Why hate onthe drow? (Forked Thread: How is FR changing with 4E?)

The drow were kinda interesting for the first couple years. Then they became horribly overused. You couldn't hardly find a gaming group that didn't have a drow. I burned out on them 15 years ago, or more.

Of course, I seemed to also always managed to find a group with at least one (male) player who wanted to not just play a drow, but a lesbian, dominatrix, whip master drow. From this experience, I also began banning gender-bending. Unfair? Yup. But, I got tired of booting players and zotting characters, so opted to never deal with it again.

My disdain for Drizzt, in particular, comes from the 2e TWF ranger. I found (and still find) the association between a woodsman and combat ambidexterity to be assinine. Not that they are exclusive, by any means, but certainly not signature. Regardless, Drizzt got it from being a drow, not a ranger.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I really don't like, however, that he popularized the whole "Oh I'm just misunderstood!" deal, whereby certain people are absolutely desperate to play members of evil races (inevitably glamourous/attractive evil races, never ugly/thuggish ones) who aren't evil like the rest of them..

Because, according to modern fiction and fiction of ye olden days: attractive evil people are corrupt and can change. Ugly evil people are just by nature.

take two races, say drow and hobgoblins. Group 'em together in equal numbers. Have to possible leaders from each that seem to be on equal footing in power, ability, and intelligence. Then, add PCs into the mix. They need information from this hostile group. They need to question someone. Who do you think they are most likely to keep alive and question?

..Okay, not the best comparison since hobgobs are Lawful and thus far less likely to divulge information, but it's really hard to find an intelligent ugly and evil race that are equal in capability to drow, shadar-kai, and so on.
 
Last edited:

take two races, say drow and hobgoblins. Group 'em together in equal numbers. Have to possible leaders from each that seem to be on equal footing in power, ability, and intelligence. Then, add PCs into the mix. They need information from this hostile group. They need to question someone. Why do you think is more likely to divluge information?
Interesting choice of comparisons. IMC, hobgoblins (due to their lawful nature) are active participants in the world political stage and are viewed as a major "civilized" race capable of reasonable discourse. Conversely, dark elves (who physically resemble high elves and tend to be more martial than religious, but are close enough to drow for this discussion) are not trusted at all and are considered irredeemable and among the most terrifying foes.
 

Interesting choice of comparisons. IMC, hobgoblins (due to their lawful nature) are active participants in the world political stage and are viewed as a major "civilized" race capable of reasonable discourse. Conversely, dark elves (who physically resemble high elves and tend to be more martial than religious, but are close enough to drow for this discussion) are not trusted at all and are considered irredeemable and among the most terrifying foes.

I had to fix something from my original comparison to have it make some sense, and still hindsight is 20/20: My point would have probably been better if I went with this comparison:

The PCs need to keep an NPC enemy alive and kill and NPC. For some reason they want to try to make that particualr enemy a 'better person' by making them good. Their choices are between a drow and a hobgoblin. Both are capable and intelligent, and the hobgoblin has a slight edge over the drow in usefulness to the group. Which would the PC's choose to save? What if the drow and the hobgob were equal on all terms?
 


I agree. The Mafia is a LE organization. I mean, c'mon.

Wouldn't the Mafia actually be Neutral Evil? You have an organization where you can try to take out those around you when you have enough money and power. So you can't always rely on your peers, your boss, or your underlings and often have to use a show of force to get your way. Anyone could betray you with the proper incentive. The organization exists by tradition, and falls apart in a chaotic mess at a moments notice. Then it's brought back after the money is counted and the bodies are carted away.
 

The PCs need to keep an NPC enemy alive and kill and NPC. For some reason they want to try to make that particualr enemy a 'better person' by making them good. Their choices are between a drow and a hobgoblin. Both are capable and intelligent, and the hobgoblin has a slight edge over the drow in usefulness to the group. Which would the PC's choose to save? What if the drow and the hobgob were equal on all terms?
IMC, the hobgoblin, no thought involved. The PCs have fought with, fought against, and parlayed with hobgoblins. A couple of the players have played in previous campaigns of mine and dealt with dark elves. If you get a chance to kill a dark elf or let one die, you take it.

Take the Star Trek TNG time frame. Use your example above, but substitute a Klingon for the hobgoblin and a Romulan for the elf. Which one has a better chance of redemption?
 

Wouldn't the Mafia actually be Neutral Evil? .
Too many rules about loyalty, codes of behavior; they do not follow the Law, but the Mafia has its own laws that it enforces. It could easily be compared to a dictatorship or other tyrannical organization; those are evil, but still have systems, structure, and order in place.

Not to mention - wait, wait. I'm getting into an alignment discussion. I'm going to stop here. :)
 


Remove ads

Top