Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6920850" data-attributes="member: 4937">I find that statement to wildly misstate what is going on.PC's don't arbitrate what species of intelligent life are morally acceptable to kill - the cosmology and hence the DM does.&nbsp; Broadly speaking, you can divide &quot;intelligent life&quot; into:a) Peopleb) DemonsIt's not morally acceptable to kill people accept in self-defense.&nbsp; It is morally acceptable to kill demons.&nbsp;&nbsp; The division is not arbitrary.&nbsp;&nbsp; If an orc is people, you can't kill them on sight - but equally it would be wrong for the DM to play them as demons.&nbsp; If an orc is a demon, you can't decide that they are people - and equally it would be wrong for the DM to play them as people (except to trick or confuse the players).&nbsp; This is set according to the creation or fundamental nature of the species.&nbsp;&nbsp; Does the thing have fundamentally a people nature, or fundamentally a demon nature.Now, within the setting some characters may disagree over the question of whether orcs have a people nature or a demon nature, but one of those groups is wrong, and ignorance doesn't prevent their actions from being wrong.And without the setting, some groups - including DMs - may never question their assumptions or think about whether orcs are people, but that is simply childish.&nbsp; That level of play got dispensed with in our groups about the time we were 14.&nbsp;&nbsp; If some groups never get past that point, or prefer never to address the point, that reflects only on the play at those tables and not D&amp;D as a whole.&nbsp;&nbsp; D&amp;D as a whole has typically had a much more nuanced take on the question than that, as even the D&amp;D cartoon did not present orcs as wholly ruined beings.&nbsp;&nbsp; Brutish, thuggish and potentially dangerous sure, but you could go into a bar and they'd be drinking along side other patrons without creating a disturbance.&nbsp;&nbsp; That sort of cosmopolitan take is I think much more common to D&amp;D that what you are here crediting.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6920850, member: 4937"] I find that statement to wildly misstate what is going on. PC's don't arbitrate what species of intelligent life are morally acceptable to kill - the cosmology and hence the DM does. Broadly speaking, you can divide "intelligent life" into: a) People b) Demons It's not morally acceptable to kill people accept in self-defense. It is morally acceptable to kill demons. The division is not arbitrary. If an orc is people, you can't kill them on sight - but equally it would be wrong for the DM to play them as demons. If an orc is a demon, you can't decide that they are people - and equally it would be wrong for the DM to play them as people (except to trick or confuse the players). This is set according to the creation or fundamental nature of the species. Does the thing have fundamentally a people nature, or fundamentally a demon nature. Now, within the setting some characters may disagree over the question of whether orcs have a people nature or a demon nature, but one of those groups is wrong, and ignorance doesn't prevent their actions from being wrong. And without the setting, some groups - including DMs - may never question their assumptions or think about whether orcs are people, but that is simply childish. That level of play got dispensed with in our groups about the time we were 14. If some groups never get past that point, or prefer never to address the point, that reflects only on the play at those tables and not D&D as a whole. D&D as a whole has typically had a much more nuanced take on the question than that, as even the D&D cartoon did not present orcs as wholly ruined beings. Brutish, thuggish and potentially dangerous sure, but you could go into a bar and they'd be drinking along side other patrons without creating a disturbance. That sort of cosmopolitan take is I think much more common to D&D that what you are here crediting. [/QUOTE]

Verification