Quote from: Chris24601;1125979It should also be noted that in the earliest versions of the game, fighting monsters to gain treasure was almost seen as a fail state... if you could gain the treasure without the risk of a fight you were coming out significantly ahead.

Thus the rules for morale and reaction. It's in later editions like 3rd where encounters become a sort of sport or a puzzle and avoiding a fight or finding a non-violent solution becomes a less frequent thing.

Quote from: Chris24601;1125979Hi! I'm the outlier to prove the rule; I love stun settings and non-lethal options.

The group I played Rifts with got really annoyed because a properly played Ley Line Walker is more ridiculous than a Glitterboy at everything except blowing things up and I played my character as a normal human being who generally likes to avoid violence or killing people. My kill count at the end of the campaign was three; all in immediate self-defense and creatures that my spells couldn't typically stop. Most of the party had kill counts in the many dozens.

The issue was I also racked up several times more captures than entire party killed put together, because spells like Magic Net are fight enders without having to punch through armor (and such non-lethal spells make perfect sense for a caster who's primary class trick is being able to teleport a hundred miles down a ley line before the net wears off).

And while I was Unprincipled (out for himself, but not a sociopath) I often ended up being the voice of morality for the Principled and Scrupulous PCs (who would have had zero issues cutting every one of them down in the heat of battle) by the simple expedient of "you can't just execute helpless prisoners."

Thus, the party's biggest hassle was that my basic "lets try not to kill anyone unless we have to" morality meant we invariably ended up with a train of prisoners we had to feed and transport to someplace justice could be administered (being unprincipled, I was fine with just taking their weapons and armor, eliminating the threat and profiting us, and letting them go... but those Principled and Scrupulous types want their justice served).

Anyway, I often play spellcasters in fantasy settings in a similar vein. The main reason in real life that many object to firearms is a fear of becoming a killer. Soldiers have to be trained to dehumanize their enemies in order to do it. Most people having to do so without such training (and sometimes even with it) suffer trauma from having to do so.

Give an ordinary human a device (magic) that can, at your option, either kill or reliably disable an attacker without killing them and I'd wager most will use the non-lethal option almost every time.

You want the orc raider stopped because they are threatening you or others; killing it is just the only viable option for most people to make that happen. Unless you're a wizard. Then you can put them into an enchanted slumber or web them up or charm them or force them to do community service polymorphed into a mule.

A wizard who resorts to just fireballing his enemies (barring some exceptions like mindless undead hordes) hasn't the imagination to be worthy of the title.

* * * *

Anyway, all this is getting to the point that one thing I think BoxCrayon completely misses in his "you just want an excuse to murder people" diatribe is actual character motivation.

I don't know of many campaigns or even adventures where the primary motivation for PCs is "Let's go murder orcs!"

No. Even the most threadbare adventures in that ballpark are typically "The orcs in the ruin are attacking nearby farmsteads. We need you to stop them."

Others are generally, "There's a ruin a days march from here said to full of lost treasure. We should try to find it."

Rather than BoxCrayon's assertion that players are looking for a "crime simulator." If anything, my experience is that players are interested in a "defenders of civilization/explorers of the unknown" simulator.

The monsters, like orcs, are either threats to civilized places or obstacles that happen to be between you and the treasure/knowledge.

It should also be noted that in the earliest versions of the game, fighting monsters to gain treasure was almost seen as a fail state... if you could gain the treasure without the risk of a fight you were coming out significantly ahead.

BoxCrayon is wrong about nearly everything so him being wrong about basic human motivations shouldn't really be a surprise. Or maybe I've just mostly gamed with a bunch of weirdos who like being Spider-Man better than Deadpool.

My gaming experience is that we kill stuff because the DM put it in our path specifically so we can kill it and the game's presentation expects us to solve our problems typically through violence. The PCs are just disposable killing machines and the setting is a death labyrinth intended to reward us with abstract loot by killing stuff. We didn't kill humanoids because they born evil, we killed them because the DM put them in our path so we could kill them for loot. Monsters are bags of XP and loot spawned by spawn points and random generation tables, nothing more.

If that education makes me completely wrong about everything (whatever that entails), then feel please enlighten me as to the correct way of playing fantasy games and consuming fantasy fiction.

Quote from: Chris24601;1125979You want the orc raider stopped because they are threatening you or others; killing it is just the only viable option for most people to make that happen. Unless you're a wizard.

Hey now, in 5e, every melee weapon can be set to stun. It's only ranged weapons and damaging spells that are always deadly.

Quote from: jhkim;1125977I don't have a problem with evil orcs, but you're making it sound like anything *other* than evil orcs means that the game isn't fun. As if the players of Earthdawn are engaging in moral philosophy.

I've had lots of fun in games with non-evil orcs. My last D&D campaign had good-aligned orcs, goblins, and others as the PCs. They were straight up killing evil -- it's just that the evil was humans, elves, and dwarves. I've had other games with non-evil orcs as well, like Shadowrun where we had an orc shaman PC, and a GURPS Fantasy game where my PC was a rich orcish arms dealer. I enjoy Tolkien, but it's not like every game has to be just like Tolkien or it isn't fun. Mix it up a little.



That sounds like Ghettopoly to me.

https://boardgamegeek.com/image/222573/ghettopoly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxf14_HSRc

Greetings!

Well, Jhkim, yeah, variety with Orc morality can be fun and interesting. In my own campaign, there have been a *few* Orc tribes that managed to not be Evil. Then there's a pretty large number of Half Orcs that are not Evil in alignment.

Whatever kind of variant you can come up with is good, too.

My comment and exhortation about the game being fun is largely targeted at the emotionalism and philosophy that having "Evil Orcs" is this huge moral problem that needs deep introspection and moral concern. Furthermore, embracing the platform that Orcs are a vile, savage, and evil race that needs to be fought against and ruthlessly exterminated at every opportunity--must therefore signify some kind of moral delinquency and immaturity on the part of those that choose to implement such platforms in their campaigns.

That kind of moralistic philosophical argument against such just wouldn't go anywhere with most of my players, and most gamers that I have known. One of my friends would say:

"Dude. Orcs hate humans and Elves, and Halflings and Dwarves. They kill us, enslave us, and eat us all the time. The Baron says we need to defend the kingdom, so the Orcs are getting fucking napalmed, baby. Wherever we find them, the Orcs are gonna fucking die."

Orcs are typically born evil. They are a monstrous race that needs to be resisted, fought against, and destroyed. Orcs are a threat to civilization, and must be exterminated. I think that position is fine. It's also fun at the game table.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: jeff37923;1125810just like how a discussion on half-orc origins has brought about a bullshit claim from Omega that everyone else REALLY MEANS that orcs are black rapists for there to be half-orcs.

hah-hah. You are so funny when you try... and fail miserably.

Did I say all? Anywhere? No. I did not.

Keep struggling.

Quote from: tenbones;1125933Can we start a thread on the the evil of Monopoly and its insinuated goal of becoming a slumlord and all the crimes and shit associated with such places? OMG... this is like genocide!

Probably allready a thread or two over on BGG along those lines. Theres alot of nuts over there with a pathological hatred of the game.

Quote from: trechriron;1125842The tragedy here is that faux-activists clearly don't practice their own advice.
[...]
So, rape and sex are not the problem. Dark, difficult subject matters are not the problem.
It's WHEN and HOW they are brought up, often against the consent or will of the participants - that is the problem.
[...]Consent is king.

You know you're dangerously close to making total sense here :-) ?
All good things in moderation, I'll say, my good sir !

Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1126000You know you're dangerously close to making total sense here :-) ?
All good things in moderation, I'll say, my good sir !

Well thats ever been the problem. Most people are sane and can look at stuff and not totally lose their minds. Unfortunately for the last century or two we've been under the increasingly growing thumb of moral guardians who, lets face it - are more often than not insane. They want to "protect" you, or just the children, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! by in many cases, totally sanitizing everything. Ray Bradbury called it out in several of his stories. Eventually taking it to its logical insane conclusion in one story where even cemeteries are being dug up and destroyed because its too morbid and might scare someone. Instead we have a growing legion of loons who want everything even remotely possibly objectionable removed.

On top of, and increasingly combined with, the nuts who will hallucinate rape and racism and anything else into absolutely anything.

Very different from saying "hey, this is going in directions I am not comfortable with. Could we tone that down or not touch on it?"

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125964I'm going insane from cabin fever under quarantine.

No shit.....

Quote from: Omega;1125997hah-hah. You are so funny when you try... and fail miserably.

Did I say all? Anywhere? No. I did not.

Keep struggling.

You said it, I didn't, nice backpeddling though.

Quote from: Omega;1125791Stupid people claiming stupid things about games. News at 11.

No. Really. These morons just parrot/cut-n-paste the same tired old spiel because they have no brain cells to rub together.

Orcs = Rape
Orcs = Black People

sooooo. That must mean Orcs = Black rapists?

Thats what these nuts are obviously claiming then.

The crux of the problem here, as I see it, is the now widespread Western idea that it is morally wrong to depict Others as threatening or dangerous.

The RPG consequence of this fundamental idea is the trope : "You're a bad human being for wanting to kill Orcs." And : "If you depict Orcs as evil, you're a flawed human being, because depicting the Other as evil is ALWAYS a moral feeling".

I don't know exactly why so many Western people are in love with the Other, except that it seems to be a symetrical twin of hating oneself.

This mad "love" of the Other, upon reflexion, may be Christianity gone seriously askew.

Going back to RPG, I would not recommend adopting the trend of making Orcs less evil - unless it serves a dramatic purpose, or for matters of style and taste ; i.e, not for any moral reason.

Because "mellowing" the Other is a bottomless rabbit hole. Soon, you will find justification for Gnolls to be misunderstood hyena-men with a bad breath problem ("but it's not their fault, man !"), for Barghest to be misunderstood puddles, and for demons to be redeemable material.  I wonder how it could all end ?

Quote from: jeff37923;1126004You said it, I didn't, nice backpeddling though.

Except I didnt say what you claimed. Nice SJWing there.

Struggle more.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125983... we kill stuff because the DM put it in our path specifically so we can kill it and the game's presentation expects us to solve our problems typically through violence. The PCs are just disposable killing machines and the setting is a death labyrinth intended to reward us with abstract loot by killing stuff.
...

You say this like it is a bad thing...

Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1126005The crux of the problem here, as I see it, is the now widespread Western idea that it is morally wrong to depict Others as threatening or dangerous.

The RPG consequence of this fundamental idea is the trope : "You're a bad human being for wanting to kill Orcs." And : "If you depict Orcs as evil, you're a flawed human being, because depicting the Other as evil is ALWAYS a moral feeling".

I don't know exactly why so many Western people are in love with the Other, except that it seems to be a symetrical twin of hating oneself.

Greetings!

Indeed, Lychee of the Exchequer, the whole terrible philosophy comes out of the foundations of Liberal SJWism. The brainwashing of millions of people through university classes--for years and years now--where Western Civilization is always painted as greedy, racist, evil, and imperialistic. Anyone that comes from "The Other" is constantly depicted as being the victims of Western Powers, and "The Other" is inherently good; innocent; and superior in knowledge and wisdom to anyone from the West. Furthermore, "The Other" is shown as being more "authentic" and deeper, spiritually. Everything from "The Other" is richer, deeper, and more meaningful, from music, dancing and art, to language, tattoos, family and social customs.

Philosophically, it is this kind of world view and ideology where it filters down into gamers, that the players--the characters--are representatives of a more advanced, greedy, colonialist and racist culture, that is imposing war, death, exploitation, and subjugation on poor, misunderstood primitive humanoid cultures.

The whole ideology is insidious, and yet it has become more pervasive throughout our society over the years, tainting and influencing everything, including gaming, world building, and how we develop and run our game worlds. These liberal ideologues take immense pleasure in questioning every assumption--no matter how reasonable--with an eye towards polluting it, criticizing it, subverting it, and ultimately twisting whatever concept into a bizarre kind of social and ideological pretzel!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1126006This mad "love" of the Other, upon reflexion, may be Christianity gone seriously askew.

Going back to RPG, I would not recommend adopting the trend of making Orcs less evil - unless it serves a dramatic purpose, or for matters of style and taste ; i.e, not for any moral reason.

Because "mellowing" the Other is a bottomless rabbit hole. Soon, you will find justification for Gnolls to be misunderstood hyena-men with a bad breath problem ("but it's not their fault, man !"), for Barghest to be misunderstood puddles, and for demons to be redeemable material.  I wonder how it could all end ?

With everyone saved by the grace of God?