NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Giltonio_Santos" data-source="post: 8019940" data-attributes="member: 36874">The 2e DMG, while giving guidelines for the creation of new PC races, states that the character should be the alignment listed for that monster in the Monstrous Manual. This is the same source for no Int penalty for orcs since it also states that -1 penalty to Int should only be the case with monsters of below-average Intelligence, which is not the case with the Monstrous Manual orc.The Complete Book of Humanoids says orc PCs can be of any alignment (as a side note, it has orcs at +1 str/-2 cha and half-orcs at +1 str, +1 con/-2 cha). As those are rules for orc PCs and not guidelines on creating new PC races, I believe they have precedence, even when you consider the DMG's status as a core rulebook. It's worth mentioning, though that the DMG also puts orcs as a good option for new PC races, giving the cooperative nature of their people.Kind of off-topic, but worth mentioning as well: going through some of my old Ravenloft modules, I don't see many alcoholic and villainous Vistani, much like I don't see dumb and always evil orcs in my Complete Book of Humanoids. Basically, WotC seems to be changing the "legacy" of D&D by fixing problems that they created in the first place...  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></blockquote>

Verification