The thing is that the Steamwheedle trade prince isn’t OUR boss or whatever. The only Steamwheedle character that could ever have been considered as OUR boss is… Gazlow. It just don’t make sense for Gazlow to refer to anyone else from the Steamwheedle carter as our boss.
On the other end, while Gallywix was our real boss, Gazlow, a member of the Steamwheedle cartel often end up bossing us more. So it just make way more sense if it Gallywix that refer Gazlow as OUR boss in a salty way.
It does appear that way. And I do wonder whether the book was reviewed fully after the lawsuits came to light.
You know what happens when yesterday’s revolutionary becomes Today’s Big Chief.
I highly doubt a guy who risked his own life to help a friend evade Gallywix would suddenly become Gallywix. I mean Gazlowe was the ruler of Ratchet since Vanilla. He knows what it is like to lead a group of Goblins.
Usually in fiction and even in real life, those kind of wannabe dictators tend to show their true side once in a while. Even if it seems accidental or just a display of anger. I mean in Starcraft you have two rebellious uprising in that game. One where the revolutionary ends up worse than those he overthrew and another where the replacements are better than the establishment they destroyed.
Gazlowe being nice before could’ve be the symptom of a Goblin mental illness, which is cured by gaining authority and lots of money, or something. Goblins being greedy may not just be a cultural influence, but an ingrained trait. I’m not sure if Wow psychology works that way for most races or not. Blizzard hasn’t clarified.
Please don’t make excuses for Blizzards incompetence.
It’s just speculation, making do with what we got.
Knowing blizz they will look at that and run with it.
but, but, uh, the dog ate their homework
We’ve been doing that for years.
Wizards of the Coast is straight-up deleting D&D monster lore that they consider problematic now. A similar thing could happen with WoW, with effort.
So that is what is going on. I joined a DnD meme group on FB and I am getting a ton of post about alignment change whining/wokeness whatever.
All alignments are gone, and they’re trying not to describe entire races as evil or with negative traits, anymore.
I can understand the not paint entire races as evil/good I am not totally sure why the alignment system is being removed however.
Just my guess, but it’s probably because by and large, people’s morality doesn’t fall neatly into a nine square grid. DnD alignment has always been a system that a lot of people either ignore entirely or ignore mostly.
There will always be creatures that are inherently malevolent in D&D like Illithid, Demons, Devils, etc… but races which can also be player characters are not being painted with a single brush.
The alignment system is kind of clunky, it is best seen as a… guideline. Most people are not always in one corner of it. Morality is a shifting thing based on situation and personal experience.
Yeah, I think treating Illithids, Drow, goblins, and such as evil by default is just safer.
That said, letting Paladins be something other than lawful stupid troglodytes is smart.
As far as I can tell it isn’t. What’s going is nailing races to particular spots in the alignment graph by default.
For example one of the first Pathfinder Society scenarios for Pathfinder 2nd edition introduced us to goblin clerics of Sarenrae, one of the leading good goddesses of Golarion. This is in stark contrast to the popular depiction in the Free RPG Day goblin series of adventures.
Also part of the Golarion canon was that any elf who was sufficiently evil stood a chance of spontaneously turning into a Drow. This was established in the Second Darkness Adventure Path which was made for D+D 3.5 before Paizo came out with it’s Pathfinder clone. That was when Paizo was writing with an anti-Drizzt style of committing the classic Drow to an innately evil stance. The extent to how much they’ve walked away from that worldview was dramatically shown when a good elf was reincarnated into a drow without losing her alignment.
Four Decades ago Travis Williams wrote an article about crypto racism in White Wolf magazine… apparently the industry is starting to listen and recognise that roleplaying games aren’t just a thing for White Midwestern and London boys any more.
In Pathfinder 2nd edition, Paladins are the Lawful Good variant of the Champion class. Redeemers are Neutral Good and Liberators are the Chaotic remainder.
The Advanced Class Guide came out with the Evil counter parts, The Lawful Tyrant, Neutral Desecrator, and the chaotic Anti-Paladin
It probably doesn’t help the alignment system that people aren’t really familiar with the works that the Law-Chaos axis originally drew on, as actual cosmic forces that can be sided with in their greater conflict.
Plus the system is kinda clunky and confusing and seems like everyone has their own way of defining how they work, and at least in my experience it doesn’t really add anything too vital to the game, just a sort of constraint that you probably chose before getting a feel of how you play that character.
Eh, ever since first edition D&D has encouraged the GM to make their own stuff if they don’t like the alignments set in the book.
All the “lore retcons” that people who didn’t read the actual changes are screaming about is them removing the “All Illithids/Beholders have this personality” but hey people love getting views in their “SJWS/CRITICAL ROLE ARE KILLING D&D” videos.