Yet, we will be getting GOOD Orcs? Come OONNNNNN. What so we can have an offical non-**** version of a Half-Orc? Or is this something to blame on WoW?
But seriously, seems a bit hypicritical. Drow MUST be evil but Orcs, yea they can be good.
What next? In 5th Ed all the good Orcs are turned into light skinned version of themselves after thier new god dies because aving lots of good Orcs was "taking away" from them?
Yet, we will be getting GOOD Orcs? Come OONNNNNN. What so we can have an offical non-**** version of a Half-Orc? Or is this something to blame on WoW?
Well, see... Thrall... I mean Oubold, is the new king of Durotar... I mean,... uhm... see, he wants peace with Lady Jaina... I mean... Alustriel!
No, there is no similarity to WoW. There just isn't, okay?!
Dangit! :D ;) :D
And friendly orcs are the new kewl, too!
Dark Elves: A small group of Drow had the curse that made them Drow reversed.
Drow: They're business as usual. Some are evil, and some aren't.
Orcs: They're business as usual as well. Some are evil, and some aren't.
The "good" orc are more netrul in my option, and its a local cultue shift, started from the top.
Just like the few, proud 'good' (mostly neutral, really) Drow of the past, ONLY Obould's Orcs will be 'good' *cough*, while the ones that live EVERYWHERE ELSE on the planet are the same old jerks they always were.
And most of Obould's ain't so hot, either. ;)
Orcs have no good/evil twin, thus more morally flexible.
BTW, it is possible that a human and Orc can love each other. I've seen uglier couples IRL.
Drow are evil elves. If you want to play a good elf, play an elf.
Orcs have no good/evil twin, thus more morally flexible.
BTW, it is possible that a human and Orc can love each other. I've seen uglier couples IRL.
Actually, based off of the inspiration for D&D and FR, being LOTR, Orcs were the dark counterpart to elves....
But anyway, Obould always struck me as an LE anyway. Especially after reading the novels. You know that something is wrong when the typical 1st level encounter has now become a PC race and will be right along side DRAGONBORN as they walk through the streets of Silverymoon.... Whats next, Kobolds selling pottery in Waterdeep while goblins become a baking corporation to rival the scale of Dunkin Donuts?!?
Actually, based off of the inspiration for D&D and FR, being LOTR, Orcs were the dark counterpart to elves....
Which I added back into FR/Core...
If I ever finish those contoversial 'primordial Elvish myths'.
In my version, the GODS of both races started off Fey, and then ascended (Seeelie and Unseelie). Seriously - whats the difference between an Immortal being, and a God, except for power level (which is obtainable)?
There will ALWAYS be exceptions in any race, so this is realistic and makes sense. Just because the rest of the Lemmings run for the cliff, their are always one or two who stay home and say ___ that noise. :D
Whats next, Kobolds selling pottery in Waterdeep while goblins become a baking corporation to rival the scale of Dunkin Donuts?!?
You laugh now, but in Warcraft the Goblins are entrepreneurs extraordinaire. They wouldn't just stop at baking, though... :evillaugh
There will still be good and bad Drow/Dark Elves, just as there will be good & bad Orcs... in about the same percentages.
Just like the few, proud 'good' (mostly neutral, really) Drow of the past, ONLY Obould's Orcs will be 'good' *cough*, while the ones that live EVERYWHERE ELSE on the planet are the same old jerks they always were.
And most of Obould's ain't so hot, either. ;)
Acturly I say by and large, good and netrul drow are a smaller percentage of drow than good and netrul orcs are of orcs.
My reasoning?
Drow culture will prety much kill any drow that strays off the dark path and posativly encorages them to get to vileness. Drow are mostly controled by Drow priestess, which enforce there evil culture more.
Also its prety hard to run away from a drow city, being in the underdark and everything..
Orcs culture on the otherhand has a basic tendercy toward CE, but it hardly impossable for CN, NE, LE,TN and LN orcs to get by in orcish culture. CG orcs will have serous problums and LG and NG will have it worse.
While orcish clerics do hold power, alot of power belongs in the hands of elite warrior, who don't have to wory about divine wraith and intervention so much.
To top it off, a orc can get away from other orcs without dying horrably with the same frequency of underdark drow.
Drow are evil elves. If you want to play a good elf, play an elf.
Orcs have no good/evil twin, thus more morally flexible.
That made no sense at all.
Whats next, Kobolds selling pottery in Waterdeep while goblins become a baking corporation to rival the scale of Dunkin Donuts?!?
-Didn't I say in another thread that in the 4-Gotten Realms, there wouldn't be Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts?
That made no sense at all.
-What I think I interpreted is that, since there is not a "good" and "evil" version of the race, it's easier to make up a character that can fit in any alignment.
-What I think I interpreted is that, since there is not a "good" and "evil" version of the race, it's easier to make up a character that can fit in any alignment.
LOL. Of course, when you think about it, the idea of a "good" version of a race and an "evil" version is an illusion, because "goodly" surface elves can be of any alignment. Drow are more likely to be evil than good, but they weren't born evil, so they could be good. That's my take on things.
I also agree that it's all up to the DM.
-That's where the 'Always', 'Usually', 'Sometimes', and whatever other things are used in monster/racial write-ups.
True. Those terms don't appear in the 4E MM, but the book also states that the given alignment should be seen as the general rule, not something that applies in every single case.
True. Those terms don't appear in the 4E MM, but the book also states that the given alignment should be seen as the general rule, not something that applies in every single case.
-That, more or less, accomplishes the same thing, then. Personally speaking, though, I like the "old" way of doing it. Because, some creatures (such as Devils) are evil incarnate, and are evil, period (barring magical change or whatever).
-I got the opportunity to flip through the 4e Monster Manual today.
-I got the opportunity to flip through the 4e Monster Manual today.
I'm glad to hear it. Have you seen any of the others? Next time we meet, I'll bring my PHB, and also my DMG if you'd like.
I'm glad to hear it. Have you seen any of the others? Next time we meet, I'll bring my PHB, and also my DMG if you'd like.
-I flipped through the Monster Manual, and the Player's Handbook. They did not have the Dungeon Masters Guide. I would very much like to see the books, though.
Well in the book Road of the Patriach (one of my favorites) there is a small village far north of Bloodstone Villiage called Palishchuk where Orcs and Humans have gotten together and breed a steady line of Orcish folks who are very peaceful and openly trade with their nieghbors.
-Yup. Like Drow, Orcs are creatures influenced to evil through society (that is, the tenets and church of Gruumsh)
That's why (IMO) orcs can become good much easier then drow.
HOWEVER I'd rather not see PC/NPC orcs raised in evil orc tribes become good on any regular basis. Just as I'd rather not see PC/NPC good drow raised in an evil drow city. IF there was a drow city that managed to rebel against the Lolth leaders, then I'd be willing to have good NPC/PC drow from that city.
Now that might seem strange, how do you get a good orc/drow tribe/city without having good orc/drow NPCs? Well its the difference between running yet another exception to the rule and having a societal movement.
Whats next, Kobolds selling pottery in Waterdeep while goblins become a baking corporation to rival the scale of Dunkin Donuts?!?
:embarrass
Ummm, is it bad that they're already doing that in my games? I never actually assumed that anyone but Drow was "kill on sight." Thus, you can freely hire Orc mercenaries in Waterdeep. People just assume they're probably bandits when they're not hired to kill people.
In a typical orc tribe, there's a few (at most) priests, right? Well in a drow city there's a TON of Lolth priestesses. So its much easier for the orcs to move towards good (also orc tribes are smaller then drow cities) as they have less people to kill. However drow have it much harder as there are simply a LOT more Lolth priestesses, and also there's no secular leader.
-To counter balance that (though it's all completely correct), Orcs are also relatively dim-witted and easily able to be manipulated. Their society is also very brutal, and doesn't particularly allow for those who don't conform to exist.
Ummm, is it bad that they're already doing that in my games?
-10%.
4E orcs: chaotic evil, chaotic evil, chaotic evil, chaotic evil
This thread is based upon an outdated rumor, and has nothing to do with 4E. (Alignment twists to orcs and drow in the Realms were there two decades ago already.)
This thread is based upon an outdated rumor, and has nothing to do with 4E.
-Quiet, you, with your logic...:P
Well in the book Road of the Patriach (one of my favorites) there is a small village far north of Bloodstone Villiage called Palishchuk where Orcs and Humans have gotten together and breed a steady line of Orcish folks who are very peaceful and openly trade with their nieghbors.
Could be wrong, but I'm almost positive it was a village entirely composed of Half-orcs. Which is why it was such a big deal for the one to look almost human.
Although many Ilythiri became corrupted through ambition, which led to the seeking of power through fiendish sources. Most of your average citizens only adopted this mindset after the fall, when they felt that the "good" gods of the Seldarine betrayed them.
It is all dependent upon culture, circumstance, and history. If Moon elves and rock gnomes were in their place they would have undergone similar transformations. These factors just raise the chance that an individual of a race would turn out evil due to social factors.
Fiends on the other hand, are evil incarnate and result only from the evil in the minds of mortals, therefore they are absolute evil (though fiends have been redeemed through outside influence).
Not sure about the "result only from the evil in the minds of mortals" part, as it presupposes a mortal shaping of the planes, and by extension the universe, that I don't really agree with on a metaphysical level, but otherwise I'd agree.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasen't according to Planescape, the Outer Planes were an incarnation of the thoughts, belief, and emotions of mortals. Maybe mortals didn't create the Outer Planes, as concepts such as law, chaos, good, and evil most likely are a priori to the universe and predate mortals, but they certainly help shape its direction.
-I flipped through the Monster Manual, and the Player's Handbook. They did not have the Dungeon Masters Guide. I would very much like to see the books, though.
Sure thing!
Could be wrong, but I'm almost positive it was a village entirely composed of Half-orcs. Which is why it was such a big deal for the one to look almost human.
That's correct--Palishchuk was a half-orc town.
In a typical orc tribe, there's a few (at most) priests, right? Well in a drow city there's a TON of Lolth priestesses. So its much easier for the orcs to move towards good (also orc tribes are smaller then drow cities) as they have less people to kill. However drow have it much harder as there are simply a LOT more Lolth priestesses, and also there's no secular leader.
That's a perfectly valid point, although I'm not convinced that orcish evil is solely due to religion.
Bah, good and evil amongst mortal races is totally determined by circumstance. Orcs probably became evil because "good" races like the elves came up to their homes when they were no better than wild animals and hunted them for sport, which led to resentment and a turning to savagery and dark powers to fight their apparent enemy, the forces of good.
What about the orcs that (IIRC) came in through planar gates and started wreaking havoc just because they wanted to?
What about the orcs that (IIRC) came in through planar gates and started wreaking havoc just because they wanted to?
That, is a different story that hasen't been fully explored yet but IMHO something similar probably happened and eventually the orcs got sick of it and one of their hordes finally conquered the world with the aid of their gods.
That, is a different story that hasen't been fully explored yet but IMHO something similar probably happened and eventually the orcs got sick of it and one of their hordes finally conquered the world with the aid of their gods.
Meh, I'll believe that when I read the proof for it.
Meh, I'll believe that when I read the proof for it.
I don't think there is anything on it, so at this point I'm just speculating based upon factual information in similar scenarios.
Its kind of based off of my real life beliefs that having any "absolutes" in the mortal world is dangerous, unintelligent, and foolish.
Its kind of based off of my real life beliefs that having any "absolutes" in the mortal world is dangerous, unintelligent, and foolish.
-Stop making yourself sound silly. I was born, and exist up until this current point. There's an absolute.
-Stop making yourself sound silly. I was born, and exist up until this current point. There's an absolute.
I did say Mortal World didn't I. None of my values have any relevence to a being who defies (or maybe even defines) reality.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasen't according to Planescape, the Outer Planes were an incarnation of the thoughts, belief, and emotions of mortals. Maybe mortals didn't create the Outer Planes, as concepts such as law, chaos, good, and evil most likely are a priori to the universe and predate mortals, but they certainly help shape its direction.
Sounds sort of correct, but its something of a chicken and egg issue... no one really knows for sure, and anyone who does probably isn't telling. I wouldn't say so much an incarnation though, reflection would probably be a better way of putting it I think.
-Yes, it's an absolute that I was born and still exist in the mortal realm. Just stop while you are ahead...;) :P
Possibly... depends on if reality is actually reality and not the delusion of some other being who's imagining all of this... no way to really be sure about it if you look at it skewed enough. ;)
Possibly... depends on if reality is actually reality and not the delusion of some other being who's imagining all of this... no way to really be sure about it if you look at it skewed enough. ;)
The very fact that he is bragging about it on a forum hints at the latter.
Possibly... depends on if reality is actually reality and not the delusion of some other being who's imagining all of this... no way to really be sure about it if you look at it skewed enough. ;)
-That I came into being, and exist(ed) as a thinking thing in the world is an absolute. If I think, then I exist. Since I think, therefore I do exist. Basic Descartes.
-That I came into being, and exist(ed) as a thinking thing in the world is an absolute. If I think, then I exist. Since I think, therefore I do exist. Basic Descartes.
You exist, just not as a timeless being of infinate power.
Bah, good and evil amongst mortal races is totally determined by circumstance. Orcs probably became evil because "good" races like the elves came up to their homes when they were no better than wild animals and hunted them for sport, which led to resentment and a turning to savagery and dark powers to fight their apparent enemy, the forces of good.
Although many Ilythiri became corrupted through ambition, which led to the seeking of power through fiendish sources. Most of your average citizens only adopted this mindset after the fall, when they felt that the "good" gods of the Seldarine betrayed them.
It is all dependent upon culture, circumstance, and history. If Moon elves and rock gnomes were in their place they would have undergone similar transformations. These factors just raise the chance that an individual of a race would turn out evil due to social factors.
Fiends on the other hand, are evil incarnate and result only from the evil in the minds of mortals, therefore they are absolute evil (though fiends have been redeemed through outside influence).
I disagree. Profoundly.
I recognize your point as the philosophy of basic Moral Relativist Theory, but Moral Relativism is not vald in the Realms (or any D&D world).
Moral Relativism (or the idea that all morals are relative to the society in question) goes out the window when you have literal demons, devils, and some active and confirmed deities who are embodiments of evil. In D&D, evil is a cosmic force, not a point of view. If a book says a creature is "usally evil", then it is not "usually evil from someone else' point of view, but good in its own", it is "usually evil" period. Regardless of how it sees itself, or justifies its actions, it is evil in the big picture.
Its kind of based off of my real life beliefs that having any "absolutes" in the mortal world is dangerous, unintelligent, and foolish.
I find this presumptious and mildly insulting. Branding the belief in moral absolutes as "unintelligent" is extremely arrogant of you. It is also hypocritical, since your dismissal of all absolutes is presented as an absolute. However, in the proper context of this argument, your real life beliefs are not valid to the Realms; simply because, unlike in real life (where we aren't sure and nothing can be proven), it is a fact that in the D&D universe, which includes faerun, evil is an objective force.
To clarify my stance, I am not against the idea of orcs having some moral freedom, I just disagree with the silly notion of "orcs [in general] are just victims of circumstance and not actually evil", to sum it up as I read it.
See, now that philosophy relies on Descartes actually being correct... something that isn't really proveable if its all being imagined... they might just be imagining you thinking, and you're just going along with the role you've been given by a snoring guy...
-That's very provable. Cogito, ergo sum. Because cogito, therefore, ergo sum. It can't be argued that I don't exist. Even if I am imagining that I am thinking, I am still existing- I am imagining that I am thinking.
To clarify my stance, I am not against the idea of orcs having some moral freedom, I just disagree with the silly notion of "orcs [in general] are just victims of circumstance and not actually evil", to sum it up as I read it.
-The "victims of circumstance" excuse is garbage, in my book. Orcs have free wills. Orcs have feelings (see R.A. Salvatore's story in Realms of War for an example). They simply choose to ignore it all when they go charging and stampeding and raiding.
-The "victims of circumstance" excuse is garbage, in my book. Orcs have free wills. Orcs have feelings (see R.A. Salvatore's story in Realms of War for an example). They simply choose to ignore it all when they go charging and stampeding and raiding.
That's because Blood Rage is fun. Everyone loves a good Blood Rage.
As to orcs being victims of circumstance and poor nurture... a case could be made for it, but given that I don't really believe in the concept of societal victimization, and am a firm believer in taking full responsibility for your choices and actions, I see no reason why orcs should be any different than any other species if they're considered a truly sentient species.
Of course it can't be proven... nothing can be if you warp your logic and point of view... Cogito ergo sum relies on the assumption of a rational objective world, an assumption I'm not making. And no, you're not imagining yourself thinking, someone else is imagining it and the imaginary being that is Karsus only 'thinks' what his 'creator' wishes him to... hence, its more "he imagines that I think, therefore he exists".
-That's getting into a different philosophy (free-will). That I am imagining that I am thinking still confirms that I exist. If I didn't exist, I wouldn't be able to think for myself, imagine that I'm thinking for myself, or anything else.
I disagree. Profoundly.
I recognize your point as the philosophy of basic Moral Relativist Theory, but Moral Relativism is not vald in the Realms (or any D&D world).
Moral Relativism (or the idea that all morals are relative to the society in question) goes out the window when you have literal demons, devils, and some active and confirmed deities who are embodiments of evil. In D&D, evil is a cosmic force, not a point of view. If a book says a creature is "usally evil", then it is not "usually evil from someone else' point of view, but good in its own", it is "usually evil" period. Regardless of how it sees itself, or justifies its actions, it is evil in the big picture.
I find this presumptious and mildly insulting. Branding the belief in moral absolutes as "unintelligent" is extremely arrogant of you. It is also hypocritical, since your dismissal of all absolutes is presented as an absolute. However, in the proper context of this argument, your real life beliefs are not valid to the Realms; simply because, unlike in real life (where we aren't sure and nothing can be proven), it is a fact that in the D&D universe, which includes faerun, evil is an objective force.
To clarify my stance, I am not against the idea of orcs having some moral freedom, I just disagree with the silly notion of "orcs [in general] are just victims of circumstance and not actually evil", to sum it up as I read it.
Oh, I agree. I also never said that in any case good and evil aren't objective forces. I did say before that my moral revelence beliefs go out the window when it comes to planar beings such as demons, devils, and yugoloths, who are driven by the evil in the hearts of mortals and are literally the embodiments of such principles. I am just against applying these same concepts to mortal races in ANY case, fictional and nonfictional, since they usually are victiums of circumstance who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Anyway, without absolutes, we can't even have the varying shades of grey we have. I am not against the belief in absolutes as much as I am against applying them. Forgive me if I sounded arrogant. Unless a being totally thrives on the very existance of evil and would not exist without such a concept, I cannot label them as absolute evil, and even in the case of fiends there are such cases as risen fiends, just as there are fallen celestials.
-That's getting into a different philosophy (free-will). That I am imagining that I am thinking still confirms that I exist. If I didn't exist, I wouldn't be able to think for myself, imagine that I'm thinking for myself, or anything else.
You're not thinking for yourself, the snoring guy is thinking for you, and you're mistaking his thoughts for your own, since you're a construct of his imagination... so you don't really, truly exist objectively, only subjectively to some snoring fellow. ;)
As to the rest of it, in the case of fiends rising to goodness, Faces of Evil for 2e Planescape presented the thought that fiends are not truly embodiments of 'true evil' of whatever alignment they espouse until they reach the pinnacle of fiendish evolution for their particular species. Until then, they have impurities that are expunged as they 'evolve' up the chain. If I'm recalling that correctly anyway, been a while since I've read it.
On the victim of circumstance, perhaps if you took out the victim part I'd have less problem with it. That word gives me no end of trouble, and it tends to imply a certain amount of innocence/ignorance of wrongdoing that I just can't buy for species like orcs and such.
You're not thinking for yourself, the snoring guy is thinking for you, and you're mistaking his thoughts for your own, since you're a construct of his imagination... so you don't really, truly exist objectively, only subjectively to some snoring fellow. ;)
-Being a construct of it's imagination doesn't nullify my existence. I still have to exist in order to think that I am thinking my own thoughts.
-Being a construct of it's imagination doesn't nullify my existence. I still have to exist in order to think that I am thinking my own thoughts.
Or he could be thinking that you think you exist.
Or he could be thinking that you think you exist.
-Which would still make me thinking that I exist, which would, in turn, mean that I exist, being that I am thinking I am thinking.
-Which would still make me thinking that I exist, which would, in turn, mean that I exist, being that I am thinking I am thinking.
Hmm, judging by mathematical logic.
~(~(~(~(~(T)=~T=Karsus does not exist:D
-That makes no sense.
Simple logic, you stated yourself 5 times in your statement, therefore the end result is the simplification that you do not exist.
That means that you are ****ed up in the head and you are talking to youfself?
It means that Karsus is just a figment of our imaginations created to give a semblence of structure to these forums.
It means that Karsus is just a figment of our imaginations created to give a semblence of structure to these forums.
No, no I think you are just ****ed up in the head :P
No, no I think you are just ****ed up in the head :P
Yeah, I should probably stop talking to myself now. It is particuarly frightning though, when he initiates and I respond. I think I might be possessed...
+
Was that the wind?
Nope, random neural impulse, sort of like a twitch from an imaginary nerve. Pay it no mind... :D
Yeah, I gotta get that looked at during my next checkup. Might have long terms effects that may lead to me trying to cast Karsus's Avatar in 2012.
To clarify my stance, I am not against the idea of orcs having some moral freedom, I just disagree with the silly notion of "orcs [in general] are just victims of circumstance and not actually evil", to sum it up as I read it.
That's pretty much my stance as well.
And look what happened to them when the mythal blew up...
-They're still out there, being all pacifistic and Eldath loving.
Couldnt a human male get really drunk with an orc female and have sex with her?
-Yes.
Drow are evil because they live in an oppressive society that forces a behavioral standard, much like the citizens of Germany during Hitler's time, or like the Iranians now, or even us Americans, not evil, just not able/willing to stand up to leaders that may not have our best interests at heart, and therefore are considered complicit.
Orcs don't necessarily have the pressure from society, more of a survival thing, so are easier to bring over, after all they don't generally go looking to raid human or other races lands. But humans being humans move into their ancestral lands and start hunting their food, and of course killing them because they are scary mindless beasts, so they act to defend themselves. Some adventures can have even better outcomes if the players chose to discover why the orcs are attacking the locals, and tried to fix the situation, rather than just slaying every one they find and taking the traesure they find.
Drow are evil because they live in an oppressive society that forces a behavioral standard, much like the citizens of Germany during Hitler's time, or like the Iranians now, or even us Americans, not evil, just not able/willing to stand up to leaders that may not have our best interests at heart, and therefore are considered complicit.
I'm just gonna say... its a good thing, and you should be thankful for this, that there are brave people out there that allow you to say such a thing.
Orcs make good low level fodder for characters, and we don't want our "heroes" killing innocent or good beings, so they are evil mostly, there are exceptions. But their inclusion in the game means that the heroes don't have to go around killing members of their own races. Would that it was so easy in the real world..
This is exactly why most people are upset. It is fantasy and thus an escape from reality. Now the lines of fantasy are blurry, afterall, WoD is still technically fantasy, but FR has always been a game of pleasure and "high adventure" while games like Ravenloft and any WoD are "dark horror" or "Personal horror/tragedy."
I'm just gonna say... its a good thing, and you should be thankful for this, that there are brave people out there that allow you to say such a thing.
I served in the Army in my more patriotic youth, and every generation in my family has at least one member who has served as well, my cousin is still in the Navy, and my brother-in-law is in the Air Force now. But I feel our use of our military has led to situations in the world that could have been resolved much more peacefully than they have been. Violence should always be a tool of last resort and not used as a threat to get your own way, or a means to make you feel safe, it has never accomplished the latter in all of history, only left people who think of themselves as victims and look for revenge on those who used it against them.
I served in the Army in my more patriotic youth, and every generation in my family has at least one member who has served as well, my cousin is still in the Navy, and my brother-in-law is in the Air Force now. But I feel our use of our military has led to situations in the world that could have been resolved much more peacefully than they have been. Violence should always be a tool of last resort and not used as a threat to get your own way, or a means to make you feel safe, it has never accomplished the latter in all of history, only left people who think of themselves as victims and look for revenge on those who used it against them.
I do not wish to divert this to politics.
This is exactly why most people are upset. It is fantasy and thus an escape from reality. Now the lines of fantasy are blurry, afterall, WoD is still technically fantasy, but FR has always been a game of pleasure and "high adventure" while games like Ravenloft and any WoD are "dark horror" or "Personal horror/tragedy."
And yet aspects of reality come through, and as always they are based on ideas that were meant to hold a mirror of our own society and lives. That is the primary appeal of sci-fi and fantasy. Drizzt's story is more than a hack and slash romp through the frozen north, it is also a story of friendship, and overcoming social expectations and being a hero even when everyone thinks you are a villian. Good roleplaying has this element as well, or else it is just see monster, kill monster, take treasure, repeat. And I would be bored with that after 5 minutes. I don't play first person shooters and games like GTA for that same reason, they teach nothing but how to cause damage.
I do not wish to divert this to politics.
Not trying for politics, just trying to illustrate a point on how we view groups other than our own.
I usually play orcs as, to a certain degree, inherently evil. Take cats, for instance, who've got their hunt/kill brain centre next to their pleasure centre. Ergo, it's fun killing/hunting. You can perhaps teach a cat to stop killing mice... but it's pretty damn hard. Whereas an orc can technically be redeemed, I don't find it very realistic.
Whereas drow [i.e. Menzoberranyr] I just usually play them as brought up a certain way, because their ancestors all made conscious choices to summon daemons etc. If a drow wishes to be all cuddly, they can, but society and his/her heritage would suggest it'll get you killed.
Couldnt a human male get really drunk with an orc female and have sex with her?
Shh*ttt I'll do one sober :D
Wars don't determine who is right...Just who's left.
hiipie! :P
Why? What has an orc ever done to you?
-Well, for one, they went on a rampage and destroyed one of the centers of Elven magic on the continent.
Wars don't determine who is right...Just who's left.
-No, not really.
Shh*ttt I'll do one sober :D
-That's just disgusting...
Look around us, we have people in our countries that are being treated as terrorists simply because of their religion, and in being ostracized start to think maybe they should be what they are already thought to be. After all society has already determined them to be evil, so...
That sounds neither beneficial nor justifiable.
Oh, and ody... that's not really saying too much in your favor, ya' know... ;)
Tad bit simplistic as well with human nature generally wanting to be accepted by the rest of the troupe... hard to get away from our natures as social creatures... follow the herd/troupe for safety and all that.
Oh, and ody... that's not really saying too much in your favor, ya' know... ;)
....Can't take it back, can I?
I usually play orcs as, to a certain degree, inherently evil. Take cats, for instance, who've got their hunt/kill brain centre next to their pleasure centre. Ergo, it's fun killing/hunting. You can perhaps teach a cat to stop killing mice... but it's pretty damn hard. Whereas an orc can technically be redeemed, I don't find it very realistic.
Whereas drow [i.e. Menzoberranyr] I just usually play them as brought up a certain way, because their ancestors all made conscious choices to summon daemons etc. If a drow wishes to be all cuddly, they can, but society and his/her heritage would suggest it'll get you killed.
Heh, I'm somewhat the opposite (although drow can rarely become good, it takes effort. No Drizzt Do'urdens).
Heh, I'm somewhat the opposite (although drow can rarely become good, it takes effort. No Drizzt Do'urdens).
-Emphasis mine. Agreed. Drizzt's example was very unrealistic, if you ask me.
I confess, I've always found a particular amusement in Klingon Orcs. However, I find a certain appeal. So, which do you prefer? Proud Warrior Race types with a shamnist/primitive culture or Always Chaotic Evil?
My biggest issue with the first is that it turns so many humans in the Realms into bigots.
Now here's an interesting but serious question for Realms fans. I have a confession to make, I actually LIKE Warcraft. Bizarrely, I hate World of Warcraft but I love Warcraft (Ah, Arthas, you lovable scamp).
I confess, I've always found a particular amusement in Klingon Orcs. However, I find a certain appeal. So, which do you prefer? Proud Warrior Race types with a shamnist/primitive culture or Always Chaotic Evil?
My biggest issue with the first is that it turns so many humans in the Realms into bigots.
Always Evil. Orcs are evil, through and through. And I actually quite like Warcraft, but really dislike WoW, with its spaceships, gryphon expresses and gameplay. I was gutted when orcs become "a little misunderstood." Queu Rod Stewart.
As the Scro show. Less evil and more intelligent doesn't mean fluffy bunnies either.
Now here's an interesting but serious question for Realms fans. I have a confession to make, I actually LIKE Warcraft. Bizarrely, I hate World of Warcraft but I love Warcraft (Ah, Arthas, you lovable scamp).
I confess, I've always found a particular amusement in Klingon Orcs. However, I find a certain appeal. So, which do you prefer? Proud Warrior Race types with a shamnist/primitive culture or Always Chaotic Evil?
My biggest issue with the first is that it turns so many humans in the Realms into bigots.
No preference.
I think either one can work in a setting.Let's assume for a moment that the Orcs have decided to become Proud Warrior Race Guystm in the Forgotten Realms. They're an Unaligned Race in the same way that Elves are now. Elves, oddly enough, have Neutral Gods rather than Evil Ones. Orcs have evil gods but that doesn't seem to mean as much now.
So, what changes in the Forgotten Realms canon as a result of this dramatic species shift?
I confess, I've always found a particular amusement in Klingon Orcs. However, I find a certain appeal. So, which do you prefer? Proud Warrior Race types with a shamnist/primitive culture or Always Chaotic Evil?
-I appreciate them (for a lack of better words) as a primitive culture that is Chaotic Evil due to the influences of the shamanistic Clerics of Gruumsh. So, a combination of both.
Now here's an interesting but serious question for Realms fans. I have a confession to make, I actually LIKE Warcraft. Bizarrely, I hate World of Warcraft but I love Warcraft (Ah, Arthas, you lovable scamp).
Skipping, the WoW commentary since I don't play it and won't comment agreed to some degree. I enjoy Warcraft and I don't particularly mind its orcs. I have objections to the some of the side effects but that's not immediately relevant.
I'm not all that picky between WoW type orcs and normally Chaotic Evil orcs provided that if FR adopts WoW style orcs they do so slowly and spend some time shredding and rebuilding orc culture in story. If orcs go from being mostly Chaotic Evil scum to merely mistunderstood victims of society overnight or as part of a retcon, I will be exceedingly ****** off.
The aftershock of such a change, I can't easily comment on without knowing how it happens.
This reversal may also have to do with playing warhammer/lotr. Though i've always seen orcs at being some what primative, I can see them adopting from other races more so then Goblins in thier own crude fashion.
Orc's being lawful evil would then make a little more sense for them to have a kindom such as Many Arrows lasting.
Not that you are totally incapable of being pacified by force or cooperation.
I've always played orcs as orcs; Tolkien orcs. Evil to the core, inherently cruel and such. Much like women.
You know, I could've taken your post seriously without that last line....
Think of the matched pairs for a bit, we have Elves and Drow, Dwarves, Druergar and Derro, and we have gnomes and Svirfneblin*, you can even stretch it a tad and add halfling and goblin. Where's the corresponding good race to match up with the orcs? Orcs are described as brutish, savage and warlike, not entirely cruel and twisted like the ebon-skinned dandelion-eaters. Sure, it's a bit of an adjustment to make, but those same words fit a description of Vikings in the real-world history, do you consider them evil without reservation?
* pronounced "snerfel-bourbon", trust me on this.
Orc's being lawful evil would then make a little more sense for them to have a kindom such as Many Arrows lasting.
-Chaotic people can have kingdoms and nations too, you know.
...we have gnomes and Svirfneblin*...
-Both are generally 'good' races. The Svirfneblin live in the Underdark, but they aren't an 'evil' analogue to Gnomes. They're 'good' themselves.
Where's the corresponding good race to match up with the orcs?
-Like Humans, there are some 'good' Orcs, and there are some 'evil' Orcs. The Ondanti Orcs are pacifists, and would certainly qualify as being 'good'.
-Like Humans, there are some 'good' Orcs, and there are some 'evil' Orcs. The Ondanti Orcs are pacifists, and would certainly qualify as being 'good'.
There are the Sharakim, humans assume that all orcs are the same—ugly, brutish, violent, and determined to kill anyone who stands in their path. These suppositions rarely prove false. But even orcs display variation within the species, and one group in particular stands apart from all others.
The sharakim (the name means “the tainted” or “those with taint” in an old human dialect) were once human. At least, their forebears were. Legends claim that, long ago, all humans resided in the village of Desh. They lived peacefully until a hunter named Sharak killed a sacred stag, and all those who ate of the stag’s flesh became ill. Many died, but others were transformed, twisted into hideous caricatures of humanity by the evil they had committed. The humans who escaped the curse scattered, leaving Desh to be lost forever.
Those creatures who had once been human gathered together and fl ed as well, making their own way in the world but forever after hated by humans because they stood as a reminder of that sin. These became the sharakim.
-Both are generally 'good' races. The Svirfneblin live in the Underdark, but they aren't an 'evil' analogue to Gnomes. They're 'good' themselves.
Half a point to LK. Svirfneblin are Neutral, it's them nasty ol' Spriggan that are evil gnomes. (not like it really matters, they got the axe in the 4e, ennit?)
Half a point to LK. Svirfneblin are Neutral, it's them nasty ol' Spriggan that are evil gnomes. (not like it really matters, they got the axe in the 4e, ennit?)
Gnomes will be coming out as a player race in a future book (I think the PHB2).
Gnomes will be coming out as a player race in a future book (I think the PHB2).
So they were ripped from the core rules to be added to a supplement at a later date? So now I have to buy two books to get what I had in one book in previous editions? Has anybody taken the time to look at how many editions TSR cranked out and in how many years? Now WoTC has three editions in how many years? Fifth Ed in what, two years?
-Chaotic people can have kingdoms and nations too, you know.
Thanks for the obvious. ;)
They're also in the MM if you don't want to wait.
They're also in 2nd ed, 3rd ed, 3.5 ed. And the big kicker is I don't have to shell out $60 to play those (or is it $30 a book for 4e?).
If you're not going to buy it then why do you care where they are, then?
Sorry, thought this was a thread about orcs being good, neutral or evil, didn't realize that it was an "all hail 4e" thread. I'll show myself out, thanks.
A Dork?
Having an imature flashback from the Orc thread... sorry...
Sorry, thought this was a thread about orcs being good, neutral or evil, didn't realize that it was an "all hail 4e" thread. I'll show myself out, thanks.
Firstly, you're the one who brought up Gnomes, not I. Second, you're complaining about the lack of Gnomes as a PC race in the 4E PHB. If you're not planning on buying it to begin with, then why are you complaining, as that's a decision which doesn't affect you in the slightest?
A tad more civil than the other way 'round, ennit?
It does affect me. When I refer to gnomes, you know what I'm talking about, but in 10 years, some new player isn't gonna have a clue, are they? As things stand, 4e changes the game in ways you probably don't even see. You probably can't understand how I can still use the 2nd ed FR material instead of immediately going out and buying the 3rd ed setting.
It does affect me. When I refer to gnomes, you know what I'm talking about, but in 10 years, some new player isn't gonna have a clue, are they?
Of course they will, because they're right there in the Monster Manual. They'll be in the PHB2 (alongside Barbarians, Druids, Bards, Sorcerers, and Half-Orcs). They'll see countless mention over the years. They haven't been completely excised.
As things stand, 4e changes the game in ways you probably don't even see. You probably can't understand how I can still use the 2nd ed FR material instead of immediately going out and buying the 3rd ed setting.
You think you're the only one who still uses 2E material?
Half a point to LK. Svirfneblin are Neutral, it's them nasty ol' Spriggan that are evil gnomes. (not like it really matters, they got the axe in the 4e, ennit?)
-Ah, the nasty ol' Spriggans. I forgot about them myself.
Thanks for the obvious. ;)
-Doin' my job.
You think you're the only one who still uses 2E material?
-Yes. 2e sourcebooks are crappy, and no one should use them...
Anything newer then the Chainmail rules are garbage. :P
The only game system designed in-advance to be easily broken - the only rules were how to do damage to something. :D
I rememeber one character I had with all stats over 100 - and that system used 3d6 for starting stats. You just got to love poorly-conceived solo-dungeons.
BTW, that was the game I was using when I first created the monster town of Gwarch, which now appears 27 years later on an official FR map.
Funny how something I invented to get away from D&D ended up part of D&D.
-Ah, the nasty ol' Spriggans. I forgot about them myself.
As long as we're traipsing down memory lane, remember the Derro? Haven't seen alot of those since 2nd ed, have you?
As long as we're traipsing down memory lane, remember the Derro? Haven't seen alot of those since 2nd ed, have you?
They were in 3E. Somewhere. Darned If I can remember where though.
I could never figure out why we had two races of psionic evil dwarves in D&D.
I'm so saddened D6 by WEG never caught on past Star Wars.
-The d6 Star Wars game was fun. But, it was a bit simple. I know, my Stepfather, the DM, had to do A LOT of Houseruling to the system to sustain it. We had, what, a sustained campaign of about three-four-five years going on...When my group discovered there was a d20 Star Wars game, and converted to it, I think, mechanically speaking, it was more fun.
As long as we're traipsing down memory lane, remember the Derro? Haven't seen alot of those since 2nd ed, have you?
-Derro? Sure. They got a bunch of mentions in 3e, here and there. I don't think they got any stats, though. I know I was disappointed that they weren't in Races of Faerûn.
-Derro? Sure. They got a bunch of mentions in 3e, here and there. I don't think they got any stats, though. I know I was disappointed that they weren't in Races of Faerûn.
See, now I know where I can find those. And in 3 and 3.5 I know how to make them again. But the 4e, so far looks like they're gone forever* unless WotC decides to package them up for easy digestion in some later sourcebook.
From my scant readings of the new books, it looks like they've made the game easier to transition for the people that play colleectible card games but have never tried their hands at an actual role-playing game. They seem to have taken what was at first glance a very loose rule structure and tossed it out the window in favor of something that reads like stereo instructions.
* one of my personal favorites was a race I created based on Finnish mythology. Mielikki (goddess of the hunt) and her father Tapio (god of nature) had and were a type of Fairy called a Metsan Vaki that would best be described as goblins. I'm going to miss being able to do things like that easily. Wait, nevermind....
Consideing that (I think) they left out the psionic stuff from the Duergar in 4e, the Derro will make an appearance as a race in the psionics handbook. They will just become the psionic Duergar at that point.
See, now I know where I can find those.
-Mostly in novels. The War of the Spider Queen series, for instance, mentions the Derro Savants in the Duergar city.
I read somewhere that the reason for the big Drow/Dark Elf change up was because Drow are supposed to be evil and monsters etc etc etc. That having a lot of good drow was "taking away" from them.
Yet, we will be getting GOOD Orcs? Come OONNNNNN. What so we can have an offical non-**** version of a Half-Orc? Or is this something to blame on WoW?
But seriously, seems a bit hypicritical. Drow MUST be evil but Orcs, yea they can be good.
What next? In 5th Ed all the good Orcs are turned into light skinned version of themselves after thier new god dies because aving lots of good Orcs was "taking away" from them?
Rofl...ever heard of a Paladin named Drizzt Do'Urden?
Rofl...ever heard of a Paladin named Drizzt Do'Urden?
Psst, ranger, not pallydingaling.
Rofl...ever heard of a Paladin named Drizzt Do'Urden?
Nope, never heard of 'im. What, some falchion-wielding renegade from Ust Natha went to the world above and converted to the worship of Chauntea?
-Derro? Sure. They got a bunch of mentions in 3e, here and there. I don't think they got any stats, though. I know I was disappointed that they weren't in Races of Faerûn.
Open MMI, they're there. ;p
Psst, ranger, not pallydingaling.
Nope, never heard of 'im. What, some falchion-wielding renegade from Ust Natha went to the world above and converted to the worship of Chauntea?
Drizzt puts Lathander to shame in terms of being a saint. His quote should be: "Want peace? Work for justice!" Although he is not classified as a Paladin, he certainly follows the ideals of one very strongly. Also, he is a **** about his "friends". I'm so sick of reading about his "friends"..."friends!!!"..."friends". Too bad he's not like Artemis, the closes thing he had to a friend was Jarlaxell, and he told him to go to hell at the end of The Road of the Patriarch.
As for the friends bit, that never bothered me that much: when you're a drow you don't get many people who actually want to be your friends... As a hero he may get a fair share of fans, but as the saying goes, old friends, old money and old wine are always better than new ones. I was more irked by the his complete denial of EVERYTHING drow - apart of, oh, his fighting style. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, Drizzt is why rangers in 3.0 HAD to be dual-wielders. Ironically, the guy who taught Drizzt how to be a ranger thought such a style is impractical. Rest in piece, Monty
Entreri... meh. I've seen my fair share of badass antiheroes, and the fad is starting to wear out. Old Zak was imo twice as interesting anyway.
Open MMI, they're there. ;p
-The 3e version, or the 3.5e version? I have the former, and I really don't recall seeing stats for Derro. I might have used them, had I seen them.
-The 3e version, or the 3.5e version? I have the former, and I really don't recall seeing stats for Derro. I might have used them, had I seen them.
Don't they have some in underdark?
Don't they have some in underdark?
-Stats in the book? I don't believe so, no.
So the orcs must be dumb yet we can have intelligent goblins?
Who said orcs had to be dumb? They're not far off from an average human for brainpower. The way I figure, that means that some of them can be downright intelligent. Siege tactics require a bit of thought, it's not just instinct that knocks down walls.
For me, my biggest issue with Obould is that he's actually a less interesting and in-depth character than Thrall who is just a video game real-time strategy character.
I'm also confused as Hell whether the kingdom of Many Arrows is evil or not.
It's weird.
For me, my biggest issue with Obould is that he's actually a less interesting and in-depth character than Thrall who is just a video game real-time strategy character.
I'm also confused as Hell whether the kingdom of Many Arrows is evil or not.
Thrall is more intresting because he was raised by humans. And thus his name means human slave. Plus the idea that he can be involved through-out the world, unlike Obould who has resitrictions to his authors areas he can write in.
So the orcs must be dumb yet we can have intelligent goblins?
-Um...No.