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

[Azzy]

That feels a little unnecessarily combative.

Maybe? I dunno. "Verisimilitude" is usually used as a cudgel here on these boards (and usually only when it serves the user).

 

[Phaezen]

Yes, but my point is to have both. The roles are just that - roles only, with no other flavor.

flavour comes from the setting not the stat block, one campaign might use orcs as savage raiders intent on killing everything, another might use them as nomadic herders fleeing something and attacking everything out of fear rather than anger. Both are grey skinned, tusked humanoids sweeping in from beyond civilisation, but the option that players have to deal with them are very different

 

[TiQuinn]

People are sure expecting a LOT from one Monster Manual and are lifting examples of stat blocks that are typically found in other places (Volo's guides, adventures, etc.)

 

[AnotherGuy]

People are sure expecting a LOT from one Monster Manual and are lifting examples of stat blocks that are typically found in other places (Volo's guides, adventures, etc.)

When the justification is one guard is the same as another, it is well to point out that previous MM didn't just showcase guards of x race.

 

[Scribe]

That feels a little unnecessarily combative.

Welcome.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes, but my point is to have both. The roles are just that - roles only, with no other flavor.

The point of the stat block is to fill a role for about 12 seconds of story time. Pirate or Cultist makes more difference in 2 or 3 rounds of combat than Gnome or Orc.

 

[TiQuinn]

When the justification is one guard is the same as another, it is well to point out that previous MM didn't just showcase guards of x race.

From the 5e MM - Guard, Medium Humanoid (any race) is not just showcasing a guard of X race? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point?

 

[Hussar]

What happened to the Orc Drudge, Orc War Chief, Orc Eye of Gruumsh, Orog, Orc Blade of Ilneval, Orc Claw of Luthic, Orc Raider, Orc Bloodrager, Orc Berserker...etc?

Those have 4e cooties.

ROLES for monsters? How video gamey. What happens if my drudge picks up a battle axe? Does his hp change to warrior? If a raider is at home, does his stat block need to be rewritten?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Really? Care to quote anything to that effect, because I don't see that written anywhere...

Page 87, under the Roleplaying an Orc section:

"No matter how domesticated an orc might seem, its blood lust flows just beneath the surface. With its instinctive love for battle and its desire to prove its strength, an orc trying to live within the confines of civilization is faced with a difficult task."

Granted, this section does say they can be raised in a non-Orc society and "develop a limited capacity for empathy, love, and compassion," and that Orcs are "unlike creatures who by their very nature are evil, such as gnolls." However, I think this still makes my point. It says that Orcs innately, genetically cannot be as empathic, loving, or compassionate as the civilized races. They are innately more prone to violence and evil, according to Volo's. The Orc racial stats are presented as a rare "monstrous" option requiring DM approval and not standard, like the Tritons, Kenku, or Tabaxi in this book are.

Obviously there are elements of this lore that are uncomfortable, to say the least. It very clearly echoes stuff that has been said about certain ethnic groups to justify their discrimination for centuries.

If you require that it outright says "all orcs are evil, full stop," then this passage likely won't satisfy your demand. But I personally see "they're all innately evil" and "they're all culturally evil, but a 'domesticated' Orc can learn a small semblance of empathy and compassion" as practically a distinction without a difference. The assumption very much is that the players are justified in slaughtering them all. Or, at least, kill all the adults and force the children to be raised by "civilized" peoples. All of the rest of the lore in the book talks at length about how evil and monstrous they are, using some questionable language to get the point across. They're tribal primitives that breed like rabbits, live short lives, kill inferior children Sparta-style, half-orcs are basically orcs physically but humans mentally, they're "brutal and feral" warmongers, they're so primitive they can't create wheeled vehicles, they were too dumb to make their own script for writing and had to steal the Dwarves' (which they still don't use well), and they have no concept of marriage. I could go on.

If the book wasn't trying to get the point across about how evil all the orcs are, it would have mentioned the Many Arrows tribe and Ondontis as examples of good orcs in the Forgotten Realms that weren't "domesticated" (still ew).

 

[Reynard]

Mechanics and story are not unrelated. For every other monster type than playable races, they are explicitly linked. You tell a story with Mechanics, and the story you are trying to tell guides Mechanics.

Lumping all orcs and drow and dwarves into the same pool of mechanics necessarily and inevitably impacts the story of play. Creating Dwarf Juggernauts that are immune to forced movement and gain advantage against Large enemies and Orc Berzerkers that fight until literally dead and hit with an extra weapon die of damage makes the stories of and involving those NPCs better.