This thread was marked as Locked by GPyromania.
Poll - Edit James Haeck article 'Reimagining Racial Ability Scores'?
Poll: Edit James Haeck article 'Reimagining Racial Ability Scores'?
Edit James Haeck article 'Reimagining Racial Ability Scores'? - Single Choice
- Yes 13.8%
- No 86.2%
Ended Aug 21, 2019
On 8/14/2019 D&D Beyond published the article by James Haeck Reimagining Racial Ability Scores.
The article discussed optional rules for the mechanics surrounding racial ability scores. The article itself has been debated much as any other optional rule, however one particular bit of the article stands out and has caused it's own bit of a stir.
The linked article is to a piece entitled "Orcs, Britons, And The Martial Race Myth, Part I: A Species Built For Racial Terror" by James Mendez Hodes. The premise of which is that JRR Tolkien was commercializing on existing racist ideology and/or propagating racist ideologies in the creation of his fiction. The article goes on to extrapolate on Tolkien's influence on the fantasy and suggests that these themes are a persisting and pervasive racist influence on the fiction.
Quite a few people, myself included, believe that citing this article is a poor choice on behalf of Haeck, and an editorial oversight on behalf of D&D Beyond, and I believe the main idea and content of the article is better served if the comment and citation is stricken from the article.
Criticisms include...
I would urge James Haeck to consider the audience and work with D&D Beyond to amend the article so as not to include such negative associations (be they valid criticism or not) within this particular space. The poll above is intended to see if others agree.
There is something to be said about the validity of a poll when the original post is so clearly biased. Also, you're asking it the post should be edited, not if that line should have been there in the first place. Those are 2 different questions, and some people might say no to the first one and yes to the second one.
Also:
Children ages 10 and up should be aware that racism has been a part of history. World War 2 is taught to 10 year olds, and I'm pretty sure there's some racism in there.
The article is neither a religious or political opinion (even less debate), and I would hardly qualify this single sentence as a "political opinion". It also doesn't feature any hateful language. Also it isn't on the forum, so I fail to see how those rules would be relevant.
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
I will admit to being biased on the subject of presenting a child with an interperetation of something they enjoy, that makes them feel excluded from that thing. I am unflinchingly against it.
The point I have attempted to call out is, this is not a citation or article that points out the fact of real-world racism past and present; it is a critical analysis that speculates specifically that fictional Orcs are an artifact of racist ideology and that their continued portrayal in games and media today is evidence of persisting racism in those mediums. I think that is a bridge too far, and that D&D Beyond by presenting the citation and giving it endorsement could contribute to the alienation of the audience needlessly.
For myself, I have to say it's disappointing to see, and though I was going to move some of my game resources to D&D Beyond... this isn't the sort of thing I want my 10 year old to read... comparing orcish features to Asians and referencing people as "Mongoloid", really? Learning about real-world racism is important, I just don't think family game night is the place to be doing it.
The problem isn't being biased, everyone is, the problem is making a poll while providing a biased opinion at the same time. Of course you're going to influence the results.
And I would be surprised if a 10 year old actually read that DDB article, AND clicked through to the linked article AND actually read it in its entirety. The sentence itself would probably not even register.
So I still disagree, but I see your point.
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
I want to speak to the above statements regarding 10 year old children using the services here on D&D Beyond with accordance to the Terms of Service:
If one does not their 10 year old to view any included content, politically correct or otherwise, then they are responsible for removing them from receiving these services.
[ Site Rules & Guidelines ] --- [ Homebrew Rules & Guidelines ]
Send me a message with any questions or concerns
You are correct about that, and more is the pity that I'm being forced to make that choice. My plan had been to move to DnD Beyond, from Roll20 when the platform was mature enough. Content such as this makes that decision for me, which is a shame.
I don't get it. Both articles appear to be against racial stereotypes. What do you have a problem with?
Seems to be a solution in need of a problem. You don't want to bring up racism at game night? Then don't. He's also making neither a political nor religious argument, and has said nothing hateful towards any group.
I like to alleviate concepts of racism at my table by introducing elves, dwarves, humans as "Walks of Life." This begins with a discussion of the different types of creatures: Aberrations, monstrosities, beasts, humanoids, etc. Then, it asks the PCs to choose a "humanoid" creature type. This leads to a decision between elf, dwarf, human, half-orc, et al.
But then I illustrate concepts of racism to the players by making my dwarves, elves, and gnomes classist and racist, lol. Equal opportunity for all! All life is connected in a collective flow, and what is the difference between astronomy, geology, and biology anyway? Celebrate all walks of life!
V/R
EJF
FOR SERF AND SOVEREIGN!
@Serf2Sove #5eOGL
VIEW HERE AND FOLLOW FOR FREE, UNIQUE CONTENT
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/serf2sove-5eogl.851074/
I originally read the post, clicked the link, thought both pieces were interesting even if I didn't fully agree, commented, and forgot about it.
But every time I've gotten a notification letting me know somebody is complaining about it, I want to give this site even more money (already bough a number of things and have a subscription, not some hypothetical "I was going to...") for supporting Haeck. Once I noticed somebody with a Pepe the Frog avatar had started commenting, it became pretty clear which side held the moral high ground.
Keep taking my money, D&D Beyond, and thanks for both the service and the thought provoking blog posts. Whether I agree or not, I want to be presented with different ideas.
I don't think James D&D Beyond nor WOTC ever need to consider the racist provocateur audience such as yours. You are a loud horrible minority of hate.
Dear members of the community,
I think we are getting out of the line here. Please, stop calling and shaming others in a disrespectful manner. Expressing an opinion is one thing, offending is another.
We all (I hope) love D&D because is, first and foremost, a welcoming community and we are doing the exact opposite here.
Actions will be taken if this behaviour persists. I really hope we can count on your common sense.
Deyric, I'm sorry you feel that way. For my part, I don't believe I have offered anything hateful to the discussion, nor do I believe the quote you selected from me represents 'racist provocation'. I do believe that when issues such as this are injected into our community, the divisiveness represented by it can't help but cause the discussion to derange.
This is precisely the reason I have urged that D&D Beyond & James Haeck not offer endorsement to opinion pieces designed specifically to inflame debate. To paraphrase the content of the article "JRR Tolkien was a racist, and playing D&D is problematic colonial fantasy wish fulfillment", is an insulting portrayal of the community designed to inflame.
Are you serious right now ?
How is saying that not hateful towards both authors, and those who might agree with them ? You're overinterpreting what they said, while literally calling them hostile hate mongers and comparing them to arsonists. What does that make of those who agree, then ?
Also, the following is a gross misrepresentation of the point that was made to a mindblowing extent, and not even by the original article, but by one used a source:
You're trying to blow up and distort every little thing to serve the point you're trying to make, you are being disingenuous, you are gaslighting, and you are inflaming the debate by purposefully misrepresenting the points being made. You literally made a poll, only to push for an answer.
You may have made some good points along the way, but your refusal to argue on reality rather than your own interpretation and exaggeration is what makes this divisive, not the article itself.
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
ClementP, I am serious right now. If you see hate, I think you are allowing your personal feelings to add meaning to my words that I did not put there (once again, I don't blame you for this... it seems to be a hallmark of the type of discussion that Hodes brings to the table).
I'm not distorting anything, I am offering my opinion on the IDEAS presented... and you are right in one instance perhaps I am guilty of allowing myself a personal opinion on Hodes being one of many people in the world today presenting ideas they know are inflammatory in bad faith.
In response to my opinion I have had the following things attributed to me... that I am a "racist provocateur", that I am gas-lighting, being disingenuous, and that my intent is to inflame. I disagree with your conclusions, I can even see the line of reasoning that brings you there, and I'd like to say something that would convince you of my sincerity... but I don't know if that is possible.
Such is the nature of this sort of debate... which is why (and really my one and only point) that I believe that it is irresponsible for James Haeck to introduce that sort of content and it's associated divisive politics here. Check it at the door so we can discuss the game.
Alternatively, if the moderators and D&D Beyond believe I am honestly being cruel, rude, or violating ToS... they could ban me. They could decide that I am some irredeemable old man with who's unconscious bigotry makes him unable to appreciate it when a person like Hodes offers to save me from my racism.
Meanwhile, I honestly do believe I am engaging in the discussion in good faith, and I have not accused a single person here including Haeck of having bad motives for their beliefs or their arguments. I've expressed nothing more strong than disappointment at Haeck for bringing the content here. All of my ire is reserved for Hodes' article.
I could be wrong, maybe I am... but this is my opinion, and I think the fact that all sorts of evil and misconduct is being attributed to me because of that opinion... is the very reason why I find the nature of the discussion introduced with Hodes' article so toxic.
The "he made me do it" defense?
Again, there's nothing inherently political about discussing issues of race, and to deny that there are players of other races who may not be able to "check" their own realities "at the door" is a privileged argument. Further, it would be perfectly within the right of the game devs (let alone Haeck) to make the case that D&D can be productively used to motivate discussions about race that may be difficult to have without the cloak of fiction. That's part of what makes fiction a great medium.
Now, has Haeck made the argument that D&D is racist? No. Has he made the argument that players using the RAW racial ASI rules are racist? No. So really, what's the big deal?
There's a deeper issue here, but I don't want to pry too deep. I happen to be a member of a certain ethnic minority for which there are anti-(my heritage) tropes in every facet of life--and I'd like to think that most of the time, they're employed without intent to denigrate my heritage. Is it divisive to document the history of these tropes? I should think not, and you'd need some serious gall to argue that it's racist or inflammatory simply to note what has always been obvious to me by nature of my position. So if Tolkien used some racist tropes (and he did), maybe he didn't intend to denigrate anybody. But that doesn't erase the experience of the people who have been historically harmed by those tropes, and it certainly doesn't allow us to shield his works from criticism.
@ColdEnd
I agree with your stance. I believe that the commentators that say our stance is incorrect or overblown are simply being noisy negativists.
It was wrong for Haeck to introduce an outside, opinionated article (that was not WotC or DDB) into his idea for homebrew content. I really wish that would be admitted to by himself or by some other member of DDB. The fact that it is not being addressed will only leave a scar on the reputation of this site. This is a clear indication of what type of crowd this site will attract. Very unfortunate.
For those of you who keep saying "racism", you're all missing the point! We pay for this content because we support the game. I don't want my money supporting articles by authors with a political agenda. Keep it off the front page.
Really ClementP?! Please use some evidence to support your approval of what Haeck wrote rather than arguing with those of us who were offended and scared of what the original statement was implying.
I think there is a real discussion to be had here and most of the comments to this thread, and mine, are a distraction from what the original offense was.
Moderator, please address this issue on the front page so that the discussion will end without emotional bloodshed.
Does Haeck's statement represent DDB core values?
This thread has derailed and will be locked.
James Haeck is not freelancing for D&D Beyond, but is a full-time employee on our staff as Lead Writer. We fully support his desire and intent to explore the storied history of races in Dungeons & Dragons in the aforementioned article. We do not believe that this exploration is political in nature, as some topics transcend politics. While these matters have also been discussed by Wizards of the Coast D&D staff, it is important to note that we at D&D Beyond are part of Fandom, and value our place as a trusted third party in the roleplaying community. We have been encouraged by the discourse on this from the community, and while we might not always get everything right, we are dedicated to doing right.
We value the feedback that has been shared, and - as always - we will take it into consideration as we continue our journey towards providing the best original Dungeons & Dragons content on the internet.
Thanks!