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

[Ruin Explorer]

I don’t know if Dirty Harry ever really tried to say anything negative about Harry Callahan unless it was the viewer bringing their own views into matters. Don Siegel and the screenwriters mostly cut their teeth on the 1950s western genre, specifically John Wayne movies, which were very much not known for being introspective in any such way. Eastwood movies were very much anchored in casual racism and rugged individuality, and it was always “the system” that was preventing a good man from carrying out justice. His final act in Dirty Harry is throwing away his badge - he’s not broken, it’s saying the system that’s broken and it’s his final statement about that system.

I disagree that it's as simple as that in the first two movies. That's Pauline Kael talk. It absolutely is in later ones.

 

[ezo]

If the rules have not been replaced, they still apply, as per WotC. Goblins are still playable. As are fairies (who are fey).

Not if you are a new player who has only the 2024 PHB...

It solves two things:

1) D&D goblins were out of line with 2020 pop culture goblins.

And what would that be? What 2020 pop culture goblins are you even talking about?

2) D&D goblins were boring.

And they still are.

I mean, seriously, what is the difference. The "new" goblins are a separation of the old into two: minion and warrior.

Overall, same AC, HP, same Stealth, same darkvision, same passive Perception, same armor and weapons.

So, what some weapon mastery fluff gives them an extra 2 damage with advantage? Yep, that must make them SO exciting now!

 

[TiQuinn]

Because pure fiction and reality are not connected. Enjoying watching things blow up and be killed has no bearing whatsoever on personal beliefs. That movie is only "It's the question and the answer is yes." for a purely fictional space that does not exist and never will, so it's completely irrelevant to a real world belief.

I think the problem is when pure fiction leans into the fantasies of the viewer, which frankly does happen. This is where having discussions about the media we consume does matter, but I don’t think we can lay the blame for how we treat violence as solely the fault of our entertainment.

 

[SkidAce]

Fair enough! I just reviewed the 2014 MM and yeah, everyone you need is there.

Again, I'm first in line to defend WotC, but I have to admit that this is a bit weird. How is a "Drow" equivalent a "Priest acolyte" or whatever? It doesn't match at all.

I mean, YES there were a few Lolth sworn clerics in the Drizzt books, but they were elite, not regular chumps like the classic "Drow" stat block was meant to represent.

I do admit some confusion now that I have the actual book in my hands. Luckily, I can fix this stuff for my own use, no problem. But still...

The interesting thing is that we can "fix" this for our own use, because we remember how the monsters were in books/lore.

But new people wont...

Paradigms we are used to are going to change.

 

[TiQuinn]

I disagree that it's as simple as that in the first two movies. That's Pauline Kael talk. It absolutely is in later ones.

I can’t comment on what Pauline Karl said since I’ve no idea what she wrote, but I’ve watched all of those movies several times over the years and I think it’s pretty clear. Magnum Force has more of an argument that “You can go too far” but it always feels like more of an attempt to soften the events of “Dirty Harry”.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I can’t comment on what Pauline Karl said since I’ve no idea what she wrote, but I’ve watched all of those movies several times over the years and I think it’s pretty clear. Magnum Force has more of an argument that “You can go too far” but it always feels like more of an attempt to soften the events of “Dirty Harry”.

I would suggest the first movie is less about "the system is broken" in general, and more that it can't handle that specific guy, who it sees as novel and almost evolved to take advantage of the system (whereas the bank robber in the famous "Do you feel lucky?" scene is "playing fair", relatively speaking - cops and robbers), but there are entire books written on that subject!

Kael basically objected to action movies as a genre/concept and tend to boil them all down to the same simplistic interpretation, as honestly did a lot of 1970s critics (whilst often ignoring more obvious-to-us objectionable elements).

(Even Barry Norman in the 1980s and 1990s, if you're British enough to be familiar with him, fell into this trap at times, I will never forget the time he was mad with a John Woo movie for the violence seeming "almost choreographed" lol.)

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Killing the other goblinoids in droves, because you see they are Fey, not People.

Yeah, this is bollocks. Fey are sentient beings. They are PEOPLE. As are dragons and any other sentients. The change is simply to bring the goblins into line with how they are seen in 2025 pop culture. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "it's okay to kill them because they are not people". This is a BAREFACED LIE being spread by people who hate change.

 

[TiQuinn]

I would suggest the first movie is less about "the system is broken" in general, and more that it can't handle that specific guy, who it sees as novel and almost evolved to take advantage of the system (whereas the bank robber in the famous "Do you feel lucky?" scene is "playing fair", relatively speaking - cops and robbers), but there are entire books written on that subject!

Kael basically objected to action movies as a genre/concept and tend to boil them all down to the same simplistic interpretation, as honestly did a lot of 1970s critics.

Are you talking about it can’t handle “Scorpio?” Or Harry?

The movie starts off with photos of a wall of officers who’ve died in the line of duty, and ends with the badge being thrown away. To me, the movie plays as a clear condemnation of the system and lifting up Harry as the one good cop just trying to get rid of the scum.

To take a quote from IMDB:

Harry: Yeah, well, when an adult male is chasing a female with intent to commit rape, I shoot the bastard - that's my policy.

Mayor: Intent? How'd you establish that?

Harry: When a naked man is chasing a woman through a dark alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross.

It’s not just Scorpio. They establish Harry as a guy who’s already gotten sick of the system.

 

[Scribe]

Yeah, this is bollocks. Fey are sentient beings. They are PEOPLE. As are dragons and any other sentients. The change is simply to bring the goblins into line with how they are seen in 2025 pop culture. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "it's okay to kill them because they are not people". This is a BAREFACED LIE being spread by people who hate change.

You read the minor flavour text for the other goblinoids?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

To me, the movie plays as a clear condemnation of the system and lifting up Harry as the one good cop just trying to get rid of the scum.

Yeah I think you've oversimplifying it in a Kael-esque that removes the context it's from, but YMMV. I don't think your quote is remotely as persuasive to your position as you seem to think it is. Harry is already a "cop of the edge", though, for sure.