Good Drow

[Stormwing]

survive long enough to exile themselves from their people?

from a very early age (want to make sure they're growing up right, dontcha!.

Do you want to suggest that alignment in genetically inherited ?
The fact that Zaknafein was only moderately evil and Drizzt had the same purple eyes would make that plausible.
But Zaknafein was also Drizzt´s main educational influence .I think that his up-bringing was more important .

 

[Redleg06]

Do you want to suggest that alignment in genetically inherited ?
The fact that Zaknafein was only moderately evil and Drizzt had the same purple eyes would make that plausible.
But Zaknafein was also Drizzt´s main educational influence .I think that his up-bringing was more important .

I think that was actually Bookwyrms point. The "good" Drow would be weeded out PDQ, and therefore most Drow would be raised evil.

"Mom, Dad don't touch it, it's evil!"

-Time Bandits

 

[Bookwyrm]

Do you want to suggest that alignment in genetically inherited ?
The fact that Zaknafein was only moderately evil and Drizzt had the same purple eyes would make that plausible.
But Zaknafein was also Drizzt´s main educational influence .I think that his up-bringing was more important .

I'm not suggesting it, the alignment system does. How else can you talk about entire races having 'alignments' without any reference to specific cultures.

There is, however, a way to explain the existence of good Drow, but no-one's come near it yet.

BTW, I'd allow Drizzt to be a good Drow simply because RAS came up with a good backstory for it.

 

[Tsyr]

I'm not suggesting it, the alignment system does. How else can you talk about entire races having 'alignments' without any reference to specific cultures.

See, I would read it as the culture is infered from the alignment. IE, if a race says "Always chaotic evil", I would read that to mean that all of that race live in a lawless, evil culture.

 

[Bookwyrm]

But then it's strange how the Elves always live in a good culture (Drow excepted), and the Orcs always live in an evil one, regardless of which game world they're in.

Are you seriously suggesting this is just 'coincidence'?

 

[Bookwyrm]

See, I would read it as the culture is infered from the alignment. IE, if a race says "Always chaotic evil", I would read that to mean that all of that race live in a lawless, evil culture.

However, I should also point out that this doesn't contradict the argument that alignment is a genetic trait.

 

[maddman75]

Here's another reason to play a drow - you want to experience a good character that is outcast by society. There are few thing to ensure that this will happen as playing a drow! Sure you could argue that you could play a goblin or orc for the same effect, but that is much more of a barbaric background. Doesn't fit all characters.

And personally, give me a fan-boy wanting to play drizzt, or Legolas, or Conan before you give me a n00b that hasn't gotten past role playing 'me if I was a elf mage' any day of the week!

 

[Bookwyrm]

How about a half-orc paladin? Ooh, look ma, no Drow!
Or how about a human from an evil society? Or does that mean I don't get kewl abilities?

And as for the newbie vs the fanboy, I'll take the newbie every time - newbies are capable of learning. We've all been newbies, but only the l33t (and I use that as a term of abuse) end up as fanboys.

Besides, there's a difference between being outcast by society and being hunted by it.

 

[Fred Delles]

I feel that this drow thingy is starting to get a bit ridiculous.

Fantasy milieux can be in three flavors:

1. "Strict" high fantasy, where alignment and ideals are almost inherent (LotR, Dragonlance, perhaps the "Old Grey Box" version of FR)
2. Middle-of-the-ground fantasy (today's Forgotten Realms)
3. Low, "grey area" fantasy, almost like real life, where there is no real good or evil (except for those celestials and infernals) and/or a different moral scale is used (Oriental-based worlds, George R. R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire)

There are others, but these three are the most common ideology for any fantasy world. In "strict" high fantasy, drow are evil to the core and there's no getting around it. In middle-of-the-ground fantasy, drow SHOULD have good outsiders beyond Drizzt and Qilue and her tiny cult. In "grey" fantasy, drow are just elves of a different skin color and magic resistance. Lolth may be lawful good, or a sect of her religion "hijacked" to chaotic evil (or vice versa), but few, with the exception of those who follow or normally fight against such religion, really care whether or not one or the other is right.

For me, (1) is great for a fantasy epic, but utterly stupid for a campaign simply because you are "railroading" with some cardboard cutout. (2) is most optimal for what I like in a fantasy setting that I play, and (3) feels a little too much, perhaps except in those vampire campaigns.
Put your setting in one of these three flavors and from there, tell if so-called "evil" can become good. We are not just limiting ourselves to drow here. Drow are the most common archetypes for this argument simply because of R.A. Salvatore and his cheesy drow ranger, who seems to get far more credit than he deserves.

Back to the subject. Compare the drow to, say, the Muslim Middle East. (No, they aren't evil, 'xept Al-Qaeda and those who support homicide bombers, but bear with me. I apologize if I offend anyone in this topic.) There, if you (a) fail to follow the tenents of Allah, or (b) dare to treat a Jew with respect, you would probably be executed. Strict, huh? The ideology of following faith in this real-world example is just as strict as the Llothians in Menzoberrenan (sp?) (I'm Roman Catholic, but anyway...)

Are there outcasts? Yes. Any of them inherently "good", at least to the U.S.'s POV? Yes (i.e. Turkey and post-Taliban Afghanistan). Are there followers under Saddam and the like kicking down doors, rooting out every single home, and searching if you dare break the two general rules? NO. There are rebels all over the place ready to take out these dictators and post a U.S.-like democracy. Ergo, there are always some kind of deviates in certain situations. As a realist, I think that evil and good exist in EVERY race, real or (logical) fantasy, and telling that so-and-so is good or evil, lawful or chaotic merely points to the status quo. I allow good cambions, evil half-celestials, and MOST DEFINITELY good drow.

For the record, I am writing my novel/game world (somewhere between types 2 and 3) and created dark elves that are mainly good, compassionate, and noble. They think that based on what happened in the past, each of these "shadowed" elves, with cursed grey skin and sensitivity to light, are elves that have to redeem for another dead elf's misdeeds.

Nice twist if you think about it.

 

[maddman75]

One idea I once had for a campaign world would be to set up the surface elves and drow as truly sundered. That is, during the inevitable split between them forcing the drow underground, it wasn't a case of one faction going off into the dark, but of the creatures being ripped apart into the good and evil side. Sort of like the skexies and mystics in the crystal shard.

Now in such a world, good elves would ALWAYS be good - an evil elf would be impossible. And drow would be irrevocably evil. Furthur, drow and elves would be linked - one drow for each elf. if one died, so did the other one. I would probably make the elves much more magical and powerful, and make the standard elf be called a 'half elf'. Neither would be appropriate for a PC race.