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="Tormenet" data-source="post: 1600901" data-attributes="member: 15690">Are good and evil cultures clearly defined in your campaign or is there a lot of gray? As a player do you like clearly defined cultural alignments? A player in my campaign took me to task because he felt there was too much overlap.In my homebrew, the Ionian Bastiyaani are a settled people, descended from conquerors and colonists.  They are based on the Greek-Bactrian nation that arose from the weakened Seleucid Empire.  The Jola are nomads that bind their children’s skulls, causing disfiguration as they grow.  The also ritually scar their children’s faces.  They bear names like Throatslitter and Slayer of Nations. The idea, from their point of view, is to be as intimidating to outsiders as possible. They are based on the Scythians (actually its more like the Xiongnu), with Mongol and Hun traits thrown in. They collect scalps.  They raid Bastiyaan.  To the Bastiyaani people this behavior is evil; to Jola it is just being manly.  The two groups are traditional enemies, but circumstances are driving them into a shaky alliance.When a Jola joined a party that included two Ionians my players role played the mixing of opposed cultures well, they were hostile but recognized the need for an alliance.  It got very amusing at times.Outside of game time, one player expressed his feeling that letting an “evil” Jola join the good party was questionable.  We debated the notion a bit, in the most friendly and pleasant way, and agreed to disagree. (Then I slew his PC and made him a minion of evil, HA, HA, HA…ahem…kidding.)Anyway, the conversation is still rolling through my mind a few months later so I thought I’d look into the feelings of folks here.Tormenet</blockquote>

Verification