D&D 5E MM Firesnake up on Christopher Burdett's Blog

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Ok, you suckered me back in.

ok...

I do not equate this with a whistle blower. It really is not important enough for that. I did not bring that term into the conversation, I brought the term rabble-rouser in because that's closer to how I view it.

I quoted you... you said whistle blower... I never used that before you...

Funny, that's your spin on what I said. I was talking about real world journalists blowing this topic up so much out of proportion that someone loses their job.

yes you made uo a hypothetical worst case scenero where instead of honest debate helping to shape how things move forward some dire consqunce that you in no way can link to this might happen...

Personally, someone losing their job is more important to me, and it should be to you, than your personal sensibilities being offended by fictional infant monsters. Are your offended sensibilities more important than someone else's job?

I"m not asking for someone to loose there job... I'm asking to talk in a public forum about this and maybe get enough head of steam up to effect change moving forward...

No. If someone posts something on a blog and someone else loses their job over it for no real good reason (which I think that you and I can both agree, this is not important enough for someone to lose their job over), than that person was a moronic blogger.

Our social media is way out of control and it's only getting worse. People do lose their jobs over the most trivial of facebook/twitter/blog reasons.

um... is that about a completely different argument?

Would you like it if you lost your job because of something trivial that you wrote? This is a small number of monsters where the vast majority of gamers and virtually no non-gamers would have ever noticed this. And of those gamers that do notice it, very few consider it important.

yea... maybe you should take this argument to someone trying to do that and just argue with us about D&D

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion. And no, I do not think (or at least I hope) that this will not blow up into something bigger.

so that half of your post was?

But when one starts questioning the moral fiber of people these days in our media, crap happens. That might not be your intent, but the two of you are approaching this as a "should publishers be publishing this type of thing?" as if it is morally wrong and not just subpar monster design. Sorry, it's not morally wrong to many people. Morality is subjective. This is fiction. It's hard to really say that fiction is morally wrong because by definition, it's not real world.

Ok, let me put you at ease... I don't want anyone fired. I would like them to take a different approach from now on though... one where the default is not killing babies, and that the exception is for hunting wyrmlings and firesnakes

You considered it an insult that I disagreed with you and thought that the thread should just die a quick death?

being called a rabble rouser and a trouble maker and being told my thoughts should not be as represented (aka whole idea die a quick death) is insulting

The author controls that character, just like the co-authors (i.e. D&D players) control their PCs.

the author writes a character and you get to interpret that character. Is Fred a hero, a villain or other? Now in D&D instead of writing a character you are playing a roll and living through it your fantasy, and all I want is the default fantasy the game presents to new players NOT to be a baby killer

Nothing forces you to have your heroic PC go fight a Firesnake.

OK, and I will ask for the 5th time, what would be the harm of taking baby monsters out of the default game?

 

[ThirdWizard]

no slideing scale at all... I just don't care about Aliens. I also don't care about other things I don't like. Use a different example please...

So, if you don't care about baby X it's okay to kill. I think at this point, your proposition that its never okay to kill a baby doesn't hold up since we've found a baby you don't care about killing. So, I guess the only question left is what makes you the expert on which babies its okay to kill and which are bad to kill and not [MENTION=2011]KarinsDad[/MENTION], for example. So, why are you the authority, and why should I only kill the babies you want me to kill? After all, if you don't care about xenomorphs, that's fine, but what if someone else doesn't care about dragons? Or salamanders?

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

So, if you don't care about baby X it's okay to kill.

IT IS NEVER OK TO KILL A BABY AND BE THE HERO WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS... I just can't argue anything about a movie I know almost nothing about...

I think at this point, your proposition that its never okay to kill a baby doesn't hold up since we've found a baby you don't care about killing.

no you found a movie I don't care enough to worry about... I can't argue what is or isn't right for a 15 second scene in a movie from before I was born, that I don't care for. It isn't OK to ever kill a baby, but I can't be expected to go through every bit of entertainment and ask people to change things in area's I don't care about...

So, I guess the only question left is what makes you the expert on which babies its okay to kill and which are bad to kill and not @KarinsDad, for example.

try this again... I now would consider Ripley to be a very violent anti hero. I'm still not sure what people see in the movies...

So, why are you the authority,

really, when did I claim to be an authority? I am voiceing my thoughts and trying to get people to think about something... nothing more nothing less...

why should I only kill the babies you want me to kill?

You are now just being mean and asking for trouble... you know the answer to that...

After all, if you don't care about xenomorphs, that's fine, but what if someone else doesn't care about dragons? Or salamanders?

Since I care about killing Babies IN THE GAME THIS BOARD IS TALKING ABOUT... how about we just talk about DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS!!!

and now time 6: If tomorrow WotC took all baby monsters out of the game, and never again put stats for babies in the game how would that affect everyone? Please someone walk me down the road where that is a problem...

 

[Imaro]

and now time 6: If tomorrow WotC took all baby monsters out of the game, and never again put stats for babies in the game how would that affect everyone? Please someone walk me down the road where that is a problem...

Well seeing as how a juvenile version of a monster being as dangerous or slightly less so ( or even in a different way) is a common trope in fantasy (as well as sci-fi and horror) I would say without monsters like the salamander/firesnake the trope becomes less likely in published adventure and more work to create on your own.

 

[Leatherhead]

and now time 6: If tomorrow WotC took all baby monsters out of the game, and never again put stats for babies in the game how would that affect everyone? Please someone walk me down the road where that is a problem...

Well for starters, it would make it significantly more difficult to hatch and rear monsters. Some people might wish to play a character similar to Daenerys Targaryen, for instance.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Well for starters, it would make it significantly more difficult to hatch and rear monsters. Some people might wish to play a character similar to Daenerys Targaryen, for instance.

why? those dragons were not very tough when hatched, it was this season before they were anything other then cats with breath weapons...

 

[aramis erak]

To use an incredibly slippery-slope sort of argument:

Many people in the gaming industry have argued that unconscionable acts (like slavery) should be an accepted part of their game world, because it's more "realistic".

WotC, and other companies, make it clear that, regardless of real-world history, such an action is unquestionably evil in their game worlds, and do not publish material suggesting otherwise.

So I question WotC's decision to allow a different "unconscionable" act (in quotes for my opinion) in their official published material.

Again, I understand you hold a different opinion about the innate evilness of the act. But I don't understand your continued dismissal of the existence of the issue, nor the degree to which you defend your indifference.

And it's never "just a game". Never.

WotC allows portrayal of Slavery in their published modules. As an evil to be thwarted, mind you, but HotDQ Episode 2 shows that slaves are in fact part of the booty.

And if you're taking the "Never just a game" view, may I suggest finding a different hobby? Because D&D has always had a large subcurrent of "Kill them all and take their stuff." Which, by the way, is the modus operandi of several of the protagonists of the inspiring fiction... Conan, Kull, Cugel the Clever, Fafhrd, the Grey Mouser, John Carter of Mars....

OK, so we know that [MENTION=2011]KarinsDad[/MENTION] would be OK with a Monster Manual that lists hill giant toddlers on the encounter table.

For the benefit of everyone else - I continue to find it surprising that a major publisher, interested in avoiding a negative reception, would make this particular choice.

Several have. Many publishers have made it clear that the evil races in their setting are in fact not creatures with full free will. In other words, they're talking animals, and are inherently prone to killing and/or eating people.

As for real world...

Me, I like dead baby cow... it's called veal. (Link to the wikipedia entry on veal.) I like calfskin jackets, gloves, and hats, too. If a farmer winds up with too many calves to feed, it's time to make veal and calfskin.

I also love lamb and kid. Which is, by definition, the pre-yearling sheep or goat. They're common holiday meat choices, and common cuisine.

I see more reason to see a threat species killed in it's pre-reproductive age than a food beast, and I have no problem eating juvenile food beasts.

and now time 6: If tomorrow WotC took all baby monsters out of the game, and never again put stats for babies in the game how would that affect everyone? Please someone walk me down the road where that is a problem...

Someone would have a formula on the web within 36 hours of publication of an edition lacking any juvenile forms. And 3rd Party publishers would publish them, with or without license from WotC. Unlicensed, label it "For use with all major FRPGs", and then include 5E, PF, GURPS, and BRP stats...

Pretty much like happened when AD&D 2E "deleted" the Demons and Devils... 6 or 7 companies produced unlicensed monster books of demons and/or devils. And that wasn't even removing them, just renaming them.

And WotC would get ridiculed publicly for caving to a vocal and tiny minority. And rightfully so. Just like they were over the "Tanari & Ba'atezu" relabel

 

[Savage Wombat]

I find it interesting that so many people seem to find the idea that WotC might have chosen to make a monster not a sentient infant so threatening to their liberties.

Yes, if WotC decided to leave demons out of 5e there would have been outcry.

If WotC had left fire snakes out of 5e, or made them something other than larval salamanders - you and your fellow debaters would never, ever have noticed.

WotC, I've heard, deliberately removed hatchling dragons from 4e because some people complained about making sentient infant creatures legitimate targets. Were you arguing about this at that time?

Why do you feel personally threatened by the suggestion that some people find killing infants objectionable? Are you taking it as a criticism of your personal gaming style?

And it's never just a game, or just a book, or just a TV show, or just a movie. Everything you read, watch, talk about with your friends, and do shapes who you are and what you believe.

Once again, to reiterate ad nauseum - since WotC has established by previous behavior that they want their game to have a positive influence (while remaining true to the nature of the game), I find it odd that this particular element slipped past them.

If you think this particular creature is such a minor issue as to pass unnoticed - you have no case to defend it so strongly.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I hope the DMG talks ahout the morals of baby and newborn being diffrent, and maybe touch on fantwsy racism and color coded monsters and murder hobo ideas

 

[bogmad]

Baby monster killing is one thing, but I think we can all agree that the most morally reprehensible thing to do would be to enslave a baby monster, and then make it fight and kill other baby monsters or else subjugate them as well.