The Sharn watch is corrupt, but it isn't the only watch in the setting, and most of them aren't. Even the corrupt Sharn watch is going to be moved to action if someone engages in wholesale slaughter in the streets as you suggested - they do have to enforce public order.
You can always check up on someone to find out if they work for Tharashk - or they might be wearing Tharashk insignia that makes it obvious. You generally don't have time to check up on someone like that if you've just decided to kill someone because they're a gnoll, though. In the process you might also miss checking up on whether they have any other legal protections from some other source.
But legal protections or not, a gnoll in Eberron can go anywhere else that the public can - they're not any different that way than a human or elf.
I never claimed that Eberron is happy and accepting - but it isn't happy and accepting of any race, even humans. Regardless, you asserted that a gnoll couldn't move around in civilization, which is false.
The Eldeen gnolls don't have to be numerous - they just have to be Eldeen and they have those protections. Legal papers to prove your nationality? That's a good idea for everyone, gnoll or not. (Not that anyone who decides to kill a gnoll for being a gnoll is likely to check on such things in the first place.)
As far as the Points of Light setting is concerned, it's not as open as Eberron but it's still much more so than you've claimed. The "playing gnolls" article even talks about the nonevil tribes making deals with nearby communities (which they couldn't if they were 'killed on sight'), and the published information about the setting has repeatedly emphasized that it is racially eclectic due to Nerath's influence. A gnoll PC is likely to face suspicion, but the fact that it's acting in a civilized fashion rather than trying to tear everyone's head off still goes a long way in PoL.
This is as far as I'm willing to debate your views though - you've made it clear (here and elsewhere) that you have a particular view of how things work, and if that's how you want to handle it in your games then go ahead. Please don't assume that everyone else will or should take the same viewpoint, however.
Back on the main topic, and ignoring the "acceptance" issue for the most part, what ever happened to Gnoll Rangers? Spec them out as some sort of bounty hunter, venturing into "civilized" lands for the Thrill of the Hunt. Yeah, sure, people are gonna ***** that there's a freaking 7-8 foot tall hyena stalking through town, but aside from the odd farmer from an outlying villiage having flashbacks to when iMacs burned his peasant villiage to the ground when he was but a lad, noone should be lighting the torches and grabbing pitchforks. Not imacs, I mean gnolls. Obscure freudian.
Thank you Neutronium, your post pretty muchs sums up what I was trying to say.
Just because a race isn't widely accepted, or even is "normally" hostile, doesn't mean that there's some kind of "go ahead and kill them on sight" clause in every town/village/city you walk into.
And as for gnolls in the Eldeen Reaches being good/neutral or evil?
First off, it's Eberron, and alignment is not an absolute barometer of behavior or allegiance. You're talking about a setting where a LE vampire is brokering for peace and a CG queen still desires warmongering and strife. It would be safe to assume, however, that when talking about a PC that we're not talking about a savage, evil, marauding gnoll. Even if most of his people were like that, who's to say that he is as well?
And you said "it's helpful to know their disposition".
You ARE shifting the goalposts, because earlier you advocated killing them on sight. What if the gnoll you are looking at is a LG pacifist, only in town to sell his crops at the market? You'll never know, because you want to kill him on sight, and you assume that there will be no legal repercussions because he's not even a person (in your eyes).
Thank you Neutronium, your post pretty muchs sums up what I was trying to say.
Just because a race isn't widely accepted, or even is "normally" hostile, doesn't mean that there's some kind of "go ahead and kill them on sight" clause in every town/village/city you walk into.
You can bet there actually is going to be such a clause in most standard D&D settings.
Chiba_Monkey wrote:
And as for gnolls in the Eldeen Reaches being good/neutral or evil?
First off, it's Eberron, and alignment is not an absolute barometer of behavior or allegiance. You're talking about a setting where a LE vampire is brokering for peace and a CG queen still desires warmongering and strife. It would be safe to assume, however, that when talking about a PC that we're not talking about a savage, evil, marauding gnoll. Even if most of his people were like that, who's to say that he is as well?
Gee it's awfully metagamey to have everyone somehow magically see the "PC" sign above the gnoll PCs head and then just intrinsically know he's a good guy don't you think?
Chiba_Monkey wrote:
And you said "it's helpful to know their disposition".
You ARE shifting the goalposts, because earlier you advocated killing them on sight. What if the gnoll you are looking at is a LG pacifist, only in town to sell his crops at the market? You'll never know, because you want to kill him on sight, and you assume that there will be no legal repercussions because he's not even a person (in your eyes).
Actually, the Drooamite gnolls are not people in the eyes of the people of the setting, which are the monsters I was talking about as being ok to kill. It has nothing to do with MY eyes. It's right there in the book, not to mention Keith Baker himself talks about it. The laws only apply to Citizens of the Five Nations. Drooam and Dargun are not counted. There will indeed be no legal repercussions for killing any monsters from Drooam. None. Deal. On top of which the status of the person murdered also matters. Most typical monsters will not have much status in a human society and their deaths probably will not even be investigated. Please read the book Sharn, City of Towers more before you try to debate with me.
Chiba, for what it's worth, Keith's post about the three largest gnoll groupings - Droaam, Eldeen, and Demon Wastes - specifically called out the third but not the other two as being the demon-worshipping kind, which strongly implies that the Eldeen ones aren't (since we know from his column that the Droaamish ones aren't). The same post talked about the possibility of gnolls living elsewhere across Khorvaire in small numbers; those three places that he mentioned are just the home of the largest concentrations (and in Droaam's case, the most organized society). Regardless, at least some of those are going to be citizens of the recognized nations with full legal rights.
But the point about allegiances is one that I've been trying to make to no avail. I played a gnoll character in 3E Eberron who was an ex-pat Droaamite who was now a citizen of Breland. The game didn't make it that far (it ended up folding whilst we were investigating a druidic catastrophe on the borders of the Mournland), but one of the plot threads that the DM had floated for the future was that Brelish intelligence might try to recruit him as an agent to infiltrate the Droaamite faction that has been setting up shop across Khorvaire. (Which, apart from being a very Eberron plot idea, would also have been a reasonable proposal, since he'd be more likely to succeed at it than a human agent.)
Now, apart from the fact that he could have trounced the average redneck even at low levels (to say nothing of the levels he would have been at by that point), if some "kill them on sight" idiot had happened along and attacked him for being a gnoll, not only would he have had full legal rights (since he was a citizen of Breland), but Mr. Redneck would have been attacking an agent of the king's intelligence service - and you can darned well bet that they would have had something to 'say' to him about that.
True, he's just one case and somewhat exceptional at that, but the point remains: you can't make assumptions based on race, and especially not based on the erroneous idea that all members of a given race belong to one specific nation - not all dwarves are citizens of the Mror Holds and not all halflings come from the Talenta Plains, either. In absence of any other factors, a gnoll probably isn't going to be as well-received as a dwarf or a halfling in most places, but only someone with a case of terminal stupidity is going to attack any of them out of the blue based on their race alone.
Gee it's awfully metagamey to have everyone somehow magically see the "PC" sign above the gnoll PCs head and then just intrinsically know he's a good guy don't you think?
And its implausible to think that, with exceptions to the "kill on sight" rule being known to exist, that the rule would continue to exist at all. If someone knows that the only gnolls who are legally protected in Sharn are the ones who are working for someone, then, when he sees a gnoll in Sharn, won't his first assumption be that it must be working for someone? And, even if it isn't, doesn't the fact that other gnolls (and similar creatures) sometimes DO have legitimate business in Sharn prevent the violent xenophobia at least to a degree?
My thoughts are as follows.
In a town or city that gnolls have attacked repeatedly in the past, gnolls are likely to be kill on sight. If the gnoll walks forward slowly, weapons sheathed or unarmed, holding up his paws or waving a white flag, he may be given one chance to explain himself before being killed.
If there are intermittent periods of peace, when the gnolls have agreed to leave the humans alone for however long, then the gnoll probably won't be killed on sight, but if someone kills him the rest of the town won't care (however, that someone will need a reason to do so. Additionally, if the townsfolk believe that killing that gnoll might bring down the ire of other gnolls, ending the tentative truce, they might very well care after all).
If gnolls have sometimes traded, sometimes ignored, and sometimes attacked, then the gnoll will be mistrusted and disliked, but probably not in danger of being killed unless he does something suspicious. Think of a native american walking into a Puritan town; he won't be treated as an equal, and people will keep one eye on him and the other on their children, but unless he pulls out a weapon or something he probably won't get shot.
If gnolls have never been seen in this area before, people are going to be more curious than hostile. After all, in 4e big teeth and claws don't necessarily mean evil (dragonborn are seen as a civilized race, after all). People are likely to be a bit wary of the gnoll on account of its size and threatening appearance, but not much more so than they would be of a dragonborn. If they've heard stories about gnolls painting them as evil, they'll be a bit warier, but still to a lesser extent than any of the cases above.
If I'm out in the middle of nowhere, and it's dark, and I know there's a prison near by, and I see someone who looks like an escaped prisoner sneaking around in the bushes, I'd be calling the cops faster than you can say "snitch".
If I drive into Boston, and see someone wearing an orange prisoner looking outfit minding his own business in a public place with lots of people around, I don't think "holy crap it's an escaped prisoner" I think "yeesh I guess the freaks are out today" and try not to stare as I walk by.
DDI auto-renew cancelled 11/17 due to lack of usable software tools (aside from the compendium)
You can bet there actually is going to be such a clause in most standard D&D settings.
That would be your personal opinion and in no way supported, ESPECIALLY by 4e, which is simply a "points of light" setting that any DM can make their own, so outside of FR or Eberron there's no continuity between the worlds.
And as per the article on gnolls, it's apparent that there are several tribes of non-evil gnolls whose presence is accepted peacefully, at least in towns closer to the wilderness.
Gee it's awfully metagamey to have everyone somehow magically see the "PC" sign above the gnoll PCs head and then just intrinsically know he's a good guy don't you think?
A gnoll PC would be coming into town with a GROUP of other adventurers, who are clearly not bothered or threatened by his presence. What do you think is going to happen? Some other adventuring group is going to stop their whole group and say "You four! Back away! That's a gnoll next to you and I'm going to kill it!"?
Of course some townsfolk might be unsettled by his presence, but his own personal behavior would immediately set him apart from his savage kinfolk, since, you know, he isn't entering town beside a howling pack of other gnolls intent on slaughtering all inhabitants of the town.
Actually, the Drooamite gnolls are not people in the eyes of the people of the setting, which are the monsters I was talking about as being ok to kill. It has nothing to do with MY eyes. It's right there in the book, not to mention Keith Baker himself talks about it. The laws only apply to Citizens of the Five Nations. Drooam and Dargun are not counted. There will indeed be no legal repercussions for killing any monsters from Drooam. None. Deal. On top of which the status of the person murdered also matters. Most typical monsters will not have much status in a human society and their deaths probably will not even be investigated. Please read the book Sharn, City of Towers more before you try to debate with me.
What do you know? I HAVE read that book. I read it cover to cover when it first came out. I read every Dragonshard article that came out for over a year, and I own every single Eberron book except for City of Stormreach. I am quite well versed in Eberron lore, and I will thank you not to be so snide and insulting when you have no idea what I do and do not know. You know what they say about when you assume. And you certainly have.
@ Neutronium I am confused by your post, as it seems you should be adressing Akuma.
I am definetely Pro-gnoll. Gnolls are one of my favorite races. I have a gnol barbarian backstory on the "Ten-Minute Background" thread (page 16 or 17, name is Garanesh). When one of ym players decided to pony up and try DMing, it came as no surprise to any of the rest of the group that I said "I'm making a Gnoll Barbarian"
I have a fairly large collection of minis, as I like to use minis when I DM, and I have a veritable Horde of gnolls, over 30.
Like I told one of my players: "You can never have enough gnolls" :D
@Space Dragon- I like your post. Very well thought out, and a good point I was going to make to Akuma about a gnoll in a town who isn't looking for a fight (i.e. he backs off and asks for peace). Granted you have a very special corner-case in your example, but I like it a lot.
@Akuma_Daimyo- One last thing, and it realtes to a part of my post you didn't respond to (other than insult me and tell me I haven't read the Eberron material as well as you ), as well as what Space Dragon said.
You advocate killing any gnoll in a town on sight and say there will be no legal repurcussions, even in Eberron. Let's say you are in that small town in the Eldeen Reaches, and you see a gnoll step out into the street and you attack and kill him. What you didn't know is that he was a LG gnoll, in town to sell his crops, and he was well-known and well-liked by the entire town. You honestly think your DM isn't going to have the townsfolk come after you for murder? You're deluded. You know why? Because the DM controls NPC actions, and the DM put a non-evil gnoll in that town as a member of that town, it's a good bet he didn't want you to kill it, or at the very least that he had some negative repercussions planned should you even try.
You know, I always felt that the DM decided what NPCs did. Not a sourcebook. After all, if a gnoll walks into town and meets a hail of arrows and bolts it's because the DM said so. Likewise if they all come out to gawk at and greet the strange visitor to their town. The DM is the final arbeiter. If i'm running an Eberron game and one of my PCs is a gnoll, i'm not going to have every gnoll in sharn be constantly attacked by random murderers at every turn. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that just because something is technically legal that you should do it. Imagine the conversation at the bar: "Hey guys! I just found out that it's legal to go kill gnolls from droam! Let's go kill a dozen or two!" "I don't know man, those things are two feet taller than you and have claws and fangs" "good point, nevermind."
), as well as what Space Dragon said.
