D&D 5E D&D's Inclusivity Language Alterations In Core Rules

In recent months, WotC has altered some of the text found in the original 5th Edition core rulebooks to accommodate D&D's ongoing move towards inclusivity. Many of these changes are reflected on D&D Beyond already--mainly small terminology alterations in descriptive text, rather than rules changes.

Teos Abadia (also known as Alphastream) has compiled a list of these changes. I've posted a very abbreviated, paraphrased version below, but please do check out his site for the full list and context.

• Savage foes changed to brutal, merciless, or ruthless.
• Barbarian hordes changed to invading hordes.
• References to civilized people and places removed.
• Madness or insanity removed or changed to other words like chaos.
• Usage of orcs as evil foes changed to other words like raiders.
• Terms like dim-witted and other synonyms of low intelligence raced with words like incurious.
• Language alterations surrounding gender.
• Fat removed or changed to big.
• Use of terms referring to slavery reduced or altered.
• Use of dark when referring to evil changed to words like vile or dangerous.

This is by no means the full list, and much more context can be found on Alphastream's blog post.

 

[Morrus]

Americans have a very different way of thinking about Ancestry I think than Europeans. We are a nation of immigrants.

Yes, we know. It's, uh, very clear. You don't need to explain it. It's 2023, we've all been explaining ourselves to each other on the internet since the 1990s!

Next tell me about how Europeans think 100 miles is a long way and Americans think 100 years is a long time. I need something to help me sleep.

 

[Bedrockgames]

People can debate if it is a sound idea or not, but self censorship is a real concept with a solid discourse behind it. Doesn't meant it is the same as government censorship, but it is also different from rewriting something to simply improve the quality or tone. However I don't think we are going to be able to resolve the censorship debate and what constitutes censorship in this thread

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Yeah I'm not sure where that came from.

No there is an actual origin difference.

 

[Morrus]

People can debate if it is a sound idea or not, but self censorship is a real concept with a solid discourse behind it. Doesn't meant it is the same as government censorship, but it is also different from rewriting something to simply improve the quality or tone. However I don't think we are going to be able to resolve the censorship debate and what constitutes censorship in this thread

I bet you self-censored at least 10 times today though.

 

[Corinnguard]

Any idea on why we of European descent don't see ourselves as European-Americans?

 

[Morrus]

No there is an actual origin difference.

No, where the comment came from. It wasn't relevant to the discussion. It was a random non-sequiter.

 

[Lanefan]

The fact that they said “like” instead of “rhymes with” just makes me giggle at the idea that it’s actually supposed to be pronounced with the w sound at the beginning

Flind. Rhymes with wind. Got it.

Now, is that "wind" as in the movement of air, or "wind" as in what you do to a clock each day?

 

[darjr]

Maybe I missed it. If so apologies.

I think it’s interesting that the folks pillorying WotC haven’t mentioned they still advertise on and use twitter.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I bet you self-censored at least 10 times today though.

I don't know about 10 times a day but certainly it happens daily lol. If you read up on it, it is something that regularly occurs in creative fields.That doesn't mean it isn't or can't be a problem though. It is more than just trying to be polite or something. I think where it is really an issue is when you self censor at the expense of quality, your genuine expression or self censor to avoid saying something true that is really important. It isn't the same as just having a filter that tells you not to use the F word in front of your mother or something

 

[Lanefan]

Again, whether it is digital, or print, unless we are just talking fixing mistakes and typos, I do think it warrants mention, and personally I would be wary of sneaking a change like that in without letting people know. Again I liken it to news sites changing headlines or altering text in an article. There is something deceptive about it that can create a false impression of what they had published before.

In the days when I paid attention to such things, I always liked the way the Magic team did it when they updated the core rules: they'd put out a point-by-point document detailing exactly what changes had been made, and (usually) why.

I try to do the same thing whenever I update any rules in my game, other than for straight-up (and all too frequent!) typo fixes.