Post/Author/DateTime	Post
SerpyMatt 08-21-05, 12:33 AM	Hi all... was talking with my DM about how I'd like to play a gnoll in an upcoming campaign, but he says that they are always evil... I told him there are always ways around that, but he seemed stuck on the fact that they're "evil". He's been playing way longer than me and I was kinda curious if anyone had any experience with gnoll pc's as non-evil they could share with me.
Rathje 08-21-05, 01:20 AM	Personally, I think it's like taking the Favoured Class of a race and saying every character of the race has to be of that class. If everyone is Evil, it puts a lot of limitations on, well, everything. First of all, it's saying that a Gnoll society (or any other "Always Evil" creature society) would have no Paladins or Cleric of Good deities. That in itself is acceptable, I guess. I'd never play with such a thing, but I like to allow for In Character variety. I think "Usually Evil" is about as high up as you can get. Unless they're mindless, you can't really dictate what the entire race acts like. There will always be exceptions to the rule. If he doesn't let you, go and memorize a large number of alignments for races. When NPC's act out of alignment, point it out. A little immature, maybe, but effective. Ask him if he would rather have a well-thought-out Good or Neutral Gnoll or a stereotypical "Something Else." WARNING: You should probably have a high-quality background prepared in case he gives in.
The_EvilDungeon_Master 08-21-05, 01:33 AM	"Always Evil" does actually mean always 100% evil. Its more like 99% of the race are evil creatures. Your character could be part of that 1%. If you explain it well, your DM might let you.
Kojiro James 08-21-05, 01:34 AM	Hi all... was talking with my DM about how I'd like to play a gnoll in an upcoming campaign, but he says that they are always evil... I told him there are always ways around that, but he seemed stuck on the fact that they're "evil". He's been playing way longer than me and I was kinda curious if anyone had any experience with gnoll pc's as non-evil they could share with me. Tell your miserable sack of **** DM to reread his Monster Manual. It says gnolls are "Usually chaotic evil." No where in the entry for the gnoll does it say they're "always" evil.
Cymraegmorgan 08-21-05, 02:16 AM	Gnolls make great PCs, because they are cute and cuddly. :D
JadeSpider9643 08-21-05, 02:20 AM	Tell your miserable sack of **** DM to reread his Monster Manual. It says gnolls are "Usually chaotic evil." No where in the entry for the gnoll does it say they're "always" evil. Well that was correct (if not supportive) at least... gnolls are "usually chaotic evil", the "usually" meaning 50%+ of them have this alignment, and it's generally a cultural influence or influence of a distant heritage. But remember even if only say 60% of gnolls are CE, another 10% or so only differ slightly, so say another 10% LE, 10% NE, 10% CN, leaving you a reasonable 10% for LG, NG, CG, LN and NN. (Now these percents are of course completly made up by my head, actual numbers will vary but the principle stands) So the net result is there are very few LG Gnoll Paladins. And if you want to play one, you risk running into the "anti-stereotype-stereotype". We all the know Halfing Rogue stereotype, it's a backstory that writes itself, Well so is the Half-Fiend Paladin, it writes itself in the sense that it has to be so insanely rediculous that no one believes it and BAM your a munchkin! (either that or ripping off the Dritz concept) So in the end, there is no problem conjuring up non-evil gnolls, just please have a reasonable(and sane) backstory to explain it.
allenchan 08-21-05, 02:21 AM	Gnolls can be any aligment. Though, they're pretty weak as a PC race. You sure?
Pryrates 08-21-05, 02:22 AM	It is indeed possible for a gnoll to be good, just not very likely. Its more or less that the gnoll society has traditions and beliefs that in comparison with other societies are more or less evil. This does not mean that all members of that race have to be evil. Take drow for instance, they are, as a race, usually evil, but i can vaguly recall a certain schimitar wielding drow who is widely loved (i have no idea why...) and is in fact of good alignment. so i would point this out to your dm and come up with a back story as to why your character differs from others of his/her race. Perhaps he was abandoned as a child...er...pup, and was raised in a not so evil enviroment. It doesnt really matter how you justify it just so long as you do. best of luck.
Steelpunk 08-21-05, 03:11 AM	A lot probably depends on the setting your DM is using - if it's his own homebrew world and he has decided that gnolls in that world are always evil, there isn't much you can do to argue. If it's a core world setting, use the "usually chaotic evil doesn't mean always chaotic evil" argument. If it's FR, hold up Drizzt as an example that alignment molds can be broken (even though I personally despise that character). Either way, make sure to have a solid backstory for why your gnoll differs from the masses. I assume it's not Eberron, since that setting doesn't rely much on MM alignment guidelines.
Branto 08-21-05, 03:48 AM	Wow.. first I'd like to take the moment to say your DM is a racist ******* if he actually thinks that ALL gnolls are evil, or that any creature can be all evil unless it is the pure physical embodiment of evil (or good, for that matter) or something.. and even then, remember that Lucifer was an ANGEL and HE became evil, hmm? Now, as for gnolls, specifically, we need to cover the reason they are usually evil, or percieved as such. Gnolls are a warlike race, yes. Their society can be rather violent, too, preferring to use strength to settle disputes over who is stronger.. which I think makes sense. (How humans got on this concept of using words to prove physical strength, I'll never know) Because of this violent, warlike society, it's true that many of them WILL develope evil tendencies, an enjoyment for the blood and suffering they cause (The MM's say that gnolls like eating sentient creatures because they scream better.. hah) BUT, think about this: You could just as easily have a non-evil gnoll who is merely determined to prove his/her strength, and gnoll clans/tribes in areas that haven't seen war in many years might produce less violent generations than normal. And, there will ALWAYS be people who simply don't like the way things around them work, and seek a life different from the norm of their race.. that would be how you would get more peaceful gnoll characters, like Druids and Clerics. I personally thought it would be fun to have a female Gnoll staff-fighter character, who led a small band or village, possibly joining the other PC's in the campaign after being defeated in one-on-one combat by a PC, being quite impressed that someone could beat her. (Maybe even becoming a little attracted to the PC, since she was tired of all the weaklings around her.)
Callista 08-21-05, 04:12 AM	Hi all... was talking with my DM about how I'd like to play a gnoll in an upcoming campaign, but he says that they are always evil... I told him there are always ways around that, but he seemed stuck on the fact that they're "evil". He's been playing way longer than me and I was kinda curious if anyone had any experience with gnoll pc's as non-evil they could share with me. No, no, no!!! Gnolls are not "always evil", they are "usually chaotic evil"! That is a big difference. "Usually" means that most are; but that also means that some aren't. And an adventuring gnoll is more likely to be an exception than your run-of-the-mill gnoll. If I were you, I'd make him a CN type. Not the random, destructive sort; but a fellow who just got tired of the endless struggle for supremacy in a CE society. He just wants to have an easy life, get away from it all, and not have to fight to survive every minute of the day. Have him run to a city, where he (say) finds work as a bouncer, at a bar. Then let him find friends (one or more of the other members of the party) and become attached to them; he'll fight to defend them and get drawn into a better sort of violence than "Raaah, I'm the strongest". Sure, it's not heroic, but you've got to remember that gnolls are an evil society and not all that likely to produce Good members without some really crazy circumstances. It can become quite heroic later on, actually, if you wish. If he's hanging out with Good characters, he's likely enough to catch on to the heroism angle and become Good himself. In the case of a "usually evil" race, Good-aligned friends are enough to account for an atypical member of the race. If your DM prohibits the gnoll, you may ask about playing an orc; or if that is also verboten, then try a half-orc raised by orcs. You'll get the same "non-evil character who's tired of chaotic evil society" flavor out of it. S/he may have something against non-core races (if that's so, go for the half-orc), or have a limit on level adjustments (+1 only) or be starting at a level too low for a Gnoll (for example, if you're starting out at level 1 or 2, then a Gnoll makes no sense). But if the prohibition here is just "No Evil characters", then you should be able to make a case for a non-evil Gnoll. Mechanically, you'll have to be careful what class you pick. You have a total ECL of 3 for your basic level-less gnoll (2 HD plus 1 LA). You get, in exchange (SRDs): Strength +4, Constitution +2, Intelligence –2, Charisma –2. Size Medium. A gnoll’s base land speed is 30 feet. Darkvision out to 60 feet. Racial Hit Dice: A gnoll begins with two levels of humanoid, which provide 2d8 Hit Dice, a base attack bonus of +1, and base saving throw bonuses of Fort +3, Ref +0, and Will +0. Racial Skills: A gnoll’s humanoid levels give it skill points equal to 5 x (2 + Int modifier). Its class skills are Listen and Spot. Racial Feats: A gnoll’s humanoid levels give it one feat. +1 natural armor bonus. Automatic Languages: Gnoll. Bonus Languages: Common, Draconic, Elven, Goblin, Orc. Favored Class: Ranger.This would make a decent melee Fighter or TWF Ranger. Don't try a spellcaster; level adjustments hurt them quite badly. Your BAB will suffer; but you'll get the +4 STR to make up for it, which means you should probably focus on melee combat. The +1 natural armor also helps. All in all, it's a bit weaker than a human of the same level (this is normal for a non-core race); but not appreciably so.
Kalanth 08-21-05, 04:17 AM	Gnolls can be any aligment. Though, they're pretty weak as a PC race. You sure? Only as weak as a bad player, because negatives are ment to be overcome. One of my favorite characters was a Gnoll Sorcerer / Barbarian / Rage Mage. I had good times with him, and the character was almost Exaulted in his Neutral Good alignment. Sure there are negatives to playing a gnoll, and I probably would have never done the class combination I did had I not rolled so well for a couple of stats, because the negatives can be punishing to say the least. As it is, a Gnoll can be a very interesting character, and there is such a variety on description too, because you are not restricted to just Hyena in resemblance but so many other animals of that bread. When it comes down to it, though, you should present the DM with the argument of the Usually evil and have a good story worked up. Be prepared to face the same racist mentality in the world that your DM holds towards the race itself. Thats a dinosaur veterin talking there, for there always was the defined evil races and Gnolls were one of those races (right there with Orcs, Ogres, Bugbears, Hobgoblins, etc).
Gilean 08-21-05, 05:28 AM	I suggest the following spread for gnolls: 60% chaotic, 30% neutral, 10% lawful 60% evil, 30% neutral, 10% good So, around 36% of gnolls would be CE, 18% CN and NE, 6% CG and LE, 9% TN, 3% NG or LN, and the grand 1% LG. Then, I don't like alignments.
darkness ninja of light 08-21-05, 08:49 AM	Races of the Wild has a small section on Gnolls...non-evil Gnolls to be precise (though it talks about the evil ones as well). So yeah, show him that. If that fails, then tell your DM that WotC put a succubus paladin riding a vrock mount into its creature competition. That should help your argument.
Ut-Napishtim 08-21-05, 09:36 AM	That's odd, what level is this game starting out at? That might have something to do with it. Since a straight-up gnoll is ECL 3, most DM's shouldn't allow it in a 1st level game. Personally I start my games at 3rd for just this reason - so players have more optional races to select from (of course they can also take class levels instead of LA's if they like). I even allow folks to be evil if they like, with the caveat that it's not my job to protect their freakshow from frightened NPCs. An evil gnoll would last about 10 seconds in any civilized city, but a neutral or good one with some friends to vouch for him would probably be tolerated. All it takes is the guards snagging a local Paladin to be sure after all. As has been mentioned though Usually does not mean Always, but it's an optional race anyway - so even though it's for the wrong reasons it is your DM's call as to whether or not he wants to allow it. If this is really the reason he doesn't want to allow it explaining this to him might help your case. I have a feeling though that there are really other personal flavor reasons behind it with such a weak argument. If it's not in the PHB just because you can do it doesn't automatically give you the right to, but your DM also has the responsibility to give you a valid reason - even if that reason is simply: I don't like monstrous PC's in my games or I'm not allowing that option in this particular campaign.
Kobold Stew 08-21-05, 12:28 PM	As you are seeing, everyone disagrees with your DM. The core rules allow for non evil gnolls; other books discuss non-evil gnolls. Gnolls are perhaps (I'd say "certainly") the most undercut of all humanoid races, and as such represent one of the toughest challenges out there for making a viable character (i.e. on par with others in a non-min/maxed party). That is part of their fun. That said, what your DM says goes. Depending on the level you are starting at, you could plunk down 4000 for a helm of opposite alignment, but if you were unlucky you would make the save... Do you have the option of starting evil and just being nice? Penalties for alignment change aren't what they were in my childhood. Sure yu will be treated as evil; but your party will know the difference. But for my money, a DM with this sort of perspective is not worth fighting on such things. Good luck.
RavenoftheCrags 08-21-05, 12:58 PM	Just come up with a decent story as to why your gnoll is good. As long as it says 'usually chaotic evil'. For instance, he could have been raised in a good aligned temple after being found wondering the surrounding countryside lost, cold and alone :weep:
Fort deadly kick 08-21-05, 01:26 PM	I had the same problem with Kobolds. Kobolds rock.
weasel fierce 08-21-05, 01:52 PM	Maybe he doesnt feel like playing monsters in a game about heroes slaying monsters, is particularly appropriate. What is the draw of the gnoll anyways ?
Phrennzy 08-21-05, 04:10 PM	Damn, weasel beat me to it. The best question here is "Why do you want to play one?" What's the draw? You do realize that everyone will want to kill you. Gnolls eat humans.
Callista 08-21-05, 04:16 PM	Hm, I didn't know they ate humans. I figured they were just your basic evil tribal society and all that... Of course, it's not all that odd. Clue: Don't make a cannibal gnoll who eats other sentient creatures... it's not gonna work... :)
SerpyMatt 08-21-05, 04:43 PM	Why Gnolls? Hmmm... well, as silly as it may sound, it's the first creature I fought in an MMORPG that really stood out to me (as a lvl 1) ;) I just really like the look and think that some interesting things could be done with them. Since "ALL" aren't evil, I doubt all would eat humans, so it could be possible to work around those handicaps and make a gnoll who was more human like (or whatever races he was brought up around or near). Plus, I think it could make for some interesting encounters :)
Kobold Stew 08-21-05, 04:45 PM	Damn, weasel beat me to it. The best question here is "Why do you want to play one?" What's the draw? You do realize that everyone will want to kill you. Gnolls eat humans. Excuse me? Isn't this entirely beside the point? The OP wants to play a gnoll; the reasons don't matter. There are many reasons why one might want to play a gnoll: the roleplaying challenge (getting past the prejudices this thread is discussing and demonstrating); the rules challenge (playing a significantly underpowered race); the similarities to Vargr in Traveller... It doesn't matter what this player's draw is; or that you don't see it. The draw exists, and the DM refuses to open the MM to check tghe alignment entry and is running on prejudice and/or dim memory. Surely this is the point. KS (p.s. Gnoll diet isn't nearly as restricted as you suggest; they prefer to eat ALL intelligent humanoids, not just humans! :P And here is another challlenge the OP gets to face by playing a gnoll who is not evil. Fortunately the MM helps again, since this is only a preference and it is not a dietary requirement. )
pres_man 08-21-05, 05:58 PM	The MM says that gnolls sometimes become mercs and bounty hunters. In these roles most societies would marginally accept them.
The Amazing Dancing Bear 08-21-05, 05:58 PM	I like the idea of a gnoll simply for the imagery of a hunched over, lithe, savage creature staring at Damien the Black coldly before diving forward, two katars lunging forth from his sleeves, canines bared, feet pounding the ground. And that's why my players like my DMing. Or you could play as a lawful good dwarf fighter with a love for gold and beer, just to spite him. Be sure to speak with a Scottish accent and do a deep laugh. And then name him Tordek.
NehpetsTtocs 08-21-05, 06:01 PM	I love gnolls! I don't see them as particularly powerful... I suppose that's besides the point. If your DM says no, then you're probably just not going to get to play one; however, you could always keep the idea around for a later date. On the plus side, a gnoll pc could provide many roleplaying experiences, from good to bad, but most probably always entertaining. On the minus, maybe your DM just doesn't want to bother with human/elfin reactions to a gnoll pc. Maybe you could convince him to allow you to play a gnoll in the next campaign?
SerpyMatt 08-21-05, 06:10 PM	That's what I'm planning... it won't be in the one we're running now, but that just gives me more time to work up one hell of a backstory for my spiffy gnoll. He said it'd have to be pretty freakin detailed and airtight, so maybe he's caving a little ;) I think also, maybe he may not be excatly sure HOW to handle a gnoll PC in his campaign :)
Kobold Stew 08-21-05, 07:26 PM	Or you could play as a lawful good dwarf fighter with a love for gold and beer, just to spite him. Be sure to speak with a Scottish accent and do a deep laugh. And then name him Tordek. Very funny.
Lao, Ninja of the Dragon 08-21-05, 08:22 PM	When making a ussually evil monstrous PC, consider what kind of world the campaign is in: Chaotic Rejecting: Full of racist jerks who would probably kill gnolls,orcs, goblinoids,kobolds, etc. on sight. Worst place for monstrous PCs Chaotic Accepting: Full of openminded people who judge people by who they are, not what they are. Best place for monstrous PCs Lawful Rejecting: Monsters are enslaved. Lawful Accepting: Monsters rule the world. If the common races do not accept the monsters than they die, horribly. Bwahahahaha!!! *the above catagories are from Savage Species*
Branto 08-21-05, 09:23 PM	What's the draw? Gnolls eat Humans. Hehe, you answerred your own question there ;) Seriously though, Gnolls are powerful, and very large.. the MM lists them as being an average of 7.5 feet tall.. and you are aware that creatures start getting counted as Large size at 8 feet? :D heheheh.. Besides that, they're anthromorphic hyenas.. which instantly qualifies them as uber sexy. *nods sagely* They're certainly more attractive than Orcs, who are just as vicious. Everyone keeps saying that they're a bit underpowerred.. That's easy enough to fix. Lower/Drop the ECL to only one level of humanoid or none at all, and maybe give them a bite attack.. Hyenas ARE known for their powerful jaws, able to chomp up bone as if it were pretzels, and Gnolls ARE known for eating other races anyways, so shouldn't it make sense for a grappling gnoll to be able to take a bite out of your face? ;) Also, since hyenas are scavengers who can eat and digest nearly anything without getting sick, you could always give the gnolls disease resistance or a bonus on saves vs. ingested poisons.
Ut-Napishtim 08-22-05, 09:15 AM	Everyone keeps saying that they're a bit underpowerred.. That's easy enough to fix. Lower/Drop the ECL to only one level of humanoid or none at all, and maybe give them a bite attack.. Hyenas ARE known for their powerful jaws, able to chomp up bone as if it were pretzels, and Gnolls ARE known for eating other races anyways, so shouldn't it make sense for a grappling gnoll to be able to take a bite out of your face? ;) Also, since hyenas are scavengers who can eat and digest nearly anything without getting sick, you could always give the gnolls disease resistance or a bonus on saves vs. ingested poisons. Personally I wouldn't go that route, and I allow quite a few (pretty much anything within ECL 3) optional races. If a player thought it was underpowered - I'd tell them to play something different then. I'm not going to start suddenly tinkering with the RAW to accomodate someone when I'm already allowing an optional race in the first place. Every time I've seen anyone start messing around with custom races and homebrewed crossbreeds they always end up overpowered and dominating the entire game.
eudas 08-22-05, 11:29 AM	Man, y'all have some repressed anger issues. Other than that observation/comment, I have no other no significant addition to the advice already posted: Gnoll is a viable PC race assuming all ECL adjustments are accounted for. Make a good character story and it should be OK. eudas
Gilean 08-22-05, 11:56 AM	To balance, remove the LA.
BloodBought 08-24-05, 11:34 AM	this is actually kinda funny because i had a similar situation with a player wanting to play a gnoll in a quickie campaign that I'm in. I'm not DM but the real tell with this guy was that he first asked if he could play a half-dragon lycanthrope.... then when the DM said no he asked if he could play the gnoll.... the DM told him to make the char, but it's getting rather annoying that he's yet to give us a good reason as to why the rest of the party (humans, elves, and a half-elf) are not going to kill him. Particularly, our human LG samarai (OA version).... if you can make an iron-clad reaso as to why your char would be tolerated at the least among other more "civilized races" then go for it. Just be prepared to have any "civilized" chars ready to kill you at a moment's notice.
Vrykolas2k 08-24-05, 01:31 PM	Hehe, you answerred your own question there ;) Seriously though, Gnolls are powerful, and very large.. the MM lists them as being an average of 7.5 feet tall.. and you are aware that creatures start getting counted as Large size at 8 feet? :D heheheh.. Besides that, they're anthromorphic hyenas.. which instantly qualifies them as uber sexy. *nods sagely* They're certainly more attractive than Orcs, who are just as vicious. Everyone keeps saying that they're a bit underpowerred.. That's easy enough to fix. Lower/Drop the ECL to only one level of humanoid or none at all, and maybe give them a bite attack.. Hyenas ARE known for their powerful jaws, able to chomp up bone as if it were pretzels, and Gnolls ARE known for eating other races anyways, so shouldn't it make sense for a grappling gnoll to be able to take a bite out of your face? ;) Also, since hyenas are scavengers who can eat and digest nearly anything without getting sick, you could always give the gnolls disease resistance or a bonus on saves vs. ingested poisons. Good points. I'd also give them Scent, so the 3 level adjustment/ HD crap is worth something.
pres_man 08-24-05, 02:03 PM	the DM told him to make the char, but it's getting rather annoying that he's yet to give us a good reason as to why the rest of the party (humans, elves, and a half-elf) are not going to kill him. Particularly, our human LG samarai (OA version).... if you can make an iron-clad reaso as to why your char would be tolerated at the least among other more "civilized races" then go for it. Just be prepared to have any "civilized" chars ready to kill you at a moment's notice. So "civilized" characters are in the habit of murdering intelligent creatures for no apparent reason? It would seem to me that the LG character would have to come up with a good reason to kill him. Why shouldn't he be killed? Has he done anything to warrent being killed? Just being a gnoll is not reason enough to be killed, unless the one doing the killing is LE. Lawful Evil, “Dominator”: A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.
Lao, Ninja of the Dragon 08-24-05, 06:00 PM	I agree with pres man. How could characters who are good justify killing something because it is a gnoll or whatever. That is a blatant evil act. I don't let PCs when I DM go around on monstrous race genocide and keep a good alignment. In Eberron people get in trouble with the law for that, but as far as I can tell(which isn't that far), not in FR.
Branto 08-24-05, 07:08 PM	Good points. I'd also give them Scent, so the 3 level adjustment/ HD crap is worth something. Gnolls don't even have scent by default?.. but pretty much ALL animals and beast-races have the scent ability :confused: Hmm. Anyways, a bite attack, resistance bonus vs. ingested poisons (and disease?), scent... and what did the default give them? darkvision, and +1 natural AC? ... hmmm.. Why do they have +1 level adjustment AND have to take 2 levels of 'monstrous humanoid', anyways? I say we drop the 'monstrous humanoid' levels and just give them a +1 (maybe 2, at most) ECL, since you look at that in comparison to a lycanthrope who have FAR greater abilities and only +2 or +3 ecl without having to take levels in anything. So "civilized" characters are in the habit of murdering intelligent creatures for no apparent reason? It would seem to me that the LG character would have to come up with a good reason to kill him. Why shouldn't he be killed? Has he done anything to warrent being killed? Just being a gnoll is not reason enough to be killed, unless the one doing the killing is LE. I agree with pres man. How could characters who are good justify killing something because it is a gnoll or whatever. That is a blatant evil act. I don't let PCs when I DM go around on monstrous race genocide and keep a good alignment. In Eberron people get in trouble with the law for that, but as far as I can tell(which isn't that far), not in FR. I agree that things SHOULDN'T be like that.. but unfortunately 'good' is often a matter of perception. Look at the real-world crusades, for example. They thought it the holiest thing ever to pillage, burn, and rape everything they came across in the war against the 'muslim devils'... all in the name of their god. Now you step into D&D and things are slightly less.. wrong. But the general idea of 'evil' is still that if it isn't human (or dwarven, elven, gnomish, half-human, or umm.. halflish? halfen? whatever), doesn't have gold scales, or does not have bird wings and a white robe, it must qualify as evil and therefore must be killed on sight. I'm really surprised that you brought up Eberron. From what I've seen, Eberron is the MOST racial intolerant setting out there. Remember that article a while back about the proposed dismantling of warforged? Or maybe I could bring up the whole Silver Flame thing. As far as I can see, the Silver Flame are the equivelant of the KKK, except they mostly hunt lycanthropes instead of everyone who isn't a white redneck.
pres_man 08-24-05, 10:37 PM	Branto: Well, I guess it all depends on the type of game someone wants to run/play in. In my games, a PC can run around say they are "good" all they want, but if they are putting baby orcs on to spikes, "Hey, they're orcs. Their evil, and need to be destroyed." Well, the paladin NPCs are probably going to be looking at them menacingly next time they come to town. PCs can have whatever personal view of what is good or evil, right or wrong, but that doesn't change the absolute standards that the worlds I play/run have. If you go against the absolute definition of good, regardless of your personal definition of good, you don't detect as good. But as I said, it is up to the individuals to determine the type of game they want to play in. If players want to say, being racists and killing individuals because of just their race is good, then more power to them. Heck they can even play games where rape is a good act, "I'm not really 'raping', what I'm doing is forcibily creating life. Good respects life, and what better way of showing your respect then to create it." Of course those are games that I would not want to have any part of. So people who are into that type of thing, get together and stay far from my games.
Branto 08-24-05, 11:37 PM	Heh, bravo. Sometimes though, the troubles that a monstrous player would have to go through can be part of the experience, and so it can be fun to thrust such a player into a realm of misguided moral standards ;) But then again, with spells like 'Detect Evil' I guess it would be pretty hard to NOT know what's really right and wrong. That isn't to say that the commoners, who don't have access to much magic, wouldn't get lied to by the upper class to make sure everything goes the way they want it... but that's a hook for a different thread.
eudas 08-25-05, 10:42 AM	Branto: Well, I guess it all depends on the type of game someone wants to run/play in. In my games, a PC can run around say they are "good" all they want, but if they are putting baby orcs on to spikes, "Hey, they're orcs. Their evil, and need to be destroyed." Well, the paladin NPCs are probably going to be looking at them menacingly next time they come to town. wonderful, you're taking a game with an objective alignment system and applying your own subjective morality to it. <sarcasm> that works *real well*. </sarcasm> eudas
Aliquid 08-25-05, 12:51 PM	As you are seeing, everyone disagrees with your DM.That is because this post is on the "What's a Player to Do?" board. I bet the results would be quite different on the "What's a DM to Do?" board. A lot probably depends on the setting your DM is using - if it's his own homebrew world and he has decided that gnolls in that world are always evil, there isn't much you can do to argue.Exactly. Gnolls in the Monster Manual are based on what Gnolls are like in the generic D&D world. If the DM has created his own homebrew world and wants 50% of Gnolls to be good and 50% evil, that's his choice. If he wants them to be 100% evil, that's his choice. Maybe he doesnt feel like playing monsters in a game about heroes slaying monsters, is particularly appropriate.Another good point. If the DM has created a world which is based on any standard mythology, then playing a monster just isn't appropriate. When you look at mythological stories from any culture (i.e. the original stories about goblins and ogres or hydras and cyclopes, or jinni and rocs) 95% of the monsters that were “evil” in the stories were always evil. It seems to be some sort of recent obsession with modern culture for “misunderstood” monsters to exist where they are in fact “good”, living a life fighting against the prejudices of others. Too many players want to have this overdone “underdog” character type. Then there are the other players who just don’t care about any of the sociological details, and want the monster purely for the increase in stats. Wow.. first I'd like to take the moment to say your DM is a racist ******* if he actually thinks that ALL gnolls are evil, or that any creature can be all evil unless it is the pure physical embodiment of evil (or good, for that matter) or something.. and even then, remember that Lucifer was an ANGEL and HE became evil, hmm?Ok now I just can't comprehend how often people make comments like this. We are playing a game where players are happy to imagine that magic exists, players are happy to imagine that the laws of physics don't apply, they are happy to imagine that a wide variety of gods actually exist and interact with the world... But they can't imagine a species that is genetically born "evil". I think it is perfectly rational to imagine a species that has a brain which is not capable of processing "compassion", "guilt", or "empathy". A brain that is hard-wired to be completely ego-centric. They are born with these limitations to their brain, and therefore are not capable of being "good". Personally I find that to be far more logical, probable, and believable that everything else that defies the laws of physics. If the DM wants to make homebrew world where certain creatures fit this criteria (such as Gnolls), that is his option. To call this racism is just silly, we are talking about a mythological monster here. Oh, and Lucifer has absolutely no relevance to this debate, unless the DM is creating a homebrew world where Lucifer falling from grace is part of the theology.
pres_man 08-25-05, 02:16 PM	wonderful, you're taking a game with an objective alignment system and applying your own subjective morality to it. <sarcasm> that works *real well*. </sarcasm> eudas I'm a little confused. Are you saying this objective alignment system supports the putting of baby orcs onto spikes as a good act? But your right to a degree, I support DMs or DMs/players using their own moral standards in conjunction with the guidelines set out in the PHB for alignments. And by the way, the "objective alignment system" only details guidelines that can be used for the alignments. Is killing one innocent life allowed if it saves five innocent lives for a "good" person? Where in the alignment section does it detail this exact example? Obviously, DMs and players have to use their own judgement to make some of these distinctions. And in the end the DM is the one who has to arbitrate all alignment issues. Wouldn't it then make sense for him (or her) to use a system that he is very comfortable and familiar with? Now if this system is very offensive to the players they can quit or they can play characters where alignment is not an issue (not paladins, monks, druids, bard, barbarians, clerics). If you are a ranger and you are acting in a fashion that the DM tells you is evil, but you in your own morality view it as good, who cares. You're a ranger, not a paladin, what do you care if you're good or evil, as long as you play your character correctly. Basicly the game is set up for an objective alignment system, but the details are left up to the discretion of the DM (and players). So the exact details of alignment can be based on subjective views of the DM, but if they are arbitrated in an objective fashion, what is the problem. Think about basketball, a normal basket is worth 2 points. Why? Why not 4 or 5 or 10? There may be some logic behind 2 points, but that doesn't mean there couldn't be similiar logic for a different value. In the end it was choosen on a subjective basis, this is the best choice in the designers' views. But does that mean that the ruling of points scored is not objective? If the DM wants to make homebrew world where certain creatures fit this criteria (such as Gnolls), that is his option. To call this racism is just silly, we are talking about a mythological monster here. Oh, and Lucifer has absolutely no relevance to this debate, unless the DM is creating a homebrew world where Lucifer falling from grace is part of the theology. Well, it is fairly unrealistic. An intelligent species that is incapable of compassion would have a hard time raising young and teaching them the skills needed to survive. Compassion isn't needed for breeding, but unless they have something along the lines of 10 young at a time, some degree of compassion is probably necessary. As for talking about a famous example of a creature that was "born good" and then "became evil". I would think it has just as much relevance as any discussion of mythology and legends. Is it just because it is tied to a current religion that it lacks validity? Certainly there are individuals who would view that religion as a "mythology", so whats the difference?
Aliquid 08-25-05, 02:52 PM	Well, it is fairly unrealistic. An intelligent species that is incapable of compassion would have a hard time raising young and teaching them the skills needed to survive. Compassion isn't needed for breeding, but unless they have something along the lines of 10 young at a time, some degree of compassion is probably necessary.I wouldn't think so. "LE" parents would see their children as an asset to their society, a purely logical concept. Having a strong society means a higher quality of life, and that's a good thing. As such it is important to raise all children to be strong fighters, good builders, etc. No compassion is required to make that happen. If a "LE" parent had a child that was weak and embarassing... well that kid better run away from home if he wants to live. A "CE" creature like a Gnoll would probably not raise their kids at all. The children would likely be born with the instinct to run away from home as fast as possible, before Mommy eats you. There are plenty of creatures out there that don't need parents to raise them and teach them how to survive. As for talking about a famous example of a creature that was "born good" and then "became evil". I would think it has just as much relevance as any discussion of mythology and legends. Is it just because it is tied to a current religion that it lacks validity? Certainly there are individuals who would view that religion as a "mythology", so whats the difference?Well that sort of was the point I was making, I just didn't do a good job of making it. It is valid, I guess I was just trying to point out that you can't go quoting the rules and definitions for alignments in the standard D&D world, and say that people can't stray from them... and then use an example to prove that point - yet the example has nothing to do with the standard D&D world.
Vrykolas2k 08-25-05, 03:24 PM	Gnolls don't even have scent by default?.. but pretty much ALL animals and beast-races have the scent ability :confused: Hmm. Anyways, a bite attack, resistance bonus vs. ingested poisons (and disease?), scent... and what did the default give them? darkvision, and +1 natural AC? ... hmmm.. Why do they have +1 level adjustment AND have to take 2 levels of 'monstrous humanoid', anyways? I say we drop the 'monstrous humanoid' levels and just give them a +1 (maybe 2, at most) ECL, since you look at that in comparison to a lycanthrope who have FAR greater abilities and only +2 or +3 ecl without having to take levels in anything. I agree that things SHOULDN'T be like that.. but unfortunately 'good' is often a matter of perception. Look at the real-world crusades, for example. They thought it the holiest thing ever to pillage, burn, and rape everything they came across in the war against the 'muslim devils'... all in the name of their god. Now you step into D&D and things are slightly less.. wrong. But the general idea of 'evil' is still that if it isn't human (or dwarven, elven, gnomish, half-human, or umm.. halflish? halfen? whatever), doesn't have gold scales, or does not have bird wings and a white robe, it must qualify as evil and therefore must be killed on sight. I'm really surprised that you brought up Eberron. From what I've seen, Eberron is the MOST racial intolerant setting out there. Remember that article a while back about the proposed dismantling of warforged? Or maybe I could bring up the whole Silver Flame thing. As far as I can see, the Silver Flame are the equivelant of the KKK, except they mostly hunt lycanthropes instead of everyone who isn't a white redneck. Okay. I'll be clearer. I think a gnoll, for its +1 LA and 2 HD, needs its current abilities plus a 1d4 bite and Scent. That would make it equal to its penalties. As far as the crusades... I am biased neither to the Christians or the Muslims, but I will say this: The Muslims did as much pillaging, raping, murdering and burning as anyone. Anyone who tells you differently lives in never-never-land.
Branto 08-25-05, 08:29 PM	Wow.. are you sure that YOU aren't the one completely lacking in human emotions, Aliquid? I guess the most important point to make is that your concept of standard PC races being the only creatures with real 'human' emotions is utterly rediculous on so many levels. Normal, everyday animals show many of the emotions that humans do, especially compassion. In fact, it's hard for me to even conceive any creature with 'animal intelligence' or above to NOT have a capacity for it, so the fact that you think that NO non-PC race would have it is utterly mind-boggling. Furthermore, your reference to evil creatures in Mythology is laughable. If you had paid any real attention to most of those myths, you would find that the monsters were very much human.. speaking in terms of compassion and other emotions, of course. They showed personal desires,often far different than their intended purpose, in fact. It was hardly ever a case of 'good hero vs. evil monster'. Let's take Medusa, for example. Originally, Medusa and her sisters were all beautiful, angellic creatures.. much comparable to some variety of winged elf you may have seen somewhere. Much like the elves, in fact, they developed quite an ego, and proclaimed themselves the most beautiful beings in existance, even moreso than the gods themselves. This ticked off the gods, as you can imagine, and the women were all transformed into horrible monsters. So, fast forward to the story of what's-his-name, who infiltrates Medusa's home, attacks her without provocation, and takes her decapitated head to use as a weapon. Medusa never ran amokk through any countrysides or terrorized any kingdoms. So you tell me WHO was the evil thing in this story?
Lao, Ninja of the Dragon 08-25-05, 08:39 PM	Branto, good point. However most of the lands tolerate the various races as long as they follow the law, like Breland.
Aliquid 08-25-05, 09:51 PM	Wow.. are you sure that YOU aren't the one completely lacking in human emotions, Aliquid?More compassionate than the average person actually. I'm not exactly sure how my ability to imagine a species that is sociopathic would make me be... lacking in compassion. I guess the most important point to make is that your concept of standard PC races being the only creatures with real 'human' emotions is utterly rediculous on so many levels.Not at all, I'm just saying that if a DM wants to make his monsters "always evil", it's a perfectly rational thing to do, and I don't understand why people can't imagine such a thing existing. I'm not even saying that's how I run my games. normal, everyday animals show many of the emotions that humans do, especially compassion. In fact, it's hard for me to even conceive any creature with 'animal intelligence' or above to NOT have a capacity for it, so the fact that you think that NO non-PC race would have it is utterly mind-boggling.You are misinterpreting all sorts of things that I said. First off I agree that most animals show the same emotions that we do. The thing is, I don’t consider any of them to be “evil”. That’s the point; I am talking about the existence of an imaginary creature that is always evil. No creature in the real world is always evil, so you can’t make real world comparisons. Secondly where the heck does this “no non-PC race” thing come from? When did I claim that? Heck I didn’t even claim that Gnolls don’t have compassion, I just said that if a DM wants to make them that way, he can, and why can’t people imagine such a creature. As for the concept of a creature not being capable of compassion, guilt or empathy… why is it mind boggling to imagine such a thing existing? Clearly you have never paid much attention to sociopaths. There are humans out there that meet that description, yes they are rare, but they do exist. So if it is possible for a human’s brain to be screwed up to the point where they are incapable of such emotions, why is it hard to imagine an entire species? Furthermore, your reference to evil creatures in Mythology is laughable.Wow, you are really ripping my post apart aren't you? I'm sorry if I offended you, that wasn't my intention. Medusa never ran amokk through any countrysides or terrorized any kingdoms. So you tell me WHO was the evil thing in this story?That really depends on who's version of the story you read. Ovid's version was quite different than Hesiod's and the other early versions.
Branto 08-25-05, 11:11 PM	I'm sorry if I offended you, that wasn't my intention. *sighs* ... Nah, I offend a bit too easily.. nothing quite like a discussion on race to get people riled up, eh? So what were we talking about in the first place? Oh, right, whether the guy's DM would let him play one or not.. You could always find a different group to play with? :P Hah, just kidding.. But, if there are no other options.. maybe you could settle for something other than a gnoll? A hound archon, maybe? I mean, yeah, technically hyenas aren't canines at all (They're closest to weasels, I believe) but.. I dunno. *goes to watch Labyrinth*
pres_man 08-25-05, 11:23 PM	*goes to watch Labyrinth* If you can, watch the opening song with the subtitles on. It is a bit disturbing. ;)
Andrew_980 08-26-05, 12:44 AM	Is the actual problem that the race is evil, or that the npc will think the PC is evil for his race? in many campeigns that is a valid issue.
Branto 08-26-05, 11:51 PM	Is the actual problem that the race is evil, or that the npc will think the PC is evil for his race? in many campeigns that is a valid issue. Well, as the thread has been going, it depends on the campaign (and the DM's house rules, if they consider the race or alignments in general different from the campaign rules) If the final answer is that it's possible for the player to be good, then yeah, you still have to deal with NPC's freaking out and chasing you with pitchforks.. but hey, they only have like 3 HP and cruddy AC, so just deal nonlethal damage and keep knocking people out until the rest decide it's a bad idea to fight you :P On a side note, I just found out that monks can add off-hand attacks in ADDITION to their flurry.. .. so now I'm tempted to give MY gnoll character a few monk levels and use her fighter bonus feats to get all the off-hand feats.. she'll be whacking people at an extraordinary rate! ... wait, that didn't sound right..