D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[Charlaquin]

Is a lion antithetical to the life and bodily autonomy of a gazelle? Is the tarantula wasp antithetical to that of the tarantula? (Seriously, look those up, first time I sympathize with a spider)?

No, because they form a natural equilibrium with their prey, and more importantly, because neither the predator nor the prey in those examples is sapient. Furthermore, I’m pretty sure if humans had any natural predators, we would be pretty morally justified in defending ourselves against them.

At what point does dietary obligation or breeding ritual become malevolence?

I don’t know if malevolence is even the best way to describe it in the case of mind flayers. Like I said before, I actually prefer to classify Aberrations as unaligned because they exist outside our traditional ethical framework.

Also, side note, let’s not pretend ceromorphasis is just a “breeding ritual.” It’s a violent invasion of a sapient victim’s body that destroys the victim’s bodily autonomy, and the existence of Neothelids proves it isn’t even an essential step in the Illithid lifecycle.

If you really want to get into it, I view Illithid
as essentially amoral beasts native to the Far Realm, whom the Elder Brains (which are absolutely evil) enslaved and turned to their own purpose. Which I’ve hinted at a couple times now with my comments about a campaign where you free the Illithid from the influence of the Elder Brains and then try to peacefully coexist with them.

 

[Charlaquin]

The dramatic function. You’re suggesting the only function of race/species is appearance. That’s remarkably limiting.

If the only difference you see between those creatures is appearance, I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[Scribe]

Do mindflayers get racially coded like Orcs?

If the language was cleaned up, and Orcs were just a default warlike race as that is how their god created them, would they then just be evil as Flayers are evil?

 

[Remathilis]

I'm pretty sure it's when sapient things decide to kill other sapient things.

That what you're saying here is basically near-quoting various diabolical villains from fantasy and SF is probably not doing you any favours.

"What is a man but a miserable pile of secrets?"

So if a mind flayer is sentient enough to know that it's survival must come at the cost of other sentient life, the moral choice is then starvation and extinction?

 

[TwoSix]

Killer whales and chimpanzees are arguably sapient. They kill other whales and chimps. Are they being malevolent?

I'd say generally yes, although I don't think they have the same capacity for altruism that humans do.

 

[Mind of tempest]

If you feel they're boring / lame, good news. In your campaign you can do anything you want!

Me? I want a starting point. Maybe I stick with that starting point because it fits a role in the fiction, maybe I tweak it to subvert the trope. I can't subvert a trope that doesn't exist.

I suspect a starting point would still be needed

 

[jmartkdr2]

So if a mind flayer is sentient enough to know that it's survival must come at the cost of other sentient life, the moral choice is then starvation and extinction?

The thing is, whether or not the Mind Flayer is evil by whichever definition you're using, it is a direct threat to the continued survival of other sapient species and therefore they are justified in fighting it.

IE it's a monster that eats people. You're allow to kill them.

 

[Oofta]

But you don't need to subvert a trope if it doesn't exist either!

That was one of the great things about Time of the Dragon. Nobody would have even talked about "subverting tropes" or the like at that time. It wasn't presented as "Our elves are different to your elves!" (which is a lame trope itself), it was presented as - "This is how this culture is, that is what that culture does" and so on. It was incredibly effective and memorable because of it.

Again, more good news. You can say during your session 0 "my orcs are different". On the other hand I can have "standard" orcs but then subvert the trope if I want to.

I haven't done that for orcs yet because I don't use them often but there is a good tribe of goblins as a result of a cascade of events from a campaign a couple of decades ago.

I don't want to have to come up with detail for every race, species and monster. I'd rather spend my time on other aspects of the story. I don't see a problem with people having both options.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Again, more good news. You can say during your session 0 "my orcs are different". On the other hand I can have "standard" orcs but then subvert the trope if I want to.

I haven't done that for orcs yet because I don't use them often but there is a good tribe of goblins as a result of a cascade of events from a campaign a couple of decades ago.

I don't want to have to come up with detail for every race, species and monster. I'd rather spend my time on other aspects of the story. I don't see a problem with people having both options.

I mean, this argument could literally be turned right around on you: there's no reason not to have a broader, less stereotypical concept of an Orc in something like the MM because you could just have your simpler version that adheres to the classic tropes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Okay but the only orcs you've ever met are those marauding orcs is it still not justified?

It’s understandable. But I’m not talking about whether characters can be excused for having biases. I’m talking about whether the setting implicitly validates those biases.

Isn't their marauding existence antithetical to the life of other sapient beings?

Again, those specific orcs? Sure, and I think the people they raid are morally justified in defending themselves.

In fact what if the lore of the game world is that only marauding orcs exist (as was true of D&D) in the game world is it still not justified?

That’s exactly the problem. The setting makes people who judge all orcs based on the actions of a few right. And that’s messed up.

And if "always marauding" orcs is problematic to exist in a game world why are Mind Flayers fine to exist?

Because they’re so far removed from anything we could reasonably recognize as people. They’re alien parasites controlled by giant fascist brains in jars. Nothing about them being inherently evil reinforces or validates any real-world attitudes.