Quote from: blackstone on February 10, 2025, 10:33:29 AMWith that being said, the removal of orcs as a monster has removed a key element from D&D 5e: a race of protagonists. From the orc point of view, their way of life is justified by this bit of lore from Dragon Magazine Vol III, originally from Dragon issue 62 (note this isn't official lore, but a lore to be used that fits within the game)



Now, I don't know about you, but that's a hell of a compelling tale to justify the orcs behavior. They as a race that feel betrayed and will continue to wage war against all other goodly races, until all are all killed.

I'm sorry, but this is much more compelling than having orcs "just like us".

IIRC that's pretty close to what their lore in more recent (pre-2024) D&D says. Based on the Forgotten Realms wiki, it looks like that Dragon article got canonized in the 2e Monster Mythology book.

It works, but it does open the door to doing the Drizzt Do'Urden narrative again. "This race has been brainwashed by its evil god into a self-destructive inferiority complex, but our hero (for some reason) sees through the lies and finds a better way." R.A. Salvatore might have actually done that already. I lost interest in his books ages ago, but he was doing an unusually smart and organized orc as the major antagonist around the time I stopped reading.

Or worse, WOTC could decide to reveal that story is actually true and the orcs are justified, which would turn them into a ready-made anticolonialism narrative.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 10, 2025, 11:39:35 AMwith darkvision...

That's a significant mechanical difference.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 10, 2025, 11:39:35 AMMost of the humanoids, even the monstrous ones, in D&D aren't statistically much more than humans

These are humans in masks.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 10, 2025, 11:39:35 AMI get the "they changed it, so now it sucks"

That bears no resemblance to what I actually wrote.

Quote from: blackstone on February 10, 2025, 12:27:10 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 10, 2025, 11:43:33 AM

Quote from: blackstone on February 10, 2025, 10:33:29 AMNow, I don't know about you, but that's a hell of a compelling tale to justify the orcs behavior. They as a race that feel betrayed and will continue to wage war against all other goodly races, until all are all killed.

I'm sorry, but this is much more compelling than having orcs "just like us".

You still have that, and it's hardly unique to orcs to feel like they've been slighted and oppressed and want to lash out at all that keep them down. Look hard enough, and you might see parallels with some human groups, so they really can be 'just like us' and yet have the background you like.

Sure, there might be some human groups that manifest in a similar way. The Easterlings themselves allied with Sauron and were counted along with orcs in their ranks.

Some. That's the key word.

Orcs, as a RACE, either depicted by Tolkien or within D&D (where it was influenced heavily by Tolkien's Orcs) are entirely warlike, without remorse or compassion.

Their whole way of thinking is literally alien to us right down to the core.

Hence why you don't see any orcs as an ally of the West in the War of the Ring.

Therefore, why should it be any different in D&D, where the Orcs in the game are clearly influenced by Tolkien's works?

Could you make all orcs, "just like us"? Sure you could, but that should have been an OPTION left up to the players and DMs of the game. Not dictated by the DEI rainbow-haired shitlords of WoTC.

Not every game (or version of a game) needs to follow Tolkien. I personally prefer the orks from Earthdawn over any version of Tolkien or traditional D&D orcs. OTOH, I really don't much like the orks from Warhammer (Fantasy or 40K) and only find mild interest in the AoS Kruleboyz (the rest of the AoS orks do nothing for me).

Quote from: yosemitemike on February 10, 2025, 07:39:10 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 10, 2025, 11:39:35 AMwith darkvision...

That's a significant mechanical difference.

Significant enough it needs an entirely separate stat block? Really?

Are you really saying you need a completely separate statblock to remember that orcs have darkvision?

How about just a line? "Note: depending on race, the Tough might have low-light or darkvision?"

Orcs (and most of the other monstrous humanoids like hobgoblins, etc.) have always just been humans in masks statistically (notable exception being 4E because of racial powers, but that's not real D&D) and you're bitching because they changed the layout by putting their statbocks in with the other humans in masks. That's literally "they changed it (the layout) so now it sucks" thinking.

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 02:15:06 AMNot every game (or version of a game) needs to follow Tolkien. I personally prefer the orks from Earthdawn over any version of Tolkien or traditional D&D orcs. OTOH, I really don't much like the orks from Warhammer (Fantasy or 40K) and only find mild interest in the AoS Kruleboyz (the rest of the AoS orks do nothing for me).

That's fine, but irrelevant.

The point is WoTC should have made orcs as a player race an OPTION left up to the players and DMs of the game. Not dictated by the DEI rainbow-haired shitlords of WoTC.

Unfortunately, this is the lame ass stance they took, and anyone who does otherwise will be labeled as a racist by the social justice warrior brigade.

This is what happens when you have a whole generation raised on cellphones who never played outside or used their imagination take over.

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 02:15:06 AMOTOH, I really don't much like the orks from Warhammer (Fantasy or 40K) and only find mild interest in the AoS Kruleboyz (the rest of the AoS orks do nothing for me).

Love 'em or hate 'em, you have to admit that Warhammer's Orks are practically labratory-designed to avoid all the debates around Tolkien Orcs. Orks are mushroom men that reproduce asexually through spores, so no questions about orc babies. Their life cycle is directly reliant on violence for growth, they're almost immune to pain, and they're too stupid to understand their own mortality. They have goblins to do their agriculture and manufacture their weapons, and as a species they were manufactured by Lovecraftian Old Ones to be war machines. You couldn't ask for more justifications for how there can be a species that just fights and nothing else. No questions about whether they can be redeemed, either. They almost fall under the animal category where they don't have enough moral agency for issue to even arise.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 11, 2025, 07:34:34 AMAre you really saying you need a completely separate statblock to remember that orcs have darkvision?

No, he's not.  And you know it, and are being disingenuous (and if you truly don't know it, you are apparently to stupid to breathe without help).

He's saying that orcs deserve a separate stat block because they are monsters, with abilities that human player character's don't have by default. If we look in the 2015 PHB, half-orcs have the following:

QuoteDarkvision.
Menacing (free intimidation).
Relentless Endurance (don't automatically drop at 0).
Savage Attacks (extra die on crits).

In the 2015 MM, various orcs have the following abilities:

QuoteDarkvision.
Aggressive (extra move towards enemies).
Greataxe proficiency.
Gruumsh's Fury (extra 1d8 on all attacks).

This is also ignoring the five different types of orcs in Volo's, each with their own special ability.

Now, even you should be able to see that the abilities granted to the monster orcs and the player half-orcs are different.  This is because the monster orcs are capable of different things, even in WotC's previous iteration of them.  They aren't just "humans in masks."  Now, that's the way that DMs with little imagination might treat them (and I'm beginning to have my suspicions...), but both mechanically and effectively (through motivation and behavior) orcs aren't the same as humans, elves, dwarves, etc. with masks.  That's just a bad-faith attempt to minimize the changes WotC has made.

Quote from: blackstone on February 11, 2025, 07:51:08 AMWoTC should have

The point is that your opinion is no more or less valuable than any other. WoTC doesn't have the same view as you, and that's OK. You can use their materials as is or adjust them to your wants. This is how it *is* (fact) so there's no need to declare how it *should be* (opinion).

Quote from: ForgottenF on February 11, 2025, 10:25:44 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 02:15:06 AMOTOH, I really don't much like the orks from Warhammer (Fantasy or 40K) and only find mild interest in the AoS Kruleboyz (the rest of the AoS orks do nothing for me).

Love 'em or hate 'em, you have to admit that Warhammer's Orks are practically labratory-designed to avoid all the debates around Tolkien Orcs. Orks are mushroom men that reproduce asexually through spores, so no questions about orc babies. Their life cycle is directly reliant on violence for growth, they're almost immune to pain, and they're too stupid to understand their own mortality. They have goblins to do their agriculture and manufacture their weapons, and as a species they were manufactured by Lovecraftian Old Ones to be war machines. You couldn't ask for more justifications for how there can be a species that just fights and nothing else. No questions about whether they can be redeemed, either. They almost fall under the animal category where they don't have enough moral agency for issue to even arise.

I certainly agree that they are distinct and alien. I just don't find them all that interesting to read about or roleplay with (whether as one or, more likely, in opposition to them).

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 10:58:29 AM

Quote from: blackstone on February 11, 2025, 07:51:08 AMWoTC should have

The point is that your opinion is no more or less valuable than any other. WoTC doesn't have the same view as you, and that's OK. You can use their materials as is or adjust them to your wants. This is how it *is* (fact) so there's no need to declare how it *should be* (opinion).

And that's why they lost me and thousands of others: they stopped listening to the majority of customers/players and listened to a minute portion of the fanbase.

And don't give me that crap about sales numbers, which we all know D&D 5e numbers are inflated and bullshit.

But please, keep espousing how it's ok for WoTC to go against the majority of the players.

We all know you're a schill for WoTC.

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 10:58:29 AM

Quote from: blackstone on February 11, 2025, 07:51:08 AMWoTC should have

The point is that your opinion is no more or less valuable than any other. WoTC doesn't have the same view as you, and that's OK. You can use their materials as is or adjust them to your wants. This is how it *is* (fact) so there's no need to declare how it *should be* (opinion).

Funny, I don't remember you saying the same thing to the folks that wanted female space marines.  Or is this something you just say to try and justify the changes you do like and avoid those you don't?  So we should never criticize what is?  You first...

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 11:00:56 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on February 11, 2025, 10:25:44 AM

Quote from: HappyDaze on February 11, 2025, 02:15:06 AMOTOH, I really don't much like the orks from Warhammer (Fantasy or 40K) and only find mild interest in the AoS Kruleboyz (the rest of the AoS orks do nothing for me).

Love 'em or hate 'em, you have to admit that Warhammer's Orks are practically labratory-designed to avoid all the debates around Tolkien Orcs. Orks are mushroom men that reproduce asexually through spores, so no questions about orc babies. Their life cycle is directly reliant on violence for growth, they're almost immune to pain, and they're too stupid to understand their own mortality. They have goblins to do their agriculture and manufacture their weapons, and as a species they were manufactured by Lovecraftian Old Ones to be war machines. You couldn't ask for more justifications for how there can be a species that just fights and nothing else. No questions about whether they can be redeemed, either. They almost fall under the animal category where they don't have enough moral agency for issue to even arise.

I certainly agree that they are distinct and alien. I just don't find them all that interesting to read about or roleplay with (whether as one or, more likely, in opposition to them).

That's fair enough. There's a reason why even Tolkien-esque or traditional D&D orcs are rarely more than secondary antagonists. If you design a creature to be an uncomplicated killing machine, you necessarily limit its narrative potential. I was mostly just making the point that if you want that kind of orc, Warhammer pretty much perfected the concept.

Personally I think you can keep orcs as villains and still make them more interesting, but you do have to give them more complicated motivations than just a love of violence.

Quote from: blackstone on February 11, 2025, 11:31:55 AMAnd that's why they lost me and thousands of others: they stopped listening to the majority of customers/players and listened to a minute portion of the fanbase.

And don't give me that crap about sales numbers, which we all know D&D 5e numbers are inflated and bullshit.

That's actually an interesting question. What do WOTC's current customers want from orcs?

I don't think there are reliable stats, but based on what I see around the internet, I'd guess that what the majority of role-players under around 40 years old expect is a slightly modified version of the Warcraft orc. A big, muscly noble-savage type with a vaguely shamanistic vibe and an oversized weapon. The males are an avatar for those that want to play a dumb meathead and the females are a fantasy for those with a muscle-mommy fetish. 

If so, then the direction 2024 D&D is taking them in is probably pleasing neither the grognards nor the core 5e audience. I'd be curious what approach Tales of the Valiant takes with them. Kobold Press seems to have its finger on the pulse of current day RPG trends.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on February 01, 2025, 04:04:17 PMPerfectly predictable.  On one hand, I love it.  Anything that will kill WotC faster is objectively a good thing.

If this change had been made for a game-related reason, it would still be stupid, but not obnoxious.  But the reason behind this change is what makes it over-the-top obnoxious and vile.  And we don't have to guess at the reason; they've told us...

Also, the people at WotC identify with evil... identify themselves with evil, but in a "good" way.  I guarantee that if you asked the average employee of WotC, they would be proud of rejecting Judeo-Christian norms and values.  These kinds of leftist danger-hairs are up front about their antipathy to Christian morality (lesbians and gays, abortion, trans grooming of kids, etc.).  On that quality alone, they would tend to view "evil" races as just misunderstood or with a valid culture (from alternate points of view), because that's how they place themselves into Western culture.  Any kind of absolute judgment is anathema to them (just like many of the leftists that post here).  So any kind of absolute is wrong when applied to orcs, or any other intelligent creature.

Totally agree with the first bit. It's a helpful reduction to absurdity. And it shows no sign of abating. Let them have that game.

But these 'leftists' are not on the left in my view. They have long since slipped into a fever dream, tilting at windmills and slaying imaginary dragons. Whilst largely ignoring matters of genuine political importance, like the growing gulf between the rich in the poor, rampant drug prices, pollution, etc. It's a kind of everyday madness.

So yeah, we agree on this issue. You presumably on to the right and me on the left. And we both love good games.

Quote from: ForgottenF on February 11, 2025, 12:09:24 PMPersonally I think you can keep orcs as villains and still make them more interesting, but you do have to give them more complicated motivations than just a love of violence.

No, you don't have to give them more motivation than love of violence. That choice is up to the DM. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the most horrifying.

Quote from: ForgottenF on February 11, 2025, 12:09:24 PMThat's actually an interesting question. What do WOTC's current customers want from orcs?

I don't think there are reliable stats, but based on what I see around the internet, I'd guess that what the majority of role-players under around 40 years old expect is a slightly modified version of the Warcraft orc. A big, muscly noble-savage type with a vaguely shamanistic vibe and an oversized weapon. The males are an avatar for those that want to play a dumb meathead and the females are a fantasy for those with a muscle-mommy fetish. 

If so, then the direction 2024 D&D is taking them in is probably pleasing neither the grognards nor the core 5e audience. I'd be curious what approach Tales of the Valiant takes with them. Kobold Press seems to have its finger on the pulse of current day RPG trends.