While I agree with the OP, I also agree an author has a right to revise their works.
Now here is the rub.
As was noted a record of changes should be made, especially for those that bought the original content. This is tech doc writing 101. Honestly if my feed hadn’t blown up with this change this morning I would have never noticed until I played one or ran a game with Hazodee in it because my hard copy books and beyond don’t match. I would say looks like Beyond messed up and didn’t follow the book. Scrubbing it doesn’t make it go away. Call it wokeness or correcting a mistake whatever you wish, but maintain the record of change, erasing history doesn’t change it. Just like they did with MotM giving us Legacy races, this should become altered lore notes at the bottom of the entry.
My only grief gripe complaint with all this, is you are altering a product I’ve purchased, for good or bad that is the dangerous slope for a customer’s interaction with a company. What if I bought D&D and decided that all elves are a non-PC race and removed them the builder? So before you celebrate the change look how it really effects you.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
While I agree with the OP, I also agree an author has a right to revise their works.
Now here is the rub.
As was noted a record of changes should be made, especially for those that bought the original content. This is tech doc writing 101. Honestly if my feed hadn’t blown up with this change this morning I would have never noticed until I played one or ran a game with Hazodee in it because my hard copy books and beyond don’t match. I would say looks like Beyond messed up and didn’t follow the book. Scrubbing it doesn’t make it go away. Call it wokeness or correcting a mistake whatever you wish, but maintain the record of change, erasing history doesn’t change it. Just like they did with MotM giving us Legacy races, this should become altered lore notes at the bottom of the entry.
My only grief gripe complaint with all this, is you are altering a product I’ve purchased, for good or bad that is the dangerous slope for a customer’s interaction with a company. What if I bought D&D and decided that all elves are a non-PC race and removed them the builder? So before you celebrate the change look how it really effects you.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
If you bought D&D and all the rights to the IP, you can change anything you like. That would be your right. No slippery slope at all. That is exactly what happened when WotC bought D&D from TSR.
You can't even complain about the digital product changing since you agreed to the Terms of Service. If you don't like it, stop spending money on digital products that are subject to change at the whims of the company that owns it.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
Calling black people monkeys and depicting them as such is a racist stereotype that's been around since the trans-Atlantic slave trade began at the very least and it's still a widely used insult today. People who recognize the problematic nature of depicting a simian race as having been former slaves with Minstrel Show art are not the ones who are part of the problem.
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.
While I agree with the OP, I also agree an author has a right to revise their works.
Now here is the rub.
As was noted a record of changes should be made, especially for those that bought the original content. This is tech doc writing 101. Honestly if my feed hadn’t blown up with this change this morning I would have never noticed until I played one or ran a game with Hazodee in it because my hard copy books and beyond don’t match. I would say looks like Beyond messed up and didn’t follow the book. Scrubbing it doesn’t make it go away. Call it wokeness or correcting a mistake whatever you wish, but maintain the record of change, erasing history doesn’t change it. Just like they did with MotM giving us Legacy races, this should become altered lore notes at the bottom of the entry.
My only grief gripe complaint with all this, is you are altering a product I’ve purchased, for good or bad that is the dangerous slope for a customer’s interaction with a company. What if I bought D&D and decided that all elves are a non-PC race and removed them the builder? So before you celebrate the change look how it really effects you.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
Post #12 has a link to WotC’s statement about this. They released an errata documenting this along with other changes not related to the issue at hand. Maybe the statement and errata should have come out first before DDB changed the digital version but I think they changed it first because it was the fastest way and could be done before a statement could be drafted.
If you bought D&D and all the rights to the IP, you can change anything you like. That would be your right. No slippery slope at all. That is exactly what happened when WotC bought D&D from TSR.
You can't even complain about the digital product changing since you agreed to the Terms of Service. If you don't like it, stop spending money on digital products that are subject to change at the whims of the company that owns it.
My comments on this are about making a change with no reference to the change. Yes I would be free to do what I wish, but should I? At any point in time it could be said we don’t like this and scrap all of Beyond. Would it be right? Nope, could they? Yup and not a thing we could do about it.
As was noted a record of changes should be made, especially for those that bought the original content. This is tech doc writing 101.
Here ya go. It is with a statement about the change they posted on the WotC website, D&D Beyond website, Twitter, Facebook...
Thank you for the link. But what I’m asking is original content and errata to be in the same entry. My default is my hard copy book, I’m in plenty of games where a computer isn’t used so the book is my reference point. Same if we have a lore or rule question that isn’t covered in the current edition by something we go back through the earlier editions to find something that fits our needs. Same playing 1e games need a ruling we will check the later editions.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
Calling black people monkeys and depicting them as such is a racist stereotype that's been around since the trans-Atlantic slave trade began at the very least and it's still a widely used insult today. People who recognize the problematic nature of depicting a simian race as having been former slaves with Minstrel Show art are not the ones who are part of the problem.
You change stereotypes by no longer using them, if you equate black people and monkeys together that is on you.
Post #12 has a link to WotC’s statement about this. They released an errata documenting this along with other changes not related to the issue at hand. Maybe the statement and errata should have come out first before DDB changed the digital version but I think they changed it first because it was the fastest way and could be done before a statement could be drafted.
Thank you. Fast isn’t always the best way, someone else also posted the link. My argument on this is the errata should be directly within the entry that is errata so one can directly compare the change to the original.
Thank you. Fast isn’t always the best way, someone else also posted the link. My argument on this is the errata should be directly within the entry that is errata so one can directly compare the change to the original.
You may not be aware but this is not the first time DDB changed a digital edition in response to WotC errata. Actually, these edits are pretty minor compared to multiple errata applied to Volo's. People have asked for a "track changes" option and DDB has said that's never going to happen. DDB is bound to express the present official version of D&D rules and texts. The Hadozee stuff you want maintained in some sort of change log integrated into the toolset is not the present and official version of the D&D rules. I'm not going to comb this board for all the prior arguments challenging DDB's stance and being denied by DDB as something they'll implement. But look for threads on changes to Strahd and Volo's should give you the basis. Your argument has been argued numerous times and the DDB (and now officially under WotC's ownership) isn't receptive to it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
Calling black people monkeys and depicting them as such is a racist stereotype that's been around since the trans-Atlantic slave trade began at the very least and it's still a widely used insult today. People who recognize the problematic nature of depicting a simian race as having been former slaves with Minstrel Show art are not the ones who are part of the problem.
You change stereotypes by no longer using them, if you equate black people and monkeys together that is on you.
This is historically not how it works, at all. How it works is when you stop educating people about hurtful stereotypes, the people who had no stakes and were never hurt by it in the first place forget within less than a generation and start using them again, whereas the people who actually have a stake in it and cannot forget quite so easily because it actually hurts them and continues to hurt them are told to stop talking about it and stop telling anyone about their pain and get victim blamed when they actually react.
The stereotype that black people have higher pain tolerances than white people was started during slave trade, was perpetuated into medical curricula, and because people were told to stop talking about it remains in medical curricula to this day causing medical mistreatment of black people. They are prescribed less pain medication for similar symptoms than white people and when they request more they are labeled as "drug seeking" which not only gets them inferior medical treatment but also leads to higher rates of criminalization, simply for seeking out correct medical treatment.
You are mistaken, and badly so.
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!
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
Calling black people monkeys and depicting them as such is a racist stereotype that's been around since the trans-Atlantic slave trade began at the very least and it's still a widely used insult today. People who recognize the problematic nature of depicting a simian race as having been former slaves with Minstrel Show art are not the ones who are part of the problem.
You change stereotypes by no longer using them, if you equate black people and monkeys together that is on you.
You can't change a stereotype by perpetuating it while simultaneously claiming that it doesn't exist and trying to pretend that anyone who actually knows enough history to understand the historical context of said stereotype is the real problem. That is, in fact, a common tactic of people who do understand the stereotype and wish to perpetuate it.
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.
If you bought D&D and all the rights to the IP, you can change anything you like. That would be your right. No slippery slope at all. That is exactly what happened when WotC bought D&D from TSR.
You can't even complain about the digital product changing since you agreed to the Terms of Service. If you don't like it, stop spending money on digital products that are subject to change at the whims of the company that owns it.
My comments on this are about making a change with no reference to the change. Yes I would be free to do what I wish, but should I? At any point in time it could be said we don’t like this and scrap all of Beyond. Would it be right? Nope, could they? Yup and not a thing we could do about it.
Yes, you should definitely do what ever you wish with your property. Also yes to them being able to scrap DnDBeyond if they like, again they own it and you agreed to the fact that one day you won't have access anymore when you paid your money. No website/service is forever.
There is something dangerous and immoral here--and it is not what Wizards is doing. Wizards, as the owners of their own intellectual property, has the freedom to do what they wish with it. This is a long-established practice--authors who want to revise or remove works from publication (ex. Stephen King's Rage) and a necessary part of expression. Self-censorship is a form of expression every bit as important as the generation of new ideas. The power to say that you do not agree with something you already said, and to change, grow, and publish art in a manner consistent with what the artist actually wishes to say is a mechanism by which an author can express themselves.
What IS a problem--when a third-party tells an artist "you must express yourself in a certain way"--exactly what you are doing here. You, OP, are telling Wizards their form of expression and the mechanism by which they have chosen is wrong and telling them they must express themselves in a manner consistent with how YOU believe they should. As should be obvious, that is something truly dangerous--that is not an artist deciding to change their mind, but a third-party, unrelated to the artist themselves, attempting to impose their will upon another.
Your post is simply dripping with hypocrisy--trying to cloak you own desire to change Wizards' chosen mechanism of expression with some (poorly executed) verbal akimbo where you attempt and make the victim of your would-be censorship appear to be the perpetrator.
So I've seen a few people on here and on other topics saying something along the lines of "we don't actually own digital content we're only leasing it, so they can do what ever they(in this case WotC) want with it even remove it if they feel like it" and this is technically true however not only is it baffling that people are actually ok with that but more importantly both amazon and apple are actually being sued for doing exactly that. Now if the reasons these people are giving for companies being able to remove/alter purchased digital content actually held up then these court cases would have been dismissed but they haven't. So in summary while it's technically true companies can alter/remove digital content you've purchase in reality it's far less set in stone and we could actually fight back if they tried to enforce it.
Thank you. Fast isn’t always the best way, someone else also posted the link. My argument on this is the errata should be directly within the entry that is errata so one can directly compare the change to the original.
keeping the original along with the errata wastes space and could cause more confusion if poorly worded than help.
Also it depends on the content. Displaying the original text for the Hadozee glide feature with the errata isn’t necessarily a problem. But leaving offensive material visible along with the correction is a problem.
What if some cheeky artist snuck in pornographic or even worse imagery in the background of art for a WotC book? Is WotC obligated to keep that imagery displayed just for posterities sake? Of course not. removing the offending art wouldn’t be leading to fascism
So I've seen a few people on here and on other topics saying something along the lines of "we don't actually own digital content we're only leasing it, so they can do what ever they(in this case WotC) want with it even remove it if they feel like it" and this is technically true however not only is it baffling that people are actually ok with that but more importantly both amazon and apple are actually being sued for doing exactly that. Now if the reasons these people are giving for companies being able to remove/alter purchased digital content actually held up then these court cases would have been dismissed but they haven't. So in summary while it's technically true companies can alter/remove digital content you've purchase in reality it's far less set in stone and we could actually fight back if they tried to enforce it.
Citation of these Amazon/Apple active suits please? Instances I'm aware of have been dismissed or are on track to be dismissed under similar grounds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
lets put it in dnd terms if a wizard was editing all of the books to his liking with this be a hero or a villain.
I can think of few things more dangerous and ripe for abuse than editing books. Sure this is just a silly game but you are normalizing a very dangerous form of censorship and oppression you need to stop this it’s wrong. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people and power were able to edit books to their Liking.
this is a steppingstone to fascism stop normalizing this if you care about freedom and democracy.
Yeah, no. There's a good reason for editing their own material, because it is BAD. A company choosing to do this based on fan feedback is a GOOD thing. Leaving in racist tropes and stereotypes is a BAD thing.
Why are you defending racist stereotypes? That's the real question here.
If the government stepped in and said it needed to be done, I'd agree with you, in principle. However, that isn't what is happening here.
And you're defending racist tropes and stereotypes.
This is a very pointed reminder for everyone who makes the choice to participate in this or any thread that they do so under the prevision that they adhere to the site rules and guidelines. I would like to draw particular attention to the following rules:
2c. Spamming and Trolling, particularly
Causing disturbances in forum threads, such as picking fights, making off-topic posts that ruin the thread, insulting other posters.
Making non-constructive posts to de-rail threads.
Abusing the Reported Post feature by sending false alarms or nonsensical messages.
2e. Posting Unsuitable Content, especially
Religious or Political opinions/debates.
Hateful language about race, religion, gender, country (Example: US vs. EU threads), political beliefs, etc.
lets put it in dnd terms if a wizard was editing all of the books to his liking with this be a hero or a villain.
I can think of few things more dangerous and ripe for abuse than editing books. Sure this is just a silly game but you are normalizing a very dangerous form of censorship and oppression you need to stop this it’s wrong. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people and power were able to edit books to their Liking.
this is a steppingstone to fascism stop normalizing this if you care about freedom and democracy.
Setting aside that freedom of speech is not a universal global right, let's start with the premise that all people should have freedom of speech. I agree.
But that does not mean it's reasonable to expect having freedom from societal consequences of that speech. If I was in your private home and started saying awful things, you have every right to tell me to leave. If you say something awful in a public space, my freedom of speech grants me the right to say something back, or to inform others in your social circles about your behavior. Likewise, privately owned businesses should have the right to manage their content in a manner consistent with their ethics.
let out it ins dnd terms if a wizard was editing all of the books to his liking with this be a hero or a villain.
I can think of few things more dangerous and ripe for abuse than editing books. Sure this is just a silly game but you are normalizing a very dangerous form of censorship and oppression you need to stop this it’s wrong. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people and power were able to edit books to their Liking.
this is a steppingstone to fascism stop normalizing this if you care about freedom and democracy.
For an accurate analogy, it would be an example of a wizard revising books they themselves authored for future reprints. How is that oppression of anyone??? A wizard using their power to edit or censor other author's books is an abuse of power and dangerous. But that's not happening here.
Moving from analogy to reality, it is their book they are editing, and it is something that has been happening since D&D existed (and also goes far, far beyond D&D books). Publishers revise their books all the time. It's their right to do so. The problem arises when someone uses their authority to edit or censor another author/publisher's book. As someone who teaches ethics, I assure you, the two situations are vastly, vastly different. Claiming a publisher revising one of their own books in future reprints is a step towards fascism is actually belittling towards the very real steps towards fascism occurring in the attacks on libraries and schools right now.
Abusing authority to silence others is a step towards fascism.
Becoming better informed and improving your own work is not. That's called "learning from your mistakes" and is actually a good thing.
100% agreed. Fixing something from your own books, is not "censorship and oppresion," it's just editing. If I make a mistake about a creatures CR or something, I should be allowed to fix it.
And the Hadozee lore was both racist and offensive, it's horrible that it made it into Spelljammer in the first place and it needed to be removed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
While I agree with the OP, I also agree an author has a right to revise their works.
Now here is the rub.
As was noted a record of changes should be made, especially for those that bought the original content. This is tech doc writing 101. Honestly if my feed hadn’t blown up with this change this morning I would have never noticed until I played one or ran a game with Hazodee in it because my hard copy books and beyond don’t match. I would say looks like Beyond messed up and didn’t follow the book.
Scrubbing it doesn’t make it go away.
Call it wokeness or correcting a mistake whatever you wish, but maintain the record of change, erasing history doesn’t change it.
Just like they did with MotM giving us Legacy races, this should become altered lore notes at the bottom of the entry.
My only grief gripe complaint with all this, is you are altering a product I’ve purchased, for good or bad that is the dangerous slope for a customer’s interaction with a company. What if I bought D&D and decided that all elves are a non-PC race and removed them the builder?
So before you celebrate the change look how it really effects you.
Also I agree if your mind automatically equates a monkey humanoid race to black people, you are part of the problem. Have you ever seen a shaved monkey, they have as many skin tones as humans.
If you bought D&D and all the rights to the IP, you can change anything you like. That would be your right. No slippery slope at all. That is exactly what happened when WotC bought D&D from TSR.
You can't even complain about the digital product changing since you agreed to the Terms of Service. If you don't like it, stop spending money on digital products that are subject to change at the whims of the company that owns it.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Here ya go. It is with a statement about the change they posted on the WotC website, D&D Beyond website, Twitter, Facebook...
Calling black people monkeys and depicting them as such is a racist stereotype that's been around since the trans-Atlantic slave trade began at the very least and it's still a widely used insult today. People who recognize the problematic nature of depicting a simian race as having been former slaves with Minstrel Show art are not the ones who are part of the problem.
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.
Post #12 has a link to WotC’s statement about this. They released an errata documenting this along with other changes not related to the issue at hand. Maybe the statement and errata should have come out first before DDB changed the digital version but I think they changed it first because it was the fastest way and could be done before a statement could be drafted.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
My comments on this are about making a change with no reference to the change. Yes I would be free to do what I wish, but should I? At any point in time it could be said we don’t like this and scrap all of Beyond. Would it be right? Nope, could they? Yup and not a thing we could do about it.
Thank you for the link. But what I’m asking is original content and errata to be in the same entry. My default is my hard copy book, I’m in plenty of games where a computer isn’t used so the book is my reference point. Same if we have a lore or rule question that isn’t covered in the current edition by something we go back through the earlier editions to find something that fits our needs. Same playing 1e games need a ruling we will check the later editions.
You change stereotypes by no longer using them, if you equate black people and monkeys together that is on you.
Thank you. Fast isn’t always the best way, someone else also posted the link. My argument on this is the errata should be directly within the entry that is errata so one can directly compare the change to the original.
You may not be aware but this is not the first time DDB changed a digital edition in response to WotC errata. Actually, these edits are pretty minor compared to multiple errata applied to Volo's. People have asked for a "track changes" option and DDB has said that's never going to happen. DDB is bound to express the present official version of D&D rules and texts. The Hadozee stuff you want maintained in some sort of change log integrated into the toolset is not the present and official version of the D&D rules. I'm not going to comb this board for all the prior arguments challenging DDB's stance and being denied by DDB as something they'll implement. But look for threads on changes to Strahd and Volo's should give you the basis. Your argument has been argued numerous times and the DDB (and now officially under WotC's ownership) isn't receptive to it.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
This is historically not how it works, at all. How it works is when you stop educating people about hurtful stereotypes, the people who had no stakes and were never hurt by it in the first place forget within less than a generation and start using them again, whereas the people who actually have a stake in it and cannot forget quite so easily because it actually hurts them and continues to hurt them are told to stop talking about it and stop telling anyone about their pain and get victim blamed when they actually react.
The stereotype that black people have higher pain tolerances than white people was started during slave trade, was perpetuated into medical curricula, and because people were told to stop talking about it remains in medical curricula to this day causing medical mistreatment of black people. They are prescribed less pain medication for similar symptoms than white people and when they request more they are labeled as "drug seeking" which not only gets them inferior medical treatment but also leads to higher rates of criminalization, simply for seeking out correct medical treatment.
You are mistaken, and badly so.
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!
You can't change a stereotype by perpetuating it while simultaneously claiming that it doesn't exist and trying to pretend that anyone who actually knows enough history to understand the historical context of said stereotype is the real problem. That is, in fact, a common tactic of people who do understand the stereotype and wish to perpetuate it.
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.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I understand and agree with you to some degree, but I think calling this a steppingstone to facism is a bit much, don’t you think?
SAUCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is something dangerous and immoral here--and it is not what Wizards is doing. Wizards, as the owners of their own intellectual property, has the freedom to do what they wish with it. This is a long-established practice--authors who want to revise or remove works from publication (ex. Stephen King's Rage) and a necessary part of expression. Self-censorship is a form of expression every bit as important as the generation of new ideas. The power to say that you do not agree with something you already said, and to change, grow, and publish art in a manner consistent with what the artist actually wishes to say is a mechanism by which an author can express themselves.
What IS a problem--when a third-party tells an artist "you must express yourself in a certain way"--exactly what you are doing here. You, OP, are telling Wizards their form of expression and the mechanism by which they have chosen is wrong and telling them they must express themselves in a manner consistent with how YOU believe they should. As should be obvious, that is something truly dangerous--that is not an artist deciding to change their mind, but a third-party, unrelated to the artist themselves, attempting to impose their will upon another.
Your post is simply dripping with hypocrisy--trying to cloak you own desire to change Wizards' chosen mechanism of expression with some (poorly executed) verbal akimbo where you attempt and make the victim of your would-be censorship appear to be the perpetrator.
So I've seen a few people on here and on other topics saying something along the lines of "we don't actually own digital content we're only leasing it, so they can do what ever they(in this case WotC) want with it even remove it if they feel like it" and this is technically true however not only is it baffling that people are actually ok with that but more importantly both amazon and apple are actually being sued for doing exactly that. Now if the reasons these people are giving for companies being able to remove/alter purchased digital content actually held up then these court cases would have been dismissed but they haven't. So in summary while it's technically true companies can alter/remove digital content you've purchase in reality it's far less set in stone and we could actually fight back if they tried to enforce it.
If I can't say something nice, I try to not say anything at all. So if I suddenly stop participating in a topic that's probably why.
keeping the original along with the errata wastes space and could cause more confusion if poorly worded than help.
Also it depends on the content. Displaying the original text for the Hadozee glide feature with the errata isn’t necessarily a problem. But leaving offensive material visible along with the correction is a problem.
What if some cheeky artist snuck in pornographic or even worse imagery in the background of art for a WotC book? Is WotC obligated to keep that imagery displayed just for posterities sake? Of course not. removing the offending art wouldn’t be leading to fascism
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Citation of these Amazon/Apple active suits please? Instances I'm aware of have been dismissed or are on track to be dismissed under similar grounds.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Yeah, no. There's a good reason for editing their own material, because it is BAD. A company choosing to do this based on fan feedback is a GOOD thing. Leaving in racist tropes and stereotypes is a BAD thing.
Why are you defending racist stereotypes? That's the real question here.
If the government stepped in and said it needed to be done, I'd agree with you, in principle. However, that isn't what is happening here.
And you're defending racist tropes and stereotypes.
By deleting them from their books, WotC is no longer using them, so it sounds like by your own measure they did the right thing.
This is a very pointed reminder for everyone who makes the choice to participate in this or any thread that they do so under the prevision that they adhere to the site rules and guidelines. I would like to draw particular attention to the following rules:
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Setting aside that freedom of speech is not a universal global right, let's start with the premise that all people should have freedom of speech. I agree.
But that does not mean it's reasonable to expect having freedom from societal consequences of that speech. If I was in your private home and started saying awful things, you have every right to tell me to leave. If you say something awful in a public space, my freedom of speech grants me the right to say something back, or to inform others in your social circles about your behavior. Likewise, privately owned businesses should have the right to manage their content in a manner consistent with their ethics.
100% agreed. Fixing something from your own books, is not "censorship and oppresion," it's just editing. If I make a mistake about a creatures CR or something, I should be allowed to fix it.
And the Hadozee lore was both racist and offensive, it's horrible that it made it into Spelljammer in the first place and it needed to be removed.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.