as we all have seen in lots of adventures, sometimes there are orcs...and orcs!
my friend asked me about GH orcs and their organization (military).
i know they are chaotic, but i still whant the "orc soldier" "orc bodyguard" "orc king"...and if any, the name of orc groups (Black Hand, Red Fangs, or something like that :P)
the entry for orcs in the 1e monster manual lists the names of some prominent orc tribes (The Broken Bone, Dripping Blade, etc.).
as for personal orc titles ("orc soldier" etc.), mostly that is just flavor text in various modules and such (although there are some specifics dependent on what edition you play-- for example in 1e orcs have 1 "leader" and 3 "assistants" for every 30 orcs encountered... leaders and assistants are like normal orcs but have 8 HP, if 150 or more orcs are encountered there will be a "sub-chief" and 3-18 "bodyguards", all of which will have AC 4, 11 Hp and attack as 2hd monsters, etc.).
Hmm I had to go back to the 1st ed Unearthed Arcana because I remembered something about orcs being in there...
It has a write up of the orc gods and their functions and duties under their chief god Grumash.
Each deity had a tribe or tribes that followed that deities beliefs. Each tribe having its own name
Evil eye. death moon, vile rune, broken bone....
For example orcs that hold the goddess Luthic in reverance call themselves orcs of the vile rune generally dwell underground and raid the surface far less but are fierce when their home is threatened and their homes tend to be well guarded and heavily defended (traps, roving patrols etc). see pg 120 of unearthed arcana...
So each orc diety has a tribe that tries to mimic what that deity portrays as best whether its strength and personal combat or stealth and raiding etc.
I tried to bring all this into my greyhawk campaigns way back when but players just seemed more interested in killing orcs then figuring out what their motivation was.
If you are really interested in orcs I would look at the 1st ed. Unearthed arcana as a good start. You can really flesh out your orcs with it. If nothing else you will see where some of the names come from as the "vile rune", "black hand" and other tribal names started here I think. Those names pop up again and again through various products.
Then there is also the whole orog/ogrillion thing which is a orc/ogre crossbreed but that isn't detailed in unearthed arcana I forget where that came from.
I'll second what Wes is saying. A tribe will have one chief, with one sub-chief per 150 orcs and the rest as he stated. The 1e Monster Manual is a good guide for this type of thing, but those stats for hit points and armor class are 1e stats, so if you use another game edition you may want to adjust things. Even if you do use 1e, you can always add some HD or even class levels to some of the sub-chiefs/chief to make them more unique(and nastier).
There are lots of Orc kings I would think. Is there one uber orc king though? No. About the closest you are going to get to that is Turrosh Mak of the Pomarj, or if you use the orcish empire west of the Baklunish lands, you may have an orc emperor and a lot or lesser orc kings who serve him as well. Imagine a land where the lesser kings are all like Turrosh Mak(or nearly so), with one orc emperor above them all. A scary place that would be.
funny thing, i was reading just now the UA entry about orc gods, and they have a little about it.
but THEN, i went to my 2ed monsters mythology and...its almost the same writing!
i feel so cheated! gary dont seems to have any credit in MMy, but some phrases are exactly the same from UA
The non-human deities appendix of Unearthed Arcana was actually written by Roger Moore (first appearing in DRAGON®). Of course, he wasn't credited in Monster Mythology either....
And I always thought the Monster Manual and Monstrous Manual listed orcs as lawful....
One option is to have the orcs translate into common as they do in Warhammer, with bosses and big bosses and nobs and such. Given their reportedly porcine features, see how your players do with Boss Hogg
And I always thought the Monster Manual and Monstrous Manual listed orcs as lawful....
One option is to have the orcs translate into common as they do in Warhammer, with bosses and big bosses and nobs and such. Given their reportedly porcine features, see how your players do with Boss Hogg
shame on me, just saw they indeed are lawfull
thats the problem with memory : it can trick you! ;)
Turrosh Mak's title is Despot of the Pomarj. He's essentially a king.
You could make the case that all orc kings put "Mak" after their names - that it's the Orcish equivalent of the Latin "Rex." Sam Weiss does this in his Oerth Journal history of the humanoid migrations .
My interpretation has always been that the organization of an orc tribe is more like the rough-and-ready hierarchy of a wolf pack, with the stronger members constantly having to prove their dominance, while a hobgoblin tribe is much more like a strictly regimented military unit.
I would rather believe Mak means (Dominate Male) to maintain the social darwism aspect rather then a social designation like king. King might be how weak humans interpret the term Mak but to an orc it means so much more.
Being lawful would suggest some measure of order; I have always seen orcs as more of an aggressive bunch. As opposed to the Hobgoblin disciplined machine. Of course the more successful tribes would generally have more effective leaders and therefore more discipline. Orcs need victory to maintain morale and can be easily provoked into a premature attack.
Romans (Hobgoblin) vs Celts (Orcs)
Both had social order and effective militaries but the cultures stressed different warrior values and created very different forces, Romans stressed unit discipline above individual prowess; the Celts stressed individual prowess above unit discipline.
Interesting rumour floating around the vapor; Orc stands for the Oxford Rugby Club - Tolkien had an axe to grind
"Known orc tribes include the following: Vile Rune, Bloody Head, Death Moon, Broken Bone, Evil Eye, Leprous Hand, Rotting Eye, Dripping Blade. If orcs from one of these tribes are encountered in an area, it is likely that all other orcs nearby will also be from this tribe."
Notice the similarity between the eight names of these tribes and the six symbols given for the orc deities in 1st Ed UA (by EGG).
Based on this, I have always assumed that orc tribes are factional theocracies, with all members of one tribe worshiping predominantly one god. In the case of a chieftain with great personal power, he would bully the tribe's shamans into supporting him. If there was no secular orc leader with sufficient personal power, then the shamans would be in control, using a figurehead chieftain to enforce their will.
When two orc tribes met, if they had the same patron god they could coexist, but two tribes with different gods would almost always fight. Thus orc territory would be patchwork affairs of loosely cooperating religious factions.
Evil Eye = Gruumsh One Eye
Vile Rune = Luthic (symbol is "Cave entrance rune")
Broken Bone = Bagtru (symbol is "Broken thigh bone")
Death Moon = Shargaas (symbol is "red crescent moon with red skull between the horns")
Dripping Blade = Ilneval (symbol is "bloodied broadsword")
Leprous Hand = Yurtrus (symbol is "white hand on dark background")
It's interesting to consider the intent of the designers of D&D and WoG when it comes to orcs. They were classified in AD&D as lawful evil. In 3e and 4e they're chaotic evil.
I believe that in AD&D, Gygax, given his interest in miniatures gaming, was thinking about orcs' capabilities as troops. Whereas monsters like bugbears or gnolls would be expected to formate in a miniatures game simply as a horde, suitably led orcs could conceivably also operate in line or column formation, form square against cavalry, etc.
On the other hand, regardless of alignment classification, orcs as an individually encountered monster have been depicted as chaotic evil from the very beginning, whether it's their fluff description found in the various version monster manuals, or characterizations of behavior in WoG setting products: savage and rebellious bullies who will fight amongt themselves for sport and position in their hierarchy unless brought under the domination of a leader who can prove the right to rule by force.
So orcs have a sort of split personality, depending on how and where they are encountered.
It's also interesting to note that, within WoG, the major concentration of orcs are dominated by non-orcs.
In the Pomarj, orcs are united by Mak, a half-orc, supported by a largely non-orc cadre made up of former Slavelords and Mak's cult of the Earth Dragon.
In the case of Iuz, orcs are dominated by the human and half fiend Boneheart and of course by Iuz itself. In the North Kingdom by the Oeridian human clergy of the Hextorian church under Grenell.
In the Bone March, orcs originally unleashed by the North Province have been operating more or less independently in the vacuum created by the collapse of the Great Kingdom, although there are indications that control is being reasserted.
Only in the Bone March and North Kingdom do there appear to be any possibility of orcs overthrowing their non-orc rule. Otherwise their lot is a sad and weepy tale of domination by others. It appears that some of these design choices are byproducts of previous version mechanics of rule sets, where things like level limits pigeonholed designers into fleshing out the world as human-ocentric to support higher level challenges for players.
In my campaign, like many WoG fans, I favor a re-casting of the Pomarj as a top to bottom orc society, playing up Orc pantheon and tribal factionalism, de-emphasizing (or eliminating entirely) the cult of the Earth Dragon.
The original problem of the orc being dominated stems from the tolkien mythos. Within the tolkien genre; the orc is the foot soldier of more powerful evil.
D&D for better or worse took much of its original tone from tolkien. Originally every evil priest had his orc troops. As the world was fleshed out; the evil nations were given humanoid hordes to throw at the heroic nations. Originally little thought was given to make a realistic world.
I have heard the reason the Horned Society was given Hobgoblins was not some social reason but to make it easier for the players to remember which evil nation they were fighting. Orc=Iuz or Hobgoblin=Horned Society.
The orc was concieved as mere fodder to be overcome before the real villian. However orcs caught the curiousity of the consumer and had to be developed.
SkR; I believe overthrew the Wild Coast and established the Orcish Pomarj as an area where the orc would stand on its own as a powerful threat. In ItU, he gave the orcs similar attributes and freedom.
Rather then dumb brutes these orcs are cunning and powerful.
My choices in red:
Bloody Head = Iuz (symbol is "grinning human skull")
Rotting Eye = Incabulos (symbol is "eye of possession")
Oh, great idea; those are perfect. Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk even says Iuz's skull symbol is highlighted with red. I suppose the Rotting Eye tribe could also serve Vecna, but I like your choice of Incabulos better.
The non-human deities appendix of Unearthed Arcana was actually written by Roger Moore (first appearing in DRAGON®). Of course, he wasn't credited in Monster Mythology either....
-The Dragon articles on the non-humans (elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, orcs, and humanoids) appeared in Dragon issues in the high 50s- low 60s, IIRC. For some reason, UA didn't include the article on the humanoids (kobolds, goblins/hobgoblins, gnolls).
nematode wrote:
It's interesting to consider the intent of the designers of D&D and WoG when it comes to orcs. They were classified in AD&D as lawful evil. In 3e and 4e they're chaotic evil...
-IIRC, Orcs were usually CE in Original D&D as well.
Grummsh got re-worked as CE in D&D 3.5, I guess the others, to some extent? Although Ilneval strikes me as LE or NE; the same would show up as a tilt toward law for the Dripping Blade tribe as well.
-The Dragon articles on the non-humans (elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, orcs, and humanoids) appeared in Dragon issues in the high 50s- low 60s, IIRC. For some reason, UA didn't include the article on the humanoids (kobolds, goblins/hobgoblins, gnolls).
Those are great articles(with great art too). A few more humanoid encounters snuck into my games after they came out. The humanoid pantheons also show up in the Best of Dragon(copper colored cover with a red dragon on it, if I recall correctly). The humanoid deities didn't show up in UA because they are not representative of Player Character races. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Last edited by Cebrion on Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Given that the 1e MM listed orcs as LE, I've pretty much always envisioned them as being organized. That said, I've also pretty much envisioned them as being rather stupid and thus unable to concoct the machinations of, say, the devils. Thus, they "fight amongst themselves" for dominance, but in a way that is determined by their (admittedly crute and primitive) traditions.
Beyond that, I have orcs as being the descendants of a once-powerful, long-fallen empire that existed long ago west of the Baklunish lands. As such, through their oral traditions they remember a time when they were organized into a powerful, orderly army under a mighty emperor. (IMC, I have it that "mak" is an ancient orcish term that hearkens back to this near-mythical figure.) It is for this reason that orcs in the Flanaess often seek out powerful figures to serve as troops - it's practically an instinct. Sure, they'd prefer to follow an orcish leader, but if one's not available any strong militaristic figure will do.
In terms of culture, I tend to think of orcs in the Flanaess somewhat as Native Americans of the late 18th century, but with an evil and far more militaristic bent. Some of these orcish tribes have a relatively good memory for their ancient origins and thus behave in a somewhat civilized manner and produce relatively more intelligent leaders. Other tribes have slipped completely into barbarism, and still others have sunk to the level of (essentially) cavemen.
I added somewhat to this approach in my last campaign. Drawing on Samwise's article on the Thundering Horde (here: http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=800) and on various sources involving the Pomarj, I had Turrosh Mak send agents into Verbobonc in search of artifacts left behind by the Horde. His ultimate goal was to learn more about and hopefully reestablish the orcish empire in the Flanaess. IMC, Turrosh Mak is quite concerned about the level of barbarism to which his "brethren" have sunk, and works tirelessly to remind them of their heritage. He seeks out those individuals who appear to possess the qualities of the ancient orcish empire, indoctrinates them thoroughly in his beliefs, and places them in high places where they can further the work. He also sends agents throughout the Flanaess in order to gain further knowledge of his people's history. His allegiance to the Earth Dragon is little more than an attempt to use this mysterious figure to further these ends - an attempt that has him snared more deeply than he knows.
Edit: I almost forgot to addres the OP! Yes, Turrosh Mak has instituted what he believes is the original chain of command used by his ancestors. He derived this from fragmentary writings his agents have gathered from numerous sources. Some of his more primitive subjects have difficulty understanding the complexity of his system, but in such cases he relies on the old "might makes right" policy. Thus, any officer he's promoted is virtually guaranteed to be pretty tough. You should've seen my players' eyes the first time they ran into a full captain backed up by two spellcasting first lieutenants! Other than Mak's forces, though, my orcs only remember a little of the ancient hierarchy. The degree to which they institute it depends on how far they've sunk into barbarism.
...For some reason, UA didn't include the article on the humanoids (kobolds, goblins/hobgoblins, gnolls).
...The humanoid deities didn't show up in UA because they are not representative of Player Character races.
-Oh, yeah. The orcs showed up because of half-orcs...
bubbagump wrote:
My take on orcs, for what it's worth:
Given that the 1e MM listed orcs as LE, I've pretty much always envisioned them as being organized...
-Yeah, the changeover from OD&D orcs = CE, to AD&D 1e & 2e orcs = LE, to 3e orcs = back to CE was a hash. Fortunately, I can't think of too many times that their exact alignment would have mattered too much.
The return to CE does have the advantage of explaining why so many of them are busy worshipping Iuz...
Yeah, chaotic evil orcs allied with Iuz and lawful evil hobgoblins allied with the Horned Society makes sense as an opposition. I think the reason that orcs were made lawful was the idea that chaotic creatures were better suited for loose bands of bandits than disciplined armies, and the assumption is that Iuz, for all his chaotic nature, has discipline within his troops.
Orcs were originally listed as Chaotic because that was where all "evil" races were assigned back in OD&D. Elves were considered Lawful then, based on the same reasoning.
Even so, I see orcish order as being of a different sort than hobgoblin order, much more rough-and-ready, based on raw intimidation rather than respect for tradition and honor.
But I don't sweat alignment that much among mortal races. It's always just an estimate, and each individual will have both lawful characteristics and chaotic characteristics.
Kirt, I agree with your tying orc culture and tribal names to their gods.
Bloody head could also be another tribe of Shagraas worshipers and
Rotting eye another of Gruumsh. Perhaps they fight or cooperate depending on how you want them to.
Tribal shaman may(like pholtus's sects) reject revering some aspect of their gods being exalted above others. Evil Eye may focus on Gruumsh's wickedness while Rotting eye exalts his feirceness for keeping his ruined eyeball in its socket to rot. The tribes may coexist one tribe focusing on the eye that sees and hates one tribe focuses on the unseeing eye that festers and burns. The predomidence of one eye over the other could be a running theme if you want.
You can use this interchange for all your tribes. Any tribe that has 'eye' worships grummsh. Adjective yourself as much as you want. Puss eye. Lost Eye, One eye, Gross eye, Angry eye... you get the idea. Many tribes, many names.
Regarding Iuz's control of orcs, I have him as a mighty deciever. to some tribes he focuses his 'message' to manipulate and control the tribe at hand. To a grummsh tribe, he kills an elf in his rhetoric, or his priests come with elf ears pinned to their black robes all to the praise of the gruumsh shaman. What a chaotic realm.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises