Checking the Lord of the Rings Wiki (which I have difficulty imagining would blatantly misrepresent Tolkien, considering the number of fanboys there):

Quote from: LotR WikiIt is interesting to note that to an extent, Tolkien did not regard Orcs as evil in their own right, but only as tools of Morgoth and Sauron.

-Frank

Quote from: Imperator;478302The more I think about the subject, the more I have troubles thinking of the Orcs (as tipically portraited in LotR or D&D and the like) as "evil," or at least more evil than humans. After all, what they do, we have done.

Maybe that is the problem with absolute evil, that we cannot imagine it (because it doesn't exist). After all, evil monsters do things that humans have done, also, as part of their cultures.
.

I think someone earlier in this thread provided some interesting examples of how a race of creatures could be evil by lacking qualities like empathy. I think the idea was what if things we consider mutations that are part of serious mental illnesses were the dominant trait. I guess it depends on whether free-will is important to your definition of good and evil and whether such a feature eliminates free-will.

For interest and to dsave you all searching on Wikipedia  - Tolkien and Orcs

The origin of OrcsThe origin of Orcs is an open question. In Tolkien's writings, evil is not capable of independent creation, making it unlikely that the Vala Morgoth, who was the first to produce them, could create them from nothing.

Unlike the orc-néas ('orc-corpses') of Beowulf, no female Orcs are ever mentioned by Tolkien in any publication. However, in the published Silmarillion it is stated that Orcs "had life and multiplied after the manner of the Children of Ilúvatar", implying that there are; in The Hobbit the Orc Bolg is the son of one Azog, while Gollum is described as having eaten a young goblin-imp (Goblins being the same as orcs) shortly before he first met Bilbo (which seems to be alluded to in The Lord of the Rings movie when Gollum goes on (with himself) about how unpleasant-tasting orcs are and that sweet hobbit meat would suit Shelob better).

In an unpublished letter, written in 1963 to a Mrs. Munsby (and auctioned in 2002 at Sotheby's), Tolkien confirmed that female Orcs did exist. He wrote:

There must have been orc-women. But in stories that seldom if ever see the Orcs except as soldiers of armies in the service of the evil lords we naturally would not learn much about their lives. Not much was known.[21]

Compare this with Tolkien's more thorough explanation of the existence of Dwarf-women, given in the Appendix. Dwarf-women seldom leave their underground cities, and are not encountered as frontline soldiers in war, but that does not mean they do not exist.

[edit] Made from the earthAccording to the oldest "theory" proposed by J.R.R. Tolkien (found in The Fall of Gondolin, from The Book of Lost Tales, circa 1917 — the first tale of Middle-earth to be written in full), Orcs were made of stone and slime through the sorcery of Morgoth ("bred from the heats and slimes of the earth" — The Book of Lost Tales, Vol. 2).

[edit] East Elves (Avari)The Silmarillion contains a suggestion that Orcs are descended from East Elves captured by Melkor, their minds and bodies distorted and corrupted. There is even evidence of the immortality, or otherwise long life of Orcs. They certainly did live for at the very least hundreds of years, since Bolg was the son of Azog and his death occurred over 140 years after the death of his father. This second theory is consistent with a statement made in the "Myths Transformed" essay of Morgoth's Ring that the orcs had short lifespans in relation to the Númenóreans.

Because this is the explanation presented in the published Silmarillion, it is the version presented by Peter Jackson's live-action film adaptation of the book series.[citation needed]

[edit] Fallen MaiarThere are hints in the History of Middle-earth series of books, (especially in Morgoth's Ring in the section "Myths Transformed"), that some Orc leaders, such as the First Age's Boldog, or the Great Goblin encountered by Bilbo and the Dwarves, may in fact have been fallen Maiar which had taken Orc form:

Some of these things may have been delusions and phantoms but some were no doubt shapes taken by the servants of Melkor, mocking and degrading the very forms of the children. For Melkor had in his service great numbers of Maiar, who had the power, as their Master, of taking visible and tangible shape in Arda.[22]

Boldog (...) is a name that occurs many times in the tales of the War. But it is possible that Boldog was not a personal name, and either a title, or else the name of a kind of creature: the Orc-formed Maiar, only less formidable than the Balrogs [23]

Melkor had corrupted many spirits — some great as Sauron, or less as Balrogs. The least could have been primitive Orcs.[24]

[edit] Corrupted MenWhile Tolkien at some point saw all Orcs as descended from the original corrupted and tortured Elves, later comments of his indicate, according to Christopher Tolkien in Morgoth's Ring ("Myths Transformed, text X"), that he began to feel uncomfortable with this theory. At about the same time he removed the references to the Thrall-Ñoldorin, he also began searching for a new origin for the Orcs. It seems Tolkien wanted to change the origin of the Orcs to make them corrupted and twisted humans. He says of this human origin view of the Orcs :

This view of the origin of the Orcs thus meets with difficulties of chronology. But though Men may take comfort in this, the theory remains nonetheless the most probable. It accords with all that is known of Melkor, and of the nature and behaviour of Orcs - and of Men. Melkor was impotent to produce any living thing, but skilled in the corruption of things that did not proceed from himself, if he could dominate them.[25]

Also in Unfinished Tales there is a passage about the Drúedain which says :

To the unfriendly who, not knowing them well, declared that Morgoth must have bred the Orcs from such a stock the Eldar answered: 'Doubtless Morgoth, since he can make no living thing, bred Orcs from various kinds of Men, but the Drúedain must have escaped his shadow; for their laughter and the laughter of Orcs are as different as the light of Aman from the darkness of Angband.' But some thought, nonetheless, that there had been a remote kinship, which accounted for their special enmity. Orcs and Drûgs each regarded the other as renegades.[26]

Tolkien would have had to change the cosmology and prehistory of Arda, for the awakening of men to happen earlier, for there to have been men for Morgoth or Sauron to corrupt. He did not live long enough to complete this task however.

[edit] Some cross-bred with MenTolkien also "suggested" that Men were cross-bred with Orcs under Morgoth's lieutenant, Sauron (and possibly under Morgoth himself). The Uruk-hai are speculated to be created in this way. The process was later repeated during the War of the Ring by Saruman, enabling him to make his own hybrids.

There is no doubt that long afterwards, in the Third Age, Saruman rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: the interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs large and cunning, and Orc-men treacherous and vile.[27]

[edit] Sentient beastsYet another of Tolkien's theories proposes that Orcs may have begun as animals of vaguely humanoid shapes, empowered by the will of the Dark Lord (first Morgoth, later Sauron):

The Orcs were beasts of humanized shape [...].[28]

It is certain all Orcs were dependent on the Dark Lord in various ways: after their leader was defeated, the Orcs were confused and dismayed, and easily scattered by their enemies. In the millennia after Morgoth's defeat and banishment from Arda, they were without a leader, and degenerated to small, quarrelsome tribes hiding in the Misty Mountains. Only when Sauron returned to power did they begin to reclaim some of their old power. The same happened after Sauron's defeat by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men: only when Sauron returned as the Necromancer of Mirkwood did the Orcs become a real danger for Middle-earth again.

Quote from: John Morrow;478276Perhaps not, but you stated something as fact which a few minutes with Google showed me wasn't fact.  Yet another example of the fact that political quips that sound too good to be true (I was all Nixon's fault) usually are.

Next you'll be telling me Nixon didn't really extend LBJ's "school busing" policy! Or work to undermine LBJ's peace efforts & keep the Vietnam War going until after he'd been elected!

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;478294The best thing to come out of this thread is the idea of Nixon-faced orcs.

One question, can anyone cite where Tolkien says orcs were redeemable and/or that they became farmers after the events of Lord of the Rings?

I'm pretty sure he actually said they kinda faded away and became the nasty goblins of nursery tales.

Just so we can close the door on the misapplication of Atonement, bolded mine.

Quote from: d20SRDAtonement
Abjuration
Level: Clr 5, Drd 5
Components: V, S, M, F, DF, XP
Casting Time: 1 hour
Range: Touch
Target: Living creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: Yes

This spell removes the burden of evil acts or misdeeds from the subject. The creature seeking atonement must be truly repentant and desirous of setting right its misdeeds. If the atoning creature committed the evil act unwittingly or under some form of compulsion, atonement operates normally at no cost to you. However, in the case of a creature atoning for deliberate misdeeds and acts of a knowing and willful nature, you must intercede with your deity (requiring you to expend 500 XP) in order to expunge the subject's burden. Many casters first assign a subject of this sort a quest (see geas/quest) or similar penance to determine whether the creature is truly contrite before casting the atonement spell on its behalf.

Atonement may be cast for one of several purposes, depending on the version selected.

Reverse Magical Alignment Change
If a creature has had its alignment magically changed, atonement returns its alignment to its original status at no cost in experience points.

Restore Class
A paladin who has lost her class features due to committing an evil act may have her paladinhood restored to her by this spell.

Restore Cleric or Druid Spell Powers
A cleric or druid who has lost the ability to cast spells by incurring the anger of his or her deity may regain that ability by seeking atonement from another cleric of the same deity or another druid. If the transgression was intentional, the casting cleric loses 500 XP for his intercession. If the transgression was unintentional, he does not lose XP.

Redemption or Temptation
You may cast this spell upon a creature of an opposing alignment in order to offer it a chance to change its alignment to match yours. The prospective subject must be present for the entire casting process. Upon completion of the spell, the subject freely chooses whether it retains its original alignment or acquiesces to your offer and changes to your alignment. No duress, compulsion, or magical influence can force the subject to take advantage of the opportunity offered if it is unwilling to abandon its old alignment. This use of the spell does not work on outsiders or any creature incapable of changing its alignment naturally.

Though the spell description refers to evil acts, atonement can also be used on any creature that has performed acts against its alignment, whether those acts are evil, good, chaotic, or lawful.

Note: Normally, changing alignment is up to the player. This use of atonement simply offers a believable way for a character to change his or her alignment drastically, suddenly, and definitively.

Material Component
Burning incense.

Focus
In addition to your holy symbol or normal divine focus, you need a set of prayer beads (or other prayer device, such as a prayer wheel or prayer book) worth at least 500 gp.

XP Cost
When cast for the benefit of a creature whose guilt was the result of deliberate acts, the cost to you is 500 XP per casting (see above).

So, you can't get an orc to change its nature, unless it wants to. Which is pretty damn unlikely. Of course, the DM can make exceptions to this.

(Not to mention that this brings up the potential for having intelligent and indecisive creatures become ping-pong balls in a game of perpetual Atonement casting between two mid-level clerics or druids of opposing alignment.)

One more thing...

If you really want kinder, gentler orcs in your game, then I would suggest making them the exception and not the rule. Otherwise they are not significant as being a deviation from the norm.

I would consider the character of Gurgi from Lloyd Alexander's Chronicles of Prydain to be either an orc or a half-orc that was of this nature.

Quote from: FrankTrollman;478269As for Orcs being irredeemably evil, that's just factually wrong. Over and above whatever diplomancy rules exist in whatever edition you're playing with, the spell atonement has existed since forever. It converts a humanoid from any alignment to any alignment. Period. Orcs can be redeemed for full value: it's in the rules.

Now if you're playing 3rd edition...

I'm playing Middle Earth.  WoC's jurisdiction ends somewhere outside my campaign, I'm pretty sure.  Moreover, my campaign setting, and it's cosmological truths are ultimately up to me as a GM - regardless of the guy I buy my books from.

Same is true for Paragrin.  It would be inane for me to quote WoC rules to him in order to validate an argument I was making about how alignment works in his campaign.  That's because it is HIS campaign.  The schmucks churning out splat book after splat book over at WoC are for the most part hack writers, not Theologians.  So quoting them as authority on whether or not orcs are redeemable in anyone's campaign is like quoting Shadowrun writers in an argument about whether a cloned human has a soul.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;478285That sounds like something off a desk calendar.

This is not a response to the point.

Quote from: J Arcane;478324This is not a response to the point.

He's not going to respond to the point, because you're right.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;478287That's fucking weird. Morrow, Krueger, you guys seem real desperate to make it OK to kill baby orcs to avoid feeling a dirty conscience, throwing out idea after idea as each one is demolished in turn.

Most of the time I've ran D&D, orcs weren't irredeemably evil, but in some settings they were.  It just depends on the cosmology of that particular setting.  Sometimes orcs reproduce and have young, sometimes they are magic fungus, sometimes they are created by wizards.

I never said the PCs should avoid having a dirty conscience, what the conscience of a character feels is where the roleplaying comes in.  There's a difference between killing being easy and killing being necessary, or justified.  That's what makes it a hard choice, even a horrible one.

This idea of paladins crushing the cute little green skulls of baby orcs under their bootheels while in the background plays "Onward Christian Soldiers" is in your head, man.

Quote from: CRKrueger;478327Most of the time I've ran D&D, orcs weren't irredeemably evil, but in some settings they were.  It just depends on the cosmology of that particular setting.  Sometimes orcs reproduce and have young, sometimes they are magic fungus, sometimes they are created by wizards.

I never said the PCs should avoid having a dirty conscience, what the conscience of a character feels is where the roleplaying comes in.  There's a difference between killing being easy and killing being necessary, or justified.  That's what makes it a hard choice, even a horrible one.

This idea of paladins crushing the cute little skulls of baby orcs under their bootheels while in the background plays "Onward Christian Soldiers" is in your head, man.

I do like the idea though of a bunch of Holy Warriors being given an orc baby to raise and treat like a Squire (Half orcs in AD&D mature faster than Humans so I assume Orcs mature faster still) then the day they all graduate from Holy Warrior boot camp the first thing they have to do is kill their squires.
Now that woudl throw up an interesting moral dilema.

Quote from: FrankTrollman;478224The fucking question was "If I use racist stereotypes of this group, is that racist?" And the answer is, obviously, Yes.

LOL Nice twisting of the original question to fit your answer, Frank.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;478227

Quote from: austinjimm;478225Good/Evil, absolute or otherwise, are whatever your DM says it is at any given time of day.

That is both retarded and empirically untrue.

I disagree. It goes to the core of the problem IMO: that whatever evil and good are is something determined by the cosmology of the campaign, a campaign which may be considering orcs as some other culture and projecting all sorts of weird ideas on the part of the DM onto them, or may be considering them as representative of something else, like concepts of bestiality or barbarism, or absolutes of this or that, or may even not consider them allegorical in nature at all... like a certain individual writing a huge book we all know a few decades ago did.

And that gets lesson-givers all worked up. Because there's no lesson-giving to do when you don't know the particulars of a campaign. It's just hot hair, retarded misreadings and projections, kind of like Frank's doing on this thread. Or like he says ... it's a basic failure of logic, so you'd better camouflage it by refuting this simple truth of RPGs, because then, there's no argument to have about words on paper. It really depends how anyone interprets them. And that gets these fuckers who want to tell us what to play and what to think real angry. It's amusing.

Quote from: CRKrueger;478327This idea of paladins crushing the cute little green skulls of baby orcs under their bootheels while in the background plays "Onward Christian Soldiers" is in your head, man.

Personally I've never encountered this with any paladins. If anything most people I know play paladins as super just and noble. They end up keeping the party from doing things like this or from killing prisoners for convenience sake.

I also think most players I know don't equate the D&D gods or alignment system with christianity in any way.