@nono A lot of people are moving away from this idea of inherent characteristics in fantasy races (particularly things like evil or unintelligent races). I'm just curious as to why you've made this choice in your game
@Alfy I'm not "a lot of people". :-)
More seriously, in my fantasy games, monsters are, well, monstrous, whether they are humanoid or not does not make a difference. I don't play them as reskinned humans but as something utterly alien. Orcs or elves are not humans; they are, in this campaign at least, respectively constructs and faeries (which are basically just nicer demons).
@Alfy I'm aware of the idea that this kind of characterization is problematic, but it does not match my experience.
Of course this is quite context-dependent; when we play, say, Star Wars, aliens *are* just reskinned humans. But not in this D&D game.
@nono I can understand that choice. I'm not of the opinion that we need to avoid every trope that could result in problematic messaging. There's a lot of media that I love that has plot points that could be read as saying something really bad. You seem to know what you're doing
@Yoric No, absolutely not on purpose. This is explicitely not an allegory.
In fact, colonialism exists in my world, and the PCs in this particular campaign are on the wrong side (that is, the colonists); I'm particularly interested in how they will handle this.
@nono Well, at the very least, you gave me an idea to explore in future campaigns :)
I recently GMed a campaign in which the PCs were very much on the side of colonists. Most of them eventually ended up rooting for the natives, although a few cynical characters preferred rooting out for their own privileges.
That was fun to GM :)
We are an inclusive Mastodon community for everything tabletop (and more).