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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 9447344" data-attributes="member: 4348">Just because you do not UNDERSTAND the forces of Chaos and how it could be perceived, does not mean there was no reason. Are you trying to toss a personal insult or slander at someone??The original makers of D&D?  The original writers of the Module??I actually agree, with MODERN DAY understandings and HOW MODERN DAY players play the game, there are too many instances where such things may be a bad idea to include...you are trying to apply MODERN DAY GAME PLAY to things that were written before that playstyle was even regularly used, and definately probably not recognized as a way people were playing at the time it was written!Those Goblin children were probably likely to see you as food or have their basic instincts to kill you with many of the games that went on.  This is why even some of the creators of the game justified Paladins and the like killing these monsters.Today, I absolutely agree with your idea and thoughts on this, but one problem I've seen in this thread is trying to ascribe more modern gamestyles on the early game itself.  I have no problem with people being more sensitive to cultural and other aspects of the world today and incorporating into their play, but that does not give them an EXCUSE to be discriminatory in other ways towards other playstyles and cultures that understood creatures and monsters in a very different manner.  It also doesn't excuse trying to insult writers who had a very different culture and understanding than you do for brownie points.  Just because you don't UNDERSTAND the legends and fairytales that have Goblins (and thus goblinoid creatures) as the things of darkness and hell, doesn't mean you get to tell others who HAD those stories told to them that their culture and their stories are BAD/WRONG, especially if it was in the past when some of them were probably already quite progressive in some areas that you may not realize.  If I have said anything in this thread it was to show that there are different playstyles, but that one predominate playstyle at the beginning was obviously different than the one many use today.  Abraham Lincoln was actually pretty discriminatory towards certain types of people if you look at things he did in comparison to what we would consider discriminatory and racist today.  HOWEVER...we also know that he was a product of his time, and for his TIME he was quite progressive.  Today, I absolutely agree with you with the current module being written (or...rewritten as one would put it).  I don't know how it's going to turn out (I'm not privy to it), but on the topic of Goblin Children, that's something I might not want to put into the module or even touch upon as it would be like putting a hot poker in a straw pile and hoping for the best.Same with any goblinoid creature.  Heck, you could have a full non-human party today with Tieflings and Dragonborn and Orcs and such...I imagine they would deal with such things far differently than a party of Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, and Gnomes would have in the past.  The audiences of today have many different types of players and gamestyles.  Many of them would not be conducive to a module where you have the moral quandaries that would present themselves with monster children.  And if goblin or orc children are troublesome, what would people do with literal Demonic children (lets say...imps) or Mindflayer spawn?For a beginner adventure meant to introduce people to the game...probably even less of a good idea to have in it today.  Of course, with WotC's recent track record...even with that sensibility...I'm not sure what to expect.</blockquote>

Verification