Concerns About the Progressions of the Goblin Plot (@Rich)

[Ionathus]

A pretty safe bet when the Oracle has said Belkar is going to die before the end of the comic.

So if D&D games feature even the protagonists occasionally engaging in racism but regularly portray it as bad then they're good to go, right?

I mean, "good to go" depends on the context, but essentially yes. I would far prefer a storyline/setting where people's cosmetic differences and prejudices are acknowledged to a setting where the cosmetic differences are glossed over and never addressed...but are still subconsciously used to identify "combatant" from "ally."

According to who?

The vast majority of D&D lore for the last 40 years.

I'd argue that a gorilla is as close or closer to a human than your standard fantasy goblin is physically.

On almost every level except physical size, this is blatantly, factually wrong.

Gorillas have a lot in common with humans in comparison to other animals, but they don't wear clothing, use complex spoken languages, live in created structures, form massive groups numbering in the thousands, trade currency, or do one of a billion other things that make humans wholly unique. Every humanoid in the Monster Manual does those things or a version of them. If you want to argue that goblins are essentially gorillas in your setting, go ahead, but if they're using metal armor and yelling out full sentences in a spoken language, be prepared for people to completely disregard your definition of "sentience."

We are not talking about propaganda, we are talking about stories. Stories in which there are protagonists and antagonists who are by their very nature opposed and create the conflict that drives the plot in the first place. There's no reason that every story should have to be a morality play or a reflection of the real world. No reason that every monster should have to be the equivalent of a human. It's not clever, if anything it's becoming overdone and trite. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes a goblin is just a goblin and if the author wanted them to represent humans, they could've just as easily used a different group of humans.

First off: they DID use a different group of humans, they just colored them green and gave them a slightly different backstory. You could literally take every hobgoblin in standard D&D, swap their token for a human, and everything they do would make sense, even if it seemed weird that they were speaking a different language and worshipping a different fantasy god. They still form armies, use weapons, speak languages, and display human emotions to varying degrees. They are not an alien intelligence, nor are they nonsentient animals.

Second: Do you genuinely believe that, in order to treat monstrous humanoids with inherent dignity, the entire story has to become a morality play? Do you really think a story is incapable of addressing something and then moving on, or not dipping its toes in that water to start with?