D&D 5E Dark Sun, problematic content, and 5E…

[Scribe]

I think it's a bad example for this because it's been actively evolving as a setting for a while, and that's not what people are talking about here.

I read a lot of the fiction, and I think this is maybe overstating the case for any kind of progress in the setting. That said, its an argument for elsewhere for sure.

The point I was failing to make, is that different settings, are able to (and frankly should) have different takes on morality. If we as real humans cannot agree on morality, why can't Dragonlance have a take, and "D&D" have a take, and Dark Sun have a take and Ravenloft have a take?

I get it though, thats a tall ask from Wizards at this point, but...one can dream.

 

[humble minion]

So the funny thing here is that 40K has softened its setting quite a lot in modern times, but also they've had to speak out against the sort of people who look at those people as absolutely "good".

To be fair, GW are a bunch of hypocrites and are absolutely trying to have it both ways here, and have done so for years. According to the background and the (better) novels, the Imperium and pretty much every power group in it is utterly appalling. But that doesn't stop GW also hyping and advertising the 'heroic space marines' and 'humanity's mightiest defenders' etc etc and clearly painting them as the good guys everywhere on the miniatures and game side of things, and in no shortage of the novels either.

GW have built the Imperium of Man with Schrodinger's morality. 99% of the stories, the background, the characters are all about defending humanity and the Imperium, and the heroes are the people who do that. But as soon as anyone asks the 'good or evil' question, the waveform collapses and they can point to X Y and Z horrible things it does and just say 'see, it's clearly written evil'. It's serious or a parody, and the Imperium is heroic or fascist, depending on whatever suits them better at any given time.

 

[Justice and Rule]

To be fair, GW are a bunch of hypocrites and are absolutely trying to have it both ways here, and have done so for years. According to the background and the (better) novels, the Imperium and pretty much every power group in it is utterly appalling. But that doesn't stop GW also hyping and advertising the 'heroic space marines' and 'humanity's mightiest defenders' etc etc and clearly painting them as the good guys everywhere on the miniatures and game side of things, and in no shortage of the novels either.

GW have built the Imperium of Man with Schrodinger's morality. 99% of the stories, the background, the characters are all about defending humanity and the Imperium, and the heroes are the people who do that. But as soon as anyone asks the 'good or evil' question, the waveform collapses and they can point to X Y and Z horrible things it does and just say 'see, it's clearly written evil'. It's serious or a parody depending on whatever suits them better at any given time.

Oh, absolutely. 40K's morality is basically a complete mess. They have been trying to soften the universe for a while after they basically hit the mainstream, but the problem is that the cultivated an image of "hard men making hard decisions" that speaks to a... certain kind of player.

 

[Minion X]

In Warhammer 40,000, the heroes are never really people with actual power. Instead you have heroes who fight on the periphery of the Imperium, like Space Marines, Rogue Traders, Inquisitors and military commanders who simply do their best to shield mankind there and now. The real power in the Imperium rests solely with the High Lords of Terra, and they are the most ruthless and corrupt people in the galaxy (Eye of Terror included), but when they do make themselves known they are practically villains in their own right.

 

[Hussar]

The marketing, mostly.

So, not based on anything like facts then.

Good to know.

Basically, the entire line about "problematic content" stems from the echo chamber of people not bothering to actually read content but going by whatever clickbait they happened to read on Bell of Lost Souls or some youtuber. Whelp, that's certainly good to know.

 

[Scribe]

So, not based on anything like facts then.

Right, because to get the facts, people have to buy it and read it, but if Wizard's markets in a certain way, its going to turn people off from things they may well have enjoyed.

 

[Minigiant]

To be fair, GW are a bunch of hypocrites and are absolutely trying to have it both ways here, and have done so for years. According to the background and the (better) novels, the Imperium and pretty much every power group in it is utterly appalling. But that doesn't stop GW also hyping and advertising the 'heroic space marines' and 'humanity's mightiest defenders' etc etc and clearly painting them as the good guys everywhere on the miniatures and game side of things, and in no shortage of the novels either.

GW have built the Imperium of Man with Schrodinger's morality. 99% of the stories, the background, the characters are all about defending humanity and the Imperium, and the heroes are the people who do that. But as soon as anyone asks the 'good or evil' question, the waveform collapses and they can point to X Y and Z horrible things it does and just say 'see, it's clearly written evil'. It's serious or a parody depending on whatever suits them better at any given time.

Part of the problem is the logic between WH.

Warhammer 40k and Fantasy run on the concept that every side is terrible than thats why anyone could fight anyone else. Every army is poblematic and hugely so. Any battle between 2 players could make sense in canon.

But what makes "logical" matchups is terriblefor expansion into other markets. What makes good for war gaming might limit RPG, books, or movies.

So GW sometimes portrays Marines and Guard as heroes even though most aren't. AgeofSigmar straight up has good guys. But now it doesn't make since for the Dwarfs to attack the Stormcasts or Elves.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Right, because to get the facts, people have to buy it and read it, but if Wizard's markets in a certain way, its going to turn people off from things they may well have enjoyed.

Sure, but what was different with the marketing of the Radiant Citadel? That it was diverse? And what do we get but this as a critique:

And why? It's not like it doesn't have darkness or bad guys. But because there is some light, people assume that it's "saccharine" without actually reading it. I mean, we have a collection of arms in a ball that goes around collecting corpse parts as the main baddie of an adventure! There are corpse-stealing ghouls, evil druids going old-testament, a whole bunch of stuff... and yet it gets painted as too "sanitized".

 

[Scribe]

Sure, but what was different with the marketing of the Radiant Citadel? That it was diverse? And what do we get but this as a critique:

Art style, absolutely look at both covers. That alone gets me looking elsewhere.

Was there ANY part of the marketing for Radiant, or Witchlight, that focused on 'corpse balls' or any of the things listed by Hussar for Candlekeep?

Not that I remember! All that I remember about the Candlekeep marketing was 'ramps' and books'.

I remember someone here outlining how Witchlight had quite a bit more nuance than their marketing push of "You dont have to have combat!" and "look at the fun and safe art" and if we had seen some of that and the art wasnt so...not what I care for, maybe I would have bought it.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Art style, absolutely look at both covers. That alone gets me looking elsewhere.

Was there ANY part of the marketing for Radiant, or Witchlight, that focused on 'corpse balls' or any of the things listed by Hussar for Candlekeep?

Not that I remember! All that I remember about the Candlekeep marketing was 'ramps' and books'.

I remember someone here outlining how Witchlight had quite a bit more nuance than their marketing push of "You dont have to have combat!" and "look at the fun and safe art" and if we had seen some of that and the art wasnt so...not what I care for, maybe I would have bought it.

Really does not speak well to the hobby that we are purely focused on how bright a picture is rather than the actual content of something.