Greetings!

Well, Jhkim, when people are arguing about whatever Tolkien said in 1938, whatever he changed his mind about, what Tolkien said in Letter 156, what he said in some interview in 1965--and then argue about what HE REALLY MEANT--and on and on--all when we are talking about fighting against Orcs in a D&D game in 2025, it certainly seems to resemble a "Moralistic Struggle Session." *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on Today at 08:31:57 AMWell, Jhkim, when people are arguing about whatever Tolkien said in 1938, whatever he changed his mind about, what Tolkien said in Letter 156, what he said in some interview in 1965--and then argue about what HE REALLY MEANT--and on and on--all when we are talking about fighting against Orcs in a D&D game in 2025, it certainly seems to resemble a "Moralistic Struggle Session." *Laughing*

C'mon, SHARK. I know you're not actually stupid, and you can distinguish between a forum posting and RPG play.

If the topic is where the idea of orcs came from, then yeah, I'm going to post about Old English etymology and about Tolkien's writings.

Do your RPG sessions consist of your lecturing your players about Mongol history and then threatening to bathe them in napalm if they're communists? No? Then maybe you can make the distinction.

Quote from: jhkim on Today at 10:55:46 AMDo your RPG sessions consist of your lecturing your players about Mongol history and then threatening to bathe them in napalm if they're communists? No? Then maybe you can make the distinction.

I used to be play Twilight 2000 back in the day for a short time and that was a legitimate scenario for players to potentially be faced with! 

Quote from: Quasquetonian on Today at 01:27:14 AM

Quote from: jhkim on February 21, 2025, 04:21:30 PMThanks for the added detail. Does that invalidate the Klingon comparison, though? Even during the TNG era, the Klingons weren't nice. They eventually had a treaty with the Federation, but they were brutal and lusted for conquest. Pre-peace-treaty they tried to mass execute civilians like the Organians. Even in the TNG era, there were many Star Trek stories where evil Klingon subgroups or individuals were the enemy.

I'm not saying that Warcraft orcs and Klingons are identical, but it seems like they have the same broader archetype of the proud, brutal warrior race. It sounds like the first two games are like pre-peace-treaty Klingons under evil government, and the third game shifted them to be more like the proud barbarians of the TNG era.

I don't think a comparison between Klingons and the orcs from Warcraft is a compelling one.  (EDIT: At least the first two games in the series.)

When people think of the Klingons as a proud and honorable warrior race, they're usually thinking specifically of Worf, an outsider who tries to live up to a highly idealized conception of Klingon culture.  When he meets other flesh-and-blood Klingons, he finds that they cannot live up that same standard, or do not want to, or twist it to suit their own purposes, or merely pay lip service to it.  When Worf chides Yar by saying, "Cowards take hostages.  Klingons do not," it's not an accurate depiction of the Klingon honor code.  It's a guarantee that, by the end of the episode, a Klingon will take hostages and Worf will have to navigate that.

However, even if the Klingons were a proud and honorable warrior race, the orcs in the first two Warcraft games are definitely not.  They're explicitly evil.

You're arguing that early Klingons are not honorable in a human sense - which I would agree with. Klingons taking hostages and engaging in genocide (which they did) makes them more like the original evil Warcraft orcs. I originally used the term "Savage" to describe the archetype, and referred to them as "proud" but didn't mention honor. estar added the qualifier "honorable", and Ratman_tf mentioned "noble savage" early in the thread, which might contribute to some miscommunication.

Do you think there's a better way to describe the archetype that Warcraft orcs represent - especially taking into account the later games?

I want to refer to a "Savage" or "Proud Warrior Race" archetype isn't necessarily noble or honorable - though some could potentially be honorable. It sounds to me like Warcraft orcs go from being sinister evil savages (in the first two games) into being more ambiguous and possibly noble savages in World of Warcraft. But maybe there's a better way to communicate that.