Every time people lament changes to the lore that amount to “not every member of species X is irredeemably evil” and claim the game is removing villains from it, I think how villains of so-caleld evil species fall into two cathegories: a) bland and boring and b)have something else, unrelated to their species going on for them, that makes them interesting.

    • dragonshouter@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not all are made from one guy though. Some are just pulped evil in a can. Even with different outlooks on life there are still things that everyone would hate. Like “very specific crimes” to an infant. I say that’s enough for pure evil

    • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, equating alignment and morality makes them both meaningless. Morality should be tied to outlooks/philosophies etc, a personal matter of how the individual acts in a situation, while alignment with the forces of good/evil/law/chaos should be a matter of absolute determinism. It’s easy to look at D&D and say it’s wrong, but just because something’s bad in D&D doesn’t mean the idea itself is bad.

      • Attaxalotl@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I have it to where the good/evil extraplanar creatures are created as expressions of the good and evil within everything sentient.

        • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yes, exactly - as I put it to my players, a “person” isn’t able to be inherently good or evil. They’ll have their own morals - particular things they always will or won’t do - but alignment is for things literally made of the concept of that alignment.