|
We indulge in a cruder, more primal mindset. In the end, most D&D adventures wind up looking sort...
Recently, I've been grappling with a problem like this in my SCAP game. I have a party of good PCs who are willing to commit acts that come awfully close to atrocity level in my opinion, and are gleefully racist about it. They still go to the trouble of having the paladin detect evil to make sure they're not executing good or neutral goblins, but they have shown themselves remorseless when it comes to executing captive creatures, even those that are pitifully begging for their lives. Their rationale is that the world has been set up so that there are races that are simply Evil in nature, and so destroying them is a Good thing.
Ultimately, I think Brian is correct. Within the game, racism is in fact a good thing in most contexts, considering that it is based on the underlying truths that (1) objective good and evil exist, and (2) there are races that are inherently evil by nature. Racism is only bad within the game if you hate someone because they come from an inherently good or neutral race.
I frankly never noticed the "race" of the artwork until after reading this thread. I guess we will never be at the point where an awesome picture is just an awesome picture.
Sure we will. And it's the people making and ordering diverse artwork that will help that happen. By making it commonplace, it loses whatever jarring or odd nature it might otherwise have.
Things happen because people make them happen.
|
I frankly never noticed the "race" of the artwork until after reading this thread. I guess we will never be at the point where an awesome picture is just an awesome picture.Sure we will. And it's the people making and ordering diverse artwork that will help that happen. By making it commonplace, it loses whatever jarring or odd nature it might otherwise have.
Things happen because people make them happen.
I see what you're saying, but at what point does that pass into the you can only have the artwork that WE have decided for you. Which I guess is what you could say it is now. The say hello to the new boss, same as the old boss.
|
Ultimately, I think Brian is correct. Within the game, racism is in fact a good thing in most contexts, considering that it is based on the underlying truths that (1) objective good and evil exist, and (2) there are races that are inherently evil by nature. Racism is only bad within the game if you hate someone because they come from an inherently good or neutral race.
Except ultimately it ignores a critical factor:
Humans hating goblins is not racism.It is speciesism.
Goblins are not just humans with a different color skin. They are a completely different species of creature. The comparison is not to humans of a particular skin color dehumanizing humans of a slightly different skin color in order to make themselves feel better for exterminating them. Rather it is to suggesing that tigers should get along with leopards because they are both great cats, ignoring the very real competition for survival.
This is not something so casually reconciled by saying it is just sublimated racism.
When people hunted wolves to near extinction because of perceived threats to human safety, whether or not wolves were routinely demonized as utterly alien and savage creatures, servants of the devil, evil spirits in animal form, and whatever else, nobody even today considers it to be racism or genocide. To suggest such is to utterly diminish the very real instances of humans killing other humans. More, it severely dimishes the very real use of such structures in fantasy gaming to examine such attitudes. That is a horrible waste of such a useful tool.
While much is routinely confused by a seeming obsession with cross-species miscegenation, half-elves, half-orcs, half-ogres, half-this-that-and-the-other-thing, ad infinitum, ad nausea, it must always be kept in mind that we are talking about fundamentally different species of creatures. While we use the same term, race, as we use to distinguish between humans of different skin tones, hair type, and so forth, it does not create an absolutely equivalency between the terms. That is further exaggerated by the very real effects of alignment, a question that has plagued the game from beginning. If a goblin is truly inherently evil as a racial trait, then it does have a very real effect on the morality of killing goblin children. And that too makes it outrageous to insist that such is an absolute parallel to any human relationships.
Just because your characters love to kill goblins, or you love to write adventures where the characters kill goblins, does not mean you are sublimating your urge to cut holes in a bedsheet and have a lynching party. That is an unfair, and indeed outrageous, characterization.
|
|
Except ultimately it ignores a critical factor:
Humans hating goblins is not racism.
It is speciesism.
Semantics. Wolves are not an intelligent species. Elves, Dwarves et al are. BIG difference.
This is all silly. As long as it's not a conscious effort to avoid putting a certain race in a certain position due to their race; it is not racism. If a white author writes a story, and puts a white lead in, it is NOT racist. The same applies to artists.
If someone puts a black lead though and marketing people say "No he has to be white" that would be racist.
Adding black people to art or to a story "just to have a black person represented" though is also racism (though not really worth making a fuss over). This is art, not government policy, the creators need to have freedom to do what they want.
|
scantily clad elves are always nice
Like this Scantily clad elf
photographed by yours truly.
(links are NSFW...)
Now THAT is what I am talking about! More of that :)
Thanks Lilith :)
wanna cookie?
|
|
Now, just for the fun of it I suppose, after my long post on racism...
You must also consider that D&D is a game. And that game must be marketed. Marketing is most successful when consumers can identify with the product being sold.
That being said, the majority of RPG consumers is white males. White males will identify most with white males as art characters, and as I have conclusively proven in this thread, we also like scantily clad females (also usually-not always white).
As a photographer I photograph what I like (as the picture I linked to earlier shows). I will identify most with scantily clad women and strong white males in the art. Most of the artists are also white males and most of the game designers are white males.
Women are a growing minority of the game and efforts have been made to make them feel more welcomed.
When I was at GenCon last year I saw a LOT of very geeky looking white males (and sorry to say it a LOT looked like they will be virgins for life) and a surprising number of women. I do not remember seeing another race there. I'm sure there were, but I don't recall seeing anyone.
Now that being said, it is certainly not racist nor even sexist to have art made that will appeal to the audience. It is imperative.
It would be racist or sexist to spitefully omit or depict someone in a bad way.
If someone called me racist because I do not have pictures of sexy orc women I would say "bite me, go shoot your own pictures." If my market research or experience showed that certain art will sell a product better than others, then by gosh I will use the art that sells. I can't make a statement to support equal rights if as a publisher I were out of business.
So, all that being said, D&D and Pathfinder, is still a game that must be marketed. Evident strides have been made to depict women as equals and not just sex objects. STrides have been made to include minority races. But until minority races begin playing more it makes little sense to ignore marketing wisdom.
Now, you can say that is morally wrong. It may be. But it is reality. To ignore reality is to invite closing your business.
PS more scantily clad women please :)
|
|
I would like to see iconics from well and truely unusual sources.
Lizardmen, Orcs and Gobbos need their time in the sun.
And Vampires too, but maybe moon as opposed to sun. (After all only white human fighter guy needs to die).
Actually, Paizo could always build a template called a Daywalker.
Actually, come to think of it, there is a Daywalker in Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. So, nevermind.
|
|
Except ultimately it ignores a critical factor:
Humans hating goblins is not racism.
It is speciesism.Goblins are not just humans with a different color skin. They are a completely different species of creature. The comparison is not to humans of a particular skin color dehumanizing humans of a slightly different skin color in order to make themselves feel better for exterminating them. Rather it is to suggesing that tigers should get along with leopards because they are both great cats, ignoring the very real competition for survival.
Actually, I disagree with this analogy. Humans of different colors and ethnicities are all of the same race, the human race. We are also all of the same species, homo sapien.
Goblins are both a different species and race. Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the two are actually interchangeable. (Sorry, no dictionary in front of me.)
That said, there clearly promoted racial hatred in D&D. Dwarves v. Giants, Goblins, and Orcs. Elves and Orcs. Gnomes and Reptilians and Goblinoids. Gnolls and ... well everyone.
A point of interest in my campaigns - I work often to blur lines of who is good and who is bad. In one campaign, the paladin hangs with a shade. (Their drow companion got sucked into the Shadow Plane ... so, he's out.) At one point, the group also had a deva and two tieflings on board.
And yet in another campaign, two heroes were a male and female partnership of gnolls.
Did they all have conflict? You betcha. Was some of it racially-motivated? Naturally. Did it make for interesting games? Oh. Most definitely.
|
|
Semantics. Wolves are not an intelligent species. Elves, Dwarves et al are. BIG difference.
No semantics at all. See my other comparisons. We have no other intelligent race on earth, so it is a pure mental exercise to suggest any equivalence with a literary construct.
This is all silly. As long as it's not a conscious effort to avoid putting a certain race in a certain position due to their race; it is not racism. If a white author writes a story, and puts a white lead in, it is NOT racist. The same applies to artists.
If someone puts a black lead though and marketing people say "No he has to be white" that would be racist.
Adding black people to art or to a story "just to have a black person represented" though is also racism (though not really worth making a fuss over). This is art, not government policy, the creators need to have freedom to do what they want.
As opposed to someone just trying to make money.
When marketing people use black leads to sell to black audiences, is that racist?That is the whole path to using diversity to try and prove something. Just build the setting, and have the art represent it. Do not worry about percentages or what not, just do it.
If someone puts a black lead though and marketing people say "No he has to be white" that would be racist.
I disagree. That would be marketing. Would it be racist to use an Asian spokesperson to sell something in country with an Asian majority?
Just because someone or something is aware of race does not mean that they or it are inherently racist. You're making it sound like any decisions that involve knowledge of race are racist by definition and that is just not always or even usually the case.
|
|
I just posted an argument, meant sincerely and constructively, that D&D contains unfortunate elements of real racism. I can't find it in the thread. Did I cross a line? Was it deleted? Brian
No, it survives in entirety above. Try deleting your cookies.
I don't agree with the concept that pidgeon-holing "good" and "evil" is necessarily racist. The concepts that describe the alignments, and the whole alignment-based system, is entirely fantastical.
"Evil" in fantasy is someone who knowingly chooses the side of evil purely out of choice, not necessarily some internal defect.
Killing orcs is not racist if the orcs are evil, because the orcs are evil. Most orcs in fantasy are evil, good orcs are the exception. Killing an orc because you assume they are evil is racist.
Killing people in the real world is different, because very few people are truly evil (and even those probably have a disorder).
EDIT: And all things in D&D that serve evil are trying to destroy something, especially good people.
|
|
Except ultimately it ignores a critical factor:
Humans hating goblins is not racism.
It is speciesism.Goblins are not just humans with a different color skin. They are a completely different species of creature. The comparison is not to humans of a particular skin color dehumanizing humans of a slightly different skin color in order to make themselves feel better for exterminating them. Rather it is to suggesing that tigers should get along with leopards because they are both great cats, ignoring the very real competition for survival.
Actually, I disagree with this analogy. Humans of different colors and ethnicities are all of the same race, the human race. We are also all of the same species, homo sapien.
Goblins are both a different species and race. Unless I'm sorely mistaken, the two are actually interchangeable. (Sorry, no dictionary in front of me.)
Actually there is no definitive definition of Race. We are all Homo Sapiens, yes, but it can truly be argued that humans have different races. For politically correct reasons we are loathe to do so.
The reason for what I just said is that by what is commonly agreed upon as justification for race can be very minor. For example, two birds of the same species may have a few feathers of a different color. Those two birds are often times separated as two races.
So, if birds and other animals can be separated into races for purely cosmetic reasons such as fur or feather color, then the human species can as well.
However, more and more scientists are questioning the distinction between species and race. What makes something different enough to qualify as a race? Some scientists would argue the two birds are the same race.
So, when we are discussing racism, or race in general as applied to humans, there is no consensus on the matter. What we do know for a fact, is that we are the same species. We do not know if race even truly exists in scientific terms anymore for any creature.
As far as goblins go... or any nonhumans, if they can mate and reproduce with a human they are in the same genus at least, and if the offspring is fertile then they are the same species.
So, humans, orcs and elves are the same species, and here we would argue then that humans, elves, and orcs are different races or more properly subspecies under the species. I would expect all the PC races to be the same genus except maybe the fey gnome.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Actually there is no definitive definition of Race. We are all Homo Sapiens, yes, but it can truly be argued that humans have different races. For politically correct reasons we are loathe to do so.
I thought we were loathe to do so because the concept lacked scientific validity (as you say later) not because we are worried about political correctness. Of course, despite the fact that scientifically it is not an easy thing to divide the world into races, people commonly do so by the most fragile of genetic markers -- skin colour.
|
|
Actually there is no definitive definition of Race. We are all Homo Sapiens, yes, but it can truly be argued that humans have different races. For politically correct reasons we are loathe to do so.
The reason for what I just said is that by what is commonly agreed upon as justification for race can be very minor. For example, two birds of the same species may have a few feathers of a different color. Those two birds are often times separated as two races.
So, if birds and other animals can be separated into races for purely cosmetic reasons such as fur or feather color, then the human species can as well.
No, they would be separated as two sub-species.
And it would be done on the basis of significant genetic differences.The key of course would be that they are still the same species, completely interfertile, with the same genetic structure, only a few minor variants in coloration.
However, more and more scientists are questioning the distinction between species and race. What makes something different enough to qualify as a race? Some scientists would argue the two birds are the same race.
No, they would call them the same species, even if of different subspecies.
That is the essential difference with humans. We add a completely different term based solely on appearance that is not used with any other creature.So, when we are discussing racism, or race in general as applied to humans, there is no consensus on the matter. What we do know for a fact, is that we are the same species. We do not know if race even truly exists in scientific terms anymore for any creature.
As far as goblins go... or any nonhumans, if they can mate and reproduce with a human they are in the same genus at least, and if the offspring is fertile then they are the same species.
So, humans, orcs and elves are the same species, and here we would argue then that humans, elves, and orcs are different races or more properly subspecies under the species. I would expect all the PC races to be the same genus except maybe the fey gnome.
Not necessarily.
While humans can make half-breeds with orcs and elves, there is no suggestion that orcs and elves can interbreed.Nor does that in any way handwave away the differences between humans, elves, orcs, and dwarves. Even more it does nothing to explain half-dragons or half-planars. Certainly you will not suggest that dragons, demons, and archons are all in the same genus as every PC race.
That is why using the term "race" for both human variation in appearance and the different fantasy species as completely equivalent and interchangeable is wrong.
And it is why such cross-breeds are more likely enabled and sustained exclusively by magic rather than biological similarity.
Actually there is no definitive definition of Race. We are all Homo Sapiens, yes, but it can truly be argued that humans have different races. For politically correct reasons we are loathe to do so.
The reason for what I just said is that by what is commonly agreed upon as justification for race can be very minor. For example, two birds of the same species may have a few feathers of a different color. Those two birds are often times separated as two races.
So, if birds and other animals can be separated into races for purely cosmetic reasons such as fur or feather color, then the human species can as well.
No, they would be separated as two sub-species.
And it would be done on the basis of significant genetic differences.
The key of course would be that they are still the same species, completely interfertile, with the same genetic structure, only a few minor variants in coloration.However, more and more scientists are questioning the distinction between species and race. What makes something different enough to qualify as a race? Some scientists would argue the two birds are the same race.No, they would call them the same species, even if of different subspecies.
That is the essential difference with humans. We add a completely different term based solely on appearance that is not used with any other creature.So, when we are discussing racism, or race in general as applied to humans, there is no consensus on the matter. What we do know for a fact, is that we are the same species. We do not know if race even truly exists in scientific terms anymore for any creature.
As far as goblins go... or any nonhumans, if they can mate and reproduce with a human they are in the same genus at least, and if the offspring is fertile then they are the same species.
So, humans, orcs and elves are the same species, and here we would argue then that humans, elves, and orcs are different races or more properly subspecies under the...
With the half planars and such I'm pretty sure they're not an acutual species at all but *insert somthing vague about magic and reproduction* at which point things become gibberish.
Okay. I'm going to suggest something I've always wondered but never had the chance to share really. Why are we not considered different "breeds" of human? Like "Breeds" of dog? Can someone explain this to me? I would think. . .the concept might, I don't know neatly explain away half-elves and Half-orcs as well as why there are no Dwelfs or Whatever on would call a mix between an orc and an elf.
I just finished reading the monster re imagined book by paizo (By this by the way it has the most terrifying bugbears ever)
for whatever reason orcs and elves can't interbreed though I think there would be some example of such an entitiy if for no other reason than "a mage did it". I'd be the first guy to try to make it...
|
I thought I read something about Ottawa having a high per-capita rate of hate crimes. I'll get back to you on that.
Actually, that statistic wouldn't surprise me *that* much, mostly because, at least, from my point of view, many of the places that seemed to be the most prejudiced had no real targets to commit hate crimes on.
You go to my hometown, there's no one besides the average European-descended Canadian. They're never faced with ethnic diversity, so prejudice sort of reinforces itself. They can't act on these prejudicial thoughts because there are no "others" around.
However, I have no clue what the statistics are like, so I could be very, very wrong!
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I thought I read something about Ottawa having a high per-capita rate of hate crimes. I'll get back to you on that.Actually, that statistic wouldn't surprise me *that* much, mostly because, at least, from my point of view, many of the places that seemed to be the most prejudiced had no real targets to commit hate crimes on.
You go to my hometown, there's no one besides the average European-descended Canadian. They're never faced with ethnic diversity, so prejudice sort of reinforces itself. They can't act on these prejudicial thoughts because there are no "others" around.
However, I have no clue what the statistics are like, so I could be very, very wrong!
Okay, I found the stat. Ottawa is third highest per capita rate of hate crimes but they also have a specialized 'hate crime' division so that may reflect greater awareness and reporting.
Still, I grew up in the country and now live in Ottawa. With better education and more interracial exchange people become more careful about their racism. Doesn't mean they're not racist. ;-)
P.S. You are wanted in the game thread ... 'I swallowed a bug'.
|
|
The default assumptions built into D&D -- half-orcs, half-elves, half-dragon-anythings, etc. -- imply that the fundamental biological process of life have like next to nothing to do with real life, much like the default assumptions about physics -- fire is not the heat and light energy released during a chemical reaction, but rather an element that composes a fundamental building block of reality) -- are divorced from reality. Discussing the genetics of race in fantasy worlds seems rather silly.
It'd make as much sense to look at early natural scientists, like the Greeks, and their wacky theories.
|
|
DS9... Flaws? Now don't go dissing DS9! The BEST of the Star Trek series... Sisko is THE captain! the others are wanna-bes at best who are not worthy to walk in Benjamin Sisko's shadow...
Agreed!
...though the reason DS9 was so good is that it was created as a whole-cloth ripoff of J. Michael Straczynski's story bible for Babylon 5, which is superior to any Star Trek series ever.
/geekgasm/
Jeremy Puckett
|
|
scantily clad elves are always nice
Like this Scantily clad elf
photographed by yours truly.
HAWT. MOAR.
Your daily dose of bad internet spelling has been provided free of charge. XD
But seriously, more. ^_^
Jeremy Puckett
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Actually there is no definitive definition of Race. We are all Homo Sapiens, yes, but it can truly be argued that humans have different races. For politically correct reasons we are loathe to do so.
Well, technically we definitely have different human races. They are just not what racists would like them to be. While there are definite genetic differences between races, these differences just do not contribute as much to the differences in phenotype as these people would like.
The reason for what I just said is that by what is commonly agreed upon as justification for race can be very minor. For example, two birds of the same species may have a few feathers of a different color. Those two birds are often times separated as two races.
So, if birds and other animals can be separated into races for purely cosmetic reasons such as fur or feather color, then the human species can as well.
However, more and more scientists are questioning the distinction between species and race. What makes something different enough to qualify as a race? Some scientists would argue the two birds are the same race.
Sorry to burst your bubble here, but the term "species" is actually well-defined and pretty unambiguous: If two otherwise healthy and fertile individuals can interbreed with fertile offspring, they belong to the same species. If not, then the belong to different ones. Pretty much noone would consider a Doberman and a German Shepard different species, because they can breed. And about noone would put a donkey and a horse into the same species, because all they ever produce could be born dead from a fitness perspective.
So, when we are discussing racism, or race in general as applied to humans, there is no consensus on the matter. What we do know for a fact, is that we are the same species. We do not know if race even truly exists in scientific terms anymore for any creature.
Race is a "gummy term" alright, but as far as i know (Biology minor here) the term is avoided mainly because it is so ill-defined and with little "hard rules", rather than for any political agenda. Social scientists might disagree, but that is what i took home from biology.
So, humans, orcs and elves are the same species, and here we would argue then that humans, elves, and orcs are different races or more properly subspecies under the species. I would expect all the PC races to be the same genus except maybe the fey gnome.
Possibly. I say possibly, because besides the problems of that rule putting an Ice Devil down as homo sapiens (not to mention the horrible problem of making dead people a "race" of humans... take a look at necromantic bloodlines), the fundamental assumption behind all this is that the world works according to principles accessible to the scientific method, and that empiric research actually is the "proper" way get the facts. Given that fantasy worlds tend to stagnate at late-medieval technology, with some later inventions but never quite making the jump to industrialism, that might just not be a sensible basis.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Sorry to burst your bubble here, but the term "species" is actually well-defined and pretty unambiguous: If two otherwise healthy and fertile individuals can interbreed with fertile offspring, they belong to the same species. If not, then the belong to different ones. Pretty much noone would consider a Doberman and a German Shepard different species, because they can breed. And about noone would put a donkey and a horse into the same species, because all they ever produce could be born dead from a fitness perspective.
That is way oversimplified as a definition of species. Darwins finches leap to mind as a case involving several species that are cross-fertile. What you have is a basic definition of species, but in practice it can get more complicated than that - and exceptions exist in both directions (that is, cross-fertile and not the same species, and not cross-fertile and the same species). For the latter, the examples I'm aware of are mainly mechanical issues.
Edit: and yes, I mean cross-fertile with fertile offspring. Even that gets murky - some mules and a single documented hinny have been fertile :)
Sorry to burst your bubble here, but the term "species" is actually well-defined and pretty unambiguous: If two otherwise healthy and fertile individuals can interbreed with fertile offspring, they belong to the same species. If not, then the belong to different ones. Pretty much noone would consider a Doberman and a German Shepard different species, because they can breed. And about noone would put a donkey and a horse into the same species, because all they ever produce could be born dead from a fitness perspective.
That is way oversimplified as a definition of species. Darwins finches leap to mind as a case involving several species that are cross-fertile. What you have is a basic definition of species, but in practice it can get more complicated than that - and exceptions exist in both directions (that is, cross-fertile and not the same species, and not cross-fertile and the same species). For the latter, the examples I'm aware of are mainly mechanical issues.
Edit: and yes, I mean cross-fertile with fertile offspring. Even that gets murky - some mules and a single documented hinny have been fertile :)
Its just hard to really discuss darwinism as pertaining to a world where the Gods are indisputable reality and could personally kick you ass for not believing in them.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
That is way oversimplified as a definition of species. Darwins finches leap to mind as a case involving several species that are cross-fertile. What you have is a basic definition of species, but in practice it can get more complicated than that - and exceptions exist in both directions (that is, cross-fertile and not the same species, and not cross-fertile and the same species). For the latter, the examples I'm aware of are mainly mechanical issues.
Edit: and yes, I mean cross-fertile with fertile offspring. Even that gets murky - some mules and a single documented hinny have been fertile :)
Good catch. :)
Yes, it is extremely simplified, but for anything but a biologist, i think that is the most concise definition, which kills 99% of all cases outright. Certainly, i could have artfully worded around "mechanical issues", but that would have made things less clear, without adding much.
But yeah, i hope the Darwin Finch goes extinct soon, so it'll fix that nasty headache (just kidding). IIRC the problem with them was that while they might still be genetically compatible, their mating behavior has diverted so radically that any pairing between different kinds is pretty much a forced issue... if they live on the same island at all. But i may be wrong. It has been a few years now.
That being said, the majority of RPG consumers is white males. White males will identify most with white males as art characters, and as I have conclusively proven in this thread, we also like scantily clad females (also usually-not always white).
Krome your honesty is the most amazing thing in this thread.
" We are white,we are your major audience, we prefer to see white heroes ('cause hey Look its us!), but we do immensely enjoy objectifiying the women of other races and cultures! Please make sure to include this concept as much as possible! I've provided links as example of what we'd like to see"
LOL. Fair enough my friend, fair enough.
Feedback is a wonderful tool. Amen.
Well, we can even invent our own races. It's fantasy after all.
Red hair, yellow skin and european facial features? Why not? :D
And what is the actual elf size? The pic seems like it was inspired by WoW a little ;)
Average height/weight for a male elf is about 5'11" and 133 pounds (about my size actually lol)
So the image in the book is waaaay off. They're more like scrawny teenagers than Night Elves.
I know what's the actual size of an elf in 3.5, but I wanted whether there are officially any changes in PRPG.
though the reason DS9 was so good is that it was created as a whole-cloth ripoff of J. Michael Straczynski's story bible for Babylon 5, which is superior to any Star Trek series ever.
/geekgasm/
Jeremy Puckett
DS9 and the B5 movie came out the same year, 1993 so its unlikely one was a ripoff of the other since neither was around to rip off the other yet. B5 the series premiered a year later in 1994.
In regards to the cybernetics thing earlier, I just thought Id point out that Geordi was not written as a black blind man. Just a blind man. Roddenberry thought the irony of a blind pilot was perfect for the show. LeVar Burton tested for the part (as did Tim Russ who would play Tuvok in Voyager) along with many people of varying ethnicities, and ultimately he was chosen.
As for the rest, well, I belong to an ethnicity whos Hollywood representation is limited to creepy/scary cults and shamanistic mystics. While I am proud of my culture, and I enjoy others cultures as well (I study Anthropology and I began doing so because of my interest in cultures. Theres no such thing as one that isnt beautiful), Ive never felt like I needed to see someone that looked like me or came from my back round in a lead role anywhere. Characters, like real people, have flaws and weaknesses. They have to overcome those, become better than they started. The ones that do are heroes, the ones who cant arent, regardless of coloration. Thats what I identify with.
Characters, like real people, have flaws and weaknesses. They have to overcome those, become better than they started. The ones that do are heroes, the ones who cant arent, regardless of coloration. Thats what I identify with.
Hippie.
(4) If people are so distrustful of things unfamiliar to them, where do half-elves come from? ;-)
Seriously, do You know how many youngsters appreciate a guy who is old enough to buy beer legally? ;-)
Also, elves and humans mature at nearly the same rate. However, while You humans might be "legal" at 18 or 21, we elves have to wait until 100 or 110 before we're considered adults. If You think waiting a few years to buy beer is rough, try waiting a few decades before You can get married to another elf! In the meantime, those human lasses in yonder farmstead/castle start looking better and better...
And THAT is where half-elves come from! :D
BlaineTog Thanks for addressing the Sauron issue a couple pages back. Saved me from having to get all fired-up. ;) The Numenoreans lost their whole kingdom thanks to Sauron's deception. Let's also not forget the dwarves and elves he tricked with gifts of magic rings. Sauron pretty much fooled whomever he damn-well pleased — even other Maia, like Saruman the White!
Finally, in a demonstration of racial cooperation... I, Mr. Pasty McWhiteElf, hereby give my full support to Krome the Dwarf... Scantily-clad hotties are ok by me — even if they are dreadfully distracting when they show up to Your D&D session wearing a spaghetti-string halter-top and sit immediately opposite You when You are attempting to DM...
|
|
Sorry to burst your bubble here, but the term "species" is actually well-defined and pretty unambiguous: If two otherwise healthy and fertile individuals can interbreed with fertile offspring, they belong to the same species. If not, then the belong to different ones. Pretty much noone would consider a Doberman and a German Shepard different species, because they can breed. And about noone would put a donkey and a horse into the same species, because all they ever produce could be born dead from a fitness perspective
Sorry I didn't make that very clear. Correct species is clearly defined, it is race that I meant was not. There are some scientists that suggest removing race all together. I can certainly see their point. It is so ambiguous it almost has no real meaning at all.
And for species I am just using a very basic definition. In my research I found more than 10 different definitions that are used under certain circumstances to define species. In reality the specific definition you use depends upon what you are talking about.
And, I don't mean to imply that dragons are humanoid, nor ice devils and such, because of so much magic in their natures they can breed with anything (probably even manage to breed with a rock if they really wanted to- weirdos). In my description of elves and orcs I kinda used loose pseudo-fantasy-science that I made up. Assuming the races are "descended" naturally and not created whole-cloth by a deity, then it is natural to make those assumptions. But as was pointed out orcs and elves do not produce fertile offspring (I forget of they can breed at all). Which throws a goblin wrench in the theory. I prefer to say they have the good sense to choose not to breed together :)
So, JJacobs, what is the offical stance? PC races same Genus, and Humans, elves, and orcs same species? (they are probably avoiding this thread like the plague) :)
There was a suggestion at one point in some thread or other I was reading that orcs and elves can interbreed, and their resultant offspring are human. The mechanical bonuses of both races are negated, as well as the penalties, the long life and short life are washed together into the average life of the human, and it helps explain why humans can breed with orcs and elves. It's an interesting idea, and one I wouldn't mind seeing used in a campaign setting at some point. Could make for some interesting RP.
But until minority races begin playing more it makes little sense to ignore marketing...
But how do you get more minorities to play when as you just pointed out the game isnt being marketed toward them. It's pretty much as you boldly pointed out a game aimed at white males because mostly white males play the game and they want to see someone who looks like them.
I see more teens / kids of color playing magic and WOW, not only becasue they are fun games, but because there are representations of themselves as characters or available options in the games and theyre not being told that they have to rationalize thier exisitance IN those games.I've been playing D&D for over 20 years and this is the 3rd such topic like this I've seen in two weeks (between here and ENworld) and these threads have made me feel less a part of the gaming community than anything else I've encountered in my 20+ years of gaming.
In another thread (again, not here on Paizo) I and other gamers of color were pretty much flat out told (by a few other posters) that if we were playing characters who resemble us in a D&D or quasi-medival setting that we had to rationalize our existance in that setting.
What's next? a sub-tag under D&D brand? "Created by white people FOR white people?"
|
|
But until minority races begin playing more it makes little sense to ignore marketing...I see more teens / kids of color playing magic and WOW, not only becasue they are fun games, but because there are representations of themselves as characters or available options in the games and theyre not being told that they have to rationalize thier exisitance IN those games.
To be honest, I've never seen one single WoW advertisement that featured a human that wasn't white. You get a lotta night elf ads, some with dwarves, and many with white male paladins and female mages.
So unless those teens / kids of color are night elves then I don't see this argument holding up, at least in WoW.
I stand by Krome more or less. The game is marketed towards white nerd types, that's the bread and butter. Most people just learn to look beyond it for the most part I figure.
Now to those comments about having to justify playing a character like yourself, that's just lame of them to suggest, no doubt there.
|
|
But until minority races begin playing more it makes little sense to ignore marketing...But how do you get more minorities to play when as you just pointed out the game isnt being marketed toward them. It's pretty much as you boldly pointed out a game aimed at white males because mostly white males play the game and they want to see someone who looks like them.
I see more teens / kids of color playing magic and WOW, not only becasue they are fun games, but because there are representations of themselves as characters or available options in the games and theyre not being told that they have to rationalize thier exisitance IN those games.I've been playing D&D for over 20 years and this is the 3rd such topic like this I've seen in two weeks (between here and ENworld) and these threads have made me feel less a part of the gaming community than anything else I've encountered in my 20+ years of gaming.
In another thread (again, not here on Paizo) I and other gamers of color were pretty much flat out told (by a few other posters) that if we were playing characters who resemble us in a D&D or quasi-medival setting that we had to rationalize our existance in that setting.
What's next? a sub-tag under D&D brand? "Created by white people FOR white people?"
You need to read all the statements I have written here before you get too upset.
If these topics upset you, don't read them.
I would argue that the fact that WOW can have a representation of a minority is NOT why a minority plays WOW. There are a LOT of video games played by all kinds of people, minorities included, that have white characters.
There is a movement in the industry toward more inclusiveness, which if you read more of this thread you will see that I supported having a black male iconic as a lead character. I believe I said earlier (maybe I didn't but I meant to) that a racially diverse fantasy world is much more realistic to me.
What I was saying is that the very real business facts are you do NOT ignore your primary audience, in order to pursue an ideal. To do so puts you out of business. You move incrementally toward your goal as the market adjusts. You can be a leader, you can be a trailblazer, but idealists are usually broke.
Now I am really going to get bold and controversial. :)
If we want more minority players in RPGs then there is only one way to do so. Get them a better education to begin with. Let's face it it does not take much education to play Magic or WOW. But if you want to play D&D, you better have your math and reading skills up to speed.
So as to the last remark you posted "Created by white people FOR white people." That was out of line entirely with everything I said. You are bringing baggage from elsewhere to this conversation. I have discussed the ideal situations regarding race, and I brought some reality to the discussion as well. You are trolling for a race fight and you won't find it from me.
*sigh*
|
|
I have been thinking about that comment about "justifying" playing a character who looks like yourself.
And you know what that just pisses me off. There is so much I'd like to say about that but I will get banned for life if I do. :)
What I WILL say is that nope better not say that either.
I will be nice and say they are wrong and should get an eduction themselves.
|
|
I am replying to my own reply!
About the comment about education and WOW... that holds across all races and ethnicites etc.
One of the women in our group has a brother. A white male. He used to play with us. He'd roll the dice but was unable to ADD the numbers (he was early teens then). He played a sorcerer who seemingly had an unlimited number of fireballs, the only spell he ever cast.
He quit playing D&D and plays WOW now.
He is uneducated, will be a drain on our society, I can never see him working. D&D was too difficult for him, so he plays WOW.
I am replying to my own reply!
About the comment about education and WOW... that holds across all races and ethnicites etc.
One of the women in our group has a brother. A white male. He used to play with us. He'd roll the dice but was unable to ADD the numbers (he was early teens then). He played a sorcerer who seemingly had an unlimited number of fireballs, the only spell he ever cast.
He quit playing D&D and plays WOW now.
He is uneducated, will be a drain on our society, I can never see him working. D&D was too difficult for him, so he plays WOW.
Yeah because being that I've been playing RPG's for a long time I know of PLENTY of "uneducated" white guys who play D&D or who complained about it being too hard.
I had a whole long post written to respond to that point but I'm glad that you made that last post, because it pretty much summed up what I was going to gbe getting at.
|
|
About the comment about education and WOW... that holds across all races and ethnicites etc.
Too many of our childhood activities don't encourage learning or problem-solving or critical thinking. The games available that are touted as 'educational,' unfortunately, tend to be lame and ham-fisted, and further reinforce the idea that this sort of stuff is for losers and chumps.
When little girls are handed dolls that say, 'Let's go to the party!' and 'What did you get at the mall?' and 'Math is hard!' and little boys are taught to mock and tease the kid with glasses, and under no circumstances to be caught dead reading a book, it's no wonder that any game that requires active participation instead of passive sitting-and-watching is a niche market at best.
|
|
This is a reply to the post that tries to distinguish racism from "speciesism." The suggestion is that killing orcs or goblins is more akin to killing a wolves or other kinds of animals.
The argument doesn't work for two reasons:
First, orcs and goblins (and all the other "bad" races) were deliberately created by fantasy writers as a stand-in for undesirable humans, not for wolves or lions.
Second, the suggestion that these "bad" races are essentially animals (maybe clever or cunning, but certainly not like us) exactly echoes the racist language used in the 19th century (and before).
Which is one of the reasons I've come to enjoy more recent fantasy series like "Game of Thrones" and "Prince of Nothing." They grapple with these issues head-on.
BTW, I think Eberron took some big steps in this direction. There are a lot of thematic openings for a muddling of the race-paradigm.
Humans are often the evil ones. Evil itself, as a concept, is richly complicated. I'm not sure how much of this surfaces at the gaming table...but I try to incorporate as much ambiguity as possible in the sessions that I DM.
Anyway, thanks for the cool discussion.
Brian
If you want to read some racist writings read Burroughs' Tarzan of the Apes. Good story, we all like tarzan, but you really have to get past the racism in the story. It is THICK.
And I believe that in the writings the subhuman races were introduced to be able to justify killing them. I am not 100% positive they were introduced soley to replace blacks in the stories to be more palatable. I think the idea was that there was an evil race opposing humanity. This race need not be equated to blacks or any other minority.
However, I do not believe that they were not influenced by racism either. In other words it was not a conscious choice. How's that?
And again, any game with no orcs and goblins to kill is going to boring. If you can't go adventuring and kill something the game is doomed. It's just the way things are. We all like hack-n-slash to some degree. (especially after work)
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
One of the women in our group has a brother. A white male. He used to play with us. He'd roll the dice but was unable to ADD the numbers (he was early teens then). He played a sorcerer who seemingly had an unlimited number of fireballs, the only spell he ever cast.He quit playing D&D and plays WOW now.
He is uneducated, will be a drain on our society, I can never see him working. D&D was too difficult for him, so he plays WOW.
You want a laugh? I play WoW, too... and it is not that easy to play well. Any hack can go and get "somewhere" in WoW, but if you really want the most of the game, you have to know math.
"What is better, the +14 to Int, or the +10 to Spell Damage? How about +12 to Spell Critical instead?" There rarely is a flat answer to these questions, and if you want something more than a "depends", you are bound to sit down and crunch numbers much harder than i have seen in D&D.
Rules of thumb exist, and they get you quite far. Others may have done a lot of the math for you - and let's face it, the more difficult the dungeon, the better the loot. But the fine-tuning can be quite the b+~@*, with many chances to do it wrong.
|
|
One of the women in our group has a brother. A white male. He used to play with us. He'd roll the dice but was unable to ADD the numbers (he was early teens then). He played a sorcerer who seemingly had an unlimited number of fireballs, the only spell he ever cast.He quit playing D&D and plays WOW now.
He is uneducated, will be a drain on our society, I can never see him working. D&D was too difficult for him, so he plays WOW.
You want a laugh? I play WoW, too... and it is not that easy to play well. Any hack can go and get "somewhere" in WoW, but if you really want the most of the game, you have to know math.
"What is better, the +14 to Int, or the +10 to Spell Damage? How about +12 to Spell Critical instead?" There rarely is a flat answer to these questions, and if you want something more than a "depends", you are bound to sit down and crunch numbers much harder than i have seen in D&D.
Rules of thumb exist, and they get you quite far. Others may have done a lot of the math for you - and let's face it, the more difficult the dungeon, the better the loot. But the fine-tuning can be quite the b#~**, with many chances to do it wrong.
I know I play WOW too :) My primary is a lvl 70 dwarven warrior (go figure). I don't do many instances but I am optimized like crazy. He's uncritable with a low Defense! Most people say you have to have a 490 Defense to be uncritable. That is only partially true. You need 490 Defense, 330 of which must come from gear, or your Resiliance can give you a 5.6% chance to be missed, OR you can combine Defense and Resiliance to have 5.6% chance to be missed and you are uncritable.
We have a Paladin who thinks he is a DPS paladin. He is Healing Speced and has healing gear. And yes his education is lacking.
Anyone, no mater your education, can play WOW. But you still need an education to be GOOD at playing WOW.