Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1037034Western cultures tend to glorify violence.

As opposed to which other culture?

Quote from: S'mon;1037138As opposed to which other culture?

Quite.

If you engage in deep moral scrutiny of human entertainments, you are going to find most (if not all) entertainment is full of naughty bits.

We're a fucked up species. No wonder the orcs hate us.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1037034The D&D world is an incredibly warped and twisted one where it is socially acceptable to engage in mass murder simply because the targets are "evil."

That would be the most realistic part of D&D. Throughout history, it was always social acceptable to mass murder the enemies of your tribe / nation / gang because your leaders made it clear the enemies were evil and deserved destruction.

Quote from: Skarg;1037096Do D&D players actually tend to have moral qualms about killing humans, or is it just that orcs are a no-brained by comparison along with anything of the Evil alignment (including humans)?

It's not a complete binary - but yes, in my experience, players sometimes have moral qualms about killing humans - and more often so than they have qualms about killing orcs or other monstrous races. It's not that they won't kill humans, but they have a higher threshold to do so. Notably, they'll sometimes kill orcs just for being in the way, but if humans are in the way, they will more often try to negotiate first.

Quote from: jhkim;1037185It's not a complete binary - but yes, in my experience, players sometimes have moral qualms about killing humans - and more often so than they have qualms about killing orcs or other monstrous races. It's not that they won't kill humans, but they have a higher threshold to do so. Notably, they'll sometimes kill orcs just for being in the way, but if humans are in the way, they will more often try to negotiate first.

That's, in my book, an argument for ONLY using humans;).

This depends on which Orc we are talking about and more importantly, the quality of the bacon you get from Porcs.

Krimson's post got me thinking...what if orcs were delicious?

What if orcs were THE source of bacon in your campaign?

Quote from: Spinachcat;1037394Krimson's post got me thinking...what if orcs were delicious?

What if orcs were THE source of bacon in your campaign?

Well we know pigs are as smart as dogs, and eat them and feed them to our pets anyway.

What about stormtroopers?

If orcs are racist stand-ins, then what are stormtroopers supposed to be? Idealized representations of the white patriarchy?

Quote from: jeff37923;1037402What about stormtroopers?

If orcs are racist stand-ins, then what are stormtroopers supposed to be? Idealized representations of the white patriarchy?

That one is easy. They are space Nazis. I mean the word Stormtrooper even comes from Stoßtruppen.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1037123Why is this an 'All or Nothing' argument?  In my games, my players assault humans, orcs, giants, goblins, dragons and demons, should the need arise, mostly in self-defense.

Why did you attribute me with this quote?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2457[/ATTACH]

U think you mean this guy

https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?38878-If-you-have-fun-killing-orcs-in-your-game-you-re-a-racist-murderer/page15&p=1037034#post1037034

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1037111From a game play perspective, consider the "mental shorthand" aspects of deciphering what is going on based on nothing but GM verbal descriptions and adjudication.  I'm talking about game handling, not questions of psychology, as relevant as those might be.  You've got roughly these categories of things as possibilities:

A. "People" - might be good, might be bad, probably often somewhere in the mushy middle.  You need some information before you go after them, or even if you go after them, unless they attack you on sight, or at least dress up or carry a banner in a way that you can identify as an unambiguous enemy.

B. "Critters" - of various temperaments and tendencies, that don't necessarily have what we would call a "People" society, probably don't use tools, may not have much in the way of language, etc.  Mostly, prudence is your guide.

C. "Hazards" - might be biological, but there is not interaction beyond touch it and it burns, corrodes, etc., e.g. green slime.

D. "Anti-people" - have a society, use tools, use language, but for whatever reason are at a state of permanent war with "People".  Or at least there are no rules for a "truce" beyond staying out of each others' way.  

E. "Myth Critters" - often smart, speaking, sometimes even tool users, but notably different in physiology compared to "humanoids".  All the rules for "People" and "Anti-People" can apply here, except it's more complicated and situational, and their attitudes and motivations are often radically different, sometimes even bleeding into ...

F. "Alien Critters" - have their own kind of intelligence higher functions, but languages often incomprehensible, and tools often arcane.  From the perspective of trying to understand them, combine all of the worst traits of the previous categories.

That's a great taxonomy. I tried to fill it out with the standard monster types:

A. "People"

Fey Type
Giant Type (e.g. stone and storm)
Humanoid Type (e.g. elves)

B. "Critters"

Animal Type
Vermin Type

C. "Hazards"

Ooze Type
Plant Type

D. "Anti-people"  

Giant Type (e.g. the rest)
Humanoid Type (e.g. orcs)
Monstrous Humanoid Type

E. "Myth Critters"

Construct Type*
Dragon Type
Magical Beast Type

F. "Alien Critters"

Aberration Type
Elemental Type
Outsider Type
Undead Type


Some thoughts:

Constructs: Not sure where to put these.
Giants: The Stone and Storm giants seem like People (they can do good or evil, and you judge them accordingly) while the rest (Hill, Fire, etc.) seem like "big orcs" and you kill them or they kill you.
Humanoids: Both elves and orcs are humanoids, but it's clear they fall distinictly into People and Anti-people. I suppose someone's created a "People Orc" but that's not baseline.
Undead: I was tempted to split them between "smart" and "mindless" with the latter in the Hazard category. Not sure.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1037102The whole thing is basically allowing you to have hydras that use swords.

Sword hydras? SWORD HYDRAS!!!

Best thing to come out of this thread!

I picture a mechanical contruct that has 4 legs and 5 arms each swinging a long sword. The large version has 5 arms swinging great swords.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1037418Sword hydras? SWORD HYDRAS!!!

Best thing to come out of this thread!

I picture a mechanical contruct that has 4 legs and 5 arms each swinging a long sword. The large version has 5 arms swinging great swords.

Maybe it kinda works like that internet image from years ago with the hamster that has a knife taped to it, except instead of a hamster it's a hydra head, and instead of a knife it's swords, maybe tied down with a pink ribbon with a pretty bow. Alternately Tinker Gnomes could use Gnomish Duct Tape to tape a steak knife that once belonged to a Titan to a Giant Space Hamster. Yes, I would actually do this. Possibly both in the same encounter.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1036919Agreed.  I refuse to be bullied.

Same. And thats effectively what some of these SJWs are doing.