General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
That is the problem with 90s racial thinking. It assumes marketing departments dictate race relations in the US. This is why white suburban people think racial tension is dissapating, but people like me who live in ethnically diverse neighborhoods know that is not the case. Hauling around your one or two ethnic friends to show what an enlightened person you are doesn't make the world a better place. Ignoring the truth behind racial stereotypes doesn't make for better race relations on the ground. A better approach would have been for the marketing department to accurately reflect the racial makeup of gamers. So instead of inflating the number of ethnic characters, something like 80% white to 20% non-white would have been more believable.
So, how is this solution any less artificial than the one suggested? Marketing believed white males would not purchase books with a non-white/non-male character on the cover, so how do you determine what 20% of covers get treatment and which don't? If one with non-white's on it doesn't sell, is it because of the cover or because of the content?
Again, you seem to be missing the point... diversity actually does start with conscious effort and conscious awareness (usually through the efforts of a few who are such), call it "artificial" if you want. And even your solution is what you seem to be implying as artificial. The fact of the matter is... this is exactly how diversity in almost all areas have started in the U.S., and I for one would rather these type of things be implemented, regardless of how "artificial" they are, than for people to sit back and wait for it to fix itself.
__________________ Nobody built like me, I designed myself ...as an
Again, you seem to be missing the point... diversity actually does start with conscious effort and conscious awareness (usually through the efforts of a few who are such), call it "artificial" if you want. And even your solution is what you seem to be implying as artificial. The fact of the matter is... this is exactly how diversity in almost all areas have started in the U.S., and I for one would rather these type of things be implemented, regardless of how "artificial" they are, than for people to sit back and wait for it to fix itself.
Diversity in the US? Where are you living. I live in a city where all the people are ethnic. Next door is a suburb full of white people. Every well-to do place I have been is full of white folks. Talking in the classroom about how great diversity is campus, how there should be more equal representation of races in media, how hurftul negative stereotypes are does little for the black man who can't afford a college education. By the way I am all for Affirmative Action. Because it is pro-active and it gets more black faces into the work force. But I find it insulting when a product (that appeals mostly to white people with a good education) pats itself on the back for throwing in some colored characters. They want diversity, give inner city kids a discount on the books. Stop putting out splat books every week so us poor folk can't even stay current on the hobby. Use language that appeals to people without a college education. But don't include a black monk and act like you are Malcolm X or something.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
I usually like Cook, but this is just cynical 90s nonsense. An attack on all things white and vaguely European. Diversity is great. Not being racist is great. But artificially engineered diversity is worse. Boo Monte Cook.
I agree with this completely. Fictional minorities should have to compete on a level playing field against fictional whites in order to obtain fictional jobs. Until said fictional minorities are equally qualified as said fictional whites, it makes sense that the fictional jobs go to the fictional whites. Anything else is a fictional quota, which fictionally offends my fictional sense of fictional fair fictional play fictional fictional.
The whole notion of Monte Cook telling us what a good guy he is because he was upset that Redgar, the white fighter, would be the figure head of the artwork, is frankly a little insulting to all the real injustices we have had to endure. Come one. It is art for a game that mostly white folks play.
See, to me that was less of a story about how awesome Monte is and how dinosaur-like the marketing department at WotC was.
To me, the concept of art for a fantasy world is about showing the fantasy world. It doesn't matter what the demographic of your actual players is: you're looking at showing characters that are representative of the world. Now if you're deliberately doing a setting that's based on a mostly-white area like Warhammer's Old World, where non-whites are rare and exotic — or something like Nyambe, where non-Africans are rare and exotic — then yeah, you should have a representative majority in the art. But if you're not zeroing in on one particular continent, then you're theoretically depicting a world. And if an entire world is 80% white — that's pretty weird.
I find that it's the difference between depicting "the world as modeled on the demographics of a gaming group" and depicting "a believable world." And for marketing to insist on the former — well, I think that's bogus.
__________________ -------
Ethan Skemp
CCP NA/White Wolf Publishing
So, how is this solution any less artificial than the one suggested? Marketing believed white males would not purchase books with a non-white/non-male character on the cover, so how do you determine what 20% of covers get treatment and which don't?
Roll percentile dice. Are you even a gamer?
Anyway, IBTL.
__________________ "This game requires no gameboard because the action takes place in your imagination..." - Cover of Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rules Set 1.
Diversity in the US? Where are you living. I live in a city where all the people are ethnic. Next door is a suburb full of white people. Every well-to do place I have been is full of white folks. Talking in the classroom about how great diversity is campus, how there should be more equal representation of races in media, how hurftul negative stereotypes are does little for the black man who can't afford a college education. By the way I am all for Affirmative Action. Because it is pro-active and it gets more black faces into the work force. But I find it insulting when a product (that appeals mostly to white people with a good education) pats itself on the back for throwing in some colored characters. They want diversity, give inner city kids a discount on the books. Stop putting out splat books every week so us poor folk can't even stay current on the hobby. Use language that appeals to people without a college education. But don't include a black monk and act like you are Malcolm X or something.
Where do I live...Chicago. I'm a black male with a college degree in computer science, who grew up in the South Shore neighborhood. Was it easy, nope... did I do it, yep because it was what I wanted (and guess what... I wasn't the only black to do this.). And yes I am all for affirmative action as well.
As far as the things you suggest above,
"Language that appeals to people without a college education", (Why? If anything D&D expanded my vocabulary when I was younger.)
"discount on the books", (You make a choice, I gave up certain things when I was younger so I could scrape together the money to buy my books. The question is how to make this more appealing than xbox 360 or PS3 games?)
"Splat Books every month" (Now I make nice money, but even I find no need to purchase every splatbook, mini, dungeon tile or anything else WotC chooses to put out. I make choices on what I want based within how much money I can afford to spend.)
It seems your suggestions, IMHO, do more to cater to negative stereotypes than they do to help promote the game to non-white's. I don't get the impression Monte Cook is trying to portray himself as "Malcolm X". He was on the creative team and there are only so many and then only particular things which they can do in order to promote diversity. Everything you list above, except using dumber language, isn't something the creative team has any control over.
__________________ Nobody built like me, I designed myself ...as an
This isn't political correctness: This is fighting against a wrong-headed and stupid marketing-driven decision about what appears in your D&D books.
QFT.
I would love to see actual data that supports marketing's decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lutecius
I’m not sure I understand how a clearly white/nordic dwarf means more diversity than a human of ambiguous ethnicity.
Yup. Elves and dwarves are not racially diverse. They are tall, slender white people and short, stout white people. (As they are typically rendered, that is. I always liked how the Shield Dwarves in the FRCS were deep brown.)
Looked at in this light, the only "iconic of color" in 3e was Ember the monk, unless you want to somehow count Krusk (which, honestly, I wouldn't).
OTOH, they did a good job on gender diversity. And Alhandra even got real armor!
__________________ If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game.
... A player cannot learn of a game's ending without experiencing it, because a game is not a linear object.
—Mike Mearls
Sounds like marketing does not play DnD. If they did play DnD, they'd know that the way to handle Chaotics is to not force them to do things, but to appeal to their interests (philosophical or personal). Make artists bend to your will? Bad move. Make it a challenge where they can test themselves? Possibly a better one.
__________________ All role playing advice is given without knowledge of you and your group. Only you and your group knows what is fun for you. What you are doing is not badwrongfun. My advice is offered based on what I think might be fun for you to try.
"Art is the demonstration that the ordinary is extraordinary." - Amedee Ozenfant, Foundations of Modern Art
"I already have a place where I can get little recognition for my accomplishments, advance at a very slow pace, and have to work hard to eke out minimum rewards for my efforts. It's called work." - toberane.
Now my question is... isn't this a self perpetuating attitude? If you believe white males will be turned off from a game by having a different ethnicity grace the cover of a book... well logic says the opposite is also true. I mean if you aren't trying to grow or expand your market... then it makes perfect sense. However if you are, then not so much.
I think it's worth noting that White Wolf turned themselves into the second-biggest RPG company on earth, at least in part, by actively pursuing diversity in their art and fluff. Not to mention expanded into demographics that were not playing RPGs at the time.
__________________ If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game.
... A player cannot learn of a game's ending without experiencing it, because a game is not a linear object.
—Mike Mearls
I think it's worth noting that White Wolf turned themselves into the second-biggest RPG company on earth, at least in part, by actively pursuing diversity in their art and fluff.
Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?
__________________ "This game requires no gameboard because the action takes place in your imagination..." - Cover of Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rules Set 1.
Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?
Now why does nobody ever mention the bulging loincloth dude on the cover of Houses of the Bull God that came out immediately afterward? I swear, it's like people want to notice the cheesecake and not the beefcake.
Also, Harmonious Jade is the win.
__________________ -------
Ethan Skemp
CCP NA/White Wolf Publishing
Like how the Savant and Sorcerer cover appeals to female gamers by putting butterflies on the cover?
The exception that proves the rule.
__________________ If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game.
... A player cannot learn of a game's ending without experiencing it, because a game is not a linear object.
—Mike Mearls
QFT. She certainly didn't prevent Exalted from being one of WW's most successful creations, either.
__________________ If knowledge of a game's plot would spoil its experience, it isn't a game.
... A player cannot learn of a game's ending without experiencing it, because a game is not a linear object.
—Mike Mearls
Weird because I look at the covers on MALHAVOC PRESS product page and....
The Night of Dissolution - white male warrior
The Temple of Mysteries - Undetermined male warrior
The Book of Roguish Luck - white male
The Banewarrens - white male warrior (although it could be a dwarf?)
Mindscapes - white male
Requiem for a God - white males
Cry Havoc - White male warrior
The Bonds of Magic - white male
Iron Heroes - white male warrior
The Book of Hallowed Might - white male warrior
Book of Hallowed Might II - white male warrior
Book of Eldritch Might III - white male warrior
He seems to have plenty of the stereotype, certainly more than half except for the Arcana Evolved, product line.
It's true! And the characters that aren't white males are mostly either white females or non-human (mostly white non-humans). There's a black woman on Ruins of Intrigue, but I can't tell if she's meant to be a drow.
Given how helpful they are to art orders and branding and how easy it is to license and merchandise their images, their absence is an enigma.
Someone must have put their foot down on this matter, and that person made the wrong call.
While I won't argue against the ease of making art orders for a business, the value of iconics to the consumer is questionable.
Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly irrelevant. What's the point to the consumer? Branding? Meh. Looks like, for example in Pathfinder's case, some giant nobody/schmoe just plastered on the cover and getting in the way of some artwork that's actually cool.
Sure, Seoni's got a nice rack, but who are these other schmoes? For me, at least, not only are the iconics completely irrelevant, it's getting to the point that it could be seen that we're getting them shoved down our throats (the aforementioned prominent ruining of covers along with two wasted pages of - again, irrelevant - stats of these nobodies in the book itself).
Sounds like WotC made the right decision for 4e, from this particular consumer's point of view.
(But sure - maybe art ordering would have been easier for their business. Meh.)
Really, AFAIC, iconics are bland, boring, and - most importantly of all - completely and utterly irrelevant. What's the point to the consumer? Branding? Meh. Looks like, for example in Pathfinder's case, some giant nobody/schmoe just plastered on the cover and getting in the way of some artwork that's actually cool.
I like the Pathfinder iconics:
1) Visually/conceptually
2) I like that if I decide to play a game and players are in attendance without ready PCs, I can just pull one of the iconics out.
Feature 2, BTW, is a significant improvement in the way Paizo does iconics than the way WotC did them AFAIAC.
So yeah. This consumer finds value.
__________________ "This game requires no gameboard because the action takes place in your imagination..." - Cover of Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rules Set 1.
Yup. Elves and dwarves are not racially diverse. They are tall, slender white people and short, stout white people. (As they are typically rendered, that is. I always liked how the Shield Dwarves in the FRCS were deep brown.)
Dwarves are described as medium-skin tone (I think?) but are usually depicted as white. Elves are described as usually fair-skinned, but Vadania is green and Mialee changes her skin color on a whim (usually orange-ish, but she's also been green and bright purple).
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzz
Looked at in this light, the only "iconic of color" in 3e was Ember the monk, unless you want to somehow count Krusk (which, honestly, I wouldn't).
She's the only black iconic, but what about Regdar, Alhandra, Hennet, and Naull?
Jozan's the only white human, except maybe Kerwyn (I can't tell with him).
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
