TTRPG Insider article on Dark suns

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship.  

 Sensitivity readers are a far cry from censorship. They are what amounts to a very specific kind of editing pass. WotC has voluntarily hired people to perform the read and will still be the ones deciding if they will take the suggestions made by those readers. If it were censorship, some outside group would assign such a reader to WotC, and WotC would have no choice but to use them. And then, WotC would have to do what they say.  It's a very big difference.

Also, as far as slavery, from the little snippet in the story, it seems like slavery is very much alive, and just kind of hiding behind some corporate (or maybe sorcerer king) doublespeak. The article has Bilsland saying that you don't have to have slavery to have oppression. Then he goes on to describe one of the city states. And, I guess, the idea is it's meant to be an example of a place oppresses without slavery. However, still uses forced labor and also gets people to "voluntarily give up their freedom."  To me, there is precious little difference between that description and slavery (or at least indentured servitude), but there's not really a lot to go on from the article.

So, as I said in my first post, I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually read some reviews, and then, most likely, see the book for myself. I've liked Dark Sun since the first time it came out, and I'm definitely going to want to see what they do with it this time around.

Quote from Portential>>

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.

This is even more confusing. Not seeing a need to advertise the sensitivity reviews on the product packaging is somehow bad, but mentioning it online is also bad? They're seemingly too heavy-handed and simultaneously not heavy-handed enough?

And while I don't know the guy personally, I highly doubt Matt Colville shares your views on this, so I'm not sure what purpose invoking him here serves either. I'm willing to bet the video you're vaguely referencing doesn't say what you seem to think it does.

You're of course free to spend your money wherever you like, just like we are.

Quote from Portential >>

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.

 Other folks have corrected your misapprehensions about sensitivity readers and the box labeling already; I don't need to add to that.

But what I do want to add is that you're only speaking for yourself and as someone who loves Dark Sun (why do you keep pluralizing it??) and has bought it in past editions, I am delighted about WotC using sensitivity readers and very happy to see slavery not given the same pass it was given in previous editions. Let me tell you, if WotC or other publishes started putting "we consulted with sensitivity readers" stickers on their products, I would absolutely see that as a positive and it would influence my buying decision. And slavery is by no means necessary to establish a "brutal grimdark setting," and thinking it is necessary betrays a lack of imagination.

I very much doubt Dark Sun 5.5E is going to be a commercial failure, but even if it is, it won't be because one single person trying to drum up discontent refused to buy it.

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience" brings in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

 

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience brings" in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

 No opinion that uses "woke" a pejorative is worth taking seriously, lmao. The same goes for the people criticising WotC for it.

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

 

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience brings" in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

 No opinion that uses "woke" a pejorative is worth taking seriously, lmao. The same goes for the people criticising WotC for it.

 Thats your opinion (and apperantly WOTCs also, sadly), many see that differently. Especially those who will not buy the new dark sun stuff.

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

 

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience" brings in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

 Define woke

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

 

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience brings" in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

 No opinion that uses "woke" a pejorative is worth taking seriously, lmao. The same goes for the people criticising WotC for it.

 Thats your opinion (and apperantly WOTCs also, sadly), many see that differently. Especially those who will not buy the new dark sun stuff.

"There are dozens of us....DOZENS"

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from Davyd >>

Quote from Portential >>

When I see that listed in content, its a sign of censorship. 

 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

 

Sensetivity reader ( even if they not censor) and slavery reduced is the woke stuff WOTC is criticised for. Lets hope for the shareholders that the "modern audience" brings in more money than the ppl they lost already and will not win back that way. With this Marketing singals the content can be as good desinged as they want. Still does not change anything for that customer base.

Out of morbid curiosity, what part of slavery do you think is so integral to Dark Sun that it absolutely must be present for the product to be acceptable to you?

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

Quote from CunningSmile >

 Define woke

 

 

Chat GBT Copy pasta:

By “woke” in the context of WotC/D&D, people usually mean that modern sociopolitical ideas are influencing the rules and worldbuilding more strongly. Examples include changing “Race” to “Species,” removing fixed ability score bonuses based on species, no longer portraying Orcs/Drow as inherently evil, retroactively revising older portrayals, and placing greater emphasis on sensitivity and safety guidelines.

Critics mainly mean that real-world debates about racism, identity, and inclusivity are being unnecessarily projected onto a fantasy setting, thereby weakening traditional distinctions between fantasy peoples/species. Supporters, on the other hand, see these changes as making the game more inclusive and less reliant on stereotypes.

So “woke” is not an official category, but rather a political characterization of this development.

 --------------------------------------------

But hey, if you want that in your games, fine with me. Its your games. But that they will loose sales for that is a fact. If they get enough nostalgia sales in return. good for WOTC I guess.

I see that produrct, which could be great, is watered down in hope to not hurt someones "feelings". If this continues WOTC will not get more of my money. The "woke" stuff in the new 2024 rulebooks was annyoing enough in my opinion. (Again, if you like that its fine, I dont want to "attack" you. your money your choice)

 

 Not listening to anything ChatGPT says, try coming up with an actual definition yourself rather than relying on something that is designed to literally rot your brain and prevent you from thinking.

Quote from MasterPhyle >>

The "woke" stuff in the new 2024 rulebooks was annyoing enough in my opinion. (Again, if you like that its fine, I dont want to "attack" you. your money your choice)

You still haven't defined "woke", instead providing a regurgitated slop response (which is against forum rules btw) that doesn't explain how you are using the term.

As for the 2024 rulebooks, would this "woke" content be related to your desire to procure copies with censored (oh the irony) artwork? Based on my understanding on how people use "woke" as a pejorative, I can only assume you mean depictions of queer relationships, diverse and respectful cultural representation, and representation of people with disabilities.

Your usage of the vague dogwhistle of "woke" seems to imply a position aligned with intolerance, discrimination, and marginalisation. Note I am not stating that is your position, just that you're conducting yourself in an oblique manner that implies an alignment with those positions. If you hope to disabuse myself and others of that impression, it would behove you to be more direct, less vague, and not use nonspecific yet still loaded terms such as "woke".

If you can’t be bothered to write a definition why should I be bothered to read it?