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

[Mercurius]

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.

Right. Its been awhile. That seems to fit the idea of separating them from humanoid races and making them of fiendish origin.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Right. Its been awhile. That seems to fit the idea of separating them from humanoid races and making them of fiendish origin.

I mean, Gnolls can be good in Wildemount and Eberron. I would like a gnoll race just to be open, and we have Yuan-Ti. Like I said before, the base races should be as inclusive as possible.

 

[Mercurius]

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.

Irony. X, let me put it this way: if you want to join the rest of us and play with ideas and come up with interesting solutions, please do. If you want to jump in and create division when there's not--especially when we're actually being constructive--I would kindly ask that you either stop and listen to what is going on, or just stay out of it.

 

[Xenonnonex]

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.

Appreciate I would if people would not misconstrue my points. That is not productive. Stop accusing me of trolling I would appreciate it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Appreciate I would if people would not misconstrue my points. That is not productive.

Let's just, drop it. No more talking about this. Next person who posts about this gets reported for trolling. Not accusing you of it, but at that point it will be trolling.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Irony. X, let me put it this way: if you want to join the rest of us and play with ideas and come up with interesting solutions, please do. If you want to jump in and create division when there's not--especially when we're actually being constructive--I would kindly ask that you either stop and listen to what is going on, or just stay out of it.

I would appreciate an apology.

My contribution is that obviously evil monsters do not need as changing. Or much changing. These can be obvious villains to engage with.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I apologize if I misunderstood you.

 

[Xenonnonex]

If gnolls are depicted in Volo's as they are. Right to change them to fiends. Otherwise create alternate lore. Bestial they can remain. But less obviously evil. Importantly they can be decoupled from demon lords.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

My contribution is that obviously evil monsters do not need as changing. Or much changing. These can be obvious villains to engage with.

Well, 5e seems to disagree. Celestials can fall, Zariel can be redeemed from devil to angel, there's a chaotic good devil in Descent into Avernus, and Acq. Inc. has a "good" lich.
I think most fiends should be evil most of the time. I think most celestials should be good most of the time. Aberrations are alien and can be evil all the time. Humanoids and other creatures aren't so clear cut.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

If gnolls are depicted in Volo's as they are. Right to change them to fiends. Otherwise create alternate lore. Bestial they can remain. But less obviously evil. Importantly they can be decoupled from demon lords.

I agree. In forgotten realms, they should be fiends. (I don't know if they're in Greyhawk, are they? If so, are they like FR gnolls?)
Eberron and Wildemount gnolls should be like the orcs in that setting. More passionate, wild, but still playable as good characters.