Quote from: beejazz;478893I'm just asking a specific reason for the appeal of the idea.

Even if I prefer shades of gray in my games I think I can answer this. The appeal is to have hordes of decently smart enemies working as a team and who aren't prone to betray their evil master.

Quote from: Sigmund;478858We're having a discussion about it brother. It's what we do here. You know the drill... if ya don't like the discussion, don't read the thread.

You have been here long enough to know how much I enjoy discussion.  What I have been lately getting quite sick of is the sloppy bullshit that people are starting to think passes for arguments.  

"Ha ha!  Look at this asshole!  He doesn't think slaughtering by the thousands is fun!  What an asshole!  And while we are at it, I am going to completely meltdown because some random dude on the internet doesn't approve of my gaming style!"

I mean, fuck.  Even on bad days, discussion around here used to be about three orders of magnitude better than that.

Quote from: boulet;478903Even if I prefer shades of gray in my games I think I can answer this. The appeal is to have hordes of decently smart enemies working as a team and who aren't prone to betray their evil master.

But isn't 'betrayal' part of 'evil'?

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;478561Why stop at nuanced orcs? Lets have some LG reformed mind flayers.

Will they sparkle in the sunlight?

Quote from: StormBringer;478904"Ha ha!  Look at this asshole!  He doesn't think slaughtering by the thousands is fun!

Who's using sloppy bullshit arguments now?  That would be you.  That's not what the OP said, and quite clearly from a detailed post you're deliberately not responding to, it's not what I objected to.

Quote from: StormBringer;478904I am going to completely meltdown because some random dude on the internet doesn't approve of my gaming style!"

The only person having a meltdown is you.

Quote from: StormBringer;478904I mean, fuck. Even on bad days, discussion around here used to be about three orders of magnitude better than that.

You're the one not discussing in detail the actual words of the OP, you're reacting on some form of political basis I would guess, thinking that just because the idiot we're responding to is espousing leftist ideology then therefore we must be Fox and Friends.  *Fuck* you use to have better discrimination than that.  

Just make a race of Morrow Orcs in your campaign and slaughter them to the last toddler, you'll feel better.

QuoteWhy stop at nuanced orcs? Lets have some LG reformed mind flayers.

In my idea for a Chaos/Order-based setting, Mind Flayers were actually the "good" guys. The dieties and followers of Order sought to bring PERFECT order to the Universe, which meant, essential, utter stagnation. No change of anything, ever - or in modern cosmological terms essentially the heat-death of the universe. The forces of Chaos understood that change, even erratic or something destructive change, was what kept the universe "alive". Of course, the higher level concepts of the Gods were way beyond the ken of "ground-level" PCs and such. The initial idea was to have them working for the side of Order because, naturally, they appear "good" on the small scale, but as more and more of the actual working of the Gods becomes apparent, they would likely switch sides and start fighting for Chaos.

Note, there is no Good on Evil in the mix - and I like it that way. I think it is more reflective of a) how the world works anyway and b) less artificial than standard alignment issues.

The OP seems to be saying that if we play this scenario, we are douchebags.

Yet, one could point out that he illustrates the scenario in wargames and these sort of games as "side A vs side B" and even notes that we don't know why they are fighting.

If you took time to drum up a narrative, instead of just saying "those orcs have 55gp and are worth 100xp each - sic em" then you might find a little more fulfillment in the scenarios.

And don't try to be so Politically Correct as to neuter every scenario.  It's not always that way, and there are lots of cool rp opportunities to be had at the head of an invasion force.

Just so everyone knows:  I've never killed orc women and children.

Quote from: Blackhand;478912Just so everyone knows:  I've never killed orc women and children.

Of course not, they're worth so much more as labor slaves.

Quote from: Blackhand;478912Just so everyone knows:  I've never killed orc women and children.

Isn't it crazy that one would actually feel the need to put that kind of a disclaimer on a gaming board post?

Fuck. That's amazing, to me.

Quote from: Blackhand;478912Just so everyone knows:  I've never killed orc women and children.

Quote from: CRKrueger;478915Of course not, they're worth so much more as labor slaves.

And the pig-faced ones taste like bacon when cooked!  

Quote from: StormBringer;478905But isn't 'betrayal' part of 'evil'?

Absolutely. But this brand of orc isn't supposed to illustrate this aspect of evil.  

Personally I'd prefer to follow a model like Stalin's red army. It's not that the troops are evil, it's that they're so (rightfully) scared of their evil master (and the other troop that's going to shoot them in the back if they start retreating) that they follow evil orders.

Nobody has pointed out during all this that orc "women and children" only exist if you want them to?

In fact, Warhammer got rid of such moral ambiguity a long time ago - orcs don't have women or children, and in fact spring up fully grown and ready to fight directly from the ground.

Also, despite the fact that I've (in my head) killed thousands of samurai, knights, elves, dwarfs and various aliens - and pretty much every other sort of life form you can imagine - no one has mentioned the kind of morality tests that involves.  Surely some of you here have piles of skulls this high also.

But does it really involve morality?  Does it really reflect who you are as a person when you sacrifice a group of ashigaru so your mounted samurai can break the right flank and the slaughter of the enemy can TRULY commence?

Is there really a risk of potential dementia, not just desensitization to the idea of human violence that repeating these scenarios through wargames and roleplay can have on a person over the course of two or more decades?  

Roleplay is used as behaviour modification (brainwashing) in some camps, you know.  Or have you never heard that?

Why are we talking about orcs if this is the kind of conversation you want to have here?

Quote from: Benoist;478916Isn't it crazy that one would actually feel the need to put that kind of a disclaimer on a gaming board post?

I wonder what he would have said to see me draw my knife across the throat of a halfling girl not five days prior.  The only thing I cannot kill are gnoll pups.  They look too much like puppies.  I leave them live, that I don't forgo my boiled eggs.

Quote from: Vmerc@I could go into it.  To do it right would require a rather long post and maybe half an hour of my time to get right.  That is more time than I am willing to devote to a post that seems insincere.  Insincere, first, because you seem extremely intelligent and fully capable of having come across the reasons before, both in theological breakdowns, if not in posts prior in this thread, which you have not included in the dismissive post from which I quoted.

Theological breakdowns? Really? I need a theological breakdown to know why you would prefer to use irredeemable orcs in your game? Is it really that complicated?

Or is this one of those things you dare not say, but you'll get all pissy at me for actually addressing.

QuoteInsincere also because of this comment.


I know when I'm having a conversation and when I'm not.

As far as the "appeal" of the "idea" is concerned.  That's covered in Cosmology A vs B.

You didn't give a direct answer to the question. You just described some things. Not the same.

Also, how am I insincere, when you're stuffing "insult" and "slander" into quotes of my posts? Even when I'm just saying I addressed something upthread (something you've done an awful lot of yourself).

Quote from: bouletEven if I prefer shades of gray in my games I think I can answer this. The appeal is to have hordes of decently smart enemies working as a team and who aren't prone to betray their evil master.

This is what a specific good-faith answer looks like.

Quote from: StormBringerBut isn't 'betrayal' part of 'evil'?

Yes, but 'loyalty' is part of 'magical compulsion.' It'd be silly to create minions who would rise against you.

On that note, I also think its silly to stock your fort with minions not ready for combat. So at this point we get back to "baby orc facehuggers" and saying that baby orcs are also combatants / not helpless / not innocent. Or we go back to a totally irrational take your daughter to work day.

Quote from: bouletAbsolutely. But this brand of orc isn't supposed to illustrate this aspect of evil.  

Personally I'd prefer to follow a model like Stalin's red army. It's not that the troops are evil, it's that they're so (rightfully) scared of their evil master (and the other troop that's going to shoot them in the back if they start retreating) that they follow evil orders.

Sorta victimizes them, though, doesn't it? Played well, I think it could be cool, but I'm totally fine with orcs just plain having alien cultural values. So yes they're bullied from above and they bully those below them, but they also just plain don't see anything wrong with an elf sandwich every now and again.

Quote from: beejazz;478939Theological breakdowns? Really? I need a theological breakdown to know why you would prefer to use irredeemable orcs in your game?

This is why I think responding to most of what you say is not worth my time.  You type faster than you think or read.

I never claimed a preference.  My post is about Cosmology A and Cosmology B being equally valid.  Others have expressed preferences.  You don't pay any more attention to their reasons than you did to my premise.

You aren't conversing.  You're just typing.