Yeah, pretty much. Just laziness. It's like level one of subverting expectations and reinforcing that it's a lived in world to have a character play outside of whatever preconceived stereotypes people have.

In a world of infinite possibility, sticking to lazy and poorly thought out usage of tropes is just kinda sad.

Warforged are discriminated against in Eberron because they used to be "mindless warmachines" that would die in battle so they didn't have to. Now that they're freed, is it lazy for a DM to include prejudices them? 

Orcs and Drow are evil in most D&D worlds, and kill innocent people. Is it lazy for a DM to have NPC's be wary of these other normally dangerous races, or just common sense?

How is it lazy storytelling to include hints of racism in D&D games? It is a real world problem that can very easily be translated to the table as there are much more races in D&D than in real life.

Also, is it lazy storytelling to have gnolls eat humans because they aren't gnolls? Isn't the same thing as racism, just against humans?

If anything, including stories of racism in D&D games is beneficial to society, as it makes people more aware of the problems in the real world!

The warforged started out as mindless war machines, but House Cannith made them sentient so they could actually develop battle strategies (also a hint of just trying to make a new race in there), but they started out as mindless war machines. They are discriminated against because people think they're dangerous (they are), and they've even started their own civilization in the Mournland.

Drow are manipulated by extraplanar beings in most campaign settings, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, so on, but that doesn't make them any less evil. It makes them a bit more sympathetic, but you won't really care about that once they murder your family and burn down your village and take you as a slave, will you?

Orcs are taken advantage of, but again, that doesn't make them any less evil. Evil races are discriminated against because of their evilness. Even if there are good members of these races, they are generally found intimidating and threatening by other races.

Having racial tensions in D&D isn't lazy, it is interesting in most cases and can develop some great stories, and I don't think there is a problem with it.

Yes? It is lazy? Also like, you realise you're literally describing the same arguments people use to discriminate against POC and other minorities IRL? That really doesn't bode well for your argument.

Why, if we can reasonably agree that racism is bad (and if we can't, we have other problems) and something we don't want to see in the real world, would you then assume that it was something okay to put into a fantasy world people escape into for fun as a building block? This is the Love Cleric problem all over again.

Having these elements be something players and DMs can talk about and choose to put into the campaign is totally different from having them baked in.

DnD has come a long when it comes to depictions of race but this kinda stuff really has no place as source material

Quote from Stoutstein >>

It was lazy to design the races that way to begin with.

Warforged are not discriminated because of being mindless war machines. They are painful reminders of the extremes they where willing to go to during the war. They are walking war memorials forcing people to face the reality of not only the horrors of war but the fact when the warforged became full fledge sentient beings they continue to force them to fight the war for them. They are slaves, war heros, wounded soldiers, and killers all at once. It's a painful mirror for people too look into

Drow is a race being manipulated by a malevolent demigod. They more victim than perpetrator.

Orcs are frequently taken advantage of and pushed off to barren inhospitable lands forced to raid during times when game is rare and crops fail. 

Eberron gnolls actually have some depth but in general they are pointless out side of being furry XP balls

The problem with having self reinforcing stereotypes in RPGs is they reward the behavior. We already have a tendency to do it so when games reinforce it the behavior enhances. That is human nature. double this if it's lazy because we are lazy as a nature being in the top 5. Including stereotypes into fantasy is easy and prevalent. It is also a great way to challenge them.

 

 
warforged = Jewish people post ww2 in terms of reminders of things.

orcs = native Americans.

drow= worshippers of the Catholic Church.

is this what you’re saying?

all you are doing is re-categorizing them away from one stereotype towards other stereotypes.

not everyone manipulated by a demigod commits evil acts of atrocity. There are plenty of political leaders or religious leaders that will manipulate and try to manipulate their masses. All the time. And not everyone commits villainous atrocious acts. The ones that do so had the propensity to commit the acts themselves beforehand whether they were manipulated or not.

none of this has to do with best race for artificer like the original topic. Let’s get back on track.

Quote from Stoutstein >>

You misunderstood my post. 

Quote from EightPackKilla >>none of this has to do with best race for artificer like the original topic. Let’s get back on track.

was the point of

my post. Everything else was essentially making fun of the multiple multiple posts of discussion prior to it.

and you still do not understand my post, as you try and steer the discussion further off topic, from the best race for artificers.

ex: of you still steering off topic.

Quote from Stoutstein >>

If they want to make orcs the embodiment of evil that's fine but basing the justification on why they're considered evil on humanistic ideals is problematic. Just say orcs are evil and remove them as a player option. 

 

 

Please take your personal conversation to Private Messages.  The public forum is not the place to debate who's doing what.

Thank you.

Quote from Stoutstein >>

to bring it all together. player race selection is based on solely on the opportunity cost of choosing one race over an other like picking  rock gnome or H elf. by adding in consequences based on intangible factions, be it because of narrative or because you want to balance an option through narrative channels, you run a risk of removing player agency.

so with a Eberron setting warforged having the vast majority of the population approach that player with general distrust or fear it  might direct that player to just avoid interacting with them at all. If the GM in question goes further and starts adding more punitive measures like charging the warforged player more for items or lodging they may view it as a GM vs player stance and act accordingly.

making a player option more difficult to utilize is never a good way to maintain balance.

 

 

 Agreed. And agree for the inverse making player options easier to utilize is never a good way to maintain balance either.

Back to topic, if you like, we can continue this discussion in Personal Messages, I know that there are things I need to reply to, but this thread isn't the place to.

I brought up racial biases because the Yuan-ti and Hobgoblin were being discussed, and I wanted to point out that in most games there are negatives to picking those races that other races don't have because of the race's nature as a whole.

So, gnomes. The only downside I can see to picking a gnome artificer (especially rock gnome) is that you're small, so if yo are a Battle Smith you likely will not be wielding weapons that deal 1d12/2d6 damage if you want to be a weapon using character. The only way to get around this will be the Lance, which is a good combination if you ride your Steel Defender as a Battle Smith.

You shouldn't be wielding those as a artificer anyways, the shield is too invaluable and it allows you to do some cheesy stuff with your infusions.

Rock Gnome is a flavour home run tho and the mounted interactions are golden.

I'm also a fan of a Warforged Artificer. Not mechanically much better, but I think the flavour is also excellent.

Quote from Stoutstein >>

Don't forget longbow/heavy xbow on small races as well.

For the most part it's about one damage per attack difference so not a big deal unless you are planning for great weapon master. Even then gnome is still tied for best all around pick from both a flavor and crunch view. 

 

 The problem with the other 1d12/2d6 weapons isn't the one damage per attack, it is that the weapons are heavy, and small races (gnomes, goblins, kobolds, halflings) have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. The lance is the only real choice if you want to have a 1d12/2d6 damage weapon.