MMA that's where neanderthals are hiding.

Maybe it's better to say... Every RPG with a heavy combat focus should have an opponent type that PC's can kill without feeling any kind of remorse or worrying about moral quandries.

Whether that's Orcs, Zombies, Demons, Automatons, Nazis or Evil cultists.

Nazis and Evil Cultists get into the grey area, but if they're presented as unrepentant dedicated to the cause (Particularly in the case of Cultists dedicated to Demons and other Evil Gods) then PC's can have a gay ole time cutting them down and not worrying about the morality of the situation.

Quote from: jhkim on September 24, 2023, 05:27:22 PM

Quote from: SHARK on September 24, 2023, 01:14:56 PM
What are your thoughts on the program by Macris?

I certainly think that he puts the nails down in all the handwringing Woke crybabies that REEE about "No, races shouldn't be EVIL!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmEFXSjEpcY

I think phrasing it as a mandate ("campaigns should have evil races") is a dumb overreach, which goes against a lots of things other than wokeness. Conan doesn't have evil races. Neither does 7th Sea, Ars Magica, and many other settings. There are lots of great fantasy stories and lots of great fantasy RPGs that don't have innately evil races.


Further, his justification for this is stretching. He talks a bunch about Neanderthals, even suggesting that evil fantasy races all represent Neanderthals - and that competing biology represents some sort of moral mandate. I disagree. Modern humans do not have some sort of moral mandate to behave like our prehistoric ancestors. That's not a woke ideal - that's a message of Judaism, Christianity, and many other established religions, among others.

If he or anyone wants to make an RPG that is an atheist morality tale where orcs represent Neanderthals and all orcs should be wiped out, that's fine. It's just a game. But it's not how all fantasy games should be. Fantasy campaigns should be different from each other, and represent different themes.

I would agree with you. I think it is more interesting to have each race (let's put aside questions about individual monsters) hold its own motivations and goals, many of which conflict and result inevitably in war, etc. Make the Elves arrogant and decadent, and the Orcs young, brash, and violent barbarians with no regard for civilized virtues. I like my fantasy worlds to be full of shades of gray (with some darker than others), so as to force the players to think and make choices, and even be surprised now and again. Creating "all inherently evil" races creates a paradigm where there are "inherently good" races which is even more boring. I like celestials to be arrogant and uncaring, and their definition of "good" not having any room for what happens to lesser races; and the demons to be arrogant and so committed to their own free will that they are equally indifferent to the results of their cruelty and ambitions.

QuoteMaybe it's better to say... Every RPG with a heavy combat focus should have an opponent type that PC's can kill without feeling any kind of remorse or worrying about moral quandries.

Nah I disagree. You can have something more akin to real life warfare either medieval or modern, fighting perfectly normal human beings.
Like in real war. Still combat heavy, but yeah you are shooting Ahmed the Kebab Maker called by Shah Rashid el Bashir el Fitzwilliam to defend his oil platform. Sorry.

QuoteI would agree with you. I think it is more interesting to have each race (let's put aside questions about individual monsters) hold its own motivations and goals, many of which conflict and result inevitably in war, etc. Make the Elves arrogant and decadent, and the Orcs young, brash, and violent barbarians with no regard for civilized virtues. I like my fantasy worlds to be full of shades of gray (with some darker than others), so as to force the players to think and make choices, and even be surprised now and again. Creating "all inherently evil" races creates a paradigm where there are "inherently good" races which is even more boring. I like celestials to be arrogant and uncaring, and their definition of "good" not having any room for what happens to lesser races; and the demons to be arrogant and so committed to their own free will that they are equally indifferent to the results of their cruelty and ambitions.

TBH I'd note that I think there were no always-Lawful, always-Chaotic or always-Good races. And you could play Evil and Chaotic PCs which make whole need for full races of baddies, even more weird. Like make halflings Good-always, literally impossible of Evil, and let my assasins slaughter entire villages, and we're fine. Cosmic War does not take hostages.

I've always found it notable in a great deal of mythology there is almost always evil species, creatures and races.

This is extra notable when you consider this is likely not merely a projection of xenophobia or simply fear of the other. Such as in the case of the Scandinavian languages and the subtle degrees of words they used for Foreignness.

Utlänning being foreigner

Främling being stranger

Raman being  total outsider.

Varelse being utter alien, or hostile.

Within these classification I find it amusing the latter two, which is where pig orks and evil creatures would dwell, I find all valid, but I like this breakdown of the four for degrees of hostile.

Okay, I read most of this, but my 2 cents.

I tend to have "mostly evil" races.  I'm fine with it.  Sure, there can be an exception, but the players may go a whole campaign and unless I decide to make a story about "the good kobold" who would have to come from an extraordinary set of circumstances, they will never see one.   Though, I also have no problem with someone else having a campaign world where kolbolds are portrayed differently (I'm running a Greyhawk campaign).

So, for example, a few months back I ran a scenario where some kobolds relocated to an abandoned mine located near a rural farming community.  Some local kids wandered too close to the mine and the kobolds... well, they killed and ate the kids.  The farmers sent some people out looking for the kids and those people were killed too.  The farmers realized they needed help, put up a notice and the players came to town...

They cleared out the mine.  They found the remains of the kids.  There were kobolds, a chieftain, some trained boars, even a few Urds (the winged kobolds), and some eggs and young.  One of my players, playing a Chaotic Good ranger asked me, "Do you have any problem if I kill the young and destroy the eggs."  He's a ranger.  "Go for it," I said.  No alignment challenge.  There was a Lawful Good fighter in the party, his player didn't care for the action, but he/the player stood aside.  The ranger's job is to protect the people.  He went in and did it with the party Thief.  I didn't describe it graphically. 

Yeah, from a human perspective, those Kobolds are 'evil'.  Though from the Kobolds perspective, maybe they are trying to survive.  But I'm not playing Philosophy 101.   This sort of thing makes it interesting, as far as I'm concerned. 

Quote from: Socratic-DM on November 18, 2023, 05:19:05 PM
I've always found it notable in a great deal of mythology there is almost always evil species, creatures and races.

This is extra notable when you consider this is likely not merely a projection of xenophobia or simply fear of the other. Such as in the case of the Scandinavian languages and the subtle degrees of words they used for Foreignness.

Utlänning being foreigner

Främling being stranger

Raman being  total outsider.

Varelse being utter alien, or hostile.

I believe this breakdown is from the sci-fi novel Ender's Game, rather than from historical usage in old Swedish.

https://enderverse.fandom.com/wiki/Hierarchy_of_Foreignness

Nothing wrong with using this in a game, or having evil species in one's game world. I don't think it's necessary to be like history or mythology, though.

Since ancient Scandinavians didn't actually encountered any evil alien species, I'd say the breakdown is expressing xenophobia - like how Greeks used "barbarian" to refer to non-Greeks. And even in Norse mythology, there were giants and dwarfs who were opposed to the Norse gods, but in many stories, they didn't come across as evil. In general, the pre-Christian Norse weren't big on moral superiority - they accepted fighting other people without considering them evil. So, for example, there was a giant who built the wall around Asgard as a bargain and the gods tried to cheat him.

Quote from: jhkim on November 20, 2023, 01:49:21 PM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on November 18, 2023, 05:19:05 PM
I've always found it notable in a great deal of mythology there is almost always evil species, creatures and races.

This is extra notable when you consider this is likely not merely a projection of xenophobia or simply fear of the other. Such as in the case of the Scandinavian languages and the subtle degrees of words they used for Foreignness.

Utlänning being foreigner

Främling being stranger

Raman being  total outsider.

Varelse being utter alien, or hostile.

I believe this breakdown is from the sci-fi novel Ender's Game, rather than from historical usage in old Swedish.

https://enderverse.fandom.com/wiki/Hierarchy_of_Foreignness

Nothing wrong with using this in a game, or having evil species in one's game world. I don't think it's necessary to be like history or mythology, though.

Since ancient Scandinavians didn't actually encountered any evil alien species, I'd say the breakdown is expressing xenophobia - like how Greeks used "barbarian" to refer to non-Greeks. And even in Norse mythology, there were giants and dwarfs who were opposed to the Norse gods, but in many stories, they didn't come across as evil. In general, the pre-Christian Norse weren't big on moral superiority - they accepted fighting other people without considering them evil. So, for example, there was a giant who built the wall around Asgard as a bargain and the gods tried to cheat him.

Yes I am indeed aware of Orson Scott Card having used the terminology, but what I said applies regardless, the fact they had degrees of it suggests a lot, at least it suggests there was people worth or not worth fighting, than merely an us vs them thing, and indeed if their legends and myths are to be believed they did encounter "aliens"  of the supernatural and terrestrial variety.

But Orson Scott Card used it for a reason, it wasn't merely something he invented.

I also like it because I think it's a good replacement for  alignment.

Quote from: jhkim on November 20, 2023, 01:49:21 PM
So, for example, there was a giant who built the wall around Asgard as a bargain and the gods tried to cheat him.

This as far from the actual plot and meaning of the myth of the giant and Svadilfari that I honestly wonder if you can actually read. 

Nah, you are just twisting things, hoping the people reading you don't know enough to notice your distortions.

And before you respond, decide whether you want to debate this point with someone who has the Prose Edda sitting right here next to him... in the original Old Icelandic (which I studied in while in grad school)...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on November 20, 2023, 10:23:54 PM

Quote from: jhkim on November 20, 2023, 01:49:21 PM
So, for example, there was a giant who built the wall around Asgard as a bargain and the gods tried to cheat him.

This as far from the actual plot and meaning of the myth of the giant and Svadilfari that I honestly wonder if you can actually read. 

Nah, you are just twisting things, hoping the people reading you don't know enough to notice your distortions.

And before you respond, decide whether you want to debate this point with someone who has the Prose Edda sitting right here next to him... in the original Old Icelandic (which I studied in while in grad school)...

My dad works at Nintendo much?

Not wanting to be apart of whatever this debate is, what is the real version or spin on the story might I ask?

Quote from: Eirikrautha on November 20, 2023, 10:23:54 PM

Quote from: jhkim on November 20, 2023, 01:49:21 PM
So, for example, there was a giant who built the wall around Asgard as a bargain and the gods tried to cheat him.

This as far from the actual plot and meaning of the myth of the giant and Svadilfari that I honestly wonder if you can actually read. 

Nah, you are just twisting things, hoping the people reading you don't know enough to notice your distortions.

And before you respond, decide whether you want to debate this point with someone who has the Prose Edda sitting right here next to him... in the original Old Icelandic (which I studied in while in grad school)...

It was an off-the-cuff reference from vague memory, not intended as a description of the full myth. I understand the builder was trying to hustle the gods, knowing that they would underestimate his building ability -- but the gods still bargained with him and he tried to deliver exactly what he promised, only failing because Loki interfered with him.

In retrospect, it being a hustle does make it a bad example. If you want to describe the myth more fully, I'll certainly accept correction.

The larger point is that the giants are not portrayed as purely evil. The Asgardian gods will bargain with giants, engage in contests and fellowship with giants, and sometimes intermarry with them. Thor has a son Magni with the giant Járnsaxa. At times, they will go and visit with giants, staying in giant houses -- and conversely, giants may be hosted at Asgard. The giants as a whole are the enemy, but they are not evil demons.

   Historically the evil race was who ever you opposed culturally/racially/politically... a foreign race/nation that often had practices you would find horrific (such as human and child sacrifices) and day to day practices that would not go over well in your society.  Evil is from a perspective...even the Bible calls for killing certain people (caanites come to mind as a considered an evil race the bible calls to genocide) to the last man/woman/child.   So I think in a fantasy game having an evil race/culture is super easy and if players are conflicted about waging absolute genocide on them (goblin slayer style where he clubs the goblin kids) they can simply choose to show mercy, work a deal, do as they please. 

QuoteHistorically the evil race was who ever you opposed culturally/racially/politically... a foreign race/nation that often had practices you would find horrific (such as human and child sacrifices) and day to day practices that would not go over well in your society.  Evil is from a perspective...even the Bible calls for killing certain people (caanites come to mind as a considered an evil race the bible calls to genocide) to the last man/woman/child.   So I think in a fantasy game having an evil race/culture is super easy and if players are conflicted about waging absolute genocide on them (goblin slayer style where he clubs the goblin kids) they can simply choose to show mercy, work a deal, do as they please.

The distinction however lies in nature vs nurture one. Israelites did not kill all Caananites, Gibeonites are certainly not shown as evil monsters. (Not even mention that Hebrew is Caananite language).

Evil races like orcs do not exist to make some political statement or to be analogues of some real world race.  They were invented in fantasy literature to serve a specific, practical purpose.  They were there to give the heroes enemies that they could kill witho0ut them or the audience having to feel bad about it.  They serve the same purpose in heroic fantasy rpgs.  They are an enemy that the PCs can kill without bringing up a lot of moral quandries.  They aren't required for a fantasy setting but they do serve a practical purpose.

A lot of this stuff about nature vs nurture misses something obvious.  Orcs are not an analogue for a human culture.  They are a fantasy race in a fantasy setting.  All of this stuff about nature vs nurture or the dominant orc culture may well not even apply at all.  For example, the orcs in LotR did not arise naturally and did not have an orc culture that developed naturally.  They were made by the Dark Lord to be his soldiers.  They were purpose built to be brutal killers and that's just what they are.  In a fantasy setting, it's common for races to be made by gods or other powerful entities in their own image or to serve their purposes.  If, in this setting, the orcs were created by a malevolent god or entity to be its foot soldiers to conquer or destroy the world, it makes perfect sense that they what they were made to be.   

I've run campaigns with and without evil races.  What I want is a base game that has the idea of them in there, without apology.  It needs to use words like "savage", "irredeemable", and "regrettably this race can never share the land with humans".

It's super easy to take that stuff out if you don't like it, but knowing where and with what measure to put it in in the first place?  Extremely tough.

Similarly, paladins need to be built from the ground up as lawful good.  Super easy to take that restriction away if you don't like it.