I don't know if this will be taken down or not, but I need to vent my frustration. So, I just found out about the allegations, against wizards of the coast, about orcs, vestani and drow, being an allegory of black people. From people who have come out saying they know nothing about the game.
Now I'm white, and still new to playing d&d (Keyword "playing"), and before I really truly started playing d&d; I got into the lore of the game, mainly the drow. But even with that, I never once saw drow as a depiction of black people. They were cool, and the fact they had a only one good goddess; who wanted her people to return to the surface and live in peace with the other races was awe inspiring. Orcs can be more than the dumb stupid strong race. I have a DMPC orc that's a bard, who's free spirited, and happy go lucky. The vestani, I dont dont know much about ravenloft, but they are being accused of being stereotypical gypsies? Really?D&D can be flexible for different ways to play the characters, PCs and NPCs alike. It's an improve game, we can make homebrew rules.
What makes this more heartbreaking to me is, it's the "D&D is the devil's game" all over again. And wizards of the coast is just giving in to this person(s) demands. The fact that the company is bending a knee to, let me remind you, PEOPLE WHO'VE NEVER PLAYED THE GAME, is JUST sad. Makes me feel like quitting playing all together.
I dont know if I will be able to post this or what. I just wanted to vent my frustration. Hope you guys have a nice day.
The main problem I have with it as well is that their complaints are factually false. Psychologists have studied the impact of rpgs on racism and have consistently found that those who play rpgs tend to show improved socialization and good moral development. If their complaints had any merit this would not be the case. We need to get back to a world where facts and stats are what matters again. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/checkpoints/202004/no-orcs-arent-racist
Not all of those are stand ins for black people. The Vistani are pretty directly Romani (gypsies). Honestly man, I can't speak for others but as a DM I read through Strahd and thought. "Ohh man, this... this did not age well this is a REALLY racist caricature of Romani stereotypes. What you might be missing is that the current versions of those races are FAR different than in previous editions, precisely for this reason. With the exception of Drizzt (and his dad), Drow were universally evil monsters. Same with orcs and goblins. It's only been in recent editions that they've been not inherently evil, like at a genetic level.
Yeah, you can homebrew it as whatever you want but for new players, the stuff in the handbooks and modules is pretty much gospel. Plus, maybe like me you looked at Strahd and though, "Ugh no i'm not going to put in the work to make this not crazy offensive. Hard pass."
Look I get it, I'm also a white dude, most of this stuff never bothered me because i just didn't notice it. The fact that I noticed the Vistani just shows how over the top it was. But I AM part of a religious minority and it really sucks to see yourself cast as a villain, not because you're doing villain things, but because your "otherness" is inherently evil or bad. It's bad writing and kills a lot of potential interest from both creators and players. Just because I'm not offended, doesn't mean something isn't offensive, not only that but the changes to the modules are all pretty subtle, nothing's being ruined and it's only making the game better.
Not all of those are stand ins for black people. The Vistani are pretty directly Romani (gypsies). Honestly man, I can't speak for others but as a DM I read through Strahd and thought. "Ohh man, this... this did not age well this is a REALLY racist caricature of Romani stereotypes. What you might be missing is that the current versions of those races are FAR different than in previous editions, precisely for this reason. With the exception of Drizzt (and his dad), Drow were universally evil monsters. Same with orcs and goblins. It's only been in recent editions that they've been not inherently evil, like at a genetic level.
Yeah, you can homebrew it as whatever you want but for new players, the stuff in the handbooks and modules is pretty much gospel. Plus, maybe like me you looked at Strahd and though, "Ugh no i'm not going to put in the work to make this not crazy offensive. Hard pass."
Look I get it, I'm also a white dude, most of this stuff never bothered me because i just didn't notice it. The fact that I noticed the Vistani just shows how over the top it was. But I AM part of a religious minority and it really sucks to see yourself cast as a villain, not because you're doing villain things, but because your "otherness" is inherently evil or bad. It's bad writing and kills a lot of potential interest from both creators and players. Just because I'm not offended, doesn't mean something isn't offensive, not only that but the changes to the modules are all pretty subtle, nothing's being ruined and it's only making the game better.
It's the fact that this controversy will is just infuriating. I don't see the racist allegory At all
Not all of those are stand ins for black people. The Vistani are pretty directly Romani (gypsies). Honestly man, I can't speak for others but as a DM I read through Strahd and thought. "Ohh man, this... this did not age well this is a REALLY racist caricature of Romani stereotypes. What you might be missing is that the current versions of those races are FAR different than in previous editions, precisely for this reason. With the exception of Drizzt (and his dad), Drow were universally evil monsters. Same with orcs and goblins. It's only been in recent editions that they've been not inherently evil, like at a genetic level.
Yeah, you can homebrew it as whatever you want but for new players, the stuff in the handbooks and modules is pretty much gospel. Plus, maybe like me you looked at Strahd and though, "Ugh no i'm not going to put in the work to make this not crazy offensive. Hard pass."
Look I get it, I'm also a white dude, most of this stuff never bothered me because i just didn't notice it. The fact that I noticed the Vistani just shows how over the top it was. But I AM part of a religious minority and it really sucks to see yourself cast as a villain, not because you're doing villain things, but because your "otherness" is inherently evil or bad. It's bad writing and kills a lot of potential interest from both creators and players. Just because I'm not offended, doesn't mean something isn't offensive, not only that but the changes to the modules are all pretty subtle, nothing's being ruined and it's only making the game better.
It's the fact that this controversy will is just infuriating. I don't see the racist allegory At all
Again, you don't get to decide what bothers other people. And if it bothers you so much, just homebrew them to be evil or Vistani to be caricatures. If making an entire race not genetically evil and just part of an evil society ruins your ability to use them, that's on you dude.
If making an entire race not genetically evil and just part of an evil society ruins your ability to use them, that's on you dude.
The advantage of having, as you call it, "genetically evil" races like the Drow and Ocrs classically used to be, is that it gives the party carte blanche to slay them in battle and not have to worry about the ethics of the situation. Now not everyone necessarily wants to run a game like that, but this is the reason why Orcs and Drow and Goblins were, originally, branded as an entire race of chaotic evil beings. So that players could kill them without qualms. So that the DM didn't have to begin every single blasted encounter with providing the players a moral justification why they would kill these creatures. There are plenty of other races (like Dwarves, Elves, Humans) who can be "any alignment" that you can use for adventures with moral dilemmas. Gygax wanted to give us some creatures like the Drow that we knew could be "killed on sight" (KOS) without needing to feel bad about it.
Because let's face it, a large chunk of D&D has always been getting into battle and killing things. And not everyone wants to RP having to angst over the morality of killing enemies. In. every. freaking. encounter.
I'm not in favor of designing motifs that would make people feel bad. And if the current design is dong that, WOTC needs to look at how to deal with it. But there is a real advantage in game terms to having some KOS humanoids, so that they can act and behave in recognizable ways to us (which monstrosities, demons, etc, might not, being so far removed from regular mortal living), but are still creatures we don't have to feel bad about killing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
But are they "genetically evil"? Do Orcs KOS everything they see? Do they not party with Goblins for common goals? Do Orcs not have families, a society, and raise young? Orcs hating humans is not "genetically evil," it's a hatred learned from being long at war.
Look at every WWII genre released in America - the Germans are painted as 'evil' in almost everything. This isn't because they're naturally evil or even as a culture/racist bias. The story takes place from a certain perspective, much as it does with D&D. Just because the hostile side of the altercation is painted in a dimmer light, doesn't mean they are 'genetically evil' or sub-human - this is story-based perspective to build the narrative.
What kind of story would LOTR be if all humanoids were peaceful and had no qualms about the others? Just my .02
Look, D&D needs “storm troopers” to kill without guilt. That’s not to say “monsters” because many “monsters” are fairly mindless. But having intelligent races that are clearly recognized as “evil” is important to the game. If every recognizably evil intelligent race suddenly stops being recognizable as evil, then it forces the story into two directions: Either 1) All of the easily recognizable evil creatures become vanilla and less exciting/challenging. Or 2) Every encounter with intelligent races becomes a morality play.
What would LotR have been like if the Goblins, Orcs, and Urukai were all objectively no more good/evil than the Elves, Dwarves, Humans, and Hobbits?
What’s next? Grimlocks? Illithid? Duergar? Where does it end?
I had this conversation with someone in one of these forums who actually said: “Why’s it gotta be the dark elves that are evil and live underground?!?” When I explained that Drow were actually a pale, ashen grey color they were flabbergasted. They literally had no idea that “dark elves” in no way referenced their skin pigmentation. It seems this argument comes from ignorance more than actual morality.
So I've followed the discussions about WOTC's decisions to make some changes based on diversity (on enworld in particular), and my take is very different than the OP's:
-I have not seen anyone who is in favor of the changes claim that "orcs are an allegory for black people." What I have seen said is that the words used to describe orcs (savage, brutal, stupid, fecund--i.e. having lots of offspring) are the exact same descriptions used by white supremacists to describe blacks and other people of color. So, understandably, many people of color, as well as some white folks (myself included) are uncomfortable with those descriptions, meaning the D&D table doesn't feel safe or welcoming for a lot of people.
-Similarly, there is concern about any humanoid race (especially playable races) that is "always evil" or "genetically evil," again, because that echoes the kinds of things racists have said about people of color and other minorities.
-As mentioned above, the Vistani clearly and obviously were based on incredibly negative stereotypes of the Romani (***** is a racial slur used to refer to the Romani.)
-The press release from Wizards of the Coast did not claim that things were changing because people from the outside who "knew nothing of the game" were attacking them. They clearly said that 1) diversity and welcome is important to them; 2) they had come to realize that their portrayal of orcs, the Vistani, and some aspects of Chult were not consistent with their values and desire to be diverse and welcoming, and so they were making changes; 3) from here on out, they would be working with sensitivity readers and consultants to help them catch things that were problematic before they hit print.
-None of this means that there can't be evil orcs or drow, and if you still want to rule at your table that all orcs and drow are auto-evil and therefore your players can kill them without any moral quandries, you can. It's not the kind of game I want to play, but there is nothing stopping you from continuing to do so.
-As an example of the last point, one of the changes to the Vistani in Curse of Strahd is that they aren't all automatically evil, and the "good" NPCs in the adventure aren't out to kill/hunt ALL Vistani. But SOME of the Vistani are servants of Strahd, and those Vistani are evil and are bring targeted by the good NPCs in the adventure.
I really appreciate what Wizards is trying to do here, and I prefer games that encourage players not to lump all beings of a particular race/species into the same category. In one game I'm in, a group of lizardfolk where kidnapping townsfolk. In the process of our tracking the wagons used to cart the townsfolk away, we encountered a group of lizardfolk out hunting. There were hints that these lizardfolk might be different. About half of our party just saw "evil lizardfolk," one or two were leaning that direction, and two of our party (including my character) didn't want to make assumptions and thought it was possible they were a different group. We managed to convince the rest to try talking first, and it turns out we were right: this group was not part of the kidnapping and were in fact concerned about the other faction. While not willing to fight them directly, they were willing to offer us help and support. That was the start of a positive relationship between that lizardfolk group and the "civilized" towns in the area. We are currently back at their encampment, preparing to try to track down the BBEG who was behind the kidnappings. For me, those interactions have been a highlight of our adventure, and far more fun/energizing than a more murder-hobo approach.
I had this conversation with someone in one of these forums who actually said: “Why’s it gotta be the dark elves that are evil and live underground?!?”
Also... the Drow were loosely based on Norse mythology, which has, literally, Dark Elves (dopkalfar) and Light Elves (ljosalfar). And that in turn comes from the ancient idea of evil being morally "dark" and good being morally "light," and consequently, using physical darkness/light (night, day) as metaphors for the moral dark/lightness.
One failing this subject has is its not an apples to apples comparison. Race IRL VS Race in game are 2 entirely different things. Race in life is a sub category of the human species indicating ethnicity whereas Race as a game term really refers to an entirely different species. This is an incredibly important distinction that is being ignored because it invalidates the argument.
-I have not seen anyone who is in favor of the changes claim that "orcs are an allegory for black people." What I have seen said is that the words used to describe orcs (savage, brutal, stupid, fecund--i.e. having lots of offspring) are the exact same descriptions used by white supremacists to describe blacks and other people of color. So, understandably, people of color, as well as some white folks (myself included) are uncomfortable with those descriptions, meaning the D&D table doesn't feel safe or welcoming for a lot of people.
-Similarly, there is concern about any humanoid race (especially playable races) that is "always evil" or "genetically evil," again, because that echoes the kinds of things racists have said about people of color and other minorities.
My point is simply that the problem lies with the supremacists, not with D&D.
Change the racists. Get rid of racism. Changing D&D does nothing to change the problem.
One failing this subject has is its not an apples to apples comparison. Race IRL VS Race in game are 2 entirely different things. Race in life is a sub category of the human species indicating ethnicity whereas Race as a game term really refers to an entirely different species. This is an incredibly important distinction that is being ignored because it invalidates the argument.
It could go either way. There's two sides to this:
On the one hand, you can't compare races in fantasy to human ethnic groups because they aren't the same. Tortles get a racial bonus to strength? I sure hope so, considering how heavy they are. And part of the fun of certain races (I'm thinking of lizardfolk in particular) is playing as something that is not human and looks at the world in a completely different way than the player would. Contrast this with humans, who regardless of their ethnicity have the same racial stats across the board. Also, I have a higher opinion of the people I game with than I do of the average population, and using fictional creatures as an excuse to justify prejudices towards real world people isn't something I'm worried about from them.
On the other hand, I can see why some people might be concerned with orcs in particular, as many of their traits line up with stereotypes applied to people of African descent in real life. And it's not like this is a new concern. The Eberron setting did away with alignment as we know it, and that was created well over a decade ago. Even Tolkien wasn't in favor of having a race be completely evil.
The solution, if you a DM, is to do what fits your needs for your campaign. Don't like the optional rule that Wizards might release in their next book? Don't use it.
-I have not seen anyone who is in favor of the changes claim that "orcs are an allegory for black people." What I have seen said is that the words used to describe orcs (savage, brutal, stupid, fecund--i.e. having lots of offspring) are the exact same descriptions used by white supremacists to describe blacks and other people of color. So, understandably, people of color, as well as some white folks (myself included) are uncomfortable with those descriptions, meaning the D&D table doesn't feel safe or welcoming for a lot of people.
-Similarly, there is concern about any humanoid race (especially playable races) that is "always evil" or "genetically evil," again, because that echoes the kinds of things racists have said about people of color and other minorities.
My point is simply that the problem lies with the supremacists, not with D&D.
Change the racists. Get rid of racism. Changing D&D does nothing to change the problem.
And one of my contentions is racism is not just about conscious/overt racists. At least in the US, we are steeped in messages from media, games, and a whole host of other cultural messaging, which shapes us at very deep levels, and a great deal of that messaging and shaping reinforces--subtly but powerfully--the idea that whites and white experience is "normal" and "best" and discounts the experiences and reality of people of color. That messaging affects everyone, even folks (like me, and presumably you) who oppose racism and want racism to end. So we can't get rid of racism until we truly address that messaging. It's not the only thing that needs to be done to put an end to racism, and addressing the issues in D&D is only one small part of of dismantling the systemic racism all around us, but it's a step that WOTC can take and I'm glad they have. Will it solve racism by itself? No, but it's one tiny part of addressing the giant issue of racism in the US (and, perhaps, the world); even tiny drops, if there are enough of them, erode rocks.
-I have not seen anyone who is in favor of the changes claim that "orcs are an allegory for black people." What I have seen said is that the words used to describe orcs (savage, brutal, stupid, fecund--i.e. having lots of offspring) are the exact same descriptions used by white supremacists to describe blacks and other people of color. So, understandably, people of color, as well as some white folks (myself included) are uncomfortable with those descriptions, meaning the D&D table doesn't feel safe or welcoming for a lot of people.
-Similarly, there is concern about any humanoid race (especially playable races) that is "always evil" or "genetically evil," again, because that echoes the kinds of things racists have said about people of color and other minorities.
My point is simply that the problem lies with the supremacists, not with D&D.
Change the racists. Get rid of racism. Changing D&D does nothing to change the problem.
One of the ways we get rid of racism is by changing our culture to make it clear that those attitudes are not welcome. One of the ways to do that is to reevaluate our stories - even the ones we love - and change them when we update them.
When the language in the game echoes the language used in the real world, that’s not an accident - it comes from deep cultural stuff about what we’re taught makes some people civilised and worthy of respect and dignity, and what makes others unworthy and - in the original language of the game - Demi-human. Orcs, for example, have evolved a lot over the history of the game, and will continue to do so, because our understanding of what it is okay to label as evil, and how to express that, has grown more sophisticated. And while a fantasy species of literally non-human people isn’t the same as the cultural idea of race in our real world culture, it really isn’t very different from the racist roots of that cultural idea. It wasn’t put into the game with that intention, and now the makers of the game have learned that’s where that language comes from, they are taking it out to remove that association.
No-one is coming to take away your existing books, or tell you how to run your game. But Wizards have made the decision, not for the first time, to change the default version of the world they present to remove that stuff. That’s something they can do, and it does affect the problem. It will make more people comfortable playing the game, and is already making us all think about the language and ideas we use at our tables. And it also removes one place in the culture where those beliefs are backed up by fiction.
I don't know if this will be taken down or not, but I need to vent my frustration. So, I just found out about the allegations, against wizards of the coast, about orcs, vestani and drow, being an allegory of black people. From people who have come out saying they know nothing about the game.
Now I'm white, and still new to playing d&d (Keyword "playing"), and before I really truly started playing d&d; I got into the lore of the game, mainly the drow. But even with that, I never once saw drow as a depiction of black people. They were cool, and the fact they had a only one good goddess; who wanted her people to return to the surface and live in peace with the other races was awe inspiring. Orcs can be more than the dumb stupid strong race. I have a DMPC orc that's a bard, who's free spirited, and happy go lucky. The vestani, I dont dont know much about ravenloft, but they are being accused of being stereotypical gypsies? Really?D&D can be flexible for different ways to play the characters, PCs and NPCs alike. It's an improve game, we can make homebrew rules.
What makes this more heartbreaking to me is, it's the "D&D is the devil's game" all over again. And wizards of the coast is just giving in to this person(s) demands. The fact that the company is bending a knee to, let me remind you, PEOPLE WHO'VE NEVER PLAYED THE GAME, is JUST sad. Makes me feel like quitting playing all together.
I dont know if I will be able to post this or what. I just wanted to vent my frustration. Hope you guys have a nice day.
The main problem I have with it as well is that their complaints are factually false. Psychologists have studied the impact of rpgs on racism and have consistently found that those who play rpgs tend to show improved socialization and good moral development. If their complaints had any merit this would not be the case. We need to get back to a world where facts and stats are what matters again. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/checkpoints/202004/no-orcs-arent-racist
Not all of those are stand ins for black people. The Vistani are pretty directly Romani (gypsies). Honestly man, I can't speak for others but as a DM I read through Strahd and thought. "Ohh man, this... this did not age well this is a REALLY racist caricature of Romani stereotypes. What you might be missing is that the current versions of those races are FAR different than in previous editions, precisely for this reason. With the exception of Drizzt (and his dad), Drow were universally evil monsters. Same with orcs and goblins. It's only been in recent editions that they've been not inherently evil, like at a genetic level.
Yeah, you can homebrew it as whatever you want but for new players, the stuff in the handbooks and modules is pretty much gospel. Plus, maybe like me you looked at Strahd and though, "Ugh no i'm not going to put in the work to make this not crazy offensive. Hard pass."
Look I get it, I'm also a white dude, most of this stuff never bothered me because i just didn't notice it. The fact that I noticed the Vistani just shows how over the top it was. But I AM part of a religious minority and it really sucks to see yourself cast as a villain, not because you're doing villain things, but because your "otherness" is inherently evil or bad. It's bad writing and kills a lot of potential interest from both creators and players. Just because I'm not offended, doesn't mean something isn't offensive, not only that but the changes to the modules are all pretty subtle, nothing's being ruined and it's only making the game better.
It's the fact that this controversy will is just infuriating. I don't see the racist allegory At all
Again, you don't get to decide what bothers other people. And if it bothers you so much, just homebrew them to be evil or Vistani to be caricatures. If making an entire race not genetically evil and just part of an evil society ruins your ability to use them, that's on you dude.
The advantage of having, as you call it, "genetically evil" races like the Drow and Ocrs classically used to be, is that it gives the party carte blanche to slay them in battle and not have to worry about the ethics of the situation. Now not everyone necessarily wants to run a game like that, but this is the reason why Orcs and Drow and Goblins were, originally, branded as an entire race of chaotic evil beings. So that players could kill them without qualms. So that the DM didn't have to begin every single blasted encounter with providing the players a moral justification why they would kill these creatures. There are plenty of other races (like Dwarves, Elves, Humans) who can be "any alignment" that you can use for adventures with moral dilemmas. Gygax wanted to give us some creatures like the Drow that we knew could be "killed on sight" (KOS) without needing to feel bad about it.
Because let's face it, a large chunk of D&D has always been getting into battle and killing things. And not everyone wants to RP having to angst over the morality of killing enemies. In. every. freaking. encounter.
I'm not in favor of designing motifs that would make people feel bad. And if the current design is dong that, WOTC needs to look at how to deal with it. But there is a real advantage in game terms to having some KOS humanoids, so that they can act and behave in recognizable ways to us (which monstrosities, demons, etc, might not, being so far removed from regular mortal living), but are still creatures we don't have to feel bad about killing.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
But are they "genetically evil"? Do Orcs KOS everything they see? Do they not party with Goblins for common goals? Do Orcs not have families, a society, and raise young? Orcs hating humans is not "genetically evil," it's a hatred learned from being long at war.
Look at every WWII genre released in America - the Germans are painted as 'evil' in almost everything. This isn't because they're naturally evil or even as a culture/racist bias. The story takes place from a certain perspective, much as it does with D&D. Just because the hostile side of the altercation is painted in a dimmer light, doesn't mean they are 'genetically evil' or sub-human - this is story-based perspective to build the narrative.
What kind of story would LOTR be if all humanoids were peaceful and had no qualms about the others? Just my .02
The orcs in LOTR are 100% evil, irredeemably so. They are clearly portrayed that way.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Look, D&D needs “storm troopers” to kill without guilt. That’s not to say “monsters” because many “monsters” are fairly mindless. But having intelligent races that are clearly recognized as “evil” is important to the game. If every recognizably evil intelligent race suddenly stops being recognizable as evil, then it forces the story into two directions: Either 1) All of the easily recognizable evil creatures become vanilla and less exciting/challenging. Or 2) Every encounter with intelligent races becomes a morality play.
What would LotR have been like if the Goblins, Orcs, and Urukai were all objectively no more good/evil than the Elves, Dwarves, Humans, and Hobbits?
What’s next? Grimlocks? Illithid? Duergar? Where does it end?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I had this conversation with someone in one of these forums who actually said: “Why’s it gotta be the dark elves that are evil and live underground?!?” When I explained that Drow were actually a pale, ashen grey color they were flabbergasted. They literally had no idea that “dark elves” in no way referenced their skin pigmentation. It seems this argument comes from ignorance more than actual morality.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So I've followed the discussions about WOTC's decisions to make some changes based on diversity (on enworld in particular), and my take is very different than the OP's:
-I have not seen anyone who is in favor of the changes claim that "orcs are an allegory for black people." What I have seen said is that the words used to describe orcs (savage, brutal, stupid, fecund--i.e. having lots of offspring) are the exact same descriptions used by white supremacists to describe blacks and other people of color. So, understandably, many people of color, as well as some white folks (myself included) are uncomfortable with those descriptions, meaning the D&D table doesn't feel safe or welcoming for a lot of people.
-Similarly, there is concern about any humanoid race (especially playable races) that is "always evil" or "genetically evil," again, because that echoes the kinds of things racists have said about people of color and other minorities.
-As mentioned above, the Vistani clearly and obviously were based on incredibly negative stereotypes of the Romani (***** is a racial slur used to refer to the Romani.)
-The press release from Wizards of the Coast did not claim that things were changing because people from the outside who "knew nothing of the game" were attacking them. They clearly said that 1) diversity and welcome is important to them; 2) they had come to realize that their portrayal of orcs, the Vistani, and some aspects of Chult were not consistent with their values and desire to be diverse and welcoming, and so they were making changes; 3) from here on out, they would be working with sensitivity readers and consultants to help them catch things that were problematic before they hit print.
-None of this means that there can't be evil orcs or drow, and if you still want to rule at your table that all orcs and drow are auto-evil and therefore your players can kill them without any moral quandries, you can. It's not the kind of game I want to play, but there is nothing stopping you from continuing to do so.
-As an example of the last point, one of the changes to the Vistani in Curse of Strahd is that they aren't all automatically evil, and the "good" NPCs in the adventure aren't out to kill/hunt ALL Vistani. But SOME of the Vistani are servants of Strahd, and those Vistani are evil and are bring targeted by the good NPCs in the adventure.
I really appreciate what Wizards is trying to do here, and I prefer games that encourage players not to lump all beings of a particular race/species into the same category. In one game I'm in, a group of lizardfolk where kidnapping townsfolk. In the process of our tracking the wagons used to cart the townsfolk away, we encountered a group of lizardfolk out hunting. There were hints that these lizardfolk might be different. About half of our party just saw "evil lizardfolk," one or two were leaning that direction, and two of our party (including my character) didn't want to make assumptions and thought it was possible they were a different group. We managed to convince the rest to try talking first, and it turns out we were right: this group was not part of the kidnapping and were in fact concerned about the other faction. While not willing to fight them directly, they were willing to offer us help and support. That was the start of a positive relationship between that lizardfolk group and the "civilized" towns in the area. We are currently back at their encampment, preparing to try to track down the BBEG who was behind the kidnappings. For me, those interactions have been a highlight of our adventure, and far more fun/energizing than a more murder-hobo approach.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
Also... the Drow were loosely based on Norse mythology, which has, literally, Dark Elves (dopkalfar) and Light Elves (ljosalfar). And that in turn comes from the ancient idea of evil being morally "dark" and good being morally "light," and consequently, using physical darkness/light (night, day) as metaphors for the moral dark/lightness.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
One failing this subject has is its not an apples to apples comparison. Race IRL VS Race in game are 2 entirely different things. Race in life is a sub category of the human species indicating ethnicity whereas Race as a game term really refers to an entirely different species. This is an incredibly important distinction that is being ignored because it invalidates the argument.
Yes, I wish years ago, like in 2nd edition, they had realized they needed to call it "species" instead of race. Or "Lifeform" or something.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
My point is simply that the problem lies with the supremacists, not with D&D.
Change the racists. Get rid of racism. Changing D&D does nothing to change the problem.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Technically, D&D uses “race” correctly. It’s society that uses it incorrectly. Our society is broken, not the game.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
It could go either way. There's two sides to this:
The solution, if you a DM, is to do what fits your needs for your campaign. Don't like the optional rule that Wizards might release in their next book? Don't use it.
And one of my contentions is racism is not just about conscious/overt racists. At least in the US, we are steeped in messages from media, games, and a whole host of other cultural messaging, which shapes us at very deep levels, and a great deal of that messaging and shaping reinforces--subtly but powerfully--the idea that whites and white experience is "normal" and "best" and discounts the experiences and reality of people of color. That messaging affects everyone, even folks (like me, and presumably you) who oppose racism and want racism to end. So we can't get rid of racism until we truly address that messaging. It's not the only thing that needs to be done to put an end to racism, and addressing the issues in D&D is only one small part of of dismantling the systemic racism all around us, but it's a step that WOTC can take and I'm glad they have. Will it solve racism by itself? No, but it's one tiny part of addressing the giant issue of racism in the US (and, perhaps, the world); even tiny drops, if there are enough of them, erode rocks.
Trying to Decide if DDB is for you? A few helpful threads: A Buyer's Guide to DDB; What I/We Bought and Why; How some DMs use DDB; A Newer Thread on Using DDB to Play
Helpful threads on other topics: Homebrew FAQ by IamSposta; Accessing Content by ConalTheGreat;
Check your entitlements here. | Support Ticket LInk
One of the ways we get rid of racism is by changing our culture to make it clear that those attitudes are not welcome. One of the ways to do that is to reevaluate our stories - even the ones we love - and change them when we update them.
When the language in the game echoes the language used in the real world, that’s not an accident - it comes from deep cultural stuff about what we’re taught makes some people civilised and worthy of respect and dignity, and what makes others unworthy and - in the original language of the game - Demi-human. Orcs, for example, have evolved a lot over the history of the game, and will continue to do so, because our understanding of what it is okay to label as evil, and how to express that, has grown more sophisticated. And while a fantasy species of literally non-human people isn’t the same as the cultural idea of race in our real world culture, it really isn’t very different from the racist roots of that cultural idea. It wasn’t put into the game with that intention, and now the makers of the game have learned that’s where that language comes from, they are taking it out to remove that association.
No-one is coming to take away your existing books, or tell you how to run your game. But Wizards have made the decision, not for the first time, to change the default version of the world they present to remove that stuff. That’s something they can do, and it does affect the problem. It will make more people comfortable playing the game, and is already making us all think about the language and ideas we use at our tables. And it also removes one place in the culture where those beliefs are backed up by fiction.