• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Portraying fantasy societies realistically instead of on the evil/good axis

the Jester

Legend
Something that really annoys me is that societies in D&D are either "good demi-humans" or "evil ugly people." I won't go into my hatred of D&D's "ugly = evil" aesthetic.

Why can't we portray societies of orcs, goblins, brain-eating squids, dark elves, snake-human hybrids, etc as just funny-looking humans like we do for the "pretty" dwarves, elves, hobbits, and gnomes? It would go a long way towards explaining how they can raise their own children without eating them and don't destroy themselves with paranoia and blood rage.

Well, not all of us portray elves, dwarves, etc as just funny-looking humans.

I just got finished working on a document describing bits of the cultures and relationships between the "civilized" races. Nonhumans have very different cultures in my campaign, sometimes grounded to some extent in their biology (e.g. the long elven lifespan has a huge impact on their world view and behavior).

The "ugly" humanoids (though honestly, there's nothing wrong with a handsome kobold) have distinctive nonhuman traits in my game too, and there are good goblins, orcs, etc. They just aren't the norm. I even have a civilization of orcs who have been converted to worship of the once-primary lawful good god of the campaign world.

Anyhow, I don't think "ugly" is a good term for all the evil races. Goblins, bugbears, orcs and gnolls, sure. But I can easily picture a striking, severely handsome hobgoblin warlord, a cute kobold or a beautiful lizardfolk. "We" (by which I mean humans and the other pc races) consider most of them ugly because they look different; the civilized races look close enough to each other that they can overcome that mutual aversion.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Starfox

Hero
Another point here is that evil looks very different seen from the outside.

If you look at England from a Chinese perspective during the Opium Wars, the only real conclusion you can draw about those English is that they were chaotic and evil. This is not how the English saw themselves, and not how we see them today. Wuthering Heights was written just 4 years after the end of the opium war. What I am trying to say is that a culture can look distinctly different from the inside and outside.

If you are a physically able hobgoblin living in a highly regimented hobgoblin society and winning a war, you probably think your life is the best there is and something very close to heaven. If you are describing domestic scenes inside an orc tribe, things probably are crude but the evil might not be apparent by any means. Sure, the weak are beaten down, but they also know there place so there is little apparent conflict. Orc babies know better than to cry when daddy is around. And a whole lot of comradely roughhousing is going on. Like kindergarten, with axes.

But in my games I generally try to avoid such scenes. Player characters have selective perception, so they will not notice signs of affection among orcs. Orcs just never have babies anywhere where the PCs are going to find them. If the theme of the campaign is life under oppression, the oppressed will be human (or elves etc - someone generally considered "good").

if we look at Paizo's current adventure path Wrath of the Righteous, they deftly bypass most of these issues by having the opponents be demons - extra-planar aliens without families and in 99% of all cases irredeemably evil. And you can still bet the players will meet that 1% redeemable demon. Thus you can BOTH have a named, redeemable heartthrob AND hordes of minions a paladin can slay in good faith. 20 years ago such a war story might be told with orcs as the antagonists, but today Paizo choose the even easier-to-slay demons. This is entertainment, not social realism, but the standards of what is acceptable entertainment change over time.
 


Lwaxy

Cute but dangerous
And what about mind flayers? Demons? Devils? Beholders? Even Drow?

Mind Flayers can't, in my view, stay evil for long if they absorb the thoughts and knowledge of their non-evil victims. You kind of become what you eat. They would need to stay on an evil diet. Demons and devils are no race as such, more like the collective evillity (word invented by my niece) of the multiverse. Beholders are usually neutral in my worlds, and drow as always evil is kind of getting old.
 

Celebrim

Legend
Why can't we portray societies of orcs, goblins, brain-eating squids, dark elves, snake-human hybrids, etc as just funny-looking humans like we do for the "pretty" dwarves, elves, hobbits, and gnomes?

What would be the point of that? If everything in the game acts like funny-looking humans, then why not just have everything in the game be humans.

I take rather the opposite tack. If the characterization of some non-human race is so trite that they are just 'funny looking humans', then they don't belong in the game. The goblins, elves, dwarves, dark elves, snake-human hybrids, and so forth that exist in my game are fundamentally inhuman.

For example, a race that ate their own children and didn't think this unusual might be interesting. Or at least, it's a race with a different enough outlook on life that I'd think about it. A race that is just funny looking humans wouldn't. One of the PC races in my game - the Orine - are destroying themselves with uncontrollable blood rage, and they are a 'pretty' race. For that matter, the 'dark elves' of stock D&D are a 'pretty' race also.

So, if you look at my PC races, the biology and culture is non-human:

Dwarf: Racially more inclined to the group than humans. Live roughly twice as long as humans, and are hardier and more durable. Live in very dense populated communities, work in groups, and can feel monophobia if alone. Hermits strike dwarves as being insane. Typically a stubborn, arrogant, and intolerant of fault in themselves and others. Dwarfin culture is dominated by the fact that male children are born at least twice the rate of female children, which means at least half of all male dwarfs never marry. Of all the races, Dwarves are the most polyandrous culture - though chaste loyalty to the family leaders is the Dwarven ideal, giving them something of a 'pack' culture. Unmarried dwarves devote themselves to war or crafts and the service the family. Prefer to live underground, and are naturally adapted to such life. Do not adapt easily to farming, which they consider drudgery, and prefer to trade with neighbors for basic foodstuffs.

Elf: Racially more individual than humans. Age at roughly 1/9th the human rate, including pregnancy, childhood, etc. Very prolonged childhood results in a family experience alien to the other races. Fundamentally connected to flora and fauna in the way that humans just aren't. Can easily survive and thrive as vegans, with no dietary supplement. Fragile and prone to illness - as such they avoid contact with strangers and avoid high population density. Require intake of beauty in the same manner that other races require food, water, and air. If deprived of beauty typically fall ill and die within days. Cannot be enslaved; enslaved elves refuse to work, lose the will to live and die. It's suggested that the goblin fondness for elf as a food meat, results from the failure to enslave them. Entirely different set of passions compared to humans. Not particularly prone to greed or lust, making crimes like lust and rape virtually unknown within elfin society. Gluttony is rare. Suffer however from anarooth and dhahelx as ordinary vices which would strike humans as insanity, and also suffer from a variety of vices and manias related to overindulgence in beauty, sensation and novelty. If you are playing elves from my world like a pointy eared human, you aren't doing it right.

Orine: Entire race strikes other races as insane. Although generally conforming to humanoid norms of appearance, are avian rather than mammalian. Feathers cover body, especially scalp, rather than hair. Oviparous. Eyes and vocal organs are more birdlike. Also have two eyelids. Poor impulse control combined with almost complete lack of a 'flight' instinct means that insults within Orine society are almost always lethal. Highly developed manners and customs to avoid giving insult and offense. Generally avoid contact with other races, and other races avoid them. Are not cosmopolitan and do not build cities. They live exclusively in tight knit nomadic family groups, banding together in alliances only for war. Nearly as obsessed with beauty as elves, but are a far more carnal and lusty race whose passions are more familiar to humans.

Idreth: Called by other races 'the born old', Idreth are born with collective racial memory. Although memory recall and retention is not perfect, Idreth individuality is nonetheless blurred, since an Idreth remembers himself doing many things in former lives - and can even remember himself meeting himself. Idreth consider themselves as much a part of a lineage as they do themselves individuals. Idreth have nothing like what the other races would consider a recognizable childhood, since they are born with adult memories which often include memories of their own parents lives. Idreth live as if understanding their own memories and passing on interesting memories to their future selves was the only thing worth doing, and omniscience was the only thing worth having. Prone to almost none of the vices of the other races, they can be either wise and gentle or completely amoral and ruthless depending on their inclination in achieving those things. Prone to injury, they avoid war and political conflict, often integrating themselves into the social fabric of other races, and forming monastic like communities which maintain strict neutrality when they can not. The only race with generally favorable relations with all the other free peoples, they are still sometimes feared and persecuted by those that believe that the are engaged in a vast conspiracy against the other races.

Goblins: The most salient trait of goblinkind is the fact that they practice deliberate selective breeding on themselves, and possible something not unlike genetic manipulation. This has resulted in goblin-kind diverging into a number of divergent physical castes, which are in turn subdivided into many other social castes. Appear fearsome and unattractive to the other races, including it is said sometimes to themselves, though it is said in their original forms they were not so. Goblins are utilitarian to the point of considering usefulness the aesthetic standard. Thus, horny hide, shaggy hair, fangs, claws, and so forth are more desirable traits than beauty. Consider themselves the rightful owners of the world, and their own gods the rightful kings of the universe - usurped from their position by younger races. Fiercely loyal to their own pantheon and generally will not serve or worship other deities. Some members of other races therefore do not consider them free peoples, but mere servitors. Prone to carnivorous diet, as raw vegetable matter is often poorly digested or not at all. Cannibalism is a common and accepted practice, as is the consumption of the flesh of other sentient beings. Almost fully nocturnal and fully adapted to living in the dark. Are out of their element in bright light. High resistance to disease makes them generally unconcerned with cleanliness and sanitation. Usually live underground. Usually keep to themselves, and are generally regarded as monsters by the other free peoples - but some individuals and groups are more or less integrated with human society although generally relegated to jobs and roles which humans find odious.

Fey: Whether changling, sidhe, pixie or other these beings are fundamentally not human, but more of the nature of 'small gods'. They are immortal. They are very nearly spirit beings, animating some principle or role within the universe. They are innately magical, and can see into and move between the other worlds more easily than other races. Many if not most are not born, and have no parents, but are rather the result of spontaneous generation. They have no childhood. They change and learn rather slowly, but are born with profound if often very narrow and seemingly spotty understanding.

It is a mistake to consider any of those races to be just funny looking humans.
 


fanboy2000

Adventurer
Something that really annoys me is that societies in D&D are either "good demi-humans" or "evil ugly people." I won't go into my hatred of D&D's "ugly = evil" aesthetic.

Why can't we portray societies of orcs, goblins, brain-eating squids, dark elves, snake-human hybrids, etc as just funny-looking humans like we do for the "pretty" dwarves, elves, hobbits, and gnomes? It would go a long way towards explaining how they can raise their own children without eating them and don't destroy themselves with paranoia and blood rage.
People can, and do.

It's fairly easy. Lets say a DM starts a game at 1st level. In an early session, the PCs come across a trade with goods to sell. The trader is a Goblin/Orc/Drow/Gnoll/Whatever with a child in tow. PCs trade with trader and come away with an early lesson that not all Goblins/Orcs/Gnolls/Whatevers are bandits out kill adventures (or whatever the PCs are).

I think the problem is that these races are usually encountered away from whatever village or society they have. If you only interact with a group's blood-thirsty criminals, you're going to come away with skewed picture of them. The DM can easily remedy that.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
The advantage of clearly/objectively-evil races is that it requires no thought to attack them. D&D isn't about moral quandries or ethical judgements. It's about killing.

As soon as you allow for the possibility for a neutral or even a good orc, then all of a sudden PCs need to make choices before every single combat; try to negotiate; perhaps even understand your opponent's position.

True objective good and evil are a narrative convenience that has worked very well for many years. It doesn't sit well with every player, though. Obviously.
 

VelvetViolet

Adventurer
The thing about many societies that we modern liberals would consider evil did not actually consider themselves evil and did not extort the values of being evil. They believed themselves to be morally right. In the USA, the two main political parties consider their opponents to be evil because of differing values. It's not particularly difficult for a writer to give a non-evil society a rationale for, say, slavery, especially if you're using Egyptian-style "you can't abuse your slaves" slavery rather than American-style "kill them as you please" slavery, although it falls apart when you can just mass-produce golems to do all labor, freeing up the slaves to work in service and maintenance and worry about boredom and no OSHA compliance rather than being whipped by sadistic taskmasters under a burning sun.

Already it sounds way more interesting than yet another cartoonishly evil society of evil sociopaths and I haven't even detailed the actual society.

The "races are taught to be evil" things falls flat for me. The closest analogue for that in our world are the dictators in certain African countries. Do you happen to notice a big difference between then and, say, the yuan-ti? The yuan-ti have this huge, successful empire and can undertake building projects on the same scale as the pyramids. The African dictatorships lack basic infrastructure.

Even the Wall Bankers (lawful evil at its worst) are dependent on everyone else NOT acting like @$$holes so that they can steal from them. A society were literally everyone is a sociopath simply could not function in any meaningful fashion.

EDIT: Whoops! Didn't notice the second page.

I like the idea that the roaming baddies are actually their equivalent of human bandit hordes, like mongols and vikings. That neatly solves the issues I have by giving goblinoid societies the same complexity as human ones, but we simply don't visit peaceful goblinoid villages in campaigns.
 
Last edited:

Celebrim

Legend
The advantage of clearly/objectively-evil races is that it requires no thought to attack them.

I find D&D players have a tendency to exert no thought when attacking things even if the target isn't clearly and objectively evil.

D&D isn't about moral quandries or ethical judgements.

I disagree.

It's about killing.

I make a moral judgment of such a game. If the game becomes solely 'about killing' then its just glorifying violence and encouraging enjoyment of vicarious murder.

As soon as you allow for the possibility for a neutral or even a good orc, then all of a sudden PCs need to make choices before every single combat; try to negotiate; perhaps even understand your opponent's position.

Well, yes. This isn't all bad; in fact it is quite good.

However, you don't have to seek a diplomatic solution in every encounter. If you encounter a boiling steaming acidic oozing goop, you don't have to have moral quandaries about killing the thing before it digests you. If it turns out to be a polymorphed prince, well, people will generally forgive you for the misunderstanding. If you are walking down the road, and a band of gnolls starts pelting you with arrows from the safety of the woods, right of self-defense very much applies and it really doesn't immediately matter if the gnolls are evil or good and this is all some sort of mistake - they are trying to kill you. And there are plenty of things that are objectively evil where the whole point is you can't usefully bargain with them - for example soul sucking monstrosities from the beyond, incarnated evil spirits, and remorseless undead - "Listen, and understand. That terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead." It's useful to have things that are both usually evil - say a goblin - and things that are always evil - say a horror spirit.

Currently in between slaying undead and the like, the PC's in my campaign are pursuing a cult of necromancers. They know the cult has been responsible for numerous murders, and indirectly killed thousands of people through its reckless disregard for human life. Additionally they know that they were pursuing weapons capable of destroying all life on the planet, and believe that they are trying to construct a weapon capable of killing the gods and shattering the barriers between the dimensions - potentially wrecking a 1000 mile swath of the planet. Further, they know that the necromancers themselves don't believe they are bad guys. They don't believe their motives are evil. It doesn't really matter if some of the people in the cult are actually good at heart but just tricked or misguided. When they burst into the bad guys lair, they have a reasonable presumption that the act of warfare they are engaged in is a just one, and that no quarter need be offered nor will be given. A soldier knows that often his enemy is as moral, decent, and patriotic as himself - good people can fight for bad causes. It's not always a question of whether the guy who is trying to kill you is a good guy. The point is, he's trying to kill you.

Even more complex, detecting evil in a goblin is no proof that it is morally right and just to kill it. If the goblin - or the human - is evil, but poses no threat to you and is guilty of no crime you are aware of, you can't justly play executioner. This has also been a lesson my PC's have had to learn. Sure, he's lawful evil - but just because he's a ruthless greedy scoundrel when it comes to business and a true Ebeneezer Scrouge doesn't mean you can kill him, break into his house, steal his stuff, and try to kill his private chaplain. Who has he ever murdered, and who appointed you judge, jury, and executioner?
 

Remove ads

Top