Orcs used to be Lawful Evil
- Thread starter dead
- Start date
Klaus
First Post
Well, in Fiery Dragon's setting, the World of Karathis, there is an orcish elite called the Himrak, who are militaristic Lawful Evil humanoids.
You can read and battle them in the FREE Ennie-nominated adventure Himrak War Party, and also in the World of Karathis: West Wood Barony. Just go to www.fierydragon.com and follow the link to DM's Day page.
You can read and battle them in the FREE Ennie-nominated adventure Himrak War Party, and also in the World of Karathis: West Wood Barony. Just go to www.fierydragon.com and follow the link to DM's Day page.
Traditional or Not?
In our campaign, we didn't change the monster palette with the advent of 3e. Of course we never really followed the canon of the previous editions either. Our orcs were and are mainly lawful evil, more like the fighting Uruk-hai than D&D or Warhammer orcs (they were bred for war by the elves, they also don't look like D&D orcs and more like Peter Jackson's Uruk-hai though there are several different breeds which have different physical characteristics).
Our gnolls are largely neutral survivalists so marauding gnolls are pretty rare, but don't try to go into their territory uninvited.
Our hobgoblins and pretty much all goblinoids are dark fae and so largely chaotic (they also tend to look more Brian Froud-ish with long, pointed noses and sharp features), though it depends which god they follow. Hobgoblins tend more towards lawfulness while goblins towards chaos, bugbears seem to ready to go either way. Our elves are probably fairly neutral, their society seems pretty lawful, but individually they can have capricious/cruel streaks from their fae blood and a lot depends on which gods they follow. Our dark elves (which aren't drow, they look more like Warhammer dark elves) are much the same, largely evil, but how lawful or chaotic they are individually tends to depend on shich god they follow, their society tends to be pretty lawful though.
On the other hand we did change halflings to look like the 3e version, because we were pretty fed up with hobbits (Why do those guys ever become adventurers outside of the 5 that did so in Tolkein?), and because we were working on changing them in that direction anyway before 3e came out.
So we seem to not care much for D&D tradition (and there are a ton of traditional D&D monsters as well as new D&D monsters that we just don't use: green slimes, beholders, illithids, digesters, etc.), but do follow tradition after a fashion with our orcs (more Tolkeinish) and goblinoids and elves (more traditional fae). Our races do have campaign roles to fill, they just aren't based on game mechanics, but rather what feels right for the campaign world. (We also don't have dragons for every challenge rating as they are exceedingly rare and powerful and more to be negotiated with than fought. We also don't follow the given alignments for them and metallic dragons may not even exist.)
In our campaign, we didn't change the monster palette with the advent of 3e. Of course we never really followed the canon of the previous editions either. Our orcs were and are mainly lawful evil, more like the fighting Uruk-hai than D&D or Warhammer orcs (they were bred for war by the elves, they also don't look like D&D orcs and more like Peter Jackson's Uruk-hai though there are several different breeds which have different physical characteristics).
Our gnolls are largely neutral survivalists so marauding gnolls are pretty rare, but don't try to go into their territory uninvited.
Our hobgoblins and pretty much all goblinoids are dark fae and so largely chaotic (they also tend to look more Brian Froud-ish with long, pointed noses and sharp features), though it depends which god they follow. Hobgoblins tend more towards lawfulness while goblins towards chaos, bugbears seem to ready to go either way. Our elves are probably fairly neutral, their society seems pretty lawful, but individually they can have capricious/cruel streaks from their fae blood and a lot depends on which gods they follow. Our dark elves (which aren't drow, they look more like Warhammer dark elves) are much the same, largely evil, but how lawful or chaotic they are individually tends to depend on shich god they follow, their society tends to be pretty lawful though.
On the other hand we did change halflings to look like the 3e version, because we were pretty fed up with hobbits (Why do those guys ever become adventurers outside of the 5 that did so in Tolkein?), and because we were working on changing them in that direction anyway before 3e came out.
So we seem to not care much for D&D tradition (and there are a ton of traditional D&D monsters as well as new D&D monsters that we just don't use: green slimes, beholders, illithids, digesters, etc.), but do follow tradition after a fashion with our orcs (more Tolkeinish) and goblinoids and elves (more traditional fae). Our races do have campaign roles to fill, they just aren't based on game mechanics, but rather what feels right for the campaign world. (We also don't have dragons for every challenge rating as they are exceedingly rare and powerful and more to be negotiated with than fought. We also don't follow the given alignments for them and metallic dragons may not even exist.)
Quasqueton
First Post
I remember reading, somewhere, way back, what the designers of D&D3 thought of the orc alignment -- most people tended to play orcs as chaotic, so they changed the official alignment to match the way most people were already playing them.
Read the old AD&D1 MM. The description of orcs just screams chaotic -- only organized if forced by a strong leader, otherwise they tend to fight among themselves. In all my years of playing AD&D1, I never DMed or saw someone else DM orcs as anything but chaotic.
I think Gygax and others back in the early days really didn't give a lot of thought to how they aligned certain creatures (at least on the chaos-law axis). There's even one *non-intelligent* creature, (can't think of the name off the top of my head) that was Lawful Good. The D&D3 designers seemed to actually consider the alignment definitions when they assigned alignments to the various creatures.
As for halflings: the only images of them in AD&D1 showed "commoner-types". Pudgy, soft, and jolly. The only adventurer halfling I can think of in any image is Blodgett in the Slaver series -- and he was closer to the current halfling image than the old hobbit image. (Granted, at least he had hairy feet.)
The plump, easy-living halflings still exist. It's just that they aren't the adventurers that you see in most images now-adays. Lidda is a slim, trim, shoe-wearing adventurer. Don't hate her because she's beautiful.
Quasqueton
Read the old AD&D1 MM. The description of orcs just screams chaotic -- only organized if forced by a strong leader, otherwise they tend to fight among themselves. In all my years of playing AD&D1, I never DMed or saw someone else DM orcs as anything but chaotic.
I think Gygax and others back in the early days really didn't give a lot of thought to how they aligned certain creatures (at least on the chaos-law axis). There's even one *non-intelligent* creature, (can't think of the name off the top of my head) that was Lawful Good. The D&D3 designers seemed to actually consider the alignment definitions when they assigned alignments to the various creatures.
As for halflings: the only images of them in AD&D1 showed "commoner-types". Pudgy, soft, and jolly. The only adventurer halfling I can think of in any image is Blodgett in the Slaver series -- and he was closer to the current halfling image than the old hobbit image. (Granted, at least he had hairy feet.)
The plump, easy-living halflings still exist. It's just that they aren't the adventurers that you see in most images now-adays. Lidda is a slim, trim, shoe-wearing adventurer. Don't hate her because she's beautiful.
Quasqueton
Last edited:
Derulbaskul
Adventurer
dead said:
The basic question of this thread was based on the fallacy that D&D orcs were originally lawful evil. They were first recorded under the two-component alignment system as chaotic evil. 3E just "corrected" this.
Personally, tradition for me is irrelevant as is change purely for the sake of change; the underlying design philosophy and logic is what is important.
And on that note, if you ever play in one of my games you will also discover that the sahuagin are chaotic evil....
Bah. I'm about as likely to make all orcs one alignment, as I am to make every orc carry a Greataxe. They're there for my convenience, and I'll do whatever I please. ![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
As for halflings - I'm actually glad they changed them. I like hobbits, but that doesn't mean I particularly want to play short, pudgy, ruddy-cheeked homebodies with oversized hairy feet in a game of heroic fantasy.
As for halflings - I'm actually glad they changed them. I like hobbits, but that doesn't mean I particularly want to play short, pudgy, ruddy-cheeked homebodies with oversized hairy feet in a game of heroic fantasy.
Psion
Adventurer
Well, first off, I never liked orcs as villains in the first place, so it doesn't affect me much.
However, conveniently (and not planned this way), in my game world, the orcs used to rule a large romanesque empire, but descended into barbarism. So my campaign, oddly, paralleled the 1e/2e to 3e transition.
Halflings being like Kender is just pictures. They do not, as a race, behave like Kender, which is the important thing. (Or otherwise, the halflings would explode, too!) To me, halflings will always look like this:
http://paratime.ca/v_and_v/pics/jeffdee/halflings_fighter_white.jpg
i.e. Chubby no, hairy feet, yes.
And I am actually rather pleased with Drow being "usually NE" because I think the description fits the typical scheming drow the way I picture them better. I am more a fan of D1-3 era drow than Drizzt era "psychotically murderous" drow (which I am convinced would be extinct from their own internal conflicts in no time.)
I really dig, however, that Plot & Poison plays to both archetypes.
However, conveniently (and not planned this way), in my game world, the orcs used to rule a large romanesque empire, but descended into barbarism. So my campaign, oddly, paralleled the 1e/2e to 3e transition.
Halflings being like Kender is just pictures. They do not, as a race, behave like Kender, which is the important thing. (Or otherwise, the halflings would explode, too!) To me, halflings will always look like this:
http://paratime.ca/v_and_v/pics/jeffdee/halflings_fighter_white.jpg
i.e. Chubby no, hairy feet, yes.
And I am actually rather pleased with Drow being "usually NE" because I think the description fits the typical scheming drow the way I picture them better. I am more a fan of D1-3 era drow than Drizzt era "psychotically murderous" drow (which I am convinced would be extinct from their own internal conflicts in no time.)
I really dig, however, that Plot & Poison plays to both archetypes.
The_Gneech
Explorer
MerricB said:
He's got a bone to pick with this silly thread.
-The Gneech ("What's the POINT of halflings that aren't hobbits? I mean, why bother?")
Similar Threads
