Why are only humans given the special ability of being able to be both good and evil, anyway? Why not orcs as well, or drows, or kobolds, or ogres, or any other race anywhere? What makes humans so special?
It's the prevalence of people like you why even the few drow that do try to get away, like Viconia, never can. The mutual paranoia results only in destruction, and one side must relent and offer kindness before the situation can ever change at all.
They are evil, charname is presumably not. There is no symetry or equality here, it is the FR.
It's the prisoner's dilemma. Being kind means either the best or the worst result, and so everyone is mean because they don't want to risk it, getting only the somewhat-bad result forever.
This is FR not the RL. Again I am baffled. Being kind in the FR with such races = being dead 99.9% of the time, and Evil having grown stronger vs Good. Everyone knows this, litterally everyone. If you show kidness and tolerance and peace to the drows, they will not become good and think again, but they will grow stronger and destroy you, feeling their evil path is the right one because it gives them more power seeing their ennemies are weak.
All I'm asking is a three-second break from everybody as they explained each other, instead of keeping on murdering. It should be reasonable, yes?
Maybe. Maybe not. If there was a way the FF guy would be ok with that approach, then it would be easier. But as it is, he leaves me no choice: kill him or her. I obviously chose to kill her, because she is drow and hsi is human.
That may be lawful, but it is never a good act to kill children. It's neutral at best, evil at worst.
Orcish children? goblin children? what do you want to do? take them under your care and hope they will end up being goody-two-shoes? if you let them live, they will become string and murder one day your own kids and that of your neighbour, that is not a possibility but a certainty. What you might want to show is pity, just like you would pity the newborn of a fierce wild animal. But is much more difficult to pity an orc than a lion.
Why are only humans given the special ability of being able to be both good and evil, anyway? Why not orcs as well, or drows, or kobolds, or ogres, or any other race anywhere? What makes humans so special?
Ask the people who have created that world, not me. That's just how things are and it is not a speculation but a fact.
A Lawful Good Paladin that kills an innocent orc/goblin/drow baby should fall, no exceptions. A Lawful or Good person that does the same, should gravitate towards or become Neutral.
No, definitely not, if that was the case then that person would go against the way the FR have been created. I would not however add drow to the list. Drows were once good, and some although extremely rare, adult drows can be redeemed. A drowish baby can probably be raised and taken care off; it is a risk, but a reasonable one. But a goblin? what would you do with a goblin?
If you show kidness and tolerance and peace to the drows, they will not become good and think again, but they will grow stronger and destroy you, feeling their evil path is the right one because it gives them more power seeing their ennemies are weak.
Eilistraeen Drow. Viconia in BG2. Do I have to repeat it a few hundred more times for people to get it?
They are evil, charname is presumably not. There is no symetry or equality here, it is the FR.
Evil doesn't mean they couldn't be reasoned with, or that they weren't actually pretty decent when you came down to it. Kagain is evil, but it just means he's a lazy bastard, he never betrays you either.
This is FR not the RL. Again I am baffled. Being kind in the FR with such races = being dead 99.9% of the time, and Evil having grown stronger vs Good. Everyone knows this, litterally everyone. If you show kidness and tolerance and peace to the drows, they will not become good and think again, but they will grow stronger and destroy you, feeling their evil path is the right one because it gives them more power seeing their ennemies are weak.
I'm not saying I would go and preach to a drow city about peace and tolerance. All I'm saying is that I might give this one drow here a chance. She is seemingly innocent and needs my help, I help her largely out of reflex, and if she still wants to turn against me and try to kill me, it's her choice.
I know this is FR, but with Eilistraee and Drizzt and all the other stuff, it is a reasonable thing to do even here. Things have not been as black and white as you say for decades.
Maybe. Maybe not. If there was a way the FF guy would be ok with that approach, then it would be easier. But as it is, he leaves me no choice: kill him or her. I obviously chose to kill her, because she is drow and hsi is human.
And yet he is the one who attacks, mouth frothing. If she is so evil, why didn't she? Hell, she shows that she could easily kill him by herself if it came to that, with her Command spell.
if you let them live, they will become string and murder one day your own kids and that of your neighbour, that is not a possibility but a certainty. What you might want to show is pity, just like you would pity the newborn of a fierce wild animal. But is much more difficult to pity an orc than a lion.
What's so different about an orc and a lion in this scenario? The lion in the wild is a violent, savage killer, but you can raise one to be tame and perfectly nice if you catch it as a child. Why are orcs any different?
Ask the people who have created that world, not me. That's just how things are and it is not a speculation but a fact.
Facts are against you. Drizzt, Eilistraee, Fall-From-Grace, and all the already very often brought up stuff speaks entirely to the contrary to your "facts". You do not change or adapt when you read of them: you just beat the stone wall with the same overused arguments.
They are victims of circumstance only. It is not a question of nature, but nurture, and they should be given the chance anyone else deserves by having them raised in a loving home, even if finding one might be hard.
They are not victims! orcs or goblins are not victims! they are evil and were made so. That's how it is. it is ok that you want to redeem orcs and goblins you're entitled to play the way you want, but don't come and tell me that I should if I believe as a RP-gamer, that it makes absolutely no sense.
They are not victims! orcs or goblins are not victims! they are evil and were made so. That's how it is. it is ok that you want to redeem orcs and goblins you're entitled to play the way you want, but don't come and tell me that I should if I believe as a RP-gamer, that it makes absolutely no sense.
But it does make sense. This is how the game has been for the past few decades: it is no longer as black and white as you claim it to be.
Your character may have been a reasonable thing to play fifty years ago, but these days he would be a violent knight templar, with extremist views not shared by many anymore.
They are not capable of raising an elf, their internal rage would urge them to destroy and eat such a creature as an elf.
What if they were? Let's just consider this hypothetical situation, that for some reason they didn't eat him on sight. What if he managed to grow up under this sort of circumstances, be raised like an orc all the way to adulthood?
Because it's better than killing him off, because everyone deserves a chance, or just to prove people such as you wrong when he turns out decent after all.
@Ignatius, you should take a gander at the Book of Exalted Deeds. You might just see things a bit different if you do. But to each their own, I suppose.
@Chow True. Demons are spawned from the Abyss, they are creatures of pure chaos and evil and yet she was redeemed. She was double-redeemed.
@Sniiiimon I was thinking of mentioning that and quoting from it but it's not ADnD, so some might denounce it.
I remember that there was a very interesting image of a Half-Orc Paladin, facing the dilemma of killing two succubi lovers that didn't want to do evil.
What's so different about an orc and a lion in this scenario? The lion in the wild is a violent, savage killer, but you can raise one to be tame and perfectly nice if you catch it as a child. Why are orcs any different?
Because they are much more intelligent than lions or other animals. You don't tame intelligent beings like you would an animal.
Facts are against you. Drizzt, Eilistraee, Fall-From-Grace, and all the already very often brought up stuff speaks entirely to the contrary to your "facts". You do not change or adapt when you read of them: you just beat the stone wall with the same overused arguments.
Facts about redemption of orcs and goblins? care to enlighten me on this?
In RL, would you have baby cobras in your house? Tame them? give them all the love and tenderness as you would for kittens? let them freely roam around the place? because you know, humans and cobras should be friends really, and cobras are victims, after all?
In RL, would you have baby cobras in your house? Tame them? give them all the love and tenderness as you would for kittens? let them freely roam around the place? because you know, humans and cobras should be friends really, and cobras are victims, after all?
I thought we just established that animals and orcs are a different thing.
But it does make sense. This is how the game has been for the past few decades: it is no longer as black and white as you claim it to be.
It is not black and white for all the usual races. But for orcs and goblins, it is as much black and white as the fact that you would not let a cobra freely romaing your house. And if "the game" (which game) has changed, then I guess it is a different game and we are not talking about the same orcs and goblins. It is all a matter of vocabulary.
Your character may have been a reasonable thing to play fifty years ago, but these days he would be a violent knight templar, with extremist views not shared by many anymore.
What has that got to do with the discussion? a knight templar is a historical RL figure who by the way, in his own day and time, was not particularly extreme nor violent. Probably kless so actually than average actually.
What if they were? Let's just consider this hypothetical situation, that for some reason they didn't eat him on sight. What if he managed to grow up under this sort of circumstances, be raised like an orc all the way to adulthood?
Then as you said, it is a different game and your orcs are not my orcs. "My orcs" do not have it in them to be patient and caring and tolerant to take the time to grow a baby elf amongst themselves. An elf is too beautiful a creature for sheer evilness and jealousy of an orc to be able to resists the temptation to tear it apart. He might resists for a few days if there is a huge ransom at the end of it, but certainly not for 30 years!!!
Because it's better than killing him off, because everyone deserves a chance, or just to prove people such as you wrong when he turns out decent after all.
In FR, no goblin is ever going to turn out decent. Again it makes zero sense and if it does to you, then it means both our fantasy worlds are extremely different.
And in the end, your world will become dull to play, because it would follow the same path as RL, ie reduced violence and gradual eradication of warfare. All the current classes would cease to make sense, there would be neither weapons not offensive spells, the toughest quest in that revised BG would be to rescue a baby wyvern that has fallen from the top of a cliff and you would spend most of your time drinking beer with Volo. That would be RL and if I play BG it is to be emreged in a world that is different from RL - otherwise why the hell would i play???
@Ignatius@UnknownQuantity I would like you to read these parts from the Book of Exalted Deeds. *Try* to ignore the Succub-ass. Check the Mercy, Forgiveness and Redeeming Evil parts. It mentions orcs, goblinoids and drow.
Why are only humans given the special ability of being able to be both good and evil, anyway? Why not orcs as well, or drows, or kobolds, or ogres, or any other race anywhere? What makes humans so special?
We are special because other races represent specific aspects of the wide variety of things a human can be. The races are meant to represent one specific aspect. They are not meant to just be a different specials of humanoid IMO.
Again I'll point out how cliche it is to have characters jump out and be different. Characters that go against the norm of things. It's fairly boring after a while and takes away from the desire to defeat evil which is the point of the game.
I think at some point this is becoming more like the SIMS then it is a fantasy game of good vs evil.
It is not black and white for all the usual races. But for orcs and goblins, it is as much black and white as the fact that you would not let a cobra freely romaing your house. And if "the game" (which game) has changed, then I guess it is a different game and we are not talking about the same orcs and goblins. It is all a matter of vocabulary.
I'm talking about FR orcs and goblins. Which ones are you talking of?
What has that got to do with the discussion? a knight templar is a historical RL figure who by the way, in his own day and time, was not particularly extreme nor violent. Probably kless so actually than average actually.
Precisely. Knight Templar were quite okay back at their time, but in modern talk they're regardless made to mean something particularly extreme such as yourself.
Then as you said, it is a different game and your orcs are not my orcs. "My orcs" do not have it in them to be patient and caring and tolerant to take the time to grow a baby elf amongst themselves. An elf is too beautiful a creature for sheer evilness and jealousy of an orc to be able to resists the temptation to tear it apart. He might resists for a few days if there is a huge ransom at the end of it, but certainly not for 30 years!!!
Again, what sort of orcs are you talking of? In Forgotten Realms, even they can be entirely reasonable under certain circumstances, and not necessarily bloodthirsty killers, even if most of them are.
In FR, no goblin is ever going to turn out decent. Again it makes zero sense and if it does to you, then it means both our fantasy worlds are extremely different.
There are at least two perfectly decent goblins in Icewind Dale.
And in the end, your world will become dull to play, because it would follow the same path as RL, ie reduced violence and gradual eradication of warfare. All the current classes would cease to make sense, there would be neither weapons not offensive spells, the toughest quest in that revised BG would be to rescue a baby wyvern that has fallen from the top of a cliff and you would spend most of your time drinking beer with Volo. That would be RL and if I play BG it is to be emreged in a world that is different from RL - otherwise why the hell would i play???
Are you really saying our modern day world is free of violence and warfare? There are plenty of wars to take part at.
We are special because other races represent specific aspects of the wide variety of things a human can be. The races are meant to represent one specific aspect. They are not meant to just be a different specials of humanoid IMO.
That does not make sense at all.
I think the Elder Scrolls did it best, because it has also different human subraces. There should be some in D&D too.
We are special because other races represent specific aspects of the wide variety of things a human can be. The races are meant to represent one specific aspect. They are not meant to just be a different specials of humanoid IMO.
That does not make sense at all.
I think the Elder Scrolls did it best, because it has also different human subraces. There should be some in D&D too.
It actually makes a lot of sense. For instance high/wood elves represent a goodly, wise, natural, beautiful aspect of humans.
Dwarves represent the more tuff and gruff aspects of humans and their desires for weath.
Orcs and other monsters represent the evil in humans.
Lets note that the drow were not always around. They came largely into play sometime in the 90s.
Well, that is how it used to be in the past, but these days it has kind of dropped from the wagon. Nowadays orcs can be perfectly decent anyway, even drow or demons.
People no longer believe in absolutely objective good and evil.
Well, that is how it used to be in the past, but these days it has kind of dropped from the wagon. Nowadays orcs can be perfectly decent anyway, even drow or demons.
People no longer believe in absolutely objective good and evil.
I don't believe in it either, but it's just a game. Anything is possible in a game. If we play the game without absolutes the purpose it taken away. There has to be a reason to want to defeat evil in a fantasy game. There has to be an overwhelming evil that needs to be destroyed to save the day. It's why I think a lot of movies now suck. The evil isn't really that evil so it takes away from purpose and removes the happiness in victory. You can't be happy about victory if you don't know what you destroyed was indeed evil and needed to be removed. As I said the games become like playing a simulation more then a fight of good vs evil. This is really boring if you want to play a game of good vs evil with a true good and a true evil. An evil that you want to make you afraid. An evil that you want to make you feel anger. Things you can't have in real life because you can't really pass judgement in that way. You can in a video game or book though.
I was thinking of mentioning that and quoting from it but it's not ADnD, so some might denounce it.
True enough. Even so I would warmly recommend it for, well, everyone. As someone who often roleplay as paladins and other forces of good, I for one learned a great deal from it. Oh and the artwork is awesome, I can't deny.
The presence of an overwhelming evil does not mean that the orcs or whatever it uses are likewise all evil and irredeemable. It may be just a game, but it needs to have a certain amount of verisimilitude and internal consistency, or else it just falls apart.
The orcs may be generally evil by culture and society. They may be used or hired by the true villains. But I cannot believe them to be irredeemable, for they are mortal like humans, they bleed when cut, grow sick when poisoned, and otherwise act precisely like us. If they were irredeemably evil, then so would be certain human cultures of the past, such as mongols or nazis - and neither of those were all evil either. Painting all orcs as evil forever is to make a terrifying comparison to real life that I just cannot handle.
Now demons, or some eldritch Cthulhu-like abominations, or whatever? Those I could get behind as acting all evil.
Then as you said, it is a different game and your orcs are not my orcs. "My orcs" do not have it in them to be patient and caring and tolerant to take the time to grow a baby elf amongst themselves. An elf is too beautiful a creature for sheer evilness and jealousy of an orc to be able to resists the temptation to tear it apart. He might resists for a few days if there is a huge ransom at the end of it, but certainly not for 30 years!!!
Perhaps they wouldn't raise an elven baby, but many FR orcs started to become a lot more civil during and especially after the reign of King Obould Many-Arrows I. In the current iteration of the setting, The Kingdom of Many Arrows is a full-fledged sovereign nature that trades amicably with surrounding nations like Mirabar.
No creature's nature is set in stone. Others have already mentioned Falls-From-Grace and numerous renegade drow.
The presence of an overwhelming evil does not mean that the orcs or whatever it uses are likewise all evil and irredeemable. It may be just a game, but it needs to have a certain amount of verisimilitude and internal consistency, or else it just falls apart.
The orcs may be generally evil by culture and society. They may be used or hired by the true villains. But I cannot believe them to be irredeemable, for they are mortal like humans, they bleed when cut, grow sick when poisoned, and otherwise act precisely like us. If they were irredeemably evil, then so would be certain human cultures of the past, such as mongols or nazis - and neither of those were all evil either. Painting all orcs as evil forever is to make a terrifying comparison to real life that I just cannot handle.
Now demons, or some eldritch Cthulhu-like abominations, or whatever? Those I could get behind as acting all evil.
You seem to be drawing from real life again. As I pointed out races represent different aspects of humans. Orcs represent an evil side of humans. If you take that away then they not longer represent anything. They are just ugly humans. It defeats the original purpose. IMO.
You seem to be drawing from real life again. As I pointed out races represent different aspects of humans. Orcs represent an evil side of humans. If you take that away then they not longer represent anything. They are just ugly humans. It defeats the original purpose. IMO.
That original purpose has not been there for a good century or two at least: orcs were initially depicted as a thing of fantasy and mythology, something irredeemably evil, but believe it or not, even Tolkien did not consider all orcs as such. He struggled with it constantly, and there have been mentions of good orcs in his works.
If what you say is right, then orcs have been purposeless and worthless since forever.
You seem to be drawing from real life again. As I pointed out races represent different aspects of humans. Orcs represent an evil side of humans. If you take that away then they not longer represent anything. They are just ugly humans. It defeats the original purpose. IMO.
Having a particular race represent things like political parties or aspects of human nature is fine in a given story, but it would be silly to apply that as a blanket to all orcs in all stories, even to all orcs in all FR stories. In general, they are an enemy to fight in most stories, but as I mentioned above, the orcs of the North make a Heel Face Turn thanks to the visionary leadership of King Obould Many-Arrows.
Comments
Send it to a monastery or church of a good god.
I know this is FR, but with Eilistraee and Drizzt and all the other stuff, it is a reasonable thing to do even here. Things have not been as black and white as you say for decades. And yet he is the one who attacks, mouth frothing. If she is so evil, why didn't she? Hell, she shows that she could easily kill him by herself if it came to that, with her Command spell. If it came to that, yeah, sure. What's so different about an orc and a lion in this scenario? The lion in the wild is a violent, savage killer, but you can raise one to be tame and perfectly nice if you catch it as a child. Why are orcs any different? Facts are against you. Drizzt, Eilistraee, Fall-From-Grace, and all the already very often brought up stuff speaks entirely to the contrary to your "facts". You do not change or adapt when you read of them: you just beat the stone wall with the same overused arguments.
Your character may have been a reasonable thing to play fifty years ago, but these days he would be a violent knight templar, with extremist views not shared by many anymore. What if they were? Let's just consider this hypothetical situation, that for some reason they didn't eat him on sight. What if he managed to grow up under this sort of circumstances, be raised like an orc all the way to adulthood? Because it's better than killing him off, because everyone deserves a chance, or just to prove people such as you wrong when he turns out decent after all.
To be raised and taught good ways? Do you forget Deekin from the NwN games? He's a kobold that didn't want to kill anyone and became a bard.
Fall-From-Grace is a full blooded succubus that became Lawful Neutral and turned from her evil ways. You can't get more evil than a demon.
True. Demons are spawned from the Abyss, they are creatures of pure chaos and evil and yet she was redeemed. She was double-redeemed.
@Sniiiimon
I was thinking of mentioning that and quoting from it but it's not ADnD, so some might denounce it.
I remember that there was a very interesting image of a Half-Orc Paladin, facing the dilemma of killing two succubi lovers that didn't want to do evil.
In RL, would you have baby cobras in your house? Tame them? give them all the love and tenderness as you would for kittens? let them freely roam around the place? because you know, humans and cobras should be friends really, and cobras are victims, after all?
Orcs and goblins are capable of reasonable thought. They worship gods and have their own languages so your cobra example is faulty.
And I have seen tamed lions that sit to be pet and show love towards people.
They are intelligent, which means they can be taught otherwise. The drow are generally considered worse than orcs and goblins are, so if a drow can be redeemed, so can those other things.
I could also point you towards Madulf and his gang, but they are mostly ogres and gnolls, so I suppose they don't technically count either. I thought we just established that animals and orcs are a different thing.
And in the end, your world will become dull to play, because it would follow the same path as RL, ie reduced violence and gradual eradication of warfare. All the current classes would cease to make sense, there would be neither weapons not offensive spells, the toughest quest in that revised BG would be to rescue a baby wyvern that has fallen from the top of a cliff and you would spend most of your time drinking beer with Volo. That would be RL and if I play BG it is to be emreged in a world that is different from RL - otherwise why the hell would i play???
I would like you to read these parts from the Book of Exalted Deeds. *Try* to ignore the Succub-ass.
Check the Mercy, Forgiveness and Redeeming Evil parts. It mentions orcs, goblinoids and drow.
Again I'll point out how cliche it is to have characters jump out and be different. Characters that go against the norm of things. It's fairly boring after a while and takes away from the desire to defeat evil which is the point of the game.
I think at some point this is becoming more like the SIMS then it is a fantasy game of good vs evil.
Again, what sort of orcs are you talking of? In Forgotten Realms, even they can be entirely reasonable under certain circumstances, and not necessarily bloodthirsty killers, even if most of them are.
Likewise, elves can be equally evil. There are at least two perfectly decent goblins in Icewind Dale. Are you really saying our modern day world is free of violence and warfare? There are plenty of wars to take part at. That does not make sense at all.
I think the Elder Scrolls did it best, because it has also different human subraces. There should be some in D&D too.
I think the Elder Scrolls did it best, because it has also different human subraces. There should be some in D&D too.
It actually makes a lot of sense. For instance high/wood elves represent a goodly, wise, natural, beautiful aspect of humans.
Dwarves represent the more tuff and gruff aspects of humans and their desires for weath.
Orcs and other monsters represent the evil in humans.
Lets note that the drow were not always around. They came largely into play sometime in the 90s.
People no longer believe in absolutely objective good and evil.
The orcs may be generally evil by culture and society. They may be used or hired by the true villains. But I cannot believe them to be irredeemable, for they are mortal like humans, they bleed when cut, grow sick when poisoned, and otherwise act precisely like us. If they were irredeemably evil, then so would be certain human cultures of the past, such as mongols or nazis - and neither of those were all evil either. Painting all orcs as evil forever is to make a terrifying comparison to real life that I just cannot handle.
Now demons, or some eldritch Cthulhu-like abominations, or whatever? Those I could get behind as acting all evil.
No creature's nature is set in stone. Others have already mentioned Falls-From-Grace and numerous renegade drow.
If what you say is right, then orcs have been purposeless and worthless since forever.