Do you use "evil" races?

[SemperJase]

Recently, I've seen writer's (generally game designers) jettisoning the common fantasy archetypes. I think there are two reasons for this, in order:
1. Moral ambiguity.
2. A misguided effort to generate variety.

The first item is a matter of personal opinion and I will not discuss the rightness or wrongness the point here.

My purpose is to discuss the second. The various fantasy race archetypes have ALL been based on exaggerated human traits. Tolkien's work is the easiest to use as example.
The elves are nature loving and aware of the spiritual aspects of creation.
Dwarves are motivated by honor, duty, and personal development through craftsmanship (although this archetype has changed from ancient folklore where dwarves were evil).
Orcs represent hate of all that is good. They despise the beauty in creation and seek to corrupt it, representing rebellion.

My problem with fantasy literature changing these archetypes is that it diminishes the genre. Once you have good orcs and evil elves, you have lost the uniqueness of these character races. Essentially you get humans with ugly faces or pointy ears instead of orcs and elves.

That is why I use evil races (and good ones for that matter). How about you?

 

[SemperJase]

Incidentally, this subject was inspired by Dungeon 100. Actually, the Polyhedron side.

The Incursion setting has the Githyanki invading a world that has humans, dwarves, and orcs. There seems to be no difference in these races except for physiology.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Only for planar creatures (who's "Always [X]" alignments I've changed to be "Incarnate [X]", meaning no chance of anything else). For mortals, I much prefer a playing field of abstracts that keep the PCs pondering moral implications for their actions.

Now, I do have "aligned cultures", being that Ogres have a culture that normally produces Chaotic Evil individuals, and Hobgoblins have a culture that normally produces Lawful Neutrals. However, I think that having a rules system that says "[Race X] is always Evil" is invite to "I kill the evil baby goblin in its crib". IMNSHO, making it clear and known that environment and choices, not heriditary instinct, give a being its alignment, makes for a better game.

The best illustration I have for this IMC is a Lawful Good Human empire that I have that gains most of its trade via Kobold merchants and has a strong military comprised mostly of Hobgoblins.

 

[Gothmog]

Originally posted by SemperJase:

1. Moral ambiguity.

Yep, I think this is a good thing since it makes for a more compelling story. Recently in my game, the paladin of a LG/LN church had to make a decision to sacrifice the lives of a few hundred individuals and allow a small-scale evil, or try and prevent this small scale influx of evil and likely cause the deaths and damnation of thousands (long story involving demonic incursions). In the end, the paladin chose the greater good of more people, but it really tore him up. The player even went to his church and demanded atonement and geas spells cast on him, even though he hadn't lost powers. To me, this makes for much more compelling role-playing than simply smiting evil left and right.


Originally posted by SemperJase:

2. A misguided effort to generate variety.

I don't think its misguided at all- its a way to mix things up and keep it fresh for the players and DMs. IMC, elves are extremely isolationist, and strongly resent ANY incursion into their domains. They ruthlessly hunt and kill those who enter their territory, sometimes for sport. Although not evil, they are extremely violent, frustrated, and unpredictable (basically a bad tempered CN). The result? The PCs despise elves, and will not associate with them for any reason.

On the other hand, gnolls in my game are more wolf-like than hyena, and have a strongly organized pack structure, much like wolves. They are honorable in their own way, but very brutal, and resent human expansion (basically LN or LE). In order to fend humans off, many gnolls turn to evil deities or demons for power, but not all. The PCs IMC befriended a large pack of gnolls who were under siege by orcs and ogres, then helped the tribe retake their home. Further, they helped to establish a treaty with the gnolls and thier patron kingdom respecting the gnolls territory and making an alliance in case of invasion or war. The result? The PCs and their kingdom have potentially useful allies who are experts in woodcraft, although animalistic and sometimes brutal to their enemies.

I think this makes for a more interesting and dynamic campaign. No race in my game is inherently good or evil (except infernals)- but there are cultural predispositions. If the PCs know that all elves are nature-loving and friendly as a default, or all orcs are bloodthirsty monsters, then the world becomes much less believable and more of a morality play.

 

[SemperJase]

For mortals, I much prefer a playing field of abstracts that keep the PCs pondering moral implications for their actions.

I understand that motivation. We differ in our solutions. I use humans for those encounters.

 

[Nightfall]

I gotta Ratman... Not sure he'd qualify as human in a rat mask.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Yes, but we still have our "no evil" rule. I permit Dark Elves (my own variety of drow) and Orcs. Does this mean that I open myself up for a lot of Drizzit clones? Yes, but it hasn't happend yet. Actually, they haven't picked Dark Elf or Orc as a race at all. I guess that's because I run a pretty human-centric game.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I never use an evil race, if for no other reason than my background in bio-psycology. I know its fantasy and all, but I still can't stop thinking how STUPID the idea of an inherently evil race which nonetheless manages to reproduce and raise young is...

Now a race could be genocidally isolationist which would seem pretty evil from the outside, but I don't think that would deserve an evil allignment as its used. And it would be hard to come up with a race wide genocidal isolationism cause that trancended the culture.

Frankly, I never liked that flavor of fantasy archetype. My favorite modern fantasy involves some deconstruction of those archetypes...

Kahuna burger

 

[ergeheilalt]

Ohhhhh. I just did my senior project for High School on the Fantasy Arch types established by Tolkien and the effects of new books and RPGs on the structure of "fantasy".

Through an in depth study of books I've read this year (yeah right, that was my cover ), I determined that the racial archetypes really only matter when dealing with people new to the genre. Giving newbies a chance to get the feel of mythical races is all fine and dandy, but established gamers might find this tedious (ie: oh, we found an elf wizard, he's gonna be a good chap). By inverting the common perception and making evil elves or good drow there is more appeal to readers who have seen the good elves of Tolkien and other authors.

No one can be untouched by the taint of evil, everything we do or say is tainted with either nice or bad intentions; there is no one who can stick to being all daises and sunshine. Tolkien's elves were created as beings of perfect beauty

Thus Eru, the One, whom Earthborn know as Iluvatar, created the fairest race that was ever made and the wisest. Iluuvater declared that Elves would have and make more beauty than any earthly creature, possess the greatest happiness and the deepest sorrow. - David Day's Characters From Tolkien

So it is not surprising that these elves would be goodie two shoes in Tolkiens world; however, what happens in yours or mine, may differ.

Races in general are a tool. It is the pointy ears and dexterity that defines elves, not the ideals you assign them; by changing their ideals, you change the feel of your campaign - not elves.

Example: I have good elves and bad elves in my campaign ... not a real difference between good High elves and bad High elves other than their alignment(anamosity towards humans for burning their forests). I felt this reflects the fact that there are good and bad eggs in every society, and these things are not something you can tell by looks or race alone.

Heh ... I think I did better standing up in front of my class.

Erge

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Hmmm...interesting thread, SemperJase!

Yes, I use Evil races in my campaign. I have Orcs, Goblins, and Beastmen for example. These races are generally Evil. The fact is, most of the Good races would have all of these creatures exterminated off the map. In truth, there are a few individuals, families, or tribes of Beastmen, Goblins, or Orcs that *aren't* evil, but for the most part, they are evil, vicious, horrible creatures that are bent on slavery, rape, and conquest.

Thus, most civilized populations wipe them out at every opportunity. It's like exterminating rats or cockroaches. The more you kill, the better!

Indeed, while not all of them are evil, most of them are, so that's the way the rest of the world looks at them. Their cultures worship evil, demonic gods; they routinely practice slavery, human sacrifice, torture, and rape. It isn't politically correct, but I tend to be somewhat "Old School" in a lot of things anyways.

Is such evil in these creatures biological? Cultural? Spiritual? In my campaign world, it doesn't matter that much. Most contact tends to be brutal, violent, and warlike, so these questions, while sometimes asked, usually go unanswered, certainly not definitively. The fact is, there are hordes of these creatures that plot and scheme the enslavement and conquest of the civilised realms, and trying to "understand" them better, or insist that they are "just misunderstood" is more than likely to get a character crucified and barbecued, then devoured by the savage horde. Wicked, savage races that worship evil, demonic gods have consequences. Some of those consequences are a growing comfort and even pleasure as these creatures mature from youth to adulthood for all manner of rape, torture, and conquest.

That's where the alignment thing in the rulebook says "Usually *Lawful* Evil, or Chaotic Evil, etc." comes into play. That means that anywhere from 85% to 99% of any group of Orcs are going to be Lawful Evil. The rest of the percentages may include Chaotic Evil, followed by Neutral Evil, then a tiny percent might be Lawful Neutral, or Neutral. Rarest of all, might be a few that are actually good. It isn't likely to be enough to be statistically significant. Imagine having a tribe of 10,000 Orcs. Imagine how they breed. Do the math, and extrapolate out the population surge for 100 years of time. How many of them are not going to be evil? How many are actually going to be of Good alignment? Now, at random, imagine taking a group of adventurers into an assault on the tribe's caves at a random year during this 100 year time frame. What are the mathematical potentials of the group encountering Orcs that aren't Evil? What are the chances of them encountering Orcs that are Good in alignment? Off the cuff, if they encountered 10 Orcs out of the tribe of 10,000 that were of Good alignment, in such a war-time situation--which is the defacto frame of existance between the typical human and elf community and an orc community--what difference would it make? The adventuring group is certain to mow them all down, and hope they can come back and kill more of them. Thus, the few good ones die right along with their evil brethren. That's also part of the consequences of an evil, savage race of creatures worshipping evil demonic gods, and embracing a culture of death, rape and conquest will do for you. The rest of the civilised world doesn't believe that there are any non-evil Orcs, or whatever, and thus take no chances. After all, would the Evil Orcs be nice and sweet to the humans, elves, and dwarves?

Not likely. They know what their fate shall be in the hands of the evil humanoids of the world. Thus, through the years, the wars rage on, as the civilized, "Good" races struggle not only amongst themselves, but also against the hordes of savage, evil humanoids that shriek and gibber their hatred of everything good, thirsting for the chance to break the civilized races to the yoke of slavery and conquest!

I think that having certain races that are Evil and Good serve well to provide a vivid, thematic foundation that can be very dramatic and engaging, and I tend to use it thusly in my own campaigns.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK