1) And in the end, if we make Orcs or Goblins "complicated people who are more than just evil" we'll just end up replacing them with another "evil race" to kill. Like, I don't know... Devils, Demons, Illithids, etc.
2) We are talking about a make believe world were all powerful gods can exist with the power to create an entire race of creatures in any fashion they want, so yes, it is possible for there to be an entirely evil race in D&D, and no, it won't make me kill people in real life.
1) Will we? Why? Is there some kind of essential need or requirement for an absolute evil race in D&D?
2) Does it matter that it's possible? The real question, I'd assume anyway, is whether it's desirable.
What you do in your campaign, assuming your players are copacetic with it, is entirely up to you. If you want entirely evil races in your setting, nobody's going to come bust down your door and make you take it back. But this isn't about your campaign or your setting, it's about the official books. Those don't have to take into account only your sensibilities, but those of the entire (potential) player base. You do you at your table with your players. That's totally fine. Don't expect your norms to be the universal standard though. That's just silly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I find it a little disturbing, no I just find it ignorant to the point of silliness that some posters are trying to equate present efforts to sincerely "open up" the game of D&D in terms of a diversity of ways it can be played as well as increase the diversity of people who find the game welcoming to them with the "Satantic Panic" which was an effort to END the game among other things like loud guitar driven music and some hip hop. The latter was an ignorant cultural revanchist effort to suppress cultural forces it thought deviated from a parochially defined sense of normalcy that seems to always rear its head to challenge social progress in America (I mean, the bad guys in Footloose, basically). The present moment is trying to create the broadest future for the game possible. Any effort to conflate the two is nothing more than a profession of ignorance over both.
Monstrous races in D&D are not, and do not have to be, analogues for Humans!
Are you also saying they can't be?
I'm saying that by default they aren't. It seems like the only people trying to make them analogues for humans are those arguing against having them be all "X" in the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I find it a little disturbing, no I just find it ignorant to the point of silliness that some posters are trying to equate present efforts to sincerely "open up" the game of D&D in terms of a diversity of ways it can be played as well as increase the diversity of people who find the game welcoming to them with the "Satantic Panic" which was an effort to END the game among other things like loud guitar driven music and some hip hop. The latter was an ignorant cultural revanchist effort to suppress cultural forces it thought deviated from a parochially defined sense of normalcy that seems to always rear its head to challenge social progress in America (I mean, the bad guys in Footloose, basically). The present moment is trying to create the broadest future for the game possible. Any effort to conflate the two is nothing more than a profession of ignorance over both.
That's a long winded way of telling us you missed the point. I was responding to a user who suggested that things in the game could make players act in a negative way outside of the game, which is exactly one of the main things conservative christians suggested would happen during the satanic panic and the reason they wanted the game stopped. They believed that playing the game would make you satanic, and make you kill people or commit suicide.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Monstrous races in D&D are not, and do not have to be, analogues for Humans!
Are you also saying they can't be?
I'm saying that by default they aren't. It seems like the only people trying to make them analogues for humans are those arguing against having them be all "X" in the game.
Groups being unfavourably compared to animals or getting ascribed unflattering traits aren't the ones doing the comparing or the ascribing. Whether something can be is meaningful in this context.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I find it a little disturbing, no I just find it ignorant to the point of silliness that some posters are trying to equate present efforts to sincerely "open up" the game of D&D in terms of a diversity of ways it can be played as well as increase the diversity of people who find the game welcoming to them with the "Satantic Panic" which was an effort to END the game among other things like loud guitar driven music and some hip hop. The latter was an ignorant cultural revanchist effort to suppress cultural forces it thought deviated from a parochially defined sense of normalcy that seems to always rear its head to challenge social progress in America (I mean, the bad guys in Footloose, basically). The present moment is trying to create the broadest future for the game possible. Any effort to conflate the two is nothing more than a profession of ignorance over both.
That's a long winded way of telling us you missed the point. I was responding to a user who suggested that things in the game could make players act in a negative way outside of the game, which is exactly one of the main things conservative christians suggested would happen during the satanic panic and the reason they wanted the game stopped. They believed that playing the game would make you satanic, and make you kill people or commit suicide.
Nope. You're still conflating the false threats of the 80s with actual constructive cultural conversations in the present moment, conversations in popular discoures that actually are predicated by decades of research on the role cultural production has on things like equity, inclusion, exclusion and otherings. You can pretend there's such a thing as complete escapism, but folks better read and studied on these matters than someone citing contrarian opinions in Psychology Today as a source of authority do think otherwise. The fact that you don't seem to realize your posts are quintessentially reactionary is part of the silly amusement here, especially for a "no bullying, fully inclusive player" ... I'd say you got some blind spots.
4) You literally just ignored me telling you how a portrayal of a fictional race hurt me, personally. And there are plenty of other personal stories on this forum alone. This isn't some story I'm making up for points, this isn't a hypothetical, this isn't unrelated. Can you not see that?
Fine. As an atheist who faces persecution for not being religious, I believe, by your logic, that we should remove religion from D&D because it makes me feel unwelcome. And no, I'm not being trite, atheists really do face persecution for being atheists.
I mean, if you want to talk about logic I'm pretty sure that was a strawman argument.
I was responding to a user who suggested that things in the game could make players act in a negative way outside of the game, which is exactly one of the main things conservative christians suggested would happen during the satanic panic and the reason they wanted the game stopped. They believed that playing the game would make you satanic, and make you kill people or commit suicide.
But honestly, the potential for something in D&D to change people's behavior outside of D&D isn't even the most direct and pressing of problems when it comes to the portrayal of races in lore. The more direct issue is that these portrayals are directly harmful to those of us who have experienced ostracization and denigration in real life because it inflames and exacerbates old wounds.
These are all the exact same arguments that have been made by, mostly, the exact same people in the last dozen threads on the same subject. Ophidimancer's provided links, even.
Post #3 was a mod reminding everybody that the "discussion" has been had to death and the mods are sick of pissing out the same brushfire
Fossman1 started a much more neutral and reasonably-stanced discussion of Alignment a few days ago, here: Fossman's Alignment Thread, where there was some actual good discussion while we were trying to bury this one.
Normally I'm all for a good Internet fight goblin fisticuff, but this dead horse has been beaten into ochre jelly now. There's not even anything new to say. Can we just not, this once? Go jump into Fossman's thread instead - with civil points accounting for both sides of the debate - and let's get that one back. It was more interesting than this latest incarnation of the Eternal Forum Tire Fire that is anything related to the Diversity & Dragons initiative.
4) You literally just ignored me telling you how a portrayal of a fictional race hurt me, personally. And there are plenty of other personal stories on this forum alone. This isn't some story I'm making up for points, this isn't a hypothetical, this isn't unrelated. Can you not see that?
Fine. As an atheist who faces persecution for not being religious, I believe, by your logic, that we should remove religion from D&D because it makes me feel unwelcome. And no, I'm not being trite, atheists really do face persecution for being atheists.
For the love of God.
Everyone, I'm also an Atheist. This guy right here does not speak for us, and I'm not at all offended/made unwelcome in the hobby through the presence of fantasy religions. (Well, now that the Wall of the Faithless has stopped existing, that is.) What he's saying is BS and attempting to compare sizes of persecution in order to say, "No, your offense isn't valid, because mine isn't!"
Side Note: You never responded to my first post quoting you, which completely dismissed the article you posted and gave absolute proof that your "opinion" is made-up nonsense. If you have anything to say about what I originally posted, please post it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
4) You literally just ignored me telling you how a portrayal of a fictional race hurt me, personally. And there are plenty of other personal stories on this forum alone. This isn't some story I'm making up for points, this isn't a hypothetical, this isn't unrelated. Can you not see that?
Fine. As an atheist who faces persecution for not being religious, I believe, by your logic, that we should remove religion from D&D because it makes me feel unwelcome. And no, I'm not being trite, atheists really do face persecution for being atheists.
I mean, if you want to talk about logic I'm pretty sure that was a strawman argument.
I was responding to a user who suggested that things in the game could make players act in a negative way outside of the game, which is exactly one of the main things conservative christians suggested would happen during the satanic panic and the reason they wanted the game stopped. They believed that playing the game would make you satanic, and make you kill people or commit suicide.
Again, the hysteria of the so called Satanic Panic of the 80s and the present conversations over Dungeons and Dragons with sensitivity toward inclusivity just don't correlate. If someone insists on that association, there isn't much to be done in terms of debate.
4) You literally just ignored me telling you how a portrayal of a fictional race hurt me, personally. And there are plenty of other personal stories on this forum alone. This isn't some story I'm making up for points, this isn't a hypothetical, this isn't unrelated. Can you not see that?
Fine. As an atheist who faces persecution for not being religious, I believe, by your logic, that we should remove religion from D&D because it makes me feel unwelcome. And no, I'm not being trite, atheists really do face persecution for being atheists.
This is the logical fallacy known as a false equivalence. It is a faulty comparison because your atheism is not represented in D&D as a harmful stereotype, while the depiction of certain races in D&D are seen as allegories with harmful stereotypes for minorities. These are not at all the same thing. A more accurate presentation of your harm as an atheist would be the show ‘God Friended Me’, which suggests atheists are little more than people who are angry at god. If anything D&D is extremely atheist-friendly, as the gods in D&D are generally beings whose existence is testable and consistently proven.
Monstrous races in D&D are not, and do not have to be, analogues for Humans!
Are you also saying they can't be?
I'm saying that by default they aren't. It seems like the only people trying to make them analogues for humans are those arguing against having them be all "X" in the game.
October, in order to have this argument, you're going to need to understand a phenomena called "coded language," and it's associated concept, "racial coding." Here's a couple links you can read:
Now that we have an understanding of those concepts, you should see that it is not a leap to show that just because something is described as "not human" in a fantasy game, people are still able to read in-- unintentionally or not-- human assumptions based off our own racial- political landscape. You can also see the problem there. In fact, the issue or racial coding specifically in fantasy is not new either. There's a lot written on that subject as well. Here's a few other articles from a few years ago to familiarize itself with that specific facet of the issue:
I also like Lindsey Ellis' description of the problem in her review of the movie Bright, but this is a longer form video essay so might not be everyone's cup of tea, and it doesn't really get to the meat of the racial coding discussion till around the 20 minute mark. But I'll still include the link anyways since I like it: https://youtu.be/gLOxQxMnEz8
I'm not trying to be hostile or argumentative, but it is vital for anyone having this discussion to have an understanding of *why* we're having this discussion. No, a group of boring, non-gaming woke folks did not just randomly decide one day to ruin D&D. This stuff as it is embedded in our culture-- not just in D&D, but definitely a bunch in D&D-- has a measurable negative effect on people in reality. That is why IRL humans will always be relevant no matter how much "orcs are not human." I really hope you give some of this stuff a read.
I think a lot of us get caught up in wanting to defend the tradition of things like alignment despite the fact that it's use since it's original implementation has completely changed, but it's been around so long that we've maybe don't fully remember it as a part of the game versus the tradition of alignment we hold to instead. It's natural to feel defensive when our traditions seem to be under attack, and reactionary arguments are very easy to fall into, but like many IRL traditions that may turn out to be harmful, we need to rip the bandaid off sometimes and have that discussion if it's going to survive going forward.
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
It's not even a discussion, it's simply a repeat of worn-out complaints that are very rarely made in good faith.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
These are all the exact same arguments that have been made by, mostly, the exact same people in the last dozen threads on the same subject. Ophidimancer's provided links, even.
Post #3 was a mod reminding everybody that the "discussion" has been had to death and the mods are sick of pissing out the same brushfire
Fossman1 started a much more neutral and reasonably-stanced discussion of Alignment a few days ago, here: Fossman's Alignment Thread, where there was some actual good discussion while we were trying to bury this one.
Normally I'm all for a good Internet fight goblin fisticuff, but this dead horse has been beaten into ochre jelly now. There's not even anything new to say. Can we just not, this once? Go jump into Fossman's thread instead - with civil points accounting for both sides of the debate - and let's get that one back. It was more interesting than this latest incarnation of the Eternal Forum Tire Fire that is anything related to the Diversity & Dragons initiative.
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
It's not even a discussion, it's simply a repeat of worn-out complaints that are very rarely made in good faith.
Yeah, there were even some posts after that orange post that suggested this thread just be locked and some sort of "nothing new under the sun" thread be provided (basically what Ophid takes upon themself to do in these threads anyway) for folks wanting to reignite this thread. I think someone even said that there are ways to have constructive discussions of the utility of alignment in D&D an this tact not being one of them. But they're not in the thread anymore because I guess they got too meta.
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
I was summoun- oh, wait, never mind. Carry on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
Most people who hate alignment just can't (or don't) understand it.
Now, that's just completely unfounded. I understand alignment, but still hate it. I understand the difference between Good and Evil and Law and Chaos. I understand the Great Wheel Cosmology, Planescape, and the Blood War.
So, you're preemptively assuming that literally everyone on the face of the Earth that knows about and understands D&D's alignment system is mandated to like it. I understand a ton of things that I don't like. I understand bigotry. I understand League of Legends. I understand avocados. That doesn't mean that I like any of that stuff. The same thing applies to Alignment.
It's merely an extra roleplaying aid (you know, in a role playing game) meant to help new players understand who their character is, opposed to the old system where it barred you within certain races/classes.
Which we already have an entirely different system for in D&D 5e. We already have Personality Traits, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws in D&D 5e that accomplish exactly that goal, but to an even greater extent than what alignment grants.
So, in 5e, Alignment is both redundant and inferior to the Personality Traits system that we have built into the character creation system.
I agree with you, wizards should stop making every race into piles of moldable putty with no basic defining cultural traits. They're meant only to be suggestions but far too many people treat them as rules. the easiest solution is to keep races as they were pre Tasha's (fixed racial modifiers, culture, lore, etc.) but VERY clearly show that these are merely optional.
No. Just plain no. That way is not better. Keeping cultural traits out of races is one of the best developments to D&D 5e that has happened since the start of this edition. If it's not a biological trait (Dwarven Resilience, Natural Armor, Wings, Innate Spellcasting) it should absolutely not be included in the racial mechanics. Dwarven Weapon Training, Language and Tool Proficiencies, listed alignment, and so on all should be kept out of racial mechanics and moved to their own thing (which 2024's revision of the Core Rules is almost guaranteed to do).
And it's more immersive and realistic than the previous version. There's absolutely no reason why literally every Dwarf on every D&D world should speak Dwarven, be proficient in Axes and Hammers, and somehow know how to use Mason's Tools. If that Dwarf was raised by Goblins or Goliaths, their cultural proficiencies should echo that. If they were like Tarzan and grew up in the wilds away from civilization and other sentient humanoids, they shouldn't get those proficiencies.
This new version is just way better. Culture isn't genetic, and anything that isn't genetic shouldn't be included in racial mechanics.
To the first part of your response- that is why I said "most" many people do not understand alignments current purpose as a simple aid for roleplaying and want to oust it because they don't use it (which is partially bad wording on my end I made it sound like many people don't understand how alignment works- opposed to my actual meaning in most don't understand it's best use as a simple tool for new players).
For the second part of your response- This... Is also partially my fault for not making my stance clear enough. I believe that wizards not including any kind of "example" culture is a flaw, and just plain lazy, but I also love creating my own lore, and one problem that many pre-Tasha's races had was an unclear explanation for new dm's on the flexibility of lore, failing to tell them that they could change it and modify it in any way they like. I merely wish that they clarified this instead of simply removing culture from every race's description. On the point of proficiencies and the like- I do believe that these should be modifiable, but an example of what the average dwarf or the like would have should be given. For example- a dwarf has axe or hammer proficiencies- or the option of any 2 weapon.
I hope this cleared up any misconceptions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Wizards should bring back old settings and try to stop neglecting the other continents of the Forgotten Realms.
Yes I like realmslore, why do you ask?
I like dragon quest and deltarune. Yes I realize this invalidates both me and my opinion.
I hate how Fantasy words like Mezoberainian get the little red spellcheck line.
I believe in TORTLE SUPREMECY
"Hey all Scott here and this is bad, real bad"- Scott Wozniak (also every session I seem to run)
1) Will we? Why? Is there some kind of essential need or requirement for an absolute evil race in D&D?
2) Does it matter that it's possible? The real question, I'd assume anyway, is whether it's desirable.
What you do in your campaign, assuming your players are copacetic with it, is entirely up to you. If you want entirely evil races in your setting, nobody's going to come bust down your door and make you take it back. But this isn't about your campaign or your setting, it's about the official books. Those don't have to take into account only your sensibilities, but those of the entire (potential) player base. You do you at your table with your players. That's totally fine. Don't expect your norms to be the universal standard though. That's just silly.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I find it a little disturbing, no I just find it ignorant to the point of silliness that some posters are trying to equate present efforts to sincerely "open up" the game of D&D in terms of a diversity of ways it can be played as well as increase the diversity of people who find the game welcoming to them with the "Satantic Panic" which was an effort to END the game among other things like loud guitar driven music and some hip hop. The latter was an ignorant cultural revanchist effort to suppress cultural forces it thought deviated from a parochially defined sense of normalcy that seems to always rear its head to challenge social progress in America (I mean, the bad guys in Footloose, basically). The present moment is trying to create the broadest future for the game possible. Any effort to conflate the two is nothing more than a profession of ignorance over both.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Are you also saying they can't be?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I'm saying that by default they aren't. It seems like the only people trying to make them analogues for humans are those arguing against having them be all "X" in the game.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
That's a long winded way of telling us you missed the point. I was responding to a user who suggested that things in the game could make players act in a negative way outside of the game, which is exactly one of the main things conservative christians suggested would happen during the satanic panic and the reason they wanted the game stopped. They believed that playing the game would make you satanic, and make you kill people or commit suicide.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Groups being unfavourably compared to animals or getting ascribed unflattering traits aren't the ones doing the comparing or the ascribing. Whether something can be is meaningful in this context.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Nope. You're still conflating the false threats of the 80s with actual constructive cultural conversations in the present moment, conversations in popular discoures that actually are predicated by decades of research on the role cultural production has on things like equity, inclusion, exclusion and otherings. You can pretend there's such a thing as complete escapism, but folks better read and studied on these matters than someone citing contrarian opinions in Psychology Today as a source of authority do think otherwise. The fact that you don't seem to realize your posts are quintessentially reactionary is part of the silly amusement here, especially for a "no bullying, fully inclusive player" ... I'd say you got some blind spots.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I mean, if you want to talk about logic I'm pretty sure that was a strawman argument.
Just because it wasn't true in the case of Satanic Panic, doesn't mean it might not be true for other things, logically you can't just make sweeping conclusions about things without examining them on their own merit.. And in the case of implicit racial bias there's actually quite a lot of research to show that how people are treated in media can affect how people view and treat each other in real life. Here's the white doll/black doll experiment showing the effects of implicit bias. For a more personal experience Here's Wil Wheaton talking about how the media he consumed led to him unconsciously treating people with bigotry.
But honestly, the potential for something in D&D to change people's behavior outside of D&D isn't even the most direct and pressing of problems when it comes to the portrayal of races in lore. The more direct issue is that these portrayals are directly harmful to those of us who have experienced ostracization and denigration in real life because it inflames and exacerbates old wounds.
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!
Y'all.
Reminder.
These are all the exact same arguments that have been made by, mostly, the exact same people in the last dozen threads on the same subject. Ophidimancer's provided links, even.
Post #3 was a mod reminding everybody that the "discussion" has been had to death and the mods are sick of pissing out the same brushfire
Fossman1 started a much more neutral and reasonably-stanced discussion of Alignment a few days ago, here: Fossman's Alignment Thread, where there was some actual good discussion while we were trying to bury this one.
Normally I'm all for a good Internet fight goblin fisticuff, but this dead horse has been beaten into ochre jelly now. There's not even anything new to say. Can we just not, this once? Go jump into Fossman's thread instead - with civil points accounting for both sides of the debate - and let's get that one back. It was more interesting than this latest incarnation of the Eternal Forum Tire Fire that is anything related to the Diversity & Dragons initiative.
Please do not contact or message me.
For the love of God.
Everyone, I'm also an Atheist. This guy right here does not speak for us, and I'm not at all offended/made unwelcome in the hobby through the presence of fantasy religions. (Well, now that the Wall of the Faithless has stopped existing, that is.) What he's saying is BS and attempting to compare sizes of persecution in order to say, "No, your offense isn't valid, because mine isn't!"
Have some empathy, man. We've already demonstrated in this thread that Orcs and other "monstrous" races have absolutely been racist in D&D's past. If you deny that, you're just lying and/or being an *******.
Side Note: You never responded to my first post quoting you, which completely dismissed the article you posted and gave absolute proof that your "opinion" is made-up nonsense. If you have anything to say about what I originally posted, please post it.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Again, the hysteria of the so called Satanic Panic of the 80s and the present conversations over Dungeons and Dragons with sensitivity toward inclusivity just don't correlate. If someone insists on that association, there isn't much to be done in terms of debate.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
This is the logical fallacy known as a false equivalence. It is a faulty comparison because your atheism is not represented in D&D as a harmful stereotype, while the depiction of certain races in D&D are seen as allegories with harmful stereotypes for minorities. These are not at all the same thing. A more accurate presentation of your harm as an atheist would be the show ‘God Friended Me’, which suggests atheists are little more than people who are angry at god. If anything D&D is extremely atheist-friendly, as the gods in D&D are generally beings whose existence is testable and consistently proven.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
October, in order to have this argument, you're going to need to understand a phenomena called "coded language," and it's associated concept, "racial coding." Here's a couple links you can read:
Racial coding: https://neaedjustice.org/social-justice-issues/racial-justice/coded-language/
Coded language: https://medium.com/@artlust/coded-language-community-diversity-and-other-racist-words-a0a19f3b3a5b
Now that we have an understanding of those concepts, you should see that it is not a leap to show that just because something is described as "not human" in a fantasy game, people are still able to read in-- unintentionally or not-- human assumptions based off our own racial- political landscape. You can also see the problem there. In fact, the issue or racial coding specifically in fantasy is not new either. There's a lot written on that subject as well. Here's a few other articles from a few years ago to familiarize itself with that specific facet of the issue:
https://www.publicmedievalist.com/race-fantasy-genre/
https://www.autosave.tv/2018/09/24/that-orcward-moment-racial-coding-in-dungeons-and-dragons/
https://thewildcattribune.com/11002/ae/the-history-of-negative-stereotypes-within-dungeons-and-dragons/
I also like Lindsey Ellis' description of the problem in her review of the movie Bright, but this is a longer form video essay so might not be everyone's cup of tea, and it doesn't really get to the meat of the racial coding discussion till around the 20 minute mark. But I'll still include the link anyways since I like it: https://youtu.be/gLOxQxMnEz8
I'm not trying to be hostile or argumentative, but it is vital for anyone having this discussion to have an understanding of *why* we're having this discussion. No, a group of boring, non-gaming woke folks did not just randomly decide one day to ruin D&D. This stuff as it is embedded in our culture-- not just in D&D, but definitely a bunch in D&D-- has a measurable negative effect on people in reality. That is why IRL humans will always be relevant no matter how much "orcs are not human." I really hope you give some of this stuff a read.
I think a lot of us get caught up in wanting to defend the tradition of things like alignment despite the fact that it's use since it's original implementation has completely changed, but it's been around so long that we've maybe don't fully remember it as a part of the game versus the tradition of alignment we hold to instead. It's natural to feel defensive when our traditions seem to be under attack, and reactionary arguments are very easy to fall into, but like many IRL traditions that may turn out to be harmful, we need to rip the bandaid off sometimes and have that discussion if it's going to survive going forward.
I am so tired of seeing this discussion on the forums, its almost catching up with "I bought the books how do I get them here for free, so I don't have to buy them all over again"
It's not even a discussion, it's simply a repeat of worn-out complaints that are very rarely made in good faith.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yeah, there were even some posts after that orange post that suggested this thread just be locked and some sort of "nothing new under the sun" thread be provided (basically what Ophid takes upon themself to do in these threads anyway) for folks wanting to reignite this thread. I think someone even said that there are ways to have constructive discussions of the utility of alignment in D&D an this tact not being one of them. But they're not in the thread anymore because I guess they got too meta.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I was summoun- oh, wait, never mind. Carry on.
#Open D&D
Have the Physical Books? Confused as to why you're not allowed to redeem them for free on D&D Beyond? Questions answered here at the Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You FAQ
Looking to add mouse-over triggered tooltips to such things like magic items, monsters or combat actions? Then dash over to the How to Add Tooltips thread.
To the first part of your response- that is why I said "most" many people do not understand alignments current purpose as a simple aid for roleplaying and want to oust it because they don't use it (which is partially bad wording on my end I made it sound like many people don't understand how alignment works- opposed to my actual meaning in most don't understand it's best use as a simple tool for new players).
For the second part of your response- This... Is also partially my fault for not making my stance clear enough. I believe that wizards not including any kind of "example" culture is a flaw, and just plain lazy, but I also love creating my own lore, and one problem that many pre-Tasha's races had was an unclear explanation for new dm's on the flexibility of lore, failing to tell them that they could change it and modify it in any way they like. I merely wish that they clarified this instead of simply removing culture from every race's description. On the point of proficiencies and the like- I do believe that these should be modifiable, but an example of what the average dwarf or the like would have should be given. For example- a dwarf has axe or hammer proficiencies- or the option of any 2 weapon.
I hope this cleared up any misconceptions.
Wizards should bring back old settings and try to stop neglecting the other continents of the Forgotten Realms.
Yes I like realmslore, why do you ask?
I like dragon quest and deltarune. Yes I realize this invalidates both me and my opinion.
I hate how Fantasy words like Mezoberainian get the little red spellcheck line.
I believe in TORTLE SUPREMECY
"Hey all Scott here and this is bad, real bad"- Scott Wozniak (also every session I seem to run)
I think I made this a bit too long.
Locking this thread due to the inappropriate conduct of many participants
Find my D&D Beyond articles here