Good and Evil
Thought: I wonder when we'll grow out of the idea of 'evil for evil's sake' in fiction and RPGs. Especially in RPGs. I mean, sure, there's something pure about knowing your opposition is an irredeemable monster - it makes it that much simpler to just try to kill them, knowing you're doing "good". But why on earth should anything be just... evil? Shouldn't there be a reason behind it, and shouldn't there be some moral complexity involved as well?
In my Pathfinder (formerly D&D) setting, I emphasized that the conflict was not between 'good' and 'evil'. It was between Order and Chaos (and in a number of cases, Chaos vs Chaos). In general, good and evil were complex and heroic PCs often found themselves working with evil people because the goals were similar or the evil individuals weren't doing anything blatantly evil (ie: stupid). For example, the ruler of one city was known to be evil - he was a tyrant who murdered off the leaders of the merchant guilds to wrest control from them and take over the city. However, the merchants were greedy, money-grubbing sorts who saw their own luxury and the gathering of prophits as more important than the people beneath them. He ruled the city, and allowed no challenge to his authority, but he also ensured that the city operated smoothly and allowed "heroes" to come in and ensure that the needs of the people were met. When the PCs did show up, they accepted his authority and set about improving the lot of the inhabitants - while also weeding out the corruption.
The thing is, I can't honestly see making any race just "evil". There has to be a reason for it, one that is internally consistent and will allow 1) the race to thrive and expand, and 2) allow it to remain together as a recognized 'race'. For example, orcs. Why are orcs evil? It can't be 'the god of orcs made it so', because that removes the idea of free will, and orcs have free will. What benefit is there to being evil for an orc? Orcs are tribal, which means they work together with one another. The thing is, if orcs were truly evil, they'd screw each other time and again for their own personal betterment, and that doesn't help keep a community together. They must understand the value of a community and cooperation - if putting the needs of others before yourself. They're probably also nomadic, you don't see many orc farmers, so they're most likely a hunting community. This also means a level of cooperation, as the hunters bring in the food, and the people in the community prepare it, cook it, and share it.
I think most fantasy settings (hell, most fictional settings) would be stronger if they removed the 'self destructive' races, and the 'evil' races, and looked more at cultural world-building. You can have a conflict between the orcs and the humans, and still paint the orcs as 'bad guys', but you can do that without demonizing them and having them be 'evil'. Individuals? Sure, of course. But an entire society? Less likely, I think.
In my Pathfinder (formerly D&D) setting, I emphasized that the conflict was not between 'good' and 'evil'. It was between Order and Chaos (and in a number of cases, Chaos vs Chaos). In general, good and evil were complex and heroic PCs often found themselves working with evil people because the goals were similar or the evil individuals weren't doing anything blatantly evil (ie: stupid). For example, the ruler of one city was known to be evil - he was a tyrant who murdered off the leaders of the merchant guilds to wrest control from them and take over the city. However, the merchants were greedy, money-grubbing sorts who saw their own luxury and the gathering of prophits as more important than the people beneath them. He ruled the city, and allowed no challenge to his authority, but he also ensured that the city operated smoothly and allowed "heroes" to come in and ensure that the needs of the people were met. When the PCs did show up, they accepted his authority and set about improving the lot of the inhabitants - while also weeding out the corruption.
The thing is, I can't honestly see making any race just "evil". There has to be a reason for it, one that is internally consistent and will allow 1) the race to thrive and expand, and 2) allow it to remain together as a recognized 'race'. For example, orcs. Why are orcs evil? It can't be 'the god of orcs made it so', because that removes the idea of free will, and orcs have free will. What benefit is there to being evil for an orc? Orcs are tribal, which means they work together with one another. The thing is, if orcs were truly evil, they'd screw each other time and again for their own personal betterment, and that doesn't help keep a community together. They must understand the value of a community and cooperation - if putting the needs of others before yourself. They're probably also nomadic, you don't see many orc farmers, so they're most likely a hunting community. This also means a level of cooperation, as the hunters bring in the food, and the people in the community prepare it, cook it, and share it.
I think most fantasy settings (hell, most fictional settings) would be stronger if they removed the 'self destructive' races, and the 'evil' races, and looked more at cultural world-building. You can have a conflict between the orcs and the humans, and still paint the orcs as 'bad guys', but you can do that without demonizing them and having them be 'evil'. Individuals? Sure, of course. But an entire society? Less likely, I think.