Why are orcs evil?

[Kichwas]

Re: Re: IMC...

It's a good question of "nature or nurture" in campaigns - which do DM's allow for monsters?

For me it's a question of the alignment listing 'usually' or 'always'.

'Usually' is nurture, 'always' is nature.

Orcs list 'usually' in their alignment. So there are vast numbers of them in my world that do not fit the CE mold.

Actually in the two major DnD worlds it's the same way. In FR Orcs live among humanity, not seperately. You're more likely to meet an Orc at the farmer's market in Waterdeep than you are in the wilds.

In Greyhawk it's the same situation in parts of the former Great Kingdom and in the 'arabian-like' nations of the far north west.

A lot of people miss this, but it's right there in the text in both cases.
Neither world treats Orcs as inheritantly evil nor even outside of civilization.

 

[Kichwas]

Now, imagine a world in which the Third Reich had conquered Europe. Imagine a world where Hitler is revered, not reviled. Imagine a world where the Nazi Party is celebrated as the harbringers of a New World Order, not the vile racist we see them as. Imagine a world where the paradigm of the Nazi Party had become the default meme of the Western World. In this world, Nazism and the Third Reich and even the Holocaust are no longer the dispicable acts of evil men, they are the liberating acts of a group of patriots.

The American West. Largest genocide in human history. It's not at all seen as a Holocaust and I can alsmot garuantee I'll get at least one post trying to claim that it's not the same thing to wipe out the Native Americans as it was to kill off a lot of the Jews.

The only real difference is that Germany didn't succeed.

The victors really do write history and really do put a spin on the ethics of their actions.

 

[KDLadage]

Excellent example of what I am saying, Arcady. Thanks.

 

[Desdichado]

arcady:
The American West. Largest genocide in human history. It's not at all seen as a Holocaust and I can alsmot garuantee I'll get at least one post trying to claim that it's not the same thing to wipe out the Native Americans as it was to kill off a lot of the Jews.

The only real difference is that Germany didn't succeed.

The victors really do write history and really do put a spin on the ethics of their actions.

Well, that's not the only difference. Really, your argument would be a lot stronger if you paid attention to the details. Still, all in all, that's a good example speaking from a "big picture" perspective.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Captain; we are caught in a powerful alignment thread, she can't take much more of this...

 

[MulhorandSage]

There are several theories.

First, some say, their heads aren't screwed on quite right.

Second, some say, their boots are too tight.

But I think that the most likely reason of all, is that their hearts are two sizes too small.

Scott Bennie

 

[zilch]

OK, can someone explain to me on how killing native americans could be considered non evil?

 

[Roland Delacroix]

Errant: Your post was great. My girlfriend works in the heart of Joliet, illinois, as a teacher and that was an almost perfect description. It also applies to most of the people i see in Gary, Indiana when i go up there to play. Are those people evil? I dunno, but our society tends to say no.

 

[Hand of Evil]

OK, can someone explain to me on how killing native americans could be considered non evil?

It was evil but to people of the time it was part of their manifest destiny to expand and it was justified to them to take land for the resourses needed for that growth. They were told that indians were dangerous and for the most part they were, because they were fighting for their lives. They were told that they were not human but savages, they were conditioned.



Heard a story the other day, IBM was talking about servers, using words like deamons and orphens, aborted jobs, tech terms. They were talking to southern bathest. They were thrown out as satan worshippers!

 

[Kichwas]

OK, can someone explain to me on how killing native americans could be considered non evil?

Watch almost any cowboy movie made before the 70s. I'd say any but there's probably at least one film in the era on J. Hoover's subversive list...

When I went to school in this country (USA) I was taught that 'the native people were savage, dirty, and abusive of women (in a sexual way...). Many of them were thankful for the help of the settlers in taking them over and civilizing them by putting them in camps...'
Maybe I'm a bit older than some of you... My mother's in the generation where some of her peers were sterilized by the US governement in order to stop the spread of 'undesirables' (actually this program was still going into the late 60's or early 70's).
In school I remember actual arguments over weather or not there were 'people' here before Columbus, as in; the natives didn't count; though it took a while to get the teachers to even admit to natives in the first place. Apparently 'those people' just suddenly appeared as something to get in the way of settlement.


Ethics of something is not only written by the victors, but changes over time.

There was a time when preachers would quote from the bible to back up slavery. Not that I've any idea what they were quoting. Certainly wasn't anything in the New Testament... And the old always seemed to me to paint the slavers as the bad guys. But they would quote away anyway. Because the ethics of their society said it was a good and moral thing and part of the natural order.

One wonders what in our modern society our own descendants will look back on with shock and horror.

Clothes? Republicans? Alcohol? Eating Meat? Vegans? Driving gas powered autos? Richard Simmons?

It could be anything.