reasons. Kwan thinks "species" is racist and essentialist. We think it's scientifically inaccurate and too modern-sounding for fantasy.
Quote from: Brad on December 02, 2022, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
It relates to the idea that acknowledging racial differences = "BiOlOgYcAl EsSeNtIAlIsM" (aka. observable reality), which is supposedly the basis for racial oppression. Cuz acknowledging that different classes of being exist inevitably leads to racism or something, and the enactment of oppressive systems in society.
Kwan is so painfully Torontonian: living in the dream bubble.
I guess he's in the 'never happy' camp unless he's had a hand in the changes.
It's too bad. I liked his Ross Rifles and the Canadian aspect of it, when the content was more important than context.
Losing 'Race' was going to be inevitable in the new D&D, so not exactly surprised. Amusing to watch the results show that any RPG terminology change will never be the 'right' change. Fumble away WoTC on your fruitless quest and keep those windmills at bay.
Quote from: Trond on December 02, 2022, 11:15:09 AM
Race was actually a better word, at least historically speaking.
The reason was that "race" as used in the 1800s, and continued by Tolkien (who was often deliberately old fashioned), to mean any population with some sort of distinguishing characteristic. Hence, "the human race" (still used today), but also "various human races" could be used at the same time. So, since we don't know exactly what fantasy races are in "scientific" terms, but they seem to interbreed (both in myth and Tolkien's work) "race" was entirely appropriate but "species" was not.
Exactly. There's no benefit to this change. "Species" doesn't improve legibility in any way, it actually hinders it.
Fortunately, I will never buy any more WotC products, so it's fine. If they want to spiral off into turning their product into a festering pit of Anti-Reality, Anti-White ideological hatred, good. I won't support it.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
Damn, hadn't seen that when I wrote my comment above, but I got it exactly right.
Quote from: Skullking on December 02, 2022, 06:15:04 AM
For fucks sake! Literally they won't be happy until every character is a grey goo. Next - 7th edition to be titled "Somethings & Somethings" so no one offended?
It'd probably be more accurate to call Nothing & Nothing.
Quote from: Trond on December 02, 2022, 11:15:09 AMSo, since we don't know exactly what fantasy races are in "scientific" terms, but they seem to interbreed (both in myth and Tolkien's work) "race" was entirely appropriate but "species" was not.
In Tolkien, elves and men were supposedly the first and second born children of the same god. Interbreeding was possible but still very rare. They also rarely interbred with the maia (angels). Orcs were corrupted elves so by extension they might also interbreed. Other than that, they were separate. No half dwarves, half hobbits, half ents, or half trolls. No dwelfs.
Quote from: mightybrain on December 02, 2022, 06:35:05 PM
Quote from: Trond on December 02, 2022, 11:15:09 AMSo, since we don't know exactly what fantasy races are in "scientific" terms, but they seem to interbreed (both in myth and Tolkien's work) "race" was entirely appropriate but "species" was not.
In Tolkien, elves and men were supposedly the first and second born children of the same god. Interbreeding was possible but still very rare. They also rarely interbred with the maia (angels). Orcs were corrupted elves so by extension they might also interbreed. Other than that, they were separate. No half dwarves, half hobbits, half ents, or half trolls. No dwelfs.
Yeah. And it is similar in D&D. Half races are the rare exception. not the rule. No half gnomes or half halflings. There are also exceptions that can breed like ligers in the real world.
So species might fit, but it clashes in flavor with a pseudomedieval fantasy setting. I think "lineage" works better.
Some of these fucking people could suck the fun out of just about anything. How miserable a person has to be to get around to making a big stink about something like this is beyond me.
It'll just be something else next year and it's just the same old grift. Once you declare a problem solved, no one will pay you to keep fighting.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on December 02, 2022, 10:40:06 AM
I dislike using the term "race" in RPGs. A dragonborn, warforged, or even dwarf is an entirely different creature.
Dwarves are pretty near-human. They definitley are not an entirely different creature. Too many similarites to humans. Dragonborn are dragon-people, with a very similar body structure. Being part dragon does put them further from humans. Warforged are possibly the furthest in difference.
Quote from: Brad on December 02, 2022, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
Yes. It's that particular branch of progressive oppression politics. Everything is oppressive, and if it isn't, you haven't looked hard enough.
Quote from: oggsmash on December 02, 2022, 07:25:03 PM
Some of these fucking people could suck the fun out of just about anything. How miserable a person has to be to get around to making a big stink about something like this is beyond me.
It's a system of belief that forbids escapism, fun, or happiness, there is only the Party (or the State, Religion, or Revolution). I'm reminded of that old quote from the Ayatollah (paraphrased); "There's no music in Islam".
Quote from: jhkim on December 02, 2022, 06:42:33 PM
Quote from: mightybrain on December 02, 2022, 06:35:05 PM
Quote from: Trond on December 02, 2022, 11:15:09 AMSo, since we don't know exactly what fantasy races are in "scientific" terms, but they seem to interbreed (both in myth and Tolkien's work) "race" was entirely appropriate but "species" was not.
In Tolkien, elves and men were supposedly the first and second born children of the same god. Interbreeding was possible but still very rare. They also rarely interbred with the maia (angels). Orcs were corrupted elves so by extension they might also interbreed. Other than that, they were separate. No half dwarves, half hobbits, half ents, or half trolls. No dwelfs.
Yeah. And it is similar in D&D. Half races are the rare exception. not the rule. No half gnomes or half halflings. There are also exceptions that can breed like ligers in the real world.
So species might fit, but it clashes in flavor with a pseudomedieval fantasy setting. I think "lineage" works better.
Not sure if that sounds better though. How about "kin"? Elf-kin and dwarf-kin etc.
Quote from: Trond on December 03, 2022, 01:50:18 AM
Not sure if that sounds better though. How about "kin"? Elf-kin and dwarf-kin etc.
While I personally prefer "race", for its traditional meaning, I think "kin" is a good word, much better than "species". "Kind" would also work.
"Kin" is something that I would use for anthropomorphic animals: Catkin, Dogkin, Lizardkin, etc. "Lineage" (much like "ancestry") is something that could apply to different humans of the same race (two European/"White" people could have a different ancestry or lineage). That's why all of these alternate terms for "race" are bullshit. None of them work better than or even equal to "race" as an adequate term to refer to different classes of being.
Quote from: VisionStorm on December 02, 2022, 12:08:36 PM
Quote from: Brad on December 02, 2022, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
It relates to the idea that acknowledging racial differences = "BiOlOgYcAl EsSeNtIAlIsM" (aka. observable reality), which is supposedly the basis for racial oppression. Cuz acknowledging that different classes of being exist inevitably leads to racism or something, and the enactment of oppressive systems in society.
My take for what it's worth: when it comes to wokists, you have got your casual ones, your dumb ones, and your smart-but-evil ones.
The casual ones think being woke is just about not being prejudiced against people who are different from you. A lot of them are actually decent people in my experience; they just haven't thought it through enough. Some of them grow up to be either...
The dumb woke: who think anything that prevents them indulging their immediate whims now with only good consequences = oppression.
The smart, evil woke: who want to be able to define what is "oppression" so they can seize control of language, culture and thought, in order to exercise power. Going back to 1984 mentioned above, these people want to be wearing the boot that is stamping on a human face, forever. I struggle to get inside the headspace but a casual glance at history suggests there are always some of these people around.
Anyway... yeah can't think of a better term than race for, er, races, although I'd take -kin as an acceptable 2nd-best and occasional change for variety's sake.
Quote from: amacris on December 03, 2022, 02:49:54 AM
Quote from: Trond on December 03, 2022, 01:50:18 AM
Not sure if that sounds better though. How about "kin"? Elf-kin and dwarf-kin etc.
While I personally prefer "race", for its traditional meaning, I think "kin" is a good word, much better than "species". "Kind" would also work.
Race works if your available options are demihumans and the like. It feels a bit inadequate once you've got non-humanoid creatures (talking animals, dragons, unicorns, etc.) as player options. Even 'species' feels inadequate once you add golems and embodied spirits (elementals, divine servitors, etc.) so options aren't even sharing the same taxonomic charts.
"Kind" though I think might work better for my purposes as Humankind, Dwarfkind, Dragonkind and Golemkind all sound grammatically correct.
I'd reserve Species for Sci-Fi settings and Ancestry or Heritage for Fantasy settings.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 03, 2022, 09:32:22 AM
Quote from: amacris on December 03, 2022, 02:49:54 AM
Quote from: Trond on December 03, 2022, 01:50:18 AM
Not sure if that sounds better though. How about "kin"? Elf-kin and dwarf-kin etc.
While I personally prefer "race", for its traditional meaning, I think "kin" is a good word, much better than "species". "Kind" would also work.
Race works if your available options are demihumans and the like. It feels a bit inadequate once you've got non-humanoid creatures (talking animals, dragons, unicorns, etc.) as player options. Even 'species' feels inadequate once you add golems and embodied spirits (elementals, divine servitors, etc.) so options aren't even sharing the same taxonomic charts.
"Kind" though I think might work better for my purposes as Humankind, Dwarfkind, Dragonkind and Golemkind all sound grammatically correct.
Yeah, I like "kind" - which works better for warforged or golems. I think "kin" is similar to "lineage" in that it implies ancestry. I feel like "kin" as well as "race" implies a cohesive group, but kinds like half-elf or aasimar aren't a group. Figures like Merlin or many Greek heroes aren't fully human in ancestry, but they aren't part of a separate race.
Quote from: jhkim on December 03, 2022, 01:18:34 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 03, 2022, 09:32:22 AM
Quote from: amacris on December 03, 2022, 02:49:54 AM
Quote from: Trond on December 03, 2022, 01:50:18 AM
Not sure if that sounds better though. How about "kin"? Elf-kin and dwarf-kin etc.
While I personally prefer "race", for its traditional meaning, I think "kin" is a good word, much better than "species". "Kind" would also work.
Race works if your available options are demihumans and the like. It feels a bit inadequate once you've got non-humanoid creatures (talking animals, dragons, unicorns, etc.) as player options. Even 'species' feels inadequate once you add golems and embodied spirits (elementals, divine servitors, etc.) so options aren't even sharing the same taxonomic charts.
"Kind" though I think might work better for my purposes as Humankind, Dwarfkind, Dragonkind and Golemkind all sound grammatically correct.
Yeah, I like "kind" - which works better for warforged or golems. I think "kin" is similar to "lineage" in that it implies ancestry. I feel like "kin" as well as "race" implies a cohesive group, but kinds like half-elf or aasimar aren't a group. Figures like Merlin or many Greek heroes aren't fully human in ancestry, but they aren't part of a separate race.
Well, it helps that in my setting there are no "half-elves" as a separate race, species or Kind. They fall under the human entry, but have elven ancestry. Merlin and Greek heroes with divine lineages would similarly just be humans with various ancestries... most just fall out the outside range of human potential in various ways instead of being in the middle (i.e. those with traceable giant ancestry mostly fall into the upper 1% for height and strength, elven ancestry tends to mean you live to uppermost range of humans and remain incredibly spry and youthful looking for your age, etc.).
Quote from: Brad on December 02, 2022, 11:43:54 AM
Quote from: Armchair Gamer on December 02, 2022, 11:16:01 AM
Daniel Kwan has already decried the change to 'species' on Twitter: https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760 (https://twitter.com/danielhkwan/status/1598409233774837760)
"codify systems of oppression in their games"
Wtf does that even mean? Is this one of those "if you have slavery in your game it means you're racist" dumbass arguments?
Pretty much.
Over on BGG they got a guy's game cancelled because it had... exploration and colonization of Africa and that was, and I quote. "Promoting Genocide." another designer was told by their editor that their historic game could not have George Washington it it because he was WACIST! And theres probably more because there is no end to what the insane will hallucinate is offensive next.
Quote from: Mishihari on December 01, 2022, 03:44:03 PMI don't really agree. I have to go from 1E, which is what I remember best, but there were halforcs and halfelves and no other crossbreeds, implying that the other combinations don't work. Also no quarter elves or orcs implying that the crossbreeds are sterile, which means the parents are separate species like horses and donkeys make sterile mules.
I never got this sense myself.
My understanding is if a pair of Half-Elves bred, they'd produce Half-Elves. If they mix with a human you get a human with Elvish blood, and vice versa.
------------------
My take on all of this is:
1) They're bullies, and bullies are never bought off or mollified. Such actions merely embolden and excite them.
2) Anyone with a basic understanding of history and the English language realizes that Race is a perfectly fine term, and historically interchangeable with terms like species or peoples.
3) One D&D is going to be an unplayable grey sludge, both mechanically and lore-wise. Created by committees that hate the very idea of exploring, fighting, the exotic, and treasure, how can it be anything else?
Quote from: Omega on December 03, 2022, 05:11:23 PMAnd theres probably more because there is no end to what the insane will hallucinate is offensive next.
I think it's important that we're clear here: They don't hallucinate this stuff. Hell, the ones that create the Newspeak don't even believe in 90% of the laughable nonsense they spout. It's a never ending game of verbal musical chairs, where there's no winning, and you're not allowed to sit down.
Races>Sub-Races
Species>Sub-Species
Moron>Retard
The permanently offended don't really play TTRPG's, they're actually into playing semantic metagames where they see how they can make people dance to their tune and jump through their hoops. So it goes.
Quote from: tenbones on December 04, 2022, 06:05:59 PM
Races>Sub-Races
Species>Sub-Species
Moron>Retard
The permanently offended don't really play TTRPG's, they're actually into playing semantic metagames where they see how they can make people dance to their tune and jump through their hoops. So it goes.
The issue is that these moronic retards have a massive megaphone in their favor called social media. Less than a few hundred of them can dictate how megacorps like Hasbro decide to focus their efforts because the stupidity is so amplified they're worried about being "cancelled" if a tweet gets enough likes or whatever. Ask 99% of people in real life about this and they'll say it's idiotic, but some fucking jackasses in a Facebook group will ostracize you for daring to have a different opinion than they do.
Whatever, IDGAF, it's not like I'll ever buy anything from WotC again anyway.
Quote from: Brad on December 05, 2022, 09:45:56 AMWhatever, IDGAF, it's not like I'll ever buy anything from WotC again anyway.
This is an industry wide problem. WotC is actually late to the party here. It won't be long before DriveThruRPG refuses to sell any game that uses racist coded language? Or GenCon not allowing any company to attend unless they meet their Diversity and Inclusion guidelines.
The sad part is, just with board gaming, RPG writers will all comply.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on December 05, 2022, 12:42:23 PM
Quote from: Brad on December 05, 2022, 09:45:56 AMWhatever, IDGAF, it's not like I'll ever buy anything from WotC again anyway.
This is an industry wide problem. WotC is actually late to the party here. It won't be long before DriveThruRPG refuses to sell any game that uses racist coded language? Or GenCon not allowing any company to attend unless they meet their Diversity and Inclusion guidelines.
The sad part is, just with board gaming, RPG writers will all comply.
Edit: Misread RPG writers and players.
Sadly every group, organization and company seems to be full of wretched cowards. They'll throw friends and colleagues to the sharks, if it will just spare them for another day.
Personally I wouldn't be an artistic whore, but plenty would.
Quote from: Brad on December 05, 2022, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: tenbones on December 04, 2022, 06:05:59 PM
Races>Sub-Races
Species>Sub-Species
Moron>Retard
The permanently offended don't really play TTRPG's, they're actually into playing semantic metagames where they see how they can make people dance to their tune and jump through their hoops. So it goes.
The issue is that these moronic retards have a massive megaphone in their favor called social media. Less than a few hundred of them can dictate how megacorps like Hasbro decide to focus their efforts because the stupidity is so amplified they're worried about being "cancelled" if a tweet gets enough likes or whatever. Ask 99% of people in real life about this and they'll say it's idiotic, but some fucking jackasses in a Facebook group will ostracize you for daring to have a different opinion than they do.
Whatever, IDGAF, it's not like I'll ever buy anything from WotC again anyway.
Same here. I just wish the Real Scotsman players would just stop pining about the death of their beloved game. That game never died. It's RIGHT here. *We* are the source of that type of gaming. And we damn well better start believing that, instead of complaining about WotC, because once it goes digital, there will never be a better time to scoop up new players and bring them to the good stuff.
Quote from: tenbones on December 05, 2022, 03:41:45 PM
Same here. I just wish the Real Scotsman players would just stop pining about the death of their beloved game. That game never died. It's RIGHT here. *We* are the source of that type of gaming. And we damn well better start believing that, instead of complaining about WotC, because once it goes digital, there will never be a better time to scoop up new players and bring them to the good stuff.
Hey, I'm doing my part. I introduced a bunch of new players to AD&D (the real one because they all said they wanted to play "D&D" and probably meant 5th edition but fuck that and I gave them all PHBs so they couldn't complain about having to buy the rules) then we migrated to Castles and Crusades and are probably going to start playing Rifts eventually. I am not a fan of Savage Worlds so we'll probably just use my old copy from 1990. Maybe they'll all be mutant turtles who got stuck on Earth via a time travel malfunction. That seems like a Rifts thing to do.
One of the OSR YouTubers I subscribe to has now started to use the term Species instead of race. Even when discussing older versions. That's why I get a chuckle when people claim that the OSR is gonna attract all the people leaving D&D for wokeness.
"Kindred" would have been an okay term, it sounds suitably antiquated, if race absolutely must be replaced (it doesn't). But species, lineage, ancestry... none of these work at all for my setting.
Dragons and men are not distinguished by species. Yes, they are different species, but that is too granular.
Domain
Kingdom
Phylum
Class
Order
Family
Genus
Species
Dragons and men would probably diverge at Class. Orcs and men would probably diverge at Genus.
Not only is "species" too specific from a taxonomical perspective, it's plain fucking lazy and bland.
Imagine a company that creates products, ostensibly for the imagination, inventing a new word!
Imagine a company with massive resources and the largest market share creating a new taxonomy for men, demi-humans, and monsters. A secret taxonomy known and debated by sages that could be gradually discovered while adventuring.
But yeah, they bounced some ideas around a boardroom for half an hour, picked "species", and went golfing. What a fucking joke.
Next they will go after the term 'men' as gender specific and patriarchal and all that.
They'll go for human and the along with species the game will have a vague Science Fiction vibe.
Quote from: Ruprecht on December 15, 2022, 07:22:08 PM
Next they will go after the term 'men' as gender specific and patriarchal and all that.
They'll go for human and the along with species the game will have a vague Science Fiction vibe.
I've seen disturbing rumors that they're actually going to take out "dwarf" next, replacing it with something like "stone folk."
Elves are fairy and that term is an insult.