Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hexmage-EN" data-source="post: 8331672" data-attributes="member: 79428">I'm increasingly convinced that the core problem isn't alignment, but changing ideas over what monsters represent.In most games, but especially video games, monsters represent obstacles to be overcome that will otherwise cause a game over. That's the reason they exist at all. This draws upon how monsters were traditionally featured in mythology and folklore; threats to people that had to be overcome.In recent years, though, at least some creatives have decided that monsters represent &quot;the other&quot;, and as such have begun to identify with and humanize them more. As far as I can tell this is most common in literature at the moment, whereas most video games still seem comfortable to have monsters as obstacles.The clearest solution I can see is to change intelligent monsters to make more of them either evil individuals who transformed because of their wickedness or devotion to evil entities (which is how 5E already treats minotaurs, medusas, and lamias by default; yuan-ti are unusual in that they can both be evil human cultists who transformed themselves or the descendants of said cultists) or creatures that come about by supernatural means (such as how 5E by default explains gnolls and many varieties of fey, such as redcaps and mites). Maybe trolls could become fey embodiments of nature's resilience and occasional savagery, and goblinoids could all start-out as cultists of Bane who are transformed in rituals, for example.Basically, the default for intelligent monsters could be that they are made, not born. This would of course necessitate sweeping changes to D&amp;D lore beyond anything even 4E did. It would, however, neatly solve the question of how there can possibly be so many intelligent creatures in the world with sustainable populations.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hexmage-EN, post: 8331672, member: 79428"] I'm increasingly convinced that the core problem isn't alignment, but changing ideas over what monsters represent. In most games, but especially video games, monsters represent obstacles to be overcome that will otherwise cause a game over. That's the reason they exist at all. This draws upon how monsters were traditionally featured in mythology and folklore; threats to people that had to be overcome. In recent years, though, at least some creatives have decided that monsters represent "the other", and as such have begun to identify with and humanize them more. As far as I can tell this is most common in literature at the moment, whereas most video games still seem comfortable to have monsters as obstacles. The clearest solution I can see is to change intelligent monsters to make more of them either evil individuals who transformed because of their wickedness or devotion to evil entities (which is how 5E already treats minotaurs, medusas, and lamias by default; yuan-ti are unusual in that they can both be evil human cultists who transformed themselves or the descendants of said cultists) or creatures that come about by supernatural means (such as how 5E by default explains gnolls and many varieties of fey, such as redcaps and mites). Maybe trolls could become fey embodiments of nature's resilience and occasional savagery, and goblinoids could all start-out as cultists of Bane who are transformed in rituals, for example. Basically, the default for intelligent monsters could be that they are made, not born. This would of course necessitate sweeping changes to D&D lore beyond anything even 4E did. It would, however, neatly solve the question of how there can possibly be so many intelligent creatures in the world with sustainable populations. [/QUOTE]

Verification