When Fantasy Racism gets stupid

[Kinak]

As much as I like my morally grey areas, heroic fantasy doesn't. There's a reason they so often have armies of subhuman enemies that you can kill without a pang of conscience.

So I think too much nuance in your monster motivations can actually be a bad thing.

However, I'd like to see a little more exploration of the "brands" of evil different monstrous humanoids represent. Nobody needs "because they're the other side on a war," we have PC races for that. I want to know that ogres like the fine things and can't build them, so they raid settlements. I want to know that goblins are easily cowed by anyone stronger, making them unreliable minions in all sorts of plots. I want to know drow see the surface elves as traitors, doing anything to destroy them and their allies.

That seems like all the more you need, though. Regardless of the race, adding nuance is campaign and encounter specific. But with as many humanoids as we're going to get, I really want their brands of evil to be distinct and inspire new DMs.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[am181d]

I hate the "humanization" of monster races. Orcs, elves, vampires, zombies, tentacle beasts from beyond time and space. I am so sick of everything having to be a human in a funny suit. They are magical beings that run off of a different set of physical laws for crying out loud. The fact that elves can live for centuries would change their very mindset and culture in such a way that it would be significantly different than humans.

It's an impossibly human-centric view and it ruins all stories other than the old and tired "man was the biggest monster all along" shlock. It's reminds me of the problem with female dwarven beards and dragonboobies: Why do they need to appeal to humans? Is it so impossible to imagine something that isn't human?

Beh. I reject your notion that any of the emotions or motivations we experience are uniquely human. All that sci-fi clap trap about humans being more adventurous or compassionate or adaptable or war-like always struck me as bunk.

But I totally agree with you on tentacle monsters.

 

[TerraDave]

I have been on both sides of this as a DM. I understand the desire to avoid a license for genocide (or hypocritical paladin genocide) and the uses of irony, nuance, and surprise.

But I also know that blood sucking vampires are better then glowing vampires.

 

[RangerWickett]

And this is why my orc friends don't come to this messageboard anymore. There is so much negativity to their culture. I tell you, last week I was playing some Trivial Pursuit with the local warband, and they all could name a dozen ways the so-called 'demi-human' races could benefit from more normalized relations with the 'humanoids.'

I mean, who here has tried orcish truffles? They're delicious. Way better than gnomish truffles. And if your only conceivable interaction with orcs is to slaughter them, well let me ask you how often you bothered to ask them where the best truffles could be found before you disemboweled them? XP and loot pale in comparison to some of the gastronomical delicacies I've enjoyed at warchief Thurgrok's cave.

 

[Ichneumon]

If the Monster Manual consists of nothing but a tree, which you can only hug, then the 5th will have lost me.

While I see nothing wrong with groups exploring racism as a theme* via gameplay, if they're happy to do so, I have no patience with any implication that treating orcs as straight-up black-hatted bad guys reflects my attitude towards real world races. When I want nuance, I'll reach for the Eberron campaign guide.

*A theme theme, not a 5e character archetype.

 

[KidSnide]

The "good" (aka playable) races have a wide array of ethical possibilities - but the default for many monster races is that they are often portrayed as only exceedingly evil, for no real reason other than players need something to kill. Campaign settings vary on this (some better, some worse), but the Tolkienesq dichonomy-as-standard with no redeemable traits for the bad guys is dull. I'd like to see that trope retired.

But it's a very useful trope.

I agree that ethical complexity is a lot more interesting that the ethical simplicity of: "we are good, monsters with stuff are evil." But I don't begrudge people for wanting to play D&D with that ethical simplicity. The scope of D&D would be greatly limited if the central activity of D&D (going into monster's lairs, murdering them and stealing their belongings) was constantly exposed as self-justifying ethical nonsense.

The purpose of D&D is to enjoy playing D&D, and the "monsters are evil" trope is of vital importance for many people who want to feel good about clearing dungeons and killing dragons. It definitely shouldn't be retired.

-KS

 

[ArmoredSaint]

I don't play D&D to be subjected to someone's notion of incisive sociological commentary. I'm comfortable with imaginary monsters in an imaginary game representing pure, unmitigated evil. I don't see any parallels with real-world justifications for colonialism or genocide. Further, I resent the implication that I support those things in the real world just because I prefer a particular style of play--to me, that comes across as shallow.

Not everything in the game needs to be analyzed according to conflict theory...

 

[Glade Riven]

I know I shouldn't be surprised, but it always catches me a little off guard when I say one thing on this forum and then several people extrapolate something completely different - no matter how careful I am about word choice.

 

[Sunseeker]

The purpose of D&D is to enjoy playing D&D, and the "monsters are evil" trope is of vital importance for many people who want to feel good about clearing dungeons and killing dragons. It definitely shouldn't be retired.

-KS

I don't think it should retired, but it shouldn't be put on a pedestal either. This is one of the benefits of including an alignment system, but not mandating things specifically hold to it.

"Monsters are evil!" or "Monsters are just misunderstood!" should be a table-decision.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I've been playing D&D since the late 70s and I've never played that *all* orcs or goblins or whatever humanoid race are evil. However, because of the nature of orc or goblin culture and their societies (tribes/clans/bands, etc), they are usually evil.

However, creatures like demons, devils, vampires, ghouls, etc, are evil by nature. (sorry, no sparkly vampires in my games...)

I don't have a big problem with people who want to make all orcs or goblins evil, though. And, if somebody wanted to play that orcs are misunderstood, I'm fine with that as well. Play what you like.