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..

The specific edition you're referring (with non-human races treated as "classes") was Basic D&D, which predates Advanced D&D 1e. The AD&D line was a split in system rules that occurred early on due to creative differences between the game's creators (Dave Arneson & Gary Gygax) leading to much confusion, which is why by 3e (with the original creators out of the picture) Wizards of the Coast dropped the "Advanced" from the label and simply marketed all editions of the game as D&D (they're all technically AD&D and Basic never got further editions). But AD&D 1e itself had half-orcs, while Basic and AD&D 2e didn't, hence the confusions we're dealing with now.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126547Oh 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.

Greetings!

Thank you, Orphan81. I can see why some adults might be uncomfortable with Half Orcs in a high fantasy or LOTR style campaign with little kiddies playing in the group.

However, my friend, that begs the question, how did 10 and 12 year old kids understand Half Orcs and their frequent origin circumstances--and play AD&D 1E for many years without being traumatized or swallowed up in such concerns before 2E came on the scene?

Since you are a *bit* younger--I realize 2E is your first main game--but 2E also was gripped by *concern hysteria* at the management level back then. They took out Demons, Devils, Half Orcs, and a whole lot more from the original AD&D 1E--including making new art assignments that often made the creatures more cartoon-like; all in efforts to make then-hysterical middle-class mommies happy.

Long before 2E and their raft of parent-pleasing changes--for *years*--we had the original rules, with the terrible Half Orcs, Assassins, poisons, and whole legions of demons, devils, vampires, and all manner of savage and bloodthirsty monsters. We also got to constantly look at wondrous black & white art in the Monster Manual of naked Succubi, and Erinyes demonesses! So much was there that could have corrupted our young minds, Orphan81!:D (I'm teasing you, my friend!)

If someone has sensitive, young kiddies playing, then self-censor away as much as you like, you know? Such campaigns are fine being Rated G. However, I know many, many 10 and 12 year olds, as well as older adolescents, that handled original AD&D just fine.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1126550Greetings!

Thank you, Orphan81. I can see why some adults might be uncomfortable with Half Orcs in a high fantasy or LOTR style campaign with little kiddies playing in the group.

However, my friend, that begs the question, how did 10 and 12 year old kids understand Half Orcs and their frequent origin circumstances--and play AD&D 1E for many years without being traumatized or swallowed up in such concerns before 2E came on the scene?

Since you are a *bit* younger--I realize 2E is your first main game--but 2E also was gripped by *concern hysteria* at the management level back then. They took out Demons, Devils, Half Orcs, and a whole lot more from the original AD&D 1E--including making new art assignments that often made the creatures more cartoon-like; all in efforts to make then-hysterical middle-class mommies happy.

Long before 2E and their raft of parent-pleasing changes--for *years*--we had the original rules, with the terrible Half Orcs, Assassins, poisons, and whole legions of demons, devils, vampires, and all manner of savage and bloodthirsty monsters. We also got to constantly look at wondrous black & white art in the Monster Manual of naked Succubi, and Erinyes demonesses! So much was there that could have corrupted our young minds, Orphan81!:D (I'm teasing you, my friend!)

If someone has sensitive, young kiddies playing, then self-censor away as much as you like, you know? Such campaigns are fine being Rated G. However, I know many, many 10 and 12 year olds, as well as older adolescents, that handled original AD&D just fine.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I'm in agreement with you that I know a number of adolescents capable of handling subject matter like that... And in particular, I know most of us in that period never went into gratuity about it. My argument is more about how society currently views things, and as D&D is the flagship of the RPG industry, it is sadly the one that has to stand up to certain amounts of unreasonable scrutiny. It's much like you mentioned with 2nd edition, and how it was sanitized from all the "Demonic" elements in order to survive the Satanic Panic that happened in the 80s..

And you can completely bet, I thought D&D was to "Kiddy" and "For Babies" compared to say... Whitewolf games when I was in my early teens... and celebrated the return of all the Demons and Devils when 3rd edition came out... But I was also a kid, and kids are dumb. I didn't understand that it wasn't about making sure to not warp the minds of children... but it was trying to survive the scrutiny of pearl clutchers as much as possible.  

Now, I am against censorship in all it's forms... (And here comes the But that can be pointed at to say, "no you aren't!) But, D&D standing as the flagship representative to the public...helps out the rest of the industry by being the most ready to pass the inspection of the normie and mainstream going public.

This is where 3rd party supplements, the OSR and other games come in. To fill the role of subject matter D&D tends to avoid, as being the "diplomat" of the RPG industry. Just as an example, I find Forgotten Realms boring as hell... But it's the most kitchensink, generic, Tolkein knock off newbie friendly setting for Dungeons and Dragons. It exists to get them in the door... and from there the ones who want more can head to the specialty sections.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126491This all comes back to the inclusion of Half-Orcs in Dungeons and Dragons being a poor choice in the first place. Because when they debuted in the Players Handbook back in 3rd edition... It was clear.. they came from Rape. Because Orcs were a nasty, brutish, and evil species.

Well, times have changed, and as I've stated before, I agree with this particular change... Rape really shouldn't be a front and center thing for a most ages appropriate game. So Half-Orcs can't come from rape. Which means, Orcs can't be a nasty, brutish, inherently evil species anymore...

Quote from: jhkimBut 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.

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.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1126546Orphan81, you probably should have just said "I didn't know half-orc PCs were from the 1e PHB. Thank you for the clarification."

Exactly. Orphan81, you were wrong when you said that half-orcs debuted in 3rd edition. That's not some sort of capital crime -- you just happen to have missed AD&D 1st edition in your play experience. It sounds like an honest mistake, and it doesn't mean you're a bad person or anything.

However, you keep doubling down as if everyone else who corrected you is wrong. Accept the new piece of information, and revise your point a little. It's not the end of the world.

In general, it seems to me that there are many points of view here -- it's not just a simple us-vs-them. Posters have varying attitudes, from the OP to BoxCrayonTales to Orphan81 and many others.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126552I'm in agreement with you that I know a number of adolescents capable of handling subject matter like that... And in particular, I know most of us in that period never went into gratuity about it. My argument is more about how society currently views things, and as D&D is the flagship of the RPG industry, it is sadly the one that has to stand up to certain amounts of unreasonable scrutiny. It's much like you mentioned with 2nd edition, and how it was sanitized from all the "Demonic" elements in order to survive the Satanic Panic that happened in the 80s..

And you can completely bet, I thought D&D was to "Kiddy" and "For Babies" compared to say... Whitewolf games when I was in my early teens... and celebrated the return of all the Demons and Devils when 3rd edition came out... But I was also a kid, and kids are dumb. I didn't understand that it wasn't about making sure to not warp the minds of children... but it was trying to survive the scrutiny of pearl clutchers as much as possible.  

Now, I am against censorship in all it's forms... (And here comes the But that can be pointed at to say, "no you aren't!) But, D&D standing as the flagship representative to the public...helps out the rest of the industry by being the most ready to pass the inspection of the normie and mainstream going public.

This is where 3rd party supplements, the OSR and other games come in. To fill the role of subject matter D&D tends to avoid, as being the "diplomat" of the RPG industry. Just as an example, I find Forgotten Realms boring as hell... But it's the most kitchensink, generic, Tolkein knock off newbie friendly setting for Dungeons and Dragons. It exists to get them in the door... and from there the ones who want more can head to the specialty sections.

Greetings!

*laughing* Good stuff, Orphan81! "Kids are dumb...the scrutiny of pearl clutchers"!:D

You make a good argument for D&D being the "ambassador" game. 3rd party publishers can wait in the shadows, offering the good stuff! Oh yeah, you are so right, with Forgotten Realms being so sugary and sweet, so full of syrup that the mommies will love it!:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Why does D&D need half-orcs when Palladium Fantasy, Tunnels & Trolls, Earthdawn, Shadowrun and many other RPGs just let you play Orcs as PCs?

Is it a nostalgia thing?

Is it a balance / contrast with half-elves?

I think the idea was that a half orc could manage to pass in human society while a full orc couldn't.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1126560Why does D&D need half-orcs when Palladium Fantasy, Tunnels & Trolls, Earthdawn, Shadowrun and many other RPGs just let you play Orcs as PCs?

Is it a nostalgia thing?

Is it a balance / contrast with half-elves?

Half-orcs come from Tolkien. Everything in the game originally had either a literary or historical source.

Quote"Are they men he has ruined or has he blended the races of orcs and men?"

-- Treebeard, The Two Towers

Orcs themselves are servants of Evil and they are corruptions, not natural living beings in their own right.

QuoteBut since they [orcs] are servants of the Dark Power, and later of Sauron, neither of whom could, or would, produce living things, they must be "corruptions".

-- Morgoth's Ring

The blending of orcs produces either stronger orcs or vile and cunning men (Morgoth's Ring, Part Five, Myths Transformed pp.418-9).

QuoteIt became clear in time that undoubted Men could under the domination of Morgoth or his agents in a few generations be reduced almost to the Orc-level of mind and habits; and then they would or could be made to mate with Orcs, producing new breeds, often larger and more cunning. There is no doubt that long afterwards, in the Third Age, Saruman rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: the interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs large and cunning, and Orc-men treacherous and vile."

-- JRR Tolkien

A playable orc, properly speaking, would just be a half-orc of some sort, since orcs themselves are "orc-minded" -- slaves. The human agency supplied by the player is what makes them half-orc and not wholly orc.

In terms of game mechanics, in AD&D half-orcs can multi-class as cleric/assassins or fighter/assassins, and their advancement in the assassin class is unlimited. Each demi-human race in that game has its own unique blend of character multi-class combinations.

Quote from: David Johansen;1126561I think the idea was that a half orc could manage to pass in human society while a full orc couldn't.

This. It's a mercy to the DM if playing to the presumptions of the setting, where orcs aren't well-liked.  It allows a player to get what they want out of the character without forcing the DM to throw them out of half the civilized places they're trying to get into for play purposes.

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.

Nothing has changed about "Orcs" in "D&D" that changes the assumptions of "Half-Orcs" in D&D. If you made a "Half-Ogre" as a playable core race... what do your critical thinking skills assume about Ogres as you already understand them in D&D to *likely* be. Exactly.

Further - NOWHERE in D&D does it implicitly say it HAS to be that way. So why castigate everyone with the likely assumption and remove your own personal agency for CHOOSING otherwise at your table? Why impugn motive where precisely zero exists? I'll use your own claims against you...

Quote from: Orphan81;1126542Flash 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.

And 5e STILL has Half-Orcs as a core race. And precisely NOTHING has changed. It doesn't mean that because they *might* be the product of rape they are, but since this is entirely independent of your choices as a player - it's moot. A GM can no more force your character to be the product of rape or incest, or anything else unpleasant to your sensibilities than you can conversely castigate the assumptions of a game based on no implicit mandate that doesn't exist. Tieflings are in the same boat. Why assume that Tieflings have had romantic concensual encounters rather than a Demon Gone Wild? It's PROBABLY a common thing. But it doesn't mean it has to.

Nor does it mean that because YOUR PC Half-orc is the product of a loving pair of trans-speciel parents - most other Half-orcs aren't the product of rape. If you're trying to justify the capacity to have rational and critical thought be expressed based on marketing needs... well you have some unspoken claims, that really aren't even part of the thread premise.

Quote from: Orphan81;1126542Don'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.

which corresponds to probably 99%(my bullshit fact) of all of us. My mom gave me the complete works of Sherlock Holmes at age 7 thinking I was going to be reading about a sleuth in a Deerslayer hat... my dad raised his eyebrows when I was asking him about cocaine and prostitutes. Somehow I survived those days of youth... /swwwwooooooon.

It occurs to me that it might all be the result of people (orcs and humans) lying on their dating profiles.

You know, I was looking through some old story notes for a superhero campaign and something occurred to me; aren't Hercules (and most of his heroic kin) and King Arthur also the "products of rape"?

How many totally normal and even heroic real people throughout history and today are the "products of rape" and yet manage to not be defined by it?

Rape isn't something exclusive to orcs. Having it as a character's backstory isn't exclusive to half-orcs.

Quote from: David Johansen;1126590It occurs to me that it might all be the result of people (orcs and humans) lying on their dating profiles.

"no hookups!!"

Quote from: Chris24601;1126592You know, I was looking through some old story notes for a superhero campaign and something occurred to me; aren't Hercules (and most of his heroic kin) and King Arthur also the "products of rape"?

How many totally normal and even heroic real people throughout history and today are the "products of rape" and yet manage to not be defined by it?

Rape isn't something exclusive to orcs. Having it as a character's backstory isn't exclusive to half-orcs.

Yes, of course. Early D&D also had naked boobies in some of the art. For a game that eventually got aimed at kids, and was sold in the kid's toy section of the Sears catalog, (not to mention the kid friendly cartoon and toy merchandising) it touched on some more "adult" themes from the literature that inspired it.

In my (1e) D&D campaign setting I toyed with the idea of allowing half-orcs, because my initial default was to accept as much as possible from the MM and the PHB and implied AD&D setting but at the end of the day, I ended up dumping them. Viable orc-human hybrids just weren't compatible with what I decided I wanted orcs to be (in my own setting, no broader judgement implied).

Effectively (again, in my own setting), they lacked the ahem apparatus to be capable of rape, let alone reproduction, with humans. Since they do love torturing sentient beings under their control, I suppose they could possibly violate them e.g. with a stick, or whatever, but obviously no half-orcs result from that.

And frankly, even that sort of rape has never come up in play. Because who wants that? Really?

 You know, thinking back to when I started playing rpgs in the 70s, as an early-teen boy, playing with a group of other early teens (mostly boys), who you'd think might be super-keen on introducing giggly potentially creepy sex-stuff into rp, we never did. However interested in sex we might have been (and cmon, young teens, hormones), nobody but nobody felt rping was a suitable venue for that. And who wanted to be "that guy?"