D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[Xenonnonex]

I don't even understand that. Can you clarify?

Quoted I did. From the MM.
Not my arbitrary decision. Official decision. And official definitions.

 

[Maxperson]

If you seriously believe this, there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise. At this point, I think you'll just say anything to win/perpetuate the argument.

I'm pointing out the arbitrary nature of the arguments you guys put forth.

Enslaving people psionically while also looking like an obese murder-squid typically doesn't make you a person.

It makes you more alien, which makes you less of a person.

I mean, watch sci-fi. You've just made every alien in the Cantina scene in Star Wars not a person. Alien = not human and/or from somewhere else, so elves, orcs, goblins, dwarves, etc. are aliens, too.

In any lore, can you point to something that makes aboleths happy or grateful? No, they're aliens and have different emotions.
Sure, sociopaths are people, but if your lack of emotions makes you murder people, you're generally not considered a person. Serial killers aren't called people, are they? They're not members of our society, they're monsters.

In the lore can you point to something that says that they don't have these emotions? We know beholders and illithids have emotions, so why not Aboleths?

Sex produces offspring that you have emotional connections to. There are no signs of aboleths having emotional connections with their children.

You really think that something that produces asexually cannot have an emotional attachment to its offspring?

It means that they don't have true societies, which is required to be called a person. Honeybees aren't considered people, and they have societies.

You forgot intelligence. Bees aren't intelligent as D&D defines it.

 

[Maxperson]

Quoted I did. From the MM.
Not my arbitrary decision. Official decision. And official definitions.

Actually, looking closer, the MM says that non-humanoids are people, too. The humanoid section says this, "Humanoids are the main peoples of the D&D world, both civilized and savage, including humans and a tremendous variety of other species." If they're the main people, being the most populous, the rest of the intelligent monsters would be the secondary people, including Aboleths. The MM says that they're people.

 

[Cadence]

Hey @Maxperson

So, what's your definition? Is it just Homo sapiens? Or are some of Dwarves, Elves, Drow, Elves, Half-Orcs, Gnomes, Orcs, Androids, Vulcans, Klingons, Goblin PCs, all Goblins, also persons? Or do you really think it's all intelligent creatures like you just claimed the MM says?

 

[Xenonnonex]

I'm pointing out the arbitrary nature of the arguments you guys put forth.



I mean, watch sci-fi. You've just made every alien in the Cantina scene in Star Wars not a person. Alien = not human and/or from somewhere else, so elves, orcs, goblins, dwarves, etc. are aliens, too.



In the lore can you point to something that says that they don't have these emotions? We know beholders and illithids have emotions, so why not Aboleths?



You really think that something that produces asexually cannot have an emotional attachment to its offspring?


You forgot intelligence. Bees aren't intelligent as D&D defines it.

By utterly alien. They cannot be people. The definition does not fit.
Aliens in your example are humanoids. Not aberrations.

Do you claim aberrations are people in your games.

 

[Dire Bare]

If you seriously believe this, there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise. At this point, I think you'll just say anything to win/perpetuate the argument.

Enslaving people psionically while also looking like an obese murder-squid typically doesn't make you a person.

It makes you more alien, which makes you less of a person.

You are the only person I know of that thinks that literal immortality doesn't mean that they're immortal. Sure, they can die, but it's more of an annoyance. To people, death normally isn't just annoying. Fiends and other creatures that respawn after death typically aren't considered people.

In any lore, can you point to something that makes aboleths happy or grateful? No, they're aliens and have different emotions.
Sure, sociopaths are people, but if your lack of emotions makes you murder people, you're generally not considered a person. Serial killers aren't called people, are they? They're not members of our society, they're monsters.

Sex produces offspring that you have emotional connections to. There are no signs of aboleths having emotional connections with their children.

It means that they don't have true societies, which is required to be called a person. Honeybees aren't considered people, and they have societies.

I can't believe I'm defending MaxPerson's point, but . . . .

I take this from a sci-fi angle. If the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise encountered the aboleth on some watery planet out there . . . would Kirk and crew consider the aboleth "people" or "monsters"? Certainly, the aboleth are alien, their thought processes, morality, and drives are inimical to our own understanding. But what about them disqualifies them as a sentient species worthy of just as much respect as humans, dwarves, and orcs?

Now, if my starship crew and I encountered the aboleth, and they tried to eat and/or enslave us . . . we would not consider them a friendly or "good" species, they would certainly be antagonists, and it would certainly be OK to take steps to protect ourselves against being eaten/enslaved.

Are the aboleth "evil"? Are they free-willed? Are they people (sentient)? As described in D&D, I would argue they certainly are sentient and free-willed, although not inherently evil, just alien to us and with a culture perfectly willing to treat us as non-people that are okay to eat up and/or enslave. I think you can view the aboleth as both "alien" and "people" and at the same time maintain their status as scary and awesome antagonists.

Same would go for other D&D aberrations such as mind flayers, beholders, and other "alien" species. I think viewing these creatures as people is just as important, and more interesting, than labeling them simply as "monsters" worthy of nothing but extermination.

Heck, we have several examples of various aberrations interacting (somewhat) peacefully with humanoid culture in D&D. There's the good old Xanathar (beholder) who runs a thieves guild in Waterdeep. We've had mind flayers partnering up with various humanoids, sometimes villains, but not always.

EDIT: To add . . . I can totally imagine a "D&D in Space" science fantasy campaign where aboleths and mind flayers are legal citizens in the space empire with all the same rights as the more populous humans, elves, dwarves, and orcs. But there are strict laws against eating and enslaving other sentients, which some aboleth have adapted to just fine, but it's rumored that many aboleths secretly indulge their ancestral habits . . . .

Perhaps the mind flayers grow brains in labs so they don't have to extract them from living sentients, perhaps they grow non-sentient humanoid clones to undergo ceremorphosis to perpetuate the species . . . .

 

[Xenonnonex]

Actually, looking closer, the MM says that non-humanoids are people, too. The humanoid section says this, "Humanoids are the main peoples of the D&D world, both civilized and savage, including humans and a tremendous variety of other species." If they're the main people, being the most populous, the rest of the intelligent monsters would be the secondary people, including Aboleths. The MM says that they're people.

Utterly absurd is that leap of "logic". Aberrations are defined as utterly alien beings in their own entry. Not for you to make arbitrary decisions.

Read Volo's. For an actual sense of what beholders are. For what mind flayers are.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I can't believe I'm defending MaxPerson's point, but . . . .

I take this from a sci-fi angle. If the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise encountered the aboleth on some watery planet out there . . . would Kirk and crew consider the aboleth "people" or "monsters"? Certainly, the aboleth are alien, their thought processes, morality, and drives are inimical to our own understanding. But what about them disqualifies them as a sentient species worthy of just as much respect as humans, dwarves, and orcs?

Now, if my starship crew and I encountered the aboleth, and they tried to eat and/or enslave us . . . we would not consider them a friendly or "good" species, they would certainly be antagonists, and it would certainly be OK to take steps to protect ourselves against being eaten/enslaved.

Are the aboleth "evil"? Are they free-willed? Are they people (sentient)? As described in D&D, I would argue they certainly are sentient and free-willed, although not inherently evil, just alien to us and with a culture perfectly willing to treat us as non-people that are okay to eat up and/or enslave. I think you can view the aboleth as both "alien" and "people" and at the same time maintain their status as scary and awesome antagonists.

Same would go for other D&D aberrations such as mind flayers, beholders, and other "alien" species. I think viewing these creatures as people is just as important, and more interesting, than labeling them simply as "monsters" worthy of nothing but extermination.

Heck, we have several examples of various aberrations interacting (somewhat) peacefully with humanoid culture in D&D. There's the good old Xanathar (beholder) who runs a thieves guild in Waterdeep. We've had mind flayers partnering up with various humanoids, sometimes villains, but not always.

Xanathar's is insane.
Mind flayers want what they want. Association is a means. They will break it if of no further use.
Does not mean they are people.
Dragons have these too. Fiends. Celestials. Are these also people.

 

[Lanefan]

Enslaving people psionically while also looking like an obese murder-squid typically doesn't make you a person.

Inflicting blasts of fire breath on people while looking like a Boeing 747 with teeth and painted red typically doesn't make you a person either.

It makes you more alien, which makes you less of a person.

One could easily argue that the term 'alien' can apply to any fantasy creature type - unicorns, elves, dwarves, dragons, aboleths, orcs, etc. - and thus I'm not sure how useful a descriptor it is here.

You are the only person I know of that thinks that literal immortality doesn't mean that they're immortal. Sure, they can die, but it's more of an annoyance. To people, death normally isn't just annoying. Fiends and other creatures that respawn after death typically aren't considered people.

Did they take out the bit where if you kill a Fiend (or Demon, or Devil) on its home plane it's permanently dead, then?

Sure, sociopaths are people, but if your lack of emotions makes you murder people, you're generally not considered a person. Serial killers aren't called people, are they? They're not members of our society, they're monsters.

Again, depends on context. For population census purposes they're people (or persons, same diff). For objective definition purposes they're people (or persons) as are all Humans. But subjective definitions on an individual and-or societal basis could easily conclude they're not people.

 

[Maxperson]

Hey @Maxperson

So, what's your definition? Is it just Homo sapiens? Or are some of Dwarves, Elves, Drow, Elves, Half-Orcs, Gnomes, Orcs, Androids, Vulcans, Klingons, Goblin PCs, all Goblins, also persons? Or do you really think it's all intelligent creatures like you just claimed the MM says?

I go with the narrower version myself. But if you go by the MM, it's pretty much anything intelligent, though it doesn't specifically define the secondary peoples beyond "not-humanoid."