Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
source: https://www.ttrpginsider.news/p/fighting-oppression-in-new-ways-d-d-s-designers-on-adapting-dark-sun-to-modern-times
It’s a notable pivot for the company. Former D&D executive producer Kyle Brink said in a 2023 interview with Bob World Builder that “
But Bilsland insisted that the D&D team is taking the subject seriously. The content is being reviewed by sensitivity readers, Bilsland said. “In fact, we invested more deeply in [sensitivity readers] for Dark Sun, knowing the challenges it faces.”
He also reinforced that the grittiness of the setting will still exist, but it won’t rely on narratives of mass slavery. “You don't have to have slavery in a setting if in order for it to be oppressive,” Bilsland emphasized. “There are other forms of oppression out there.”
I was an extensive D&D Basic and AD&D player, I came back when 5E launched and I've spent over $5K on D&D Beyond, D&D Books, VTT, Miniatures and Paints. After reading this article, I will not be spending any money on the new Hasbro take on Dark Suns. WotC needs to have an over 18 label if they want to make sales.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorIt does have an over-18 label.
Need help with D&D Beyond? Come ask in the official D&D server on Discord: https://discord.gg/dnd
What if you waited to see how good or bad it actually is? Instead of basing your decision on a single article that presents some pretty vague information about it.
Sensitivity Readers
Slavery Removed
Those two features are non-starters for most people who have bought Dark Suns. It's obvious from from financial results, the new change from WotC is to appeal to a broader audience. However that article shows a focus on the audience from the change in WotC in 2020 onward. I wish them the best of luck. I do not buy content that removes basic human concepts like slavery that was in a brutal grimdark setting.
If Dark Suns is a great financial success, congratulations to WotC, they found their audience. IF Dark Suns is a financial failure, they can scan the forums for text sentiment, and they will get feedback from one whale customer on why this one whale did not buy Dark Suns. I'd love to get WotC my money but this is not the way forward.
Weird take, given that's not what's said. What is actually said is
This isn't "We've removed slavery from Dark Sun", this is "We're not using slavery as a lazy cheat code to make the setting gritty and oppressive."
And anyone who has an issue with sensitivity readers needs to put on their grown up pants and get over it.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Tell your marketing guys to literally put a label on it in black on the corner 18+. It was done in the 80's when Tipper Gore was on her censorship crusade. The 18+ label on CD's sold like mad. Do that for Dark Suns and you will make a tremendous amount of sales just from a black and white label.
That’s literally what they’re doing. They stood in an auditorium at GenCon and said “we’re shrink wrapping it and putting an 18+ sticker on it.”
You seem to be basing an awful lot of your opinions about this release on a single article you’ve dug up that is already wrong about some of the things, like slavery, that has already been confirmed to have not been removed. How about you wait and see what they’re actually releasing before writing it off
It goes more down to being an adult and reading content. I get it you want sensitivity readers for your content. I do not. I believe the vast majority of the market if they knew sensitivity readers were used for the content would not buy it. If it was a selling point, WotC would put "sensitivity reader approved" on the box. WotC does not do that on any of their packaging.
When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. And again Davyd, you want it, I understand your need. We buy different content. Dark Suns is supposed to be for an adult market, adults without issues can handle slavery in their content. If WotC were smart, they'd run their sensitivity readers and make it a point not to disclose that information to the general market. If that single line was not disclosed, I most likely would have bought the content. Sensitivity Readers do not generate sales, they lose sales. Like me.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorAs I said above, it already has that label.
Need help with D&D Beyond? Come ask in the official D&D server on Discord: https://discord.gg/dnd
You sound increasingly like you have made up a thing to get mad at and are now getting even madder that everyone else is not mad at the thing you made up.
pronouns: he/she/they
TBH if we need sensitivity readers to help tone it down in order to get a new DARK SUN setting published i'm okay with this, there will be slavery, cannibalism and more in my Athas anyways, just like Drow /Orc are mostly all evil in my Realms despite WoTC article deciding to portray them as not so much in past article.
No not all. I'm leaving a forum post that Hasbro can scan for customer sentiment on Dark Suns, that's it. I have two issues I wanted to bring up to WotC, sensitivity readers and slavery being removed from content.
WotC did make a public change to appeal to the broader audience this year. However, they still have problems with their Internet and Communications policy and think that a polarization type position like "sensitivity readers" will help sales. In my case its a lost sale. For the Narrative Story Gamer audience that follow Critical Role or Dungeon Crawler Carl, that would be a sale, however they have their own games and ate that market. I mean Hasbro can sensitivity reader as much of their content as possible, just don't communicate it online to the general audience who will view it as a bad sign. More Spider Man Beyond type of content and less Ghostbusters 2016 type of content. I was ready to give Hasbro my money and now I'm not.
Matthew Collville put out a very good video about the gaming community is for gaming and to avoid certain terms because its polarizing. He calls a company "that Seattle company" to avoid polarization. It's why he has an audience and is appreciated, just give us the games.
My point is that you have constructed in your mind a version of this book that has aspects to it you don't like. Since the book hasn't been released yet, this version only exists in your mind, and it only exists so that you can be upset at it and then tell everyone you're upset at it. This is something people do a lot, especially on the internet, but it's worth pointing out it's something you don't have to do, and you can just let go of it any time you want and you'll feel better. Give it a try.
It's also worth pointing out that this:
is very obviously not a rational belief, which should be apparent just from the fact that Wizards of the Coast has done it at all.
pronouns: he/she/they
Obviously this thread is trying to push an agenda. The intentional mischaracterization of the article (“slavery removed”, for example, being objectively wrong). Hypocritically crying “censorship” while demanding Wizards comply with the speech OP wants Wizards to put out, instead of the speech Wizards wants to put out. I think it is transparent what is happening here.
But let us talk about sensitivity readers for a second. I do this less for OP’s benefit, since I do not expect them to change their mind, but for the benefit of anyone who might read OP’s post and accidentally fall for their intentional mischaracterization of a sensitivity reader’s role.
Sensitivity readers are not censorship, in the same way any other type of editor is not engaging in censorship (general censorship, obviously this is not a free speech censorship issue since no government is involved). This is because they do not actually prohibit or remove content - they make recommendations to the author and the author still has creative control over their own work. (Author, in this context, can be an individual or collective - here Wizards is the author).
A sensitivity reader is someone who can read content from another perspective and say “hey, did you think about this?” They are basically an editor who looks at content for unconscious bias and then can provide the author recommendations on changes. The author still has final say on what content they want to release, which means the final product is still the author’s speech and thus definitionally is not censored.
The reason Wizards started doing this was because they did have a real mistake. Their Hadozee release included lore that was unfortunately similar to the actual arguments of 18th century slavers. A sensitivity reader would have looked at the situation and said “huh, that looks a lot like what slave traders said to justify racial based slavery. Are you sure you want to do that?” Which.. is reasonable.
Dark Sun, in its original version, contained a lot of that kind of content. For example, Dark Sun did things like present slavery in a bit of a positive light - “slaves get to live in civilized areas instead of the barbaric wilds they are from” kinds of vibes. That sentiment was very popular in the 1600s-1800s as a justification for real world slavery, and even today is used by some to justify cultural erasure. A game designer from a single culture without a history degree might not recognize that; an expert on those fields would and can provide the writer with that context so, and this needs to be stressed, the author can ultimately make the decision themselves on whether to include, modify, or exclude certain content.
Greatly appreciate you taking the time to do that.
pronouns: he/she/they
Of course WotC is going to try to appeal to a broader audience: first they sell more books (their business model) and second they pull in more players. No one is stopping anyone from adding grittier elements than what are in the book at any particular table. Each table is welcome to make the setting as horrifying as they want it to be.
It's important to some people that they be able to feel like they have official permission to do awful things in their TTRPGs.
pronouns: he/she/they
This take seems to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding as to what service sensitivity readers offer. They don't censor anything, they don't tell WotC what they can and cannot publish. All sensitivity readers do is offer insight from a perspective that exists outside the team that makes the product. They give WotC information as to how their products might affect people and then WotC makes the decision if they want to keep that content as-is, modify it, or remove it.
That's not censorship, that's good design. You should really understand something before maligning it
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Thank you for your eloquent input!
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
This is a true statement, but it overlooks what those who decry these changes are looking for—they want endorsement to be grotesque, permission to be offensive. If a setting includes harmful content, they're just running the setting as designed, it's not their fault. But if WotC removes that content from the setting, those DMs have to own the decision to include the content. It's no longer "Well I'm just running the setting as written" and it's now "Yes, I've actively added this harmful theme back in because I want it there".
That's why some people decry these changes, they're losing the cover that means they don't have to own their choices.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here