drows and orcs --breeding potential
Lutz Hofmann
a Tolkien-inspired campaign. I remember his orcs are perverted elves.
But do as ever you please. Allow orc-elves or elf-orcs or no
halfbreeds at all. It is YOUR game.
Lutz Hofmann l...@cs.tu-berlin.de
littl...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Maybe this time my post will go thru, but here's my $.02.
Cross-breeding between elves and orcs should not be allowed. If one were to
take the earlier "biological" explaination offered by someone, this does not
necessarily have to be the case. That person equated that since humans could
cross-breed with orcs and elves, there was a "species" transitive property.
This property need not, nor should not exist. a(humans) does not equal b(orcs),
and in turn equals c(elves). Humans can cross-breed with orcs and elves, but
there need not be (nor should there be) a link between orcs and elves. This is
best visualized by constructing a Venn Diagram of three interlocking circles,
where humans occupy the center and orcs and elves are to the far end.
Since there is not a necessary biological or genetic link from orc to
elf, one should consider whether or not to facilitate one in their campaign. I
say that this shouldn't take place because of the diametric nature of elves and
orcs, which I believe would run to most basic, biological level. There are
qualities of both that seem to be mutually exclusive substantiating my
viewpoint.
If one were to take the Tolkien definition, I believe that orcs were
"distorted elves," or something of that nature. In any case, my interpretation
was that they were distorted magically. This does not mean that since, at some
primeval level, orcs having origins going back to elves, have the capabilities
of reproducing with them. Had they evolved from elves, then *maybe* (though I
wouldn't think so). The case being, however, with the element of magic coming
into play, I would be led to think that elf-orc cross-breeds make no sense nor
should be permitted in a campaign.
The age-old saying that anything is possible in fantasy role-play
should be taken with a grian of salt. There should be some element of
verisimilitude that intelligent players will buy. There should be some
established norms that aren't always dismissed as "fantasy" or "it's done by
magic." When too many of these elements enter into play, the more mature player
would tend to lose the sense of realism that the campaign provides. In essence,
in order to preserve game sanity, too many wierd things should be limitted and
considered heavily. I don't think that there's much demand or justification for
elf-orcs. They don't make much sense, and don't think that they'd find a viable
niche in a campaign that I would run. The question that needs to be addressed
is "why do they exist?" If the answer is "because I want to make some monster"
then perhaps it isn't viable. There should be a real reason behind why and how
can such a creature come into being, and IMHO, I don't believe that elf-orcs
satisfy this criteria.
--Kevin Littlefield (DM retired)
Michael Lewchuk
>In article <1992May29.1...@cs.tu-berlin.de>, l...@cs.tu-berlin.de (Lutz Hofmann) writes:
>>Interbreeding between orcs and elves should be possible if you play in
>>a Tolkien-inspired campaign. I remember his orcs are perverted elves.
>>
>>But do as ever you please. Allow orc-elves or elf-orcs or no
>>halfbreeds at all. It is YOUR game.
>>
>>Lutz Hofmann l...@cs.tu-berlin.de
>littl...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Tolkien's orcs are NOT distorted elves. They were creations of Sauron
(or was it Morgoth?) made "in a mockery of elves". Read "Lord of the Rings",
book 2, and the wise old Ent will mention that Trolls were created by Sauron
in mockery of Ents just as Orcs were created as a mockery of Elves. There
need be no biological similarity whatsoever. Generally, from AD&D campaigns
I've seen, orcs can crossbreed with any humanoid monster except Elves. That's
why Orcs hate Elves so much. Orcs hate Elves because Orcs have bad taste
(bad smell, bad manners, bad appearance,...). Humans can crossbreed with
most other humanoid lifeforms, although I don't think I've ever come across
a half-dwarf or half-gnome or half-halfling. Perhaps dwarves and gnomes and
halflings are a species unto themselves.
In Tolkien's LOTR book, the only species which were proven compatible were
Elves and Men (humans). Orcs and Men were probably compatible due to the
schemings of the wizard Saruman, and probably had more than a little help
from his powerful magics to help in their creation.
Michael Lewchuk
lew...@cs.UAlberta.CA
Thomas Omar Smith
No Orc would ever consent to having relations with an elf under any
circumstances.
No elf would consent to having relations with an orc under any circumstances.
Since neither side has relations with the other, there are no offspring.
Tom the non hacker
Kemp in 96!
Ross Perot may indeed turn this
country around. However, his next act
will probably be to bend it over.
Stephen P Spackman
There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
gametime!
Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
different, now, doesn't it?
- sez me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies
ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BlackLace
>This racism is disgusting. People are people, orc, elf or dwarf.
>There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
>with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
>gametime!
Well, people may be people..but they aren't the other races. WIth the exception
of Shadowrun, I've never heard anyone claim that elves/humans/dwarves were anything but seperate biological organisms. Yes, they have similar characteristics
and in some cases they can breed with each other, but this is again *FANTASY
and FICTION*
It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
takes place.
>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
>orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
>different, now, doesn't it?
Well, considering that orcs and elves are at war with each other in most
campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one. Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
If God says don't have relations with orcs..then most people won't have
relations with orcs. Because the dieties in FRP are usually real and manifest
themselves in the lives of the people who follow them.
I realize the point you are trying to make about racism, but I don
not think that is really an issue here. This was a technical question
when it started, and I think that maybe we are just being a wee bit too PC
when we start worrying whether orcs and elves hating each other is racist
or not.
Of course, I could be wrong on this..
It does raise some interesting thoughts on race relations in the gaming sphere..
Like why you never see any races in other worlds except Europeans..Hmm..
BlackLace
kaki...@kontu.cc.utu.fi
> I've always avoided the 1/2 elf 1/2 orc problem as follows:
>
> No Orc would ever consent to having relations with an elf under any
> circumstances.
You try to say that an Orc wouldn't find it most amusing to >rape< an Elf
woman, had he a chance to?? I've always had this impression that Orcs more or
less like to torture Elfs all ways possible, and what more painfull to an
Elffemale than to be raped? And it wouldn't be possible that Orcs would keep
her as a slave or something, or a rescue party would appear right afterwords?
Just thoughts on the subject...
--Kaitsu
Email: kaki...@kontu.utu.fi
"But God really exists!", said the old man, and alas, my faith was restored
for I knew that Santa Claus would never lie.
kaki...@kontu.cc.utu.fi
> campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
> slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
> the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
> active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
> then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one. Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
> If God says don't have relations with orcs..then most people won't have
> relations with orcs. Because the dieties in FRP are usually real and manifest
> themselves in the lives of the people who follow them.
True, very true....
But,
> It does raise some interesting thoughts on race relations in the gaming sphere..
> Like why you never see any races in other worlds except Europeans..Hmm..
??? What other worlds are these? I've seen Asians, Americans, even 'Indians'
(American), in a world. There's been even races _Green_ or _Red_ (Not
brownish-bronze, as I imagine Indians are coloured, although I don't know, for
I've never seen a fullblooded Indian, you know, quite few of them here in
Finland :), so howcame you say that there is no others out there than
europeans? That's just in D&D (And D&D oriented), and other such games which
are based in european folklore. And even in those I've seen Asian and Black
races.
Just thoughts.
Stephen P Spackman
|ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu (Stephen P Spackman) writes:
|Well, people may be people..but they aren't the other races. WIth the exception
|of Shadowrun, I've never heard anyone claim that elves/humans/dwarves were anything but seperate biological organisms. Yes, they have similar characteristics
|and in some cases they can breed with each other, but this is again *FANTASY
|and FICTION*
You'll find similar attitudes towards non-white races prevalent in
THIS world until LONG after mediaeval times. Even today, the PC word
for canadian esquimeaux, "inuit" means in inuktitut (so they tell me)
"people" (i.e. as opposed to "animals" - that's the rest of us).
|It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
|just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
|takes place.
But in a world where crossing DOES occur to claim that the different
races are "really" different SPECIES *sure is* racist. AND WHAT DO YOU
THINK THESE RACES ARE THERE TO MODEL? What part of human psychology do
they appeal to? Have you not noticed that the words "race" and "race"
are the same????
|Well, considering that orcs and elves are at war with each other in most
|campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
|slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
|the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
|active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
|then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one. Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
|If God says don't have relations with orcs..then most people won't have
|relations with orcs. Because the dieties in FRP are usually real and manifest
|themselves in the lives of the people who follow them.
Uh huh. And you notice how europeans have never ever made war on
africans, for instance.... And how no organised religion on THIS
planet has ever tried restricting who you can marry....
|I realize the point you are trying to make about racism, but I don
|not think that is really an issue here. This was a technical question
|when it started, and I think that maybe we are just being a wee bit too PC
|when we start worrying whether orcs and elves hating each other is racist
|or not.
|
|Of course, I could be wrong on this..
|It does raise some interesting thoughts on race relations in the gaming sphere..
|Like why you never see any races in other worlds except Europeans..Hmm..
Because that's who the orcs and elves are. Scary, isn't it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies
ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PS I think PC is really silly, because the important thing is to look
after your own head, and plain talk is a VERY important tool for this.
Legalism is just not a good substitute for morality. I'm *not* saying
that a multispecies universe is not a fine idea; I *am* saying, think
carefully about your assumptions, because you might find ouy stuff you
need to know about yourself....
Dustin Lee Laurence
>In article <lewchuk.707161844@menaik>, lew...@cs.UAlberta.CA (Michael Lewchuk) writes:
>>
>>Tolkien's orcs are NOT distorted elves. They were creations of Sauron
>>(or was it Morgoth?) made "in a mockery of elves". Read "Lord of the Rings",
>>book 2, and the wise old Ent will mention that Trolls were created by Sauron
>>in mockery of Ents just as Orcs were created as a mockery of Elves. There
>>need be no biological similarity whatsoever.
Actually, the issue is not so clear. In the Silmarillion, it is strongly
suggested that the orcs were in fact the decendents of the elves that
listened to Morgoth's lies and did not go west at all. This would make
them technically altered elves, but considering that a being who would be
a god in most rpg's was doing the twisting over a few millenia it seems
likely to me that they need not be cross-fertile on biological grounds. I
would also say that biology is kind of irrelevant here, and creatures so
opposite in nature would never be able to interbreed in Tolkien's universe.
--
Dustin Laurence "Someone please stop me, before I net again."
Alan Braggins
> |It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
> |just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
> |takes place.
> But in a world where crossing DOES occur to claim that the different
> races are "really" different SPECIES *sure is* racist. AND WHAT DO YOU
> THINK THESE RACES ARE THERE TO MODEL? What part of human psychology do
> they appeal to? Have you not noticed that the words "race" and "race"
> are the same????
Horses and donkeys are different species. Mules exist. Cross-breeding does
not imply being the same species. Maybe half-orcs and half-elves are sterile
hybrids.
> |Well, considering that orcs and elves are at war with each other in most
> |campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
> |slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
> |the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
> |active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
> |then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one.
> |Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
Of course not being in love with an orc doesn't stop you being raped.
--
Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
"Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
"My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
littl...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
>>>>>> On 30 May 92 14:24:24 PDT, ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu (Stephen P Spackman) said:
>
>> |It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
>> |just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
>> |takes place.
>
>> But in a world where crossing DOES occur to claim that the different
>> races are "really" different SPECIES *sure is* racist. AND WHAT DO YOU
>> THINK THESE RACES ARE THERE TO MODEL? What part of human psychology do
>> they appeal to? Have you not noticed that the words "race" and "race"
>> are the same????
>
>Horses and donkeys are different species. Mules exist. Cross-breeding does
>not imply being the same species. Maybe half-orcs and half-elves are sterile
>hybrids.
>
>> |Well, considering that orcs and elves are at war with each other in most
>> |campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
>> |slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
>> |the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
>> |active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
>> |then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one.
>> |Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
>
>Of course not being in love with an orc doesn't stop you being raped.
>
The issue of rape possibilities, however, does not aid your argument.
The action of rape does not connote ability to reproduce.
>
>--
>Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
> "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
> "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
--Kevin
Bill Seurer
*ARE* (corrupted) elves. Morgoth could not create life so he twisted elves
into orcs. THAT is why elves hate orcs so much.
--
- Bill Seurer Language and Compiler Development IBM Rochester, MN
Internet: BillS...@vnet.ibm.com America On-Line: BillSeurer
Bryan J. Maloney
>*Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
>give headspace?
>
Lemme see, do I have any "evil races" in my campaign?
Orcs--no, they're very wolfish in their culture, not too good at accepting
organization outside of the clan, so they can't really get organized, but
they're not evil.
Goblins--they're smaller and weaker than everyone else. Dwarves kill them,
Orcs enslave them, Elves "make them leave". Humans at least only despise
them. Mostly, they want to be left alone to farm, make skunk cabbage beer,
and get into raucous, jolly brawls on the weekend, but nobody will let them.
So they're pretty foul-tempered about the rest of the world.
Elves--okay, so they're "supermen", but only on the surface. They're
actually pretty uppity bastards by and large, and who knows what really
goes on in their groves? Furthermore, they're pretty unpleasant
to other species, for all their claims of pacifism. They've done a lot
of damage in the name of "protecting nature" in my world.
Dwarves--dying species in my world. Internecine warfare has reduced their
population to below replacement levels. They've only got a century or
two left. Sad thing, considering that they ran the world pretty well
when they ruled it. Now they tend to act as kindly teachers to whichever
country will protect them. My dwarves own knowledge, not wealth.
As for interbreeding:
Elves and humans can produce sterile offspring.
Humans and orcs can produce sterile offspring.
Elves and orcs might be able to produce sterile offspring, but it would
take a bit of trying and probably some fertility aid.
No other species can interbreed.
Dwarves are the children of a different deity altogether.
All other species are the results of playing around with non-human material
to begin with.
Orcs and Elves, on the other hand, are related to humans, but the two
branches diverge in different direction.
PS: I only named my species "elves" etc. for convenience's sake. I could
have called my "elves" "orcs" and vice versa--this really would have screwed
with the players' minds.
Nancy Lebovitz
>In article <ge9gyR_00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, ts...@andrew.cmu.edu (Thomas Omar Smith) writes:
>> I've always avoided the 1/2 elf 1/2 orc problem as follows:
>>
>> No Orc would ever consent to having relations with an elf under any
>> circumstances.
>
>You try to say that an Orc wouldn't find it most amusing to >rape< an Elf
>woman, had he a chance to?? I've always had this impression that Orcs more or
>less like to torture Elfs all ways possible, and what more painfull to an
>Elffemale than to be raped? And it wouldn't be possible that Orcs would keep
>her as a slave or something, or a rescue party would appear right afterwords?
>Just thoughts on the subject...
Just to stretch it a little, even if neither elves nor orcs will consent to
relations, it might be possible to anesthetize a male and female and do
artificial insemination. (Turkey basters may well be within the tech capacity
of middle earth. The lack of mad scientist types is a more serious problem,
but perhaps it could be an orc with an elf and an orc to torture, or it
might be a Sauron/Morgoth type trying to produce magic-using orcs.)
Nancy Lebovitz
button catalogue availible by email
na...@genie.slhs.udel.edu
I've made such terrible mess of things, and all I wanted to do was rule
the universe.
Mike Civita
>I've always avoided the 1/2 elf 1/2 orc problem as follows:
>
>No Orc would ever consent to having relations with an elf under any
>circumstances.
I disagree, I think an Orc would screw anything. Do you think a
human and an Orc actually settle down and raise a couple kids?
No way! The Orcs captured a human woman, raped her, and somehow
she survived until she bore the child, which of course killed
her. Elves are very beautiful people, there is no reason that
a raiding party of orcs would not take an elven female as a
prisioner. the reason they are probably so scarce is that elves
breed MUCH more slowly than humans or orcs, so it is less likely
that the orcs would catch a fertile elf, ready to be impregnated.
>
>No elf would consent to having relations with an orc under any circumstances.
Agreed.
Mike
Mike Civita
>There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
>with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
>gametime!
No, not true. Orcs are goblinkind, and elves are almost a royal race.
Orcs are basically a Neanderthal, or Cro-Magnon counterpart to humans
or elves. they are, by nature, evil, and elves are probably the most
egotistical race there is. Orcs have a lifecycle of <50 years, where
elves live to 800-1200 years. Also, Orcs are UGLY by nature (-1 Charisma
by the old rules, max 12) and elves are VAIN. Orcs are tribal, recognize
few, if any, family ties, and rule by the "Might makes right" axiom.
Elcves are a highly organized, magically oriented, aristocratic society,
were family line stretch 10,000 years. In short, they are not compatible
socially. Physically is a different story, however.
>
>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
>orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
>different, now, doesn't it?
Ok, Stephen, you get your brownie point for today's Politically
Correct admonition. Just remember to open your eyes before you
try to walk home, you might get hit by a bus or something.
Mike
PS - What exactly are you equating Orcs to in the real world, anyway?
Stephen P Spackman
|In article <STEPHEN.92...@estragon.uchicago.edu> ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu (Stephen P Spackman) writes:
|>This racism is disgusting. People are people, orc, elf or dwarf.
|>There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
|>with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
|>gametime!
|No, not true. Orcs are goblinkind, and elves are almost a royal race.
|Orcs are basically a Neanderthal, or Cro-Magnon counterpart to humans
|or elves. they are, by nature, evil, and elves are probably the most
|egotistical race there is. Orcs have a lifecycle of <50 years, where
|elves live to 800-1200 years. Also, Orcs are UGLY by nature (-1 Charisma
|by the old rules, max 12) and elves are VAIN. Orcs are tribal, recognize
|few, if any, family ties, and rule by the "Might makes right" axiom.
|Elcves are a highly organized, magically oriented, aristocratic society,
|were family line stretch 10,000 years. In short, they are not compatible
|socially. Physically is a different story, however.
Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair. Some of them are
bigger than "normal" people and some of them are smaller, but they all
have a reputation of insatiable sexual drive, huh? Dwarves, of course,
have a stranglehold on the money supply. Meanwhile elves are Supermen
and are so inherently superior that matters of morality simply don't
arise.
Where oh where have I heard this before?
Look, the problem is NOT that I'm accusing you (or anyone) of being a
bigot, or not "PC" enough (in fact, if you want to know my notion of
what socially well-balanced people are like, go read alt.sex.bondage -
I'm serious). I'm just pointing out that the paragraph above (modulo
some differences of scale) could just as well have been written about
europeans and the "lesser races" - or japanese and the "lesser races"
- or ANYONE and their competitors. I've heard it before, and when I
heard it before it was NOT benign.
So I'm asking you, please, try to see it this way. I'm not saying
"change your campaign", I'm saying "check your assumptions".
*Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
give headspace?
Maybe the answer is "yes". I wouldn't hesitate to run such a campaign
myself. But I'd want to think it through upfront. I'd want to know
what "evil" _meant_ in my universe.
Tolkein thought this through. But did Gygax? Did you?
|>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
|>orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
|>different, now, doesn't it?
|
|Ok, Stephen, you get your brownie point for today's Politically
|Correct admonition. Just remember to open your eyes before you
|try to walk home, you might get hit by a bus or something.
Nobody here's being politically bloody correct. PC is social
ruleplaying and I'm standing up for ROLEplaying here. Ask yourself
what it's like to be an orc. Is it *really* impossible to overcome
your upbringing and function smoothly in a non-orc society? Ask
yourself what it's like to be an elf. Is it really impossible to fall
for a capable and streetwise (or educated and urbane!) orc?
People are people and rules that don't address the individual AS AN
INDIVIDUAL are bad. IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies
ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe in Strong AI? I don't even believe in Strong I!
Stephen P Spackman
|In article <Bp1MH...@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (BlackLace ) writes:
|>
|>>This racism is disgusting. People are people, orc, elf or dwarf.
|>>There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
|>>with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
|>>gametime!
|
|little weird, I agree that the idea that NO Elf would breed with ANY orc and
|vice versa. I haven't seen an Elf definition yet that wasn't pretty much
|like a human who was mellow and didn't die. Humans have perverts (I'm
|not meaning to slam anyone), other races would have perverts.
I'll let you in on a secret: the indignance isn't mine. I've just
played an elf for a long time - an elf who was adopted by humans and
makes a Real Effort to like orcs, which is kinda tough have you SEEN
orc pornography? It's disgusting. I mean, gross. Blecch. *Gross*.
And, yeah, perverts are common. In fact, we're everywhere. Show me
someone who isn't a pervert, and I'll show you a real *pervert* ;-).
Ok, I'll behave now.
| Some people will, from time to time, schtup (sp?) whatever. With so
|many races so close to human, I'd say some crossbreeding (reproductive
|systems willing) will happen.
Hee hee hee. And if conception is rare, it'll happen more often! Pig.
| I'd say they could interbreed. Both races can interbreed with
|humans, so I'd think they could with each other. Does anyone know any
|biological evidence sighting cross breeding races?
Well, my sister (in real life now) is kinda milk-chocolate coloured,
and HER kid is sort of cafe au lait, but her mother was a little
darker than her. So I guess it works fine. I wouldn't worry about it.
Oops, I said I was going to behave, didn't I?
|>It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
|>just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
|>takes place.
|
| I'm saying there is a precedent in most fantasy worlds for such cross
|breeding.
And I'm saying that the danger of racism lies in denial of the
relevance of the question. Maybe you WANT your world to be a paradigm
of racial prejudice, because you want to work that through. Or maybe
your world has absolute good and evil and the "races" of people are
reflections of that. Fine, no problem. But have your eyes open, keep
your eyes open, open your heart and your mind and your EYES.
|>>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
|>>orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
|>>different, now, doesn't it?
|
| Not neccesarily. Some well brought up humans (I would guess)
|copulate with fowl. Depending on upbringing, such cross-breeding could be
|common, but no matter the taboos, it would be there.
I don't know how fowl react to this, but if they're into it too, I
don't see a problem. As I said, maybe being a "good little elf" isn't
all it's cracked up to be. Punk elfs is what we need here, stir things
up a bit.
Actually, we've got a pretty good Elf here on the net. Yaaay Elf!
|>I realize the point you are trying to make about racism, but I don
|>not think that is really an issue here. This was a technical question
|>when it started, and I think that maybe we are just being a wee bit too PC
|>when we start worrying whether orcs and elves hating each other is racist
|>or not.
|
| I agree that PC creeping in the game is a little dumb. However,
|unless your Drow are more like ants than people, not everyone will tow the
|party line. Generalizations saying NO elf would such-and-such are
|unneccesary.
And in any case, this argument was started be ME and I AM a elf. So,
um, fuck you and everyone with the same PIN number as you. Or thing.
Cos I'm an elf, I'm a lesbian, I like orcs, well mostly, I mean saome
of them are quite nice, and I'm a bit confused maybe but I'm happy.
Mostly. And if you got problems with that, um, well, they're your
problems. You've got problems. Ok, I'll shut up now - someone buy me
another beer.
peter the elf & stephen p spackman
Sam Jones
>
>>This racism is disgusting. People are people, orc, elf or dwarf.
>>There're enough people in the REAL world telling folks that having sex
>>with their chosen lovers is unnatural, without it carrying over into
>>gametime!
While I find this sort of indignance about Elf or Orc stereotypes a
little weird, I agree that the idea that NO Elf would breed with ANY orc and
vice versa. I haven't seen an Elf definition yet that wasn't pretty much
like a human who was mellow and didn't die. Humans have perverts (I'm
not meaning to slam anyone), other races would have perverts.
Some people will, from time to time, schtup (sp?) whatever. With so
many races so close to human, I'd say some crossbreeding (reproductive
systems willing) will happen.
I'd say they could interbreed. Both races can interbreed with
humans, so I'd think they could with each other. Does anyone know any
biological evidence sighting cross breeding races?
>Well, people may be people..but they aren't the other races. WIth the exception
>of Shadowrun, I've never heard anyone claim that elves/humans/dwarves were anything but seperate biological organisms. Yes, they have similar characteristics
>and in some cases they can breed with each other, but this is again *FANTASY
>and FICTION*
Yes, but people have sex with different biological organisms in the
real world, and many fantasy worlds have cross breeds.
>It's not racism to debate whether this race COULD breed with that race. It's
>just a discussion of whether it's possible given the realm in which the game
>takes place.
I'm saying there is a precedent in most fantasy worlds for such cross
breeding.
>>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
>>orc. Kinda suggests we should be bringing up our elves a little
>>different, now, doesn't it?
Not neccesarily. Some well brought up humans (I would guess)
copulate with fowl. Depending on upbringing, such cross-breeding could be
common, but no matter the taboos, it would be there.
>Well, considering that orcs and elves are at war with each other in most
>campaigns I know, the possibility of the two mingling peaceably is probably
>slim at best. Most people do follow rather nationalistic beliefs, so if
>the orcs are trying to kill you most of the time (and they do this with the
>active support of their diety who exists and provides their priest with powers)
>then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one. Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
>If God says don't have relations with orcs..then most people won't have
>relations with orcs. Because the dieties in FRP are usually real and manifest
>themselves in the lives of the people who follow them.
Historical precedent shows that having two groups at war can even
facilitate inbreeding. Alexander the Great started a program to make a
Greco-Persian elite class.
>I realize the point you are trying to make about racism, but I don
>not think that is really an issue here. This was a technical question
>when it started, and I think that maybe we are just being a wee bit too PC
>when we start worrying whether orcs and elves hating each other is racist
>or not.
I agree that PC creeping in the game is a little dumb. However,
unless your Drow are more like ants than people, not everyone will tow the
party line. Generalizations saying NO elf would such-and-such are
unneccesary.
>Of course, I could be wrong on this..
>It does raise some interesting thoughts on race relations in the gaming sphere..
>Like why you never see any races in other worlds except Europeans..Hmm..
"I get nervous when I see these movies set in the future that don't
have any black people in them. Call me paranoid." -- A black comedian I
saw.
--
These opinions are not those of my employers. In fact, they are not
mine. They're yours, and you're projecting them on me because you're unable to
take responsibility for your own thoughts.
Shane Kerr
>I disagree, I think an Orc would screw anything. Do you think a
>human and an Orc actually settle down and raise a couple kids?
>No way! The Orcs captured a human woman, raped her, and somehow
>she survived until she bore the child, which of course killed
>her. Elves are very beautiful people, there is no reason that
>Mike
Why does everybody assume that all half-orcs are the product of a
orc raping a human? Ever heard of wartime rape? Do you think
a soldier/brigand/knight loves or respects or is even attracted to
the unfortunate female he rapes? Are you saying you've never
known a human who would screw anything? Admittedly orcs are ugly,
stupid, dirty, mean, and ignorant in every way, but so were most
humans during, oh, say the middle ages.
Personally, I don't understand the debate over whether it is
possible or not. I mean, you've got Centaurs, Mermen, Chimeras,
Griffons, Minotaurs, and skads of other obviously patchwork
creatures wandering around. If you want half-orc/half-elves,
go for it.
Kerr
President of the Orc Preservation Society
ke...@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
Pamela K. Keller
>a raiding party of orcs would not take an elven female as a
>prisioner. the reason they are probably so scarce is that elves
>breed MUCH more slowly than humans or orcs, so it is less likely
>that the orcs would catch a fertile elf, ready to be impregnated.
Or, perhaps the myth that female elves can only become impregnated
when they chose to be is true. There are no orc-elf combinations because
elves do not want children to result from such a union.
Now, if there were some kind of drug that would cause an elf to want
to be impregnated...
Pam Keller kel...@calvin.Tymnet.COM
"Never underestimate the band width of a station wagon full of
tapes hurtling down the highway" - Tanenbaum
littl...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
I'll repeat this argument again: rape and insemenation (sp?) does not
necessarily mean inter-breeding is possible. One *could* rape a goat, but a
satyr will not be produced.
--Kevin
Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell
Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair.
Nahh.. they're blotchy, and pale, vaguely pinkish or greenish. They
don't deal well with sunlight and mostly roam at night [or stay
underground]. No?
Dark skin usually means an elf of some sort...
--
Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell <rock...@socrates.umd.edu>
Alan Braggins
> Includes strength of spirit (which is distinct from soul) depends on number
> of descendants. Orcs are keen on half-orc children, because there is no
> need to boost another orcs spirit at same time (Inferior races like humans
> don't have real (=orcish) spirits).
Some more on this... Spirit is sort of "life-force", but not personalised.
Soul is the bit that carries identity.
When you die, your soul goes off to fight in the eternal battle in the
afterlife. How strong it is depends on how strong your spirit is back on
earth - things that strengthen it are
having living descendents (original number is largely limited
by social standing - after a number
being remembered
having had your body properly eaten (when the eaters will
also benefit from the spirit your body no longer needs).
something only shamans can do that they don't let on about...
Humans and other non-orcs have spirits, but do not have souls. (Or if
they do, those souls go somewhere different after death - some shamans
say the existence of incorporeal (human) undead shows that humans have
spirits and souls which can remain bound together with no body. But they
aren't _real_ souls, because that doesn't happen to orcs. Mindless undead
are created by a priest binding spirit into a body with no soul.)
You can gain strength by eating humans (assuming brave strong humans), but
their souls won't gain from it. (OTOH, you can eat weak cowardly humans
just for food, and not worry about it).
Orcs who do not die "suitable" deaths (generally in battle) will not be
eaten or honoured in song to keep their memory alive. A Shaman will
normally be eaten by whoever takes over (and, unlike warriors, will be
worthy of this even if dying of old age).
And you thought your GM just threw orcs you against to die because they were
stupid bloodthirsty monsters and he couldn't think of a better reason...
Alan Braggins
> having living descendents (original number is largely limited
> by social standing - after a number
Oops. That should say
by social standing - after a certain number, you will
be 'discouraged' from having any more (in case you get
'inappropriately' powerful in the afterlife).
Alan Braggins
>>> |then it's not likely you as an elf would fall in love with one.
>>> |Your gods/priestprobably feel the same way.
>>
>>Of course not being in love with an orc doesn't stop you being raped.
>>
> The issue of rape possibilities, however, does not aid your argument.
> The action of rape does not connote ability to reproduce.
Of course not. It does reduce the strength of the "but orcs and elves don't
love each other" argument though.
I'll write up my orcish religion sometime...
Includes strength of spirit (which is distinct from soul) depends on number
of descendants. Orcs are keen on half-orc children, because there is no
need to boost another orcs spirit at same time (Inferior races like humans
don't have real (=orcish) spirits).
Elves have voluntary control over their fertility, which is why they don't
have enormous populations in spite of their long lives (it can't just be
low fertility or half-eleves would be much rarer). Orcs, after noticing that
unions with elven prisoners never result in children, just kill them.
(And eat them if they show reasonable strength of spirit first).
Your mileage may vary. The "orcs are just similar enough to interbreed with
humans who are just similar enough to elves, but orcs are too different from
elves" solution is simpler.
Go with whatever suits your world. (And if you really want a one-off
character that breaks your rules, introduce wizardly tampering with the
forces of nature...)
Mike Civita
>In article <1992Jun2.2...@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov> mi...@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Mike Civita) writes:
>|No, not true. Orcs are goblinkind, and elves are almost a royal race.
>|Orcs are basically a Neanderthal, or Cro-Magnon counterpart to humans
>|or elves. they are, by nature, evil, and elves are probably the most
>|egotistical race there is. Orcs have a lifecycle of <50 years, where
>|elves live to 800-1200 years. Also, Orcs are UGLY by nature (-1 Charisma
>|by the old rules, max 12) and elves are VAIN. Orcs are tribal, recognize
>|few, if any, family ties, and rule by the "Might makes right" axiom.
>|Elcves are a highly organized, magically oriented, aristocratic society,
>|were family line stretch 10,000 years. In short, they are not compatible
>|socially. Physically is a different story, however.
>
>Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair. Some of them are
>bigger than "normal" people and some of them are smaller, but they all
>have a reputation of insatiable sexual drive, huh? Dwarves, of course,
>have a stranglehold on the money supply. Meanwhile elves are Supermen
>and are so inherently superior that matters of morality simply don't
>arise.
No. Orcs are pigmen with tusks, they do not stand completely erect,
and are covered from head to toe with bristly fur. They are evil by
nature. You actually have the NERVE to say that a primitive race
in D&D represents the NEGRO RACE??????? Negros in MY world are HUMAN,
with different colored skin. PERIOD. You sound like some rich,
white-bread liberal who claims to be unprejudiced, yet you have the
GALL to parade this closet little fantasy about some D&D race, designed
to be glorified apes BY THE GAME, as NEGROS???? Go away, little boy.
>
>Where, oh where have I heard this before?
Who gives a SHIT?
>
>So I'm asking you, please, try to see it this way. I'm not saying
>"change your campaign", I'm saying "check your assumptions".
>*Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
>give headspace?
>Maybe the answer is "yes". I wouldn't hesitate to run such a campaign
>myself. But I'd want to think it through upfront. I'd want to know
>what "evil" _meant_ in my universe.
>Tolkein thought this through. But did Gygax? Did you?
Yes, there IS an evil race. It is called ORCS. THey are a complete
fabrication, based in literature as, more than likely, the mating
of some demon or devil, and some surface creature, to create an EVIL
race of creatures, Strong, Stupid, and Ugly. Where the HELL do you
get off equating this with BLACK PEOPLE??????
>
>|>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
>|Correct admonition. Just remember to open your eyes before you
>|try to walk home, you might get hit by a bus or something.
>
>Nobody here's being politically bloody correct. PC is social
>ruleplaying and I'm standing up for ROLEplaying here. Ask yourself
>what it's like to be an orc. Is it *really* impossible to overcome
>your upbringing and function smoothly in a non-orc society? Ask
>yourself what it's like to be an elf. Is it really impossible to fall
>for a capable and streetwise (or educated and urbane!) orc?
>
Orcs are not PC, because they are a primitive barbaric race, incapabable
of fitting into the existing "civilization" structure. I LIKE plying
half-orcs, and have 2 or 3 high level PCs who are 1/2 orc. HOWEVER,
this thing you've created in yourself that associates mythic races
with actual human beings is so far up your ass you should see a doctor
about it. HUMANS are HUMANS, jewish, chinese, black, mexican, AND
white. THis preception you have of humans in D&D only being white is
your own ingrained ethnocentricity and bigotry showing it's face.
Before you open your big trap again, you better realize that the
views you think you are eliminating, are only propagating in your
words.
>People are people and rules that don't address the individual AS AN
>INDIVIDUAL are bad. IMO.
You are the one calling Jews Dwarves, and Blacks Orcs. In my world,
jews and blacks are humans. You should really think about this idiocy
you just splooged all over the net and aask yourself, "WHO IS MAKING
RACIAL STEREOTYPES AROUND HERE?"
Mike
Axly
Excuse me? I believe what he was trying to say is that representing one
race as inherently evil for their physical characteristics is racist.
I didn't think he was implying that orc = negro. I think what he said is
something like this. "Gee, you look different,and I think you have this
enormous sex drive and I think that I'm going to oppress you because of
how you look." When you look at it like this, you can see his point,
instead of accusing him of being racist when he was trying to fight a racist
attitude.
Whether Orcs are evil by nature depends on how you define it. Yes, they
are not as pretty as humans. To humans. To each other, their characteristics
are probably very attractive. Nice tusks and thick fur are probably
attractive features to an orc.
Orcs are evil because they are competing with mankind. If you were an orc
and everyone wanted to kill you just because you were an orc and didn't
ever stop to see whether you could interact with them in a peaceful manner,
then you would probably act toward humans in what they would consider an
"evil" manner.
Sure, in the game as it was originally designed, races are inherently evil
with alignments bolted onto the whole subset of beings. But anyone will tell
you that alignments are one of the biggest problems with ADD. People don't
have alignments. If races like orcs did exist, they wouldn't have them either.
You can hide behind the game and be a racist and say "Some races are inherently
evil" Yes, you are just racist when you game..but I don't want any sort of ideas
like that perpetuated by my gaming group. In the worlds I've played in, the orcs and humans don't get along. They are in competition..but neither race is
inherently evil/good. They are all just sentient beings.
>>
>>Where, oh where have I heard this before?
>Who gives a SHIT?
>>
>>So I'm asking you, please, try to see it this way. I'm not saying
>>"change your campaign", I'm saying "check your assumptions".
>>*Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
>>give headspace?
>>Maybe the answer is "yes". I wouldn't hesitate to run such a campaign
>>myself. But I'd want to think it through upfront. I'd want to know
>>what "evil" _meant_ in my universe.
>>Tolkein thought this through. But did Gygax? Did you?
>Yes, there IS an evil race. It is called ORCS. THey are a complete
>fabrication, based in literature as, more than likely, the mating
>of some demon or devil, and some surface creature, to create an EVIL
>race of creatures, Strong, Stupid, and Ugly. Where the HELL do you
>get off equating this with BLACK PEOPLE??????
He didn't equate them with blacks, you did. He just questioned the assumption
that the orcs were evil predicated on their appearance. "Strong, stupid, and
ugly." And before you start ranting again, think about the racists right
here in America who will say the exact same thing about a black person. Yes, I
know they are some sick mentally twisted bastards. But that's how they think.
And I will be damned if *I* am going to help spread their dogma on any level.
So the person who posted this and I agree on one thing. We don't intend to
continue this fallacious idea that one race is evil/good in comparison to
each other in our gaming. Yes, there is racism in my campaign. Some people hate
orcs just cause they are orcs. A few PC's have actually met some orcs who were
better people than most of the people who claimed they were "Strong,Stupid, and
Ugly." And maybe that is something they can take home and think about...
>>
>>|>Ok, so maybe a "well brought up" elf wouldn't be caught dead with an
>>|Correct admonition. Just remember to open your eyes before you
>>|try to walk home, you might get hit by a bus or something.
>>
>>Nobody here's being politically bloody correct. PC is social
>>ruleplaying and I'm standing up for ROLEplaying here. Ask yourself
>>what it's like to be an orc. Is it *really* impossible to overcome
>>your upbringing and function smoothly in a non-orc society? Ask
>>yourself what it's like to be an elf. Is it really impossible to fall
>>for a capable and streetwise (or educated and urbane!) orc?
>>
>Orcs are not PC, because they are a primitive barbaric race, incapabable
>of fitting into the existing "civilization" structure. I LIKE plying
>half-orcs, and have 2 or 3 high level PCs who are 1/2 orc. HOWEVER,
>this thing you've created in yourself that associates mythic races
>with actual human beings is so far up your ass you should see a doctor
>about it. HUMANS are HUMANS, jewish, chinese, black, mexican, AND
>white. THis preception you have of humans in D&D only being white is
>your own ingrained ethnocentricity and bigotry showing it's face.
>Before you open your big trap again, you better realize that the
>views you think you are eliminating, are only propagating in your
>words.
He never associated mythic races with actual human beings. He merely
pointed out that the attitudes used in describing them were quite similar
and just as racist as the real life racist attitudes.
As for the perception that the only humans in DD are white, well, you
can blame TSR for that one. Ever seen another race used in any novels,
art, or modules? Dont include the Oriental adventures or special out of
the way campaign settings, because most gamers never use those.
White folks, white folks, white folks. That's ALL you see in a TSR product.
Now read somethign by someother companies, like FASA for example..
"Wow, look, artwork where someone who is black/chinese/etc. actually is shown
as the adventuring hero type we like to play!"
So next time you want to get on your little soapbox and rant about who is
a racist..why don't you get on the phone to TSR and rant at them or at any
of the other gaming companies that only use artwork that respresents Europeans.
A picture, my friends, is worth a thousand words, and in this case, TSR's
continued refusal after who knows how many letters to start using people of
race as heros sucks eggs.
>>People are people and rules that don't address the individual AS AN
>>INDIVIDUAL are bad. IMO.
>You are the one calling Jews Dwarves, and Blacks Orcs. In my world,
>jews and blacks are humans. You should really think about this idiocy
>you just splooged all over the net and aask yourself, "WHO IS MAKING
>RACIAL STEREOTYPES AROUND HERE?"
Who is splooging idiocy? Him or you? He said that the racial stereotype
of Dwarves controlling the money supply and Orcs as stupid, cruel and
having a huge sex drive was rather familiar and racist. YOU, yes, YOU were
the one who made those connections. Yes, those are the connections he wanted
you to make. To show you how racist it is to put a stereotype on any race,
be it in your gaming or real life. If you don't understand that...*ring* It's
the clue phone, it's for you!
>Mike
Axly
--
* Axly * "Well, yes, it did occur to me that I*
* dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu * might hit one or two civilians. But I*
* Red Sword Targa * really never thought that I would hit*
* * all of them." -Axly *
Stephen P Spackman
Well, (shock horror) I've never played D&D, but I *have* played in
worlds where the orcs had night-black skins and the dwarves controlled
the money supply, and the elves were all white. Jack Mandora, me no
choose NONE.
So am I making this up? Am I projecting my own racist fantasies? Nope;
I'm calling them as I see them. I see a lot of people going around
saying this is a "good race" and this is an "evil race" and I'm
worried about that choice of wording and I'm worried that people may
not have thought it through.
So I ask them to think it through.
As for your outrage over my supposed association of black skin with
stupidity and ugliness, hell no, that chip is on YOUR shoulder. My
point is that elves and dwarves and orcs are clearly people, and
people just don't COME In "good" and "evil" - leastways, not on
account of their birth. Nor do they come in "attractive" and "ugly" -
not on account of their birth. (In fact, in less segregated societies
than this, even skin colour doesn't run in families with great
reliability. America is noticeably weird for the purity of its
"whites").
So (a) blow it out your ear and (b) come meet my family and my friends
before you accuse me of racism, asshole.
Oh, and before we part: you said this -
| You are the one calling Jews Dwarves, and Blacks Orcs. In my world,
| jews and blacks are humans. You should really think about this idiocy
| you just splooged all over the net and aask yourself, "WHO IS MAKING
| RACIAL STEREOTYPES AROUND HERE?"
in response to my comment about your "lovely" world where personality,
appearance and social worth are fully governed by race (in full
accordance with theories we all wish we'd never have to hear again):
>Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair. Some of them are
>bigger than "normal" people and some of them are smaller, but they all
>have a reputation of insatiable sexual drive, huh? Dwarves, of course,
>have a stranglehold on the money supply. Meanwhile elves are Supermen
>and are so inherently superior that matters of morality simply don't
>arise.
Are you sarcasm-impaired or is your brain just taking a nice little
vacation this decade?
Roberts David
keep it to ourselves on r.g.f.misc when there's a perfectly good newsgroup
elsewhere that would be so much more appreciative of your argument. As much
as it grieves me to think of this newsgroup without this particular thread,
I, for one, am willing to make the necessary sacrifices and go without.
---
Dave (an...@sol.acs.unt.edu)
Entrpy hapens
Markku Sorto
> Stephen P Spackman:
> Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair.
>
> Nahh.. they're blotchy, and pale, vaguely pinkish or greenish. They
> don't deal well with sunlight and mostly roam at night [or stay
> underground]. No?
>
> Dark skin usually means an elf of some sort...
>
Hmm....have you ever heard of Tolkien? His orcs were dark-skinned...and since
he invented the orcs, so I guess if one wants to do it by the textbook,
I think he would be the #1 authority.
Tumpa
Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell
Hmm....have you ever heard of Tolkien? His orcs were
dark-skinned...and since he invented the orcs, so I guess if one
wants to do it by the textbook, I think he would be the #1
authority.
Sure, and if you deviate from the story line, then what? You play by
that book and you're doomed. And Tolkien himself provided some words
on just what it is to be doomed.
Actually, my favorite conception of orcs was a campaign where they
grew on trees. [Money doesn't grow on trees, but orcs aren't money.]
There was this huge forest in a far and distant land, where the
sunlight never reached the ground. Every day the trees would drop
rather large pods, about six feet long and a couple wide. Every night
the pods would split open...
--
Raul Deluth Miller-Rockwell <rock...@socrates.umd.edu>
The U.S. government went another thousand million dollars into debt today.
Matt Hucke
the first attempt. Use /ux1_repost/h:=:j to eliminate these posts, if
you have already seen them. Praise Cthulhu!
In article <BpAGo...@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
makes astounding leaps of logic, but falls flat on his face:
>Excuse me? I believe what he was trying to say is that representing one
>race as inherently evil for their physical characteristics is racist.
Physical characteristics have nothing to do with the issue. He was
attempting to claim that because orcs have dark skin, and negroes have
dark skin, hating one is equivalent to hating the other, which is
ridiculous.
>Whether Orcs are evil by nature depends on how you define it. Yes, they
>are not as pretty as humans.
That has nothing to do with good or evil.
>Orcs are evil because they are competing with mankind.
No, orcs are evil because they rape, pillage, torture, etc. While humans
engage in these activities to some extent, they are much more prevalent
among orcs.
> But anyone will tell
>you that alignments are one of the biggest problems with ADD. People don't
>have alignments.
Speak for yourself. "Chaotic good with neutral-good tendencies" describes
me very well.
> If races like orcs did exist, they wouldn't have them either.
Why not?
>You can hide behind the game and be a racist and say "Some races are inherently
>evil" Yes, you are just racist when you game..but I don't want any sort of ideas
That is not racism but a simple observation. "Amoebas are inherently stupid"
is not racist either, but a fact.
>like that perpetuated by my gaming group. In the worlds I've played in, the orcs and humans don't get along. They are in competition..but neither race is
>inherently evil/good. They are all just sentient beings.
What about Hitler? Was he evil? Or did he and the Jews just not "get along"?
>And I will be damned if *I* am going to help spread their dogma on any level.
Perhaps you should learn the difference between fantasy and reality. Saying
"orcs are evil" is in no way equivalent to racism. Orcs don't exist.
Tolkien invented them, Gygax modified them.
>As for the perception that the only humans in DD are white, well, you
>can blame TSR for that one. Ever seen another race used in any novels,
>art, or modules? Dont include the Oriental adventures or special out of
>the way campaign settings, because most gamers never use those.
>White folks, white folks, white folks. That's ALL you see in a TSR product.
Because it is based on medieval Europe. Medieval Europeans were white.
And is it TSR's fault that ORIENTAL ADVENTURES doesn't sell as well as the
other books? There isn't a single white person in that book, because,
in the time period it was set, there was little contact between the
subraces of humanity.
>Who is splooging idiocy? Him or you? He said that the racial stereotype
>of Dwarves controlling the money supply and Orcs as stupid, cruel and
>having a huge sex drive was rather familiar and racist. YOU, yes, YOU were
>the one who made those connections. Yes, those are the connections he wanted
>you to make. To show you how racist it is to put a stereotype on any race,
>be it in your gaming or real life. If you don't understand that...*ring* It's
>the clue phone, it's for you!
Perhaps you should get a clue yourself, as you apparently cannot separate
fantasy from reality, and you apparently believe observing a difference
between species and observing a difference between races are equivalent.
There is nothing wrong with "stereotypes", except when they are established
without any supporting evidence. Is it a "stereotype" to say that humans
are more intelligent than chimpanzees? Is this "racist"?
--
And thither came Conan, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, to tread the jeweled
thrones of the Earth beneath his sandaled feet. --THE NEMEDIAN CHRONICLES
hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Gene Roddenberry 1921-1991
--
And thither came Conan, a thief, a reaver, a slayer, to tread the jeweled
thrones of the Earth beneath his sandaled feet. --THE NEMEDIAN CHRONICLES
hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Gene Roddenberry 1921-1991
Matt Hucke
>
>stupidity and ugliness, hell no, that chip is on YOUR shoulder. My
>point is that elves and dwarves and orcs are clearly people, and
No, they are clearly numbers on paper. That is all. Classifying orcs as
evil is perfectly valid, as they exist only within the imagination.
>people just don't COME In "good" and "evil" - leastways, not on
>account of their birth.
The "Heredity vs environment" debate has existed a long time, and people
better qualified than either you or me [Dr.'s of psychology, etc.] cannot
come to a consensus. "People just don't COME in 'good' and 'evil'" is
your opinion, not a fact.
>So (a) blow it out your ear and (b) come meet my family and my friends
>before you accuse me of racism, asshole.
What do your family and friends have to do with any of this?
>in response to my comment about your "lovely" world where personality,
>appearance and social worth are fully governed by race (in full
>accordance with theories we all wish we'd never have to hear again):
Species, not race. Don't you know the difference? Blacks and Whites are
seperated by race. Humans and gerbils are seperated by species, as are
elves and orcs.
--
"It begins here--an army--to bring sense to a world plagued by worse than
thieves and murderers. This will be a good life... good enough."
Bruce Wayne, "Batman: The Dark Knight Returns"
Robert Osborne
> Orcs are probably dark-skinned and have funny hair. Some of them are
> bigger than "normal" people and some of them are smaller, but they all
> have a reputation of insatiable sexual drive, huh? Dwarves, of course,
> have a stranglehold on the money supply. Meanwhile elves are Supermen
> and are so inherently superior that matters of morality simply don't
> arise.
>
> Where oh where have I heard this before?
>
> Look, the problem is NOT that I'm accusing you (or anyone) of being a
> bigot, or not "PC" enough
> "change your campaign", I'm saying "check your assumptions".
If you are not accusing us of being bigots what are you accusing us of?
Admonishments to search our souls for racism is a funny way of
NOT accusing us of being bigots.
> *Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
> give headspace?
Orcs are evil in my land because they are the children of a god who has
created them for a single purpose; to destroy life. Dwarves love gold
because they love to work with metal and gold is colourful, rare and
soft. These examples are not symbolic of some deep seated hatred of
mine nor are they part of a secret agenda to foist some sterotype on
unsuspecting players.
> Nobody here's being politically bloody correct.
This is what drives me crazy about the PC folk. They always
have the words "I'm not PC!!" somewhere in their tirades.
> PC is social
> ruleplaying and I'm standing up for ROLEplaying here. Ask yourself
> what it's like to be an orc. Is it *really* impossible to overcome
> your upbringing and function smoothly in a non-orc society? Ask
> yourself what it's like to be an elf. Is it really impossible to fall
> for a capable and streetwise (or educated and urbane!) orc?
>
> People are people and rules that don't address the individual AS AN
> INDIVIDUAL are bad. IMO.
Orcs, dwarves, elves, and even humans are not PEOPLE or INDIVIDUALS!
They are mythical creatures in my mythical world. If seeing racism and
other bigotries in how I define my species isn't being PC what is?
Rob.
--
Robert A. Osborne ...!uunet.ca!isgtec!robert or rob...@isgtec.com
Shane Kerr
>Hmm....have you ever heard of Tolkien? His orcs were dark-skinned...and since
>he invented the orcs, so I guess if one wants to do it by the textbook,
>I think he would be the #1 authority.
>
>Tumpa
Actually, Tolkien took most of his fantastic races from mythology (I'm
not sure which, Celtic? Norse? Somthing like that. The only race he built
from the ground up was the Halfl- oops. I mean Hobbit race.
Does anybody know how long until Iron Crown's rights on Tolkien's
works expires and we can say Hobbit instead of Halfling?
Erich Schneider
>Does anybody know how long until Iron Crown's rights on Tolkien's
>works expires and we can say Hobbit instead of Halfling?
In the (A)D&D system? Probably never. Long before Iron Crown existed,
in the original D&D (three books in a box), there were creatures called
Ents, Balrogs and Hobbits. However, the Tolkien estate got a bit miffed
about this, and thus we have Treants, Balor (the type VI demon) and
Halflings. "Orcs" remained because apparently there is a mythological
creature by that name; note, however, that "orcs" and "goblins" are
different in D&D, but not in Tolkien. ("Orcrist" = "Goblin-cleaver")
Besides, I believe Iron Crown doesn't directly control the rights to
Tolkien's work. Tolkien Enterprises, a division of "Elan Merchandising"
(some company based out of Berkeley) controls those rights; I believe
this corporate entity appeared when Ralph Bakshi filmed his movie of
the first half of _The Lord of the Rings_ (which, curiously, is
called _The Lord of the Rings_).
I doubt Iron Crown will lose its license unless it goes under. Then,
who knows?
--
er...@lighthouse.caltech.edu
"Today/Yes Winners/Yes Losers/Yes In the Zone/Yes Tomorrow/No"
- Walter Jon Williams, _HardWired_
Jonathan Sari
>There is nothing wrong with "stereotypes", except when they are established
>without any supporting evidence. Is it a "stereotype" to say that humans
>are more intelligent than chimpanzees? Is this "racist"?
There is nothing wrong with stereotypes in and of themselves. The problem
comes about when we start making judgments based on stereotypes rather than
on the qualities of the individual.
-Jon
--
su...@u.washington.edu, BITnet: surge@milton, UUNet:uw-beaver!surge@milton
"What's in it for me?" "Enough cash to buy the Outer Hebridees."
"14 shillings sixpence?"
Bertil Jonell
>worlds where the orcs had night-black skins and the dwarves controlled
>the money supply, and the elves were all white. Jack Mandora, me no
>choose NONE.
In Gygax's 'Gord the Rogue' (No, I didn't buy it, I lent it from a friend
and read it:) the (anti)hero buyes a magic dagger from a Dwarven pawn-shop
owner who speaks with an outrageous German accent. Interpret this as you like.
-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
exercise for your kill-file."
Bertil Jonell
>If you want half-orc/half-elves,
>go for it.
How about this: Orc/elf crossbreeds are possible and they are not sterile.
There are quite a lot of them, hordes and hordes actually. They're almost as
smart as the elves, and almost as bloodthirsty as the orcs. It is just that
the elves won't tell them about their origin, and the orcs have probably
forgotten it long ago. In most fantasy worlds they are called humans.
Bertil Jonell
>In article <STEPHEN.92...@estragon.uchicago.edu> ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu (Stephen P Spackman) writes:
>>people just don't COME In "good" and "evil" - leastways, not on
>>account of their birth.
>
>The "Heredity vs environment" debate has existed a long time, and people
>better qualified than either you or me [Dr.'s of psychology, etc.] cannot
>come to a consensus.
I doubt that anybody could grow up to be an harmonious individual after
having orcish child-rearing methods inflicted on them for several years.
>Species, not race. Don't you know the difference? Blacks and Whites are
>seperated by race.
That is debatable. A good argument can be made that genetically, humans
cannot be divided into 'races'. The genetic studies that led to the 'African
Eve' hypothesis also discovered that there are greater genetic spread *within*
the so-called 'races' than there is *between* them.
Summary: 'races' do not exist.
>hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Gene Roddenberry 1921-1991
Ridley McIntyre
The only AD&D game I was in allowed Half-breed Elves and Orcs. I was one.
It was part of the usual story, Elven mother raped by Black Orc father, and
I was shunned in my home village which made my character eventually leave to
go adventuring. The only Elf in my village who liked me for what I was was
a mad old man who taught me how to use the magical crossbow he had from when
he was an adventurer. When he died, he willed me the crossbow. The whole thing
was based around a lead miniature I had (everything the figure had on him was
my starting equipment, and that wasn't much), and he was pretty shrewd, and
one of the best looking orcs there was. He did solicit some pretty foul names
throughout the adventure from anyone who didn't know his reputation. And
some townsfolk were prone to spit at him because of his orcish features, but
he'd learned over the years when to be docile and when to use his anger in
fights.
This is a bit of a break from these genetics/racist threads, I know, but
this is the only character I ever played that I really liked. This element
of being so visually repulsive, yet so good at his job (Fighter/Thief) that
everyone wanted to work with him but no one wanted to admit it, was really
fun to roleplay. After all, that's what it's all about, eally, isn't it? If
it ain't then you're better off doing a sociology degree.
--
**Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig**
gdg...@cck.coventry.ac.uk
-----------------------------------
two minds but with one single memory
Matt Hucke
>
> That is debatable. A good argument can be made that genetically, humans
>cannot be divided into 'races'. The genetic studies that led to the 'African
>Eve' hypothesis also discovered that there are greater genetic spread *within*
>the so-called 'races' than there is *between* them.
> Summary: 'races' do not exist.
That's my point exactly, that the differences between "races" (white/black)
are trivial compared to the differences between species (elf/orc,
human/hedgehog). Therefore, claims that "orcs are evil" is a racist statement
have no merit.
Sam Jones
>the first attempt. Use /ux1_repost/h:=:j to eliminate these posts, if
>you have already seen them. Praise Cthulhu!
>
>
>In article <BpAGo...@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
>
>>Excuse me? I believe what he was trying to say is that representing one
>>race as inherently evil for their physical characteristics is racist.
>
>Physical characteristics have nothing to do with the issue. He was
>attempting to claim that because orcs have dark skin, and negroes have
>dark skin, hating one is equivalent to hating the other, which is
>ridiculous.
No, no, no, you've got it dead wrong. Look, no one (that I've read,
anyway) has said that the Orc generalizations are racist toward blacks. I've
seen people say that this 'Orcs are all scum' resembles racism in that it
takes a large group of people and gives them all a single trait.
>>Whether Orcs are evil by nature depends on how you define it. Yes, they
>>are not as pretty as humans.
>
>That has nothing to do with good or evil.
It does in most of the D&D supplements I've seen. The nasty
creatures tend to be the ugly ones. I'm not saying that this is really
wrong. Maybe it pushes bad thinking, maybe it doesn't. The only thing I
have against running a campaign with that kind of world is that it's a little
simple-minded.
>>Orcs are evil because they are competing with mankind.
>
>No, orcs are evil because they rape, pillage, torture, etc. While humans
>engage in these activities to some extent, they are much more prevalent
>among orcs.
Look, you can play with this, but isn't a campaign where people have
motives a bit more interesting? If the Orcs kill people because they're
orcs, and that's it, you've got a pretty narrow campaign. I mean, wouldn't
the orcs attacking because they've outbred their food supply be more
interesting? You could have orcs you could negotiate with. It's better than
a color-coded world.
>> But anyone will tell
>>you that alignments are one of the biggest problems with ADD. People don't
>>have alignments.
>
>Speak for yourself. "Chaotic good with neutral-good tendencies" describes
>me very well.
Oh, you're good? Entirely good? Wow. I thought you made a post
under several false assumptions. That's not evil, of course, but it's not
good. I houseclean chaotic evil, but that's as much as the alignments apply
to me.
>> If races like orcs did exist, they wouldn't have them either.
>
>Why not?
Look, how could an evil race survive? Who would look after the
children? My sister is good if she's anything, and she's been tempted to
push her daughter off the roof of her house. An evil race would kill the
tykes the first time they yelled at three in the morning, which, being evil
tykes, the orc babies would always do.
>>You can hide behind the game and be a racist and say "Some races are inherently
>>evil" Yes, you are just racist when you game..but I don't want any sort of ideas
>
>That is not racism but a simple observation. "Amoebas are inherently stupid"
>is not racist either, but a fact.
Seemed pretty damn smart last time I got the flu.
>>like that perpetuated by my gaming group. In the worlds I've played in, the orcs and humans don't get along. They are in competition..but neither race is
>>inherently evil/good. They are all just sentient beings.
>
>What about Hitler? Was he evil? Or did he and the Jews just not "get along"?
They REALLY didn't get along.
>>And I will be damned if *I* am going to help spread their dogma on any level.
>
>Perhaps you should learn the difference between fantasy and reality. Saying
>"orcs are evil" is in no way equivalent to racism. Orcs don't exist.
>Tolkien invented them, Gygax modified them.
No, but it's too pat, like I said, simply evil orcs made for a dull
campaign.
>>As for the perception that the only humans in DD are white, well, you
>>can blame TSR for that one. Ever seen another race used in any novels,
>>art, or modules? Dont include the Oriental adventures or special out of
>>the way campaign settings, because most gamers never use those.
>>White folks, white folks, white folks. That's ALL you see in a TSR product.
>
>Because it is based on medieval Europe. Medieval Europeans were white.
>And is it TSR's fault that ORIENTAL ADVENTURES doesn't sell as well as the
>other books? There isn't a single white person in that book, because,
>in the time period it was set, there was little contact between the
>subraces of humanity.
Not entirely true. The moors came a long way. Besides, I think it
does say something about TSR that they thought of putting Jackalopes and Mind
Flayers into their books before they thought of putting in something really
weird, like non-Anglos.
>>Who is splooging idiocy? Him or you? He said that the racial stereotype
>>of Dwarves controlling the money supply and Orcs as stupid, cruel and
>>having a huge sex drive was rather familiar and racist. YOU, yes, YOU were
>>the one who made those connections. Yes, those are the connections he wanted
>>you to make. To show you how racist it is to put a stereotype on any race,
>>be it in your gaming or real life. If you don't understand that...*ring* It's
>>the clue phone, it's for you!
>
>Perhaps you should get a clue yourself, as you apparently cannot separate
>fantasy from reality, and you apparently believe observing a difference
>between species and observing a difference between races are equivalent.
>
>There is nothing wrong with "stereotypes", except when they are established
>without any supporting evidence. Is it a "stereotype" to say that humans
>are more intelligent than chimpanzees? Is this "racist"?
No, but think. Why don't you run a campaign with humans vs.
chimpanzees? You wouldn't be able to do much with it. That's why running
Orcs with genuine complex motives would be better than the dice-a-thons the
munchkins tend to favor.
Matt Hucke
>
> No, no, no, you've got it dead wrong. Look, no one (that I've read,
>anyway) has said that the Orc generalizations are racist toward blacks. I've
>seen people say that this 'Orcs are all scum' resembles racism in that it
>takes a large group of people and gives them all a single trait.
An earlier poster compared attitudes toward orcs with stereotypes about
Blacks and Jews, and specifically mentioned the 'dark skin'.
> It does in most of the D&D supplements I've seen. The nasty
>creatures tend to be the ugly ones. I'm not saying that this is really
>wrong. Maybe it pushes bad thinking, maybe it doesn't. The only thing I
>have against running a campaign with that kind of world is that it's a little
>simple-minded.
"Ugly" is subjective. To an orc, humans and elves would be ugly, and they
would think of ugliness being associated with 'good'.
>>No, orcs are evil because they rape, pillage, torture, etc. While humans
>>engage in these activities to some extent, they are much more prevalent
>>among orcs.
>
> Look, you can play with this, but isn't a campaign where people have
>motives a bit more interesting? If the Orcs kill people because they're
>orcs, and that's it, you've got a pretty narrow campaign. I mean, wouldn't
>the orcs attacking because they've outbred their food supply be more
>interesting? You could have orcs you could negotiate with. It's better than
>a color-coded world.
On the contrary, I think a campaign that involves actual 'evil' is more
interesting. Look at the new Star Trek series compared to the old. Klingons,
Romulans, even the Borg are no longer 'evil'. It's not nearly as interesting
as the old.
Of course, some people prefer the new series for that reason. :)
>>Speak for yourself. "Chaotic good with neutral-good tendencies" describes
>>me very well.
>
> Oh, you're good? Entirely good?
I try. :)
> Wow. I thought you made a post
>under several false assumptions. That's not evil, of course, but it's not
>good.
What 'false assumptions'?
> Look, how could an evil race survive? Who would look after the
>children? My sister is good if she's anything, and she's been tempted to
>push her daughter off the roof of her house. An evil race would kill the
>tykes the first time they yelled at three in the morning, which, being evil
>tykes, the orc babies would always do.
Evil doesn't necessarily mean 'stupid'.
If you want an evil race, consider the Beanes. This family lived in Scotland
around the 15th century, in a sea-cave. For over 25 years, they preyed on
the people of the area, capturing and eating them. The family started with
a single *evil* couple, and grew to 48 children and grandchildren before they
discovered and executed. The children were taught that to hate and kill all
outsiders, yet they lived peacefully among themselves.
Certainly, they were 'evil' (tho i admit this was from their upringing, not
genetics), but they did not kill their children.
>> "Amoebas are stupid" is not a racist statement, but a simple fact.
> Seemed pretty damn smart last time I got the flu.
That's because they were under Illuminati control. :)
>>What about Hitler? Was he evil? Or did he and the Jews just not "get along"?
> They REALLY didn't get along.
IM!HO, Hitler was 'evil'. Possibly genetic, possibly environmental, but
certainly evil.
>>There is nothing wrong with "stereotypes", except when they are established
>>without any supporting evidence. Is it a "stereotype" to say that humans
>>are more intelligent than chimpanzees? Is this "racist"?
>
> No, but think. Why don't you run a campaign with humans vs.
>chimpanzees? You wouldn't be able to do much with it.
Well, if they were more intelligent... of course, I'm a "Planet of the Apes"
fan. :)
> That's why running
>Orcs with genuine complex motives would be better than the dice-a-thons the
>munchkins tend to favor.
I feel that a race that is truly ruthless and evil, such as orcs, would have
an outlook on life sufficiently different from the humans to make an
interesting campaign. A world where everyone is somewhere within 'neutral'
would be far more boring.
Stephen P Spackman
|attempting to claim that because orcs have dark skin, and negroes have
|dark skin, hating one is equivalent to hating the other, which is
|ridiculous.
Speaking as the "he" in question, he was attempting to point out that
not ONLY does fantasy by its very nature correlate closely with
reality - with, in particular, the subjectivised reality that we see
in our own minds - but in this particular case there is an inescapable
parallel between (some popular/famous portrayals of) fantasy "races"
and the issues of race in our own world.
That these parallels are so direct as to correlate with the folk lore
about physical appearance, lifespan, socioeconomic status and
fecundity is icing on the cat.
In Jamaica they say: Jack Mandora, me no choose none. I'm not making
this up, even if it deals with fiction. And I think it's cause enough
for concern - but not panic.
|>Orcs are evil because they are competing with mankind.
|
|No, orcs are evil because they rape, pillage, torture, etc. While humans
|engage in these activities to some extent, they are much more prevalent
|among orcs.
No; there are only two choices. (1) Orcs (like humans) are not evil,
but are brought up (or directed by evil gods) to RP&T; or (2) Orcs
rape pillage and torture because they are evil. You choose your
theology and then abide by it.
It's the notion that because Orcs in general indulge in RP&T that Orcs
in general are evil that is racist - you just can't do with statistics
what you can do with theology!
|[...]
|That is not racism but a simple observation. "Amoebas are inherently stupid"
|is not racist either, but a fact.
Be very careful here. There are two readings of this sentence, one
true and one false: there's nothing about being NAMED an amoeba that
makes you stupid; but as it happens there are things about the
STRUCTURE of an amoeba (arising now from the strict definition of the
term) that will make you be.
If this sounds dumb, consider instead "Animals are inherently stupid".
The statistical evidence is nearly as strong (MOST animals are very
very small and ick and stupid) but this time the structural reading
doesn't apply - there's nothing about being an animal that makes you
stupid.
What about how you are named? If I point out that one definition of
"animal" includes people.... So it transpires that "amoebas are
inherently stupid" is a sensible statement but ONLY because it is
nearly vaccuous under the definition of amoeba. "animals are
inherently stupid" is an ill-considered statement.
Thus (as I said above) I think the only good choices are that Orcs are
INHERENTLY evil (and this is a structural property of the universe,
and linked to the definition of what it is to be an orc, cf. Tolkein);
or that some Orcs are evil and _even if all Orcs living today happen
to be grossly unpleasant people_ (!!) "Orcs are evil" is a gross
generalisation and a *potentially* racist statement (time to check the
context and the author's intent [note that this is the step missing in
blind 'PC']).
|What about Hitler? Was he evil? Or did he and the Jews just not "get along"?
Theological point. If I said that Hitler was (a) not in control and
(b) trying to be in control, and that BOTH (a) and (b) are evil - but
neither makes the person evil, I'd get flamed, I'm sure. So pretend I
didn't say it.
|Perhaps you should learn the difference between fantasy and reality. Saying
|"orcs are evil" is in no way equivalent to racism. Orcs don't exist.
|Tolkien invented them, Gygax modified them.
Perhaps you should learn the *connection* between fantasy and reality.
Fantasy exists too - it's in your head and it colours your perceptions
of the world. The relationship is NOT LINEAR - it is NOT the case that
"everything you fantasise you will do". It IS the case that most
everything you fantasise will have some impact on what you do (and
more importantly, how you think). So sometimes it helps to draw out
the connections a little.
|Perhaps you should get a clue yourself, as you apparently cannot separate
|fantasy from reality, and you apparently believe observing a difference
|between species and observing a difference between races are equivalent.
Please note that we have been discussing differences between "races"
on one hand and differences between "races" on the other. YOU may not
have noticed the re-use of the term for these two (to you different)
notions, but I assure you that your unconscious mind will have no such
difficulties. That "coincidence" [NOT!] *will* affect your thinking.
Stephen P Spackman
|>
|>As for your outrage over my supposed association of black skin with
|>stupidity and ugliness, hell no, that chip is on YOUR shoulder. My
|>point is that elves and dwarves and orcs are clearly people, and
|
|No, they are clearly numbers on paper. That is all. Classifying orcs as
|evil is perfectly valid, as they exist only within the imagination.
That's what the rules may say. That is not the substance of
roleplaying.
|The "Heredity vs environment" debate has existed a long time, and people
|better qualified than either you or me [Dr.'s of psychology, etc.] cannot
|come to a consensus. "People just don't COME in 'good' and 'evil'" is
|your opinion, not a fact.
The reason the debate continues is that in many cases upbringing can
OVERRIDE heredity and even the POSSIBILITY that this is true is enough
to establish my thesis. So the fact that people better qualified than
you disagree with each other is not evidence in your favour.
|>So (a) blow it out your ear and (b) come meet my family and my friends
|>before you accuse me of racism, asshole.
|
|What do your family and friends have to do with any of this?
Unless you are now willing to assert that there is no difference
between fantasy and reality (a strawman you were earlier trying to
wish on me), it is entirely relevant to suggest that someone check the
empirical data before accusing me of racism. As it *happens* (though I
submit that it would make no difference if this were NOT the case, it
is only interesting in that it IS) we're a parti-coloured band and
there's never been a trace of internal tension about it (by contrast
we have recurrent disagreements about women's rights. I firmly believe
that women shouldn't HAVE rights because they're only people like me
and they should be able to get by on people's rights like the rest of
us. Some of my friends are a touch more radical and insist that men
have botched up too badly to be trusted anymore).
|>in response to my comment about your "lovely" world where personality,
|>appearance and social worth are fully governed by race (in full
|>accordance with theories we all wish we'd never have to hear again):
|
|Species, not race. Don't you know the difference? Blacks and Whites are
|seperated by race. Humans and gerbils are seperated by species, as are
|elves and orcs.
Go check the rulebooks. Go check the terms of this debate. The word
"race" is the preferred one for the elf/orc distinction.
Stephen P Spackman
|If you are not accusing us of being bigots what are you accusing us of?
|Admonishments to search our souls for racism is a funny way of
|NOT accusing us of being bigots.
Not really. When you teach evolution to people you go to a lot of
trouble to say to them, now look, don't confuse this mechanism with
with the Lamarckan hypothesis, because you know there's scope for
confusion - to the extent that Darwin himself was unsure of the
distinction through much of his life. It doesn't mean that you are
accusing each of the students of not understanding Darwin - or even
that you're accusing ANY of the students of not understanding darwin.
You're just taking precautions in view of a very easy mental trap that
is present because the unconscious mind favours the "wrong" solution
and will continue to do so (because such is the nature of humanity, I
suppose - there's some computational evidence for this) even when
consciously and "in the full light of day" everyone knows what's going
on and can keep the distinctions clear.
|> *Is* there such a thing as an "evil race"? Is that an idea you want to
|> give headspace?
|
|Orcs are evil in my land because they are the children of a god who has
|created them for a single purpose; to destroy life. Dwarves love gold
|because they love to work with metal and gold is colourful, rare and
|soft. These examples are not symbolic of some deep seated hatred of
|mine nor are they part of a secret agenda to foist some sterotype on
|unsuspecting players.
That's great. Here we find a system that HAS internal justification
and is a reflection of some real aesthetic philosophy. I'm with you
here - you're NOT saying "yeah, well, orcs are evil because they're
orcs, you know?" - an opposing attitude that is also strongly
represented on this group, I think.
|> Nobody here's being politically bloody correct.
|
|This is what drives me crazy about the PC folk. They always
|have the words "I'm not PC!!" somewhere in their tirades.
I'm pro-life, pro-S&M, opposed to women's and native rights movements,
and think that changing the language around every three weeks is worse
than a crock, it's a method of evading real issues - relying on the
notion that if you're confused enough you can't think bad thoughts. I
could add to that list; I'm *not* 'PC'. (People are people and you
can't "patch" reality, sez me).
|Orcs, dwarves, elves, and even humans are not PEOPLE or INDIVIDUALS!
|They are mythical creatures in my mythical world. If seeing racism and
|other bigotries in how I define my species isn't being PC what is?
They become individuals when people identify with them. The walls of
reality are thinner than you think - or roleplaying wouldn't be the
blast that it is.
Douglas Holzworth
|> mi...@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov (Mike Civita), this flame's for you.
|>
|> Well, (shock horror) I've never played D&D, but I *have* played in
|> worlds where the orcs had night-black skins and the dwarves controlled
|> the money supply, and the elves were all white. Jack Mandora, me no
|> choose NONE.
|>
|> So am I making this up? Am I projecting my own racist fantasies? Nope;
|> I'm calling them as I see them. I see a lot of people going around
|> saying this is a "good race" and this is an "evil race" and I'm
|> worried about that choice of wording and I'm worried that people may
|> not have thought it through.
|>
|> So I ask them to think it through.
|>
|> As for your outrage over my supposed association of black skin with
|> stupidity and ugliness, hell no, that chip is on YOUR shoulder. My
|> point is that elves and dwarves and orcs are clearly people, and
|> people just don't COME In "good" and "evil" - leastways, not on
|> account of their birth. Nor do they come in "attractive" and "ugly" -
|> not on account of their birth. (In fact, in less segregated societies
|> than this, even skin colour doesn't run in families with great
|> reliability. America is noticeably weird for the purity of its
|> "whites").
|>
OK, maybe this is worth exploring further. Within the context with which we
are familiar, I agree that no race is inherently evil. However, it seems to
me that certain cultures could be evil, or at a minimum have certain
"characteristics" associated with them with a fair degree of accuracy. I would
point to the Nazis, the Aztecs, the Mongols (of Attila's time). Therefore,
it is not so much the physical characteristics of the race that connote evil,
but the associated culture. This is the theme behind Drzz't Duorden (sp?)
in the Homeland trilogy: a "good" drow.
My assertion: there is the CAPACITY for evil in the human (or just about any
other) race. It is the acceptance of a culture that realizes or denies that
evil. A culture that glorifies sadism, brutality, rape, and plunder is most
probably evil, whether it's adherents are of one race or many.
-- Doug the DM
Douglas Holzworth
This has turned into quite a volatile and emotion-laden thread. We should be
careful not to lose the intellectual points of the discussion amid the emotion.
I think Stephen's discussion point has validity, as a discussion point.
While I did find it very disturbing, as it suggested I examine a fundamental
concept of fantasy, I don't perceive it as a personal attack or "holier-than-
thou" admonition. It transcends fantasy, which I admittedly use as a
recreational escape mechanism, and causes "real-life" to intrude into an other-
wise pleasureable pasttime. Perhaps it is that threat: if we examine the
situation and find plausible argument, that we'll have to change and thus
lose such an enjoyable pasttime, that is responsible for some of the emotion-
alism that I've seen in response.
MY take: I don't think any real-life human races are "evil." I do think
certain CULTURES may be "evil" (see previous post). I further suspect that
"evil" may be a subjective perception of the individuals (the Inquistion
believed they tortured and killed in the name of God).
However, think it would be anthropomorphic to extrapolate the state of humans
to hold true for ALL creatures. Man has ever been an egocentric animal, and
this attitude is not unknown. While I see the possibility of interpreting
surface similarities as being analogous to real-life human situations, I do
nopt agree that this is the case. I also would not say that it is impossible
for (especially in a fantasy setting) a race to be evil. Again, my first
guess would be an evil culture rather than an evil race, though.
Lastly, I want to acknowledge the right and validity of Stephen to have raised
the question. If one is "right" in their views, examination will verify this.
If one is wrong and won't examine, one isn't interested in truth. I had a
lot of dissonance reading his post and the implications. I felt attacked,
though upon re-reading, there were no attacks in the post. It caused me
to examine my reasoning and positions, though, for which i am ultimately
grateful. My outcome: I don't feel moved to change my position, although I now
have a better understanding of it.
Let's make sure we don't demonstrate the same lack of tolerance
that we dislike in those aligned against gaming.
-- Doug the DM
Stephen P Spackman
| My outcome: I don't feel moved to change my position, although I now
|have a better understanding of it.
response to subsequent criticism :-(.
|[...] It [my comment &c] transcends fantasy, which I admittedly use as a
|recreational escape mechanism, and causes "real-life" to intrude into an other-
|wise pleasureable pasttime. Perhaps it is that threat: if we examine the
|situation and find plausible argument, that we'll have to change and thus
|lose such an enjoyable pasttime, that is responsible for some of the emotion-
|alism that I've seen in response.
I certainly hope that not much wants to be changed. One of the reasons
why I insist that I'm not a 'PC' type, and why I think 'PC' and rpgs
are pretty much immiscible, is that playing out morally or
intellectually loaded issues really is a valid and creative response;
censorship CAUSES problems rather than solving them.
At the same time, (1) being the victim of censorship is not the ONLY
way of acquiring a blind spot; and (2) [and this is something a lot of
educators should be more sensitive to, and is also perhaps what I feel
is at stake here] playing out such situations among people who are
_not_ prone to the intellectual pitfall stands in danger of
introducing them to it!
|MY take: I don't think any real-life human races are "evil." I do think
|certain CULTURES may be "evil" (see previous post). I further suspect that
|"evil" may be a subjective perception of the individuals (the Inquistion
|believed they tortured and killed in the name of God).
Myself I think evil is a prior, external thing. If your fantasy
universe (or your perception of the real universe) contains an Evil
principle, then many things may (if only in your own perceptions)
respond to it and partake of it. Conversely, if your universe is
"clockwork" (as anything with a rulebook and no polarities is going to
be!) then evil remains a relative value judgment. (Of course, there's
no reason why even in a fantasy world, characters can't disagree about
the nature of evil. All the more amusing if you feed them evidence...
:-).
In either case, it seems unlikely to me that anything, creature,
society, practise or policy will be _entirely_ evil; in a polar
universe this implies domains in which the principle of good is
"looking the other way" or has no power at all, and in a nonpolar
universe it seems to be symptomatic of a certain lack of insight(!).
~ * ~
I'm told that Father Brown (a paperback detective who is a Roman
Catholic priest) at one point admits that his whole method rests on
the spiritual exercise of identifying with the criminal. Similarly, I
found defending the Inquisition (in, say, a formal debate) to be an
important emotional and intellectual exercise.
Douglas Holzworth
|> In article <1992Jun7.2...@meaddata.com> doug...@meaddata.com (Douglas Holzworth) writes:
|> | My outcome: I don't feel moved to change my position, although I now
|> |have a better understanding of it.
|> Thankyou, amen, and sorry about the dissonance level - and my poor
|> response to subsequent criticism :-(.
|>
I may have missed a post or two; I perceived the dissonance to be from the
sensitivity of the topic rather than from the presentation. Any dissonance I
experienced was not due to the topic post.
Since you raised the point, it seems to lead to the question: just because
there doesn't exist a real-life case for an "evil" race, does that mean that
such a thing is not possible? Referring to the following syllogism:
Premise: There are no inherently evil races in real life.
(Assumption: Calling a real-life race "evil" may be a sign of
racial prejudice.)
Premise: Racial prejudice is to be avoided.
Conclusion (?): Calling a real-life race "evil" is to be avoided
as a sign of racial prejudice.
Can Premise #1 be extrapolated to "A race cannot be evil?" I would say "no."
While I believe Premise #1, I would be hard-pressed for providing justification
for the extrapolation.
HOWEVER, you've made a good point about the acceptance of the concept of evil
races. It is one thing to talk about "concepts," it is another to apply them
logically and accurately. What is the probability that accepting the concept
that "there MAY be such a thing as an evil race" (actually, for game purposes,
we are taking a more definite stance: there IS a such thing as evil races) will
be inaccurately applied to counter Premise #1 (opposite: there are inherently
evil races **in real life**). We should look at the bigger picture, too. Just
because WE (assumption of the readers' abilities here) would not erroneously
apply this thinking, doesn't mean that some set of gamers (small, med, large?)
won't do just that.
While I like to act logically (and therefore am not moved to change my approach
to races in gaming), I still have to be sensitive to the possible effects these
general approaches (transcending my influence) could have on real life.
Now comes a bottom-line kind of question: what can be done to avoid mis-`
application of this kind of concept? I balk at removing the "evil race" concept
from my games, since I don't think this is unreasonable (lack of real-life
analogies notwithstanding) and it would remove an enjoyable dimension from
gaming. Is it enough to have a clear delineation between application of the
concept in real vs fantasy settings? I would say "yes," partially due to the
realization that I am responsible for myself and don't want to step up to
ensuring everyone else in the world applies things accurately. The goofs will
be goofs, ultimately, in spite of what anyone does.
-- Doug the DM
Stephen P Spackman
|Now comes a bottom-line kind of question: what can be done to avoid mis-`
|application of this kind of concept? I balk at removing the "evil race" concept
|from my games, since I don't think this is unreasonable (lack of real-life
|analogies notwithstanding) and it would remove an enjoyable dimension from
|gaming. Is it enough to have a clear delineation between application of the
|concept in real vs fantasy settings? I would say "yes," partially due to the
|realization that I am responsible for myself and don't want to step up to
|ensuring everyone else in the world applies things accurately. The goofs will
|be goofs, ultimately, in spite of what anyone does.
Whereas my view hinges on the *internal* justification within the
game. If the fantasy world says "ok, so there's this evil race, see?"
and that's the end of it, then it is appealing to the intuitions -
presumably the *real world* intutions - of the players, and that is in
this case a little worrisome.
If, on the other hand, it goes "ok, so there's this evil {principle,
god, force...} and it has produced this purpose-built evil race" then
there's no question that here we're exploring the raw fantasy stuff
and it seems coherent and sensible to me: the appeal to the intuition
is at the level "evil can exist" (dicey, but not directly worrisome
for me - perhaps others will differ) and not "evil RACES can exist".
Of course, there's an additional level of confusion engendered by the
fact that the game world may differ from a character's own view....
But I guess the idea I'm trying to convey is that any premiss of a
fantasy world should either be justified as an *explicit starting
assumption* or correspond to an attitude you would be comfortable
discovering that you really have.
Does that make any kind of sense?
Jonny the Z
....(various things)....
>
> Your mileage may vary. The "orcs are just similar enough to interbreed with
> humans who are just similar enough to elves, but orcs are too different from
> elves" solution is simpler.
Exactly. If you want a resonable explanation this is one. The term
species that we use is an arbitrary distinction. We look at two
creatures and judge whether they are close by various means, but the
basics such as reproductive ability aren't always the final answer.
There is a bird which eats insects and can be found spanning the west
coast of North America from southern Canada to Mexico. The nifty
thing about this species (singular or plural- I forget) is that is
changed as it spread down the coast such that birds from one area can
breed with those from neighboring states or provinces to produce
fertile offspring, but those at the ends, (Canada and Mexico) are
unable to produce viable offspring.
So if you want orcs and other races to be able to cross breed you can,
and if you want to say that all the other tall humanoid races are
Divinely twisted spin offs of humans (including elves) thus only able
to interbreed with humans the closest other race you can, or you can
make up any other explanation. Science is mutable, and our theories
could be thrown out the window tommorow, don't let them bind your
worlds.
> Go with whatever suits your world. (And if you really want a one-off
> character that breaks your rules, introduce wizardly tampering with the
> forces of nature...)
Yep. You biggum GM you makus poor erc/olf/elc/orf crossbreed
Jonathan Zamick
> --
> Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
> "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
> "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
Stephen P Spackman
way around the pole in a ring, such that they interbreed all the way
around, but where the two ends meet they're "distinct species" by the
interbreeding mechanism (think of a keyring).
Anyone ever tried this with humanoids?
Maybe even with multiple windings?
What a neat idea.
Douglas Holzworth
|> |Now comes a bottom-line kind of question: what can be done to avoid mis-`
|> |application of this kind of concept? I balk at removing the "evil race" concept
|> |from my games, since I don't think this is unreasonable (lack of real-life
|> |analogies notwithstanding) and it would remove an enjoyable dimension from
|> |gaming. Is it enough to have a clear delineation between application of the
|> |concept in real vs fantasy settings? I would say "yes," partially due to the
|> |realization that I am responsible for myself and don't want to step up to
|> |ensuring everyone else in the world applies things accurately. The goofs will
|> |be goofs, ultimately, in spite of what anyone does.
|>
|> Whereas my view hinges on the *internal* justification within the
|> game. If the fantasy world says "ok, so there's this evil race, see?"
|> and that's the end of it, then it is appealing to the intuitions -
|> presumably the *real world* intutions - of the players, and that is in
|> this case a little worrisome.
|>
|> If, on the other hand, it goes "ok, so there's this evil {principle,
|> god, force...} and it has produced this purpose-built evil race" then
|> there's no question that here we're exploring the raw fantasy stuff
|> and it seems coherent and sensible to me: the appeal to the intuition
|> is at the level "evil can exist" (dicey, but not directly worrisome
|> for me - perhaps others will differ) and not "evil RACES can exist".
|>
I think I see the difference, but **is** this a significant difference? It
would seem to me that the sense of justification by "real world institutions"
would not be dependent on the origin of the race's evil nature. Yes, "evil
exists" is the key, but it is still manifested by means of an "evil race."
Aren't there folks in the real world who believe the Negroes are descended
from the biblical Cain -- forever "marked" for the evil of fratercide? Isn't
religion and who-is-really-shaped-in-God's-image still debated among some
folks?
Perhaps I need further clarification, but the difference seems to be more
semantic than substantive, and I have ever doubted the ability of the masses
to employ critical rational thought to any problem. It seems to me that the
Evil Race is still put forth as a valid concept.
|> Of course, there's an additional level of confusion engendered by the
|> fact that the game world may differ from a character's own view....
|> But I guess the idea I'm trying to convey is that any premiss of a
|> fantasy world should either be justified as an *explicit starting
|> assumption* or correspond to an attitude you would be comfortable
|> discovering that you really have.
|>
|> Does that make any kind of sense?
I see a difference, but am not seeing why that difference is important. Is
there a reason that a person who was predisposed in such a manner would
think:
Premise: "The concept of Evil Races in real life is valid."
(Ah know! Ah seed it in D & D!)
Unwarranted prejudice: "<<Fill in the blank>> race is Evil."
(I can't/don't assume rationality.)
Premise #2: "The orc race was created by a force of Evil, which is
the reason they became Evil."
Conclusion: "The <<fill in blank>> real-life race is evil because
<<Satan/other choice>> created them as an Evil race.>>
Thus, not only is the real-life race "evil," but now it serves a greater
evil and, as such, might be openly and enthusiastically opposed.
Premise #1 is unjustified, rationally, but is what we are trying to avoid
(through inadvertant influencing of irrational/less-rational minds). Just
because it is not "true," does not mean some set of people will not believe
it as a valid premise.
The above syllogism is false, because Premise #1 and the Prejudice are false.
However, I can see this happening. Am I off base for looking at an example
wherein the person is obviously looking to justify a prejudice? Perhaps, but
if we remove the unwarranted prejudice, the stated conclusion **could** still
be an answer some folks will come up with.
I would think that the justification you suggest would more probably be
perverted into providing a religious "rationale" for why Evil Races (including
Real World) exist. Does this sound feasible, or am I overlooking something?
-- Doug the DM
Stephen P Spackman
attempt to deal with a problem and decide it's a problem in its own
right - sometimes rightly (it's beyond me why affirmative action isn't
unconstitutional: discrimination in the workplace should NOT be
allowed, simple), ofttimes wrongly (ever-mutating vocabulary just
gives people a chance to duck the real issues).
The distinction I was trying to draw between the two methods of
introducing "evil" into a fantasy world ("explicit", which I support,
and "implicit", which makes me uncomfortable) is based on the
observation that, to a first approximation, human reasoning works with
prototypes and exception lists: it's *realistic* to separate the
"let's pretend" from the "everyone knows" in a fantasy world, and the
more explicitly things that you DON'T believe in in the real world are
labelled "let's pretend" the less misunderstanding/psychological
spillover you need to worry about.
The best such justifications (in the cognitive sense, and the more so
when dealing with fairly smart people) are the one-point ones. If
something in the game is clearly a "logical" consequence (by the logic
of the game world, of course) of something else, then IT isn't an
exception itself.
So if the players will trace the existence of an evil race back to a
*real* evil god in the game, then I don't think there's much chance of
that doing harm (and it encourages reflection on the issue, which is
neutral to good). But if it's just a given with no internal
justification, one really has to assume (or at any rate starts to
wonder) that this is founded in some real world belief structure - or
wouldn't at least the player characters question it?
Nancy Lebovitz
while....If it _is_ possible, what would an elf/orc crossbreed be
like?
I've decided that when Morgoth (or was it Sauron?) was damaging elves
to create orcs, he would have left the possiblity of crossbreeding open
if he could, just because that's got more obnoxious possibilities.
Nancy Lebovitz
button catalogue availible by email (170K)
na...@genie.slhs.udel.edu
That which does not kill us powers up our weapons.
littl...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
While I fall in the camp that feels that elves and orcs cannot cross-
breed, I would seriously wager that they would come out like humans. It just
seems that intuitively humans are the middle ground between the two races.
Giving an Elf-Orc (or vice versa) any advantages just wouldn't make much sense,
precedence given that half-elves (human flavored) tend to be significantly
less advantaged than the elvish counterparts. I guess Humans with infravision
would work. Perhaps one could temper this with a short lifespan (relative to
humans).
Just MHO.
--Kevin
Axly
>Ok, we've been discussing the possibility of elf/orc interbreeding for a
>while....If it _is_ possible, what would an elf/orc crossbreed be
>like?
>I've decided that when Morgoth (or was it Sauron?) was damaging elves
>to create orcs, he would have left the possiblity of crossbreeding open
>if he could, just because that's got more obnoxious possibilities.
This depends on what system you are using. Orcs breed true with demihumans
at a 90% efficiency rate I believe. I'd have to check the MC on this
but I think that it states in there that only 10% of orc interbreedings
with the demihuman races will relate in halforcs (the 1st edition race
which was SO popular). A halforc (if I remember correctly) is an orc and
any demihuman race's babies.
This is for ADD.
Your mileage may vary according to the gaming system you use.
Axly
--
* Axly * "Well, yes, it did occur to me that I*
* dv5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu * might hit one or two civilians. But I*
* Red Sword Targa * really never thought that I would hit*
* * all of them." -Axly *
Stephen P Spackman
(and it works) you're going to get, potentially, an entire spectrum of
results (and if the interbreeding forms a stable community, the
diversity will increase for a long time before it starts to get
homogeneous again). Or at least, that's what happens in real life.
The interesting thing is that IF you are going with the "inherent
evil" theory (as opposed to the people-under-the-skin theory) then you
now not only have the usual build, shape, longevity, disease
resistance, colours of parts kinds of things to worry about, but you
also have to think about the genes that control alignment. Are
heterozygous individuals schizophrenic? Neutral? Intermediate? Is evil
(or good) dominant? Recessive (I nearly typed "submissive", shows how
my mind works)? Can the cross produce new alignments altogether?
Interesting stuff....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stephen p spackman ste...@estragon.uchicago.edu
from july 01 spac...@dfki.uni-sb.de
Owain James Bennallack
>not sure which, Celtic? Norse? Somthing like that. The only race he built
>from the ground up was the Halfl- oops. I mean Hobbit race.
>
>Does anybody know how long until Iron Crown's rights on Tolkien's
>works expires and we can say Hobbit instead of Halfling?
>
>ke...@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
Hmmmmmmmmmmm...I was quite intrigued last night when I was reading the Booker
prize winner 'Possession' (A.S Byatt) to find reference to a creature called a
'Hob' who lived in a 'Hob Hole'..sounds familiar!! It derives I believe from
some folklore of Yorkshire, North England, and the author includes it in
corresponance between two 19th century figures, a poet and his wife.
Actually, as you start reading around history and philosophy you find a lot
of similarities between names in Tolkiens books and elements from real sources.
Much of his mythology is one big crib in fact. If I had to pick a unique race
I'd pick the history and relegion of the elves, though no doubt someone can
mention an eastern philosophy or relegion somewhat elvish..;)
Owain
--
Owain o...@doc.ic.ac.uk 'Dare to be different - Spend to pretend!' - Powell
Dumb Flag Skum London 'Though I sang in my chains like the sea' - Dylan Thomas
Dana Goldblatt
"Doug the DM" writes:
I balk at removing the "evil race" concept
from my games, since I don't think this is unreasonable (lack of real-life
analogies notwithstanding) and it would remove an enjoyable dimension from
gaming.
I don't actually understand this. I would prefer to have my
role playing games free of "evil races" even in the ones where
I have a "Principle of Evil". I think that it is sufficient to allow
individuals to align themselves with good, evil, or whatever;
I also agree that it is often the case that a culture as a whole
has a bent that a given individual would describe as "good" or
"evil" (or whatever the alignments you choose to have in the given
game)... But I think it is boring, discourages true role playing,
and makes there be no variety in a game, not to mention bothers
me for some unknown subconscious reason, to have a species or race
(say, red dragons in AD&D, to mention something no one has brought
up) be uniformly of a single nature.
At most, I have a family or small tribe be all of an alignment, and
there may be rebels among them.
Now, my fiance, with whom I play nearly all the role playing
games I have ever played, disagrees strongly. He feels that it
is an unnecessary burden upon him to have to determine beyond
the creature type to some individual alignment. Once, in one
of the first AD&D games I ran, he was playing a lawful good
aligned character named Talisman. Talisman was running around
in a secret underground bunker of a group that was dedicated
to a power which was in fact an evil aligned power. He chose
to assume that that meant that everyone would look the other
way if he killed everything he saw (except prisoners)...
One of the creatures there was a red dragon who was in a
human appearing form. This fellow's mate and offspring were
down there keeping him company, but not participating in
the "evil religion" thing. Talisman, *unprovoked*, attacked
the mate and she knocked him unconscious.
The next thing he knew, he was imprisoned. He was quite indignant
that this dragon had been lawfully aligned, and therefore chose
to have him disgraced in court rather than slaying him herself.
To this day he carries on about my gaming style because I
"gave a red dragon rights."
Well, I wonder what others on the net have to say about this.
Would it bother you to play AD&D or another role playing game
in a world where you couldn't necessarily assume that a given
creature had a given alignment, or commitment to good/evil?
I would appreciate any comments posted or emailed.
-Dana
Stephen Swann
>In article <1992Jun5.2...@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> sk...@isis.cs.du.edu (Shane Kerr) writes:
>>
>>Actually, Tolkien took most of his fantastic races from mythology (I'm
>>not sure which, Celtic? Norse? Somthing like that. The only race he built
>>from the ground up was the Halfl- oops. I mean Hobbit race.
>
>of similarities between names in Tolkiens books and elements from real sources
>I'd pick the history and relegion of the elves, though no doubt someone can
>mention an eastern philosophy or relegion somewhat elvish..;)
Actually, the "religion" of the Elves bears some really striking (or not
so striking, depending on how you look at it) similarity to Catholicism.
(A unique creator, a rebellious "angel", a fall from grace, etc...)
Anyway, wrong newsgroup for this. If you're really interested in the
philosophical ramifications of Morgoth's perversion of the Elves into
Orcs, and other such things, I *highly* recommend Paul Kocher's fine
book _Master of Middle Earth_. It discusses the moral element of
Tolkien's universe in great detail. It's also excellent reading, even
for us not-very-philosophically-inclined types. :-)
--
Steve Swann | Speak to me in many voices; make
sw...@acsu.buffalo.edu | them all sound like one... -BOC
Stephen Swann
>
>"Doug the DM" writes:
>>I balk at removing the "evil race" concept
>>from my games, since I don't think this is unreasonable (lack of real-life
>>analogies notwithstanding) and it would remove an enjoyable dimension from
>>gaming.
>
>I don't actually understand this. I would prefer to have my
>role playing games free of "evil races" even in the ones where
>I have a "Principle of Evil".
>At most, I have a family or small tribe be all of an alignment, and
>there may be rebels among them.
You have to realize that the D&D Orcs are pretty much based on Tolkien's
Orcs, but without the philosophical structure that made Tolkien's Orcs
what they were (essentially, a race of corrupted Elves, which had been
bred in darkness and indoctrinated in a religion of hatred and jealousy
towards their "bretheren". This didn't happen because they were "bad"
but because they were enslaved into this by Morgoth, who was essentially
a god, and had the power to alter/corrupt their very nature.
Thus they do not have the same choice of good or ill that the "uncorrupted"
Elves have, they are "twisted" by the power of Morgoth, and cannot be made
whole again.
This concept does not exist naturally in D&D, although I made it a point
to build such a religious/philosphical structure into my own campaign, in
order to explain the hateful and destructive nature of the "humanoid" races.
This does not, in any way that I can measure, restrict the roleplaying
possibilities in my campaign. Evil, as in the evil of Orcs, is to some
extent a lack of free will, an enslavement to a cause that bears them
no profit. (The evil done by those with free choice, though, is typically
done out of a desire for domination). The Orcs' attitude toward those with
free choice is one of jealousy and hatred, a desire to pull everyone else
down to their own miserable state.
>Well, I wonder what others on the net have to say about this.
>Would it bother you to play AD&D or another role playing game
>in a world where you couldn't necessarily assume that a given
>creature had a given alignment, or commitment to good/evil?
Nope. It's not the sort of campaign that I choose to run (speaking
as a GM), but I certainly wouldn't mind playing in it. The main thing
is that whatever the people/races are like in a campaign, that there
be a good reason for it.
>I would appreciate any comments posted or emailed.
do...@abby.chem.ucla.edu
as kill them....
I prefer not necessarily knowing that "all orcs are evil," etc.
-Doug Gibson
do...@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.
This is a properly spelled version of the mimetic signature virus. Copy it
into your .signature file and join in the fun today!