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

The need to make a change in something that doesn't exist would also be dead in the water. If there aren't any official settings with always evil orcs, there are no always evil orcs to change.
Reflecting this in the core rules, that don’t match the settings. The MM and Volo’s still default them to evil despite it apparently not being intrinsic to any specific WOC campaign setting.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I do find that generally orcs are monsters in games I played in and as monsters, they are meant to be defeated. Same with most things in the MM that isn't a pegasus or angel.

Have you tried Pegasus meat? You might change your tune.

Made for some pretty good Swedish meatballs, but you had to get them earlier- they just FLEW off the shelves.
 

thanks. Since the issue is in dispute I will do some research and get back to you.

in the meantime, let’s assume you are correct. Doesn’t that mean that d&d is and always has been inclusive? Orcs aren’t always evil, they aren’t always dumb, etc. What actually needs changed about them?
The monstrous manual entry and the way they are used in campaigns.

It’s possible that in earlier editions they were seen as such and while FR, Eberron, Wildemount, Nentir etc have developed the core 5e books are a throwback that need bringing in line.
 

Reflecting this in the core rules, that don’t match the settings. The MM and Volo’s still default them to evil despite it apparently not being intrinsic to any specific WOC campaign setting.
I think a better use of WotC's resources would be to write in the alignment section at the beginning that no monster entry is always the alignment shown. The shown alignment is just a general overview. That allows for non-evil everythings.
 

The monstrous manual entry and the way they are used in campaigns.

It’s possible that in earlier editions they were seen as such and while FR, Eberron, Wildemount, Nentir etc have developed the core 5e books are a throwback that need bringing in line.

I’m not really sure how we got to 20 pages into this discussion if all that is being advocated for is making the core book lore match settings lore. I have no issues with that. I don’t think anyone else does either.
 

Have you tried Pegasus meat? You might change your tune.

Made for some pretty good Swedish meatballs, but you had to get them earlier- they just FLEW off the shelves.
I actually have a character who's a chef that specializes in locally sourced foods. The more rare, the better: unicorns, pixies, pegasi and owlbear are all big sellers. Nobody likes eating the local goblins for some reason. Give the customers what want, I guess.
 

I think a better use of WotC's resources would be to write in the alignment section at the beginning that no monster entry is always the alignment shown. The shown alignment is just a general overview. That allows for non-evil everythings.

They do that now, but it's just a sentence buried in a paragraph that's easy to miss.
 



can you provide page reference?


Page 7 of the MM

The alignment specified in a monster’s stat block is the default. Feel free to depart from it and change a monster’s alignment to suit the needs of your campaign. If you want a good-aligned green dragon or an evil storm giant, there’s nothing stopping you​


Earlier on that page is one that might be changing... "Almost as numerous but far more savage and brutal, and almost uniformly evil, are the races of the goblinoids (goblins, hobogoblins, and bugbears), orcs, gnolls, lizardfolk, and kobolds."

Was surprised the DMG doesn't even have alignment in the index.
 

Remove ads

Top