Originally Posted by Nerd_Paladin
I dunno; the world of D&D and high fantasy operates in a way that just doesn't resemble the real world. The real world has no dark gods, no corrupting mystical powers, no fiends and archfiends that influence the nature or makeup of the universe and its people (not in a literal sense, anyway).
I can accept, for example, that red and green and blue dragons are inherently evil in a way that doesn't quite make sense, because the game tells us that they are the creations/children/pawns of Tiamat, a goddess of Pure Evil, basically Dragon Satan. Plainly, we cannot say this about any living creature in the real world, so the "argument" of D&D would only last in the real world for about as long as it would take us to verify the non-existence of Dragon Satan. So, honestly, it's never bothered me in the way it does you, nor, evidently, has it ever bothered the designers that way.
This is treading very close to real-world religion already, but suffice to say that if you have a means of verifying the non-existence of any given deity in the real world, there are a few billion people who might want to give it a spin.
But beyond that, no fiction is meaningful if its lessons cannot be applied to the world that we, real actual humans, live in. If you are going to dismiss any themes or subtext present in any fantasy story as simply not applying to our world because that world has dragons and ours doesn't, then you have largely missed the point of literature as a whole, and are likely rather poorer for it. Fantasy literature is ONLY worthwhile for what it can tell us about the real world; everything else is petty escapism. So if I can make even one person think about how we treat people of other races (or religions, or creeds, or what have you) by using the analogy of Redcloak, then it will have been time well spent on my part.