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: 8032069" data-attributes="member: 18">Ok, you're objecting to 5E in general, well, have fun with that dude. The idea that a race which is "traditionally agile" also has to be "more agile than everyone else" is just laughable, I note. That's not logic. You can be "traditionally" something without having any kind of actual modifier, let alone being the very best at it.More generally on this thread, I strongly suspect WotC were already planning some of these changes, including the disassociation of stats and races as an option (for the long suspected Xanathars-2 which will presumably have the CFVs and so on as well), and I don't for a second believe a 6E would have been published with races still called races. Honestly it was slightly surprising in 2014. So they're just pushing that forwards. I think the orc/drow stuff is more a case of house-cleaning rather than having planned it. The key difference is the definitions of what is Good and what is Evil not only vary wildly in the examples you've given right there, but that they actively contradict each other. In myth and fairy tales in particular, a lot of stuff the stories themselves clearly regard as "good" or "righteous" is diabolically evil by superhero standards, and would be something a villain would do in Star Wars. Even in more modern stuff, some action heroes are seemingly murderous psychopaths we're supposed to see as "good" (hello many iterations of James Bond), and some villains have films have motivations which would line up much better with conventional D&D definitions of "Good" than D&D "Evil". You attempt to claim people learn Good and Evil early on, but that's demonstrably untrue - humans learn allowed and not allowed, which is different. Humans with empathy learn "hurts people/doesn't hurt people". But those aren't the same as Good and Evil. Especially not D&D's Good and Evil. D&D for example puts individual freedom of choice in as a "Good" value. That's fine, but that's in stark contrast to much of myth, fairy tales, and many historical and philosophical views on "good".You basically nuked your own argument from orbit with your own examples there. Anyone actually familiar with the examples can immediately see that Good and Evil are not consist concepts. Even within societies, there's often stark disagreement about morality. I won't go into examples, as it could lead into politics, but denying that is denying reality.Whereas Law and Chaos represent more specific and consistent forces/conceptual poles. Ideas about them from ancient Babylon, or classical Greece, or middle ages Europe, or China circa 200AD all seem to line up pretty well. Certainly they line up vast, almost infinitely better than ideas about good and evil. Nor are they a moral judgement on someone or something in the same way. They're also themes that crop up in plays, literature, and so on, through the ages, and again are consistent to a degree ridiculously far beyond good/evil.</blockquote>

Verification