billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Whether or not it's bad game design is a matter of taste.
A disturbing revelation, to be sure.
D&D General Inherently Evil?
Lyxen
Great Old One
Yeah, sure, please show us some great examples of your own game design that have been alive for 50 years and entertained millions of people.
Yes, but plants don't have Feelings which is why it's okay to eat them!
Except we now know that plants can communicate with each other and may even express hostility and camaraderie in their Rhizosphere.
So... y'know. Soon Vegans will have no choice but to eat nothing, I guess.
Show me literally a single piece of game design from D&D that has been in every edition for the past 50 years, unchanged.
Voadam
Legend
Generally orcs and such eating non-orc people is generally termed cannibalism from what I have seen and in a D&D context saying people eating different species of people is cannibalism seems reasonable.
I would probably not extend it out to all sentients though as it does not seem appropriate for describing a dragon eating humanoids.
I would probably not extend it out to all sentients though as it does not seem appropriate for describing a dragon eating humanoids.
Vaalingrade
Legend
While I appreciate the high specificity designed to hedge me out entirely if only because I'm not even 50 years old myself, the mechanic you're trying to defend, alignment itself, hasn't survived in the same form for 50 years.
It's not my own game design, but NOT using alignment has also been alive for 50 years and entertained millions of people.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Tangentially, anyone else creeped out by the sheer number of sapient you can harvest for components.
"I defeated the local warlord (a dragon) and as a trophy I am now wearing his skin. I am certainly the good guy here."
Voadam
Legend
The Monster Manuals at least no longer have gold piece sale values for the captured young of friendly sentient talking intelligent animals anymore.
1e MM page 77 for the very intelligent Owl, Giant: "Giant owls are rarely encountered as they inhabit only very wild areas. They are nocturnal predators and effective hunters. Giant owls speak their own language.
These creatures are intelligent and will sometimes befriend other creatures. If encountered in their lair there is a 20% chance that there will be 1-3 eggs (25%) or 1-3 hatchling owls, 20% to 70% grown. The parents will always attack any creature threatening the eggs/owlettes. Eggs sell for 1,000 gold pieces, young for 2,000 on the open market."
I have -always- found Dragonscale Armor kinda disturbing in settings where Dragons are intelligent, and prefer settings with dragon-armor where dragons are basically just animals.
'Cause that's a -person- you're wearing as a skinsuit, Buffalo Bill...
Lyxen
Great Old One
Alignment has not changed much, honestly, and neither have concepts like hit points, armor class, the fact that you have races and classes, etc. For sure they have been variations, but I can almost litterally take a AD&D character or even BECMI and play it straight, I know that I can run 1e modules with almost no conversion in 5e.
Enduring design does not mean "completely frozen", you know...
From AD&D, you still have the same 9 old alignments, and the variations have been minimal over the editions. Much more of the core design has survived than things have changed.
And yet, D&D, including alignment since the proportion of people not using at all it is I think fairly low (the degree of use varies for sure) has entertained many more people than any single other TTRPG game out there, by a huge margin.
