Blog (A5E) Level Up: Origins List

As we near our final manuscript for the first three chapters of Level Up, here's a quick look at our near-final list of heritages, cultures, backgrounds, and destinies. The first chunk of the book will be going into layout soon, and we thank you for all the vital playtest feedback you’ve given us. Note that the below is not the layout of appearance of the final book!

This list may change slightly, but it is near-final. As you can see, many cultures have become ‘general’ cultures, but also the handful of core legacy 5E cultures have been preserved as unique cultures in their own right (i.e. a wood elf is different to a forest gnome, despite them both living in woods, and they exist alongside the generic wildling culture).

Continue reading...

 

[Horwath]

Settler implies the region was unsettled. That can imply that the organizations that the people who lived here already don't count, because they don't count.

For instance did Europeans "settle" New England, or did Europeans "conquer" New England?

correct would be, 1st they conquered, then they settled.

 

[tetrasodium]

correct would be, 1st they conquered, then they settled.

E eberron has some counter examples with humans in khorvaire being the clearest most concise for my phone
.

Spoiler

Date: -8,000 YK

The daelkyr - a race of immensely powerful beings from Xoriat, the Plane of Madness - invade Eberron. They are eventually defeated by the Gatekeeper druids, who seal the portals to Xoriat and trap the remaining daelkyr below ground, but not before decimating the western reaches of Khorvaire.
Date: -4,000 YK

Weakened by the Daelkyr War, the Dhakaani government collapses to internal power-struggles and civil strife. Goblinoid city-states and smaller nations endure, but lack the political and military cohesion of the earlier empire.


Date: -2,000 YK

Lhazaar leads humans from the continent of Sarlona to the eastern shores of Khorvaire. The humans land in the pre-Galifar Lhazaar Principalities, and have little or no contact with the fractious goblin states.

the dar/goblin eusocial bond was somehow destroyed broken or corrupted by the four thousand year long daelkyr invasion so the goblins had pretty much been living in the bones of a long collapsed civilization that they couldnt recover. Humans came along to settle and build cities where the goblins just integrated with the new order. There is a lot of generational poverty for the dar but it wasn't so much conquering as rebuilding and bringing an economy. Still living in khorvaire are a state/nation of dwarves, gnomes, halflings, plus more recent nations built after the last war of monstrous humanoids, and dar. Along with various orc tribes/clans ... a lot of that is too complicated for this post but it's very much not the same as European colonization efforts and our inevitable colonization of Mars too will not be either

 

[Argyle King]

Thank you for the link.

The article seems to discuss the negatives of the concept, but it appears unclear that the word itself has negative connotation. Even so, I can see how it might be perceived that way.

Is there a culturally neutral term for describing people who moved somewhere else and established a settlement?
I suppose "settlement" would be problematic as well. Is there a word which should be used to replace that?
Words such as "village," "town," and "city" tend to imply population and advancement levels.

 

[Horwath]

Thank you for the link.

The article seems to discuss the negatives of the concept, but it appears unclear that the word itself has negative connotation. Even so, I can see how it might be perceived that way.

Is there a culturally neutral term for describing people who moved somewhere else and established a settlement?
I suppose "settlement" would be problematic as well. Is there a word which should be used to replace that?
Words such as "village," "town," and "city" tend to imply population and advancement levels.

only problematic thing that I have about "settlement" is PTSD from Fallout4 minuteman and his spamming of:
Another settlement needs your help!

 

[Waller]

For instance did Europeans "settle" New England, or did Europeans "conquer" New England?

Whether or not we settled or colonized it, we're called Americans now, not Europeans!

 

[Dire Bare]

Whether or not we settled or colonized it, we're called Americans now, not Europeans!

What does that have to do with anything?

Yes, The US is now inhabited by "Americans" . . . but many of us are of European descent, our European ancestors most certainly did settle, colonize, and conquer North America all while committing genocide on its indigenous peoples with the effects still being felt today.

Does our American identity somehow invalidate or erase this?

 

[Dire Bare]

Thank you for the link.

The article seems to discuss the negatives of the concept, but it appears unclear that the word itself has negative connotation. Even so, I can see how it might be perceived that way.

Is there a culturally neutral term for describing people who moved somewhere else and established a settlement?
I suppose "settlement" would be problematic as well. Is there a word which should be used to replace that?
Words such as "village," "town," and "city" tend to imply population and advancement levels.

European colonization and settling of the world was most certainly a very violent and awful time in history. We do have to be careful about how we view it and treat it in our fantasy games. The whole back-and-forth about systemic racist language used in descriptions of fantasy races like orcs and drow is tied to this, as we often use the same kind of language describing, say, orcs that European colonists/settlers used to describe indigenous peoples.

But we also should not go looking for words that have not accrued negative connotations and then assign them. The word settler is one you have to be careful with, but the word itself doesn't have a negative connotation. The act of settling CAN be violent, but isn't inherently so. Settlers CAN (and have) displaced indigenous peoples, but it isn't inherent in the act of settling. The word pioneer is in a similar position as settler. I'm a little more wary of the word colony (colonizer, colonization) and probably wouldn't use that as something to describe a character option. But I'm fine with settler and pioneer.

 

[Waller]

Does our American identity somehow invalidate or erase this?

The exact opposite. It's important to acknowledge that for many of us it's our ancestors and for all of us it's the land we're living on.

 

[Morrus]

Guys, this really isn't the place to discuss the broader topics of colonialism. There's plenty of places on the web more suited to that sort of topic. Let's keep this focused on the topic at hand (discussion of the name of the culture is fine, but let's keep it to that).

 

[Morrus]

Those who listen to this week's podcast might know about a secret change to that list!