Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8481542" data-attributes="member: 18">I agree re: only a small minority of people supporting that at this point. Back in the 1990s it seemed like it was a fairly sizeable minority but a minority nonetheless. By well into 3E it seemed to be fairly few people and it's even smaller now.As for the other two comments, I'm not sure if they're aimed at me, or if you're quoting someone I can't see. The middle one seems to be aimed at me, and yeah, that's factual, if you have intelligent races where there's no way to deal with them except genocide, you are kind of agreeing with Gygax. The thing is, if you're not supporting genocide/infanticide, you don't have "all-evil" races (aside possibly from supernatural entities), you only have "mostly-evil" races, which is disagreeing with Gygax.Not sure if "give me a break" etc. is aimed at me, I'm not really clear on what it relates to if so. Certainly I don't see anything in my post "lumping everyone together". Quoting Freud doesn't make sense if you mean my post, because he's talking about the unconscious, whereas I'm talking about stuff people have conscious control over. Yeah, if you have some evil orcs and everyone has to fight them and no good orcs are mentioned, but they're also not explicitly ruled out, I actually agree, that's "just a cigar" in this sense. If, OTOH, you do like Gygax and either rule good orcs out explicitly, and/or insist on placing non-combatants and kids in places the PCs will have to fight through, well, I think maybe don't do that? Or if you know the players will be kind and helpful because you know your players, I guess it's fine.</blockquote>

Verification