Ye know what? Never mind. it's not worth it. Y'all have fun committing war crimes on as many orcs as your DM lets you find. I'll do better at my own-assed personal table, and that will have to be good enough for me.
We should completely remove any possibility of conflict and necessity for cooperation, engagement and sacrifice out of Dungeons&Dragons and make sure all conflicts are always settled dipomatically and with all parties to a mutual consent to the terms of things going forward.
That seems overtly hyperbolic....I think you can even address racism in game as long as everyone is on board with it.
I address it in my game (after having a discussion about it in session 0) in Eberron as Warforged are seen as mindless killing machines (they are not) and face issues now that they are replacing labor forces.
The difference is I set the stage appropriately and we all discuss how we want to go about it before assuming anything.
Brief clarification: I was trying to state that putting alignment directly in stat blocks or not should be a nothingburger, not alignment itself. Alignment is one of those things I feel is best handled as one of the "Optional Rules" sections in a potential theoretical future 6e DMG, wherein the book explains alignment, how to use it, and gives a few examples of assigning alignments, but alignment is otherwise not held up as a core tenet of the game. A DM can assign an alignment, and any books in which alignment-as-a-physical-force becomes a factor, such as Planescape or Blood War, can go more in-depth on alignment as needed.
I am of the opinion that the category "fiend" is overly broad, and should be broken out into Demon and Devil specifically where appropriate, with certain fiends that float between the two being left to the broad 'Fiend' category. Devils can be Lawful, demons can be Chaotic, and in games where that matters it's relatively easy to sort out. Elsewise? In many games the only thing the PCs need to know is "AHHHH FIEND!" and that it's trying to do Bad Shit. If alignment matters the GM can give it one, elsewise why bother?
Except it is not a big nothing burger. Yes, it maybe a nothing burger in terms of removing alignment from the standard playable races like drow and goblinoids. I would say most people either don't mind this per se or are at least neutral (no pun intended) towards it even if they think it is a bit overkill. It is not a nothing burger when you consider the Great Wheel cosmology which is the default cosmology of DnD.
The great wheel is really only relevant to religions and creatures from the outer planes.
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered?
What made you look at my statement of "I find the language of people being compared to animals hurtful and demeaning" and simply have to ask this question? Does this address the issue I brought up at all? Or is it an extrapolation? If it's an extrapolation, was it necessary to be brought up in response to me and the hurt that I expressed?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered? I am telling as a Liberal Black dude that Dark Sun for example is one of my all time favorite worlds. So, now because of this what I consider overkill on sensitivity do we not publish that world because slavery was so prevalent in it? If so doe we print it with the quite frankly ridiculous amounts of trigger and safeword warnings that existed in Ravenloft (a horror product). I mean Stephen King books which are made for the same age range as Ravenloft and heck even R.L. Stine did not come with the number of safety warnings. This seems to be phenomena specific to the DnD gaming audience. Do we not have adventures with violence in them....in a fantasy game because MANY people in life have experienced some form of physical violence or the threat there of and can suffer episodes when exposed to it like soldiers who have PTSD (and many people in the military also game btw). So like should an adventure ever show a town or village getting burn to the ground and violence done to the residents by villains (I am sorry I mean misunderstood morally complex people)?
YES I fully admit some people can be triggered by a host of things but in general in fiction it has never been the norm not to products available or remove topics that through vague association could cause harm to others otherwise Shakespeare would be removed from high school curriculums due to the fact that it could glorify suicide. BTW Romeo Juliet didn't come with a warning even in the new editions (that I have seen) but Ravenloft did LOL. I find it laughable.
My view on this is that you do your best to ensure that you are not causing undo harm to people....if you make body horror games that is fine...just warn people that there is body horror.
If you want to have racism be a big part of an adventure module....go ahead but preface with the fact that there is overt racism and that the module is intended to deal with it in a respectful way.
Bascially it boils down to respecting those people who have experienced trauma and forewarning them of the content. When your default is "Racist Orc" with no warning then it puts people in an awkward position to have to address it after the fact.
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered?
What made you look at my statement of "I find the language of people being compared to animals hurtful and demeaning" and simply have to ask this question? Does this address the issue I brought up at all? Or is it an extrapolation? If it's an extrapolation, was it necessary to be brought up in response to me and the hurt that I expressed?
Well it is not an extrapolation it addresses your issue directly. Your point is that FANTASY races within DnD like Orcs, have no physical features equivalent to real world human races nor in DnD to the appropriate the cultural idiosyncrasies specific to real world human races the way that Orkz in Warhammer do, cause you and others to feel hurt when they are protrayed whole sale as evil or savage, etc. This is a vague association (DnD Orcs and Real World humans) but regardless of that you are hurt by the comparison. I am asking at what point are vague associations that could possibly trigger emotional/mental trauma in someone allowed to totally take said enjoyment and the removal of certain things (in this case alignment although as I mentioned I ambivalent towards playable humanoid races being more complex as opposed to fiendish races and such) away from others? I gave examples, ie.e in Dark Sun slavery is heavily present. Slavery and watching it is traumatic to some folk. Therefore Dark Sun which is supposed to be rough gritty world where slavery which is part of what made the world appealing is common except in Tyr where the slaves gained their freedom. So should the Dark Sun product not be released? Horde of the Dragon Queen has a scene when the adventurers first arrive in Greenest that shows the town being ravaged by goblins and villagers being hurt. A woman is being chased. This is something minus the goblins (which there is no real world equivalent of as it is a FANTASY race) a soldier who served time in Iraq or Afghanistan may have seen. So should future products not show towns and villages, etc being harmed because it could trigger PTSD in someone? I think these are valid questions. MY answer is we can't not have literature because someone may take a vague association and harm themselves or cause harm to others or again Romeo and Juliet would be banned due to promoting possible suicide. I was not attacking you. I was asking a question. I am willing to bet in real life our politics probably align more than you think but this is a fantasy game and I was asking about your views....no need for defensiveness and also why I may have quoted you I am opening it up for broader discussion hence why I posted publically vs sending say a private IM.
This was clearly not meant as a truth or wish... :D
As long as you talk about it before you run the game and everyone is on board, you can go for any topic and depth you socially agreed upon til someone cries "lord have mercy" and says its too much now. Thats between the DM and the players. I get that. I played a lot of campaigns, lot of systems beside D&D to be well aware how deep things can go and how flat things are in the realm of d&d in comparison. that doesn't mean i would like to have my CoC mechanics in d&d or would like to go deep edge on Monsterhearts or World of Darkness.
D&D at its core is a game system with a heavy load about violent problem solving and damage, damage, damage. And what you make out of it - is a totally different beast.
In my world Orcs are proud horse people who see themselves as superior to other races who are not able to protect themselves against their might. they live in large families, have multiple wifes and are in the slave trading business. They can be violent and are easy to anger, but they are looking into the future (of domination and even more slave trading, but with fatter bellies) and use fear as a tool of war and victory. If you ask me why they are how they are i'd tell you "they have been given their traits by their creator and used it to forge themselves in what they are now. They could change, but why if it has worked for so long."
But how different is that from my early D&D orcs that i met when i was a young boy? In detail - a lot. Overall - not as much. I grew up playing D&D with my IRL friends and the lore that every race, humanoid or not, can be tried to bargain with. Your enemies enemies can be your allies, even if only for a short while." which always has the necessity to give them something players can grasp for to make em more believable, approachable or even trustworthy. Or easy to manipulate. To ally with the local clan of kobolds to kick out the neighboring orcs that are a pest for them.... just to ally with an ogre who wants to get rid of the kobolds he can't reach cause their tunnels are too small.... or tell the kobolds and hit the ogre? we sure had some debating to do even in the black and white era. good old times :D
Your point is that FANTASY races within DnD like Orcs, have no physical features equivalent to real world human races nor in DnD to the appropriate the cultural idiosyncrasies specific to real world human races the way that Orkz in Warhammer do, cause you and others to feel hurt when they are protrayed whole sale as evil or savage, etc. This is a vague association (DnD Orcs and Real World humans) but regardless of that you are hurt by the comparison.
I'm gonna stop you right there. My whole entire point was that @OldMightyFriendlyGamer said something hurtful, and I would like them to stop and maybe throw an apology in there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered?
What made you look at my statement of "I find the language of people being compared to animals hurtful and demeaning" and simply have to ask this question? Does this address the issue I brought up at all? Or is it an extrapolation? If it's an extrapolation, was it necessary to be brought up in response to me and the hurt that I expressed?
Well it is not an extrapolation it addresses your issue directly. Your point is that FANTASY races within DnD like Orcs, have no physical features equivalent to real world human races nor in DnD to the appropriate the cultural idiosyncrasies specific to real world human races the way that Orkz in Warhammer do, cause you and others to feel hurt when they are protrayed whole sale as evil or savage, etc. This is a vague association (DnD Orcs and Real World humans) but regardless of that you are hurt by the comparison. I am asking at what point are vague associations that could possibly trigger emotional/mental trauma in someone allowed to totally take said enjoyment and the removal of certain things (in this case alignment although as I mentioned I ambivalent towards playable humanoid races being more complex as opposed to fiendish races and such) away from others? I gave examples, ie.e in Dark Sun slavery is heavily present. Slavery and watching it is traumatic to some folk. Therefore Dark Sun which is supposed to be rough gritty world where slavery which is part of what made the world appealing is common except in Tyr where the slaves gained their freedom. So should the Dark Sun product not be released? Horde of the Dragon Queen has a scene when the adventurers first arrive in Greenest that shows the town being ravaged by goblins and villagers being hurt. A woman is being chased. This is something minus the goblins (which there is no real world equivalent of as it is a FANTASY race) a soldier who served time in Iraq or Afghanistan may have seen. So should future products not show towns and villages, etc being harmed because it could trigger PTSD in someone? I think these are valid questions. MY answer is we can't not have literature because someone may take a vague association and harm themselves or cause harm to others or again Romeo and Juliet would be banned due to promoting possible suicide.
Fiction in general can definately invoke real world emotions. A movie with a sexual assault (especially an unexpected one) can definitely shake someone who has experienced assault themselves.
So a game in which overt or even institutionalized racism (especially if not expected) could harm someone who has experienced it themselves.
Personal pain is something that is defined by the person who is feeling it and should be part of ANY discussion when it comes to content in the game. It is a good faith move by WotC to show they agree with this by removing sterotypes that likely should not have existed in the first place.....or have just naturally evolved over time through cultural change.
This was clearly not meant as a truth or wish... :D
As long as you talk about it before you run the game and everyone is on board, you can go for any topic and depth you socially agreed upon til someone cries "lord have mercy" and says its too much now. Thats between the DM and the players. I get that. I played a lot of campaigns, lot of systems beside D&D to be well aware how deep things can go and how flat things are in the realm of d&d in comparison. that doesn't mean i would like to have my CoC mechanics in d&d or would like to go deep edge on Monsterhearts or World of Darkness.
D&D at its core is a game system with a heavy load about violent problem solving and damage, damage, damage. And what you make out of it - is a totally different beast.
In my world Orcs are proud horse people who see themselves as superior to other races who are not able to protect themselves against their might. they live in large families, have multiple wifes and are in the slave trading business. They can be violent and are easy to anger, but they are looking into the future (of domination and even more slave trading, but with fatter bellies) and use fear as a tool of war and victory. If you ask me why they are how they are i'd tell you "they have been given their traits by their creator and used it to forge themselves in what they are now. They could change, but why if it has worked for so long."
But how different is that from my early D&D orcs that i met when i was a young boy? In detail - a lot. Overall - not as much. I grew up playing D&D with my IRL friends and the lore that every race, humanoid or not, can be tried to bargain with. Your enemies enemies can be your allies, even if only for a short while." which always has the necessity to give them something players can grasp for to make em more believable, approachable or even trustworthy. Or easy to manipulate. To ally with the local clan of kobolds to kick out the neighboring orcs that are a pest for them.... just to ally with an ogre who wants to get rid of the kobolds he can't reach cause their tunnels are too small.... or tell the kobolds and hit the ogre? we sure had some debating to do even in the black and white era. good old times :D
That is your world and your right to run as you see fit. It's just that WotC no longer believes the Orc representation that currently exists should exist as it should.
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered? I am telling as a Liberal Black dude that Dark Sun for example is one of my all time favorite worlds. So, now because of this what I consider overkill on sensitivity do we not publish that world because slavery was so prevalent in it? If so doe we print it with the quite frankly ridiculous amounts of trigger and safeword warnings that existed in Ravenloft (a horror product). I mean Stephen King books which are made for the same age range as Ravenloft and heck even R.L. Stine did not come with the number of safety warnings. This seems to be phenomena specific to the DnD gaming audience. Do we not have adventures with violence in them....in a fantasy game because MANY people in life have experienced some form of physical violence or the threat there of and can suffer episodes when exposed to it like soldiers who have PTSD (and many people in the military also game btw). So like should an adventure ever show a town or village getting burn to the ground and violence done to the residents by villains (I am sorry I mean misunderstood morally complex people)?
YES I fully admit some people can be triggered by a host of things but in general in fiction it has never been the norm not to products available or remove topics that through vague association could cause harm to others otherwise Shakespeare would be removed from high school curriculums due to the fact that it could glorify suicide. BTW Romeo Juliet didn't come with a warning even in the new editions (that I have seen) but Ravenloft did LOL. I find it laughable.
My view on this is that you do your best to ensure that you are not causing undo harm to people....if you make body horror games that is fine...just warn people that there is body horror.
If you want to have racism be a big part of an adventure module....go ahead but preface with the fact that there is overt racism and that the module is intended to deal with it in a respectful way.
Bascially it boils down to respecting those people who have experienced trauma and forewarning them of the content. When your default is "Racist Orc" with no warning then it puts people in an awkward position to have to address it after the fact.
My friend I basically agree with you. Sure the nature of a campaign not just alignment but a host of other things the TONE of the game, how much comedy or idle table talk will be allowed should be discussed before hand. No problem. I am just saying (and again overall the Ravenloft product was one of my favorite DnD worlds released) that R.L. STINE books that are made for kids did not have as much stop gap warnings as was smattered throughout Ravenloft and said numerous times on promotional videos of the product. I agree with you but that aspect in particular I find funny because I think it is ridiculous.
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered? I am telling as a Liberal Black dude that Dark Sun for example is one of my all time favorite worlds. So, now because of this what I consider overkill on sensitivity do we not publish that world because slavery was so prevalent in it? If so doe we print it with the quite frankly ridiculous amounts of trigger and safeword warnings that existed in Ravenloft (a horror product). I mean Stephen King books which are made for the same age range as Ravenloft and heck even R.L. Stine did not come with the number of safety warnings. This seems to be phenomena specific to the DnD gaming audience. Do we not have adventures with violence in them....in a fantasy game because MANY people in life have experienced some form of physical violence or the threat there of and can suffer episodes when exposed to it like soldiers who have PTSD (and many people in the military also game btw). So like should an adventure ever show a town or village getting burn to the ground and violence done to the residents by villains (I am sorry I mean misunderstood morally complex people)?
YES I fully admit some people can be triggered by a host of things but in general in fiction it has never been the norm not to products available or remove topics that through vague association could cause harm to others otherwise Shakespeare would be removed from high school curriculums due to the fact that it could glorify suicide. BTW Romeo Juliet didn't come with a warning even in the new editions (that I have seen) but Ravenloft did LOL. I find it laughable.
My view on this is that you do your best to ensure that you are not causing undo harm to people....if you make body horror games that is fine...just warn people that there is body horror.
If you want to have racism be a big part of an adventure module....go ahead but preface with the fact that there is overt racism and that the module is intended to deal with it in a respectful way.
Bascially it boils down to respecting those people who have experienced trauma and forewarning them of the content. When your default is "Racist Orc" with no warning then it puts people in an awkward position to have to address it after the fact.
My friend I basically agree with you. Sure the nature of a campaign not just alignment but a host of other things the TONE of the game, how much comedy or idle table talk will be allowed should be discussed before hand. No problem. I am just saying (and again overall the Ravenloft product was one of my favorite DnD worlds released) that R.L. STINE books that are made for kids did not have as much stop gap warnings as was smattered throughout Ravenloft and said numerous times on promotional videos of the product. I agree with you but that aspect in particular I find funny because I think it is ridiculous.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
No they don't. R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD that people's individual idiosyncrasies and neurosis (and I don't even know if this group is the majority) is able to dictate and censor the body politic. Also to be clear the stuff in Real World people are demanding better of are things like the Uncle Remus cartoon from Disney that was full of demeaning stereotypes and fallacies of real world people, or people getting choked out without true provocation....not because gray skinned orcs are shown as barbarians. BLM is not marching for Orc rights that I can assure you.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
No they don't. R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD that people's individual idiosyncrasies and neurosis (and I don't even know if this group is the majority) is able to dictate and censor the body politic.
These are works that existed before the standard was set and they have chosen to not address it (for better or worse).
WB/DIsney no longer censors their racist cartoons but instead offers a warning/discussion point before the cartoon to state that ignoring the hurtful nature of the material is to pretend it didn' t exist.
R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD
It's not surprising that a roleplaying product (where you literally play out the actions of a character, in an usually-communal setting) would have different standards than a book or TV show (where you just read or watch).
We could also just try to understand that its a work of fiction in a world filled with magic and fictional gods that created them with a mind and a purpose thats all over the place for a lot of races. Nothing of which holds true in our scientific minds and views of today and nothing we call reality. But maybe we should give all sentient beings a complete human mindset and diverse nature. So that all races are basically just different clothes we put on with no real meaning and zero edges.
I know what fiction is, but speaking about people like they are less than people is an abuse that I and other people have suffered in real life. However it is meant in intention, this kind of language is hurtful as a consequence. I'm letting you know that I find it personally demeaning and hurtful, so please stop.
It is also something that WOTC has explicitly said they are going to change, so your suggestion contradicts the official statement of Wizards of the Coast.
I guess my question is at what point does it become nonsensical not to print something because someone might get triggered? I am telling as a Liberal Black dude that Dark Sun for example is one of my all time favorite worlds. So, now because of this what I consider overkill on sensitivity do we not publish that world because slavery was so prevalent in it? If so doe we print it with the quite frankly ridiculous amounts of trigger and safeword warnings that existed in Ravenloft (a horror product). I mean Stephen King books which are made for the same age range as Ravenloft and heck even R.L. Stine did not come with the number of safety warnings. This seems to be phenomena specific to the DnD gaming audience. Do we not have adventures with violence in them....in a fantasy game because MANY people in life have experienced some form of physical violence or the threat there of and can suffer episodes when exposed to it like soldiers who have PTSD (and many people in the military also game btw). So like should an adventure ever show a town or village getting burn to the ground and violence done to the residents by villains (I am sorry I mean misunderstood morally complex people)?
YES I fully admit some people can be triggered by a host of things but in general in fiction it has never been the norm not to products available or remove topics that through vague association could cause harm to others otherwise Shakespeare would be removed from high school curriculums due to the fact that it could glorify suicide. BTW Romeo Juliet didn't come with a warning even in the new editions (that I have seen) but Ravenloft did LOL. I find it laughable.
My view on this is that you do your best to ensure that you are not causing undo harm to people....if you make body horror games that is fine...just warn people that there is body horror.
If you want to have racism be a big part of an adventure module....go ahead but preface with the fact that there is overt racism and that the module is intended to deal with it in a respectful way.
Bascially it boils down to respecting those people who have experienced trauma and forewarning them of the content. When your default is "Racist Orc" with no warning then it puts people in an awkward position to have to address it after the fact.
My friend I basically agree with you. Sure the nature of a campaign not just alignment but a host of other things the TONE of the game, how much comedy or idle table talk will be allowed should be discussed before hand. No problem. I am just saying (and again overall the Ravenloft product was one of my favorite DnD worlds released) that R.L. STINE books that are made for kids did not have as much stop gap warnings as was smattered throughout Ravenloft and said numerous times on promotional videos of the product. I agree with you but that aspect in particular I find funny because I think it is ridiculous.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
Todays better is tomorrows worse. Zeitgeist is a fickle beast. Sensitive.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
No they don't. R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD that people's individual idiosyncrasies and neurosis (and I don't even know if this group is the majority) is able to dictate and censor the body politic.
These are works that existed before the standard was set and they have chosen to not address it (for better or worse).
WB/DIsney no longer censors their racist cartoons but instead offers a warning/discussion point before the cartoon to state that ignoring the hurtful nature of the material is to pretend it didn' t exist.
You are not strawmanning. You are grasping at straws in this particular regard.
RL Stine books have reprinted numerous times since first released. They don't come with trigger warnings in the most modern printing. Stephen King has printed book since the standard was set. Guess what? No trigger warnings. Shakespeares works have been reprinted numerous times and still are being since then. No trigger warnings. Although my friend did give a brief warning to her class after they reviewed R&J just letting the kids know resources are there if they need them....even so that was a one and done she chose to do and was not in the book.
New books, movies and TV shows are being released constantly and these don't have a modern standard? REALLY? Yeah, they say mature audiences and move on. New shows are produced almost ad nauseaum now especially as the cable chord gave way to streaming.
Yes, WB/Disney does address and give a warning for racist cartoons and rightly so.....because they depict real world people on screen in a negative way. I am fully behind that.
R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD
It's not surprising that a roleplaying product (where you literally play out the actions of a character, in an usually-communal setting) would have different standards than a book or TV show (where you just read or watch).
Except it seems to be taken to an extreme by (I suspect ) a small albeit vocal group of folks within DnD (note I did not say TTRPGs) I said DnD specifically.
R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD
It's not surprising that a roleplaying product (where you literally play out the actions of a character, in an usually-communal setting) would have different standards than a book or TV show (where you just read or watch).
Except it seems to be taken to an extreme by a suspect a small albeit vocal group of folks within DnD (note I did not say TTRPGs) I said DnD specifically.
DnD is the most popular TTRPG ever (by like an order of magnitude). It's also basically the oldest (and has some...old-fashioned ideas), and experiencing an unprecedented growth in playerbase, especially among young people. All of that adds up. Furthermore, despite (or because of) their moves towards inclusivity and psycological safety, their sales keep going up.
R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD
It's not surprising that a roleplaying product (where you literally play out the actions of a character, in an usually-communal setting) would have different standards than a book or TV show (where you just read or watch).
Except it seems to be taken to an extreme by a suspect a small albeit vocal group of folks within DnD (note I did not say TTRPGs) I said DnD specifically.
DnD is the most popular TTRPG ever (by like an order of magnitude). It's also basically the oldest (and has some...old-fashioned ideas), and experiencing an unprecedented growth in playerbase, especially among young people. All of that adds up. Furthermore, despite (or because of) their moves towards inclusivity and psycological safety, their sales keep going up.
Yeah, I know DnD is the most popular RPG. I am well aware of market demographics within gaming. Honestly, there is not truly an TTRPG market. DnD is the tabletop RPG market for the most part or I will say as goes DnD so goes the market. The last part however is somewhat speculative. DnD sales increases could be contributed to a number of reasons. None of the least being that DnD has FINALLY started to release crunchy books that actual have rules expansions for people to game with (Xanathar's, Tasha's, Mordenkainen) and these books honestly took a good while to come out as compared to past editions so people were hungering for crunchy content. Also, now they are finally releasing campaign worlds including classic campaign worlds like Eberron and Ravenloft that people have been asking for. So you can't contribute this increase in popularity to the diversity push which was actually very recent all things considered in DnD 5E history. OH! Also this thing called a global pandemic happened that had people shut inside and thus people started gaming more. DnD has pretty much said the pandemic boosted sales. Now that summer is here and many places even in the most conscious states are opening up and loosening restrictions I am curious if this will impact the growth? I guess we will see but my point is no you are claiming something that is not a contributor to the popularity as the drive has only recently started and the upswing was going on before that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That seems overtly hyperbolic....I think you can even address racism in game as long as everyone is on board with it.
I address it in my game (after having a discussion about it in session 0) in Eberron as Warforged are seen as mindless killing machines (they are not) and face issues now that they are replacing labor forces.
The difference is I set the stage appropriately and we all discuss how we want to go about it before assuming anything.
Brief clarification: I was trying to state that putting alignment directly in stat blocks or not should be a nothingburger, not alignment itself. Alignment is one of those things I feel is best handled as one of the "Optional Rules" sections in a potential theoretical future 6e DMG, wherein the book explains alignment, how to use it, and gives a few examples of assigning alignments, but alignment is otherwise not held up as a core tenet of the game. A DM can assign an alignment, and any books in which alignment-as-a-physical-force becomes a factor, such as Planescape or Blood War, can go more in-depth on alignment as needed.
I am of the opinion that the category "fiend" is overly broad, and should be broken out into Demon and Devil specifically where appropriate, with certain fiends that float between the two being left to the broad 'Fiend' category. Devils can be Lawful, demons can be Chaotic, and in games where that matters it's relatively easy to sort out. Elsewise? In many games the only thing the PCs need to know is "AHHHH FIEND!" and that it's trying to do Bad Shit. If alignment matters the GM can give it one, elsewise why bother?
Please do not contact or message me.
The great wheel is really only relevant to religions and creatures from the outer planes.
What made you look at my statement of "I find the language of people being compared to animals hurtful and demeaning" and simply have to ask this question? Does this address the issue I brought up at all? Or is it an extrapolation? If it's an extrapolation, was it necessary to be brought up in response to me and the hurt that I expressed?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
My view on this is that you do your best to ensure that you are not causing undo harm to people....if you make body horror games that is fine...just warn people that there is body horror.
If you want to have racism be a big part of an adventure module....go ahead but preface with the fact that there is overt racism and that the module is intended to deal with it in a respectful way.
Bascially it boils down to respecting those people who have experienced trauma and forewarning them of the content. When your default is "Racist Orc" with no warning then it puts people in an awkward position to have to address it after the fact.
Well it is not an extrapolation it addresses your issue directly. Your point is that FANTASY races within DnD like Orcs, have no physical features equivalent to real world human races nor in DnD to the appropriate the cultural idiosyncrasies specific to real world human races the way that Orkz in Warhammer do, cause you and others to feel hurt when they are protrayed whole sale as evil or savage, etc. This is a vague association (DnD Orcs and Real World humans) but regardless of that you are hurt by the comparison. I am asking at what point are vague associations that could possibly trigger emotional/mental trauma in someone allowed to totally take said enjoyment and the removal of certain things (in this case alignment although as I mentioned I ambivalent towards playable humanoid races being more complex as opposed to fiendish races and such) away from others? I gave examples, ie.e in Dark Sun slavery is heavily present. Slavery and watching it is traumatic to some folk. Therefore Dark Sun which is supposed to be rough gritty world where slavery which is part of what made the world appealing is common except in Tyr where the slaves gained their freedom. So should the Dark Sun product not be released? Horde of the Dragon Queen has a scene when the adventurers first arrive in Greenest that shows the town being ravaged by goblins and villagers being hurt. A woman is being chased. This is something minus the goblins (which there is no real world equivalent of as it is a FANTASY race) a soldier who served time in Iraq or Afghanistan may have seen. So should future products not show towns and villages, etc being harmed because it could trigger PTSD in someone? I think these are valid questions. MY answer is we can't not have literature because someone may take a vague association and harm themselves or cause harm to others or again Romeo and Juliet would be banned due to promoting possible suicide. I was not attacking you. I was asking a question. I am willing to bet in real life our politics probably align more than you think but this is a fantasy game and I was asking about your views....no need for defensiveness and also why I may have quoted you I am opening it up for broader discussion hence why I posted publically vs sending say a private IM.
This was clearly not meant as a truth or wish... :D
As long as you talk about it before you run the game and everyone is on board, you can go for any topic and depth you socially agreed upon til someone cries "lord have mercy" and says its too much now. Thats between the DM and the players. I get that. I played a lot of campaigns, lot of systems beside D&D to be well aware how deep things can go and how flat things are in the realm of d&d in comparison. that doesn't mean i would like to have my CoC mechanics in d&d or would like to go deep edge on Monsterhearts or World of Darkness.
D&D at its core is a game system with a heavy load about violent problem solving and damage, damage, damage. And what you make out of it - is a totally different beast.
In my world Orcs are proud horse people who see themselves as superior to other races who are not able to protect themselves against their might. they live in large families, have multiple wifes and are in the slave trading business. They can be violent and are easy to anger, but they are looking into the future (of domination and even more slave trading, but with fatter bellies) and use fear as a tool of war and victory. If you ask me why they are how they are i'd tell you "they have been given their traits by their creator and used it to forge themselves in what they are now. They could change, but why if it has worked for so long."
But how different is that from my early D&D orcs that i met when i was a young boy? In detail - a lot. Overall - not as much. I grew up playing D&D with my IRL friends and the lore that every race, humanoid or not, can be tried to bargain with. Your enemies enemies can be your allies, even if only for a short while." which always has the necessity to give them something players can grasp for to make em more believable, approachable or even trustworthy. Or easy to manipulate. To ally with the local clan of kobolds to kick out the neighboring orcs that are a pest for them.... just to ally with an ogre who wants to get rid of the kobolds he can't reach cause their tunnels are too small.... or tell the kobolds and hit the ogre? we sure had some debating to do even in the black and white era. good old times :D
I'm gonna stop you right there. My whole entire point was that @OldMightyFriendlyGamer said something hurtful, and I would like them to stop and maybe throw an apology in there.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Fiction in general can definately invoke real world emotions. A movie with a sexual assault (especially an unexpected one) can definitely shake someone who has experienced assault themselves.
So a game in which overt or even institutionalized racism (especially if not expected) could harm someone who has experienced it themselves.
Personal pain is something that is defined by the person who is feeling it and should be part of ANY discussion when it comes to content in the game. It is a good faith move by WotC to show they agree with this by removing sterotypes that likely should not have existed in the first place.....or have just naturally evolved over time through cultural change.
That is your world and your right to run as you see fit. It's just that WotC no longer believes the Orc representation that currently exists should exist as it should.
Its really as simple as that.
My friend I basically agree with you. Sure the nature of a campaign not just alignment but a host of other things the TONE of the game, how much comedy or idle table talk will be allowed should be discussed before hand. No problem. I am just saying (and again overall the Ravenloft product was one of my favorite DnD worlds released) that R.L. STINE books that are made for kids did not have as much stop gap warnings as was smattered throughout Ravenloft and said numerous times on promotional videos of the product. I agree with you but that aspect in particular I find funny because I think it is ridiculous.
Times change and people maybe expect better from their media now.
No they don't. R.L. Stines books still don't come with a trigger warning. R&J (and Shakespeare) taught in high school does not give a trigger warning. Most shows on TV may say "Intended for mature audiences" if that applies and leave it at that. They don't browbeat the issue. Quite frankly, this seems to be a phenomena relegated to DnD that people's individual idiosyncrasies and neurosis (and I don't even know if this group is the majority) is able to dictate and censor the body politic. Also to be clear the stuff in Real World people are demanding better of are things like the Uncle Remus cartoon from Disney that was full of demeaning stereotypes and fallacies of real world people, or people getting choked out without true provocation....not because gray skinned orcs are shown as barbarians. BLM is not marching for Orc rights that I can assure you.
These are works that existed before the standard was set and they have chosen to not address it (for better or worse).
WB/DIsney no longer censors their racist cartoons but instead offers a warning/discussion point before the cartoon to state that ignoring the hurtful nature of the material is to pretend it didn' t exist.
It's not surprising that a roleplaying product (where you literally play out the actions of a character, in an usually-communal setting) would have different standards than a book or TV show (where you just read or watch).
Todays better is tomorrows worse. Zeitgeist is a fickle beast. Sensitive.
You are not strawmanning. You are grasping at straws in this particular regard.
RL Stine books have reprinted numerous times since first released. They don't come with trigger warnings in the most modern printing. Stephen King has printed book since the standard was set. Guess what? No trigger warnings. Shakespeares works have been reprinted numerous times and still are being since then. No trigger warnings. Although my friend did give a brief warning to her class after they reviewed R&J just letting the kids know resources are there if they need them....even so that was a one and done she chose to do and was not in the book.
New books, movies and TV shows are being released constantly and these don't have a modern standard? REALLY? Yeah, they say mature audiences and move on. New shows are produced almost ad nauseaum now especially as the cable chord gave way to streaming.
Yes, WB/Disney does address and give a warning for racist cartoons and rightly so.....because they depict real world people on screen in a negative way. I am fully behind that.
Except it seems to be taken to an extreme by (I suspect ) a small albeit vocal group of folks within DnD (note I did not say TTRPGs) I said DnD specifically.
DnD is the most popular TTRPG ever (by like an order of magnitude). It's also basically the oldest (and has some...old-fashioned ideas), and experiencing an unprecedented growth in playerbase, especially among young people. All of that adds up. Furthermore, despite (or because of) their moves towards inclusivity and psycological safety, their sales keep going up.
Yeah, I know DnD is the most popular RPG. I am well aware of market demographics within gaming. Honestly, there is not truly an TTRPG market. DnD is the tabletop RPG market for the most part or I will say as goes DnD so goes the market. The last part however is somewhat speculative. DnD sales increases could be contributed to a number of reasons. None of the least being that DnD has FINALLY started to release crunchy books that actual have rules expansions for people to game with (Xanathar's, Tasha's, Mordenkainen) and these books honestly took a good while to come out as compared to past editions so people were hungering for crunchy content. Also, now they are finally releasing campaign worlds including classic campaign worlds like Eberron and Ravenloft that people have been asking for. So you can't contribute this increase in popularity to the diversity push which was actually very recent all things considered in DnD 5E history. OH! Also this thing called a global pandemic happened that had people shut inside and thus people started gaming more. DnD has pretty much said the pandemic boosted sales. Now that summer is here and many places even in the most conscious states are opening up and loosening restrictions I am curious if this will impact the growth? I guess we will see but my point is no you are claiming something that is not a contributor to the popularity as the drive has only recently started and the upswing was going on before that.