The end justifying the means is Machiavelli and generally held up as prototypical LE.
The "end justifying means" is archenypical Lawful. If your ends are for your own selfish benefit it's LE. If your end is for the benefit of others it's LG. You of course could be entirely delusional as to what would benefit others, but your motives would still be good.
The writers seem to simply assume that society at large is good, or something. Lawful Good "can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society," so in a LE society, the LG can be counted on to be LE. In a CE society, the LG can be counted on to be..... CE......
Seems right to me. We have too many historical examples of general populace made of mostly normal good well-meaning people going along with whatever crazy course the leadership of a country/community went with out of assumption that the people in power know what they're doing.
Except Conan was a thief much of his early career and not especially the 'heart of gold' kind
Did you NOT read what I just wrote? Conan would STILL count as a Hero in D&D, because it was built on the assumptions of Heroism being more in the Classical sense. Its why the early game was far more Swords & Sorcery than High Fantasy. From my handy-dandy copy of OD&D Gods, Demigods & Heroes:
CONAN Armor Class — As a normal man Alignment: Neutral Move: 12" Magic Ability: None Hit Points: 117 Fighter Ability: 15th Level Str: 18/100 Int: 16 Wis: 10 Con: 17 Dex: 18 Cha: 15
You can absolutely play a Hero of any alignment in D&D. You CAN be a Hero and be Evil in D&D Heroic Fantasy too. Raistlin Majere is one of the Heroes of the Lance and he's Chaotic Evil.
Not sure how many would agree that counts as LG. The end justifying the means is Machiavelli and generally held up as prototypical LE.
There is a Goblin village nearby to where my Lawful Good Fighter starting a settlement to attract peasants to come stake a claim and build a community. Its entirely Lawful and Good for me to lead a band of my retainers and wipe out that Goblin village, putting every last one of them (males, females, the young and the old) to the sword. They're Goblins and are Monsters, irrespective of age (goblin children are just small monsters) or gender (female goblins often fight just as hard as their mates and are just as capable). They are Evil and the creation of Evil gods who have malintent towards all others not like them. Its not Evil to put them to the sword because its preventing future harm to my settlement and Goblins cannot be reasoned with to hold up any bargain to NOT raid.
And anyway, Alignment has become irrelevant to D&D 5E for all intents and purposes for reasons that I don't comprehend other than most players (or DMs) can't understand that when you try cramming modern morality into D&D, you create havoc with the system.
All of which is to say that there is nothing remotely wrong with the term Dwarf or Halfling. If you don't want to use them, either think up new ones, use the ones I provided that come from Greyhawk or grok that a lot of D&D fans (especially us older ones) don't appreciate being called racists or bigots in a backhanded manner by people who wouldn't even be able to enjoy this hobby if we hadn't put up with a bunch of crap from society at large like the Satanic Panic when the game was still fresh and new.
There is a Goblin village nearby to where my Lawful Good Fighter starting a settlement to attract peasants to come stake a claim and build a community. Its entirely Lawful and Good for me to lead a band of my retainers and wipe out that Goblin village, putting every last one of them (males, females, the young and the old) to the sword. They're Goblins and are Monsters, irrespective of age (goblin children are just small monsters) or gender (female goblins often fight just as hard as their mates and are just as capable)
This is where I have a problem. You can play it that way if you like, but to me this is horrific. You have decided to take that land away from the people who live there, and are happy to commit genocide to do so. This is an Evil act, even if those you are removing from their home are Evil.
This is without considering the ramifications of encouraging people to view an entire group as Evil. This has led to atrocities throughout the ages, and will not be part of a game I am playing. "That whole group is evil, so we are allowed to do whatever we want to them" is a horrific viewpoint to take, and is a path to Evil in itself.
This has led to atrocities throughout the ages, and will not be part of a game I am playing. "That whole group is evil, so we are allowed to do whatever we want to them" is a horrific viewpoint to take, and is a path to Evil in itself.
DnD is meant to be not!Medieval anyways. That kind of thinking is pretty much how people operated before modernity, so I say it fits into the setting perfectly. Judging entirely justified xenophobia of the medieval society from the comfortable safety of modern society is such a hypocricy...
Bessides chances are those goblins also took that land by force and killed everyone who lived there before them.
This is where I have a problem. You can play it that way if you like, but to me this is horrific. You have decided to take that land away from the people who live there, and are happy to commit genocide to do so. This is an Evil act, even if those you are removing from their home are Evil.
This is without considering the ramifications of encouraging people to view an entire group as Evil. This has led to atrocities throughout the ages, and will not be part of a game I am playing. "That whole group is evil, so we are allowed to do whatever we want to them" is a horrific viewpoint to take, and is a path to Evil in itself.
Well, you'd be wrong because the co-creator of the game gave a perfect example of just what Lawful Good means. Thus spake Gygax:
"Paladins are not stupid, and in general there is no rule of Lawful Good against killing enemies. The old adage about nits making lice applies. Also, as I have often noted, a paladin can freely dispatch prisoners of Evil alignment that have surrendered and renounced that alignment in favor of Lawful Good. They are then sent on to their reward before they can backslide.
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is by no means anything but Lawful and Good. Prisoners guilty of murder or similar capital crimes can be executed without violating any precept of the alignment. Hanging is likely the usual method of such execution, although it might be beheading, strangulation, etc. A paladin is likely a figure that would be considered a fair judge of criminal conduct.
The Anglo-Saxon punishment for **** and/or murder of a woman was as follows: tearing off of the scalp, cutting off of the ears and nose, blinding, chopping off of the feet and hands, and leaving the criminal beside the road for all bypassers to see. I don't know if they cauterized the limb stumps or not before doing that. It was said that a woman and child could walk the length and breadth of England without fear of molestation then...
Chivington might have been quoted as saying "nits make lice," but he is certainly not the first one to make such an observation as it is an observable fact. If you have read the account of wooden Leg, a warrior of the Cheyenne tribe that fought against Custer et al., he dispassionately noted killing an enemy squaw for the reason in question.
I am not going to waste my time and yours debating ethics and philosophy. I will state unequivocally that in the alignment system as presented in OAD&D, an eye for an eye is lawful and just, Lawful Good, as misconduct is to be punished under just laws.
Lawful Neutrality countenances malign laws. Lawful Good does not.
Mercy is to be displayed for the lawbreaker that does so by accident. Benevolence is for the harmless. Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves. They have no place in determining general alignment, albeit justice tempered by mercy is a NG manifestation, whilst well-considered benevolence is generally a mark of Good."
Being merciful to Goblins is idiotic. They're Goblins and they're Evil. They routinely engage in pillaging, murder, rapine and destruction of settlements of humans & demihumans. D&D is not 4-Color Heroism. Go play Champions if you want that kind of game.
Just going to point out this thread appears to have got wildly off topic, departing from the region of 'what would be less pejorative names for X' and into an esoteric discussion of ethics and morality within various regions of fantasy.
Please keep things on topic; if you discover a new, interesting topic you want to discuss, please start a new thread.
Some people must not have any fun playing this great game.
Exactly. If people wonder why us older fans become exasperated nowadays, one needs only to pay attention to the discourses going on about OUR game. I mean, if Halfling is offensive because of being "Half a man", then Kender can't be used either since it came DIRECTLY from the German word "Kinder", meaning Children.
Here's a handy-dandy NOT OFFENSIVE guide to renaming your fantasy races (from the Flan language), courtesy of D&D co-creator E. Gary Gygax: Elf = Olve Dwarf = Dwur Gnome = Noniz Halfling = Hobniz Goblin = Jebli Hobgoblin = High Jebline Kobold = Celbit Ork = Euroz Ogre = Eiger Gnoll = Kell Bugbear = Buheer Norker = Noblink Giant = Jialt
You're welcome.
Considering that these are still exonyms, this doesn't actually address the OP's question about endonyms for these races. 🤷♂️
I have to say this discussion seems largely academic. Dwarves are called Dwarves by Humans in the Common language. What do Dwarfs call themselves in their own language of Dwarvish? Do they call themselves Dwarves? What do Halflings call themselves in the Halfling language? It seems like you've completely ignored that angle.
It would be whatever the Dwarven word for Dwarf would be. In Tolkien's world it's Khazâd and since D&D Dwarves are based off Tolkienien Dwarves it wouldn't be a stretch to apply the same language at a table as Tolkien especially considering he went so far as to actually create one. In official written content that would be much harder due to legal reasons.
Funny enough, the Forgotten Realms has endonyms for both halflings and elves, but to my knowledge there's isn't one for dwarves.
According to the Forgotten Realms wiki the Dwarvish word for "Dwarf" is "Dwar".
Apparently this comes from an old Dragon Magazine article called "A Dwarven Lexicon"
I have to say this discussion seems largely academic. Dwarves are called Dwarves by Humans in the Common language. What do Dwarfs call themselves in their own language of Dwarvish? Do they call themselves Dwarves? What do Halflings call themselves in the Halfling language? It seems like you've completely ignored that angle.
It would be whatever the Dwarven word for Dwarf would be. In Tolkien's world it's Khazâd and since D&D Dwarves are based off Tolkienien Dwarves it wouldn't be a stretch to apply the same language at a table as Tolkien especially considering he went so far as to actually create one. In official written content that would be much harder due to legal reasons.
Funny enough, the Forgotten Realms has endonyms for both halflings and elves, but to my knowledge there's isn't one for dwarves.
According to the Forgotten Realms wiki the Dwarvish word for "Dwarf" is "Dwar".
Apparently this comes from an old Dragon Magazine article called "A Dwarven Lexicon"
Tolkien has King Théoden of Rohan say "the Halflings, that some among us call the Holbytlan". Tolkien set out a fictional etymology for the word "hobbit" in an appendix to The Lord of the Rings, that it was derived from holbytla (plural holbytlan), meaning "hole-builder". This was Tolkien's own new construction from Old Englishhol, "a hole or hollow", and bytlan, "to build".
The minority plural dwarves was recorded as early as 1818. However, it was later popularized by the fiction of philologist and legendarium author J. R. R. Tolkien, originating as a hypercorrective mistake. It was employed by Tolkien since some time before 1917.
Regarding his use of this plural, Tolkien wrote in 1937, "I am afraid it is just a piece of private bad grammar, rather shocking in a philologist; but I shall have to go with it".
How do you think POC might feel, being faced with Drow, who're dark-skinned because they are evil ...?
They're not black skinned because they're evil. They're black skinned because they adapted to the strange radiations of the underworld and it allowed them to camouflage themselves. Its why their Elven Cloak & Boots are black and why their mail armor is made of adamantine, that is also black in color.
Uh, so why the white hair? That pretty much destroys any attempt of camouflage.
Cripes, does no one do ANY research anymore? Their hair, assuming the hood of their Elven cloak were pulled down, would blend in with the background colors....
From D3: Vault of the Drow
Special Note: Colors will be non-normal under the strange light of the stony Drow "heavens". Those with normal visual capabilities will see only in blacks and grays with bluish tinges. Those with infravision will see blues and purples as well as dull reds. All yellows appear green. With ultravision, all colors glow, scintillate, and are breathtaking. As referee, feel free to give any color you believe reasonable for monsters with distinctive coloration, i.e.indigo worm, lavender trolls, puce bugbears, etc.
How do you think POC might feel, being faced with Drow, who're dark-skinned because they are evil ...?
They're not black skinned because they're evil. They're black skinned because they adapted to the strange radiations of the underworld and it allowed them to camouflage themselves. Its why their Elven Cloak & Boots are black and why their mail armor is made of adamantine, that is also black in color.
Uh, so why the white hair? That pretty much destroys any attempt of camouflage.
Skin colours aside, black (particularly in western cultures) has plenty of connotations of evil, death, mystery, terror and so on, especially when contrasted with white. Black is the colour of mourning. It’s the colour of witches’ attire. Black cats are bad luck. The White Knight is the good one, the Black Knight is evil (same with cowboy hats). Light vs Dark - darkness is scary. Darkness is decay, is negation, is what must be kept at bay, is where death and danger lie in ambush. White Magic is life-affirming, Black Magic is dangerous and used for nefarious purposes.
I’m sure all sorts of logic-based arguments can be made why Drow skin became black (or various tones close to black, at least), but I’m also fairly confident they were created as Dark Elves by Gygax because of all that is evoked culturally by such a description. They were literally described as “as dark as fairies are bright”.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
How do you think POC might feel, being faced with Drow, who're dark-skinned because they are evil ...?
They're not black skinned because they're evil. They're black skinned because they adapted to the strange radiations of the underworld and it allowed them to camouflage themselves. Its why their Elven Cloak & Boots are black and why their mail armor is made of adamantine, that is also black in color.
Uh, so why the white hair? That pretty much destroys any attempt of camouflage.
Skin colours aside, black (particularly in western cultures) has plenty of connotations of evil, death, mystery, terror and so on, especially when contrasted with white. Black is the colour of mourning. It’s the colour of witches’ attire. Black cats are bad luck. The White Knight is the good one, the Black Knight is evil (same with cowboy hats). Light vs Dark - darkness is scary. Darkness is decay, is negation, is what must be kept at bay, is where death and danger lie in ambush. White Magic is life-affirming, Black Magic is dangerous and used for nefarious purposes.
I’m sure all sorts of logic-based arguments can be made why Drow skin became black (or various tones close to black, at least), but I’m also fairly confident they were created as Dark Elves by Gygax because of all that is evoked culturally by such a description. They were literally described as “as dark as fairies are bright”.
I know this is pointing out the obvious and well known, but white has plenty of connotations with evil, death, mystery, terror, and so on as well. The color of ghosts is white. The color of bones is white. People turn pale when they get sick. Funeral shrouds are usually white or near white. The white witch or winter witch is a common trope. Vampires are often portrayed as white-skinned.
Cripes, does no one do ANY research anymore? Their hair, assuming the hood of their Elven cloak were pulled down, would blend in with the background colors....
So, their white hair is an adaption to wearing their hoods pulled down? Okaaaay.
From D3: Vault of the Drow
Special Note: Colors will be non-normal under the strange light of the stony Drow "heavens". Those with normal visual capabilities will see only in blacks and grays with bluish tinges. Those with infravision will see blues and purples as well as dull reds. All yellows appear green. With ultravision, all colors glow, scintillate, and are breathtaking. As referee, feel free to give any color you believe reasonable for monsters with distinctive coloration, i.e.indigo worm, lavender trolls, puce bugbears, etc.
Even if this wren't solely applicable to the eponymous Vault (and not to the underdark in general), this would still be irrelevant to the drow's supposed "addaptions".
Cripes, does no one do ANY research anymore? Their hair, assuming the hood of their Elven cloak were pulled down, would blend in with the background colors....
So, their white hair is an adaption to wearing their hoods pulled down? Okaaaay.
From D3: Vault of the Drow
Special Note: Colors will be non-normal under the strange light of the stony Drow "heavens". Those with normal visual capabilities will see only in blacks and grays with bluish tinges. Those with infravision will see blues and purples as well as dull reds. All yellows appear green. With ultravision, all colors glow, scintillate, and are breathtaking. As referee, feel free to give any color you believe reasonable for monsters with distinctive coloration, i.e.indigo worm, lavender trolls, puce bugbears, etc.
Even if this wren't solely applicable to the eponymous Vault (and not to the underdark in general), this would still be irrelevant to the drow's supposed "addaptions".
Okay, smart guy, why DID the Drow develop inky black skin that just happened to allow them to completely blend in with their natural surroundings? Cause it wasn't cause they were Evil or Cursed. They were Evil BEFORE they fled underground and inky-black skin wouldn't do them much good on the surface.
Cripes, does no one do ANY research anymore? Their hair, assuming the hood of their Elven cloak were pulled down, would blend in with the background colors....
So, their white hair is an adaption to wearing their hoods pulled down? Okaaaay.
From D3: Vault of the Drow
Special Note: Colors will be non-normal under the strange light of the stony Drow "heavens". Those with normal visual capabilities will see only in blacks and grays with bluish tinges. Those with infravision will see blues and purples as well as dull reds. All yellows appear green. With ultravision, all colors glow, scintillate, and are breathtaking. As referee, feel free to give any color you believe reasonable for monsters with distinctive coloration, i.e.indigo worm, lavender trolls, puce bugbears, etc.
Even if this wren't solely applicable to the eponymous Vault (and not to the underdark in general), this would still be irrelevant to the drow's supposed "addaptions".
Okay, smart guy, why DID the Drow develop inky black skin that just happened to allow them to completely blend in with their natural surroundings? Cause it wasn't cause they were Evil or Cursed. They were Evil BEFORE they fled underground and inky-black skin wouldn't do them much good on the surface.
It's been way too long since my first experiences with Drow so I honestly don't remember; is there any source that says they did not have dark skin before being driven underground?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The "end justifying means" is archenypical Lawful. If your ends are for your own selfish benefit it's LE. If your end is for the benefit of others it's LG. You of course could be entirely delusional as to what would benefit others, but your motives would still be good.
Seems right to me. We have too many historical examples of general populace made of mostly normal good well-meaning people going along with whatever crazy course the leadership of a country/community went with out of assumption that the people in power know what they're doing.
Did you NOT read what I just wrote? Conan would STILL count as a Hero in D&D, because it was built on the assumptions of Heroism being more in the Classical sense. Its why the early game was far more Swords & Sorcery than High Fantasy. From my handy-dandy copy of OD&D Gods, Demigods & Heroes:
CONAN
Armor Class — As a normal man
Alignment: Neutral
Move: 12"
Magic Ability: None
Hit Points: 117
Fighter Ability: 15th Level
Str: 18/100 Int: 16 Wis: 10 Con: 17 Dex: 18 Cha: 15
You can absolutely play a Hero of any alignment in D&D. You CAN be a Hero and be Evil in D&D Heroic Fantasy too. Raistlin Majere is one of the Heroes of the Lance and he's Chaotic Evil.
There is a Goblin village nearby to where my Lawful Good Fighter starting a settlement to attract peasants to come stake a claim and build a community. Its entirely Lawful and Good for me to lead a band of my retainers and wipe out that Goblin village, putting every last one of them (males, females, the young and the old) to the sword. They're Goblins and are Monsters, irrespective of age (goblin children are just small monsters) or gender (female goblins often fight just as hard as their mates and are just as capable). They are Evil and the creation of Evil gods who have malintent towards all others not like them. Its not Evil to put them to the sword because its preventing future harm to my settlement and Goblins cannot be reasoned with to hold up any bargain to NOT raid.
And anyway, Alignment has become irrelevant to D&D 5E for all intents and purposes for reasons that I don't comprehend other than most players (or DMs) can't understand that when you try cramming modern morality into D&D, you create havoc with the system.
All of which is to say that there is nothing remotely wrong with the term Dwarf or Halfling. If you don't want to use them, either think up new ones, use the ones I provided that come from Greyhawk or grok that a lot of D&D fans (especially us older ones) don't appreciate being called racists or bigots in a backhanded manner by people who wouldn't even be able to enjoy this hobby if we hadn't put up with a bunch of crap from society at large like the Satanic Panic when the game was still fresh and new.
Raistlin Majere is more of an anti-hero than anything, but that’s just by-the-by. He was the antagonist as much as a protagonist in Legends.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
This is where I have a problem. You can play it that way if you like, but to me this is horrific. You have decided to take that land away from the people who live there, and are happy to commit genocide to do so. This is an Evil act, even if those you are removing from their home are Evil.
This is without considering the ramifications of encouraging people to view an entire group as Evil. This has led to atrocities throughout the ages, and will not be part of a game I am playing. "That whole group is evil, so we are allowed to do whatever we want to them" is a horrific viewpoint to take, and is a path to Evil in itself.
DnD is meant to be not!Medieval anyways. That kind of thinking is pretty much how people operated before modernity, so I say it fits into the setting perfectly. Judging entirely justified xenophobia of the medieval society from the comfortable safety of modern society is such a hypocricy...
Bessides chances are those goblins also took that land by force and killed everyone who lived there before them.
Well, you'd be wrong because the co-creator of the game gave a perfect example of just what Lawful Good means. Thus spake Gygax:
Being merciful to Goblins is idiotic. They're Goblins and they're Evil. They routinely engage in pillaging, murder, rapine and destruction of settlements of humans & demihumans. D&D is not 4-Color Heroism. Go play Champions if you want that kind of game.
Just going to point out this thread appears to have got wildly off topic, departing from the region of 'what would be less pejorative names for X' and into an esoteric discussion of ethics and morality within various regions of fantasy.
Please keep things on topic; if you discover a new, interesting topic you want to discuss, please start a new thread.
Thanks
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Considering that these are still exonyms, this doesn't actually address the OP's question about endonyms for these races. 🤷♂️
Ah, cool. I had only looked at the FRWiki's page for dwarves and it didn't list an endonym. I'll have to suggest a change to address this.
Heh. Apparently the Dwarven name for "Halfling" is Jargh, which in Dwarven means "idiot".
Not kidding.
It seems, this language will do little to address the concerns of the original post!
he / him
Source: Hobbit - Wikipedia
Tolkien has King Théoden of Rohan say "the Halflings, that some among us call the Holbytlan". Tolkien set out a fictional etymology for the word "hobbit" in an appendix to The Lord of the Rings, that it was derived from holbytla (plural holbytlan), meaning "hole-builder". This was Tolkien's own new construction from Old English hol, "a hole or hollow", and bytlan, "to build".
Source: Dwarf (mythology) - Wikipedia
The minority plural dwarves was recorded as early as 1818. However, it was later popularized by the fiction of philologist and legendarium author J. R. R. Tolkien, originating as a hypercorrective mistake. It was employed by Tolkien since some time before 1917.
Regarding his use of this plural, Tolkien wrote in 1937, "I am afraid it is just a piece of private bad grammar, rather shocking in a philologist; but I shall have to go with it".
Uh, so why the white hair? That pretty much destroys any attempt of camouflage.
Cripes, does no one do ANY research anymore? Their hair, assuming the hood of their Elven cloak were pulled down, would blend in with the background colors....
From D3: Vault of the Drow
Special Note: Colors will be non-normal under the strange light of the stony Drow "heavens". Those with normal visual capabilities will see only in blacks and grays with bluish tinges. Those with infravision will see blues and purples as well as dull reds. All yellows appear green. With ultravision, all colors glow, scintillate, and are breathtaking. As referee, feel free to give any color you believe reasonable for monsters with distinctive coloration, i.e.indigo worm, lavender trolls, puce bugbears, etc.
Skin colours aside, black (particularly in western cultures) has plenty of connotations of evil, death, mystery, terror and so on, especially when contrasted with white. Black is the colour of mourning. It’s the colour of witches’ attire. Black cats are bad luck. The White Knight is the good one, the Black Knight is evil (same with cowboy hats). Light vs Dark - darkness is scary. Darkness is decay, is negation, is what must be kept at bay, is where death and danger lie in ambush. White Magic is life-affirming, Black Magic is dangerous and used for nefarious purposes.
I’m sure all sorts of logic-based arguments can be made why Drow skin became black (or various tones close to black, at least), but I’m also fairly confident they were created as Dark Elves by Gygax because of all that is evoked culturally by such a description. They were literally described as “as dark as fairies are bright”.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I know this is pointing out the obvious and well known, but white has plenty of connotations with evil, death, mystery, terror, and so on as well. The color of ghosts is white. The color of bones is white. People turn pale when they get sick. Funeral shrouds are usually white or near white. The white witch or winter witch is a common trope. Vampires are often portrayed as white-skinned.
So, their white hair is an adaption to wearing their hoods pulled down? Okaaaay.
Even if this wren't solely applicable to the eponymous Vault (and not to the underdark in general), this would still be irrelevant to the drow's supposed "addaptions".
Okay, smart guy, why DID the Drow develop inky black skin that just happened to allow them to completely blend in with their natural surroundings? Cause it wasn't cause they were Evil or Cursed. They were Evil BEFORE they fled underground and inky-black skin wouldn't do them much good on the surface.
It's been way too long since my first experiences with Drow so I honestly don't remember; is there any source that says they did not have dark skin before being driven underground?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].