Personally, I think "Folk", or maybe "Type" works the best. It sounds best when compared to "Class", like:
"Oh, what's your Folk and Class?"
As opposed to:
"Oh, what's your Species and Class?"
I have nothing wrong with "Species", but I think "Type" or "Folk" works the best.
Folk is personally my favorite out of the options thrown around, with ancestry, bloodline and lineage being the most terrible i heard. But my opinion is based on thinking about the international versions of D&D that will be translated into their respective languages. I'm german and ancestry, bloodline, lineage translated simply doesn't convey what race, species, folk would do. As in "your are XYZ". Ancestry/bloodline/lineage would always translate to "you are descended from XYZ" making it ambiguous what you actually are, as you could still be a half-elf, tiefling, genasi, hybrid or a number of other things were it doesn't matter what your ancestors were. Heck, Gith used to be humans, but no one would call their folk human anymore even though their ancestry/bloodline/lineage would be human. Not to mention the issue with artificial creatures like warforged and autognomes.
While I believe species is a word that could be used in a fantasy setting, Folk has a better sound to it.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
As has been raised a thousand times, the word “species” predates its use as a “scientific classing” term by centuries. The word has definitions which are perfectly applicable to Warforged.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
As has been raised a thousand times, the word “species” predates its use as a “scientific classing” term by centuries. The word has definitions which are perfectly applicable to Warforged.
Oh. Sorry, im just an otter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
As has been raised a thousand times, the word “species” predates its use as a “scientific classing” term by centuries. The word has definitions which are perfectly applicable to Warforged.
But yeah, as soon as a synthetic life form is accepted as being sentient, I would bet that it would be added as a new species, after a long and exhausting debate, but under an entirely different tree of life. It would take a while to know how to classify synthetic lifeforms until broader patterns emerged. (E.g. carbon based, silicone based, photonic, plasmonic, varying neural processes, etc...). If the processing units could be swapped between shells, then the "speciation" would have to prioritize cognitive firmware over the typical visible traits. Messy messy.
While it isn't appropriate for this thread, it would be a good segue into other identity conversations.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
As has been raised a thousand times, the word “species” predates its use as a “scientific classing” term by centuries. The word has definitions which are perfectly applicable to Warforged.
But yeah, as soon as a synthetic life form is accepted as being sentient, I would bet that it would be added as a new species, after a long and exhausting debate, but under an entirely different tree of life. It would take a while to know how to classify synthetic lifeforms until broader patterns emerged. (E.g. carbon based, silicone based, photonic, plasmonic, varying neural processes, etc...). If the processing units could be swapped between shells, then the "speciation" would have to prioritize cognitive firmware over the typical visible traits. Messy messy.
While it isn't appropriate for this thread, it would be a good segue into other identity conversations.
Maybe, or the approach to species and non-organics creatures will be differentiated as there is no direct line from one non-organic creature to the next via reproduction and mutations as organic creatures do. Artificial creatures would probably differentiate not on the physical aspects of origin, but on the mental. Like which ideas and knowledge brought up the new design and improvements? Which in turn could create debate about genetic engineering for organic creatures. Afterall, why is it okay for artificial creatures to willingly change their "offspring" to have better traits as they do, but a ethic taboo for organic creatures? A deep topic, but probably for a different type of forum.
There are 24 pages explaining how this would be a disaster. In short, the term is offensive to a lot of people and words that make the game an unsafe place for some community members should never be allowed to stay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
That ship has sailed. They made A STATEMENT about how they are not using that term again and the mods have repeatedly reminded people that this move has been done in response to people being legitimately harmed by it and that statements invalidating that harm will not be tolerated.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
That isn't even what the discussion is about. "Race" is not staying. The discussion is about which term to use instead. You're the third or fourth person to say this without even reading the discussion you're commenting on beforehand.
Personally, I think "Folk", or maybe "Type" works the best. It sounds best when compared to "Class", like:
"Oh, what's your Folk and Class?"
As opposed to:
"Oh, what's your Species and Class?"
I have nothing wrong with "Species", but I think "Type" or "Folk" works the best.
I like Folk the best because it's sorta usable in character and usable in narration without any sort of weird framing of the speaker.
It fits on base player choices like Elf, Gnome and Human with Elf-Folk, Gnome-Folk and Human or Manfolk- But it fits even easier on beastial groups as a suffix like with Lizardfolk- And it means that cultural lore literally becomes Folklore
The only place where it feels most difficult is with more planar touched groups like Tiefling and Aasimar, where their name already effectively means Fiendfolk and Angelfolk
On species VS warforged and autognomes I do think if we're looking into definitions it's fine. (And even if it didn't have older definitions that fit... Well we'd be making a new definition that would fit anyway)
However I do think the way modern language uses the word species colloquially there is a disconnect there that makes it feel weird to use it for constructs.
We're used to species being used when we turn on a nature documentary and david attenborough talks about what distinguishes one plant or animal from another, and very much not used to it being a word for different types of artificial thing.
Like I could very easily say "Ah I love this species of pen!" for fountain pens and people would know what I'm talking about, it wouldn't be incorrect, but the wording would feel eccentric or weird cause we're not used to it in that context.
Personally, I think "Folk", or maybe "Type" works the best. It sounds best when compared to "Class", like:
"Oh, what's your Folk and Class?"
As opposed to:
"Oh, what's your Species and Class?"
I have nothing wrong with "Species", but I think "Type" or "Folk" works the best.
I like Folk the best because it's sorta usable in character and usable in narration without any sort of weird framing of the speaker.
It fits on base player choices like Elf, Gnome and Human with Elf-Folk, Gnome-Folk and Human or Manfolk- But it fits even easier on beastial groups as a suffix like with Lizardfolk- And it means that cultural lore literally becomes Folklore
The only place where it feels most difficult is with more planar touched groups like Tiefling and Aasimar, where their name already effectively means Fiendfolk and Angelfolk
well, you could have the generic folk for descriptive text, while having specific names for how the different folks call themselves.
Like:
Commonfolk = Human
Stoutfolk = Dwarves
Feyfolk = Elves
Smallfolk = Halflings
Giantfolk = Goliaths
Catfolk = Tabaxi
Warfolk = Warforged
Ravenfolk = Kenku
Lizardfolk = Lizardfolk .... okay they would need a new in universe name, or their culture simply doesn't needed one and they are fine with the name lizardfolk
I feel like trying to give every race a 'folk' and non folk name would just be needlessly confusing.
Species may be a bit odd for warforged/atuognomes but these are outliers and there's not going to be one perfect word for this without just adding confusing by using a made up word.
I agree on it being confusing to give every current group some kind of variant name, I just think that its much more easy to use in many more situations, and isn't a word we tend to use for other stuff sept maybe music.
I kinda feel like species feels odd not just for warforged and autognomes though, but for all sapient/sentient thinking creatures for the same reason. The way we tend to use species is for sciency stuff (e.g. documentaries) and when we use it we most often use it for plants and animals
That's because irl there are no other species on the same sapient/sentient level as humans. Just like 'class' and 'ability score' and 'saving throw' etc it doesn't need to be a term that is used in character if it feels awkward for you to say. Things like 'folk' and 'lineage' just feel too vague to me, where species is just more accurate. So if there's no perfect word I feel like we might as well go with the accurate one.
Like class, it's a word that's mostly there to sit on the character sheet or character creator list etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I agree, and species cannot apply to artificial folk, as they do not follow that area of scientific classing.
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
Extended Signiture
You cannot class a warforged like a earth animal, everything would just say warforged.
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
Extended Signiture
That could work but it makes it sound like a variant of something else.
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
Extended Signiture
As has been raised a thousand times, the word “species” predates its use as a “scientific classing” term by centuries. The word has definitions which are perfectly applicable to Warforged.
Oh. Sorry, im just an otter.
Mx. Otter (They/them/theirs)
Terry Pratchett & Brian Jacques. Best authors of all time. Change my mind.
Extended Signiture
Traxigor has entered the chat.
But yeah, as soon as a synthetic life form is accepted as being sentient, I would bet that it would be added as a new species, after a long and exhausting debate, but under an entirely different tree of life. It would take a while to know how to classify synthetic lifeforms until broader patterns emerged. (E.g. carbon based, silicone based, photonic, plasmonic, varying neural processes, etc...). If the processing units could be swapped between shells, then the "speciation" would have to prioritize cognitive firmware over the typical visible traits. Messy messy.
While it isn't appropriate for this thread, it would be a good segue into other identity conversations.
Maybe, or the approach to species and non-organics creatures will be differentiated as there is no direct line from one non-organic creature to the next via reproduction and mutations as organic creatures do. Artificial creatures would probably differentiate not on the physical aspects of origin, but on the mental. Like which ideas and knowledge brought up the new design and improvements? Which in turn could create debate about genetic engineering for organic creatures. Afterall, why is it okay for artificial creatures to willingly change their "offspring" to have better traits as they do, but a ethic taboo for organic creatures? A deep topic, but probably for a different type of forum.
Stick with "race".
"Type" could gainfully classify between - aberrations, constructs, humanoids, etc.
There are 24 pages explaining how this would be a disaster. In short, the term is offensive to a lot of people and words that make the game an unsafe place for some community members should never be allowed to stay.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.That ship has sailed. They made A STATEMENT about how they are not using that term again and the mods have repeatedly reminded people that this move has been done in response to people being legitimately harmed by it and that statements invalidating that harm will not be tolerated.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
That isn't even what the discussion is about. "Race" is not staying. The discussion is about which term to use instead. You're the third or fourth person to say this without even reading the discussion you're commenting on beforehand.
[REDACTED]
I like Folk the best because it's sorta usable in character and usable in narration without any sort of weird framing of the speaker.
It fits on base player choices like Elf, Gnome and Human with Elf-Folk, Gnome-Folk and Human or Manfolk- But it fits even easier on beastial groups as a suffix like with Lizardfolk- And it means that cultural lore literally becomes Folklore
The only place where it feels most difficult is with more planar touched groups like Tiefling and Aasimar, where their name already effectively means Fiendfolk and Angelfolk
On species VS warforged and autognomes I do think if we're looking into definitions it's fine. (And even if it didn't have older definitions that fit... Well we'd be making a new definition that would fit anyway)
However I do think the way modern language uses the word species colloquially there is a disconnect there that makes it feel weird to use it for constructs.
We're used to species being used when we turn on a nature documentary and david attenborough talks about what distinguishes one plant or animal from another, and very much not used to it being a word for different types of artificial thing.
Like I could very easily say "Ah I love this species of pen!" for fountain pens and people would know what I'm talking about, it wouldn't be incorrect, but the wording would feel eccentric or weird cause we're not used to it in that context.
well, you could have the generic folk for descriptive text, while having specific names for how the different folks call themselves.
Like:
I feel like trying to give every race a 'folk' and non folk name would just be needlessly confusing.
Species may be a bit odd for warforged/atuognomes but these are outliers and there's not going to be one perfect word for this without just adding confusing by using a made up word.
I agree on it being confusing to give every current group some kind of variant name, I just think that its much more easy to use in many more situations, and isn't a word we tend to use for other stuff sept maybe music.
I kinda feel like species feels odd not just for warforged and autognomes though, but for all sapient/sentient thinking creatures for the same reason. The way we tend to use species is for sciency stuff (e.g. documentaries) and when we use it we most often use it for plants and animals
That's because irl there are no other species on the same sapient/sentient level as humans. Just like 'class' and 'ability score' and 'saving throw' etc it doesn't need to be a term that is used in character if it feels awkward for you to say. Things like 'folk' and 'lineage' just feel too vague to me, where species is just more accurate. So if there's no perfect word I feel like we might as well go with the accurate one.
Like class, it's a word that's mostly there to sit on the character sheet or character creator list etc.