Pathfinder 1E May there be non-evil societies of always evil races? What would they be like?

[VelvetViolet]

I am dissatisfied with Pathfinder's reliance on the cliche of entire races being evil. Even Tolkien struggled with the idea of orcs being born evil or not until he died (he was Catholic).

So I'd like to use this thread to brainstorm non-evil societies of evil races. I'll start with the most controversial: drow.

[TABLE="width: 500"] [TR] [TD]Serq
If any race exists to prove that being good or evil is a choice, the serq would be it. The serq, or “shadow elves,” are distant relatives of the drow who have forsaken their evil ways and adopted the worship of the benevolent scorpion goddess Serqet. The serq are immigrants from the Plane of Shadow, though their precise origin before they lived on that plane is lost to history. They practice matriarchy and servitude that good societies find distastefully strange and off-putting, but lack the sadism and cruelty characteristic of drow. Serq men have the same legal rights as women, but suffer subtle discrimination such as lower wages and sexual objectification. Slavery, indenture, debt servitude, serfdom, prison labor, conscription, and corvée is legal within serq lands but, unlike evil societies, serq law prohibits the mistreatment of servants (as unhappy servants make for poor workers and are prone to revolt), allows servants to have servants of their own, and permits servants to buy their freedom, among other differences. While serq society at large is not evil, they are not necessarily good.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Opinions? Advice?

 

[gamerprinter]

I always thought that though a race as a whole is generally evil, PCs who choose to be members of a given "evil race" can choose not to be evil themselves. This means to me that a certain percentage of a given evil population, even a small one could be something other than "evil". While a subculture of non-evil members of an evil society would be small and probably weak, I'd think such exists for practically every evil race. Consider that fallen angels and devils are a thing, while most would consider all angels being "good" - if one could not be an opposing alignment, than a fallen angel could not exist - which we know is not true. I could see small factions and subcultures of opposing alignment members of a specifically aligned race, but probably not whole societies.

 

[VelvetViolet]

While a subculture of non-evil members of an evil society would be small and probably weak, I'd think such exists for practically every evil race.

I don't consider that thinking a solution. Drow are evil matriarchs and orcs are evil patriarchs. How can we fix this? Make them as morality flexible as humans and demihumans. Every race is divided into societies based on alignment: evil societies and non-evil societies.

Consider that fallen angels and devils are a thing, while most would consider all angels being "good" - if one could not be an opposing alignment, than a fallen angel could not exist - which we know is not true.

Why can't evil gods simply create obedient evil angels of their own? Why do they have to rely on hiring fiend mercenaries who they can't trust?

 

[Kramodlog]

What would they be like? They would all be angsty rangers with black cats.

 

[was]

...The whole concept of 'good' and 'evil' is, of course, culturally subjective. Certainly the classic orc does not consider itself to be evil when it slaughters and eats a human child. It's merely following its own cultural practices and religious ideologies which deem that to be a logical action.
...Being that the classic 'roots' of the game lie in good vs. evil campaigns, it's not surprising to find entire races to be described as 'evil'. Classic pc character races, often based on the suppositions of many modern day ideologies, have morals, ideals, religions which run contrary to those valued by the 'evil' races. It might be interesting for adventurers to actually compile an ethnography of an 'evil' race's culture in order to reflect upon the moral implications of killing them.
...There will certainly always be members of a society which rebel against conforming to cultural norms. It would also be perfectly natural for such non-conformists to establish their own community and have it grow into a thriving society. Their values, however, would most likely be viewed as 'perverse' or 'evil' by the standard cultural norms.
...Simply because Pathfinder follows past creature models, does not necessarily make it either racist or sexist. Labelling it as such, reflects a value judgement based upon one's own ethnocentric viewpoint. Certainly, one that may not be shared by others. Publicly attacking the creativity of others will likely alienate readers before they can appreciate the value of your creative efforts.
...The notion that the fantasy genre is one which allows writers to express modern racist viewpoints in a non-pc world is a fallacy. One used to twist the game into a vehicle to express a certain political agenda. It also falsely implies an intimate knowledge of the intent and feelings of the author, as well as those of every subsequently contributing author. The name Drow is from the Scottish Trow. Much of their description arises from the dark elves in Norse Mythology. This argument is eerily similar to the religious viewpoint that argues the magic in My Little Pony is a means of spreading satanic influences. Please do not further this personal political viewpoint. This board is not a political forum.
...If one views pc races as being racist, then that term can be fairly applied to most of them. Dwarves, elves and humans all view themselves as being superior to all others. This view exists even amongst differing subtypes within the same race.
...IME, gamers in general support creativity within a game setting. In that view, I regard your creation as a laudable effort. I am, however, a little confused by your creation. Your post indicates that you are attempting create a neutral drow society which, in no way, would reflect values which today would be considered sexist or racist. Your society does, however, include both a matriarchy and sexual discrimination which both reflect your arguments against the existing sexist nature of drow culture.
...Your society also practices slavery. Even though you add the qualifier that slaves are not mistreated, this practice does not seem to reflect the worship of a 'benevolent' goddess using modern-day value judgements. While this looks like a good start at creating a new Drow society, it still appears to be quite similar to the the racist, and sexist, model which you decry.
...I think more sweeping changes might be necessary to create a totally new culture. I'd like to see you give them a totally unique flair. The idea of a dark 'shadow' or 'gloom' fey pc race, without the heavy oppresive nature of the drow, has always appealed to me. Perhaps you might consider an early Germanic tribal or Gypsy society as a reference. Make them a semi-nomadic, more egalitarian society. Or maybe use an eastern Native American matriarchal model, where the power roles of women are less overt. In these, the women are the secret, real power behind the male puppets that run the bureaucracy of government. Maybe the men are limited to martial roles based upon their maternal lineages, the secular world, and women control the forces of arcane and divine power. You could also consider a late Roman Empire model where rank and power is based on citizenship in the empire, not necessarily a racial qualification.

 

[Umbran]

Even frigging Tolkien believed evil races were a stupid idea (he was Catholic).

Yet, he gave us orcs, our basic icon for an evil race. Did Tolkien depict a single good orc? I don't know of any.

Real-world racism is a problem. Game racism, however, I can't see as particularly problematic, so long as it clearly isn't, "this obvious cognate of a real-world culture is the model of this evil race".

It is a game, and it can have moral codes that are drastically simplified, for ease of play.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I usually don't have purely & universally evil races in campaigns I run.

However, in game worlds in which gods walk the earth and magic is a real force, I don't see a real contradiction with the concept that a race could actually be purely and universally evil, especially if they were created that way.

 

[pickin_grinnin]

When I GM, no entire species is "evil." An individual may be of any alignment, when I even bother to use alignment. Some cultures have practices that may seem "evil" to characters from other cultures, but that doesn't mean they are "evil" in some cosmic sense.

 

[VelvetViolet]

I usually don't have purely & universally evil races in campaigns I run.

However, in game worlds in which gods walk the earth and magic is a real force, I don't see a real contradiction with the concept that a race could actually be purely and universally evil, especially if they were created that way.

The problem is this conceit takes away that race's agency, turning them into automatons. All the satisfaction of defeating a villain vanishes when it turns out they never had any free will to begin with: they didn't choose to do evil things, they're just soulless meat puppets programmed to perform evil acts. Good and evil as cosmic forces only works well when people have a choice between them, otherwise free will doesn't exist and everyone becomes soulless meat puppets.

When I GM, no entire species is "evil." An individual may be of any alignment, when I even bother to use alignment. Some cultures have practices that may seem "evil" to characters from other cultures, but that doesn't mean they are "evil" in some cosmic sense.

In Pathfinder, good and evil are actual cosmic forces which just so happen to coincide with the values of progressive Americans. Moral ambiguity doesn't really exist except with the neutral alignments. Eberron tried to include moral ambiguity, but in practice what they did was create good counterparts of all the bad guys; which admittedly is the only thing you can do when good and evil are cosmic forces.

Yet, he gave us orcs, our basic icon for an evil race. Did Tolkien depict a single good orc? I don't know of any.

Real-world racism is a problem. Game racism, however, I can't see as particularly problematic, so long as it clearly isn't, "this obvious cognate of a real-world culture is the model of this evil race".

Tolkien explicitly compared orcs with Asians. The Easterlings were clearly modeled after Arabs. However, Tolkien struggled with the idea that anyone could be born evil, and struggled with it until his death. He actually stopped writing the LOTR sequel "The New Shadow" because he couldn't stomach the idea of evil coming from the hearts of men rather than an external entity like Sauron. The orcs and Easterlings weren't inherently evil, they were being manipulated by Sauron. (Aside, orcs had a taboo against cannibalism of other orcs in the books and consider leaving comrades behind to die needlessly is bad, so they do have a code of honor.)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The problem is this conceit takes away that race's agency, turning them into automatons. All the satisfaction of defeating a villain vanishes when it turns out they never had any free will to begin with: they didn't choose to do evil things, they're just soulless meat puppets programmed to perform evil acts. Good and evil as cosmic forces only works well when people have a choice between them, otherwise free will doesn't exist and everyone becomes soulless meat puppets.

I'm sorry, but that does not track logically.

First of all, one race- or even several- lacking free will to choose between evil and good (or chaos and law) does not mean that ALL races are so. As long as there is one race that does have free will, there is real gravitas there. After all, in Christian theology, humans are the only beings in God's creation with truly free will- even those angels who rebelled and fell were only able to do so once, and remain eternally broken, incapable of redemption.

Second, to say that satisfaction in defeating a villain occurs if and only if the villain had free will to act says more about you than about the game universe. For many, if not most, there is as much satisfaction in defeating someone who harms others due to a biological or psychological inability to experience empathy or control violent impulses as there would be in stopping someone who actively chose evil. This is because they're looking more at helping the victims- and preventing the creation of more- than "reveling in the challenge of defeating evil." To put it differently, their satisfaction is in the helping of others, not merely the victory over evil.