D&D General In 2025 FR D&D should PCs any longer be wary of the 'evil' humanoids?

[Micah Sweet]

You could play a drow and ally with orcs in 1e (by Gygax!). Tiefling were created to be a player race in 2e and non-evil Gith have been around for decades. As for 3e, its most famous module hinged on allying with kobolds.

But if you have an adventure where the party needs to fight through and kill dozens and dozens of goblins, why not?

Though it would be cooler if it was dozens and dozens of elves.

I've run elves as antagonists more than once. They really lend themselves to it IMO.

 

[Mallus]

… I mean creatures like the tieflings, gith, drow and kobolds.

I come from a community formed in days of 3e, where there were pretty strict expectations on what was an appropriate response to such creatures,

I come from a community that got bored with evil mortal races by the late 1980s. Well, my college DM and I did at any rate. Seemed to be going around though, considering some of the official 2e publications, or 1e, since playable Drow were introduced in the original Unearthed Arcana.

Also, not to criticize, but if you don’t play 3e with an anything goes attitude, you really miss out on what that edition has to offer.

 

[pukunui]

I've run elves as antagonists more than once. They really lend themselves to it IMO.

Like in Discworld!

 

[Piperken]

...As the years roll on it increasingly feels like it's a lot of greybeards shouting 'NO! IT ISN'T HOW WE DID IT IN OUR DAY!'...

At a music festival, listening to classic rock...

In the audience, at the theater watching Hamlet...

While watching a basketball game... a soccer game... an American football game...

Observing as someone cooks French cuisine...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Like in Discworld!

My immediate thought lol.

 

[Clint_L]

It's a bit of an outlier situation, but without going into excessive detail it is a single online setting, where DMs move between players, and players move freely among one-another, as such a single agreed upon policy is required, which is currently that most traditional 'monsters' cannot enter civilised settlements, and interactions with traditional creatures (elves, dwarves, humans etc), if not hostile, should generally be conducted with animosity. Further to this certain races, such as drow, are almost entirely prohibited from being good aligned.

Hypothetically a DM, in accordance with existing rules, wouls feel compelled to intervene if they saw a budding romance between a drow and a human, or if they saw a goblin sitting down for dinner with a dwarf. This is all rather strictly enforced, and often also reflected in good vs evil traditional narratives and quests (and in NPC attitudes).

I admit when it comes to traditional tabletop I am far more likely to be playing WHFRP, where such issues rarely arise (it's hard to get cosy with a two-headed warrior of chaos with a bloody tentacle hanging from his chest).

I am intriqued to learn more about this game as it seems very unique, not to mention successful if you have hundreds of players at any one time! Kudos for making it happen!

I'm sure that the text of the FR 2025 books will reflect the current design philosophy of WotC, and the strong trend among players to not worry too much about alignment and traditionally "evil" species, etc. Instead, antagonists will be defined by their motives and cultures, unless they are forces of pure destruction. But it shouldn't be hard to retrofit to your players' tastes.

I agree with others that, as your preferred style is out of synch with the new norm, this may pose recruting issues, and thus might put you in a tough spot.

Might I ask, why does it matter that "orcs are evil" by definition? As long as the orcs that you are using in the story are clearly antagonistic to the players, their essential evilness, or lack thereof, doesn't need to be an issue. So maybe you can sidestep the whole problem by basically ignoring it.

 

[TreChriron]

Any longer?

Not trying to be a big downer, but they never were. There's no period in RPG history where that was a major, popular thing in RPGs.
...

Yes. Any longer. I started playing in 1981. I was post AD&D pre 2e basic Moldvay Red Box. In my circles, people used to wax poetic about authenticity to the ugly peculiarities of the medieval personage. If you hang out in any OSR spaces, I still believe there is a crowd looking for this authenticity, or at least bemoan the fact that people don't want to engage the old ugliness in an effort to be "authentic", which reminds me of the same conversations I had with people back when we started playing. I had this master GM who took us youngins' under his wing (with his college group). He was about 10 years older than us. We played a game set in this hodgepodge of Warhammer Fantasy meets Lahnkmar meets Forgotten Realms with a focus on being medieval. We had many lectures on the matter and were schooled "appropriately." Often.

I fully admit this is my perspective, but I also rebut the idea that it was not a major popular thing in RPGs. It was the center of attention for my hobby for many years.

 

[pukunui]

Yes. Any longer. I started playing in 1981. I was post AD&D pre 2e basic Moldvay Red Box. In my circles, people used to wax poetic about authenticity to the ugly peculiarities of the medieval personage. If you hang out in any OSR spaces, I still believe there is a crowd looking for this authenticity, or at least bemoan the fact that people don't want to engage the old ugliness in an effort to be "authentic", which reminds me of the same conversations I had with people back when we started playing. I had this master GM who took us youngins' under his wing (with his college group). He was about 10 years older than us. We played a game set in this hodgepodge of Warhammer Fantasy meets Lahnkmar meets Forgotten Realms with a focus on being medieval. We had many lectures on the matter and were schooled "appropriately." Often.

I fully admit this is my perspective, but I also rebut the idea that it was not a major popular thing in RPGs. It was the center of attention for my hobby for many years.

I started with 2e. I would point to the Complete Paladin's Handbook as evidence of D&D's medievalesque leanings back then. 99% of the art in that book depicts people dressed in medieval European fashions engaging in medieval European activities. The content of the book is also geared toward "how to play a paladin as a chivalrous, courtly medieval European knight" and "this is what happens to your powers if you fail to tithe the church on time or neglect to greet someone you pass in the street" and so on and so forth.

Lots of art in other 2e era books depicted characters in doublet-and-hose with pointy shoes and elaborate headgear, etc etc. It was really not until 3e came along with its "dungeonpunk" aesthetics (so many buckles and belt straps!) that D&D art at least became less medieval-oriented.

 

[Remathilis]

I started with 2e. I would point to the Complete Paladin's Handbook as evidence of D&D's medievalesque leanings back then. 99% of the art in that book depicts people dressed in medieval European fashions engaging in medieval European activities. The content of the book is also geared toward "how to play a paladin as a chivalrous, courtly medieval European knight" and "this is what happens to your powers if you fail to tithe the church on time or neglect to greet someone you pass in the street" and so on and so forth.

Lots of art in other 2e era books depicted characters in doublet-and-hose with pointy shoes and elaborate headgear, etc etc. It was really not until 3e came along with its "dungeonpunk" aesthetics (so many buckles and belt straps!) that D&D art at least became less medieval-oriented.

Well... It depends on the book. Ravenloft's art was very Victorian (without firearms) and there is a Planescape art with the Lady of Pain chasing hoodlums on a skateboard. (The hoodlums, she is floating). The Realms always has a more Renaissance theme than strictly medieval. More Italian city states than British kingdoms. The most medieval looking art in AD&D probably comes from the 2e Mystara books (ironic considering how gonzo Mystara is just below the surface).

 

[pukunui]

Well... It depends on the book. Ravenloft's art was very Victorian (without firearms) and there is a Planescape art with the Lady of Pain chasing hoodlums on a skateboard. (The hoodlums, she is floating). The Realms always has a more Renaissance theme than strictly medieval. More Italian city states than British kingdoms. The most medieval looking art in AD&D probably comes from the 2e Mystara books (ironic considering how gonzo Mystara is just below the surface).

I guess I'm thinking more the generic D&D art rather than the setting-specific art. Like the stuff in the core books and the brown / blue faux leather supplements (not the historical green ones).