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

[SkidAce]

But people cry "muh toolbox" and how specific lore ruins their homebrew. So D&D dances between being lore heavy enough to explain why gnolls are fiends and lore light enough to allow 76 unique cultures of elf over 12 different settings.

This is me!

 

[Gradine]

Look, some people like their D&D like Eberron, where even the "monstrous" races are portrayed with some level of nuance and range of society; and some people like their D&D like it was originally envisioned by E. Gary "killing orc babies is lawful good" Gygax. The truth that they don't want you to acknowledge is that D&D, while it might not be able to be all things to all people at all times, can and always has and even still is capable of being many things to many people. Including both of the above scenarios. D&D reigns the hobby for a reason, and contrary to what its detractors want you to believe is due to a lot more than mere name recognition. D&D's dominance is not inevitable, if the 4e era taught us anything.

Now all that said, when it comes to the 2014 version, Volo's use of the term "domesticated" is all kinds of gross, like Hadozee levels of "are you serious?"

I can acknowledge that there are almost certainly ways to use orcs as "always evil, kill on sight" unnuanced enemies without also leaning on racist tropes. I'm not entirely convinced that any version of D&D has managed that, and Volo's certainly didn't.

 

[Garmel]

Saying orcs are all inherently evil might be too much. However, being created by an evil god I think orcs should have a tendency toward that direction.

Gruumsh didn't put love and compassion into their souls so to speak.

 

[Scribe]

Look, some people like their D&D like Eberron, where even the "monstrous" races are portrayed with some level of nuance and range of society; and some people like their D&D like it was originally envisioned by E. Gary "killing orc babies is lawful good" Gygax.

And some people are just looking at a game piece, or a package of stats and rules to...play a game.

I can acknowledge that there are almost certainly ways to use orcs as "always evil, kill on sight" unnuanced enemies without also leaning on racist tropes. I'm not entirely convinced that any version of D&D has managed that, and Volo's certainly didn't.

Indeed.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean, I wont even get into UFC/K1/ONE or old school Muay Thai.

Are all Boxers Evil?

They were just products of their time.

 

[Remathilis]

Saying orcs are all inherently evil might be too much. However, being created by an evil god I think orcs should have a tendency toward that direction.

Gruumsh didn't put love and compassion into their souls so to speak.

What I don't like about that answer is that humanoids are supposed to have free will. We would not say "Moradin is Lawful Good and instilled Law and Goodmess in dwarves. Therefore, chaotic and or evil dwarves are extremely rare. You should always be able to trust dwarves are being honest and fair with you. It goes against their creation to not be."

I mean, we can I guess. All elves are chaotic good, all halflings lawful good, etc. That's just the way their Gods made them. They can't not be, and those who are are outliers, as rare as Drizzt would be. Dalamar is as opposite to his kind as Drizzt is. But generally, we give elves and dwarves a wide array of alignments we say goblins and orcs can have, but rarely do.

 

[Guest 85555]

But the problem is D&D never puts its money where it's mouth is. The vast majority of encounters with orcs puts them in the Evil and Aggressive role. You don't see orc football players, you see orc raiders. You dying meet orcs in cities, you meet them in dungeons. You see references to the ordonni, but they don't appear in modules (and I don't think have been acknowledged since 2e). You get references to non-evil orcs in Many-Arrows (which was reconned to being a ruse to get it's neighbors to let down their guard) and the Shadow Marshes, but little is done with them. There are no adventures set there, no sourcebooks detailing them. Orcs don't appear as citizens, they appear as villains. Over and over again.

Orcs are described as aggressive, warlike and dangerous. They are listed as Evil aligned and worship evil Gods. And PC overwhelmingly encounter them in hostile situations. 2 + 2 = 4, for the math illiterate.

So no, most players don't create characters with the intent to kill on site all orcs. But the game spends a lot of time convincing you that when you encounter orcs, you should not be conflicted about having to kill them.

Honestly this is probably just because something about menacing orcs just works. People like imagining a savage orc horde on the the warpath

 

[FrogReaver]

Can I refer you to the concept of the "dog whistle"? It's a concept in public speaking where you don't overtly say what you mean, but the language is known by those who are familiar with it's second meaning. Politicians use it all the time when they want you know who is really responsible for a certain problem without saying the quiet part out loud.

I find the concept that one can presume to know the motives of another to be problematic. Assigning secret meaning to words is just that.

 

[Scribe]

We would not say "Moradin is Lawful Good and instilled Law and Goodmess in dwarves. Therefore, chaotic and or evil dwarves are extremely rare. You should always be able to trust dwarves are being honest and fair with you. It goes against their creation to not be."

Wouldn't we?! I can tell ya right now, I do that, but you just need to avoid words like 'always'.

All elves are chaotic good, all halflings lawful good, etc. That's just the way their Gods made them. They can't not be, and those who are are outliers, as rare as Drizzt would be. Dalamar is as opposite to his kind as Drizzt is.

Just drop the 'all' and we are good here! Though, my Halflings are LG/NG....

 

[Guest 7037866]

The Volo's Guide depiction has more in common with D&D's past depiction of orcs, which is basically the evil savage. This stands to reason as it was written back in 2016, I believe?

Yes, Nov. 2016 is the date on mine. How much longer was it before WotC issued its apology?

I agree with savage, but not with evil when it tells you orcs are not inherently evil. CAN they be evil, most assuredly, but their culture nor nature dictates this is a "must" IMO.

In the 2020s players must have alignment

Whoa there, hoss! You want players to take responsibility for the actions of their characters!?! Perish the thought!!!

But the problem is D&D never puts its money where it's mouth is. The vast majority of encounters with orcs puts them in the Evil and Aggressive role. You don't see orc football players, you see orc raiders. You dying meet orcs in cities, you meet them in dungeons. You see references to the ordonni, but they don't appear in modules (and I don't think have been acknowledged since 2e). You get references to non-evil orcs in Many-Arrows (which was reconned to being a ruse to get it's neighbors to let down their guard) and the Shadow Marshes, but little is done with them. There are no adventures set there, no sourcebooks detailing them. Orcs don't appear as citizens, they appear as villains. Over and over again.

They don't have to. Orcs can certainly be evil and most due to their culture are, and D&D portrays them as such.

Orcs are described as aggressive, warlike and dangerous. They are listed as Evil aligned and worship evil Gods. And PC overwhelmingly encounter them in hostile situations. 2 + 2 = 4, for the math illiterate.

Again, I am not arguing this isn't how they've been used, my point (has always been) that the Volo's text does not make them "innately evil entities which can be slaughtered without remorse."

For example, if the PCs come across an orc encampment in the wilderness, days from any other civilization, can they just assault it for no reason?? Of course not! That would be an evil act, sometime many orcs would do, but otherwise non-evil orcs would do it for plunder and love of battle, sparing the weak or infirm who are not worthy of their might and seen as inferior.

Now, you want your PCs to do that? Fine, then your PCs are evil as well.

So no, most players don't create characters with the intent to kill on site all orcs. But the game spends a lot of time convincing you that when you encounter orcs, you should not be conflicted about having to kill them.

You should be if they've given no cause for you to do so.

Best simple example? Orcs are Klingons. They make war, lay waste to the border, and still love their children and honor their family. They have cultural standards and goals. They are different.

Considering what Volo's text says about orc breeding, this is not supported IMO. Otherwise, I think your points are solid.

Saying orcs are all inherently evil might be too much. However, being created by an evil god I think orcs should have a tendency toward that direction.

Gruumsh didn't put love and compassion into their souls so to speak.

Yes, I agree with that completely.

But generally, we give elves and dwarves a wide array of alignments we say goblins and orcs can have, but rarely do.

True. We rarely see evil dwarves or halflings, about as often as we see good orcs or goblins. There are tendencies created by culture, certainly, not just as I don't view dwarves, elves, humans, etc. as "inherently good" I don't view orcs or goblins as "inherently evil" (and certainly not to be slaughtered on sight)--just as I wouldn't necessarily trust a human, dwarf, elf, etc. "on sight."