D&D (2024) bring back the pig faced orcs for 6th edition, change up hobgoblins & is there a history of the design change

[Oofta]

We have a lot of terrible jackholes in real life and few are cultists.

And the entire spectrum of religious bad guys is artificially narrowed due to alignment (specifically gods being aligned) where you can't have clerics who are... wrong. Like a fanatic Pelorite that wants to sunlaser all non-Peolrites for not being Perlorites, Or a group of Melora worshippers who go full-on animal wrongs group.

There's a lot you can do that isn't 'they are evil because of how they are born or because the writer is too lazy and they are a monoculture'.

I'm talking about entire group default alignment not individuals.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm talking about entire group default alignment not individuals.

Entire groups of default alignment is exactly the thing we’re trying to move away from. Not shifting from default aligned races to default aligned cultures, but to completely eliminate the idea of groups of sapient beings having default alignments (outsiders notwithstanding, because they operate under a different rule where changing their alignment would change the type of outsider they are).

 

[Chaosmancer]

If a specific group that has, let's say non-caucasian looks, is evil only because of their religion and culture I see a very close tie to real world religious bigotry that is sadly far too common. It's not like a group of hobbits (who are typically depicted as northern European) is suddenly going to start worshipping Gruumsh and turn evil.

Why can't there be non-orc worshippers of Gruumsh?

Why must Gruumsh be the only orc god that matters? Even the Drow have more than Lolth, with Elistraea being of note in this example.

Monsters serve a purpose in the game. If orcs have the same flexibility as humans, I have no reason to use them since the half dozen or so "standard" races is already too many for my tastes.

You seem to miss that this has already happened. The game hasn't fully caught up to it, but Orcs already have the same moral flexibility as humans, elves, gnomes, Dragonborn, dwarves, halflings, Goliaths, ect ect

Sounds like the ship of Theseus to me, I like orcs as they are even if I think some wording should change. You don't. What else is there to discuss?

It isn't like the Ship of Theseus at all. I know this for a fact, because I've seen orcs in other fantasy worlds that aren't universally evil, and have a culture that can be good and evil, and they are still recognizably orcs.

I guess I'm still just flummoxed why you think this is impossible, or why this is going to inevitably lead to re-education camps, or them just being boring humans. There doesn't seem to be this issue with any other situation, so why is this so hard for orcs?

 

[Oofta]

Why can't there be non-orc worshippers of Gruumsh?

Why must Gruumsh be the only orc god that matters? Even the Drow have more than Lolth, with Elistraea being of note in this example.



You seem to miss that this has already happened. The game hasn't fully caught up to it, but Orcs already have the same moral flexibility as humans, elves, gnomes, Dragonborn, dwarves, halflings, Goliaths, ect ect



It isn't like the Ship of Theseus at all. I know this for a fact, because I've seen orcs in other fantasy worlds that aren't universally evil, and have a culture that can be good and evil, and they are still recognizably orcs.

I guess I'm still just flummoxed why you think this is impossible, or why this is going to inevitably lead to re-education camps, or them just being boring humans. There doesn't seem to be this issue with any other situation, so why is this so hard for orcs?

We have different preferences. I've explained mine you've explained yours.

I don't see anything else to add.

 

[Faolyn]

If a specific group that has, let's say non-caucasian looks, is evil only because of their religion and culture I see a very close tie to real world religious bigotry that is sadly far too common.

...You have specifically said orcs (who have non-caucasian looks) are evil only because of their religion and culture...

 

[Oofta]

Entire groups of default alignment is exactly the thing we’re trying to move away from. Not shifting from default aligned races to default aligned cultures, but to completely eliminate the idea of groups of sapient beings having default alignments (outsiders notwithstanding, because they operate under a different rule where changing their alignment would change the type of outsider they are).

It's easy to add that in for individual campaigns. The MM has the default adversary version, different versions should be encouraged but left up to the campaign. Especially because I think it should apply to all intelligent creatures and at a certain point there's an issue with page count.

All, just my opinion of course. Feel free to differ.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's easy to add that in for individual campaigns.

No, it’s not.

The MM has the default adversary version,

Right, I don’t think it should. Easier to remove nuance if for some reason you don’t want it than to add it if you do.

different versions should be encouraged but left up to the campaign.

Sure.

 

[Oofta]

...You have specifically said orcs (who have non-caucasian looks) are evil only because of their religion and culture...

They're evil because they were made to be evil, they don't have a choice.

 

[Mind of tempest]

They're evil because they were made to be evil, they don't have a choice.

describe what the material evil is? describe pure sociological evil if that would work better?
give us a description a definition so we can at least have ground for the topic to discuss.
as at the end of the day, it is not about orcs really but can we make a pure evil species?

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm talking about entire group default alignment not individuals.

I'm talking about groups too, just not races and with actual philosophy instead of alignment because that's just generally icksome to me and I'd like D&D to knock that crap off.