Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Orc babies.

Falconer wrote:Wow, Bargle. What a condescending prick.

My moderator duties require me to remind everyone that it is the official policy of K&K that personally insulting other posters is discouraged.

Ghul wrote:Orc babies.

I like orc babies. They taste like chicken.

capitalbill wrote:

Ghul wrote:Orc babies.

I like orc babies. They taste like chicken.

Damn you both to hell, horrible bastards.

T. Foster wrote:In my games PCs are never encouraged or expected to "leave no survivors" or wantonly slaughter non-combatants (and doing so is considered an Evil act), and avoiding combat (while still accomplishing your goals) is usually a better path to success than deliberately seeking it out, and as far as I can tell both of those are exactly what was intended all along. The quoted poster is setting up an artificially simplistic straw man misreading of D&D and then acting like he's uniquely morally and intellectually superior by knocking it down, which means his big essay is more just a waste of time than anything else.

You know, the more I think about this, the more I realize how true it is. I don't recall ever playing a PC that specifically sought out a humanoid settlement for the purposes of exterminating everything there. Rescue prisoners taken in raids? Yes. Recover some stolen treasure? Yes. But for the most part, my PCs interactions with humanoids have been... 1) Explore abandoned dungeon. 2) Encounter group of humanoids unexpectedly in room. 3) Kill humanoids in self-defense as they attempt to kill my PC and take his stuff. So, yeah, I think this guy is either playing D&D very differently than everyone I've ever played with or is setting up a major strawman.

Bargle wrote:We eat sugar because it is sweet, we play d&d because it is fun.

Both have more complex answers. It's ok to simply eat the sweet, but the evolutionary sociologist isn't wrong when he says it's more complicated than that.

Sometimes an orc is just an orc

Bargle wrote:Either you believe joseph campbel's universal themes, the john carters are part of our DNA and we play with them though we know it not ..

Sorry to get all wikipedia on you, but I'll need some citations for that. I'm not familiar with that stance of Campbell's.

I actually think there's something in what Bargle suggests, but the conversation has gotten a little heated. As far as I can tell there are just certain folks who enjoy considering the symbolic implications of even trivial subjects (like inherently expendable races in D&D), and there are certain people who are more practical. Fortunately D&D works on both levels, so there's room for us all.

blackprinceofmuncie wrote:

T. Foster wrote:In my games PCs are never encouraged or expected to "leave no survivors" or wantonly slaughter non-combatants (and doing so is considered an Evil act), and avoiding combat (while still accomplishing your goals) is usually a better path to success than deliberately seeking it out, and as far as I can tell both of those are exactly what was intended all along. The quoted poster is setting up an artificially simplistic straw man misreading of D&D and then acting like he's uniquely morally and intellectually superior by knocking it down, which means his big essay is more just a waste of time than anything else.

You know, the more I think about this, the more I realize how true it is. I don't recall ever playing a PC that specifically sought out a humanoid settlement for the purposes of exterminating everything there. Rescue prisoners taken in raids? Yes. Recover some stolen treasure? Yes. But for the most part, my PCs interactions with humanoids have been... 1) Explore abandoned dungeon. 2) Encounter group of humanoids unexpectedly in room. 3) Kill humanoids in self-defense as they attempt to kill my PC and take his stuff. So, yeah, I think this guy is either playing D&D very differently than everyone I've ever played with or is setting up a major strawman.

Thirded, or whatever.

I've never subscribed to the notion that orcs are irredeemably evil and exist solely to be slain on sight, nor have I adopted the idea that orcs are simply misunderstood and evil is just a point of view. Orcs and other humanoids have a culture, but that doesn't change the fact evil pemeates that culture, that their economic system is one based on pillage and slavery, and that when you've outlived your usefulness - or just piss off the wrong orc - you end up in the stewpot. I also have no problem with exceptions to the general alignment trend - frex, lawful neutral hobgoblins often gravitated to human lands in my game-world, seeking employment as highly-valued mercenaries.

There is a middle ground between cartoon cut-outs set up to be knocked down and the Noble Savage.

Steve wrote:"Sweet, I rolled a natural 20, I landed a critical hug!"

"Awesome! You vanquish Johnnie's inner darkness and saved his self-esteem! We're all winners here!"

You made me pee myself, you fucker.

JasonZavoda wrote:

Bargle wrote:We eat sugar because it is sweet, we play d&d because it is fun.

Both have more complex answers. It's ok to simply eat the sweet, but the evolutionary sociologist isn't wrong when he says it's more complicated than that.

Sometimes an orc is just an orc

No no, I think Bargle's on to something...

Which raises the question, why did this guy choose Bargle as his username? Well, Bargle was an evil magic-user who killed the cleric Aleena.

So I guess this poster is a real Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde - a mild-manner dentist by day, and by night, an evil occultist with a deep-seated hatred for women, God, and doctors.



In other news, I new Coleston was a Satanic drug-dealer, but I didn't know he was a genocidal hatemonger, too!

You're killing me, Steve.

The Shaman wrote:I've never subscribed to the notion that orcs are irredeemably evil and exist solely to be slain on sight...

You have aptly summarized what I don't get -- why must these two things must be linked? Because that's where the genocide argument breaks down and the big Scooby-Doo reveal is (gasp!) a strawman, as Trent's and BPoM's posts already demonstrate. I've likewise never personally experienced a d&d game where [being evil] = [must be exterminated], but when I DM'ed my players certainly learned to strike hard and fast against enemies known to be evil, and that included making proactive raids against orc tribes in order to protect a farm or thorp or village, well...because

The Shaman wrote:evil pemeates that culture, that their economic system is one based on pillage and slavery, and that when you've outlived your usefulness - or just piss off the wrong orc - you end up in the stewpot.

I am sure that somewhere out there is more than one gaming group sick in the head enough to actually use d&d as a means to embody their collective racism, xenophobia, and/or hatred. But that doesn't mean such a link has to be done, simply that it can.

Save bs. Diabetes

I absolutely hate moral equivalence. The notion that there really are no "bad guys" and that everything is just a matter of perspective is something I just can't accept. When I watch The Sopranos, No matter how much of Tony's day to day family life I see, I can't get past the fact that this is a guy who makes his living by selling drugs to kids and murdering people who get in his way. The fact that he goes home at night and hugs his little girl doesn't change my feeling that he's an evil mofo. Same goes for the guy at the teddy bear picnic sporting Hells Angels colors. I think of Orcs in the same light as mobsters. Sure, they have their lives and they have their "aspirations" but at heart they are evil beings who are by their very nature a pox upon the land.

But I agree with several other posters here who've noted that the guy quoted in the OP seems to have experienced a different game than the one I've played. None of my characters would specifically venture out to eradicate an "ethnic group" in the game world just based on their ethnicity. Its always been rescue the hostages, save the damsel in distress, drive off the clan thats been raiding the village etc etc...

Steve wrote:


In other news, I new Coleston was a Satanic drug-dealer, but I didn't know he was a genocidal hatemonger, too!

Hey, whatever pays the best.