Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Indagare Nogitsune" data-source="post: 8498236" data-attributes="member: 40018">There's always some kind of Problem and it needs to be dealt with otherwise there's no story. However, there have been (and, sadly, still are) people who are only too eager to punish or kill those different than them or what their particular idea of a "perfect society" is. They have to be fought because otherwise they'll just steamroll over people (before, inevitably, turning on themselves because there never is a "pure enough"). But while I don't think the creators are endorsing murder or racial theories, it's also exhausting (for me) that it keeps popping up apparently without them even realizing it.I can't keep up with the other replies, but I keep wanting to emphasize that my point is not, and has not been, that the Narrator cannot change anything or everything nor that whatever makes everyone happy at the table is what should go on.In the entry on the Gnolls it specifically mentions not all undergo the ritual, and even those that do can try to turn around (though they are forever fighting the demonic influence). However, that's not what a DC check will tell players. Not unless the Narrator specifically alters it.And that's where my problem lies. The designers went out of their way to, specifically, state that there are, in fact Good Gnolls out there, but the DC checks and most of the info they provided is on the Evil ones. Now, they could have done this differently. They could have started with "while Gnolls are often known for their bloody raids, as many are known for their strong community ties and willingness to work with others" or something similar. The DC 10 would, then, reveal that there's a mix of info on Gnolls, some of it making them out to be Evil, and some of it making them out to be Good. This would, at least, allow Good Gnolls a chance to parlay with the PCs without there being a sort of "attack first, ask questions later" thing going on.And, again, I am not saying that the Narrator can't alter what the DC check provides in terms of info based on the campaign. I am saying that if the designers wanted to emphasize there are also Good Gnolls then the entry should not read like a "why you should attack and kill this thing on site".</blockquote>

Verification