I've been wanting to make a druid who has a very different view compared to most druids on this collective group of intelligent bipeds who make up all the civilizations of Golarion, from advanced, to tribal. I would like to be able to explain this view in the most concise manner should it ever pop up,and constantly saying "collective group of intelligent bipeds" would not only make this explanation more windy, but it also just gets old saying it.
So basically, in the real world the inclusive term for all the intelligent bipeds who make up the world's civilizations is HUMANity, considering it is only comprised of humans. However Golarion clearly has more races than that, humans are only a fragment of this group, so the word humanity would only refer to a fragment of it.
I'd go with "sentients" or "civilization". I think the generic term is "humanoids" but that's, y'know, racist.
This depends on the character's personality. It is possible for a low Charisma druid to reference humanoids as "meat snacks" or "self-propelled field rations" (SPFR's for short), "meat bag" (HK droid reference), "ugly bags of mostly water" (such as an android) or "meat popsicles".
Generically speaking I'd go with "two legs" or "pink-skins". (The latter in this case referencing below the epidermis. Tasty!)
"The Handed Races", is my humble suggestion. It has that implicit awareness of a parity between, say, a bear and a woodsman. But one has hands, and has learned to use them, and the other has natural tools.
I think when an animal reports to a druid of a human, or an dwarf, or a goblin, the term they use translates to 'man'. It's just human hubris to imagine that 'man' applies only to themselves.
|
I've seen "Mortal" used in this way, as opposed to meaning everything mortal, even the non-sentient critters.
Earthdawn has a neat term for exactly answering the OP's question: "Name-givers". I don't know about the Intellectual Property issues, but other than that, "Name Givers" is a great term even for Golarion.
"Sentient" is probably the correct term in English.
|
"Sentient" is not the term we want for this purpose. That is a term that applies to most vertebrate and many invertebrate animals (as opposed to the more hoity-toity term "sapient"), as well as intelligent monsters like dragons and aberrations (to whom "sapient" would most certainly apply as well, so bang goes that as an alternative).
I've come up with the term "pentoids," "fives," or "starfish," in recognition of what these races all have in common that an intelligent creature of an entirely different design would have the easiest time recognizing as a distinctive pattern: 5 extremities radiating from a central trunk. True, the same could be said of giants, and some of the category of races we're talking about might have four arms or something, but categorizing terms such as this are inevitably imperfect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'Humanoids' really fits. It's humano-centric, but I expect that's a matter of linguistics; I expect that the Dwarven translation of the term is 'Dwarfoids', the Elven 'Elfoids', etc.
Classically, the various Core races have been referred to as 'Humans' and 'Demi-humans', which really does sound racist.
'Sapients' sounds too modern to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'Humanoids' really fits. It's humano-centric, but I expect that's a matter of linguistics; I expect that the Dwarven translation of the term is 'Dwarfoids', the Elven 'Elfoids', etc.
Classically, the various Core races have been referred to as 'Humans' and 'Demi-humans', which really does sound racist.
'Sapients' sounds too modern to me.
To be Asmodeus' advocate here, cultural relativism is an awfully modern concept to be inserting into Golarion as well.
Afterall, "Halfling" is an awfully racist name, but it's fairly universally accepted. Even by the Halflings themselves. So long as Golarion is humanocentric, then human centric naming conventions are not inappropriate.
Anthropoids, or anthropoids (not arthropods!)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'Humanoids' really fits. It's humano-centric, but I expect that's a matter of linguistics; I expect that the Dwarven translation of the term is 'Dwarfoids', the Elven 'Elfoids', etc.
Classically, the various Core races have been referred to as 'Humans' and 'Demi-humans', which really does sound racist.
'Sapients' sounds too modern to me.
To be Asmodeus' advocate here, cultural relativism is an awfully modern concept to be inserting into Golarion as well.
Afterall, "Halfling" is an awfully racist name, but it's fairly universally accepted. Even by the Halflings themselves. So long as Golarion is humanocentric, then human centric naming conventions are not inappropriate.
Indeed, some of us have even taken the term of slip as one of endearment.
Best one I can come up with at the moment is "fire huddlers" as that pretty much encompasses all sentient bipeds
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Peeps.
I liked TORG. Orrorsh was the WORST place to go. As it should have been.
Good times, good times.
I am not 100% on who will be carrying this label. Are you talking about specifically those who live with some sort of civilization such as those living in towns/villages/cities/thorps? Does this extend to hermits. Are we only talking about bipedal creatures? what about those who shape change?
How about civilians or civils? Whose who have or show some sort of civility? While civility encompasses respect which people or animals do alike, it also encompasses politeness, which I might argue is not normally seen beyond intelligence.
Or how about people?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I misread this thread title to be about names for groups, such as a drive of dragons or a murder of crows.
Not to threadjack, but I'm gonna threadjack, a little.
So!
I'm thinking "An arson of Goblins" fits. How about a "brutality of orcs" and an "enchantment of elves"?
|
|
I liked TORG. Orrorsh was the WORST place to go. As it should have been.
My character in the TORG game I played in was an Orrorshan. Because I came to the game with a clear character concept, the Narrator let me go a bit off-template and be a kind of combined Lunatic and Occultist with a unique spell (a play on Call of Cthulhu's shriveling spell that I could enhance by accepting damage myself). Sadly, the game died when our Cyberpapist Knight Templar stopped making it to the game in the middle of a HUGE, multi-sided, train-wreck of a battle in which we couldn't afford to lose any players. My character had drawn the Secret Identity subplot and become some kind of Aysleish chosen one, too....
My character in the TORG game I played in was an Orrorshan. Because I came to the game with a clear character concept, the Narrator let me go a bit off-template and be a kind of combined Lunatic and Occultist with a unique spell (a play on Call of Cthulhu's shriveling spell that I could enhance by accepting damage myself). Sadly, the game died when our Cyberpapist Knight Templar stopped making it to the game in the middle of a HUGE, multi-sided, train-wreck of a battle in which we couldn't afford to lose any players. My character had drawn the Secret Identity subplot and become some kind of Aysleish chosen one, too....I liked TORG. Orrorsh was the WORST place to go. As it should have been.
Nasty business. <grin> That group at the time had really stuck it to several of the Big Bads ... but Orrorsh we well and truly feared to tread. We dutifully sent in our monthly newsletter reports. Good times.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
in Pillars of Eternity it's the kith
I am not 100% on who will be carrying this label. Are you talking about specifically those who live with some sort of civilization such as those living in towns/villages/cities/thorps? Does this extend to hermits. Are we only talking about bipedal creatures? what about those who shape change?
How about civilians or civils? Whose who have or show some sort of civility? While civility encompasses respect which people or animals do alike, it also encompasses politeness, which I might argue is not normally seen beyond intelligence.
Or how about people?
Well, I guess I am referring to "intelligent" creatures that fall into the humanoids category who are capable of speaking languages and creating any manner of societies. I was simply curious if their was a term that referred to them all that was't grouping them based on their anatomy.