Dwarves aren't cool anymore

[Mordar]

I'm not sure... this thread alone suggests people might want to see new variation on old themes.

However I do think you can look at the things that make dwarves classically dwarven and come up with something that isn't bagpipe playing, scottish dwarves in heavy armour that mine for gold, live underground and are defined by their beards.

Quite the contrary; I could absolutely get behind a Dwarven culture that espouses the sky or sea. [SNIP 2 good ideas]

But we are already the established fan, the niche of the niche that is already the established customer. Is there a way to move close-to-traditional dwarves into a more attractive space...without making them radically different? Without totally selling out?

I very much support the idea of moving the needle a little/lot on things like magic - sort of playing up the combination of physical and magical strength. It doesn't have to be earth-based, but more importantly to me, it needs to be not-Arcane Powah! based.

Leaning into the Highlands idea (or the Great White North, for Cygnia's reference...However, people from Minnesota have much less accent than people from an awful lot of other states/regions! it would also be nice to get away from the CHUD (you know - Cantankerous Humanoid Underground Dwellers) perspective without leaving the core element of earthy-miner-smith-craftsdwarf. This opens up more of the naturalistic classes like rangers, druids, etc.

Lastly for me - maybe also leaning into a bit of Norseness but with the Bard angle, not the gruff drinking bearded ravager angle. Though the danger level is high for falling into more of an Elan or that idiot from Vox Machina trope, it would be very cool to re-develop both the race and the class. Someone bada$$ enough to wander the wild lands to actually gather the stories and investigate the myths and legends first hand, rather than sitting in a tavern and living out the other pubescent fantasies too often depicted with high charisma male characters.

Other thoughts?

- M

[catagent101]

I like some of the stuff Pathfinder has been doing with dwarves these days. The Mbe'ke for example are dwarves who worship cloud dragons and practice a form of magical archery based on air magic (okay that's not a good summary but they are pretty cool imo).

[LibraryOgre]

You can't play against type if there isn't a type. You can't subvert or invert a trope that doesn't exist. Nor can you play it straight. Instead, you end up typecasting the entire group. Or, if you fail to be memorable enough, you just create something that's a generic PC-blob in a costume. Not even a human--humans have more tropes than that!

This is the argument I always see aimed at against-type characters... "Playing a human with pointy ears." If your dwarf is a clean-shaven smooth talker, you're not a dwarf, you're just a "short human". Only humans can be fully realized characters with variety.

It's part of why I compared D&D to Westerns... you're supposed to have stock characters. You've got the Swede. The Englishman. The Fella from Back East. The Chinese Guy. The Indian sidekick. The Mexican. The only people who are allowed to be freely characterized are the "regular Americans of the West".

[Psyren]

I'm not sure... this thread alone suggests people might want to see new variation on old themes.

This thread might - but this thread isn't even a representative sample of 5e D&D, much less other editions, other games, or fantasy media more broadly.

Quite the contrary; I could absolutely get behind a Dwarven culture that espouses the sky or sea.=

I'm not saying you or any other individual couldn't do so. I'm saying there's a reason the vast majority of published settings across various commercial media (again, not just D&D) have avoided this kind of thing. Diagnosing and challenging the why is the only way we can get more authors to be comfortable trying this out.

D&D Dwarves draw a lot from Flint Fireforge, Dwarves Deep, Complete Dwarves, and Bruenor Battlehammer, which aren't Gimli or Thorin.

I mean... aren't they? Gruff with strangers, community-minded, martially-inclined, wary of magic at best, diligent and task-oriented...

One thing that I find when playing traditional races (the core races in AD&D) is that they do, generally, have a weight of history, and you can play to type or against type. I can play Brunar Waraxe if I want, the traditional dwarf... or I can play Varric, who exists as a contrast to the more traditional dwarf... he's suave and sexy instead of gruff and greedy, shaved and with a crossbow instead of an axe and a beard. Varric exists as an atypical dwarf among more traditional dwarves. He's Driz'zt, the atypical drow, without the angst.

Even Varric is not that far outside of type; he represents the newer but still prevalent dwarf stereotype of the shrewd trader (In FR he'd be a Gold Dwarf.) They take the dwarven tendencies towards greed and community, but apply it outward in a mercantile, political and treasure-hunting context rather than the more insular concepts of mining and close-knit family. He's also an engineer rather than a smith, but the core drive is the same - dedication to studious industry.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This is the argument I always see aimed at against-type characters... "Playing a human with pointy ears." If your dwarf is a clean-shaven smooth talker, you're not a dwarf, you're just a "short human". Only humans can be fully realized characters with variety.

It's part of why I compared D&D to Westerns... you're supposed to have stock characters. You've got the Swede. The Englishman. The Fella from Back East. The Chinese Guy. The Indian sidekick. The Mexican. The only people who are allowed to be freely characterized are the "regular Americans of the West".

Personally, I dislike the "humans are the only ones allowed to vary" trope as well. Everyone should have tropes and stereotypes and archetypes and cultures (plural!) that can be freely played against, played into, or subverted. The "blank slate" isn't really valid for a TTRPG race/culture unless that's a specific setting choice (I could see a setting where one particular group of people are basically decanted from vats as adults with a pre-programmed set of facts. They'd be blank slates, and that would make sense. But the setting would have to figure out how they react to these blank slates.

[LibraryOgre]

Personally, I dislike the "humans are the only ones allowed to vary" trope as well. Everyone should have tropes and stereotypes and archetypes and cultures (plural!) that can be freely played against, played into, or subverted. The "blank slate" isn't really valid for a TTRPG race/culture unless that's a specific setting choice (I could see a setting where one particular group of people are basically decanted from vats as adults with a pre-programmed set of facts. They'd be blank slates, and that would make sense. But the setting would have to figure out how they react to these blank slates.

Somewhat what happened with Warforged, isn't it? While they have a history with the Cannith, they don't have a deep culture of their own; what culture they have is emergent.

Half-elves also had something of that, in that their space was "in between". While 4e and 5e have made them "The charismatic diplomats", some of their earlier D&D representation was "don't really fit" or "try to fit somewhere"... not blank slates, but ones who were trying to fit themselves in.

[GloatingSwine]

This is the argument I always see aimed at against-type characters... "Playing a human with pointy ears." If your dwarf is a clean-shaven smooth talker, you're not a dwarf, you're just a "short human". Only humans can be fully realized characters with variety.

I think the way to avoid that is to still figure out what the type is for this world and figure out which bits of it someone would discard and which they would hang on to if they're deliberately living outside it.

So figure out what a clean-shaven smooth-talking Dwarf plays like and do that.

(See also: Varric, Cheery Littlebottom)

[PhoenixPhyre]

Somewhat what happened with Warforged, isn't it? While they have a history with the Cannith, they don't have a deep culture of their own; what culture they have is emergent.

Half-elves also had something of that, in that their space was "in between". While 4e and 5e have made them "The charismatic diplomats", some of their earlier D&D representation was "don't really fit" or "try to fit somewhere"... not blank slates, but ones who were trying to fit themselves in.

Emergent culture is still culture. Yeah, they have less of it (and thus more variation), but they (both of the examples) also tend to get swallowed up in other cultures. As a result, you don't get "half-elf" or "warforged" culture, you just get one more person of the surrounding culture.

But all in all, Warforged make a good example of how you can build cultures that allow variation while not fitting into the "basically human" bucket so easily.

[Satinavian]

Personally, I dislike the "humans are the only ones allowed to vary" trope as well. Everyone should have tropes and stereotypes and archetypes and cultures (plural!) that can be freely played against, played into, or subverted. The "blank slate" isn't really valid for a TTRPG race/culture unless that's a specific setting choice (I could see a setting where one particular group of people are basically decanted from vats as adults with a pre-programmed set of facts. They'd be blank slates, and that would make sense. But the setting would have to figure out how they react to these blank slates.

I think, the best way to go against this is dumping the human dominated settings. If you don't have 25 human nations and a dwarf nation but but 13 of each, you are automatically likely to vary the latter far more. And it also naturally brings way more interactions with dwarfs in very different positions or professions in different context.

[Unoriginal]

If a race has less of an established type, there risks the Tasslehoff/Greedo problem... the example we see becomes the entire species. Greedo is a bounty hunter, so all the Rodians have a culture that centers around hunting. Tasslehoff is irrepressible and wears a topknot, so that's common among all of them. You might make a character, and even decide that they are an outlier for their race... but if no one knows what you're an outlier from, then you're the race.

I have to point out that Greedo was not a bounty hunter, he was a bottom-level enforcer for the local crime boss, or more accurately he was "an idiot with a gun" in a place where a lot of people have guns.

That the Rodians have a bounty hunting tradition is one of the reasons why Greedo was so eager to go after Han, but buying his own hype about it didn't do him any favor, due to his incompetency.

So Greedo doesn't fit his planet's hat due to failing at it badly.

If Greedo had been a dwarf, he'd have had one scene bragging about the tunnel he managed to dig by himself before Han gives a light kick on one of the walls and Greedo is burried under the immediately-collapsing tunnel.

[Beelzebub1111]

Quite the contrary; I could absolutely get behind a Dwarven culture that espouses the sky or sea.

Spoiler: Sky

Show

For airborne Dwarves, I'm envisioning an affinity for the sky born of their living atop mountains (in a similar way Cloud Giants are); theirs is the province of weather, air, lightning and the contrast between the purity of the clean air at those altitudes and the chaotic nature of the wind as it blows across mountain peaks. These dwarves would have a special relationship with giant eagles or other flying mega-fauna and be renowned as devastating sky cavalry, utilising their short stature and muscular build to ride the winds atop their flying steeds, raining destruction down upon their foes in the form of gunpowder based grenades and artillery made from the natural resources mined from their mountain homes. Dwarves hailing from these mountaintop homes would be hardy and resilient to cold weather and high altitude, with thick, soft, wispy hair (think husky or hare) and beards that flow in the wind; superstition has it that they can "read" the breeze in their prized beards, the elders claiming to be able to predict the weather or impending doom by the tugging of the wind on their whiskers. Dwarven mages take this a step further and are known to be Astronomers and Astrologers both, with many famous Oracles; wise in their interpretations of the mercurial currents of magic that they read from lofty mountain towers and canny in their reading of the celestial spheres above; Kings and Rulers from across the world travel far and long, or send their most trusted heralds to hear their portents. Harnessing the magic of the ground beneath and the sky above, the long-lived, studious Dwarven Magi are considered some of the most powerful wielders of magical power in the world; some say their proximity to the heavens lends them a fraction of the power of the gods themselves, but that's only superstition and hearsay...right?

Spoiler: Sea

Show

For Dwarves that sail the seas, I envision a mighty navy of warships that pack far more punch than their size and weight would allow for other races fleets. The short stature, resistance to disease and hardy nature of the dwarves speaks well for them as sailors. They last longer on fewer rations than other sailors. They can fit more crew per square foot than longer-limbed ships. Diseases that plague other fleets are weathered as handily as any storm. Yes indeed, the Dwarven Navy is a thing to be feared. Originally hailing from a ring of volcanic islands, they have developed a raiding culture and they utilise small, heavy ships suited for boarding actions and coastal or river assaults, where they can best use their superior numbers. These Dwarves famously don't swim well. Their dense bones has a tendency to make them sink, but in response to this, many dwarven raiders dreadlock their beards, woven with cork, bladders and other buoyant materials, turning their facial hair into a remarkably adequate floatation device. These coastal dwarves have a love of song and the sea beyond the comprehension of humans or forest elves. Their deep, resonant voices carry far and wide underwater and their love of tradition and lasting things has given them a strong bond and relationship with some of the largest, oldest and wisest of creatures to exist; whales, sea turtles and older, deeper things still. Dwarven sea mages speak to these creatures and use them as a source of knowledge, communication and even travel; stories abound of dwarven mystics travelling in the belly of blue whales or requesting the wisdom of ancient turtles. Other dwarven magi speak to the elder things in the deeper, darker places; Warlocks and Sorcerers drawing power from creatures beyond the ken of mortal creatures, or at least the younger, more flighty species, summoning the inky dark and frigid cold of the ocean depths to assail their foes.

Alternatively for both those aspects can appeal to the Mercantile nature of dwarfs. Both of those things are hugely tied with trade and a dwarf with mastery of the air could have an entire Merchant Marine culture going for them. Massive fleets of ships entering contracts and trade deals in seek of profit Mercenaries, free trasders, shipping conglimerates, and pirates with a taste for gold.

[Vyke]

This thread might - but this thread isn't even a representative sample of 5e D&D, much less other editions, other games, or fantasy media more broadly.

Sure. But if you're going to take the position then it's equally fair to say that dwarves can't be boring because the mass market appeal that apparently constrains all creators from attempting variation lest their financial safety be placed in peril says that few people find dwarves boring. So it's really just a few people are bored of them.

Even Varric is not that far outside of type; he represents the newer but still prevalent dwarf stereotype of the shrewd trader (In FR he'd be a Gold Dwarf.) They take the dwarven tendencies towards greed and community, but apply it outward in a mercantile, political and treasure-hunting context rather than the more insular concepts of mining and close-knit family. He's also an engineer rather than a smith, but the core drive is the same - dedication to studious industry.

Yeah. He's a dwarf. If he didn't at least brush against some classically dwarven concept then he wouldn't be interesting for his variation. Then he would just be a short human.

Though I do think if you think changing dress, personality, interactions with others outside his own culture, interaction with own culture and traditional career choice don't make a character different then... yeah, I guess, dwarves are all the same.

I just think operating in with a baseline is more interesting that a hundred variations of cat, cat, rabbit, bird, bird, horse, goat, insect, cow person that all come from no where and have their lore summed up as "whatever you want really". But they're flashier and look like they're more interesting.

It feels like watching 13th Warrior and saying it's really good Antonio Banderas is there because of how boring Vikings defending a Viking settlement are.

And to be clear, if people find it limiting then that's fair enough. I just know I'll be more impressed by a dwarf that feels like it's a real part of the world, linked to the history of it and has reactions and beliefs that are believable and understandable in context but that still provides a unique and individual twist (even if it's just a small tweak)to it than I ever will be with a character who is relying on "I'm the only Firbolg in a 3 nation radius. I don't speak any known language, have a god that only I know and talk to and rainbows shoot out of my eyes at random intervals. Aren't I interesting?". And the fact that the lore of dwarves is so prevalent is why I can respond to those histories, beliefs and contexts. You have a lot of work to make me care about your Firbolg. If it's not interesting once the "Huh, don't think I've seen a Firbolg before" wears off I'll be bored of your character fast because I have nothing to anchor it in my vision of the world. It's just the bag you keep your stats in.

I'm not picking on Firbolgs by the way. They just were the first one I thought of.

[Blue Dragon]

Never liked them, too loud and too limited. Loved when MtG ditched them for goblins. If I was to create a campaign setting (I will never do it) I would simply ditch both goblins and dwarves for gnomes.

[Witty Username]

They're not faring any better in Baldurs Gate 3 either.

Githyanki is 4th least popular? You people are missing out.

Also I must be an outlier on that, I have 2 characters of my own creation, a duergar and a Githyanki. Both because they are ancient enemies of mind flayers so I figured it fitting.

Maybe that is the call, dwarves tend to have the least plot conection and most similar tropes. But when they are allowed to have variety or focus, the appeal goes up.

Or people don't like being short.

[Unoriginal]

Anecdotal evidence, but I have to point out I recall a lot more songs about dwarfs or being dwarfs being created in the last 20 years than songs about/about being elves, orcs, tieflings or the like.

There even are dwarf-themed music groups

Given how those songs tend to be popular, well-received or at least memetic, I think it's a strong indicator of the enduring coolness of dwarfs and dwarves.

[Mordar]

I think, the best way to go against this is dumping the human dominated settings. If you don't have 25 human nations and a dwarf nation but but 13 of each, you are automatically likely to vary the latter far more. And it also naturally brings way more interactions with dwarfs in very different positions or professions in different context.

I *really* liked Earthdawn, for a million reasons. Interestingly, until this thread I hadn't really contemplated the notion that Earthdawn features two organized "nations" - Throal, led by dwarves, and Thera, the BadGuyLand. Scattered groups of other races had holdings throughout Barsaive (the "continent")...and none of the noteworthy ones were human. Scorcher Tribes, Sky Pirates, Riverboat fleets, Blood Wood...each tied to a not-human race. None of these received the attention, focus or lore that Throal received. Even in that setting, though, I'd bet Dwarves were #6, 7 or 8 most frequently chosen race for a PC out of 8.

Makes me wonder where dwarves sit/sat in Shadowrun.

This thread might - but this thread isn't even a representative sample of 5e D&D, much less other editions, other games, or fantasy media more broadly.

Sure. But if you're going to take the position then it's equally fair to say that dwarves can't be boring because the mass market appeal that apparently constrains all creators from attempting variation lest their financial safety be placed in peril says that few people find dwarves boring. So it's really just a few people are bored of them.

I don't think I follow.

Psyren appears to be echoing the same sentiment I had - the sample group here (particularly the posters) is the portion of the GitP Forum community that likely had a positive investment in dwarf characters. We self-selected to read and post here. So, we are the niche of the GitP Forum population, which is a niche of the fantasy RPG-inspired web-comic fan community. Which is a niche of the fantasy RPG fan community. Which is a niche of the fantasy media fan community.

To make us generalizable to the whole, and saying since the posters in this thread are interested in dwarf variation/popularization/resurgence that the population likely feels the same lacks sufficient statistical power.

It seems you are saying that since this thread has far too low of an n to extrapolate dwarven variation advocacy to the whole is analogous to saying that people haven't crafted dwarven variation in their commercial products because they are afraid the backlash against changing dwarves would make people not buy their products. Further, it hinges on the premise that "no popularly selected" = boring.

We don't know why dwarves are not selected as character race more frequently. It may be that people perceive them as boring, true. It could also be because people think them limited to certain roles, and maybe even being the paragon example of those roles - but roles that aren't necessarily people's first choice to play. Or that there are so many newer races that there is a recency bias. Or that the perceived power curve is stilted to primary magic use, so people want to wish fulfill ultimate cosmic power look to pointy eared races. Or that the rebellious youth (of all ages) that play fantasy RPGs want to go against the race thought to be reflective of institutional values...or wanna play edgy demon-looking characters that actually have hearts of gold and get the boy/girl in the end.

Frankly, I think dwarves are looked at like toilet paper. They are almost always included in the rules because they serve a role and have historical importance. They just don't ever get the big promotional slot because, like TP, they will never be the new hotness. There is no perceived need for innovation because the current version is plenty good. It isn't broken (enough) to fix. Development is a sunk cost, so take advantage of it to keep including them. Though not a TP-shared trait, removing them will make the old scratchy bearded people complain so leave them be.

In short, I don't think boring applies. Just...familiarity and pigeon-holing, coupled with not being sexy for bog-standard youth players. And with limited play opportunities for the more experienced players, there just aren't enough opportunities to get to character #6 on the list of "I want to play that next!".

- M

[Errorname]

Dwarves absolutely do still have fans, Deep Rock Galactic is a pretty recent and decently popular game that's built entirely around putting classic Dwarf tropes into a sci-fi setting. I think most people like them overall, unless you're strongly on the other side of the Elf/Dwarf split, but thinking Dwarves are a fun character archetype doesn't necessarily translate to having them be your first choice for "I want to play as one of these guys". There's a difference between liking Gimli and wanting to play as Gimli.

Even Varric is not that far outside of type; he represents the newer but still prevalent dwarf stereotype of the shrewd trader (In FR he'd be a Gold Dwarf.) They take the dwarven tendencies towards greed and community, but apply it outward in a mercantile, political and treasure-hunting context rather than the more insular concepts of mining and close-knit family. He's also an engineer rather than a smith, but the core drive is the same - dedication to studious industry.

Varric is still clearly meant to be playing against the classic Dwarf stereotype. Clean shaven, rogueish, charming. Just because he's not the only character that's been written with that sort of intent doesn't mean he isn't a departure.

[Psyren]

Sure. But if you're going to take the position then it's equally fair to say that dwarves can't be boring because the mass market appeal that apparently constrains all creators from attempting variation lest their financial safety be placed in peril says that few people find dwarves boring. So it's really just a few people are bored of them.

Both things can be true though. Dwarves can be experiencing general decline as people gravitate to more interesting races, while the folks who like Dwarves and settings featuring Dwarves can have a very rigidly defined image in their heads of what Dwarves can and should be, that the makers of those settings are wary about deviating from lest they accelerate the decline further, or worse, turn people off their setting entirely.

In other words, just because I (for example) am not interested in playing a dwarf character in a given setting, that doesn't preclude me from having an opinion on how dwarves should be portrayed in that setting.

Yeah. He's a dwarf. If he didn't at least brush against some classically dwarven concept then he wouldn't be interesting for his variation. Then he would just be a short human.

He does more than "brush," is my point. He's firmly in line with many of the same dwarven tropes all the others are. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but then, I'm not someone who is particularly invested in dwarven adoption rates or variation either.

And to be clear, if people find it limiting then that's fair enough. I just know I'll be more impressed by a dwarf that feels like it's a real part of the world, linked to the history of it and has reactions and beliefs that are believable and understandable in context but that still provides a unique and individual twist (even if it's just a small tweak)to it than I ever will be with a character who is relying on "I'm the only Firbolg in a 3 nation radius. I don't speak any known language, have a god that only I know and talk to and rainbows shoot out of my eyes at random intervals. Aren't I interesting?". And the fact that the lore of dwarves is so prevalent is why I can respond to those histories, beliefs and contexts. You have a lot of work to make me care about your Firbolg. If it's not interesting once the "Huh, don't think I've seen a Firbolg before" wears off I'll be bored of your character fast because I have nothing to anchor it in my vision of the world. It's just the bag you keep your stats in.

I'm not picking on Firbolgs by the way. They just were the first one I thought of.

I know you just used Firbolgs as an example, but I'd find them pretty easy to fit into any setting that contains forests and giants of any kind. I find the same is true of anything in MotM.

Varric is still clearly meant to be playing against the classic Dwarf stereotype. Clean shaven, rogueish, charming. Just because he's not the only character that's been written with that sort of intent doesn't mean he isn't a departure.

I know he's a departure, but I'm saying he's not particularly radical. He's still subject to the overall trope.

[Mordar]

Varric is still clearly meant to be playing against the classic Dwarf stereotype. Clean shaven, rogueish, charming. Just because he's not the only character that's been written with that sort of intent doesn't mean he isn't a departure.

Departure, or something more like a culinary fusion? Swapping a couple spices in the same basic recipe to make Korean tacos as opposed to serving bulgogi with kimchi and seaweed salad at a Mexican restaurant?

- M

[Errorname]

Both things can be true though. Dwarves can be experiencing general decline as people gravitate to more interesting races, while the folks who like Dwarves and settings featuring Dwarves can have a very rigidly defined image in their heads of what Dwarves can and should be, that the makers of those settings are wary about deviating from lest they accelerate the decline further, or worse, turn people off their setting entirely.

In other words, just because I (for example) am not interested in playing a dwarf character in a given setting, that doesn't preclude me from having an opinion on how dwarves should be portrayed in that setting.

Also, most of these settings also have other playable races like Halfings and Gnomes which are pretty similar physically, so they tend to really rely on personality and culture to make them feel distinct. A Half-Orc's unique physical features mean it will still feel like a Half-Orc even if you play them against type, while trying to do something like Varric in a D&D setting might just end up feeling like a halfling.

I know he's a departure, but I'm saying he's not particularly radical. He's still subject to the overall trope.

Yeah, he's still meant to be a Dwarf, but I think Varric is pushing it about as far from the stock aesthetic, personality and vibe as you can while having the character still be recognizable as a Dwarf.

[Xervous]

Makes me wonder where dwarves sit/sat in Shadowrun.

I’ve generally seen dwarves at a high pick rate for mages, followed by deckers and riggers. General pick rate of meta types went something like human > elf > dwarf >= troll >> orc. But most of that is filtered through the pricing, benefits and favored archetypes. Human fits anything; elf has benefits for Face and universal combat applicability; dwarf has durability, infravision, and a universal caster benefit; troll is effectively its own archetype; and orc wishes it was troll 90% of the time. Poor orcs, hardly seen any.

[Trask]

The thing about Varric, and Dragon Age in particular, is that it was deliberately written to subvert tropes. Then it became so popular that the subverted tropes became tropes in and of themselves. I like Varric as a character, and I like trope subversion, but I do think, as others have mentioned upthread, that its best if there is a type which you are playing against. If that pigeonholes fantasy races into tropes, that's because that's what fantasy races are, because that's what fantasy is. I don't have a problem with that, as D&D is fantasy, and fantasy is about archetypes in general.

I do feel like there is space in the noosphere for Dwarves to grow however, particularly in "evil" or at least unsavory directions. The dwarves of norse myth are sneaky, cunning, and often magic using little creatures. In an alternate, less Tolkien dominated fantasy milieu, perhaps Dwarves' favored classes would be rogues, wizards, warlocks and so forth, rather than fighters and clerics.

[Psyren]

Also, most of these settings also have other playable races like Halfings and Gnomes which are pretty similar physically, so they tend to really rely on personality and culture to make them feel distinct. A Half-Orc's unique physical features mean it will still feel like a Half-Orc even if you play them against type, while trying to do something like Varric in a D&D setting might just end up feeling like a halfling.

I'd say Varric in D&D would be a Gold Dwarf; definitely not a halfling or a gnome. He's not parochial enough for the former and not manic/whimsical enough for the latter.

Yeah, he's still meant to be a Dwarf, but I think Varric is pushing it about as far from the stock aesthetic, personality and vibe as you can while having the character still be recognizable as a Dwarf.

Which isn't very far at all. Engineering instead of smithing, distrustful of magic, distrustful of nature, barfly, greedy, family-oriented, mercantile, industrious... he has more in common with the stock dwarf than might first appear.

[Errorname]

I'd say Varric in D&D would be a Gold Dwarf; definitely not a halfling or a gnome. He's not parochial enough for the former and not manic/whimsical enough for the latter.

I think you could play him as any of those three options pretty easily, and that players who wanted to play a character with the same general vibe as Varric would probably lean towards Halfling or Gnome instead of going for a Dwarf.

Which isn't very far at all. Engineering instead of smithing, distrustful of magic, distrustful of nature, barfly, greedy, family-oriented, mercantile, industrious... he has more in common with the stock dwarf than might first appear.

Commonalities do not minimize the things he does extremely differently from the norm, especially considering how samey fictional dwarves tend to be.

[Mordar]

I’ve generally seen dwarves at a high pick rate for mages, followed by deckers and riggers. General pick rate of meta types went something like human > elf > dwarf >= troll >> orc. But most of that is filtered through the pricing, benefits and favored archetypes. Human fits anything; elf has benefits for Face and universal combat applicability; dwarf has durability, infravision, and a universal caster benefit; troll is effectively its own archetype; and orc wishes it was troll 90% of the time. Poor orcs, hardly seen any.

Thinking back on the 10-ish non-convention Shadowrun games I played in (so at least intended as ongoing campaigns) I seem to recall Human - Elf - Troll - // Orc - Dwarf, or maybe swapping Troll and Elf. My favorite character (as in "that I played") was an Orc. Seems virtually every game had a Troll (Samurai or Phys Adept, surprising no one I suspect).

Human, of course, had the benefit of not costing a priority slot, so it was optimal for riggers and deckers.

- M

[Yora]

To provide another data point, I never found dwarves to be interesting.

Of all the classic fantasy peoples, dwarves are the ones in which strict adherence to the archetype feels like an essential trait of the archetype. While there may not strictly be only one dwarf, there is only one dwarf culture. Occasionally people have tried to do something new and different with dwarves, but that always felt like them no longer much resembling a dwarf.

Countless variants of elves, and they still feel like elves. Dark Sun and Eberron really go out of their way to nake something new with halflings, and it's something cool and compelling. Eberron tries to put a completely new spin on everything. Except dwarvs. Eberron dwarves are just default dwarves with a different fashion sense.

And the key trait of the dwarf archetype is being anti-social. They are rude and want to be left alone. The dwarven homeland in generic fantasy worlds are rude and want to be left alone. They don't want anyone to know what's going on in their cities and what they are doing either. Borders closed. Stay away or get an exe to the face. There they will stay and continue their eternal fight to the death with goblins and orcs. Which everyone knows they will finally lose soon.
Archetypical dwarves don't want to talk to anyone or see anyone. They want to stew in their own misery.

The only way to make a dwarf work as a PC is to reject dwarveness. And then why play a dwarf to begin with?

The only situation which I feel would be interesting to play a dwarf, or even have dwarves in a campaign setting, would be a campaign in which everyone plays only dwarves, and which takes place entirely in dwarven lands. That actually sounds quite cool and interesting. It lets the characters flourish in their dwarveness, and the other players, being up for playing archetypical dwarves, will appreciate the grumpy roughness and stubborness.

[Beelzebub1111]

Countless variants of elves, and they still feel like elves. Dark Sun and Eberron really go out of their way to nake something new with halflings, and it's something cool and compelling. Eberron tries to put a completely new spin on everything. Except dwarvs. Eberron dwarves are just default dwarves with a different fashion sense.

It's hard to improve upon what's already perfect.

I wouldn't say dwarves are anti-social. more that they are Esoteric. they have different customs and taboos that make them seem anti-social to outsiders. For example, the stereotype is also that dwarves are rowdy feasters and celebrators. Nobody parties like a dwarf. They enjoy good food, good drink, and good song.

They express their feelings in ways different from the other races that make them really fun to play. A dwarf might not share intimate details of his past, he would surely go on about current events and what everyone is up to currently.

A dwarf never forgets a grudge or greivance, nor an oath. Nor takes them lightly. A dwarf does not forgive and forget. To some this makes dwarfs seem hard minded and literal. To the dwarf, everyone else is flighty, untrustworthy, and irresponsible. I think all of that is VERY interestin to play with and work within.

[LibraryOgre]

The only way to make a dwarf work as a PC is to reject dwarveness. And then why play a dwarf to begin with?

To either reject or embrace dwarfiness.

While dwarves, in the archetypical culture, generally are insular, there's almost always examples of those who are outside the closed society; outcasts are a major example, of course, such as Flint Fireforge. But you also have Gimli, who comes to the Council of Elrond to discuss with other leaders what should be done. Or the "lost homeland" types, such as Bruenor Battlehammer or Thorin. Those are, IMO, four of the major points of reference for D&D-style dwarves.

The other option is to reject that dwarfiness. While Varric has many dwarfy traits, I don't think he expresses them in a way that is immediately recognizable as such. I recall a dwarf woman in a Dragonlance novel who was a travelling trader. Lusty, gregarious, favoring bright clothing. She seemed specifically built to be the anti-dwarf dwarf... extremely feminine, charismatic, and bright, compared to the masculinity and dourness of the standard dwarf. And playing against type is a major theme in D&D, especially post-1e. Driz'zt is a common example, certainly, but Kaz the Minotaur comes to mind, as well. Playing against type often becomes a type in and of itself, as we see with kobolds and goblins morphing through editions, as well as Drow and Minotaurs.

[Psyren]

I think you could play him as any of those three options pretty easily, and that players who wanted to play a character with the same general vibe as Varric would probably lean towards Halfling or Gnome instead of going for a Dwarf.



Commonalities do not minimize the things he does extremely differently from the norm, especially considering how samey fictional dwarves tend to be.

I don't think the things he does differently/the ways he plays against type outweigh the similarities with dwarf nature - but that's fine, we don't have to agree.

[Trask]

The only situation which I feel would be interesting to play a dwarf, or even have dwarves in a campaign setting, would be a campaign in which everyone plays only dwarves, and which takes place entirely in dwarven lands. That actually sounds quite cool and interesting. It lets the characters flourish in their dwarveness, and the other players, being up for playing archetypical dwarves, will appreciate the grumpy roughness and stubborness.

Makes me think that a campaign in which Dwarves (and perhaps Halflings & Gnomes) are the most common races in the land might be interesting. A bit more hobbit inspired, less human farming villages threatened by orcs and more dwarfholds, gnome burrows, and halfling shires threatened by monsters with PCs as humans from faraway lands.

Hobbit inspired and perhaps Mahakam from the Witcher inspired as well. These races have a "salt of the earth" feel that I think would make them good as the most common races in the setting, and as a bonus it would give humans a bit of LotR style mystique as adventuring knights and wizards from Not!Gondor/the Great Kingdom.