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="steeldragons" data-source="post: 5728801" data-attributes="member: 92511">Well, presuming that most campaigns treat sentients as sentients...and all gamers are, apologies to any exceptions, human, then we are left with presuming, other than cultural differences, that goblins...on an instinctual level...will think how we think. (I'm talking goblin humanoids here, not "fey" creatures or whatnot) And animals will act the way we understnad animals to act...and "monsters" (being to the human perspective nothing more than deadlier, more unusual "animals") will act as animals and/or humans/sentients do.I'm not sure what is meant here...but if you think because it's a "monster" then it is not worthy of human consideration or basic human standard dignity or respect, then I really don't know what to say. Thankfully (to my sensibility), my players see things differently...more "shades of grey", if you will...than you. That said, if you had been one of the PCs and just killed everything, then that would have happened...and the story would have continued from there.7 Point taken. But all the human players have to go on, in the fictional world, is what they know as the definitions/parameters of the alignment and the application thereof. Of course, in a fictional game, all of the decisions and actions are filtered through the real human player's eyes/minds.But, I think, imho, that to say there is no ethical standard is incorrect.Yes, because it was not a human or demi-human or humanoid or even an "NPC"...it is thus, a "monster." The only name it has/had was "Hargak" which I said translated from the kobold language as "death rock" or "rock of death." Maybe it has a name among its kind...but I don't speak roper.Well, I'm sorry to hear it and offend any sensibilities you possess. I certainly was not attempting to be "contrived, artifical and frankly precious."Nor, did my players think so. They thoroughly enjoyed the dilemma and the discussion/moral argument that ensued. They also came out of the experience with a greater/deeper/more secure understanding of their characters and their moral stances and ethical concerns...and how they might view a similar situation in the future...kinda the point.No one, no where, in this post said anything about the players not having an understanding of the "kind of game" they were entering, nor have any concept of some kind of DM-driven "disservice".There is no "concept of monster" beyond a "monster" is some creature that does not fit into the easy slots of "human-/goblinoid." The term "mosnter" does not automatically translate as "unnatural", as would be the case for undead or demonic/diabolcic/celestial beings. It is simply that, until explained, defies explanation/characterization.As always, have fun and (to borrow from JamesonCourage) "play what you like." My players like my game just fine, thank you.--SD</blockquote>

Verification