D&D General Drow & Orcs Removed from the Monster Manual

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the 2014 Monster Manual. Orcs are portrayed as evil, savage monsters.

While it doesn't literally say, "and that means you can slaughter them without remorse." That is the obvious implication.

Please.
A person should feel remorse for any slaughter IMO. There is no "obvious implication" to me as you claim. If you see an obvious implication, that is on you I'm afraid.

The 2014 orc are "savage raiders and pillagers..." who "gather in tribes that exert their dominance and satisfy their bloodlust by plundering villages, devouring or driving off roaming herds, and slaying any humanoids that stand against them".

So, if a half-dozen orcs are walking down a path, the PCs should just slaughter them without thinking? Why? I could see the PCs being cautious, perhaps trying to find out what the orcs are doing there if the PCs fear for a nearby farmer or something, or perhaps the orcs are deserters from a band, etc. and can forewarn the PCs about an upcoming attack!

But attacking and killing without provocation, and especially without any remorse, is evil IMO.

Now, as DM, I have creatures attack the PCs all the time of course because I am portraying these creatures many times as evil, but even so I often attempt to engage the PCs first as talking to their opponents can lead to plot points, etc. they would otherwise miss. Even still, too often I feel they jump the gun and attack first, often to their detriment.

A couple months ago my players infiltrated an ancient tomb looking for the "boss-caster". When they finally made it to the end and found her, she was going to talk to the PCs because she realized, much too late, that she was herself just a pawn being used by an evil undead (who resided in the tomb). The undead needed her to be its final victim before it could be freed! However, the players attacked her on sight, slaying her in a single round when she was (unfortunately) going last. Her death resulted in the undead's release and nearly resulted in a TPK when the party had to face it.

Now, if they had talked to her first, she could have warned them what was beyond the next doors, trapped until it had another victim. She would have actually joined the PCs in the final battle, making the encounter much easier, and the six trapped villagers (trapped in magical mirrors in the room) would have been freed after the defeat of the undead. But no, they killed her, and the undead claimed three of the villagers life-forces to restore itself during the fight.

In the end, it was a victory...of sorts. The "boss-caster" was stopped from trapping the villagers, the undead defeated forever, and three villagers returned alive.

However, it could have been: the "boss-caster" was redeemed, the undead defeated forever, and all six villagers returned alive.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It does not, however, say that this is universally so - in fact, it details an exception in the form of Obould Many-arrows. Nor does it say they are unredeemable.

And the 2014 MM notes that the stated alignment is a default only.

The claim is overstated.
The claim is perhaps "overstated" if you insist on the literalness of "every single orc in the game is evil and must be killed". But no one is claiming that. Even if they don't word their posts perfectly or clearly. You know better.

The claim is, "The portrayal of orcs in D&D, up to and including the 2014 rules, embodies racist tropes that need to go away." Even if folks don't express the claim perfectly or to your tastes.

It's also not a binary claim, that orcs are either portrayed as monsters or portrayed as people. The portrayal of orcs (and other fantasy beings) has evolved over decades, and not in a straight line. Two steps forward, one step back. We've made good progress, but the issue is hardly solved.
 



Volo’s Guide to Monsters absolutely does make it sound like all orcs are innately violent and evil and that it’s okay to slaughter them on sight.
The problem with having a book penned by an unreliable narrator (ie, Volo, that goofy fool) is that it can't really be a practical guide for players/DMs. I could totally see that foppish bard making such a statement, but that's of no help as an objective document.
 

So, what do you say to the gamers who deride WotC and its products for not giving them traditional, vicious orcs who are always evil (or are so with high enough frequency) and can be slaughtered indiscriminately?

Play Shadowdark and leave this kind of false dichotomy "we only deal in polarized absolutes around here" nonsense behind.

Heck, it doesnt even HAVE Good and Evil.
 


The problem with having a book penned by an unreliable narrator (ie, Volo, that goofy fool) is that it can't really be a practical guide for players/DMs. I could totally see that foppish bard making such a statement, but that's of no help as an objective document.
Volo, the character, is definitely an unreliable narrator.

But Volo's Guide to Monsters is not an unreliable source for the 2014 portrayal of orcs in the game.

Volo's commentary is just flavor.
 


Play Shadowdark and leave this kind of false dichotomy "we only deal in polarized absolutes around here" nonsense behind.

Heck, it doesnt even HAVE Good and Evil.
I was not aware Shadowdark treats orcs with the same variety of options it treats elves with. Orc cities full of knights, orc archmages, orc nobles at dancing galas, etc. Perhaps I underestimated it. Tell me more.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top