Quote from: David Johansen;1126531One really simple and realistic source for half orcs is a recessive gene.  One in four or one in eight orcs is born just a little more human.  There isn't really any human DNA involved, just a quirk of the genome.

So something like the way a small number of sahuagin look like sea elves despite not having any actual sea elf blood in them (unless it's in their bellies after feasting on sea elf flesh)?

It could also be the result of a disease. Orcs that eat human flesh or perhaps those that are simply around them for too long might have a chance of giving birth to half-orcs without ever actually breeding with humans. Now the orcs try to quickly kill humans or drive them away because they are an existential threat.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126532So something like the way a small number of sahuagin look like sea elves despite not having any actual sea elf blood in them (unless it's in their bellies after feasting on sea elf flesh)?

It could also be the result of a disease. Orcs that eat human flesh or perhaps those that are simply around them for too long might have a chance of giving birth to half-orcs without ever actually breeding with humans. Now the orcs try to quickly kill humans or drive them away because they are an existential threat.

Or, conversely, orcs are the result of habitual human cannibalism. Half-orcs are the recessive human genetics expressing.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126519The point was that they existed well before 3e. That they existed in 2e is also true regardless of the particular book that their rules appear in.

I don't dispute that on principle, but I was talking more about "the point" that the S'mon and Orphan81 were trying to make. I also think that you're taking the word "exist" more literally than was intended and Orphan81 missed the inclusion of the race in earlier editions cuz he didn't have the books (a honest mistake). No one is completely denying the existence of half-orcs in general, but rather pointing out that they weren't always a standard race, so their presence as a persistent standard PC race wasn't codified as part of the system till later editions.

So this whole topic didn't really become an issue till then. Before that half-orcs were mostly an oddity or relegated to a Monster Manual entry intended as enemy encounters.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1126534I don't dispute that on principle, but I was talking more about "the point" that the S'mon and Orphan81 were trying to make. I also think that you're taking the word "exist" more literally than was intended and Orphan81 missed the inclusion of the race in earlier editions cuz he didn't have the books (a honest mistake). No one is completely denying the existence of half-orcs in general, but rather pointing out that they weren't always a standard race, so their presence as a persistent standard PC race wasn't codified as part of the system till later editions.

So this whole topic didn't really become an issue till then. Before that half-orcs were mostly an oddity or relegated to a Monster Manual entry intended as enemy encounters.

Greetings!

My friend, I must respectfully disagree with you here. Half Orcs go all the way back--firmly--to AD&D 1E. There were rules for including them as Player Characters both in the rule books--as well as Dragon Magazine. In addition, Half Orc characters were *always* very popular, not merely an oddity or kept locked away as opponents within the Monster Manual. I remember many players eagerly wanting to play Half Orc Fighter/Thieves, Fighters, and occasionally, Assassins.

And the moralistic crying about the "origins of the Half Orc" is a much over-blown hysteria. Even myself, and many people I played with at the time--as we were mostly 10-12 years old at the time, we had no problem embracing the idea that Half Orcs came from rape, or also likely, from small communities of Half Orcs, usually living in independent communities in the wilderness, or as minority sub-cultures within larger Human settlements. It wasn't a cause for hysteria and gnashing of teeth, or some other "problematic" navel-gazing, as we see so much with the SJW morons nowadays.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: VisionStorm;1126534I don't dispute that on principle, but I was talking more about "the point" that the S'mon and Orphan81 were trying to make. I also think that you're taking the word "exist" more literally than was intended and Orphan81 missed the inclusion of the race in earlier editions cuz he didn't have the books (a honest mistake). No one is completely denying the existence of half-orcs in general, but rather pointing out that they weren't always a standard race, so their presence as a persistent standard PC race wasn't codified as part of the system till later editions.

So this whole topic didn't really become an issue till then. Before that half-orcs were mostly an oddity or relegated to a Monster Manual entry intended as enemy encounters.

But again, in 1E, they were a standard race listed alongside the others. And 1E was the game that a ton of people grew up on, since D&D's peak popularity for a long time was in the early 1980s. This was the player races illustration from the Player's Handbook:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4255[/ATTACH]

They were clearly standard, not differentiated at all from the other four PC races. They were not a sidebar, and were listed alongside in all the race tables.

I could see an argument that they were the least popular of the five PC races, but they existed and were standard in 1E.

Quote from: jhkim;1126536I could see an argument that they were the least popular of the five PC races, but they existed and were standard in 1E.

Gnomes... they don't even make it into the picture!

Neither do halflings, but they've always been one of the Big Four.

@SHARK and jhkim

I'm aware of half-orcs in 1e and was talking more specifically about 2e in that last post, but this side discussion has gotten fragmented over multiple post between multiple posters. Half-orcs were standard in 1e (Orphan81 didn't know in the post that kicked off this side discussion, which contributed to the confusion) but were removed by 2e and didn't come back to stay till 3e. That's why I used the qualifier "persistent" at some point in my last post, to indicate that half-orcs didn't become a standard race that stuck around edition after edition ("persistent") till 3e+. So it really wasn't codified as a standard race everyone expected to always be part of the game till then.

Quote from: SHARK;1126535And the moralistic crying about the "origins of the Half Orc" is a much over-blown hysteria. Even myself, and many people I played with at the time--as we were mostly 10-12 years old at the time, we had no problem embracing the idea that Half Orcs came from rape, or also likely, from small communities of Half Orcs, usually living in independent communities in the wilderness, or as minority sub-cultures within larger Human settlements. It wasn't a cause for hysteria and gnashing of teeth, or some other "problematic" navel-gazing, as we see so much with the SJW morons nowadays.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

This was my experience as well. Everyone I played with when I got into the game was a teen and no one lost sleep over the idea that most half-orcs were most likely the product of rape. Hysteria around it seems to be a recent phenomenon. I mean, our characters murder and maim, or at the very least have to deal with murder and maiming and cannibalism, etc. from enemy monsters, but rape specifically is what people want to make a non-topic like it's worse?

Quote from: jhkim;1126536But again, in 1E, they were a standard race listed alongside the others. And 1E was the game that a ton of people grew up on, since D&D's peak popularity for a long time was in the early 1980s. This was the player races illustration from the Player's Handbook:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4255[/ATTACH]

They were clearly standard, not differentiated at all from the other four PC races. They were not a sidebar, and were listed alongside in all the race tables.

I could see an argument that they were the least popular of the five PC races, but they existed and were standard in 1E.

Sure.

Anecdotally even as a teen back then - literally no one I knew assumed that the product of Half-Orcs *weren't potentially* by rape. I had a couple of players that played Half-Orcs a lot, and they always assumed that but it didn't stop them from roleplaying it, and invariably they would have stronger connections to their human mothers (interestingly I've never had a player have a human father - which obviously underscores those assumptions.

My years of running games at conventions, no one batted any eye at that assumption - because it doesn't define the character. Just like your skin color, and sex don't define the character of the character. Do they inform the circumstances under which a player approaches playing the character? sure - but that's on the player. Nowhere does it implicitly state that you have to product of rape, but given the assumptions about what orcs are, and how they operate, it takes zero intelligence to make that leap. I have *no idea* why this is controversial unless a person is bringing their own hangups into the game, including their own inherent racist projections and biases (which includes idiotic narratives like "orcs are clearly analogs of blacks" and stupid shit like that), and so we're clear - I'm not saying you are saying that jhkim, I'm speaking to the narrative of this stupid thread.

And then there is the ignorance of the conceits of the setting - nothing stops a player and GM from concocting some scenario where a human is somehow in love with an orc and layed an egg which hatched into your character. But that would be highly circumstantial and equally fine.

Would people be having this discussion with Warhammer Fungus Orks? Seems like a whole lotta projecting is going on that has nothing to do with the act of gaming and make-believe for the purposes of having this thing called "fun".

Because no one is getting raped. No one is getting murdered. No one is having anything done to them. It's a game. The fact I need to spell it out should be an indicator of how psychologically unstable people have become. I'm going to start calling these numbskulls "Hanks"... stop playing Mazes&Monsters, you Hanks out there.

Quote from: jhkim;1126536But again, in 1E, they were a standard race listed alongside the others. And 1E was the game that a ton of people grew up on, since D&D's peak popularity for a long time was in the early 1980s. This was the player races illustration from the Player's Handbook:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4255[/ATTACH]

They were clearly standard, not differentiated at all from the other four PC races. They were not a sidebar, and were listed alongside in all the race tables.

I could see an argument that they were the least popular of the five PC races, but they existed and were standard in 1E.

I think you and HappyDaze here are probably blinded by your age and need to take your Grognard glasses off. I'm only 38, I played 1st ed D&D when I was like 12, and I remember the specific version of 1e I played at the time, didn't have Half-Orc as a playable race. It had Elf and dwarf as it's own separate class. Next for me was D&D 2e... which specifically didn't have Half-Orcs as a playable race..

So I'd hazard to say, for most D&D players out there right now around my age group... We never saw Half-Orc as being a viable option. It was something new and different that 3rd Ed touted as a feature back in 99/00 when it released. And it was cool and edgy to my 18 year old self.

Flash forward a couple decades later. Having a character race based entirely on rape, is not a good idea for something you're trying to sell as a main-stream product. Yes, I agree with Tenbones, it's all a game, it's all pretend. But D&D is the "Marvel" of roleplaying games. It's meant to be appropriate for most ages, it's meant to be something you can bring the kids in to play... Yes you can have settings and supplements that are meant for a more mature audience.... But selling wise, right out of the box.. the Book Mom and Dad can buy for 12 year old Johnny and Suzy to try out RPG is probably going to go further in this day and age with a race that doesn't have RAPE as the primary reason for it's existence.

Don't get me wrong. Werewolf the Apocalpyse was my introduction to RPGs... but you can bet your ass if my Mom had actually *KNOWN* about the content in Werewolf, she probably wouldn't have been very happy about it. Just as if I had kids, I probably wouldn't want them to play WoD games until they were about 16 or so.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126542I think you and HappyDaze here are probably blinded by your age and need to take your Grognard glasses off. I'm only 38, I played 1st ed D&D when I was like 12, and I remember the specific version of 1e I played at the time, didn't have Half-Orc as a playable race. It had Elf and dwarf as it's own separate class. Next for me was D&D 2e... which specifically didn't have Half-Orcs as a playable race..

So I'd hazard to say, for most D&D players out there right now around my age group... We never saw Half-Orc as being a viable option. It was something new and different that 3rd Ed touted as a feature back in 99/00 when it released. And it was cool and edgy to my 18 year old self.

Flash forward a couple decades later. Having a character race based entirely on rape, is not a good idea for something you're trying to sell as a main-stream product. Yes, I agree with Tenbones, it's all a game, it's all pretend. But D&D is the "Marvel" of roleplaying games. It's meant to be appropriate for most ages, it's meant to be something you can bring the kids in to play... Yes you can have settings and supplements that are meant for a more mature audience.... But selling wise, right out of the box.. the Book Mom and Dad can buy for 12 year old Johnny and Suzy to try out RPG is probably going to go further in this day and age with a race that doesn't have RAPE as the primary reason for it's existence.

Don't get me wrong. Werewolf the Apocalpyse was my introduction to RPGs... but you can bet your ass if my Mom had actually *KNOWN* about the content in Werewolf, she probably wouldn't have been very happy about it. Just as if I had kids, I probably wouldn't want them to play WoD games until they were about 16 or so.

Your lack of accurate knowledge is no reason for me to take off my "grognard glasses."

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126543Your lack of accurate knowledge is no reason for me to take off my "grognard glasses."

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4256[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Orphan81;1126542I think you and HappyDaze here are probably blinded by your age and need to take your Grognard glasses off. I'm only 38, I played 1st ed D&D when I was like 12, and I remember the specific version of 1e I played at the time, didn't have Half-Orc as a playable race. It had Elf and dwarf as it's own separate class. Next for me was D&D 2e... which specifically didn't have Half-Orcs as a playable race..

So I'd hazard to say, for most D&D players out there right now around my age group... We never saw Half-Orc as being a viable option. It was something new and different that 3rd Ed touted as a feature back in 99/00 when it released. And it was cool and edgy to my 18 year old self.

Flash forward a couple decades later. Having a character race based entirely on rape, is not a good idea for something you're trying to sell as a main-stream product. Yes, I agree with Tenbones, it's all a game, it's all pretend. But D&D is the "Marvel" of roleplaying games. It's meant to be appropriate for most ages, it's meant to be something you can bring the kids in to play... Yes you can have settings and supplements that are meant for a more mature audience.... But selling wise, right out of the box.. the Book Mom and Dad can buy for 12 year old Johnny and Suzy to try out RPG is probably going to go further in this day and age with a race that doesn't have RAPE as the primary reason for it's existence.

Don't get me wrong. Werewolf the Apocalpyse was my introduction to RPGs... but you can bet your ass if my Mom had actually *KNOWN* about the content in Werewolf, she probably wouldn't have been very happy about it. Just as if I had kids, I probably wouldn't want them to play WoD games until they were about 16 or so.

Greetings!

Hmmm. Orphan81, you and your friends must have been playing with copies of some OD&D books, which surfaced after AD&D 1E. OD&D originally was produced for awhile before AD&D 1E. OD&D had *Races as classes*--whereas AD&D 1E did not. AD&D 1E had clearly defined classes, and separate races. Of the official races for player characters in AD&D 1E was the Half Orc--as Jhkim shows in the character races graphic, from the AD&D 1E Player's Handbook.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Orphan81, you probably should have just said "I didn't know half-orc PCs were from the 1e PHB. Thank you for the clarification."

Quote from: SHARK;1126545Greetings!

Hmmm. Orphan81, you and your friends must have been playing with copies of some OD&D books, which surfaced after AD&D 1E. OD&D originally was produced for awhile before AD&D 1E. OD&D had *Races as classes*--whereas AD&D 1E did not. AD&D 1E had clearly defined classes, and separate races. Of the official races for player characters in AD&D 1E was the Half Orc--as Jhkim shows in the character races graphic, from the AD&D 1E Player's Handbook.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Oh you're most certainly correct... But it illustrates how "Younger" Guys like me, had mainly seen 2E as our primary originating D&D where Half-Orcs weren't originally playable.. Alongside with OD&D as well.

Which again, as the discussion is going, is not the point anymore. The point is, in this day and age, Half Orc works less and less as originally intended for a most ages appropriate product. There was also a long stretch of time the 2nd edition era, where they apparently thought putting the Half-Orc race in as a standard character race probably wasn't a good idea either.

There's nothing inherently wrong with having a Half-Orc race in a more Witcher/GoT style maturity level... But not something you wanna have in your LotR intro Fantasy Adventure series the kids can play. At least not, as they were originally written.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1126539@SHARK and jhkim

I'm aware of half-orcs in 1e and was talking more specifically about 2e in that last post, but this side discussion has gotten fragmented over multiple post between multiple posters. Half-orcs were standard in 1e (Orphan81 didn't know in the post that kicked off this side discussion, which contributed to the confusion) but were removed by 2e and didn't come back to stay till 3e. That's why I used the qualifier "persistent" at some point in my last post, to indicate that half-orcs didn't become a standard race that stuck around edition after edition ("persistent") till 3e+. So it really wasn't codified as a standard race everyone expected to always be part of the game till then.



This was my experience as well. Everyone I played with when I got into the game was a teen and no one lost sleep over the idea that most half-orcs were most likely the product of rape. Hysteria around it seems to be a recent phenomenon. I mean, our characters murder and maim, or at the very least have to deal with murder and maiming and cannibalism, etc. from enemy monsters, but rape specifically is what people want to make a non-topic like it's worse?

Greetings!

Excellent, my friend! Yeah, definitely some good times! I understand what you were saying now. Weird how 2nd Edition waffled on the Half Orcs, huh?

I don't understand what all the moralistic hysteria is with these folk about the origins of the Half Orc. Half Orcs don't always come from *rape*--there are assumed to be populations of Half Orcs that get together.

And beyond that, what is with these folk's crying? Some Half Orcs come from rape. AND? When we were 10, 12 years old, we understood what Half Orc's background *often* entailed--and we weren't traumatized by such knowledge. Have a drink my friend! I'm fixing to light up a pipe of fine tobacco.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK