Search results

  1. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    I’m not saying there isn’t a difference, I’m saying the difference isn’t necessarily as conclusively important as you imagine it to be. It’s important, sure, but it’s not necessarily enough to allow redcaps to escape criticism.
  2. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Says you 😉 I’m being cheeky, but the distinctions you’re drawing aren’t as monolithic, unambiguous, or unquestionably important as you imagine them to be.
  3. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    You’d be surprised how much pushback I’ve already received in this thread for making much the same point. Some people seem to really care about metaphysical distinctions in the lore (e.g. was the creature born or created?). These distinctions matter more to some than the plain fact that the...
  4. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    I don’t know, as I can’t predict future societal mores. Fire giants are notorious slavers. I can definitely see that getting phased out. Yup, now what about centaurs? What about satyrs? Keep going down that path and you’ll arrive at redcaps soon enough. I say this entirely without value...
  5. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    No, no. You see giants aren’t “humanoid” so they’re in the clear. I agree with you, of course, but a few people place more value on the status-quo established by the lore, the rules, and tradition then they do on they can see right in front of their nose.
  6. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Oh, I’ll get drawn in for one last quibble. You replied to my post initially which was entirely based in speculating about the future. Is it’s so uninteresting, why engage at all? It wasn’t me who challenged your definition of humanoid, it was you who disagreed with the notion that redcaps are...
  7. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    If you’re uninterested, one wonders why you would bother replying? And suggesting people not engage in a particular topic of conversation goes a lot further than expressing a lack of interest. That’s an awfully strong stance to take on a whole lot of nothing. As I said in my first post, I’m...
  8. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    That’s how I felt reading your reply chastising me for engaging in on-topic speculation on a discussion forum.
  9. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Your mistake is assuming that because this distinction is good enough for you it’s good enough for everybody.
  10. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Good! I never said you were!
  11. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Or we could not police other people’s on-topic posts and let the conversation flow organically? I like that idea better.
  12. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    The designers and the hardcore fans don’t unilaterally dictate how things are understood. The very existence of this post, in which the OP appears to be earnestly confused by the depiction of redcaps is evidence of that. Get a critical mass of people like OP and the game will change.
  13. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    The D&D rules construct of “humanoid” isn’t a complete defence against the every day normal person’s understanding, which was my point. Saying “yeah, but this is different because the rules say so” only works if you’ve already bought into that premise. It’s somewhat tautological, and won’t stop...
  14. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    We’re talking about how changing social mores intersect with D&D. The rules sleight of hand which somewhat arbitrarily divides elves from redcaps may not be good enough for future players.
  15. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Take it up with the dictionary my friend! The monster categories of D&D (a rules conceit which has subsequently dictated fluff) have warped our understanding of the word.
  16. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    I think it’s less of a “manufactured controversy” and more of a discussion about where/how we draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable portrayals of humanoid (if you go by the dictionary definition) creatures in D&D.
  17. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    😂 Agreed! Although, my point was slightly more specific: the idea of an inherently evil, essentially humanoid (except in name) creature may come to be seen as problematic regardless of its origin.
  18. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Your point is perfectly valid and reasonable, but it doesn’t really address mine. You’re simply presenting an alternative perspective without addressing the elements of the perspective you’re refuting. It’s an acceptable position to have, but it’s not a rebuttal. To your point, there are...
  19. B

    D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

    Agreed, but the first distinction is paper thin; redcaps are definitely humanoid according to the dictionary definItion if not the game rules. I wouldn’t be overly surprised if perceptions gradually shift over time and creatures like this eventually come to be regarded as problematic, perhaps...
Top