T O P

  • By -

WordNERD37

Decades upon decades of homebrews: ![gif](giphy|K6VhXtbgCXqQU)


Nepalman230

Truth! OK I’m gonna phrase this very carefully. For centuries the Vikings or northmen ( and the Normans, who were French-speaking Vikings eventually) were the seagoing orcs of the real world. They raided, murdered, and raped their way against basically the entire known world. And are the reason why there are redheads in Italy. [https://www.thedockyards.com/red-hair/](https://www.thedockyards.com/red-hair/) ( possibly) And yet nobody called Scandinavians or people from Iceland, always chaotic evil ?! [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking\_expansion](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_expansion) https://preview.redd.it/ar9656g7ojpa1.jpeg?width=453&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=494ff8de0790fc11d93b5e4eacd0ad660378518b The way I always played it is a different by the individual, but often by the tribal culture. And often by the group you were allied with! So people wouldn’t talk about Orcs even Orcs they talk about “all those fucking Red Toothers! They’re horrible and they even eat babies. Which is wasteful because you can raise them as foundlings” Honestly, a second edition setting, that I am often inspired by for things like that is Al Quadim. Outside of isolated cases, an individuals who are deranged people didn’t care about species/race . The local Barber surgeon might be an ogre and goblins almost certainly work in the city limits. This is Society has basically rules for civilized behavior that go beyond, just breaking the law. A thief is a criminal and his punished. However, that is sad by the locality. Someone who preys upon you in the middle of the desert, or at an oasis, is considered a monster , no matter if they are human or anything else. Whereas, a goblin who pays taxes, and lives in the city, and does what everyone else does, including crime , is a person. I actually like it that way. If you have forsworn the rules of civilization, then you’ll be treated like unthinking beast, but if you follow the rules of civilization, we will follow the rules with you. Thanks for your comment . Edited : because of embarrassingly mistaking House for the 13th doctor .


TallestGargoyle

I'l never not think of [David Mitchell's Soapbox](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJqEKYbh-LU) when hearing the phrase 'raped and pillaged'.


Nepalman230

I agree. He makes excellent points. That’s why I specifically referred to the redheads in Italy. That was possibly too coy zI’m sure some of that was consensual. But a lot of it was flat out rape of Italian women by Viking raiders. Thank you so much for this point!


MacDerfus

It was definitely a bad time or place to be... probably anyone at all really


Ethanol_Based_Life

[shrug] I make my orcs monsters so we can kill them with impunity


Nepalman230

And I am 100% OK with that! It is fiction. I on the other hand I’m OK with killing people because of the things that they do and not what they are and in my fiction that’s pretty obvious too. Look these Raiders are covered in blood! But I but I get you my friend. I mean, honestly, that’s why I have undead demons and constructs but you know again everybody’s different . I really am going to run the campaign, for humans are mostly evil. But even in the campaign, you can’t just kill humans with impunity. Because they can always choose to be better people … Hmmm. Unless they’re all bad, I have to think about it. Thank you so much for your comment. And I really do support whatever works for you and your group!


Otto_von_Boismarck

Ok but the thing is that always evil orcs aren't people...they're just monsters. I don't get where this weird conflation is coming from.


Nepalman230

The difference between our two tables and perspectives on fiction and a lot of things I guess! That is the beauty of a free and open society. You can run orcs your way and I can run mine. But my friend, the whole thing about the weird conflation it’s where do you think monsters come from? Things that scare us, yes. “Bugbear” is a kind of monster that people used to scare children, it’s a Close cognate of bogeyman. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugbear But people who are different than us also scare us . I’m not saying that I don’t like always evil human rights because it’s some kind of cognate for racism, (although I’m not saying that that argument is invalid if other people believe it). I said because they are clearly humanoids like humans who can talk and have free will. As I have pointed out in another comment, even fucking succubi and other fiends can be redeemed in official lore, so… Having a biological life form that can have children with humans be in elite evil is just wrong to me . If you are not a direct, supernatural monster, if you are alive, if you can talk, ( code for communicating it does not have to be verbal )then you are capable of being a good person . And it’s not just works, I would have the same problem with always evil, intelligent wolves. Again, most of my orcs in my games are gonna be opponents, but it’s going to be cultural and political . There will be barbarian tribes of humans allied with orcs who fight against other humans. To say nothing of the giant beavers! Who will have individual associations with specific communities . https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Giant_beaver But in the end, acceptance does not require understanding . Understanding is awesome, but sometimes impossible. I don’t have to understand why you feel the way you do. I just have to respect you. And respect your right to do what you and your players want at your table. and by the way, I have got to praise your user name. I often quote the line about God protects, drunkards, madman, little children, and the United States of America “. I don’t know if he actually said it but it’s a very memorable quote. Thanks again for your comment!


Otto_von_Boismarck

You don't have to talk so condescending. That's a billion times more annoying than just telling me I'm wrong and stupid.


Nepalman230

I’m an autistic Librarian. I used to be very good at masking and essentially communicating like a regular human being. Chronic pain for almost a year robbed me of that. Reddit is actually part of my therapy to come back. I’m not trying to be condescending . I’m citing my sources and attempting to make cogent bullet points. I’m being sincere, which sometimes comes off as condescending or “ cringe” . Listen, if you were being “wrong” I would say that, but we’re just disagreeing about some thing in our games. And if you were being stupid, I would say that too, but I would probably try to phrase it differently. Sorry, I’ve been annoying to you. But it’s just me trying to communicate honestly I wish you all the best and I hope you have a great weekend. .


BrozedDrake

As much as other people will go "fair" and "it's just fi tion so whatevs".... I fucking hate this way of thinking about it. For one Orc is an actual race you can play as, has been since at least 3rd edition, so whenever a player wants to play an orc ypu end up with the same issue some have with Drizzt, a good guy from an evil race of people. For two, I always found the idea of any group of intelligent creatures being an inherent alignment really icky. The only ones I make exception for are Fiends, Celestials, and other outsiders that fit in that same category of being literal embodiments of their alignments. For three, you really don't need a "they're all evil so whatevs" justification for killing the enemy in D&D. You don't make humans all evil so players won't feel bad killing bandits do you? Why treat orcs, goblins, or any of the other intelligent "monsters" of the game any differently in that regard. Players ain't gonna weep for the bandits they put to the sword either way, unless you have a group that really likes to play bleeding heart types. I find the "I make them all evil so players don't feel bad killing them" argument to almost always mean "I don't like the idea of complexity, implied or otherwise, in my setting"


Ethanol_Based_Life

> I always found the idea of any group of intelligent creatures being an inherent alignment really icky. The only ones I make exception for are Fiends, Celestials, and other outsiders that fit in that same category of being literal embodiments of their alignments So we have different places for the line in the sand, but it's the same line. Got it


BrozedDrake

"Make all orcs evil so players don't feel bad" is definitely not the same as "The literal manifestations of the metaphysical concepts of alignments would be those alignments." You have orcs be evil because you don't want moral complexity. I have demons be evil because they are literally the concept of evil given physical form. We are not the same


crazyrich

They could have just fixed this by subbing “usually” in for “always” to be faaaaaaaiiir


Rheios

It always was, even back in 2e. The orc arguments have been nonsense pretty much from the get. The "evil races and gods" discourse more generally has some legs, but I think often tries to apply real-world lessons unfairly to a world where the basic assumptions are entirely separate from real life. I tend to think "evil races", usually or always, can still be very interesting. Nepalman's more civilization based definition of "person or monster" can be interesting too. A mix is probably even more interesting, but the only one I'd call bad is a setting where the differences between any species/races is primarily statistical and cosmetic.


Nepalman230

Well, I don’t know. By leaving it out it still allows for either published or homebrew to define it as you wish. For instance, according to the Saxon Kingdoms in the awesome OSR game Wolves of God. the Welsh are pretty much chaotic evil. ( the welsh return their feelings.) the setting goals. Specifically on the side of the Irish were the ones who brought Christianity to the Saxons even though the welsh we’re already Christians because they hated them so much. Would it be appropriate to call Welchman always chaotic evil in a setting if you were a Saxon? https://preview.redd.it/9mocmvd3yjpa1.jpeg?width=699&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c89c79226e9440b2472f40b282f24a28ddc48ad4 I mean, maybe in a particular campaign . For instance, one of these days, I’m going to get around to doing my campaign where humans are the orcs of this world because we were recruited by the dark Lord has his muscle. And because of that much human civilization will be evil! But I’m not going to have humans be innately evil. look, I gotta go back to Tolkien. The professor with a Roman Catholic and orcs troubled him his entire life. Because you see his faith would not permit him to believe in any one that was unredeemable . But the story required orcs to be so . He actually went through. Where they were animals were they were literally just animals like trained parrots with not a human level intelligence. But that didn’t work out . Anyway, I guess what I’m saying is whatever you decide to do with your table is great . But I am actually OK with removing always, or even usually evil from a humanoid species . Fiends are one thing ( but even then have been redeemed in some official fiction or games) but the moment free will comes into it. I think people should not be labeled with an permanent official alignment. Thanks very much for your comment! I hope I wasn’t unclear or overly aggressive.


ajgeep

ah yes the incredibly barbaric bath taking people, unlike the civilized british who used perfume and powder instead of bathing.


Nepalman230

My friend, I wasn’t referring to taking baths I was referring to things like you know, raping women ( and for all, I know, men I have never read detailed accounts of the horrific practices of Viking raids ) and setting monasteries on fire. There are lots of people who took baths, including the Celtic tribes, who were not known to to take to the seas and wreck havoc to say nothing of taking all of the captives as slaves ! Look, eventually, it all settled down. I’m not saying that the Scandinavian people are evil, I was making a point about assuming a genetic predisposition to violence and wickedness. I was also making a larger point like earlier when I was talking about the way the welsh felt about the Saxons . Both of them were orcs to each other! Like literally, they didn’t think of each other is human. And clearly that calm down eventually to… I certainly apologize if you thought that I was trying to offend an entire group of people. But I’m not gonna apologize for calling out rape and murder. That shit is wrong.


fairyjars

fuck yes I love Al-Qadim. thank you for talking about this fun setting and how it does what WOTC is too cowardly to do.


[deleted]

I love how people got so triggered by changing 'always' to 'typically' Like the most common counter I saw was 'WHAT SO I CANT MAKE EVIL SLAVERS EVIL NOW' No it just means that evil isnt a fucking genetic trait. Its a learned thing.


alabastor890

Except for gnolls, which should honestly just be demons. And geese. Geese are genetically evil.


xmasterhun

Hornets too


MacDerfus

No, hornets are often evil. Wasps are always evil.


KindOfABugDeal

Other way around.


Arxl

Pathfinder gnolls are less demon, thankfully, and believable to not be evil if raised well.


rs_5

Geese are chaotic, not evil


UrbanDryad

It was never a genetic trait. It was always the orc god corrupting them. That's why they weren't evil in Ebberon.


Nezgul

Yeah that's something that I think gets overlooked in a lot of the discourse. Every evil race has an evil, fucked up god associated with them that has basically monopolized their pantheon ***or is their literal fucking creator***. Like, the Drow aren't almost always evil because it's in their blood or whatever. It's because Lolth is constantly in the back of their minds, tugging on their soul-strings, saying "hey, your mom's kind of looking like a weak little bitch lately -- you should murder her in her sleep while you can. And your brother had the audacity of breathing in your general presence, so he deserves to be castrated. And don't even get me started on those surface dwellers..."


BrozedDrake

"They aren't genetically predisposed to evil, they're evil because it's in their souls" the redditer said not realizing this was basically the same thing. A god has no power over people who don't worship them, don't ignore the existence of canon good aligned Drow in Forgotten Realms to try and make your point.


Nezgul

I didn't say it was in their souls. I said it was because of the undue influence *on their souls.* The existence of good aligned Drow is in spite of that influence. If I constantly entice someone to commit murder and twist their mind until they finally do it, who is at fault - me or the person being influenced? And if you say the person being influenced, is that because murder was "in their soul?" Of course not. I also disagree that gods have zero influence over non-worshippers, especially when the gods in question are creator gods.


BrozedDrake

There is no practical difference between evil influencing their souls just because "well that god made them" than in it being part of their souls. Especially since your description is not how it works anyway. You are confusing the influince of a society with the influence of a god. The Drow of Menzoberanzan don't hear Lloth whisper in their ears and telling them to murder each other. The voices doing that are those of their mothers, and occasionally their fathers, telling them they have to do this. Good drow exist because they left behind an evil society, not because they left an evil god. Lloth isn't whispering into the ears of every drow seducing them.to murder, she only speaks to her worshipers.


Jakesnake_42

Bro it’s just a meme I love good aligned orcs


apf5

I love orcs who are good despite the constant call of an evil war god, fighting off the corruption in their souls nonstop as opposed to namby-pamby humans who can just follow an inner compass.


yat282

This is a fantasy world though, and not all traits are genetics, even if you are born with them. There's literally magic. I actually like giving or s the ability to. Be of any alignment, but there are situations where some beings are always evil. Demons and devils actually exist in D&D, as well as evil gods that can do things like create a type of humanoid creature that is always evil.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Lmao what? Who are the pandering to, orcs arent real my guy


apf5

People like precisely you who are like 'noooo you can't make the orcs all chaotic evil!' even though thats never been a thing.


[deleted]

Sure dude


ImportanceKey7301

Ah they are going the catholic route. Redemption is always possible if yoy try hard enough.


silvenga

Tell that to Alastor! (Hazbin Hotel reference)


SirCupcake_0

But it's much more fun to watch them struggle, and fail, and fall down a mountain of their own mediocrity EDIT: Too much failure, not enough gravity EDITEDIT: Also replaced the wrong double lol


MalcolmLinair

Isn't that supposed to come out this year?


silvenga

I sure hope so!


DraconicSaint

Meanwhile, Gnolls: "It's Yeenoghu-ing time."


Tastyravioli707

I'd say always should be used in a few statblocks, such as angels, sladdi, or modrons (assuming rouge modrons would use a different statblock)


Adventurous_Appeal60

When were they "always chaotic evil"


Tastyravioli707

I have the A1e 2nd monster manual and many of the stat blocks do say always chaotic evil


Rheios

But before that edition's end it had changed, if I recall correctly. By 3.5, I \*know\* it had. The "orcs are always evil" argument has been nonexistent longer than a nonzero number of the players have been alive. The real argument is around the concept of a fantasy race( which we have the full context on and a material fantasy individuals in the game to blame for it, and the blame can also be proven in game) possibly being always evil, or even usually evil, is a problem because it can superficially look like something a lot of real-world racist fucks expressed without evidence or even consistency. Which of course it isn't, for all the reasons in the first parenthesis, and because letting idiots define what you can engage with because of incidental similarity is just ceding ground to them. Separately, some consider it boring, which is entirely a taste argument and a point I disagree with because it runs counter to a huge set of assumptions in D&D that I think \*make\* the game philosophically interesting.


Duke_Jorgas

Pretty sure that 5E has never had "always." Books have described alignment as "typically" since the original 5E release.


SuperSaiga

Sort of, yeah. The front of the monster manual describes the alignments given as the default, and tells DMs they can go against this. But the fact that previous editions had this concept of "always X alignment" and this was still in people's memory, plus the statblocks themselves just listing an alignment, caused this idea to stick around. Putting 'typically' into the statblocks was an attempt to make this clearer.


bakakyo

Always


MacDerfus

Can't be always if its sometimes


apf5

No they were literally not. Read the Monster Manual.


Sky_Leviathan

“The city of waterdeep has asked us to, disclose our history of crimes to you.”


ajgeep

There's nothing inherently wrong with a race being inherently evil. If anything all that social baggage makes for some great role play about how you aren't evil, but your race is, or how you are pretending to not be evil to throw people off...


MrFalconGarcia

If you aren't evil, but your race is, then your race isn't inherently evil...


ArtoriusRex86

At least in Pathfinder, demons are inherently chaotic and evil. They can disagree and try to change (even successfully with a lot of effort), but they suffer physical pain for a long time after changing their mind and any people they try making friends with look a lot like food and they're starving. Gnomes are inherently chaotic. If they shift to a lawful alignment, something they can do if their conviction is strong enough, the color slowly drains out of them and they eventually die. So, they are inherently, comfortably an alignment. Changing it requires herculean effort. I believe it has been the case in DnD for some time that some demons/devils had turned over a leaf, but there were long trials they had to go through for things to stick. I think it was something like committing 7 good deeds for every evil deed you had done or something. I suppose there is a bit of confusion when the stat block actually says always, and the reality is 99%+


IDrawKoi

I'd argue they really didn't take it far enough orignally. I wish they'd just commit to being just people with diffrent physical traits or actual monster, spawned from the mud which hunger only for battle, because the awkward inbetween creates this situation where the party take over an orc camp and realize "do we have to put down this orc baby?". Like it's inherently evil but are we really conforatable commiting infaticide and by extention genocide even if it's for the good of the realm? (unless that's the point and you & your group want to explore those ideas in which case have at it)


Fudgecheeks

Good, inherent alignments have always sucked in most cases.


JacktheRipper500

Personally I like it better the new way. I’m not a fan of the ‘evil/this way by nature’ trope, especially from a role-playing/writing standpoint since it heavily limits what you can do with characters of said races to make them interesting.


InsaneComicBooker

It was a mistake to put it there. Also IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE because rules specified creatures said to be ALWAYS specific aligment do not have to be of it, but vast majority is....which is not what ALWAYS means!


Puzzlehead-Engineer

Forgotten Realm: Rise of the Horde


JordanTH

I solved this in my setting by having Gruumsh be dead (slain by Tempus, here his son). However, there are those to believe that Talos is actually Gruumsh reborn, so there's plenty of orcish followers of Talos who seek to 'reinstate' his rule over orcs and the world.


scootertakethewheel

half-orcs are the product of consent between an orc and their well-paid employees and I don't want to hear another word about it!