Quote from: Theory of Games on Today at 02:25:29 PMYeah. No more "monsters". Now we must refer to them as "Our Friends, The Sophons".

I still blame Do'Urden. Everybody wanted to be a Drow Ranger or a Drow Monk. Remember that?!? You had everybody clamoring to play a RACE that was infamous for being bloodthirsty cultists.

That was the birth of "But what is a monster really?" And where is it all going?

The original AD&D had half-orcs as a core PC race. And Gygax added drow as a PC race in Unearthed Arcana years before the first Drizzt book was published.

AD&D didn't assume that the PCs were always shiny good guys. It was understood that the PCs might be neutral or evil-aligned mercenaries trying to loot and collect as much gold as they could. Paladins were powerful, but ever since the start they had the reputation of being a pain in the ass compared to normal adventurers. Gygax wanted to make sure that monsters and/or evil didn't take over as the default for PCs, but he wanted it to be an option.

That's consistent with the wargaming roots - sometimes you play the good guys, sometimes you play the bad guys, and sometimes there are no good or bad guys.

Quote from: Theory of Games on Today at 02:25:29 PMYeah. No more "monsters". Now we must refer to them as "Our Friends, The Sophons".

I still blame Do'Urden. Everybody wanted to be a Drow Ranger or a Drow Monk. Remember that?!? You had everybody clamoring to play a RACE that was infamous for being bloodthirsty cultists.

That was the birth of "But what is a monster really?" And where is it all going?

DRAGONS as a playable character class, ladies and gentlemen. Then we can have conversations about dragons defending their dungeon-homes from the oppression of human imperialism.

While AD&D specifically says it's a bad idea:

Quote from: AD&D Dungeon Masters GuideA gold dragon can assume human shape, so that is a common choice for monster characters. If alignment is stressed, this might discourage the would-be gold dragon. If it is also pointed out that he or she must begin at the lowest possible value, and only time and the accumulation and retention of great masses of wealth will allow any increase in level (age), the idea should be properly squelched. If even that fails, point out that the natural bent of dragons is certainly for their own kind — if not absolute solitude — so what part could a solitary dragon play in a group participation game made up of non-dragons? Dragon non-player characters, yes! As player characters, not likely at all."

OD&D is the opposite:

Quote from:  Men and Magic"There is no reason that players cannot be allowed to play as virtually anything, provided they begin relatively weak and work up to the top, i.e., a player wishing to be a Dragon would have to begin as, let us say, a "young" one and progress upwards in the usual manner, steps being predetermined by the campaign referee."

Both ideas are branches of D&D.