It's important to keep in mind that just because you never noticed a problem or were aware of it, that doesn't mean it didn't exist.
This. So much this^^^^
I am honestly shocked by the amount of replies in this thread saying “This doesn’t offend me, so it can’t offend anyone else.” Have some compassion people. Changing the word race doesn’t hurt you, it only helps other people.
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.
To be fair I'm kinda lost here. I'm D&D grognard, but I'm not from USA so I don't understand the issue either.
On one point this was never an issue back when we played Skyrim, World of Warcraft and many other cRPG fantasy games, but somehow when 5e became a thing there's a need to fix this?
On the other hand it's just a word. Changing race to "species" or "ancestries" won't affect whether I buy it or not. I'm much more interested about mechanics, character options, the pacing of combat and how the game in the end will feel to DM it.
It's not about the word. It's about control. Wizards and or the entire D&D community could come up with the perfect word to describe the mechanic and it will be fine - for a brief moment. Then the cancel culture will suddenly decide that new word is no longer acceptable and demand it be changed again - or this gaming community will be a new addition to the corpse field.
Vecna riding a Tarrasque is nothing compared to the monster that is Cancel Culture.
Cancel Culture is simply consequences for actions. The kids today would call it "**** around and find out". People are allowed to have reactions to things.
Speaking constructively on it, before Internet the marketplace of ideals was extremely limited to your local area and was pretty much isolated from a lot of social influence. Circles were much smaller and therefore someones personal sight on issues was extremely limited. This isn't the case anymore. I can know in real time how social issues are impacting people in any other nation on the planet.
This is from the ADND 1st PHB, and its the first paragraph when it talks about race:
After creating your character's ability scores, you must select a player character race. This is not a race in the true sense of the word: caucasian, black, asian, etc. It is actually a fantasy species for your character -- human, elf, dwarf, gnome, half-elf, or halfling. Each race is different. Each possesses special powers and has different lists of classes to choose from.
While it makes an effort to try and differentiate what was known back then as race to what they were trying to describe in the book, it also makes an allegory that race defines what your potential is. This note was removed in 3rd edition which honestly makes sense. I understand the intent of what was being conveyed but it was done in a poor way.
I think Lineage is the right word to me.
"As Creatures have evolved in different parts of the world, all of them have things that could be considered blessings or hinderances depending on point of view. Some are four legged Beasts who can run like the wind, some are intelligent Humanoids who craft wonderous objects, and others could be small winged Fey who weirld both fantastic and furious magic. Lineage denotes their ancestral hertige from birth. Even those creatures who aren't born in the traditional sense, such as Constructs have a lineage based on the knowledge of their creator. If you are playing a being that was brought into the world through wholly magic or other means, work with your DM on what characteristics make sense. The following information can be used as a template for each Lineage that a player character can choose."
To be fair I'm kinda lost here. I'm D&D grognard, but I'm not from USA so I don't understand the issue either.
On one point this was never an issue back when we played Skyrim, World of Warcraft and many other cRPG fantasy games, but somehow when 5e became a thing there's a need to fix this?
On the other hand it's just a word. Changing race to "species" or "ancestries" won't affect whether I buy it or not. I'm much more interested about mechanics, character options, the pacing of combat and how the game in the end will feel to DM it.
It's not about the word. It's about control. Wizards and or the entire D&D community could come up with the perfect word to describe the mechanic and it will be fine - for a brief moment. Then the cancel culture will suddenly decide that new word is no longer acceptable and demand it be changed again - or this gaming community will be a new addition to the corpse field.
Vecna riding a Tarrasque is nothing compared to the monster that is Cancel Culture.
ಠ_ಠ
Please don't let this thread become a political warzone. Cancel culture is shit, but it isn't the cause of WotC changing a word. Also, might I remind you that the "it's about control" argument is used constantly by a certain demographic of rather unfavourable individuals regarding "the left".
Cancel culture is literally fake news. If you believe that cancel culture is a credible threat to anyone, you need to look into who told you that, why they told you that, and why you believed them.
Anyway, I guess I was naive to think that this thread would be about anything else. We've already got "anti racists are the real racists," we've already compared changing a word in a silly dragon game to the Holocaust, and it's day 2 of the thread. I'm out. Have fun doing this song and dance again.
Cancel culture is literally fake news. If you believe that cancel culture is a credible threat to anyone, you need to look into who told you that, why they told you that, and why you believed them.
Anyway, I guess I was naive to think that this thread would be about anything else. We've already got "anti racists are the real racists," we've already compared changing a word in a silly dragon game to the Holocaust, and it's day 2 of the thread. I'm out. Have fun doing this song and dance again.
100% agree. Does anyone actually care about a word changing in a fantasy game? Is it really worth arguing about?
It's important to keep in mind that just because you never noticed a problem or were aware of it, that doesn't mean it didn't exist.
This. So much this^^^^
I am honestly shocked by the amount of replies in this thread saying “This doesn’t offend me, so it can’t offend anyone else.” Have some compassion people. Changing the word race doesn’t hurt you, it only helps other people.
This. If it helps a single person, I'm willing to consider changes to terminology. It doesn't even affect my game, let alone be worth fighting against.
That said, I'm someone it would help. Years ago, I spent ages arguing with racists (of the "other races are less intelligent and therefore shouldn't have as many civil rights" variety), and while I full well know that they're not referring to race as the word as we know it (as been proven by a quote earlier in the thread), writing words like "racial benefits", writing phrases like "this race is better at..." and other things are just really icky to me and feel distasteful. It brings back a lot of memories that I'd rather forget and, to be frank, I don't want to associate with a hobby that I love. That those statements are objectively true in the context of D&D doesn't change anything. Using the word species (or some other word than race) would help me enjoy the game and the community significantly more. The fact the term is grossly inaccurate makes this, in my opinion, a no-brainer if there are others that feel similarly to me (and I'm sure there are many more that have more acute feelings about it, too).
However, this thread is becoming prone personal attacks and political rants, so I'm going to try and stay clear now. I daresay morbid curiousity will drag me back to see how it progresses, but I shouldn't let it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To be fair I'm kinda lost here. I'm D&D grognard, but I'm not from USA so I don't understand the issue either.
On one point this was never an issue back when we played Skyrim, World of Warcraft and many other cRPG fantasy games, but somehow when 5e became a thing there's a need to fix this?
On the other hand it's just a word. Changing race to "species" or "ancestries" won't affect whether I buy it or not. I'm much more interested about mechanics, character options, the pacing of combat and how the game in the end will feel to DM it.
It's not about the word. It's about control. Wizards and or the entire D&D community could come up with the perfect word to describe the mechanic and it will be fine - for a brief moment. Then the cancel culture will suddenly decide that new word is no longer acceptable and demand it be changed again - or this gaming community will be a new addition to the corpse field.
Vecna riding a Tarrasque is nothing compared to the monster that is Cancel Culture.
ಠ_ಠ
Please don't let this thread become a political warzone. Cancel culture is shit, but it isn't the cause of WotC changing a word. Also, might I remind you that the "it's about control" argument is used constantly by a certain demographic of rather unfavourable individuals regarding "the left".
This change is because WotC decided to kowtow to cancel culture. And by doing so plunged this community into the political warzone. Don't come to me about it, talk to WotC. If you all and WotC are so worried about offending anyone out there, this game shouldn't even exist. Oh and it's comical you are trying to label me as some awful person because I'm pointing out the obvious.
Either way I'm not adopting this latest cancel culture nomenclature nonsense.
To be fair I'm kinda lost here. I'm D&D grognard, but I'm not from USA so I don't understand the issue either.
On one point this was never an issue back when we played Skyrim, World of Warcraft and many other cRPG fantasy games, but somehow when 5e became a thing there's a need to fix this?
On the other hand it's just a word. Changing race to "species" or "ancestries" won't affect whether I buy it or not. I'm much more interested about mechanics, character options, the pacing of combat and how the game in the end will feel to DM it.
It's not about the word. It's about control. Wizards and or the entire D&D community could come up with the perfect word to describe the mechanic and it will be fine - for a brief moment. Then the cancel culture will suddenly decide that new word is no longer acceptable and demand it be changed again - or this gaming community will be a new addition to the corpse field.
Vecna riding a Tarrasque is nothing compared to the monster that is Cancel Culture.
ಠ_ಠ
Please don't let this thread become a political warzone. Cancel culture is shit, but it isn't the cause of WotC changing a word. Also, might I remind you that the "it's about control" argument is used constantly by a certain demographic of rather unfavourable individuals regarding "the left".
This change is because WotC decided to kowtow to cancel culture. And by doing so plunged this community into the political warzone. Don't come to me about it, talk to WotC. If you all and WotC are so worried about offending anyone out there, this game shouldn't even exist. Oh and it's comical you are trying to label me as some awful person because I'm pointing out the obvious.
Either way I'm not adopting this latest cancel culture nomenclature nonsense.
No, they aren't deferring to cancel culture. This has been a long-overdue change.
And no, the game doesn't exist to offend people, I have no idea where you're getting that from.
Additionally, would you mind referring me to where I "labelled you as an awful person"? I've scoured my comments and haven't found such a claim this far.
Finally, again, it isn't about cancel culture. Referring to fictional peoples as a "race" is incorrect and, again, long overdue. It bears repeating that Orcs, Elves, and Dwarves are not an analogy to real-world races or cultures; they are entirely separate creatures to humans. Thus, the term "species" is preferred.
I don't understand why you're being so defensive about a word. It's genuinely nonsensical.
That said, I'm someone it would help. Years ago, I spent ages arguing with racists (of the "other races are less intelligent and therefore shouldn't have as many civil rights" variety), and while I full we'll know that they're not referring to race as the word we know it (as been proven by a quote earlier in the thread), writing words like "racial benefits", writing phrases like "this race is better at..." and other things are just really icky to me and feel distasteful. It brings back a lot of memories that I'd rather forget and, to be frank, I don't want to associate with a hobby that I love. That those statements are objectively true in the context of D&D doesn't change anything. Using the word species (or some other word) would help me enjoy the game and the community significantly more. The fact the term is grossly inaccurate makes this, in my opinion, a no-brainer if there are others that feel similarly to me (and I'm sure there are many more that have more acute feelings about it, too).
Beautifully stated. I always felt a bit uncomfortable when I was making posts about races in D&D.
This change is because WotC decided to kowtow to cancel culture. And by doing so plunged this community into the political warzone. Don't come to me about it, talk to WotC. If you all and WotC are so worried about offending anyone out there, this game shouldn't even exist. Oh and it's comical you are trying to label me as some awful person because I'm pointing out the obvious.
Either way I'm not adopting this latest cancel culture nomenclature nonsense.
Siiigh. "Cancel culture" is just a synonym for getting in trouble for treating others poorly. If your whole argument is that fixing things that hurt other people is "nonsense", then I honestly don't know what to say.
To be fair I'm kinda lost here. I'm D&D grognard, but I'm not from USA so I don't understand the issue either.
On one point this was never an issue back when we played Skyrim, World of Warcraft and many other cRPG fantasy games, but somehow when 5e became a thing there's a need to fix this?
On the other hand it's just a word. Changing race to "species" or "ancestries" won't affect whether I buy it or not. I'm much more interested about mechanics, character options, the pacing of combat and how the game in the end will feel to DM it.
It's not about the word. It's about control. Wizards and or the entire D&D community could come up with the perfect word to describe the mechanic and it will be fine - for a brief moment. Then the cancel culture will suddenly decide that new word is no longer acceptable and demand it be changed again - or this gaming community will be a new addition to the corpse field.
Vecna riding a Tarrasque is nothing compared to the monster that is Cancel Culture.
ಠ_ಠ
Please don't let this thread become a political warzone. Cancel culture is shit, but it isn't the cause of WotC changing a word. Also, might I remind you that the "it's about control" argument is used constantly by a certain demographic of rather unfavourable individuals regarding "the left".
This change is because WotC decided to kowtow to cancel culture. And by doing so plunged this community into the political warzone. Don't come to me about it, talk to WotC. If you all and WotC are so worried about offending anyone out there, this game shouldn't even exist. Oh and it's comical you are trying to label me as some awful person because I'm pointing out the obvious.
Either way I'm not adopting this latest cancel culture nomenclature nonsense.
Your comments just show why politics have no place in gaming. If Wizards of the Coast wants to change the word race to something else for whatever reason.. Just do it. Don't talk about it, don't open it up for debate, don't even comment on it... just do it because you think its the right thing to do and be done with it. This is exactly how Paizo handled it.. they eliminate the word race and changed it to Ancestry.. no drama, no discussion, no politics not even a comment as to why.. they just did it because they wanted to.
WotC is not interested in doing the right thing, they are interested in taking a political stance and dragging the entire gaming community down with it because they think doing it so publicly will help them sell more books. They are a company governed by ... ... fill in your own profanity
Yeah, sure. Replacing an outdated term is "taking a political stance".
Also, about your "politics have no place" argument: political intrigue is literally an entire genre. This whole ordeal remind me of The Last of Us 2.
I do, however, generally agree that WotC could have handled the change slightly better, perhaps even by not mentioning the change at all.
Exactly. WotC specifically cited cancel culture/politics for this name change. Not because it made more logical sense or whatever - because of politics. So we can add DnD to the growing pile of places people can't go to escape the nonsense of real world politics.
This is not due to "politics," and saying that "WotC specifically cited cancel culture" and politics for this change is downright false. People were hurt by this, so it changed. Listening to people who have long been marginalized is not "political."
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.
Maybe it's just me, but 'species' to me suggests that each 'species' is more removed from one another than calling them 'races'. Compare the words 'interracial' to 'interspecies', for example.
Also, 'species' is more commonly used to explain different kinds of animals, and while we recognize humans in the real world as being a species few people actually use the word that way.
What is needed, as far as I can see, is a word that suggests all sapient species (ie., potential player characters) are equal but variations of a grander theme. Species does not do that; in fact it would just let an actual racist go "Ewww, a human and an elf! They're different species, stop it!"
It saddens me that we're now talking about that we can't even use the word race in a correct, non derogatory, context for fear of offending people and I think having different kinds (races) of the same species e.g. elves being listed as completely different species rather than races of the same species just to avoid using the word race (even in the correct context) is actually even more divisional, but I haven't seen the material that shows how they're planning to implement this in full yet so withholding my judgement a little for now.
I feel like if we were saying people with different skin colours or that come from different regions were entirely different species to each other in the real world there would be an immense amount of uproar, and rightly so. So if that's what we're talking about doing to the 'races' in DnD my response is that it just doesn't make any sense.
Having a species division only makes sense to me when there is actually a species division. E.g. Harengon and Human are clearly not the same species. Drow and High elf obviously are the same species.
Are we going to get species and a bunch of subspecies? With all the humanoid races stemming from the same overarching species (in which case what on earth would it be called?) e.g Elves Dwarves Humans, Gnomes, Halflings etc... all have the same 'species' but are different sub species? I've not seen enough information on this yet to wrap my head around how it would even work. And then what would the current sub races be? Sub-subspecies?
It saddens me that we're now talking about that we can't even use the word race in a correct, non derogatory, context for fear of offending people and I think having different kinds (races) of the same species e.g. elves being listed as completely different species rather than races of the same species just to avoid using the word race (even in the correct context) is actually even more divisional, but I haven't seen the material that shows how they're planning to implement this in full yet so withholding my judgement a little for now.
I feel like if we were saying people with different skin colours or that come from different regions were entirely different species to each other in the real world there would be an immense amount of uproar, and rightly so. So if that's what we're talking about doing to the 'races' in DnD my response is that it just doesn't make any sense.
Having a species division only makes sense to me when there is actually a species division. E.g. Harengon and Human are clearly not the same species. Drow and High elf obviously are the same species.
Most everything you mentioned here have been discussed at length already. As I said before, does anyone actually care about this? WotC is changing to a more accurate, less harmful word. Who cares?
Nobody has argued that drow and high elves are different species. They are different lineages of the same species. This, whether intentional or not, is literally the definition of a strawman argument. Elves and humans, however, are different species. They have different physiology and are only connected in that they're humanoid.
Are we going to get species and a bunch of subspecies? With all the humanoid races stemming from the same overarching species (in which case what on earth would it be called?) e.g Elves Dwarves Humans, Gnomes, Halflings etc... all have the same 'species' but are different sub species? I've not seen enough information on this yet to wrap my head around how it would even work.
And then what would the current sub races be? Sub-subspecies?
Elves, dwarves, gnomes, and halflings are not the same species, stop trying to argue that they are.
Yes, subraces can be subspecies, or as the second 1D&D UA called them, lineages.
Species is actually pretty good IMO, but race is great for some instances. Species has a clear tone for biological, environmental and natural/supernatural differences, which I think the words should be for. They originate from different worlds and gods etc. = species.
Then again. Elves are a species, different elves have racial differences. So Wood Elf is a race. Dragonmark subraces are lineages.
Mountain Dwarves and Hill Dwarves are different races of the same species. Why race? Because they can have evolutionary differences from living in different places = race.
I think it's ok to use either word as long as it's informative.
But!
-We should ALWAYS avoid mixing racial/biological differences and culture/behaviour/attitude/values/norms-
IMO It's ok to have a really toxic culture that encompasses an entire civilization as long the toxicity originates from something other than race.
For example an orcish culture should not be toxic by their racial nature, but instead be the result of for example an abusive and warhungry god that enforced aggression and violence in their culture for centuries. That way there is room for redemption.
So I think any word is good, but we shouldn't mix things such as alignment with race or species but instead with origin/culture.
Suggestion:
Why not have all?
Species sets a few biological differences like lifespan, anatomy etc. Elves live 700 year, are typically tall and slender. Have darkvision and perception bonus from elven eyes.
Race sets more biological and magical features. Wood Elves are light footed have natural camoflage.
Then Ancestry/lineage adds more individual details. Wood Elves of the Mirkland lineage are skilled Diplomats, ensuring peace between all the creatures inhabiting Mirkland. They gain skills in Persuasion and Insight.
Species is actually pretty good IMO, but race is great for some instances. Species has a clear tone for biological, environmental and natural/supernatural differences, which I think the words should be for. They originate from different worlds and gods etc. = species.
Then again. Elves are a species, different elves have racial differences. So Wood Elf is a race. Dragonmark subraces are lineages.
Mountain Dwarves and Hill Dwarves are different races of the same species. Why race? Because they can have evolutionary differences from living in different places = race.
I think it's ok to use either word as long as it's informative.
But!
-We should ALWAYS avoid mixing racial/biological differences and culture/behaviour/attitude/values/norms-
IMO It's ok to have a really toxic culture that encompasses an entire civilization as long the toxicity originates from something other than race.
For example an orcish culture should not be toxic by their racial nature, but instead be the result of for example an abusive and warhungry god that enforced aggression and violence in their culture for centuries. That way there is room for redemption.
So I think any word is good, but we shouldn't mix things such as alignment with race or species but instead with origin/culture.
Suggestion:
Why not have all?
Species sets a few biological differences like lifespan, anatomy etc. Elves live 700 year, are typically tall and slender. Have darkvision and perception bonus from elven eyes.
Race sets more biological and magical features. Wood Elves are light footed have natural camoflage.
Then Ancestry/lineage adds more individual details. Wood Elves of the Mirkland lineage are skilled Diplomats, ensuring peace between all the creatures inhabiting Mirkland. They gain skills in Persuasion and Insight.
Etc. You get the point. 😄
That could work. I guess this use of "race" is closer to the real-world use for it. I still doubt WotC will use this system, likely favouring "lineage" for what we currently call subraces, but it's definitely better than the 2014 PHB naming system
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[REDACTED]
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I would have gone with Breed, but I'm sure that's problematic to someone somewhere.
This. So much this^^^^
I am honestly shocked by the amount of replies in this thread saying “This doesn’t offend me, so it can’t offend anyone else.” Have some compassion people. Changing the word race doesn’t hurt you, it only helps other people.
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.Cancel Culture is simply consequences for actions. The kids today would call it "**** around and find out". People are allowed to have reactions to things.
Speaking constructively on it, before Internet the marketplace of ideals was extremely limited to your local area and was pretty much isolated from a lot of social influence. Circles were much smaller and therefore someones personal sight on issues was extremely limited. This isn't the case anymore. I can know in real time how social issues are impacting people in any other nation on the planet.
This is from the ADND 1st PHB, and its the first paragraph when it talks about race:
While it makes an effort to try and differentiate what was known back then as race to what they were trying to describe in the book, it also makes an allegory that race defines what your potential is. This note was removed in 3rd edition which honestly makes sense. I understand the intent of what was being conveyed but it was done in a poor way.
I think Lineage is the right word to me.
"As Creatures have evolved in different parts of the world, all of them have things that could be considered blessings or hinderances depending on point of view. Some are four legged Beasts who can run like the wind, some are intelligent Humanoids who craft wonderous objects, and others could be small winged Fey who weirld both fantastic and furious magic. Lineage denotes their ancestral hertige from birth. Even those creatures who aren't born in the traditional sense, such as Constructs have a lineage based on the knowledge of their creator. If you are playing a being that was brought into the world through wholly magic or other means, work with your DM on what characteristics make sense. The following information can be used as a template for each Lineage that a player character can choose."
ಠ_ಠ
Please don't let this thread become a political warzone. Cancel culture is shit, but it isn't the cause of WotC changing a word. Also, might I remind you that the "it's about control" argument is used constantly by a certain demographic of rather unfavourable individuals regarding "the left".
[REDACTED]
Cancel culture is literally fake news. If you believe that cancel culture is a credible threat to anyone, you need to look into who told you that, why they told you that, and why you believed them.
Anyway, I guess I was naive to think that this thread would be about anything else. We've already got "anti racists are the real racists," we've already compared changing a word in a silly dragon game to the Holocaust, and it's day 2 of the thread. I'm out. Have fun doing this song and dance again.
100% agree. Does anyone actually care about a word changing in a fantasy game? Is it really worth arguing about?
[REDACTED]
This. If it helps a single person, I'm willing to consider changes to terminology. It doesn't even affect my game, let alone be worth fighting against.
That said, I'm someone it would help. Years ago, I spent ages arguing with racists (of the "other races are less intelligent and therefore shouldn't have as many civil rights" variety), and while I full well know that they're not referring to race as the word as we know it (as been proven by a quote earlier in the thread), writing words like "racial benefits", writing phrases like "this race is better at..." and other things are just really icky to me and feel distasteful. It brings back a lot of memories that I'd rather forget and, to be frank, I don't want to associate with a hobby that I love. That those statements are objectively true in the context of D&D doesn't change anything. Using the word species (or some other word than race) would help me enjoy the game and the community significantly more. The fact the term is grossly inaccurate makes this, in my opinion, a no-brainer if there are others that feel similarly to me (and I'm sure there are many more that have more acute feelings about it, too).
However, this thread is becoming prone personal attacks and political rants, so I'm going to try and stay clear now. I daresay morbid curiousity will drag me back to see how it progresses, but I shouldn't let it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
This change is because WotC decided to kowtow to cancel culture. And by doing so plunged this community into the political warzone. Don't come to me about it, talk to WotC. If you all and WotC are so worried about offending anyone out there, this game shouldn't even exist. Oh and it's comical you are trying to label me as some awful person because I'm pointing out the obvious.
Either way I'm not adopting this latest cancel culture nomenclature nonsense.
No, they aren't deferring to cancel culture. This has been a long-overdue change.
And no, the game doesn't exist to offend people, I have no idea where you're getting that from.
Additionally, would you mind referring me to where I "labelled you as an awful person"? I've scoured my comments and haven't found such a claim this far.
Finally, again, it isn't about cancel culture. Referring to fictional peoples as a "race" is incorrect and, again, long overdue. It bears repeating that Orcs, Elves, and Dwarves are not an analogy to real-world races or cultures; they are entirely separate creatures to humans. Thus, the term "species" is preferred.
I don't understand why you're being so defensive about a word. It's genuinely nonsensical.
[REDACTED]
Beautifully stated. I always felt a bit uncomfortable when I was making posts about races in D&D.
Siiigh. "Cancel culture" is just a synonym for getting in trouble for treating others poorly. If your whole argument is that fixing things that hurt other people is "nonsense", then I honestly don't know what to say.
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.Yeah, sure. Replacing an outdated term is "taking a political stance".
Also, about your "politics have no place" argument: political intrigue is literally an entire genre. This whole ordeal remind me of The Last of Us 2.
I do, however, generally agree that WotC could have handled the change slightly better, perhaps even by not mentioning the change at all.
[REDACTED]
This is not due to "politics," and saying that "WotC specifically cited cancel culture" and politics for this change is downright false. People were hurt by this, so it changed. Listening to people who have long been marginalized is not "political."
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.Maybe it's just me, but 'species' to me suggests that each 'species' is more removed from one another than calling them 'races'. Compare the words 'interracial' to 'interspecies', for example.
Also, 'species' is more commonly used to explain different kinds of animals, and while we recognize humans in the real world as being a species few people actually use the word that way.
What is needed, as far as I can see, is a word that suggests all sapient species (ie., potential player characters) are equal but variations of a grander theme. Species does not do that; in fact it would just let an actual racist go "Ewww, a human and an elf! They're different species, stop it!"
My two sents:
It saddens me that we're now talking about that we can't even use the word race in a correct, non derogatory, context for fear of offending people and I think having different kinds (races) of the same species e.g. elves being listed as completely different species rather than races of the same species just to avoid using the word race (even in the correct context) is actually even more divisional, but I haven't seen the material that shows how they're planning to implement this in full yet so withholding my judgement a little for now.
I feel like if we were saying people with different skin colours or that come from different regions were entirely different species to each other in the real world there would be an immense amount of uproar, and rightly so. So if that's what we're talking about doing to the 'races' in DnD my response is that it just doesn't make any sense.
Having a species division only makes sense to me when there is actually a species division. E.g. Harengon and Human are clearly not the same species. Drow and High elf obviously are the same species.
Are we going to get species and a bunch of subspecies? With all the humanoid races stemming from the same overarching species (in which case what on earth would it be called?) e.g Elves Dwarves Humans, Gnomes, Halflings etc... all have the same 'species' but are different sub species? I've not seen enough information on this yet to wrap my head around how it would even work.
And then what would the current sub races be? Sub-subspecies?
Most everything you mentioned here have been discussed at length already. As I said before, does anyone actually care about this? WotC is changing to a more accurate, less harmful word. Who cares?
Nobody has argued that drow and high elves are different species. They are different lineages of the same species. This, whether intentional or not, is literally the definition of a strawman argument. Elves and humans, however, are different species. They have different physiology and are only connected in that they're humanoid.
[REDACTED]
Elves, dwarves, gnomes, and halflings are not the same species, stop trying to argue that they are.
Yes, subraces can be subspecies, or as the second 1D&D UA called them, lineages.
[REDACTED]
Species is actually pretty good IMO, but race is great for some instances. Species has a clear tone for biological, environmental and natural/supernatural differences, which I think the words should be for. They originate from different worlds and gods etc. = species.
Then again. Elves are a species, different elves have racial differences. So Wood Elf is a race. Dragonmark subraces are lineages.
Mountain Dwarves and Hill Dwarves are different races of the same species. Why race? Because they can have evolutionary differences from living in different places = race.
I think it's ok to use either word as long as it's informative.
But!
-We should ALWAYS avoid mixing racial/biological differences and culture/behaviour/attitude/values/norms-
IMO It's ok to have a really toxic culture that encompasses an entire civilization as long the toxicity originates from something other than race.
For example an orcish culture should not be toxic by their racial nature, but instead be the result of for example an abusive and warhungry god that enforced aggression and violence in their culture for centuries. That way there is room for redemption.
So I think any word is good, but we shouldn't mix things such as alignment with race or species but instead with origin/culture.
Suggestion:
Why not have all?
Species sets a few biological differences like lifespan, anatomy etc. Elves live 700 year, are typically tall and slender. Have darkvision and perception bonus from elven eyes.
Race sets more biological and magical features. Wood Elves are light footed have natural camoflage.
Then Ancestry/lineage adds more individual details. Wood Elves of the Mirkland lineage are skilled Diplomats, ensuring peace between all the creatures inhabiting Mirkland. They gain skills in Persuasion and Insight.
Etc. You get the point. 😄
Finland GMT/UTC +2
That could work. I guess this use of "race" is closer to the real-world use for it. I still doubt WotC will use this system, likely favouring "lineage" for what we currently call subraces, but it's definitely better than the 2014 PHB naming system
[REDACTED]