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

[The Sigil]

I think the fatal flaw with a humanocentric world building is the fact that you world has to strictly limit what else is in the world.,,,
Again, if that's your like, fine. I'm just kinda bored with it.

I don't believe I opined on whether or not I liked humanocentric design or whether it is "desirable" - I merely called it out as a potential cause of the "nonhumans are evil" trope in previous editions. I think we can all agree "if that's your like, fine."

 

[Micah Sweet]

One compromise option where you can have humanocentrism without human ascendancy is that the humanocentrism is merely local; the campaign is mostly set in lands where humans are most populous, but other parts of the world are dominated by other species. This also allows the campaign to evolve over time from familiar humanocentrism to adventuring in more fantastic lands, as the characters travel far away from the starting location.

I did that with the first campaign in my homebrew setting. It was set in and around a empire that was pretty human-focused, with other heritages being made to join if they don't do so willingly. Eventually it became clear that the empire occupied just one region of a larger continent where relations being cultures can be quite different.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Widespread racial prejudice is primarily an invention of the Renaissance or later, and it grew out of the extremely unfortunate interaction of multiple societal traditions that were not...that. Remember, Shakespeare had a "Blackamoor" character, and nobody thought that was particularly offensive. Before that, French and English authors in the Arthurian romances included bi-racial and Moorish characters (who had converted to Christianity, of course), and that wasn't considered offensive. Or Miguel de Cervantes, who includes (IIRC) a fleeing Moorish princess as one of the bravest and most noble of the characters in his works. Any controversy about her would have been that he was showing a woman with such qualities, not that he was showing a Moor with them.

Prejudices of the medieval period were almost exclusively driven by religion, far and away more than ethnicity. Further back, again, there doesn't seem to have been any particular dislike for Egyptians by Greeks or Norsemen by Romans, other than to look down on outsiders for their "bar bar bar" language, why couldn't they be civilized and speak Greek?

But, much like the idea that the Church burnt witches at the stake, pop history and pop religion often have literally nothing whatsoever to do with actual history and actual religion. (For the record, the Inquisition burned heretics--people who failed to practice Christianity "correctly"--at the stake....and it was literally heresy to claim that witches existed, as in, it was literally, formally in violation of Catholic doctrine to claim that anyone could get power from making a deal with Satan, and accusing someone of that meant you would get punished, not them!)

I agree with you regarding widespread racial prejudice, but regional and/or cultural prejudice absolutely was a thing. It doesn't have to be worldwide to be present in some places and make sense.

 

[The Sigil]

(For Tieflings)
Notice how you already had to add an exception ("or transformed..."), and it's now descent, not just direct creator attention.

All minotaurs were either directly created by Baphomet (IIRC?), or can trace direct ancestry to such. All of them. ...

To me it's almost guaranteed to be a much, much, much more distant one. Because, as stated, 100% of minotaurs come from beings directly, personally created and taught by Baphomet(?). The vast majority of tieflings don't have that connection. It could, quite literally, be that their great-grandfather did a bad thing exactly once, and the curse has only finally flowered three generations later, in a child who literally never did anything wrong and who came from parents who literally could not possibly have known any of this.

This is a difference without distinction. A minotaur's connection to Baphomet, could, quite literally, be that their great-grandfather was created by Baphomet exactly once, and the minotaur child literally never did anything wrong.

Again, all Tieflings are descended (to use your term) from something that WAS Evil Incarnate (Evil Outsider ancestor) or altered by Evil Incarnate (human touched by Asmodeus, willingly or not, and the implication of the lore is usually that this ancestor actively embraced evil).

All minotaurs were either directly created by or descended from creatures directly created by an evil deity (note the small "e" here - while evil deities are evil, they are usually seen as complex beings, not unadultered evil like a planar denizen of an evil plane).

So a minotaur owes its minotaur-ness to evil (Baphomet). The tiefling literally owes their very "tiefling-ness" to Evil Incarnate.

One is descended from evil. One is descended from Evil. What's the difference?

It's that you personally find "size" and "bull horns" and "obvious bull head" to be more off-putting than "skin hue" and "vestigial horns." You may be right that other humans would have the same predisposition. But to the point that was already made - that more often it's RELIGION than RACE, I would submit, that the difference between owing your differences to evil and owing your differences to Evil is more akin to that.

Also, I suppose in the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I personally find the "misunderstood, good-hearted PC tiefling" trope (where "tiefling heritage" is used as a stand-in for whatever group the PLAYER identifies with but thinks everyone else "others" - which can be something as mundane as "nerd" in the 80's and 90's when being a nerd wasn't cool) to be even more widespread and therefore boring than humanocentrism, which is probably why I missed the change to tieflings... because I actively avoid them (does that make ME prejudiced against them? Perhaps, but it's mostly because I prefer to ask people not to actively try to drag their out-of-game baggage into my escapist hobby).

(Think "every PC drow is a Drizz't wannabe" fatigue... when every drow/tiefling wants to be the "exception" and it's gone on for decades so the "exception" has become the rule, it makes the very idea boring. I would actually find the idea of a player that wants to play a Cambion that has fully and unabashedly embraced their evil heritage and revels in their badness compelling at this point.)

 

[The Sigil]

From the PHB:
Tieflings are either born in the Lower Planes or have fiendish ancestors who originated there. A tiefling (pronounced TEE-fling) is linked by blood to a devil, a demon, or some other Fiend. This connection to the Lower Planes is the tiefling’s fiendish legacy, which comes with the promise of power yet has no effect on the tiefling’s moral outlook.

Game mechanics know this, sure. Does the in-game culture? I would argue, "probably not."

I mean, we talk about "minotaurs are bigger" and yet racial (ancestral) attribute increases have been done away with. A minotaur is bigger, do you think it's reasonable for people to assume they have higher Strength and Constitution (in the same way we describe them as attributes in the real world), even though they mechanically don't have any difference in ability scores (the way we quantify those attributes in game)? Do you think, when you see someone who has a 6'6" frame and compare them with someone with a 5'2" frame, that they are stronger (absent something else obvious like one being a body-builder)? Maybe you do. But the game doesn't.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Tieflings have gone back to what they were before 4e, no default assumptions of being related to Asmodeus. 2024 PHB they've gone far enough back to at least the 3e assumptions with some of the 2e assumptions. The mention that some are born on Lower Planes does imply the 2e bit of some Tieflings being mutations from the effect of Planar influences.

They're no longer assumed to be exclusively of Human backgrounds either, as the word "Human" no longer appears anywhere in their entry. The iconic Bard in the PHB which is a Tiefling looks quite Elven in appearance, and since they can be size small or medium, one can certainly assume they can be of Halfling or Gnome backgrounds too.

 

[GMMichael]

I think there are two parallel conversations happening in this thread:

I think you're probably correct.

1. Should/do biologically evil species exist in the game?

Should:
In my game, no. "Evil" is a label applied by propagandists, not something required by genetics.
In all D&D, yes, since WotC's goal is to sell the most dead trees, and apparently killing sacred cows (currently) goes against that goal. (What alignment are the cows, I wonder?)

Do:
The SRD assassin is "neutral," and Tieflings can be good. So I'm leaning "no" on this one.

2. Should/do people in the game display prejudice against certain species, regardless of whether said species are actually biologically evil?

Should:
Is the game supposed to be realistic? Then yes. Is it supposed to be idealistic? Then the answer depends on your ideals.

Do:
I'd have to read current WotC products to answer that, but the historical answer is yes.

 

[Clint_L]

Tieflings have gone back to what they were before 4e, no default assumptions of being related to Asmodeus. 2024 PHB they've gone far enough back to at least the 3e assumptions with some of the 2e assumptions. The mention that some are born on Lower Planes does imply the 2e bit of some Tieflings being mutations from the effect of Planar influences.

They're no longer assumed to be exclusively of Human backgrounds either, as the word "Human" no longer appears anywhere in their entry. The iconic Bard in the PHB which is a Tiefling looks quite Elven in appearance, and since they can be size small or medium, one can certainly assume they can be of Halfling or Gnome backgrounds too.

And, as previously quoted, the current PHB specifies that a Tiefling’s ancestry has no bearing on their morality - play them how you like. Arguments about “evil” vs. “Evil” are besides the point (also, note that the PHB pointedly uses the word “moral” rather than “alignment”).

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Again, all Tieflings are descended (to use your term) from something that WAS Evil Incarnate (Evil Outsider ancestor) or altered by Evil Incarnate (human touched by Asmodeus, willingly or not, and the implication of the lore is usually that this ancestor actively embraced evil).

No. They aren't.

Because some were affected by a person using warlock magic near their mom when she was pregnant.

The connection you're asserting isn't there.

 

[Piperken]

... and there is a Planescape art with the Lady of Pain chasing hoodlums on a skateboard. (The hoodlums, she is floating)...

Not without precedent:

(also, the Lady of Pain casually pursuing quarry while grinding a skateboard is badass.)