I found two great posts over on the Candlekeep forum ->


Originally Posted by Wooly Rupert
That's the point you consistently fail to acknowledge: orcs have, repeatedly, attacked everyone and anyone simply because they could. It wasn't in self-defense, it wasn't because their homes or livelihoods were threatened, and it certainly wasn't doing what other races have done -- I've not heard of too many elf hordes sweeping out of the north and killing everything in site.

Orcs have killed without reason or provocation for millennia. A handful of adventurers here or elves defending themselves there is not the same thing, and it is not justification.

Originally Posted by Wooly Rupert
Speaking of double-standards... Why all the concern over orcs?

There was a Red Dragon named Firebrand Flametongue that retired, decided to live in peace, and became friends with Elminster. Why is he not held up as an example of how all Red Dragons are misunderstood and oppressed?

Why is Large Luigi not held up as an example of how Beholders really are peaceful, so long as you leave them alone?

Why is Estriss the Illithid not cited as proof that his brain-eating kin aren't really all that bad?

Why do we not hold Liriel up as proof that Drow are not murderous and backstabbing?

Why is Nojheim not held up as an example that Goblins really are honorable sorts?

I am, quite frankly, getting sick of one or two isolated examples being cited as proof that the other million+ members of the same race really aren't as bad as their behavior and history indicates they are.

Especially when the counter-argument is to take the actions of the minority of another race and use that to malign the majority. One group of elves did something bad, so all elves are evil -- but all orcs doing something bad does not mean all orcs are evil. How is that not a double-standard? Why is it okay for (on the rare occasions it's happened) orcs to defend themselves, but other races can't?