D&D General I really LOVE Stomping Goblins

[Charlaquin]

I am going to assume you are being forthright so I am going to put that as advice rather than as a rebuke:

When I started a thread about loving having an evil race I can stomp with impunity, and some others have expressed their agreement with that sentiment, you saying that such a thing "might also be morally bankrupt" it feel very directed. Maybe that is not what you meant but that is very much how it comes off.

You have to understand that the vast majority of the people critiquing the portrayal of evil races in D&D are critiquing systems, not individuals. You can like whatever you like, I don’t really care, and I think it would be pretty absurd to call someone racist because they enjoy pretending to kill evil goblins in a game. My problem is with the broader cultural effects of the game’s portrayal, not with any individuals’ enjoyment of that portrayal.

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

I'm gonna try to put some oil on this blazing fire...

Can we equate goblins with modern day pests or invasive species? Australia hunts the red fox, which is a relatively intelligent animal. (I was first gonna use the mosquito as an example, but I think a fox provides more fuel for this conversation). According to what I read on the Ozzie government website (pdf warning), they used to shoot them, and now use poison traps. They also try to reduce rabbits.

At least in my games, you will not have an intelligent conversation with a goblin. They will just snarl at you, because they consider you their prey and property, and attack on sight. (Also, I would never allow a PC goblin for that reason).

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm gonna try to put some oil on this blazing fire...

Can we equate goblins with modern day pests or invasive species? Australia hunts the red fox, which is a relatively intelligent animal. (I was first gonna use the mosquito as an example, but I think a fox provides more fuel for this conversation). According to what I read on the Ozzie government website (pdf warning), they used to shoot them, and now use poison traps. They also try to reduce rabbits.

Obviously you can do whatever you want in your home games. But no, I don’t think that equating a race of sapient beings to pest animals is a good look.

At least in my games, you will not have an intelligent conversation with a goblin. They will just snarl at you, because they consider you their prey and property, and attack on sight. (Also, I would never allow a PC goblin for that reason).

Right, so first of all it seems like a strange worldbuilding choice to have an entire species of sapient beings that universally thinks and acts the same way. Second, whether or not you can have a conversation with them seems like a weird place to draw the “ok to kill” line. I mean, there are lots of humans you can’t have a conversation with.

 

[GreyLord]

Obviously you can do whatever you want in your home games. But no, I don’t think that equating a race of sapient beings to pest animals is a good look.

Right, so first of all it seems like a strange worldbuilding choice to have an entire species of sapient beings that universally thinks and acts the same way. Second, whether or not you can have a conversation with them seems like a weird place to draw the “ok to kill” line. I mean, there are lots of humans you can’t have a conversation with.

Tossing this out there, if we are going to take this into consideration...

And what happens when you find that "pest" animal is actually a race of sapient beings? Creatures that are wise, sane, perceptive...etc can be found around us.

If we are using Sapient, quite a few animals could fall under that idea such as Dolphins, Dogs...and RATS. Rats are considered to be rather intelligent, emotional, and very into community. They are puzzle solvers and can figure things out using intelligence rather than their animalistic qualities. This is one reason they have survived in many instances, despite many attempts to wipe them out. They are also considered a pest.

Pigs are another creature that we tend to kill on a massive scale. Pigs are incredibly a lot like Humans. They are intelligent, being smarter than dogs and most other creatures, building attachments similar to humans, having emotional and characteristic ranges as wide as humans (so yes, sadistic pigs, loving pigs, etc), and even physically being close enough to humans that we can use different body parts of theirs in transplants for humans. We can grow those body parts (pig blood, hearts, ect.) to be replacement parts for humans.

We eat bacon, hot dogs, and a ton of other things from these intelligent creatures.

It seems that people have an EASY time considering creatures in a fantasy game as being things we need to treat like humans, but when it comes to REAL LIFE examples of things that actually have some intelligence or show qualities of humanity and intelligence in real life...we discount what we are doing and the killing we participate in (many times, everyday).

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'm gonna try to put some oil on this blazing fire...

Can we equate goblins with modern day pests or invasive species? Australia hunts the red fox, which is a relatively intelligent animal. (I was first gonna use the mosquito as an example, but I think a fox provides more fuel for this conversation). According to what I read on the Ozzie government website (pdf warning), they used to shoot them, and now use poison traps. They also try to reduce rabbits.

At least in my games, you will not have an intelligent conversation with a goblin. They will just snarl at you, because they consider you their prey and property, and attack on sight. (Also, I would never allow a PC goblin for that reason).

I'm wondering if the moral protest be just as strong if we just substituted the culling of the current Australian government officials instead of goblins. I reckon a game where one waxes off politicians would have far less blowback.

What is great about D&D is that it is creatively wealthy - your goblins necromancers could raise fallen goblin corpses (skeletons & zombies), goblin warlocks can bring about a dark ritual transforming goblin applicants into Ravnica's cacklers (demons), goblin shamans could slay a treant and tear it apart to create twig blights (the vegan option as someone mentioned upthread)...etc

"Evil" races in D&D are fun!

 

[Mirtek]

I am currently once again playing Civ 5.

I am a mass murdering religious tyrant like the world has never seen. Best not think what happens when I send an inquisitor to a freshly conquered City and with one click the previous religion just vanishes.

Well, the population doesn't drop, so I guess I only torture and brainwash them

 

[Mirtek]

Actually that's an interesting question. Wasn't there a video game where you start doing typical FPS slaughter and then discover you were actually working for the bad guys all along? It seems a common plot so I'd like to know if it was implemented (but it might turn the audience off, so maybe not).

Also Far Cry. The 4th iirc.

It also starts with you as the "mighty whity" arriving im some faux Tibetian country run by a brutal dictator.

You end up joining the rebels and slaughter the dictator's soldier.

Late game you have the choice to
a) betray them and join the dictator
b) Stick with the rebels who become torn between two leaders
-> Support leader A who turns out a religious fanatic slaughtering unbelievers
-> Support leader B who turns out a powerhungry dictator, forcing children to work growing drugs to sell for money

No matter which option, the game doesn't have a happy end. The country stays a ##$@hole no matter what you chose.

Actually the only way to win is by not playing. You can do absolutely nothing for the first couple of minutes. Then the game ends with a secret ending of your character just getting what he came for without getting involved at all

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yes, true. But someone who likes role-playing heavy CRPGs don't tend to tell those who like action RPGs that they are different moral levels.

Not really. I like all sorts. To name a couple: Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous is quick to judge your moral choices, as it KotOR. Witcher 3 and Pillars of Eternity give your moral choices without passing judgment. Solasta: Crown of the Magister and Titan Quest give you no moral choices. And I like all of them.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Tossing this out there, if we are going to take this into consideration...

And what happens when you find that "pest" animal is actually a race of sapient beings? Creatures that are wise, sane, perceptive...etc can be found around us.

If we are using Sapient, quite a few animals could fall under that idea such as Dolphins, Dogs...and RATS. Rats are considered to be rather intelligent, emotional, and very into community. They are puzzle solvers and can figure things out using intelligence rather than their animalistic qualities. This is one reason they have survived in many instances, despite many attempts to wipe them out. They are also considered a pest.

Pigs are another creature that we tend to kill on a massive scale. Pigs are incredibly a lot like Humans. They are intelligent, being smarter than dogs and most other creatures, building attachments similar to humans, having emotional and characteristic ranges as wide as humans (so yes, sadistic pigs, loving pigs, etc), and even physically being close enough to humans that we can use different body parts of theirs in transplants for humans. We can grow those body parts (pig blood, hearts, ect.) to be replacement parts for humans.

We eat bacon, hot dogs, and a ton of other things from these intelligent creatures.

It seems that people have an EASY time considering creatures in a fantasy game as being things we need to treat like humans, but when it comes to REAL LIFE examples of things that actually have some intelligence or show qualities of humanity and intelligence in real life...we discount what we are doing and the killing we participate in (many times, everyday).

Sure. And I don't have hard time imagining that humans would treat somewhat intelligent humanoids who they find mildly annoying utterly horribly. It just is that it is the humans who would be bad guys (or at least not good guys) in such a scenario. Such conflicts are perfectly plausible. What I don't get is the need to justify such behaviour by inserting cartoony moral system in it. Just accept that a medieval fantasy world is a a brutal place, your character is not a paragon of virtue, and go stomp some goblins if that's what you want. The desire to paint such behaviour as laudable is what I find distasteful.

Seriously, humans have found reason to fight and kill each other as long as we have existed. No inherent evil and good factions needed, comes to us perfectly naturally. I have no reason to think the same wouldn't be true if sapient non-humans existed.

 

[Lanefan]

I hate this situation when DMing.

The party kills three bugbears during a forest ambush, captures the final one, interrogates it. Okay, what do we do with them? Leave them? Bring them with us? Kill Murder them?

IME in this situation they'd usually try to charm it if they can, then cure it up and take it in to the party as a meat shield.

Or, oh we'll knock out these six bandits. And then... ?

That one's a bit easier: loot them of anything even remotely resembling a weapon, leave them enough rations and water to get to civilization, and leave them where they lie. They'll wake up eventually.

At the risk of getting into a moral debate, knocking out an enemy can lead to eviler actions than killing them in combat.

It certainly can do, but the choices can be interesting...and sometimes unexpected.

You know you've got a less-than-good party when after capturing a group of bandits the PC whose background is 'slaver' comes out with this now-famous quote: "Stop taking prisoners and start taking inventory!"