D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[FrogReaver]

I’d say not when the core setting is forgotten realms. It can be left to homebrew. The published settings should be inclusive.

So part of the issue In this discussion is you implying that any setting that doesn’t allow non-evil orcs is non-inclusive.

you don’t actually believe there should be any settings with only evil orcs do you?

 

[Xenonnonex]

I have no desire to buy the book, I don't plan on running an Eberron campaign. If I am misrepresenting what the book does, can you explain what I have incorrect? Cliff Notes version is fine because all I've heard so far is that orcs are distinguished by only their culture and religion.

Anyone?

@Aldajust posted about Eberron orcs above and they sound just like humans. Products of their culture and history.

From Keith Baker
"
ORCS
While they aren’t as directly animalistic as shifters, I see orcs as a very primal race. They’re extremely passionate and emotional; this can manifest as aggression or rage, but it’s just as strong when it comes to loyalty, affection and faith. They believe in things intensely. This led to them being the first druids on Khorvaire and having one of the oldest sects of the Silver Flame – the Ghaash’kala guardians of the Demon Wastes. But they’re also highly individualistic… leaning more towards chaos than law. They are very effective in small tribes or family groups, where they all know each other and are working together… but they aren’t good with faceless authority, blind obedience, or being part of a huge infrastructure. This is one of the main reasons the orcs never dominated Khorvaire. They are barbarians by nature. They have no innate desire to build vast cities or organize huge armies; the small tribe is what they are comfortable with. This led to their being pushed into the fringes of Khorvaire by the Dhakaani goblins, and that’s where this linger to this day. If the goblins are like ants or wasps, orcs are like wolves: fierce, loyal to their pack, but not inclined to form into a massive legion of wolves and conquer the world.

In playing an orc – whether as a player or DM – I’d emphasize this primal and passionate nature. They feel emotions strongly, and are quick to anger but equally quick to celebrate. They believe things deeply, and can be very spiritual. As an orc, you’re loyal to your pack – whether that’s your family or your adventuring companions – and quick to distrust massive, faceless forces and invisible authority. This may seem at odds with the idea of strong faith, but they’re equally distrustful of monolithic organized religions. The Ghaash’kala are one of the oldest sects of the Silver Flame, but they operate in small clans and have never formed the sort of political hierarchy that you see in the Church of the Silver Flame. So as an orc, follow your heart; explore your faith; be true to your friends and suspicious of those who would tell you what to do."

 

[Xenonnonex]

I don't know what 'One Note Religions' are. In any case, It's hard avoid baggage. Some things strike home for some people more than others. Once again, I still find it interesting to explore as long as it's done in good taste. Making an adventure that directly insults the Pope or present day Caliphate or other holy person in a round-about way is insulting to anyone who respects any religion. OTOH, you cannot deny that there has been corruption in every religion at some point in history. Telling that kind of story is perfectly fine as long as people at the table are also fine with it. The Evil Church Leader is a trope. If you start making your corrupt Church of Pelor a mirror of Christian Catholicism, you'd better make sure your players are on-board.

I've played a game where Vecna was secret god behind 'The God of Light', which was a National God. It was a super-cool campaign. Lots of real-world parallels were drawn: there were Cardinals based on Virtues. Neat, but not for every player. The fact that Vecna was a 'pretender god' helped to keep the whole thing in perspective. But if my DM, out of game, kept spouting anti-religious rhetoric, I wouldn't play because I would understand that the game was just a forum for his own bigoted, ignorant views.

Part of the heritage of D&D is changing things to suit the needs of the table. Themes, mechanics; settings and homebrew.

I mentioned this before: I think WotC has to be very careful to highlight that this is a game that can be changed based on the table's needs. Here is a toolset, here are examples of creatures and locations, now go ahead and do with it what you want.

Strongly do they already say make the game your own. People already have permission to do that.

 

[TheSword]

So part of the issue In this discussion is you implying that any setting that doesn’t allow non-evil orcs as non-inclusive.

you don’t actually believe there should be any settings with only evil orcs do you?

I don’t think that the main WOC published settings of 5e of which there are only a handful should have monolithically evil humanoids no.

What 3pp want to do like Frog God Games or Goodman Games want to do is on them. However I would expect to see big 3pp publishers running from the theme like crazy.

There’s always homebrew and Kickstarter though. I’m sure it will be a good niche for someone.

 

[Umbran]

Products of their culture and history.

People... should not be products of their culture and history?

 

[Xenonnonex]

People... should not be products of their culture and history?

Apparently this only makes you another blend of human.

 

[FrogReaver]

People... should not be products of their culture and history?

always evil orcs aren’t people they are monsters.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don’t think that the main WOC published settings of 5e of which there are only a handful should have monolithically evil humanoids no.

What 3pp want to do like Frog God Games or Goodman Games want to do is on them. However I would expect to see big 3pp publishers running from the theme like crazy.

There’s always homebrew and Kickstarter though. I’m sure it will be a good niche for someone.

Seems the early assessment was spot on - no compromise. Evils only orcs cannot exist in any WOTC published setting.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Strongly do they already say make the game your own. People already have permission to do that.

But they haven't gone far enough, IMO. Saying 'make the game your own' isn't stopping people from saying, I feel this race represents 'xyz' and that insults me, you must change it!

They have to be clear that no assumptions have been made and give people the tools to change things.

They need to codify ways to homebrew and change things. The DMG does this a bit with some of the expanded rules.. They need to go into more details of how to create and balance feats, tweak and invent races.

It's just not obvious for a lot of people.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Seems the early assessment was spot on - no compromise. Evils only orcs cannot exist in any WOTC published setting.

Too much of an uncompromising statement.