Orcs

I2

I'll see myself out

Same reason barbarians generally lost to organised states. Logistics, strategy, and a sense of tactics that contains more then raiding party and headlong rush.

>>Suposedly super strong
>>Supposedly numerous
>>Supposedly great warrior-culture

None of these except warrior culture is actually a constant, though. LotR orcs were overshadowed by Uruk-Hai, for example.

Just look at africa. it's a wartorn continent you could saw that sub saharan africans are a warrior culture but that doesn't mean they are ever going to conquer and rule anything.

>>Suposedly super strong
Nope.

>Supposedly numerous
Yea, and that's also the only thing they have going for them.

>Supposedly great warrior-culture
Nope. They're cowardly and backstabbing, only finding the courage to fight against a bigger foe when they have the advantage of numbers or are being forced to do so by a bigger orc.

>Why do all orcs suck so much?
The question should rather be, why do fantasy authors suck so much?

>nobody even knows what setting is being discussed and is just shitting on their keyboards and clicking "post"

You get screamed at if you answer with "depends on the setting", even if its appropriate.

because they are bigger and more numerous, so it's gonna take more to feed them all. logistics will fuck them over.
also, they aren't very smart and humans got better technology, better quality weapons/armor.

Lack charisma and comunication skills.
Lack inteligence.

Also Tolkein Orcs were just goblins created from undead elves.
Need to return that flavour.

One of three:
>orks invade elves
>elves ask humans for help
>orks btfo

or

>orks invade dorfs
>dorfs ask humans for help
>orks btfo

or

>orks invade humans
>orks btfo

They are unlucky to exist alongside humans, and are dumb enough to pick a fight with either them or their allies.

If you're talking about D&D, ultimately it's because Gruumsh is a buffoon who only knows how to destroy. Their strength is not that great and their numbers are not that large. Every orc uprising has been quelled.

I agree with the above user.

Individual one on one battles might be won by the thoughest motherfucker around.

Wars are won by the people with the best logistics, technology and strategy. No matter how much of a badass motherfucker you are, it doesn't mean shit if you don't have enough food to eat or the know how to make or maintain your weapons.

On a side note, that is why 40k orks are successful compared to other orc equivalent. They have LOGISTICS trough the Orkoid ecosystem which terraforms the land to provide Orks with food. They have TECHNOLOGY coded on a genetic level and they have STRATEGY... ok maybe not this one.

You only hear about their losses rather than their victories, and that any massive horde will fall apart due to infighting and be fractured into clans again.

An orcish Horde that complelely razes the north of a continent but eventually falls due to infighting still completely destroyed a massive section of a continent.

Also, you don't hear about them winning because there are little to no survivors to tell the tales. When people survive an orc attack and beat them back, that's when you hear about it.

>barbarians generally lost to organised states

Laughing_Sea_Peoples.WebP

In which setting?
In LotR they aren't super-strong, have no great-warrior culture, are actually UNIVERSALLY shorter then humans, and only have numbers as their advantage.

because strong and numerous rarely defeats discipline and tactics

>>Lose to everyone all the time
but they don't

>HFY+slav
nuclear mix
>calling orcs "orks" outside of Warhammer
Come fucking on

Because they are goblins.

Numbers and warrior code vs technology. Orcs almost never use guns, and almost always fight someone with guns.

An orc IS a goblin in LotR.
See? Depends on the fucking setting.
So which setting is OP talking about? D&D? If it's even just D&D I can help answer his question, but he needs to narrow that goddamn shit down.

It's not hard. He just needs to type in like four extra words in the post for fuck's sake.

>An orc IS a goblin in LotR
And this is why bringing up a LotR goblin in an orc thread is kinda silly.

Orcs were written as German analogues, and much like the krauts no matter how they talk about their military history they tend to lose wars because they overreach and declare war on everyone around them until they get beat up again.

So which kind of orcs are they then?

>calling orcs "orks" outside of Warhammer
There is a difference? It's like arguing about deamons/daemon/demon or elf/elve. It literally doesn't matter, nor should you care about it.

They're called orks in shadowrun too.

Beat me to it.

They get ganged up on by the more civilized races. That's just what happens when you're a dirty no good orc.

>Lord of the Rings
These orcs are more like goblins ("orc" in fact being the Westron word for goblin) and they were shorter then human beings, still decently strong, but not super human by any means. Even the Uruk-hai were described as being "almost of man height", so the biggest ones were still pretty short.
>D&D 1e-2e/AD&D
Orcs are actually still closer to to the LotR version; short, bandy-legged, antagonistic bullies. They were also LE in alignment back then. Not super-strong (mildly above average strength). No great warrior culture.
>D&D 3e-4e-5e
Taking notes from WarCraft's popularity, orcs get stronger and tougher then humans and are now taller, though still hunched over. On average stronger then the average human, but not actually super human, and not any better fighters. They also loose the organization and infrastructure of the older orcs, so now they walk around using inferior weapons and armor or even no armor at all while not really gaining anything in return. Warrior-culture is there, but it's really closer to "raiding culture", and they don't actually organize or train very well. Intelligence also drops pretty hard from previous versions too.
>WarCraft
Stronger then humans and have a warrior culture, but everything in WarCraft is the equivalent of wrestling kayfabe; it literally stops mattering the instant the words stop getting uttered and the abilities of the characters instead match the needs of the plot.
That said, orcs are more dangerous here then in other settings considering they fought several major wars with the other races combined and did a good job each time. They loose to keep the setting going.
>Warhammer
These orcs are stronger (but a strong human can still match them), tougher (but a tough human can still match them), but holy SHIT are these guys dumb, even worse then the later D&D orcs. They're also terrible at organizing and prone infighting even worse then other examples, sometimes literally in the middle of battle.

>celts
>supposedly super strong
>supposedly numerous
>supposedly great warrior-culture

>Loses to everyone all the time

Feels good being Roman, i guess!

>Warrior-culture is there, but it's really closer to "raiding culture", and they don't actually organize or train very well.

What's even the difference?

You are asking why a race that has all the traits necessary to be a impressive army keeps losing and have it's shit pushed in.

Defeating a small army formed by mild mannered civilians begrudgingly drafted into service, meek of physique and coward is not a great feat for a hero. Defeating a large army formed by raging, hulking monsters bred for war and violence is a great feat.

Is not that they have this traits and yet they lose. Is that they were conceived to lose and then given this traits.

Now if you want a IN universe reason, they will depends on the setting and circumstances because there's no unified explanation to why orcs lose.

this two have very good points that can be sum to lack of organization and strategic mind. In LOTR, this is the case and without a master to whip them or control them with dark magic mind control, orcs can't even organize in large numbers, they will fight and segregate in small tribes, or just scatter.

Further drive the aforementioned point home.

Often orcs are defeated by cunning or mcguffin. Seldomly by raw strength and numbers. Strategy, and being skilled rather than brute, play a role in both macro (defeating an orc army) and micro (normal human defeating a single orc) scales.

>>Warhammer
>These orcs are stronger (but a strong human can still match them), tougher (but a tough human can still match them)
why are orc models so huge and swole then?

desu Rome had the best warrior culture.

Lol, people still believe viking could do anything but prey on weak monasteries and surprise attack dying kingdoms then fleeing.

you see my point though?
Discipline and organization gets you longer than being big and mean.

They mostly lack the mental capacity for tactics, strategy and logistics.

there is. Daemon is a greek word that originated the later word Demon, though they mean different things.

Ork is exclusively used by warhammer 40k.

There's significant differences.
The difference between a raiding culture and a warrior culture are contrasting between the...let's go with the Nordic forefather cultures (Danes, Jutes, Geats) and the Romans.
>Norse
They have warriors, but didn't have any better military organization then anyone else. Mostly they traveled a lot, which sometimes led to trading and sometimes lee to raiding. Their warriors aren't trained or drilled, they just recieve individual instruction of varying quality. The Danish kings have bigger and more expansionistic armies, but not any more so then any other nation at the time, nor are their armies better equipped or trained.
>Romans
You can't advance in citizenship, social status, or politics without joining the military first. The military is equipped with standardized equipment whenever possible and goes through a fairly standardized training regimen that still remains flexible and incorporates new tactics that they find useful. Every leader is a former soldier, as is every full citizen. Landownership is granted by military service.

Rome is a warrior culture.
The Nordic forefathers are a culture with warriors in it.

sea-people.
From the bronze age collapse.
Though one theory is that it was a soldier revolt of so called "runners". a class of lower class warriors that specialized in killing chariot crews after the chariot had been disabled by another chariot.

How would a game represent a race of jobbers? Like what sort of abilities would they have? that makes their jobbing useful for a team or group?

>Favored Enemy: Protagonist's Parents

Aesthetic reasons.
Go look at actual stats if you don't believe me; even in the RPG orcs weren't impossibly strong, and humans were of comparable strength or greater depending on the unit in question.

Or did you never actually PLAY either of these games and instead just looked at the pretty pictures?

>Or did you never actually PLAY either of these games and instead just looked at the pretty pictures?
Of course I only looked at the pictures!
Who the fuck can spend 200£ on miniatures, more on paint and brushes AND have the patience to paint it all AND find someone to play with when you are 14!?

Real adults have no interest in age of sigmar.

Fair enough, but next time when you aren't aware of the actual fluff or rules behind something perhaps not make assumptions about it until you have better information.

This is actually a good general policy for life in many other respects too.

Yeah, why would I assume that Huge McBeefy is stronger than Joe Blow?
INSANITY!

Not Vikings, Sea Peoples.
Y'know, the shirtless barbarians who ended 7 of the 8 great Bronze Age civilizations in a mere 50 years and crippled the Egyptians beyond recovery.

Later on average orcs were stronger then the average human unit, but not super humanly so. Another reason it's not really that helpful is that they're bigger but also tend to think raw hides and fur make for good protection against swords, crossbows, and guns.
Being bigger but not COVERING your bigger bits while still remaining vulnerable to stabbing means all you're really doing is hitting harder while making yourself a bigger target, and that was kind of the downfall of a lot of cultures that fought more organized warrior societies.

And since "strategy" isn't even pronounceable by most Warhammer Orcs, size is literally their only advantage and everything else they have puts them in the back foot pretty hard.

I always thought that they were related to africans, not injuns.

I want to have orcs with warrior culture more similar to that of Bushido code.
But I don't know how to implelent it correct.
Do they also more proficient in arts just as samurai were?

Because they are based on Germany in both of the World Wars.

Dwarfs match Orc strength in canon.

Orcs at their highest swoll limit are ridiculously strong though. They just have to live long enough and keep fighting to reach it.

Samurai were artists because society dictated it.

Religion and war mix for most cultures. The Shinto faith dictated a reverence for the magnitude of how every single thing is basically a Fey being and you being a cog in that gigantic ethereal mechanism that can become the mechanism itself by being open to life as a whole and maintaining dignity. As a result dying with glory is as important as success in life as is important as mastering all the facets of peaceful life.

That and in a culture where warriors are top dog and you want to maintain peace for at least one generation, you need non-violent competition combined with a pride in pursuits that are solitary just to keep shit functional.

Orcs already have a belief in spirits. They just need hobbies. American Indians on the coast would take blankets their wives weave and sew designs, buttons, and objects into them to tell stories that could be used both as a blanket and as a tapestry decoration, that'd be a good one. So would self-tattooing, and love of music.

Using common "tribal orc" version:
>Strategy
>Tactics
>Logistics
>Industrial complex
Most fantasy settings are high medieval, so during/after first "industrial revolution", meaning that other guys can throw a lot of advanced good steel equipment at tribal orcs.

Orcs may field great light infantry, that can mostly only fight as unorganized swarm/horde, and they will be facing charge of armoured knights in terrain favoured by knights.
On top of that "good" kingdom is more efficient than orcs so they could use proportionally more of its population in a war, and superior logistic means that humans/dwarves/elfs could potentially bring more forces to one battlefield than orcs despite overall lower number of troops.
As lack of adequate supplies my be one of most important limiters on orcish army size.
Warrior culture is detrimental to war fighting as death of commander creates power struggle and possible disintegration of troop under his command.
If we factor magic orcs may have some kind of shit tier shamanism while humans and elfs will throw arcane magic at them

Personal strength is just irrelevant in mass combat, adherence to orders, team work and discipline is what wins the day, not individual action.

Turmoil from within main reason for it in my campaign setting, they're dangerous if someone can manage to unite them as one but that's not an easy task.

The rpgs are literally free. Some are even good.

>Implying this stops them from chopping through most squads anyway

When you say Orcs have strength comparable to humans are you talking about regular old humans or space marines, or are you not talking about 40k?

>Why do all orcs suck so much?

Their culture is tribal based, and they rarely are able to have settlements larger than a large village. Additionally, their concept of warfare is mostly based around individual feats of heroism, they cooperate poorly and rarely use formations - and don't even ask about things like logistics and organization. Finally, loyalty is personal rather than national, so when a great orc king dies, all the tribes and their smaller kings fall out immediately.

Basically they're the Germanic tribes before they got their shit together.

This is true, but that's only the strongest orcs; most regular orcs do not.
I would have typed "orks" then, not "orcs". There IS a difference between them, though GW has been trying as hard as they can to turn Fantasy into 40k for nearly a decade and half now.
Generally I don't talk much about 40k; no point when the half of the board does it without my help and has said everything that could possibly be said in addition to saying shit that certainly DOESN'T need saying.

this post was actually helpful to me

Post different kinds of orcs

It's not that helpful, honestly.
There's nothing I typed out that couldn't be found out with a few minutes of Googling and reading, so I can't really take credit for any of it.

Didn't they rekt the spanish marines crimson fists?

these two renditions have singlehandedly made me not want to read whatever story this person has put together.

Orks in rogue trader they have unnatural strength/toughness 2x (and some other advantages, but those are the big uns relative to this discussion). Both of these things are possible to get as a "normal human". You just need money or just you know, the balls to turn your gellar field off for extended periods of time. Things rogue traders have in abundance.

That'd be a terrible shame, seeing how it's from the best Veeky Forums related Manga running

the material being a comic book only makes my decision easier. I will not suffer such visual atrocities in a primarily image based form of entertainment. God only knows how bad the actual writing is.

>the best Veeky Forums related Manga

Couldn't agree more. Anyone who hesitates in checking it out is doing themselves a disservice.

do your farts echo too or is it just your bullshit

>he can't discuss fantasy memes, only settings

what are you? stupid?

>Every orc uprising has been quelled
>Current setting, the Forgotten Realms: Kingdom of many arrows

Every D&D setting has some example of an Orcish land that they conquered and claimed for themselves.

The Aztecs also lost because they were an evil empire and all of the other natives rallied behind the Spanish to fight against the Aztecs because "Well these conquistador guys seem a bit iffy, but nothing could be as bad as the Aztecs"

>something is popular on tg
>it must be because it's bad
kek

You keep enjoying your obscure hipster trash kiddo ;^)

>"but nothing could be as bad as the Aztecs"

I wanna say shit like "well, the weren't evil PER SAY", but honestly the Aztecs were pretty unpleasant guys.
Their obsession with human sacrifice is kind of alarming, though apparently by the time the Spanish arrived they had been in decline for some time.

You really are a moron if you're gonna miss out on it just because you don't like the kobold/orc design.

yeah, nice interference mate. Sorry I'm not interested in your shitty comic book.

>I wanna say shit like "well, the weren't evil PER SAY"

Please don't. The word is se, not say.

Well, whatever, it's your loss. I'll be, you know, enjoyin life over here while you get mad that popular things exist.

I made Green Orcs in my world the result of a curse on a group of humans. They try their best to live a functioning human society, bu the curse obfuscates their understanding of how to do so. They plant rows of crops... crops of brambles and weeds with poisonous berries and bitter leaves. They fence in animals... jackals and vultures who just run away and eat their food. They build tall buildings... out of sticks and spit, and they always fall apart. So they always fall back on attacking functioning human towns, stealing their food, squatting in their homes, and making vague curses.

Anyway that's just my world, but I think it answers your question pretty well. They always lose because they're cursed to be incompetent.

I fucking hate the Japanese media trope of "Kobolds=Dog People", "Orcs=Pig People"

Orcs=Pig People is not a japanese trope though.

Or did you think they were literally the first ones to realize orc=porc?

I quite like it.
I find orcs being pig people to be more interesting.

I fucking hate the American media trope of "Kobolds=Lizard People", "Orcs=Green People"

Neither of those are uniquely Japanese, and standard D&D interpretations are every bit as unfaithful to the myth.

I don't necessarily equate popular with being good, some things are just a matter of taste. Pop music for example.

That said, dungeon meshi is legit cool. I think the story and characters are even more interesting than the art style which is unique and cutesy but nothing special.

Wasn't Sea People the regional nickname of the Phoenicians/Carthaginians? Those weren't exactly barbarians.

If anything, them being on the sea meant they were constantly exposed to new technologies and ideas, and being on a ship requires significant degrees of cooperation and planning, both essential in out playing opponents militarily.

Plus, you know, if you actually read the slightest bit about them you'd know they were a race of sophisticated city building merchants whose wealth and power practically made Carthage Rome's archnemesis throughout much of its history.

>Orcs were written as German analogues
No, absolutely not, and the only people who claim this are intellectuals who feel the need to justify their absolutely retarded studies in meaningless subjects by making allegorical claims where no allegory actually exists.

It's also a common myth that Tolkien said that there were no allegories at all in his story, which he didn't. He did deny exactly what you described, however; that the story itself was an allegory of things he had witnessed in his life. He did not deny that his personal experiences had colored his work and that there was allegories to be found within the work, such as the hardships of war, or the corrupting influence of power.

It's a timeless tale, not some redundant reselling of contemporary events.