D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

[Tonguez]

Eh, we (as a whole) aren't all that consistent when it comes to what races/lineages/whateverwecallthemnow are evil by default so why would we expect WotC to be consistent?


Come on. Could we really just reclassify orcs as some other creature and make everyone happy?

If you stopped Orcs being a playable race and had no other monstrous race substitute in their place and reemphasized that Orcs are the fiendish spawn of twisted magics - then allowed a generation or two for that depiction to sink in, then maybe?

 

[Hussar]

Eh, we (as a whole) aren't all that consistent when it comes to what races/lineages/whateverwecallthemnow are evil by default so why would we expect WotC to be consistent?


Come on. Could we really just reclassify orcs as some other creature and make everyone happy?

No, we couldn't. Because the "humanoid" part ISN'T THE PROBLEM.

Good grief.

 

[Azzy]

Well, there were many points of similarity between all previous editions of D&D (even 4e). The kind of changes some people seem to want to the basic structure of the lore, if taken along this course over time, will render a very different game than what we've had before.

Opinions differ, but in regards to alignment of humanoids (giants, and maybe others) isn't something that I feel changes the fundamental nature of the game. I can still have marauding orcs as bad guys if I want even if they no longer have an alignment listed in their monster entry. I could always do this. The only change is that, in the future, orcs and other sapient mortal creatures won't have to be burdened by problematic ideas of biological essentialism and all that goes along with that.

 

[Charlaquin]

Oh I agree. But, like you said, that's not today's problem. Today's problem is tied to real life groups. Maybe after we sort that out, we can start taking a little harder look at some of the borderline cases and worry about that then? Because, right now, if we want to dive down into biological essentialism, we are simply obfuscating the much larger problems which are directly impacting real life people.

In other words, describing an entirely fictional race that has never been tied to any real life people as being fundamentally evil is a somewhat less urgent issue than using language and descriptions that are directly tied to real, living, breathing people right now.

Sure, it’s definitely a less urgent issue. But I think it’s still a present issue, rather than an issue someone some day might hypothetically take. And, you know, strike while the iron is hot and all that.

 

[Bardic Dave]

Come on. Could we really just reclassify orcs as some other creature and make everyone happy?

You’d be surprised how much pushback I’ve already received in this thread for making much the same point. Some people seem to really care about metaphysical distinctions in the lore (e.g. was the creature born or created?). These distinctions matter more to some than the plain fact that the redcap is basically 100% human in form.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh I agree. But, like you said, that's not today's problem. Today's problem is tied to real life groups. Maybe after we sort that out, we can start taking a little harder look at some of the borderline cases and worry about that then? Because, right now, if we want to dive down into biological essentialism, we are simply obfuscating the much larger problems which are directly impacting real life people.

In other words, describing an entirely fictional race that has never been tied to any real life people as being fundamentally evil is a somewhat less urgent issue than using language and descriptions that are directly tied to real, living, breathing people right now.

My point is that after that is worked out, they will inevitably continue this line of reasoning for all other intelligent creatures, leading to a fundamentally different game that may alienate fans.

 

[Charlaquin]

Come on. Could we really just reclassify orcs as some other creature and make everyone happy?

No, because just changing their mechanical creature type wouldn’t address the things that make them humanoid - being a people, who are born and live mortal lives, who organize themselves into societies, who have cultural and religious beliefs and practices, who are autonomous, free-thinking agents. If we changed all those things about them, I don’t think there would be a problem with them being inherently evil. But I also don’t think they would be orcs any more.

 

[Bardic Dave]

There’s no such gray area with redcaps. They aren’t people

Says you

I’m being cheeky, but the distinctions you’re drawing aren’t as monolithic, unambiguous, or unquestionably important as you imagine them to be.

 

[Mecheon]

You’d be surprised how much pushback I’ve already received in this thread for making much the same point. Some people seem to really care about metaphysical distinctions in the lore (e.g. was the creature born or created?). These distinctions matter more to some than the plain fact that the redcap is basically 100% human in form.

Its not about form, its aobut how they're presented

Redcaps do not have culture, do not have civilians, do not have babies. They're born of blood, born of murder, and exist merely to create more murder. They'll just spontaniously pop up one day of the conditions for "Redcap" are arbitarily met

Orcs, meanwhile, are not the fiendish spawn of twisted magics, they're not fungus, they're just, regular guys who form their own cities, have their relationship drama and are basically normal.

An orc will go down to the pub for a pint and a parma with you. A redcap probably couldn't even conceive of it

 

[Hussar]

Centaurs and Satyrs are, like I said in an earlier post, an unusual case. It comes down to what they are in the setting. If they’re spirits of nature? Then it’s fine for them to have an essential nature. Are they people with societies and cultures and such? Then it isn’t. Personally, I lean more towards the “they’re people, and should therefore not be essentialized” interpretation, but there’s definitely gray area there.

There’s no such gray area with redcaps. They aren’t people, they are literal murder spirits. Is it possible that some day they will come to be viewed as people, or that the standard will shift such that even defining otherworldly spirits in essential terms isn’t considered acceptable? Sure. And if that day ever comes, they’ll probably be changed. But for now, I don’t think there’s a problem.

See, @Charlaquin, this is why I'm saying that this "essentialism" stuff is just clouding the issue. It's a deep, deep rabbit hole and all it does is provide ammunition to those who want to do nothing but throw up roadblocks. It provides a never ending list of "whaddabouts" that will just tie things up in knots forever.

Look at this specific conversation - we have the original issue - Redcaps. It's a clear cut, cut and dried answer. Redcaps were never used to denigrate real people, and, in game, they are murder elementals, not biological at all, so, the biological essentialism argument doesn't apply.

Now, we're talking about eladrin, satyr's, giants and who knows what else will get brought up. Even though no one has actually pointed to any of those races as being ones that are in need of changing nor is the topic of conversation actually focused on them, they keep getting dragged up for yet another round of "Let's play musical chairs", all the while making it look like there's an issue were none actually exists.