Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 6210583" data-attributes="member: 8835">Racism in the real world is bad.If the party is "good", I expect to not have any PCs act like members of the KKK.As GM, I may have a blatantly racist race to act as the obvious racist jerks/evil race that you can kill (like Orcs).I might make a rivalry between "good races" that might show some NPCs acting like jerks, but not out outright villains.  An elven shopkeep who "doesn't serve your kind" might be an example (and that's as far as it goes, so he's a jerk exercising his rights as a shop owner, not a terrorist).  In such situations, I may shift such jerk personalities based on player behavior.  In a Disney moment, the heroic party of Dwarves may just change his mind through their selfless actions despite his jerky treatment toward them.In a PC party, I might accept two PCs begrudgingly working together (because of their race's background), but I won't accept it being used to justify jerky behavior amongst the party.  There's saying your PCs don't like each other, then there's actively disrupting another player's fun.  That would be the line.In general play, this kind of thing doesn't come up.  Races with Evil in the alignment description gets portrayed as evil (justifying the alignment description), and the party is legally free to kill them in most situations because they all are caught in the act of being evil.Stuff without evil in the alignment tends to be nice or not based on their personality or the PCs reputation, rather than the PCs races.I avoid certain gender issues.  I avoid certain racial issues.  It's just not what we're there to game for</blockquote>

Verification