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

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I would have the base orc be as open as possible. The setting determines how they act in that world based on lore. Any race should be as open and inclusive as possible. It shouldn't require work for us to make the race more inclusive to playing certain races, it should require work to make the races more restricted in certain worlds.

 

[Mercurius]

I would have the base orc be as open as possible. The setting determines how they act in that world based on lore. Any race should be as open and inclusive as possible. It shouldn't require work for us to make the race more inclusive to playing certain races, it should require work to make the races more restricted in certain worlds.

Fair enough. Would you apply the same to all humanoids? What about monsters and monstrous races (e.g. yuan-ti, rakshasa, illithid, etc)?

 

[Xenonnonex]

Fair enough. Would you apply the same to all humanoids? What about monsters and monstrous races (e.g. yuan-ti, rakshasa, illithid, etc)?

These are obviously monsters. Importantly there is really no racist tones in their depiction. Your question is a red herring.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Fair enough. Would you apply the same to all humanoids? What about monsters and monstrous races (e.g. yuan-ti, rakshasa, illithid, etc)?

I'm fine with Fiends and Aberrations being almost universally evil. Illithids have to eat brains to survive, so they have to be evil. Yuan-Ti and current 5e Gnolls are in a weird point, where they probably should all be evil, but I haven't made my mind up about it.

 

[Mercurius]

These are obviously monsters. Importantly there is really no racist tones in their depiction. Your question is a red herring.

Please stop contributing conflict. People are trying to have civil conversations.

 

[Mercurius]

I'm fine with Fiends and Aberrations being almost universally evil. Illithids have to eat brains to survive, so they have to be evil. Yuan-Ti and current 5e Gnolls are in a weird point, where they probably should all be evil, but I haven't made my mind up about it.

I suppose it would depend upon (added) lore? Meaning, someone suggested added fiendish ancestry to gnolls...maybe they are demons who were "left behind" after a demonic incursion in the elder days, and adapted to the Prime Material.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

These are obviously monsters. Importantly there is really no racist tones in their depiction. Your question is a red herring.

Yeah, we were discussing here. Don't be a troll. We're on the same side of this conversation, and Mercurius was asking an honest question and we were being constructive.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Please stop contributing conflict. People are trying to have civil conversations.

Yeah, we were discussing here. Don't be a troll. We're on the same side of this conversation, and Mercurius was asking an honest question and we were being constructive.

That was an honest answer. I gave. Please do not tell me how to post. Do not tell me that I am contributing conflict when I am not. Stop that.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I suppose it would depend upon (added) lore? Meaning, someone suggested added fiendish ancestry to gnolls...maybe they are demons who were "left behind" after a demonic incursion in the elder days, and adapted to the Prime Material.

Isn't that kind of the current lore? They were hyenas that ate the spoils of Yeenoghu's rampage and were corrupted by the demonic power. They're essentially demons in humanoid forms, in the current lore.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That was an honest answer. I gave. Please do not tell me how to post. Do not tell me that I am contributing conflict when I am not. Stop that.

Sorry if I misunderstood your post, but the "red herring" part seemed like an attack, and an attempt to escalate the conflict. We both interpreted it as trolling, which is against site policy. We agree on this topic, we're just trying to keep it civil.