Fantasy RPGs, race and ethnicity, mostly D&D

I think a lot of it depends on how big a game world you are planning on making.

If you are planning on making an entire planet, then a great resource is this map: http://mapsontheweb.zoom-maps.com/post/70907150095/map-of-the-world-by-natural-skin-color.

As that map shows, skin color is based primarily on how close you are to the equator. Presuming that your fantasy world is roughly based on ours (a ball of rock spinning as it orbits a star), then you should have darker skinned people of all varieties near the equator, with the skin tone lightening as you travel away from the equator.

If you are planning on making a smaller game world (those couple of continents you described are just a small part of a much larger world), then what you should do is figure out the rough location on the planet your game world will take place, and go from there. If you decide to make it a Europe analog, then you will have more white people, with communities of different races here and there.




Regarding fantasy races and their location, something you need to decide is what influences you want to draw upon, since obviously elves and orcs don't actually exist or have a culture. Once you pick the influence, it is easier to place them on their appropriate landmass.

One of the most pervasive stereotypes for fantasy creatures is the dwarf. If you see a fantasy dwarf in pretty much ANY work, they will have the following traits: beard, lives underground, has a Scottish accent. Note the last one. Every person I have ever played with that played a dwarf took on that accent. When playing a human, they spoke normal English. When playing a halfling, elf, or gnome, they spoke normal English. Playing an orc....well, they spoke like an idiot, because obviously Int was the dump stat. They play a dwarf? Scottish. Every time.

You do not have to make racial tensions between humans of different skin tones if you don't want to. One of the big drivers of racial tension is a feeling of "us vs. them". In normal society, that occurs due to skin color (and culture, but just talking about skin color now). Those people over there are different from us. They are not part of our group. Fear the outsider. Etc. We only have other humans as sentient, speaking beings, so we define each group as a different race.

In a fantasy world, you now have a whole bunch of different peoples to be racist against. When it is a choice between fearing the black or latino guy, or fearing the far more different gnome or goblin, I like to think that the fantasy humans will band together in a mutual hatred of those that aren't human. Elves are less feared because they look similar to humans. Halflings look like human children, so they are distrusted due to the dissonance, but not hated. Goblins look nothing like humans, and thus are vilified by the humans. Extrapolate as necessary for reactions between different groups.




Finally, in regard to the different races on different landmasses: it depends. Are you planning on having some of each race being native to each continent, or are you thinking more of having each continent be the native home of 1 or 2 races each?

If each land has its own native form of each fantasy race, then you are going to have physical differences between individual races from each continent. Chinese look different from Nigerians look different from French look different from Iraqi. Each of these groups is a major part of a landmass away from each other, but it is very easy to tell from a distance what general area their ancestors came from.

If each land mass is home to 1 or 2 races, then there will be less variation. This land has humans and dwarfs. This land has elves and orcs. If humans are travelling to elfland, people will be able to say "that's a human, he must be from human land".

Actually, come to think of it... that isn't a bad idea. Each race has a common ancestor with each other (or in this case, the deity had a common thought when creating each race). Much like how humans in the real world are all the same with some genetic variations (as evidenced by the fact that there is no genetic barrier to reproduction between members of different races), each fantasy race is just that region's version of the common sentient life form. So, just like we can see a guy and say "he's Chinese, I bet he came from Asia", fantasy people can say "he's a human, bet he came from Humandia (or whatever you want to name the human homeland).

 

My D&D world was sort of different it was a HUGE world

JUPITER= 38,163,834,811.575 MILES SQUARED
PARRIN= 460,800,000,000 MILES SQUARED
OUR SUN= 3,803,328,561,202.577 MILES SQUARED

*Making the map was a nightmare

However due to it's largest moon crashing into the planet it's Axial Tilt was at a roughly 35 degree angle, so summer would come to the southern hemisphere, and the northern hemisphere was stuck in constant night, the equator was in a dark twilight etc.

Near the start of the campaign a vampire gestalt Wizard||Cleric who had gained control of herself and was feeding off of the blood of summoned creatures used an unbelievable amount of magic drawn from a crystal with an Archdemon trapped within, almost all the magic in the world to set the world into a better axial tilt, but the main reason for this was to deprive the Archdemon of power, but the vampire Aecura predated the moon hitting the plantet (Which was known as 'The Sundering')

I'll tell more if you want but it's a very loooooong story.

 

I used to have an instinctual understanding of stereotypes prior to Scalenex directing me to tvtropes.org

Now I know everything.

For the record, I wrote Scots dwarfs before I knew it was a stereotype. Welsh will also do, according to TT.

Bob's theory of stereotypes, also known as the "Hooker with a Heart of Gold" theory. Actual source: Mad Magazine sometime in the 80s.

Fun Fact: Work Colleague of Bob actually looks like Alfred E. Neumann. And a dwarf. At the same time. (It's the Beard)

Anyway, Mad explained that stereotypes are used as characterization shortcuts to save pages of actual character development by delivering "relate-able" characters. Like dumb henchmen, absent minded geniuses, witty sidekicks and, apparently, lizardmen who die partway through the Third Act.

Mad went on to "avert" the stereotype trope by a series of single frame comics which jarred the pop subconscious of the reader (? looker) by depicting, for example, a hooker WITHOUT a heart of gold. (which is the only one I can remember)

Long story short. Scots are grumpy, gruff, tight and stubborn (ish, sometimes). Your dwarf problem is not that they are Scots. It is that they are grumpy, gruff, tight and stubborn. Every genius screen writer (including, ahem, moi) saved the ignorant reader pages of boring exposition by making the bow legged little runt say, "Aye" and "Dinnae ye ken?" a lot.

Sad fact: My personal most hated lazy stereotype is employing a black comedian (Ahmed Best - presumably NOT his slave name) doing his best slave (Yes Massa, No Massa) for Jar Jarr Binks. Why? Because the character was rustic, cheerful, naive and lazy. I don't rely on Mad Magazine for everything. This tripe is from the 19th century (according to Wikipedia).

Sad fact 2: I know someone who hated Chewbacca for much the same reasons. This is not fair. Chewbacca was far cooler (And effective, intelligent, articulate and possibly flammable).

Controversial Opinion: Bob and Wife of Bob worked for 2 years in the Middle East (KSA). A friend (UK expat) said to me early, "This place will teach you racism."

I was taken aback of course. Then over time I inderstood his definition. In that place there were many, many national and ethnic groups who tended to flock together (groups also overlapped in a healthy way, socially, for sport or for business).

What he meant was peoples ARE different. In work ethic (my Filipino friends almost ALL had side businesses, almost all were supporting family through senior schooling and university - they sought opportunity for family). My Indian friends had similar objectives but with much fewer opportunities, and on soul destroying contracts. They didn't work extremely hard, as a rule, because they had to endure long years of long hours and have no access to any kind of health care) As for sense of humour. I'm Australustrian. For the only time in my life I felt close kinship with New Zealustrians. Belgians were a humour mystery. Locals were 14 year old boys (easy to amuse).

If I needed to navigate an interaction with most folk I started with a small advantage in being able to guess who would likely need me to get emotional to get them off their asses and do their job, who I needed ingratiate myself to (eg. if their first name was "Prince" and their last name was Al Saud), who needed constant supervision and direction and who was likely to just do what they said they would.

Summing up section A:

If you have lived long in a diverse community, you have a feel for GENERAL features of your fellow humans.

Is this prejudice? Yes.

Is this discrimination? Only if you deny an opportunity (work, friendship, marriage) to an individual on the basis of this.

Can I interact identically with all people of all nationalities and education levels? Nope. I am awkward with my brother in law (Melanesian). I "Ockerize" my interactions with older and less educated clients. I tiptoe around the many expatriot staff I work with until I know them VERY well.

Except for Kiwis. I am instantly cruel to them because I know they can take it and reciprocate. (Antipodean Kinship Rules)

And the English. We mock them automatically. It's all they deserve. *

And the Irish. There are enough economic refugees here to justify that. I blame the potatoes.

But, I would not even joke about joking with an Australian of Aboriginal descent, even though one of them is among my closest work colleagues and mentors.

Have I failed to learn from decades of life in the world? Nup.

Does that make me racist? You judge.

Controversial Opinion #2: Girls and Boys are different.

Stream of Consciousness continues in part B:

Part B:

How does the author diversify his humans / humanlike peoples?

i) Using conventional stereotypes?

ii) Using the author's own inherent "racism"?

If if you choose i), don't do it because you are lazy. Do it for a reason, even if it is because you are lazy. Just be conscious of it.

Option ii) is fraught with problems, but particularly "universal acceptance", because even a brother knows "Brothers never make it out of situations like this! Not ever!" Just ask Preacher (LL Cool J) in "Deep Blue Sea" (he did, and so did some token white dude).

Part C:

The "Malazan Book of the Fallen" (Stephen Erikson) notes about twice in 10 very large novels that one of the main characters (and they are legion), Quick Ben (Ben Adaephon Delat), was dark. The Empress Laseen was blue (Napan). The characters who interacted most with these two were professional soldiers, and did not give a damn. They had rivalries and unreliabilities based on individual traits. Race of origin was irrelevant in the Malazan Empire. There were about 4 other major species, some living some dead, many other races of men, and too many gods to keep track of. The fact you were blue, or half Tarthenal (like Ublala Pung - who had very impressive, erm, equipment) mattered far less than the size of your, erm, equipment.

Transpose to Tolkien.

So the movie with extras cast from New Zealand had white Anglo-Saxon dudes cast as goodies and the Maori All Black Rugby Union Team cast as the Uruk Hai? Ridiculous!

Just like casting a Maori as the Archetypal Bounty Hunter, Jango Fett, in Episode II just because he sounded "exotic". Not round here that isn't exotic, Bro! (which was written by an Australian, but is 100% accurate (for Auckland))

Back to the books. Gondorians / Numenoreans were racially distinct from Rohan. The Baddies had Wain-riders (??), Wild Men, (Black) Haradrim, (Arabic) Men of Rhun. Equipment (even in the movies) matched the fluff geograpphy (bamboo and light clothing, Oliphaunts vs full face covering, olive skin)



Back to WHFB.

Empire = Germanic / Dutch, Bretonnian = Norman (AKA 2 generations post Viking colonization = Germanic anyway).

"I"Tileans and Estaleans / Hispanians explain themselves. Araby... let me think. Grand Cathay, Nippon, Hmm. The Ungol=Kazakh/Mongols and the Kislevite Gospodins = Slavs are all stereotypes too. The cool part is that they have been all portrayed at their historical height more or less simultaneously.

On the Chaos side, we have the Norscans (Umm....), Kurgans (probably Vandals or Huns) and the Hung (? Mongols - although I haven't read anything about them) plus minor tribes of Fluff convenience)

Fun Fact: The Mongols were still raiding Western Europe when Captain Cook was mapping the best bits of Australia prior to European "Settlement" (If dumping unwanted prisoners followed by near starvation can be considered settlement).



Back to YOU (whoever raised the topic. Probably starts with an "S")

Part D and probable conclusion:

If you aren't planning to draw criticism, or even silent distaste.....

Make everyone of the same race of as many colours / morphologies as you like for historical / geographical reasons, but if they are opposed / have different values, do it because they follow different (made up) gods.

If you don't, and then you become famous, PhD students will do their theses about what a bastard you are, despite never having met you.

I know that's how I feel.




Meanwhile... you forumnites have put me at least a full day behind posting a low-brow comic based on sexual innuendo because you have come up with another thought provoking topic.

You are so insensitive.






* Warm Beer **






** Bastards

 

All that without applying any of the normal conventions of English spelling and pronunciation?

I'll pass.....

 

Not yet, but you are a single work of genius away from making it so.

eg. Thanks to The Princess Bride, I can cough out a vengeful Estalian Swordmaster or a Yiddish Wizard who will garner instant recognition. Even R.O.U.S.s are to be found here and now they are popping up everywhere!

Which was recycling Shakespearian-age pop-prejudice. Darn J.R.R. - never an original thought!

I'm not a PhD student and I haven't met you, but if you want me to tell everyone, but if you want me to tell everyone what a bastard you are, I'm happy to oblige!

"He killed K'enny! And Kaitar, and Zat-kai and What'shisname*! You Bastard!"

In the meantime, I know you pump a lot of depth into your worlds and we only get to scratch the surface. I know that if there are racial / ethnic differences apparent, they are in your stuff for thoughtful reasons.

Also..."racism" is a powerful motivator for characters - you would be a nut (more of a nut) not to employ it to drive a plot for correctness reasons. You can still end up smelling like roses if the racist character has a plot arc which sees him / her / it renounce their view, or if you heroically kill the discriminated-against sometime in the third act.

See which one of those options you prefer.




* "What'shisname" - is this appropriate use of an apostrophe in a fantasy name?