Big Changes At White Wolf Following Controversy

Following an online backlash regarding the content of their recent publications, White Wolf Publishing has just announced some big changes, including the suspension of the Vampire 5th Edition Camarilla and Anarch books, and a restructuring of management.

White Wolf's Shams Jorjani made the following announcement about an hour ago:

"Hello everyone,

My name is Shams Jorjani, VP of Business Development at Paradox Interactive and interim manager at White Wolf Publishing. I wanted to inform you of some changes that will be implemented at White Wolf, starting immediately.

Sales and printing of the V5 Camarilla and Anarch books will be temporarily suspended. The section on Chechnya will be removed in both the print and PDF versions of the Camarilla book. We anticipate that this will require about three weeks. This means shipping will be delayed; if you have pre-ordered a copy of Camarilla or Anarchs, further information will follow via e-mail.

In practical terms, White Wolf will no longer function as a separate entity. The White Wolf team will be restructured and integrated directly into Paradox Interactive, and I will be temporarily managing things during this process. We are recruiting new leadership to guide White Wolf both creatively and commercially into the future, a process that has been ongoing since September.

Going forward, White Wolf will focus on brand management. This means White Wolf will develop the guiding principles for its vision of the World of Darkness, and give licensees the tools they need to create new, excellent products in this story world. White Wolf will no longer develop and publish these products internally. This has always been the intended goal for White Wolf as a company, and it is now time to enact it.

The World of Darkness has always been about horror, and horror is about exploring the darkest parts of our society, our culture, and ourselves. Horror should not be afraid to explore difficult or sensitive topics, but it should never do so without understanding who those topics are about and what it means to them. Real evil does exist in the world, and we can’t ever excuse its real perpetrators or cheapen the suffering of its real victims.

In the Chechnya chapter of the V5 Camarilla book, we lost sight of this. The result was a chapter that dealt with a real-world, ongoing tragedy in a crude and disrespectful way. We should have identified this either during the creative process or in editing. This did not happen, and for this we apologize.

We ask for your patience while we implement these changes. In the meantime, let’s keep talking. I’m available for any and all thoughts, comments and feedback, on shams.jorjani@paradoxinteractive.com."

White Wolf is currently own by Paradox Interactive, who acquired the World of Darkness rights in 2015 from previous owner CCP (who you might know from Eve Online) whose plans for a WoD MMO failed to bear fruit.

The recent Camarilla and Anarch books have met widespread criticism. The former, Camarilla, includes a section which appears to trivialise current real-life events in Chechnya, where the LGBTQ community is being persecuted, tortured, and murdered and uses that current tragedy as a backdrop for the setting. This comes after the company was forced to deny links to neo-Nazi ideology. White Wolf recently announced that "White Wolf is currently undergoing some significant transitions up to and including a change in leadership. The team needs a short time to understand what this means, so we ask for your patience as we figure out our next steps" and this appears to be the result of that decision.

 

[ruemere]

[MENTION=5515]ruemere[/MENTION], your Anarch Guides link is broken. I would very much like to see the conversation you are talking about. Can you fix the link?

Sure, let me try.

On the guides in general:
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/vampire-5th-ed-camarilla-anarch-guides.836416/

Offending piece (image):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dreh9TrV4AMdzsI?format=jpg

Offending piece (text):
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/vampire-5th-ed-camarilla-anarch-guides.836416/post-22218511

Other issues:
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/white-wolf-to-no-longer-develop-books-internally-camarilla-book-to-be-edited.837179/
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/white-wolf-to-no-longer-develop-books-internally-camarilla-book-to-be-edited.837179/post-22227731

 

[D1Tremere]

Having read the extensive thread at rpg.net on V5 Anarch and Camarilla guides (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/vampire-5th-ed-camarilla-anarch-guides.836416; the offending passage on Chechnya is quoted there) I find the treatment of Chechnya issues distasteful, and the official follow-up with its promise of making amends quite recommendable (statement link: https://www.white-wolf.com/newsblog/a-message-from-white-wolf).

Man-made atrocities should stay man-made, especially if they are recent, or worse, ongoing. Fictionalizing them should not involve shifting blame to supernatural third parties, period.

Lastly, if a writer feels a strong urge to capitalize on recent headlines in their fiction, they should do a serious peer review of their piece first. And this particular case (well, several cases in recent memory of V5, like that sex-changing ritual - search rpg.net forums if you want to find examples) imply that peer review was lacking on several occasions.

Regards,
Ruemere

Those are definitely opinions, and you are allowed to have them, but they are not objective facts. Matters of taste, morality, or public opinion should never be treated as objective or applied to art in my opinion. No art should EVER be peer reviewed, because making art to fit an external standard is no longer art. It is useful only from a sales and business perspective.

Vampires themselves are often seen or used as an allegory for sex, especially in particularly repressive points in human history. That these vampires very often use force or mind altering abilities to feed is then an allusion for rape. Rape is an aspect of man-made atrocities that is, in this context being fictionalized and blamed on third party supernatural entities. By your logic, no vampires of the typical Western European variety should be presented as they trivialize rape.

I believe in inclusion, and in supporting people of all genders, religions, ethnicity, biodiversity, etc., in the pursuit of equality and freedom. I, however, do not think that horror fiction, which by definition highlights the worst aspects of the human psyche, is a place for drawing moralistic lines in the sand.

 

[ruemere]

Those are definitely opinions, and you are allowed to have them, but they are not objective facts. Matters of taste, morality, or public opinion should never be treated as objective or applied to art in my opinion. No art should EVER be peer reviewed, because making art to fit an external standard is no longer art. It is useful only from a sales and business perspective.

Vampires themselves are often seen or used as an allegory for sex, especially in particularly repressive points in human history. That these vampires very often use force or mind altering abilities to feed is then an allusion for rape. Rape is an aspect of man-made atrocities that is, in this context being fictionalized and blamed on third party supernatural entities. By your logic, no vampires of the typical Western European variety should be presented as they trivialize rape.

I believe in inclusion, and in supporting people of all genders, religions, ethnicity, biodiversity, etc., in the pursuit of equality and freedom. I, however, do not think that horror fiction, which by definition highlights the worst aspects of the human psyche, is a place for drawing moralistic lines in the sand.

Ah, you're being romantic about the art. No, my dear, the art is always peer reviewed - ever heard about art critics, exhibitions, etc? How about editors - you know, these guys, who redline, comment, re-do text? Have you ever, by any chance, published anything? Do you know through how many changes a piece of text can go through?
And the particular piece of fiction is insensitive, shallow and reeks of lazy racking word count.

Your second paragraph is not relevant to this discussion. Artificial broadening of topic scope does not work with me.
Your last paragraph is just a convenient disclaimer, akin to "Let me say something outrageous first, and now I will do a convenient escape with a disclaimer". So again, not really worth refuting in-depth.

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[TrippyHippy]

Ah, you're being romantic about the art. No, my dear, the art is always peer reviewed - ever heard about art critics, exhibitions, etc? How about editors - you know, these guys, who redline, comment, re-do text? Have you ever, by any chance, published anything? Do you know through how many changes a piece of text can go through?

You are assuming that it wasn't peer reviewed or edited, and that the conclusion to this process ought to have been the same as people who were offended by it.

And the particular piece of fiction is insensitive, shallow and reeks of lazy racking word count.

Which is your opinion, as pointed out by D1Tremere.

Your second paragraph is not relevant to this discussion. Artificial broadening of topic scope does not work with me.

I think it's pretty relevant as a way of illustrating that vampires have been used as metaphors for some time, so trying to assert that this piece of writing wasn't making use of a metaphor is a stretch. It's to the point at hand.

Your last paragraph is just a convenient disclaimer, akin to "Let me say something outrageous first, and now I will do a convenient escape with a disclaimer". So again, not really worth refuting in-depth.

He didn't say anything outrageous.

 

[ruemere]

You are assuming that it wasn't peer reviewed or edited, and that the conclusion to this process ought to have been the same as people who were offended by it.

Which is your opinion, as pointed out by D1Tremere.

I think it's pretty relevant as a way of illustrating that vampires have been used as metaphors for some time, so trying to assert that this piece of writing wasn't making use of a metaphor is a stretch. It's to the point at hand.

He didn't say anything outrageous.

Let me quote you a statement by Shams Jorjani, VP of Business Development at Paradox Interactive and interim manager at White Wolf Publishing:

In the Chechnya chapter of the V5 Camarilla book, we lost sight of this. The result was a chapter that dealt with a real-world, ongoing tragedy in a crude and disrespectful way. We should have identified this either during the creative process or in editing. This did not happen, and for this we apologize.

This is a statement by the guy who is now in charge of this item. This is not my opinion, this is official word on this by the publisher.
Therefore, would you kindly stop acting patronizingly toward me and other participants who happen to disagree with you? The publisher, who is definitely closer to the source has admitted that they are at fault.

Again, attempting to redirect subject of this discussion (treatment of ongoing atrocities in Chechnya) toward broader topics (like what vampires are metaphor for) classifies as items number three and nineteen on "The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument":
#3 Generalize Your Opponent's Specific Statements
#19 Generalize the Matter, Then Argue Against it

As for your flat denial, well. In the very first paragraph, D1Tremere, admitted (indirectly) that they are not familiar with publishing. To me it is an outrageous lack of information.

To sum it up - the show's over, there are consequences, and hopefully the next version of the guides will not spark such outcry.

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[Umbran]

Matters of taste, morality, or public opinion should never be treated as objective or applied to art in my opinion.

*blink*

Art is, in the end, about human experience and feelings and thoughts. Taste, morality, public opinion - these are the very lifeblood of art.

No art should EVER be peer reviewed, because making art to fit an external standard is no longer art.

With respect, *ALL* art gets peer reviewed, unless it is art that nobody but its creator ever sees. Art is subject to the thoughts and opinions of every single member of the audience. Engaging the minds of others is part of the (some say the only) point to making art at all! Putting out art is making yourself vulnerable to judgement.

 

[D1Tremere]

Firstly, I do not believe standing up for free speech is saying anything outrageous.
Secondly, I was generalizing your argument because if it cant be generalized then it lacks external validity.
Thirdly, your opinion is still an opinion, no matter who agrees with it. It doesn't matter if the person in charge of the company agrees with you (appeal to authority), it is still just an opinion.
Lastly, when I think of peer review I do not consider it the same as critiquing. Anyone can critique any work of art, but peer review as I was thinking of it involves using objective standards (as opposed to opinion) to refute a written position. Fiction is not a peer reviewable written position, it is a non-real product which need not be subject to reality or its outlook.

 

[D1Tremere]

*blink*

Art is, in the end, about human experience and feelings and thoughts. Taste, morality, public opinion - these are the very lifeblood of art.



With respect, *ALL* art gets peer reviewed, unless it is art that nobody but its creator ever sees. Art is subject to the thoughts and opinions of every single member of the audience. Engaging the minds of others is part of the (some say the only) point to making art at all! Putting out art is making yourself vulnerable to judgement.

I think we are using different ideas of peer review. Any one can critique art, no one should have the right to choose for another what should be allowed in art.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Let me quote you a statement by Shams Jorjani, VP of Business Development at Paradox Interactive and interim manager at White Wolf Publishing:

I know his quote, and I've obviously taken issue with it throughout this thread for the reasons given.

It still doesn't mean that your opinion is fact.

To sum it up - the show's over, there are consequences

Absolutely, but I'm not sure that some people are particularly cogent with what those consequences now are.

 

[Jester David]

If we look at the issue in a more general sense, I think it becomes clearer. It really boils down to this:

Are we or should we as customers/readers/viewers/gamers guaranteed some level of freedom from offense by the art we consume?

Sure, there are commercial considerations at playy here, and they have been a factor. But separate of that....separate of the business folk sitting in a conference room looking at spreadsheets...should art be banned/removed/restricted/altered based on its content?

If a work of art offends one person, is that enough for it to be removed? If not, then how many people must be offended?

And is there not some level of personal ownership that should be considered? If I find naughty language offensive, does that mean that films with naughty language should be banned? Or edited for content? Orshould it be on me to avoid films that I find offensive?

Should I be deciding this for myself or should others decide for me?

This is a million dollar question tied into several very hard to answer questions.

Such as "are mainstream commercial products done by employees and freelancers considered art?" And even, "are roleplaying game accessories art?"
Even if the answers to the above are "yes" that just leads to the big question: "should all art be free from criticism for offending people?" Or even the related "how many people must be offended before art crosses a line?" Which you yourself bring up.


Some of these can be narrowed down.

I would argue that most products whose sole purpose is to make money are NOT art. So, in general, commercial products are products and not art. I think they can be unintentionally art. And I think that creators can choose to try and make their work into a creative expression, but this is not the norm.
No matter how skilled the writer, a textbook or manual for an electronic device or the instructions for assembling a cabinet are probably not art. Cars are a mixture of sculpture and writing and engineering and very much require artistic skill to create. But I don't think every car produced can be considered "a work of art". A movie can absolutely be "art" but was Avengers III: Infinity War *really* art? I dunno...
This is a pretty big net to cast. For example, I'd argue that the first Harry Potter film was not art. It was pure, crass commercialism based on a book that very much was art. However, despite also being produced by the same studio entirely for financial reasons, the third Harry Potter film could be considered art.


Second, the intended audience is a big factor. Huge. As a elementary school librarian I come across this a lot. It's not censorship for me not to include a book from my library. Or to remove a no longer appropriate book. The book simply is not appropriate for the audience. And standards can change over time.
Art galleries get much more of a pass in this regard. Because the audience is entirely people who wish to experience art. And galleries that have a particular focus on harder or more adult art have less worries about offending people, because the audience gives their knowing consent when they enter. When I toured the H.R. Giger museum in Château St. Germain I knew what I was getting into.

Now, I think a roleplaying game product really has to be considered "appropriate" for a general audience. 13+ at least. It has to be firmly PG but shouldn't veer too far into PG-13/ 14A territory. Nothing unacceptable on prime time television.
As a culture, we've overall deemed certain things acceptable and unacceptable. As shown by the fact I cannot say on these forums. It just gets bleeped out. Nor can I hear that on the radio or on the television at certain hours. Even though I use the word two or three times a day and everyone above the age of 5 has heard it, we still deem it inappropriate. It's a form of censorship, but one we all accept for the sake of society. Because we all censor ourselves all the time in the name of not being colossal antisocial jerks and decent human beings. Some degree of censorship allows society to function.

Even a "mature audiences" roleplaying game like Vampire can't be entirely uncensored and unrestrained. But because it clearly identifies itself as for adults, and as a game that involves blood drinking monsters, the bar is MUCH higher. It can use language not appropriate for this forum. It can go full-Carlin with its prose. Because the audience knows to expect that. The audience consents.
However, even a horror gaming book knows that there are lines. More than any other RPG, there are lines. There was a lengthy section on this exact topic in the Vampire 5th Edition Core Rulebook. About how, as the Storyteller, you need consent from the audience and cannot just spring horrible things on the players without any warning and justify it with "because horror". You need to have trigger warnings and frank discussions with the audience (and know your players) as well as provide the opportunity for people to tap out from a game if you go too far.
As the book warns, the game was about pretending to be monsters, not becoming monsters.
After all, just because someone is running a vampire horror campaign does not mean they can, say, freely throw child endangerment or pedophilia into the mix.
As an example, despite being a horror movie based on a horror book, the film It chose not to have a child orgy at its climax. The could have. It was in the source material. It could be argued that people were warned. But that's a time of trigger that's not necessarily what you expect. The audience knows to brace themselves for a horror movie involving youths (and clowns) and can prepare themselves. But that doesn't mean they're ready or prepared to see a 12-year-old girl get gangbanged by a half-dozen friends.


For a book like Camarilla, the reader clearly consents to read a book about violent blood drinking monsters. So certain topics are assumed. Murder. Assault. Shades of sexual violence. Reading a Vampire the Masquerade book and complaining it romanticised predatory behaviour would be silly. It's not that predatory behaviour is acceptable, its that the topic is assumed and you shouldn't be surprised by its presence. You know what you're getting into.
But that does not mean they have free rein to show or describe anything and everything. It doesn't mean that there are no more lines that can be crossed. Anything beyond the common assumptions of the horror vampire genre fall under the purview of "general audiences".

The line that is relevant for this example is that—for the longest time—VtM has pushed that it is a dark reflection of the world BUT deliberately, purposely, and explicitly avoided attributing real world events to vampires. They didn't overtly say certain political or media figures are canonically vampires. Even historical figures were rare.
When New York By Night was published in September, 2001 they even said this:
View attachment 103181
The Camarilla book references the current head of Chechnya by name and says he's a thin-blood vampire. And a puppet of a more powerful vampire. And attributes the LGBT purges as a smokescreen for vampire feeding. And more.
So without even considering the subject matter and if the chapter is in good taste, this breaks the "rules" established by previous writers and publishers of the game established. Which also means this is not what the audience consented to read.

Then you get into the matter of good taste. If turning a real world nation and its leader and a currently ongoing crime against humanity into a plot point and potential campaign seed is a good idea.