You're either twisting, not reading or just plain ignoring what I've said repeatedly now. If they are just humans with funny colored skin and bad dental work they serve no purpose for me.
No, you've been misunderstanding what I've said: orcs + culture =/= human.
But this is going same as every other thread.
Maybe that means you're not understanding what everyone else is talking about.
2. But why not have only some orcs be evil? [EDIT: add implied racism]
Why not? Some humans are evil. The second-most recent big bad in my campaign was a halfling. The players hated him. I'm gonna have him come back as undead soon.
If all members of a race are "irredeemably evil" simply because you want them to be,
and you spend a lot of time fighting against any possibility of them being not evil--such as by comparing the DM making cultures for orcs to real-life people forcibly stripping others of their cultural identity--then maybe there is a problem. And not with the "not Always Evil" crowd.
And quite frankly, you're the one who brought up racism. Paul Farquhar said "Anyone can be evil. It's just that you can no longer tell who is evil by looking at their skin colour." To me, that clearly means "you can't just look at someone and decide they're evil because of their race, which since this is D&D, that actually means things like your fighter can't just look at an orc and decide they're evil because they're an orc." But you seemed to take that as a personal attack, as if Paul was saying you were a real-life racist.
3. That's fine. Do what makes sense for your campaign.
From what I could tell, your first post in this thread was:
I think the issue with any generically evil creature (let's call them Blargs) is that at some point someone is going to start identifying with them because Blargs are outcasts from normal society that are feared and some people feel like they don't fit in. Then they want to play a Blarg so we come up with stats. The next thing you know, it's a bad thing that Blargs are a representation of people that are prejudiced against. Since we can no longer have generically evil Blargs we come up with something completely different called Blurgs. The cycle continues. [...] For me? It's just a game and I think people read too much into this. I just finished playing Half-Life Alyx after getting a new VR headset (awesome game by the way) and I have no qualms about mowing down the enemy in this or any other video game I've ever played. Is that over-simplified, not realistic? Absolutely. It's a game.
You literally started this by saying that it was somehow bad that people would want to play an evil race because then "people would start identifying them" and
you'd have to come up with a new evil race.
And hey, sure, maybe you're the type of player who hates having to deal with moral quandaries in-game. That's fine. We can all appreciate a little black and white morality at times. But
then you started fighting against the idea of having evil non-racial groups by saying things like "For some people, some games, it's okay for Nazis to be evil because the Nazi regime was evil. It ignores that soldiers in the Nazi army were there for a whole host of reasons. Same with storm troopers for that matter."
It doesn't look good when your argument is #NotAllNazis. And it looks worse when your argument is "its better to kill people for the way they were born than for the conscious choices they make," because you're ignoring that most DMs aren't going to have the Evil Empire conscripting innocents as soldiers without also at least strongly hinting that is the case to the PCs.
4. Okay, but why not have only some orcs be evil?
5. Go to step 1 until thread is shut down.
You've been claiming that would happen four fifteen pages now.