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

[CleverNickName]

Yes, sure, in theory at least. Then again, I have hard time imagining an entire species of psychopaths being able to survive.

 

[Umbran]

With Redcap being bilingual and INT 10, they clearly have what it takes to create a culture, even if it is unpalatable to us (a kill song? an arson lullaby?) Even if they don't have currently a culture, they are able to create one, being as intelligent as humans are.

Art is only one element of culture. Creating art alone, however, does not create culture as a whole. Culture includes shared ways of living together, which, from the little we have seen, Redcaps may not be capable of.

We haven't seen the book yet, but in legend and mythology, there's a fairly standard trope with respect to the Fae - they are not mortal beings, and are not given free will to the degree mortals are. They are at least as much spirit as flesh, and the spirit is what it is, and cannot change. They follow esoteric, and often very complicated, sets of rules they cannot, even in principle, violate - meaning that in some ways, their free will is restricted. In mythology, mortals typically deal with the fae by finding the secrets of the rules, and exploiting them, rather than by simply killing them with swords. An echo of this may be part of why the upcoming book is reportedly designed so that all challenges have some non-violent resolution path.

I can understand that some may feel the precept of having absolutely no creatures that look even vaguely human or sentient be uniformly baneful should take precedence in all world-building and design. I'm okay with that being limited to mortals.

 

[Gradine]

Yes, sure, in theory at least. Then again, I have hard time imagining an entire species of psychopaths being able to survive.

He's got you there

 

[Umbran]

I have hard time imagining an entire species of psychopaths being able to survive.

If following the typical mythology, they are not a biological species as we think of it. They may not be subject to the selection pressure. Perhaps as long as there are violent murderous impulses among mortals, there will be redcaps, and they literally cannot go extinct until then.

 

[mrpopstar]

I wonder if the "fey are bound but strong emotions" excuse applies to centaurs, satyrs and hexbloods? You know, the three PC "fey" races so far...

The centaur is a monstrosity.

 

[Nefermandias]

Hard to believe someone is really upset this creature is described this way. Shocking oversensitivity in my opinion.

It isn't a... real... creature.

Careful... Mods are probably watching.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

When I was a child some classmates' nicknames were based in famous characters from the TV.

I guess maybe Hasbro is afraid about the idea the name of fantasy creatures becoming peyorative slang against members of minority groups, for example ferengi (race of Star Trek) a key nickname against the richest classes.

 

[Umbran]

Careful... Mods are probably watching.

Mods are actively posting in the thread, so... yeah.

 

[Ancalagon]

I think redcaps shouldn't be a species, they should an organisation or subculture of gnomes. It's like a violent gang or cult in which some gnomes join. Then the biological essentialism angle is gone.

Red caps aren't a gang of violent humanoids. They are FAE.

FAE aren't entirely biological creatures, incidentally.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In describing CREATURES. Did you know they are not real? I mean, I don't understand. I cannot stereotype an Illithid? A beholder? How about a dragon. Can we say "those damn red dragons, always liking it hot!" How about "can you believe those mind flayers, always wanting to read our minds. My word they are slimy! gross! and inherently EEE-VIL!". Or are mind flayers retconned as well into unique, individualistic entities. That eat brains.

Can we describe anything without the thought police getting up on everyone? Just because it is in multiple threads, it must be the correct opinion? LOL I hope not, as there are some scary threads in this world that are popular.

If, in your description of fictional Orcs, you use the language associated with bigotry to blacks, you keep those concepts alive. Those so inclined to do so could- and would- then use “Orcs” as a RW racist dog whistle.*

To be clear, not all “monsters” or cultures in the game share this issue. Some are described without using derogatory stereotypes.

That’s a crucial distinction between what’s going on with Orcs and other things in the D&D history which DO contain such language, and others- Illithids, Beholders, Dragons, etc.- which do not.







* if you have any lingering questions about this, try substituting racist imagery for the creature illustrations where the problematic descriptions have been cited. The only difference is that the language is easier to spin as neutral and harmless.