D&D 5E (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[Horwath]

That's part of where orcs don't fit the description to me. The second they're playable (even partially so with half orcs) it's being suggested that they're not just always evil beasts. From then on they can be any alignment the player wants their character to be.

As for the 'int 7 always evil humanoids', I think it's the 'always evil' which is part of what makes them problematic. It might be better to make them neutral or even unaligned in the same way as a lion is. And what makes them antagonistic is being predators of sapient species, just like lions. They're just smart enough to make tools and more complex plans to go about their hunts, as would be needed if your main food source is sapients. I'd probably even use beasts rather than humanoids as the creature type if i was to go about making a species to fill that role.

A zebra might consider a lion to be evil, but the lion is just catching the food it needs to survive.

PCs are one in a thousand of NPCs, same can be said for non evil orcs.
IF they are not recognized in their clan as not worshiping their evil gods, they have a chance and escape. Make a "normal" life for themselves.
Yes, they will face prejudices, but that is the fun in playing that character. You want to make things hard for yourself.

 

[Frozen_Heart]

I was going to say that this thread was better when it wasn't another Always Evil Orcs and Drow thread, but it really wasn't that good to begin with...

I'd argue that wondering why half-orcs and half-elves don't get their own species entries in 5.5e is a reasonable thing. It's just one guaranteed to descend into hell over the thread.

 

[Guest 85555]

And yet you have not been able to name a movie with a villain who is less powerful than the hero. That's for a reason. Sure, it isn't an unbreakable titanium-braced rule... but nothing is. However, we don't say that this is a true thing for no reason. There are reasons we make the claims we make. Because they pan out again and again. Robo-cop involves punching down, the "hero" of the movie is clearly destroying a criminal organization far weaker than him... but he's also the monster. That's the point. And Robo-cop isn't about glorifying violence.

Again, it seems this is tangent so I won't belabor the point beyond this, but I have provided example, you just don't accept the examples (which is fair, you aren't obligated to share my readings of them). But just to offer another, Dirty Harry punches down all the time. The movie, especially the first, still works.

 

[AnotherGuy]

And it isn't orcs specifically, but it isn't every single monster either. Mostly it is just the humanoid monsters. Very very very few of them are even decently written. They overlap, follow the same tropes over and over again of primitivism, savagery, low-intelligence. It is so oft repeated that it is almost impossible to work with a large number of them.

I'm of a similar opinion on the samey-ness vibe I get from Orcs, Bugbears, Hobgoblins and Goblins along with the other more fantastical Bullywogs etc. The problem is they would need to make a monster manual that is less setting specific and provide more variety in the fluff provided.
I'm all for that.

 

[Minigiant]

Orcs have had more than one culture since 1e. Below is from 1e Greyhawk. Emphasis mine.

Only Iuz, The Horned Society, and portions of the Great Kingdom allow the more civilized humanoids to dwell amongst the humanfolk, at least to any large scale. The large free cities are also known to allow various sorts of humanoids free access to their precincts."

The Pomarj, ruled by humanoids has multiple cities, including a port. The Bone March, also run by humanoids has multiple cities as well.

Greyhawk was the default setting for the creator of the game, and orcs were not limited to barbarian there.

That's not their culture though. That's orcs in human lands conforming to human culture.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Racism is a story tool that does not need to be showcased in the core rules because it can be disturbing to a growing community that is more and more considering it unacceptable. We don't need species v. species hate as a baseline. Hate between ideals and nations and rivalries makes sense, but we don't ever have to paint an entire humanoid species as racist.

Racism is a known concept that people can already opt into using if it is important for their home games. People who want to play Dark Sun can use the old sourcebooks (available on DMs Guild if they don't have physical copies).

I believe a compromise could be attainted (see my post to @Chaosmancer) but I do not see removing the tool completely as a compromise.

 

[Guest 85555]

Yes

Here I think we have a key point of disagreement. I wouldn't use the term people to describe such beings

Not quite, there are a few other things



Nope, and that is awfully dangerous territory you are skirting.

I don't think it is. We are talking about fictional races. We aren't talking about applying it to humans in the real world. Maybe it would be a concern if a race of aliens appeared tomorrow and people used it as an argument to annihilate them (but again real world versus not real world). Also I think the concept of person is a very difficult one to nail down, so it is fair to ask if there are any qualities that would make something not a person.

 

[Faolyn]

It isn't that I don't have a problem with it, I would prefer people understand where I am coming from better, but I mean at a certain point you have to agree to disagree with people.I have been arguing because I think it is an important issue, and I have also been persistent because in many instances I feel my opinions were being very innaccurately rephrased.

Maybe you're not doing a good job stating your reasons. I mean, they're often very contradictory, which I and others have pointed out to you.

Because I think that at this point, it's fair to say that people understand where you're coming from. Many of us just disagree with it.

I don't mean to be disrespectful or anything, but at this point in the conversation I really don't think it will be fruitful for me to restate my reasons to you

See, at this point I have no choice but to believe that your reasons are just "because" and "because I like it the old way" and "it's somehow more creative to do things the way they've always been done," as opposed to any reasons that could potentially be used to convince someone else.

 

[Maxperson]

Studies have been done on the connection between violence and violent games. Studies have not been done that stereotypes in games are somehow fundamentally different than stereotypes in written media. Especially since you somehow think news doesn't engage in storytelling.

I reject your argument that real life news=games. People know that they are playing a game. Many, if not most do not know when the news lies to them or portrays things in a bad light.

Studies have been done to show that violent games do not cause violent people. However, games absolutely can affect what you do in real life. You can't create emotional impacts that have no impact.

Where are the studies that show that games cause bias and/or racism?

Yes there is. Because that isn't artwork of a standard human from one of those cities.

So barbarians don't live in those cities?

Seriously? You are trying the "but you can give them any armor" to try and prove that orc technology is equal to the technology of elves, dwarves and humans? Guess that means Ogres are the most technologically advanced race on Greyhawk, since I can just equip them with power armor and laser rifles.

They forge stuff out of metal as I have shown. They have smith and have in an official capacity in every edition of D&D except maybe 4e. I don't know for sure because I haven't played 4e. Why do you malign orcs so badly and insist that they can't make armor? Do you think they're too dumb? Do their gods keep it from them?

Morg: "Ozak, I would like you to make me some chain mail."
Ozak: "Sorry. I can make nails, horse shoes, studs for armor, hammers, any kind of weapon, sickles, plow shares, shields, and more, but for some bizarre reasons I can never seem to be able to make chain links or plates of mail to wear."
Morg: "You need to complain to Chaosmancer and see if he will allow you to make what you very obviously should be able to make."

If you aren't going to try and make serious points, why even bother posting Max? They specifically, and repeatedly, demonstrate in the books that orcs lack many, many of the things that the "civilized" races used. The parallels are obvious.

They have civilized orcs. They had them in 1e, 2e, and 3e, and I see no reason for 5e not to have them. For your point to stand, you need to show that all of the civilized orcs that are shown in official products since the game came out really don't exist.

 

[Maxperson]

That's not their culture though. That's orcs in human lands conforming to human culture.

Official advanced cultures have been shown already. And no, those things do not say that they have conformed to human culture.