Then it's a useless term for D&D. If everything intelligent in D&D is a person, then personhood in D&D doesn't really matter.
Love how you skip everything else to make a blanket statement.
But, I don't think the value in personhood can be defined by pointing to an intelligent group and saying "they aren't people". Seems to be a rather ugly view of a what a person is to me.
You're using different lore than I am, obviously.
I forget which, but one of Demon or Devil actually has a quasi-infant (more like a larval) phase, that being Lemure. I also have Demons grow over time, they certainly don't stay the same forever.
Never gave much thought to the development and life cycles of Devils or Angels, largely because I don't often use either.
Werewolves can reproduce with each other, or with non-afflicted Humans (cf. Lupin and Tonks); I'd be open to their being able to breed with wolves as well, when in wolf form; and in all cases in the usual male-female way.
Slaadi laying eggs isn't a big step away from frogs laying eggs; it's a different but well-known form of reproduction.
Missing a few points,
Yes, Demons can change over time, but they are "born" mature. A Dretch is a Dretch, and it might stay a Dretch forever, or it might morph into a Vrock or a Hezrou, but there are no baby Vrocks, no bay Hezrous, and no real life cycle. Demons can arise straight as Balors, or they can grow and change and eventually become Balors.
Devils creating Lemures is a mid-step, but Lemures are still the souls of mortals who made a deal and were dragged to the Nine Hells after death.
Werewolves can have children, but there is a major difference. A natural born child of a werewolf is not born evil, nor are they under the effects of the curse in the same manner. For example, they can change to their beast form at will, instead of relying on the moon.
And yes, Slaadi laying eggs is a well-known form of reproduction, but the eggs hatch, eat out of the humanoid, and mature very rapidly. I think within a manner of hours if not minutes after bursting forth. That compared with the parasitic nature of their conception, makes them incredibly alien.
Again, different lore for different stores.
Trolls and Gnolls both reproduce the same way Humans do. I've no idea at all how Hags reproduce; I've always thought it was a curse.
I was quoting the official 5e lore. Check your monster manual for the Hag details. It is a gross but super thematic detail they added that upped the evil and twisted nature of hags.
Dragons are people? Where does this come from?
Common Decency?
I mean, Dragons have all the markers of personhood, why should we say they are not people?
For purposes of whether the varions 'xxxx Person' spells will affect them, yes a Half-Orc is by definition a person.
After that, it's all subjective. Some might see them as persons, some might see them as monsters, some might see them as both.
heavy double facepalm
So first, you want to attach the idea of personhood to what kind of spells work on you? Read back up to the evil experiments by killing dragons joke. That is what you are advocating for. And it is a horrific way to decide if someone is a person or not.
Secondly, you don't see the glaring problems with the subjectiveness of half-orc personhood?
"Well, you see, since one of your parents was an orc, then there are people out there that are going to see you as a monster. You were born with tusks, and that is all some people are going to see."
And you can't imagine why this could
possibly be construed as having racist overtones for the treatment of minority people?
I don't think the worst orcs are a problem. We have stats for evil necromancers, liches, bandits, and other versions of the worst humans and other humanoids in the game.
Yeah, being a "good race" doesn't seem to stop us from having ancient elven liches or mad dwarf kings. Don't see why making orcs as a race non-evil would somehow mean they can never be antagonists.