Quote from: jhkim;1060565Are there any good matriarchies within official D&D settings, though? There are good amazons in some variants of legend and some fantasy fiction, but they aren't in D&D except as third-party works. For that matter, patriarchy doesn't seem to be featured much in D&D. There is I'm sure writing somewhere that describes orcs as being extremely patriarchal - but there's no mention of it in the current Monster Manual or in Volo's Guide to Monsters. (Nor in the original Monster Manual, for that matter.) Whereas the drow are described as matriarchal everywhere.

Well in the Realms, Dambrath is a matriarchal society - but they're Drow LARPers, and evil. I'm not sure of any specific matriarchies. As far as I know most of the Realms "kingdoms" aren't explicit patriarchies either. A lot of them have females in direct line of succession (I believe Cormyr which is one of their "flagship" nations.) Orcs - I suspect aren't explicitly patriarchal - as much as it's might-makes-right and males are usually the ones that win that exchange. I wouldn't bat an eye at a Orc female that could beat that ass, running a tribe. But I would imagine that's the exception to the rule. (but a fun premise).

Quote from: jhkim;1060565Similarly, are there examples of good creatures or races that are inherently black-skinned like the drow? I know that in art, they have shown halflings or other races sometimes have figures that have African-like black skin - but those races are usually portrayed with white skin.

Gold Dwarves of the Great Rift. Dark skinned. The majority race. Xenophobic and territorial. Make of that what you wish.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1060615I apologize.

Accepted. I love you again.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1060641IDK if that would sell. Guys don't like to stand too close to each other when we pee.

Good for pee-sword fights, though.

Kooii

Quote from: S'mon;1060568That's a Deep Gnome or Svirfneblin. http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Deep_gnome

Quote from: tenbones;1060645Well in the Realms, Dambrath is a matriarchal society - but they're Drow LARPers, and evil. I'm not sure of any specific matriarchies. As far as I know most of the Realms "kingdoms" aren't explicit patriarchies either. A lot of them have females in direct line of succession (I believe Cormyr which is one of their "flagship" nations.) Orcs - I suspect aren't explicitly patriarchal - as much as it's might-makes-right and males are usually the ones that win that exchange. I wouldn't bat an eye at a Orc female that could beat that ass, running a tribe. But I would imagine that's the exception to the rule. (but a fun premise).

Quote from: tenbones;1060645Gold Dwarves of the Great Rift. Dark skinned. The majority race. Xenophobic and territorial. Make of that what you wish.

OK, so no good matriarchies or explicit evil patriarchies - and no good races with black skin per se, but the svirfneblin have grey skin and the gold dwarves have light brown or tanned skin. (I knew about the svirfneblin, they just didn't spring to mind for some reason - thanks for the note about gold dwarves.)

That does seem notable to me, but as tenbones says - one can make of that whatever, depending.

The Rashemen are a Matriarchal society in the Forgotten Realms, the alignment spread is Neutral, Neutral Good and Chaotic Good.  The Red Wizards of Thay are mostly male, they could be a Patriarchy and are evil.

Quote from: jhkim;1060743OK, so no good matriarchies or explicit evil patriarchies - and no good races with black skin per se, but the svirfneblin have grey skin and the gold dwarves have light brown or tanned skin. (I knew about the svirfneblin, they just didn't spring to mind for some reason - thanks for the note about gold dwarves.)

That does seem notable to me, but as tenbones says - one can make of that whatever, depending.

The only non-evil matriarchy I recall are the formians, although that depends on the specifics of their biology which can vary in different editions and books. They technically qualify as a matriarchy because they are always ruled by queens to which all others are loyal. Unfortunately, that is about as far as the matriarchy goes. Only the queen is gendered as female. The only caste gendered as male are the gymarches who exist solely to inseminate the queen. The other formian castes are not gendered at all.

Quote from: jhkim;1060743OK, so no good matriarchies or explicit evil patriarchies - and no good races with black skin per se, but the svirfneblin have grey skin and the gold dwarves have light brown or tanned skin. (I knew about the svirfneblin, they just didn't spring to mind for some reason - thanks for the note about gold dwarves.)

That does seem notable to me, but as tenbones says - one can make of that whatever, depending.

yeah I really can't think of *any* examples of a "good" matriarchy in the Realms (or any other setting I can think of from D&D).

If we're going OUTSIDE of the Realms - I dunno if the Irda from Dragonlance count. They had darkblue skin... now I think they're light-blue. And they were good.

Would Aglarond, Rashemar and Silverymoon not count?

Quote from: HorusArisen;1060834Would Aglarond, Rashemar and Silverymoon not count?

Aglarond and Silverymoon are not overt Matriarchies. They're ruled by Queens. But they happen to be immortals that to my knowledge have no actual culture beyond the fact these immortal women rule. I don't believe there is any discussion anywhere about some line of succession.

Rashemar might definitely count.

Quote from: tenbones;1060856Aglarond and Silverymoon are not overt Matriarchies. They're ruled by Queens. But they happen to be immortals that to my knowledge have no actual culture beyond the fact these immortal women rule. I don't believe there is any discussion anywhere about some line of succession.

Rashemar might definitely count.

Agreed that having a queen doesn't make a country a matriarchy. I'm not familiar with Rashemen. From reading the wiki entry, I guess female witches are traditionally in positions of leadership?

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Rashemen

But it doesn't sound like men are considered second-class like male drow, or women in many historical societies. I think it's especially the lack of patriarchy that seems weird to me. The drow entry in the Monster Manual explicitly says,

QuoteMatriarchal Rule. Lolth, through her faithful priestesses, dictates the rules of drow society, ensuring that her orders and plots are carried out. Since Lolth is prone to manifesting on the Material Plane and directly punishing those that disobey her, the drow have learned to heed what she says and do as her priestesses command.
In drow society, males are subservient to females. A male drow might lead an Underdark patrol or a raiding party to the surface, but he reports to a female drow-either the matron of his house or one of her hand-picked female subordinates. Although male drow can fill almost any function in drow society, they can't be priests, nor can they rule a house.

But it seems like no race or country specifies that women can't be priests or rule a house - which was common in many historical societies. Having played and run in many historical or alternate-historical games, I don't think it's sexist for a setting to have in-game patriarchal societies. But taking out patriarchy and leaving in evil matriarchy seems weird.

Quote from: jhkim;1060863But it seems like no race or country specifies that women can't be priests or rule a house - which was common in many historical societies. Having played and run in many historical or alternate-historical games, I don't think it's sexist for a setting to have in-game patriarchal societies. But taking out patriarchy and leaving in evil matriarchy seems weird.

Weird like what? Would it be less weird if they had a matching evil patriarchy to "balance" it out? How about a good matriarchy, and a good patriarchy to balance those out? Etc, etc, etc.

I'm not sure where this matters? Frankly I don't know of any OVERTLY patriarchal nations in the Realms - that aren't simply Might Makes Right. That men run the show of most of these nations is kinda obvious - but no overtly so. I don't know of any examples - and there *might* actually be some - where the lines of succession in the many city-states and kingdoms are patriarchal through the eldest son.

If we're going to assume patriarchy of those non-specific examples, then there are *clearly* more evil patriarchal civilizations than matriarchal ones. If not? then maybe it's about even.

If we're taking a headcount of Male to Female rulers... that's going to take some time. I know in the Realms Adventure books a *LOT* of those City States are ruled by women. And I'm pretty sure even in the 1st and 2nd editions of the Graybox and Book respectively one of those leaders is a lesbian, pretty much out and out (I think she's a NG Ranger). I know of know openly male gay NPC's. (though I could be wrong there).

 I think it would surprise people more than they'd think about how many females are running things in the Realms.

Quote from: jhkimBut it seems like no race or country specifies that women can't be priests or rule a house - which was common in many historical societies. Having played and run in many historical or alternate-historical games, I don't think it's sexist for a setting to have in-game patriarchal societies. But taking out patriarchy and leaving in evil matriarchy seems weird.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1060866Weird like what? Would it be less weird if they had a matching evil patriarchy to "balance" it out? How about a good matriarchy, and a good patriarchy to balance those out? Etc, etc, etc.

I don't think of it as adding stuff in. It's normal for societies - particularly pseudo-historical ones - to not be perfectly egalitarian between the sexes. If I were doing it, I would probably expect one of:

1) No sexism is mentioned for any society. It's an option that individual GMs can bring to their games, but not a part of the official canon. This is close to how D&D is approaching things with the exception of the drow.

2) Light sexism. The default is ahistorical egalitarianism, but a minority of societies are exceptions. There is some mix of good patriarchy, good matriarchy, evil patriarchy, and evil matriarchy.

3) Pseudo-historical sexism. The default is patriarchy, but notes are given about ways for women PCs to still be viable and fun to play.

Do you think the Drow are "Problematic?" If so, in what ways? Nope, I'm ok with them.

If you like the Drow, why do you like them? While I'm not a Drow fanboy or anything, I think they make good villains in a campaign.  They are intelligent, civilized, manipulative, etc. which makes for a nice change of pace from beasts, monsters and other more savage opponents.

Do you use the Drow in your campaigns? I have.  I would again.  I usually use them as powers behind the scene.  The group is doing something or have something that the Drow want and go from there.

Have you done anything bizarre with the Drow, or somehow made them different?  I haven't but I picked up Spire at GenCon this year and I'm really looking forward to running a few games of it.  The setting has the Drow as the oppressed underclass, subservient to the High Elves in a mile high tower city.  As per the book's description:

QuoteThe story of Spire is one of rebellion. You and your friends will become drow freedom fighters, clawing back their city through subterfuge, sedition and brutal violence. They will have to risk their relationship with their community to save it from the cruel overlords of Spire – what are they prepared to lose to liberate their people? Who are they prepared to hurt, or kill, to see Spire under drow control once more?

I like the drow, warts and all. But just like with all my tabletop games that I GM, if a player has a problem with 'em, all they gotta do is actually say something before the game starts. Or whenever they want to tell me. Truthfully, though, I don't really find the drow to be so crucial to my D&D experience that my games must have them exactly as written, rules-as-written. I don't mind substituting in something else or homebrewing up something new to suit a player sometimes. Though I don't know if that's me trying to be nice or me just being very, very, very addicted to homebrewing new races for my gaming groups.