Dwarves aren't cool anymore

[Cygnia]

Someone did a 3.5 all dwarf game on another PBP forum elsewhere. I made a Badlands (from the Sandstorm supplement) Dwarf Dragonfire Adept. Sadly, that game died on the vine.

[LibraryOgre]

Someone did a 3.5 all dwarf game on another PBP forum elsewhere. I made a Badlands (from the Sandstorm supplement) Dwarf Dragonfire Adept. Sadly, that game died on the vine.

Of "intentionally single race games" (as opposed to "Oops, all tieflings!"), I hear all-dwarf most often.

[Prime32]

I quite prefer early D&D edition tieflings what with them being "vaguely human, but weird in some nasty way". Extra phalanges or fingers, sharp nails and inhuman teeth, constant weak-but-detectable smell of sulfur (yuck, rotten eggs!), eyes and noses that aren't quite right etc. I have played several tieflings over the years, and only one was anywhere similar to what D&D 5e stereotypes them as. An outside observer would've been hard pressed to put any two of those characters into the same "race", much less all of them taken together.

It's kind of weird how tieflings got cut down to a single prolific stereotype and apparently stayed popular, when doing so is usually enough to reduce a race's popularity among the players, case in point being...dwarves.

That they went from having a Charisma penalty to a Charisma bonus may have had something to do with it.

Tieflings (and aasimar) were popular in PF partly for all the alternate abilities they could have. And it definitely plays into the "outsider" thing if you can never find someone who looks just like you, if even you have trouble telling other tieflings apart from actual fiends.

[Telok]

Oh, yeah. We tried to do an urban dwarven biker gang game. But chariots & horses aren't quite the same and D&D vehicle rules are pretty much crap as soon as you're past "moveable background scenery with hp". Gave up because the game couldn't hack it.

Related, last week we almost lost the dwarf & gnome. They intentionally triggered warpy crap (dangerous wild magic) while fighting an invisible elephant in a dungeon, popped a major daemon, and ended up flying around on jet packs to flee. Worked well as long as they stuck to the larger passages and lower speeds. They even made it through a 2 meter wide archway to a side tunnel at 60 kph, but couldn't quite make the extremely short stop to avoid the next wall 7 meters away. They got close. They were only doing about 25 kph (16 mph) when they hit the solid bronze door. Pancaked the dwarf's head totally gone.

That's OK. He's a robot. He'll get over it.

[Leon]

Not sure they have ever been "cool" broadly but that's not important really, that they are there for the people who want to play them is what is the key thing.

I like Dwarves a lot but I also like Orcs but only when they are not Violent Tribals so I get to play Dwarves a heck of a lot more often (the two times I have gotten to play an Orc they have been that worlds technological leaders)

Dwarves are heavily bearded, traditionalist, really into their heritage, and very blue-collar.
None of which are are traits considered cool (let alone sexy) by a majority of the current player base.

In a "Traditional" limited view of them, then again much fuss tends to get made whenever there is a Dwarf without copious face hair (or any hair)

[Psyren]

In a "Traditional" limited view of them, then again much fuss tends to get made whenever there is a Dwarf without copious face hair (or any hair)

There are some popular beardless/hairless dwarves. Varric Tethras has a huge fan following, and Grimgnaw managed to be a decently favored pick despite being a (gasp) 3.0 monk.

[Mechalich]

In a "Traditional" limited view of them, then again much fuss tends to get made whenever there is a Dwarf without copious face hair (or any hair)

The traditional limited view has a lot of weight behind it. 'Dwarves' calls to mind a very specific thing, traceable to mythology, Tolkien, and any number of video games, with a very strong hold on the cultural consciousness, to the point that the traditional view gets play in media as far removed from its origins as Chinese Manhua. This view is strong enough that it is significantly easier to create something else, with a new name, to fit a variation on the concept, rather than to try and broaden the role of dwarves in most fantasy scenarios.

This isn't only true of Dwarves, it applies to Elves and Halflings as well, the difference being that the traditional view of elves is, if not cool, at least appealing (it never hurts for a playable option to be 'hot' as a default). Halflings were never cool, which perhaps ironically opened up space for variants to develop because very few people were invested in defending the traditional view and experimentation started on them quite early.

And several of the traits of the dwarven niche have grown less relevant to modern culture over time. Dwarves are very blue-collar coded, but the proportion of the population that works blue-collar jobs continues to fall compared to white collar jobs (the most dwarf-specific category, mining, has seen especially large workforce reductions).

[Zevox]

I'm definitely one of those who would probably never play a Dwarf. Even in video games that offer the option I don't believe I ever have, or that that'll likely change.

There's just nothing about the race that would make me want to play them. They're stereotypically gruff and stubborn, not traits that I'm typically eager to RP. I've never much liked the look (or feel for that matter) of facial hair. I'm a non-drinker who finds it difficult to RP even mild drinker characters. I'm not likely to play a character who's into smithing or stonework. Thematically they're generally associated with the Fighter class, one of the lowest on my personal preferences list, and many of my preferred classes, such as Wizard, are stereotypically classes they'd be unlikely to take. Mechanically they tend to have a speed downside, and their main upside is usually being more durable, which is kind of boring.

My favorite Dwarf character by a long shot is Varric from Dragon Age 2, who is basically designed to go against most of the race's steretypes, being a witty, charming rogue with more chest hair than facial hair who would prefer never to see the inside of a cave again if he could manage it. There's some chance I might play a Dwarf if I got an idea for someone like him, who was specifically playing against the stereotype in an entertaining way, but it'd have to be something more unique than just trying to copy Varric.

My own group has included a few dwarves over the years though, including one now. Our regular DM likes them, so it's somewhat common to see them as NPCs as well. Of the current group he's the only one I know specifically likes them though.

[Bookwyrm13]

I love dwarves deeply, whether playing into the archetypes or against it, but I admit I seem to be in the minority.

I have a bunch of possible theories why (and multiple could be true) but I think the simplest reason is that people are sick of the so-called "Standard Fantasy Races"--whether or not they've actually tried it.

Elves can get away with it because there are eighty million different kinds of them, for every possible setting (plus being more traditionally attractive probably doesn't hurt). Orcs can get away with it because everyone likes playing the "stereotypically evil" races--either to prove that they're not all that bad, or to play into the idea of being a villain.

Beyond that, I also just think it has to do with the image people have of them. They're not sexy (unless you have very specific tastes, I suppose) and they're stereotypically very rigid, gruff, and unfriendly, and I think that's gradually become less popular in TTRPGs, at least in the mainstream.

Part of me is also tempted to try and speculate on the idea that there may be some correlation between a larger disinterest in a typically Lawful-aligned, traditionalist society, and the rise in popularity of post-modern philosophy and less trust in the status quo of real-world society. But I am far from a sociologist, I've done no research in it, and this may be just observation on the part of my own limited scope with the circles I tend to play in.

[Kane0]

There are some popular beardless/hairless dwarves. Varric Tethras has a huge fan following and Grimgnaw managed to be a decently favored pick despite being a (gasp) 3.0 monk.

And let's not forget Khelgar Ironfist, the dwarven 3.5 unarmed fighter.

[Arkhios]

Might have something to do with how the dwarves are designed lately, in several games/editions.

I'm a longtime dwarf fan myself, and I've noticed that for example in 5th edition, the dwarves aren't very appealing for some reason. The previous editions were much more appealing.

The only cool bits about dwarves in 5th edition are that the 2014 mountain dwarf is strong AF, and gets armor proficiency up to medium, or the 2014 hill dwarf getting bonus hit points on top of the consitution modifier, but that's about it.
I've fallen off the loop regarding Pathfinder since the release of 2nd edition, so can't say much about that. 1st edition is more or less the same as 3.5 D&D and understandably more appealing as a result.
4th edition D&D dwarf was great because of their innate ability to regain hit points very much like a 5th edition fighter does with Second Wind.

[Amnestic]

With Dungeon Meshi's anime adaptation now starting up proper, I'd expect dwarves to see a slight resurgence. The party is almost as traditional as can be to start with (human/(half-)elf/halfling/dwarf) and Senshi the Dwarf is core to the entire story and comedy of the series. If you start seeing dwarven chefs crop up as character ideas...well, just don't be too surprised.

He's also a hottie, which helps.

[ti'esar]

I have a bunch of possible theories why (and multiple could be true) but I think the simplest reason is that people are sick of the so-called "Standard Fantasy Races"--whether or not they've actually tried it.

Elves can get away with it because there are eighty million different kinds of them, for every possible setting (plus being more traditionally attractive probably doesn't hurt). Orcs can get away with it because everyone likes playing the "stereotypically evil" races--either to prove that they're not all that bad, or to play into the idea of being a villain.

Yeah, this. The "traditional" dwarf is not only saddled with the baggage of being a Traditional Fantasy Race, which some people regard as limiting, but also with the extra baggage that the "traditional dwarf" is already more limiting as a character concept than, say, the "traditional elf". I don't like linking to TV Tropes anymore, but that Our Dwarves Are All The Same page - a name that's been kept, incidentally, when a lot of similarly-named tropes were renamed - really does sum it up pretty well.

I personally don't think dwarves are uncool - and I certainly don't have any sort of personal quantifiable data regarding their popularity, so I actually don't know if this is a new thing - but I think they do inherently have more of an uphill battle than many other races.

(I actually think the observation a couple people made about liking all-dwarf games plays into this too: that would by definition offer a lot more room for fleshing out individual characters then just being the Stereotypical Token Dwarf.)

[Beelzebub1111]

In my experience the volume of dwarves depends on the table. In a "beardy" table you might see a dwarf more frequently. In a theater-kid table you might find that dwarves are forgotten about to the point that you're lucky to see one as a background character.

That is a stereotype, of course. Sort of like how, back in the day, a stereotype in LotR fanfiction was that Gimli didn't exist. The people you play with may color your perception of the game.

[Kurald Galain]

Yeah, this. The "traditional" dwarf is not only saddled with the baggage of being a Traditional Fantasy Race, which some people regard as limiting, but also with the extra baggage that the "traditional dwarf" is already more limiting as a character concept than, say, the "traditional elf"

I don't agree with that. Precisely because they have so much more culture and tradition, makes it more interesting to play a dwarf than to play Generic Humanlike With Some Animal Features #17.

Seriously now, we have birdman, bearman, horseman, rabbitman, another birdman (both distinct from angelman), lizardman (distinct from dragonborn, somehow), bullman, goatman, catman, turtleman, and snakeman. Other settings add hippoman, insectman, yet another birdman, lionman (distinct from catman for some reason), elephantman, generic animalman, fishman, and frogman.

And then we get the feylike changeling and feylike eladrin and feylike fairy and feylike shadarkai and feylike shifter; and also there's the tough brutish half-orc and tough brutish firbolg and tough goliath and brutish hobgoblin and full orc.

...yeah, dwarves have way more personality than most of that list. And also, D&D has too many races.

[Eldan]

Dwarves are heavily bearded, traditionalist, really into their heritage, and very blue-collar.
None of which are are traits considered cool (let alone sexy) by a majority of the current player base.

Clearly, it's time to go back to Tolkien.

Dwarves are taciturn, secretive, mystical, stealthy, heavily into art and music and aesthetics. That's always how I liked to play them.

Heck, Gimli was the romantic among the fellowship. He's the one who has a crush and talks about love (other than Aragorn, who mostly does it off-screen), and not only that, he's courtly and poetic about it, chastly asking the Lady he is stricken by (Galadriel), for a token, and she compliments him for his fair words and manners. And in several scenes later, he waxes on poetic about her.

Spoiler

Show

The world was young, the mountains green
No stain yet on the Moon was seen
No words were laid on stream or stone
When Durin woke and walked alone
He named the nameless hills and dells
He drank from yet untasted wells
He stooped and looked in Mirrormere
And saw a crown of stars appear
As gems upon a silver thread
Above the shadows of his head

The world was fair, the mountains tall
In Elder Days before the fall
Of mighty kings in Nargothrond
And Gondolin, who now beyond
The Western Seas have passed away
The world was fair in Durin′s Day


A king he was on carven throne
In many pillared halls of stone
With golden roof and silver floor
And runes of power upon the door
The light of sun and star and moon
In shining lamps of crystal hewn
Undimmed by cloud or shade of night
There shone for ever fair and bright

There hammer on the anvil smote
There chisel clove, and graver wrote
There forged was blade, and bound was hilt
The delver mined, the mason built
There beryl, pearl, and opal pale
And metal wrought like fishes' mail
Buckler and corslet, axe and sword
And shining spears were laid in hoard

Unwearied then were Durin′s folk
Beneath the mountains music woke
The harpers harped, the minstrels sang
And at the gates the trumpets rang

[KorvinStarmast]

I quite prefer early D&D edition tieflings what with them being "vaguely human, but weird in some nasty way".

Yes. The 'taint of infernal blood' theme has fine RP openings as well. The aesthetic in 5e is {censored} and I guess we have 4e's artists to blame for that? (Not sure).

It's kind of weird how tieflings got cut down to a single prolific stereotype

Weird is a very kind assessment.

5e? Nobody need Gnomes, except as food items!

I can get on board that band wagon.

I have a bunch of possible theories why (and multiple could be true) but I think the simplest reason is that people are sick of the so-called "Standard Fantasy Races"--whether or not they've actually tried it.

Indeed. My dwarf celestial warlock is a bit rough around the edges. It's fun to play a high charisma character as something other than a nice fella/face.

Elves can get away with it because there are eighty million different kinds of them

Yes, that's been overdone. I have generally avoided elves this edition, other than a short stint as a wood elf monk/outlander, a high elf thief/rogue, and a drow genie warlock. None of those games lasted very long for any number of reasons.

and they're stereotypically very rigid, gruff, and unfriendly

Unfriendly? No.

... a larger disinterest in a typically Lawful-aligned, traditionalist society, and the rise in popularity of post-modern philosophy and less trust in the status quo of real-world society.

Interesting line of thought, but there can always be the rebel dwarf (see the Hobbit movie with the elf/dwarf romance ...) sort of a short, stocky Drzzt thing ...

I'm a longtime dwarf fan myself, and I've noticed that for example in 5th edition, the dwarves aren't very appealing for some reason.

The medium armor prof makes for interesting choices if you are a spell caster.

The only cool bits about dwarves in 5th edition are that the 2014 mountain dwarf is strong AF, and gets armor proficiency up to medium, or the 2014 hill dwarf getting bonus hit points on top of the consitution modifier, but that's about it.

Only cool bits? A hill dwarf life cleric has war hammer or battle axe proficiency. For that matter, with a standard array, you can make a nice, tanky cleric (life, light, what have you) for a beginner player. Also, they both have resistance to poison and adv on poison saves, which in Tier 1 and 2 is very beneficial given how much poison figures into monsters in those tiers. (IME)

Yeah, this. The "traditional" dwarf is not only saddled with the baggage of being a Traditional Fantasy Race, which some people regard as limiting

That speaks to me to a lack of imagination.

In my experience the volume of dwarves depends on the table. In a "beardy" table you might see a dwarf more frequently. In a theater-kid table you might find that dwarves are forgotten about to the point that you're lucky to see one as a background character.

Hmm, I wonder how one could collect data on that, you may be on to something there. I have got a friend who still plays dwarfs, since the 70's, and he's always been clean shaven.

I don't agree with that. Precisely because they have so much more culture and tradition, makes it more interesting to play a dwarf than to play Generic Humanlike With Some Animal Features #17.

Seriously now, we have birdman, bearman, horseman, rabbitman, another birdman (both distinct from angelman), lizardman (distinct from dragonborn, somehow), bullman, goatman, catman, turtleman, and snakeman. Other settings add hippoman, insectman, yet another birdman, lionman (distinct from catman for some reason), elephantman, generic animalman, fishman, and frogman.

Amen.

And then we get the feylike changeling and feylike eladrin and feylike fairy and feylike shadarkai and feylike shifter; and also there's the tough brutish half-orc and tough brutish firbolg and tough goliath and brutish hobgoblin and full orc.

Yes, the elf thing is way overdone. "Oh, you're going to play an elf game?" question sort of deserves the sneering tone that often accompanies it.

And also, D&D has too many races.

+100 (But I still think that genasi ought to be core ...)

[Unoriginal]

Clearly, it's time to go back to Tolkien.

Dwarves are taciturn, secretive, mystical, stealthy, heavily into art and music and aesthetics. That's always how I liked to play them.

Heck, Gimli was the romantic among the fellowship. He's the one who has a crush and talks about love (other than Aragorn, who mostly does it off-screen), and not only that, he's courtly and poetic about it, chastly asking the Lady he is stricken by (Galadriel), for a token, and she compliments him for his fair words and manners. And in several scenes later, he waxes on poetic about her.

Not only about Galadriel. Gimli was able to leave Legolas stunned with how poetically he describes the glittering caves at Helm's Deep, and when he sings the song you posted under spoiler, Sam's immediate reaction is stating he'd like to learn it too.

Furthermore, as you mention "stealthy", people tend to forget that Gimli was so stealthy not even Aragorn noticed him when the Dwarf sneak-attacked orcs during the siege of Hornburg.

I wouldn't call Tolkien's Dwarves taciturns, though, they generally love to talk as much as anyone else in Tolkien's work, although making them talk when they didn't want to was a difficult endeavor.

Also a point of note: Tolkien didn't think Dwarves were brave or courageous. It is directly stated in The Hobbit, and in LotR Gimli distinctly states he wouldn't pick a fight with human enemies he'd consider too big for him, and out of the group that takes the Path of the Dead, Gimli is the only one who panics.

[Eldan]

Yeah. Pop culture was really selective about which traits they took from Gimli when they made the cliché fantasy dwarf. Small, stout, bearded, axe -> yes. Stealthy, magical, poetic, well-mannered -> no.

Just like almost everyone else in the fellowship, Gimli comes from nobility. He's clearly well-educated, well-mannered and well-spoken. Not some grumpy, quaffing, unkempt barbarian.

[Kurald Galain]

Yeah. Pop culture was really selective about which traits they took from Gimli when they made the cliché fantasy dwarf.

Perhaps the cliche fantasy dwarf is based less on Gimli, and more on the band of dwarves from The Hobbit. They are not at all stealthy and magical, and except for their leader Thorin, they're not poetic or well-mannered either. But sSmall, stout, bearded, axe: yes, that's them to a T.

[Blue Dragon]

CBoE is merely the most notorious example.

What does "CBoE" stands for?

[Satinavian]

What does "CBoE" stands for?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co..._Book_of_Elves

[Unoriginal]

Perhaps the cliche fantasy dwarf is based less on Gimli, and more on the band of dwarves from The Hobbit. They are not at all stealthy and magical, and except for their leader Thorin, they're not poetic or well-mannered either. But sSmall, stout, bearded, axe: yes, that's them to a T.

On the contrary, all the Dwarves in the Hobbit are quite polite (except in moments of frustration or anger) and most are well-spoken.

All of them are quite artistic, as well, being decent musicians and singers.

While their introduction does portray them as boundary-pushing (and in general are portrayed as pretty pushy) and not above making fun of their host through song, they're also under the impression Bilbo was on board for hosting them and was trying to get hired as a burglar.

As for being magical, the narrator mentions they put spells on the Trolls' treasure, and they also sing about "mighty spells" among the accomplishments of Dwarf smiths.

[Kurald Galain]

On the contrary, all the Dwarves in the Hobbit are quite polite (except in moments of frustration or anger) and most are well-spoken.

Interesting. Well it's at least ten years since I last read the Hobbit so I'm clearly not remembering all of it. But then, where does the stereotypical dwarf come from? I think it's described as such in the D&D PHB (2nd and 3rd edition at least) but that's unlikely to be the source...

[Eldan]

Perhaps the cliche fantasy dwarf is based less on Gimli, and more on the band of dwarves from The Hobbit. They are not at all stealthy and magical, and except for their leader Thorin, they're not poetic or well-mannered either. But sSmall, stout, bearded, axe: yes, that's them to a T.

They are definitely not very well-mannered, yes. At least not early on. They barge into Bilbo's house, refuse to explain anything, eat all his food. Thorin is especially rude to him and complains that Bilbo doesn't already know where Erebor is or what his mission is going to be. And they don't even say thank you or goodbye, they just tell Bilbo what they want for breakfast. Without, Bilbo notes, even saying please.

They are definitely poetic, though. Note that they didn't bring weapons on their quest to slay Smaug, but they each brought a musical instrument.

[Eldan]

For the source, we can look at Appendix N? It's the list of fiction that Gygax considered essential for the D&D feeling.
https://dungeonsdragons.fandom.com/wiki/Appendix_N

There's a lot of books on there, and many which I haven't read. THose I have read don't tend to feature dwarves, other than Tolkien.

Fairy tales may be one source? In all the Germanic fairy tales I know, dwarves are solitary and enormously grumpy. But they are also stealthy and magical, casting a lot of curses and illusions.

[GloatingSwine]

Interesting. Well it's at least ten years since I last read the Hobbit so I'm clearly not remembering all of it. But then, where does the stereotypical dwarf come from? I think it's described as such in the D&D PHB (2nd and 3rd edition at least) but that's unlikely to be the source...

TBH They do all come from Tolkien, but they're Tolkien's versions with the subtlety stripped out.

The modern stereotypical Dwarf is probably a combination of D&D and Warhammer though. They followed the same path of making the Dwarfs even less like Elves in any way it was possible to be. So they got earthier, less refined, less magical, more attuned to smithing and metalwork and sometimes technology and less to nature.

[Unoriginal]

They are definitely not very well-mannered, yes. At least not early on. They barge into Bilbo's house, refuse to explain anything, eat all his food. Thorin is especially rude to him and complains that Bilbo doesn't already know where Erebor is or what his mission is going to be. And they don't even say thank you or goodbye, they just tell Bilbo what they want for breakfast. Without, Bilbo notes, even saying please.

I mean, they don't refuse to explain, they just think Bilbo already knows, and Bilbo is too overwhelmed by the successive arrivals to even ask. They all are very polite when introducing themselves, at least, which is likely why Bilbo invites them in in the first place.

Thorin does stand out, true, and Gandalf notes in one of the LotR appendices that he had nothing but haughty disdain for Hobbits in general at this point.

The traditional limited view has a lot of weight behind it. 'Dwarves' calls to mind a very specific thing, traceable to mythology, Tolkien, and any number of video games, with a very strong hold on the cultural consciousness, to the point that the traditional view gets play in media as far removed from its origins as Chinese Manhua.

I want to point out that Chinese Manhua aren't that removed from the starting point, because Dwarfs in Chinese Manhua come from Japanese fantasy, which comes from Dungeons & Dragons.

Record of Lodoss War even had a Dwarf in the party.

[Mordar]

I want to point out that Chinese Manhua aren't that removed from the starting point, because Dwarfs in Chinese Manhua come from Japanese fantasy, which comes from Dungeons & Dragons.

Record of Lodoss War even had a Dwarf in the party.

But Lodoss was supposed to be the massively stereotyped D&D party...much like the covers of the D&D boxed sets, or Dragonlance...

- M

[GloatingSwine]

But Lodoss was supposed to be the massively stereotyped D&D party...much like the covers of the D&D boxed sets, or Dragonlance...

- M

IIRC Lodoss literally was based on one of the author's D&D games.