D&D (2024) Humanoids in the MM...

[FitzTheRuke]

That's my point. Inclusivity was not their top priority at the time like it is now.

Sure, but my point was that it WAS still a part of their reasoning. Who knows, perhaps it was the original reason that someone suggested the naming convention - though I think that you're right that in the end, it was taken too far.

The funnier part of 4e's naming convention, IMO, is the number of ways that they took two words and shoved them together. It worked well for the Feywild and the Shadowfell, but it got out of control with things like the "Battlemind".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, but my point was that it WAS still a part of their reasoning. Who knows, perhaps it was the original reason that someone suggested the naming convention - though I think that you're right that in the end, it was taken too far.

The funnier part of 4e's naming convention, IMO, is the number of ways that they took two words and shoved them together. It worked well for the Feywild and the Shadowfell, but it got out of control with things like the "Battlemind".

Agreed. They definitely had a style book entry about that.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I've always seen alignment as more of a "what team do you support (if any)" sort of thing.

Yeah, I take it one step further from that and call it the "lies your enemies tell about you".

But that's mostly a joke. I'm okay with it being a descriptor, told after the fact, about how your actions generally pan-out.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, I take it one step further from that and call it the "lies your enemies tell about you".

But that's mostly a joke. I'm okay with it being a descriptor, told after the fact, about how your actions generally pan-out.

I like the law-chaos-neutral divisions of the OD&D / B/X / BECMI branch of the game, where it really was an affiliation with a side in the eternal cosmic struggle, and "good" and "evil" existed on all sides and has the same cultural relativity that it did in our world (what's good in one culture may not be in another).

 

[Remathilis]

I like the law-chaos-neutral divisions of the OD&D / B/X / BECMI branch of the game, where it really was an affiliation with a side in the eternal cosmic struggle, and "good" and "evil" existed on all sides and has the same cultural relativity that it did in our world (what's good in one culture may not be in another).

Except much of the Chaotic creatures were effectively evil and the Lawful ones effectively good. You didn't see "evil" Lawful monsters and the only good "Chaotic" ones were PCs.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Except much of the Chaotic creatures were effectively evil and the Lawful ones effectively good. You didn't see "evil" Lawful monsters and the only good "Chaotic" ones were PCs.

Maybe you didn't, but to my mind plenty of Lawful beings are effectively evil from mortal perspectives. And Chaos, being fundamentally anti-civilization as it is commonly understood, will often be seen as evil by most folks who bother thinking about it. The concept is still blue and orange mentality, and any campaign can accentuate that if as you say it seems too often to equate law-chaos and good-evil.

Hey, it worked in Babylon 5.

 

[Reynard]

As an aside, I recall having always (since the 80's) assumed that the orcs that PCs fight are usually an "orc raiding party" and not representative of your average orc in temperament or goals. I did see their culture as extolling the virtues of the mighty warrior, and as nomads, having little respect for "settled" folks, but I always felt that just exactly how wrong they were was a question that could be argued, depending on your point of view.

I guess I've never been much of a believer in alignment!

It is analogous to how a lot of folks probably felt about "Norsemen" in medieval Europe. If your experience with those people is only Viking raids (and, worse, exaggerated stories of Viking raids) you probably aren't going to have a high opinion of the Norse.

 

[Tonguez]

Elves aren't. Why would gnomes be?

Elf in fantasy RPGs have become entrenched as there own thing, the idealised eidolon of Humanoid exuding charm, wisdom and otherworldliness. Elfs are Elfs - theyre essentially their own type

Gnomes are a small whimsical but not quite defined species, in the mundane world but still not quite conforming to it. Making them Fey also means they get to link back to other fey types be it Pixies and bogans, jermlaines, redcaps or leprechauns. And if Goblin are fey then theres really no reason why Gnomes cant be

 

[Remathilis]

Maybe you didn't, but to my mind plenty of Lawful beings are effectively evil from mortal perspectives. And Chaos, being fundamentally anti-civilization as it is commonly understood, will often be seen as evil by most folks who bother thinking about it. The concept is still blue and orange mentality, and any campaign can accentuate that if as you say it seems too often to equate law-chaos and good-evil.

Hey, it worked in Babylon 5.

I'm only going by what BECMI advocated. Nearly everything you were supposed to fight in Basic was Chaotic, everything you weren't was Lawful and anything that was a coin flip was Neutral. This is a theme carried by both the rule books and the modules. It's only in AD&D that the idea that Chaotic could be "good" and Lawful be "evil" was explored, but good ole Basic put Lawful as the heroic team and Chaotic as the villains.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm only going by what BECMI advocated. Nearly everything you were supposed to fight in Basic was Chaotic, everything you weren't was Lawful and anything that was a coin flip was Neutral. This is a theme carried by both the rule books and the modules. It's only in AD&D that the idea that Chaotic could be "good" and Lawful be "evil" was explored, but good ole Basic put Lawful as the heroic team and Chaotic as the villains.

BECMI assumed the party was a civilizing force, intending to ultimately carve out a domain and rule it after first clearing the land of what are almost certainly Chaotic or Neutral beings, or possibly going to war with another civilization (which is probably also Lawful). It makes sense that most of the people you're fighting are Chaotic, as most of the PCs are assumed to be Lawful (and thus directly supporting the rule of Law) or Neutral (and thus benefiting from the protection of the rule of Law). You could just as easily play a Chaotic and Neutral group fighting for team Chaos.