D&D (2024) Humanoids in the MM...

[Clint_L]

My honest guess is that there is a little sleight of hand here. Yes, WotC has said humanoids do not have a set alignment, but WotC has not ruled out alignment tendencies for things that aren't humanoids, and they have turned a lot of humanoids that traditionally were antagonists into non-humanoids so they can keep their alignment tendencies. Monsters of the Multiverse pretty much explained this in a little sidebar on hobgoblins of all things (stating PC hobgoblins are humanoids and have a variety of outlooks, while the monster hobgoblins are fey and influenced by fey magic, so they can have an alignment).

This has several ramifications. First, it lets WotC keep alignment on a lot of creatures that otherwise would end up in the "no specific alignment" bin. Gnolls can remain mostly evil, githzerai mostly chaotic, etc. It also tries to keep the classic play style alive while also addressing the concerns of biodeterminism. However, I think it's a compromise that ends up upsetting both sides. Most bio-essentialism proponents aren't satisfied that "they aren't humanoids" justifies goblins and gnolls having evil alignments, and those who rejected the concept see them unnecessarily messing with monster types. And, of course, it will raise questions regarding the PC versions of these creatures remaining humanoids and weakening X Person spells.

But yes, this is WotC trying to have its cake and eat it too.

It would be so much simpler to just do away with alignment. Other RPGS, even other fantasy RPGs do just fine without it. Nobody has any trouble creating characters or running monsters or whatever. Writers don't need alignments to create protagonists and antagonists and conflict. I know it's a sacred cow since it's been with D&D since the beginning, but alignment is just a pain in the butt, IMO. It's a carry over from needing to make "teams" for war gaming, and was added before the concept of role playing was fully understood.

 

[Corinnguard]

I miss the Outsider type... Would be so useful to have that one back.

While it would be nice to bring back Outsider as a type representing someone from the Inner or Outer planes, the word runs up against WoTC's desire for inclusivity thanks to its' RL definition IMO. How about using the word, Planar, to represent those from the Planes?

I prefer the Lycanthropes take the Beast type. Being a "Werewolf" is about becoming a wolf. It is Primal magic, but conveys the identity of a natural wolf. In their Humanoid form, they are Humanoid, of course, but even then I can see them remaining a kind of Beast.

Would their hybrid form be considered a Humanoid and a Beast when they are in that form?

Dragonborn should be both Dragon and Humanoid. They literally hatched from a Dragon egg, and being Humanoid is the point of their creation.

This would be nice.

 

[Parmandur]

It would be so much simpler to just do away with alignment. Other RPGS, even other fantasy RPGs do just fine without it. Nobody has any trouble creating characters or running monsters or whatever. Writers don't need alignments to create protagonists and antagonists and conflict. I know it's a sacred cow since it's been with D&D since the beginning, but alignment is just a pain in the butt, IMO. It's a carry over from needing to make "teams" for war gaming, and was added before the concept of role playing was fully understood.

Too late, the nine point Alignment grid has too much cultural cache for WotC to change it.

 

[Remathilis]

Too late, the nine point Alignment grid has too much cultural cache for WotC to change it.

Yeah. Alignment, for as nonsensical as it is, has penetrated into the mainstream via memes in a way that losing that would be detrimental to the culture of the game even if better for the actual game.

Saving throws (especially seen in 4e when they were static defenses) and +1 anything I feel have similar places. You can build far better games without them, but the humor and reference of "save vs paper shredder" or "+1 shovel" is too valuable to give up.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah. Alignment, for as nonsensical as it is, has penetrated into the mainstream via memes in a way that losing that would be detrimental to the culture of the game even if better for the actual game.

I think we would survived without vegetable alignment grids.

 

[Remathilis]

3e solved this problem 20 years ago with "often", "usually", and "always" descriptors for alignments.

WotC is trying to fix it now with a similar, simpler system.

Humanoids have no fixed alignment tendencies.
Non-humanoids are usually (but not always) the alignment listed in their stat block.

The thing is they are taking a bunch of things that were formally humanoids and moving them to non to keep them as (usually) alignment. You can argue that's brilliant (it keeps things like gnolls and bullywugs in the villain role) or cheating (it is a workaround for bio-essentialism by making it magical/monstrous).

I'm not sure where I fall on this yet. I think when I see the full book I'll make my judgement.

 

[Remathilis]

I think we would survived without vegetable alignment grids.

But the memes Reynard, the MEMES!

 

[Reynard]

But the memes Reynard, the MEMES!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

WotC is trying to fix it now with a similar, simpler system.

Humanoids have no fixed alignment tendencies.
Non-humanoids are usually (but not always) the alignment listed in their stat block.

The thing is they are taking a bunch of things that were formally humanoids and moving them to non to keep them as (usually) alignment. You can argue that's brilliant (it keeps things like gnolls and bullywugs in the villain role) or cheating (it is a workaround for bio-essentialism by making it magical/monstrous).

I'm not sure where I fall on this yet. I think when I see the full book I'll make my judgement.

One problem I see is the question of how they handle orcs. In many adventures and games orcs and goblins serve similar roles.
Maybe they could have worked as giant kins. I think in 4e orcish was a dialect of the giant language.
Maybe this way, powerful built could have been justified.

 

[Remathilis]

One problem I see is the question of hownthey handle orcs. In many adventures and games orcs and goblins serve similar roles.
Maybe they could have worked as giant kins. I think in 4e orcish was a dialect of the giant language.
Maybe this way, powerful built could have been justified.

I'm not sure yet, but this is my guess. Humanoids are going to be reserved mostly for PC species. Orcs are now a PC species and won't have a fixed alignment. If there are other humanoids in the MM, they won't have an alignment either. The monsters that changed type will fill that "slaughter on sight" orc role, though with a little more nuance to their reasoning. Goblins are malicious fey. Gnolls are Abyss spawned locusts. Werewolves have abandoned humanity. Etc.

I'm very interested to see where they are going with this. I feel we are missing some nuance yet.