According to dragon age, no. According to DnD, yes. According to Tolkien, well that's just bizarre (I think wizards were actually a different race?). What's the answer in your world?
I feel depressed seeing how clear and easy this question is, where the exactly parallel query about gender got immediately bogged down. I'd far rather they were more the same. So ....
"I suppose it depends what you mean. You can clearly have a Mage with achondroplasia, which would result in dwarfism. So it's really not clear what you're trying to say. I don't know whether elves and gnomekin have similar conditions. One could even argue that gnomekin are all dwarves. But you could clearly have a human dwarf. Would that count?"
I remember one of the biggest complaints when 3.0 D&D first came out was the fact that Dwarves could be Wizards.
There were pages and pages of arguments against it with a few people standing up for it. All about a fantasy race and what fantasy thing they can do. It was nuts then and it's kind of nuts now.
If I was designing a setting each race would do magic different. Dwarven magic would be a mix of technology and runes.
I honestly don't know, and damn I don't know if you mean it to but that answer sounded smug....
You seem to be paralleling this with your one about gender, but then you would be comparing a gender identity to a fantasy species (and I say species because race is really a misnomer when it comes to this)
And I don't like not letting Dwarves be mages any more than restricting it by gender.
If presented with only that statement and forced to say yes/no I'd probably say no, they can't be mages, but I would wonder if dwarves fall into gnomekin since I don't have any idea what your race structure of your world is like.
Dwarves aren't real in the sense that sentient beings are real; they are manifestations of the power of primordial creation. They create and shape, particularly shaping the will of the great hero and sorcerer, which is why they are always making magic weapons. That's one take on svartálfar anyway.
Jason Morningstar As unpersons, do we owe them moral treatment? Or, as they have the shape and mind of persons, but not the spirit, should we treat them with contempt?
[ Feel free to x-card if this goes too far. Everyone is more important than the game. ]
There is a reason not to parallel race and gender in fantasy. The reason is that the word "race" is specialist jargon meaning something //very// different from the normal English meaning.
That said, unless a choice has clear mechanical effects, I would always allow players to insert their own choices. And even if it does, I'd likely allow it even if, once we worked out suitable mechanics. (assuming group consent, of course).
I think it would be determined by world creation or players making choices on the world. It could be cool if part of world building players determine who is excluded from each class. Maybe a group decides druids can't have red hair because of their demon blood. Men can't be rogues because of chauvinistic honor codes. Elves can't be bards because they go insane from becoming obsessed with music. It could help players to set the level of classism, racism, and sexism.
According to dragon age, no. According to DnD, yes. According to Tolkien, well that's just bizarre (I think wizards were actually a different race?). What's the answer in your world?
ReplyDeleteDwarf Wizards are teh best.
ReplyDeletesquints It feels like you have an agenda here. :P
ReplyDeleteI feel depressed seeing how clear and easy this question is, where the exactly parallel query about gender got immediately bogged down. I'd far rather they were more the same. So ....
ReplyDelete"I suppose it depends what you mean. You can clearly have a Mage with achondroplasia, which would result in dwarfism. So it's really not clear what you're trying to say. I don't know whether elves and gnomekin have similar conditions. One could even argue that gnomekin are all dwarves. But you could clearly have a human dwarf. Would that count?"
But really, no, you're clear in both places.
Matt Johnson Whatever could be that agenda?
ReplyDeleteT. Franzke I wholeheartedly agree with you. But, does that help us resolve the question within this game?
David Rothfeder You have all the information in front of you the players would. What's your answer?
Tony Lower-Basch Ah shucks, was I too obvious? I thought keeping the typo might be a bit far.
I remember one of the biggest complaints when 3.0 D&D first came out was the fact that Dwarves could be Wizards.
ReplyDeleteThere were pages and pages of arguments against it with a few people standing up for it. All about a fantasy race and what fantasy thing they can do. It was nuts then and it's kind of nuts now.
If I was designing a setting each race would do magic different. Dwarven magic would be a mix of technology and runes.
I honestly don't know, and damn I don't know if you mean it to but that answer sounded smug....
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be paralleling this with your one about gender, but then you would be comparing a gender identity to a fantasy species (and I say species because race is really a misnomer when it comes to this)
And I don't like not letting Dwarves be mages any more than restricting it by gender.
If presented with only that statement and forced to say yes/no I'd probably say no, they can't be mages, but I would wonder if dwarves fall into gnomekin since I don't have any idea what your race structure of your world is like.
Dwarves aren't real in the sense that sentient beings are real; they are manifestations of the power of primordial creation. They create and shape, particularly shaping the will of the great hero and sorcerer, which is why they are always making magic weapons. That's one take on svartálfar anyway.
ReplyDeleteMatt Johnson Is there a reason not to parallel race and gender?
ReplyDeleteJason Morningstar That is delightfully out of left field. Under this view, are dwarves people?
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols No, of course not.
ReplyDeleteJason Morningstar As unpersons, do we owe them moral treatment? Or, as they have the shape and mind of persons, but not the spirit, should we treat them with contempt?
ReplyDelete[ Feel free to x-card if this goes too far. Everyone is more important than the game. ]
Of course, all they have to do is learn the Polymorph spell.
ReplyDeleteI have one question, which will determine my answer -- are dwarves magic-resistant?
ReplyDeleteBecause a magic resistant Mage isn't really likely to be a thing.
What happens if, when presented with the above information, i decide to write at the top of my sheet: Mage. Dwarf.
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols Jason Morningstar
ReplyDeleteSpirits and gods are not people either, nor is the storm, the sea, or desert.
It would be foolish not to respect them. Ethics has little to do with it.
There is a reason not to parallel race and gender in fantasy. The reason is that the word "race" is specialist jargon meaning something //very// different from the normal English meaning.
ReplyDeleteThat said, unless a choice has clear mechanical effects, I would always allow players to insert their own choices. And even if it does, I'd likely allow it even if, once we worked out suitable mechanics. (assuming group consent, of course).
William Nichols. Why do you hate us so?
ReplyDeleteThese mages can't be dwarves, but dwarves can be mages. Logical.
I think it would be determined by world creation or players making choices on the world. It could be cool if part of world building players determine who is excluded from each class. Maybe a group decides druids can't have red hair because of their demon blood. Men can't be rogues because of chauvinistic honor codes. Elves can't be bards because they go insane from becoming obsessed with music. It could help players to set the level of classism, racism, and sexism.
ReplyDelete