D&D 5E Are humanoid mono-cultures being replaced with the Rule of Three?

[Vaalingrade]

No. I use orcs -- you know, soulless minions of a dark god.

Which they have never canonically been.

I use vampires -- you know, bestial shapeshifters beholden to the full moon.

 

[Reynard]

Well, just know that when others are discussing fantasy races through the lense of racism and racial theory, and you're coming in and yelling and screaming about how it's not an issue, it really makes it look like you're arguing a different point.

That's fair.

 

[Reynard]

Which they have never canonically been.

I use vampires -- you know, bestial shapeshifters beholden to the full moon.

Context matters, especially when you are responding to the response to a response. It's actually disingenuous to reply in this way to this post.

 

[Xeviat]

That's fair.

Thank you.

Just be aware, you might get a new player with a different view on orcs that is uncomfortable. That's why a lot of us use demons and undead for such monsters without moral quandries.

 

[el-remmen]

Withholding information to force a tragedy onto someone's character isn't just a trick, it's a dirty trick and I'd walk from any DM that attempted it.

Clearly we have different play styles. For me, playing through the ethical consequences of actions has long been a part of playing D&D both as a player and DM. That's okay. Hopefully before it got to that kind of scenario (heck, before we even started playing!) we'd have discussed this and gone our separate ways without hard feelings.

 

[Weiley31]

Context matters, especially when you are responding to the response to a response. It's actually disingenuous to reply in this way to this post.

I concur that Vaalingrade is right.

 

[el-remmen]

And for the record, I'd definitely describe those starving orcs with some clues as to their predicament - but some PCs may not pay enough attention or care in the moment because they feel threatened. It is a quandary.

 

[Thunder Brother]

Which they have never canonically been.

Whose canon? Orcs can be whatever the DM wants them to be at their table and in their setting. There's no canon police coming to break down his door.

 

[Cadence]

Whose canon? Orcs can be whatever the DM wants them to be at their table and in their setting. There's no canon police coming to break down his door.

DM can also make clerics be arcane pick pockets, but it isn't usually helpful in discussions ;-)

 

[pming]

Hiya!

I certainly don't like mono-cultures for any humanoid, but the trend seems we're going from a single monolithic culture to 3 different cultures in many cases. It's like the Rule of Three moved from beyond Planescape. I guess it's the easiest number to have as it's, "here's the one you know, here's it's opposite, and here's something else". Having 4 or more might seem too much for some.

It's certainly something I thought about with the thread on FR Drow with Udadrow, Aevendrow and Lorendrow, but it's already in place in Eberron with Vulkoori, Sulatar and Umbragen (Drow), Aereni, Tairnadal and Khovaire (Elves) or Ghaal'dar, Heirs of Dhakaan, City Goblins (across all Goblin races, Marguul Bugbears might break that). It seems to be a coincidence that it's often 3.

Seems to be going that way. I'm not keen on it though. I think it dilutes the classical story narratives that are, imnsho, the cornerstone of "heroic fantasy stories", and, consequently, the D&D game. There's a reason why Star Wars is so popular (or WAS...); Empire = Bad, Rebels = Good. Simple. Oh, sure there may be the odd individual that hovers somewhere closer to the middle (Boba Fett, Han Solo [initially], etc)...but for the most part, it was just "Good vs Evil".

I see the same thing with the VAST majority of D&D monsters; they are "bad", the PC's are "good" (or at least neutral with a leaning towards good). It lets the Players and DM run an encounter of goblins attacking a village and the PC's wiping the goblins out completely...then travel back to the caves they were lairing in...and killing everything in it. Why? Because Goblins are evil from birth and will never change; they are MONSTERS...not "humans in funny suits....and just misunderstood". When a game starts to blur the line between Good/Evil, it COMPLETELY changes the entire game system/premise/play.

But hey, if a group wants al that "greyness" in their game, go for it! I enjoy a game like that as much as I enjoy a more black/white dichotomy. But...as a 'default for D&D'...I think it's the wrong direction to go. For D&D, "It's a group of Orcs! Lets kill them!" should be the default...not "It's a group of Orcs! Lets talk to them and hope they don't kill us because they've had a rough life".

^_^

Paul L. Ming