Dwarf — Scars of Honor race

This is the shortest lore section on the site, and the shortness is the finding. Dwarves have no published capital, no named starting settlement, no origin myth and no faction storyline of their own in any of the sources this page draws on — while Humans, Undead, Infernal Demons and Sun Elves all have several.

What exists is a design philosophy rather than a history. Dwarves are treated as one of the classic MMORPG archetypes, strongly associated with mining, precious metals and craftsmanship, and their cities are said to be underground. The stated approach is to keep dwarves recognisable as dwarves rather than radically redefining them — repeated almost verbatim across an art discussion and a lore discussion, which suggests it is the actual brief rather than an offhand remark. The core associations named for preservation are underground cities, mining, jewellery and precious metals.

One further note is that Scars of Honor's dwarves are intended to be distinct in a way viewers are expected to like, but no specifics were attached to that claim.

The one piece of dwarven lore that circulated in any depth did not come from the developers. When players learned that Necromancer had landed on Dwarves for the Sacred Order, someone constructed the in-world reasoning themselves: necromancy is broadly outlawed, but dwarven ancestor worship gives them enough cover that the Sacred Order looks the other way rather than make another enemy. That is a player explanation for a class assignment, offered in a Discord thread — it is not published lore, and it should not be repeated as though it were.

Dwarves have no published racial bonus, and neither does any other race. The racial-traits system has not been decided.

The fullest statement came in December 2025. Racial traits were described as still under internal discussion rather than removed from the game, and their absence from the redesigned website was explained as a result of that unresolved design debate. The objection raised was mathematical: with roughly 300 talent nodes available, flat percentage racial bonuses could compound into something disproportionately strong. The argument in favour was that race choice should carry gameplay meaning beyond appearance. Some designers were described as opposed and others in support, with no decision presented.

April 2026 brought the same answer through a community Q&A. The summarised developer response was that traits remain under internal design debate, that the main worry is over-tuning pushing players into meta picks — choosing a race for stats instead of identity — and that if traits ship they are unlikely to be game-breaking or highly impactful. No final decision was locked.

Players discussing the topic sorted their own preferences into two buckets: out-of-combat movement speed, resting and regeneration, and profession perks were broadly acceptable, while damage bonuses against specific races and combat stats like critical strike or haste were rejected as meta-distorting. That is community sentiment, not a design document. A mining or craftsmanship perk would be the obvious fit for this race, and no such perk has been announced.

The list below is the Sacred Order class pool as the game client data defines it, and as this site's gear planner enforces it. All four Sacred Order races carry the same seven entries.

Dwarves are the reason that uniformity deserves a warning label. In the alpha era the race was reported as the Sacred Order's only Necromancer option, and the reaction was sustained: players found a dwarf-only necromancer strange on its face, complained that it made one race compulsory for anyone who wanted the fantasy, and kept raising it through April. A separate March 2026 discussion described a setup in which dwarf was the only druid race shown for the test while humans lost druid access and Domination had no druid at all.

That second chart no longer stands. It was withdrawn after staff intervention, with the explanation that the race/class image did not reflect the latest setup and that an updated version would be shared later. In late April the developers said combinations were still being adjusted in response to feedback, and players noted they had seen dwarf druids and human druids in earlier material — evidence the chart was genuinely in motion rather than simply misread.

Official April 2026 messaging presented a full race × class availability matrix as the current plan for early access and likely 1.0, while stating plainly that the matrix is provisional and subject to change.

The dwarf model has been through at least one substantial pass. A newer version was described in August 2025 as a substantial uplift over older in-game versions, with different body volumes and a stronger overall character read. An earlier August 2025 discussion showed a dwarf model as the example for an internal process that automatically refits older armour assets onto the new body models — dwarves being a useful test case precisely because their proportions differ most from the human baseline. By November 2025 dwarves were confirmed for the next public test and described positively on the strength of that new model.

When the model reached players in March 2026, the response focused on the legs: dwarf calves became a running joke, described as looking either capable of cutting steel or exaggerated in an old-school polygonal way.

The most useful appearance data point came later and was not about the model at all. A June 2026 community poll asked players to judge a warrior armour set on dwarves versus humans, and dwarves drew the cleaner, more confident support — with the observation that the set read better on dwarves and possibly on the bulkier races in general. For a game whose armour is adapted from shared class designs and then fitted per race, that is a meaningful signal about which silhouettes the art is currently serving best.

The general customisation rules apply here as everywhere: facial variation, hairstyles, beards and scars are planned options, additional ethnicity variations were in development as of March 2026, and full slider-based body customisation is not favoured because unrestricted body scaling would create armour-fitting problems. No dwarf-specific customisation feature — beard styling depth, for instance — has been detailed.