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

[AnotherGuy]

Do you really not see the problem though? Forced eugenics, breeding slaves for specific traits, misanthropic, sullen... Do you actually not see why this might a problem?

I'd rather not get into that.
I just liked the excerpt provided and my head was spinning with ideas from both a player's and from a DM's perspective. That's all my comment was about. I'm not here to get stuck in this thread. I commented in the other general one about what is lost when we eliminate controversial content. The conversation proved not to be fruitful. Especially when one side was willing to compromise and the other was not. I'm not interested in repeating empty endeavors.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Then we have to clear up the differences of the limits between TTRPGs and and other media.

I suggest a possible solution, it isn't almost a retcon. The ordinary Athasian halfligns don't eat sentient beings, and the meneater "halflings" have got a different name, the jerrens. Maybe these are worshippers of some Lovecraftian entity, and also with some tainted biotech gadgets.

* We shouldn't waste our time about certain details because these can be easily omited or changed, in the same way they have been in Ravenloft. Maybe this has been the intention by WotC since the begining, in the first moment.

* Maybe the creation of the muls wasn't by means of forced breeding but by remains of transgenic engineering by the rhulisti biotechnology.

* Could sentient Athasian spiders the "oddparents" of the Athasian drows?

* Could be possible "biohackers" in DS? Could life-shaped creations to be used in the circus arena for "pokemon battles"? Couldn't that technology to be used for renewable energy sources?

Could alchemy be used for (preserver) arcane-magic effects?

* Could any plants to survive the defiler magic, but mutating into any thing like the brown tide, or the Martian red weed (from War of the Worlds)?

* What if special plants from the "Endless night"(Shadowfeel) could survive in the Deadlands, and this used by sentient undeads to become "sentient shadowtouched plants", to live again? They could breed again and rebuild the civilitation.

* What if other zones of Athas have been invaded by efreeti from the Fire elemental plane? And these have to defend their conquered zones against raids from the infernal planes. (Doesn't this sound very heavy metal?).

Can metal be mined from the Earth elemental plane?

 

[Minigiant]

The only specific examples I'm aware of are instances of Wizards blocking LGBTQ content on the grounds of explicitness, but they do review and block content. This was one of the popular arguments against the morality clause in the OGL 1.1.

I'm reasonably certain DM's Guild content has to be flagged with a complaint before it is reviewed in detail, just based on how these things are usually run in the corporate wild, but I'm not privy to the specific internal workings of OBS or WotC.

That essentially might be the issue.

WOTC isn't an active moderator.
Dark Sunnotonly makestoo little money if WOTC does it, it requires more resources if put out in DM's Guild.

So Dark Sun is flagged as a resource sink and shelved.

 

[Hussar]

I'd rather not get into that.
I just liked the excerpt provided and my head was spinning with ideas from both a player's and from a DM's perspective. That's all my comment was about. I'm not here to get stuck in this thread. I commented in the other general one about what is lost when we eliminate controversial content. The conversation proved not to be fruitful. Especially when one side was willing to compromise and the other was not. I'm not interested in repeating empty endeavors.

You have a very different definition of compromise than I do.

 

[AnotherGuy]

You have a very different definition of compromise than I do.

I asked if it would it be satisfactory if we increased the age requirement for a product that features problematic content. And perhaps even label it appropriately (for mature audience or something).
I then asked what would make it ok for an RPG to feature problematic content. I got nothing.

If you don't think that the above is compromising then I guess you're correct.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Do you really not see the problem though? Forced eugenics, breeding slaves for specific traits, misanthropic, sullen... Do you actually not see why this might a problem?

I don't see it as a problem for those things to exist in a setting available for sale, no. Of course, I know your issue is AL and public games, which are an aspect of D&D i don't engage with and which I don't believe the game should be written towards.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You have a very different definition of compromise than I do.

What's your version exactly? What do you want WotC and other companies to do regarding this issue?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I asked if it would it be satisfactory if we increased the age requirement for a product that features problematic content. And perhaps even label it appropriately (for mature audience or something).
I then asked what would make it ok for an RPG to feature problematic content. I got nothing.

If you don't think that the above is compromising then I guess you're correct.

Yeah, I've suggested warning labels multiple times.

 

[Vaalingrade]

This could be rectified without removing the actual cannibalism, however.

Or we could just not.

Like how we don't focus on and fetishize characters going to the bathroom in the general game.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Yeah, I've suggested warning labels multiple times.

Warning labels, a page of mature discussion regarding the issues the setting brings with it, maybe some changes (such that there aren't entire PC races who do-evil-thing, maybe the starting adventure be an 'against the slavers' narrative) -- all would help mitigate any negative blowback WotC might get. However, that still leaves them with starting up a 'Mature Subjects' line of products, and I think they've decided that that really isn't profitable enough to bother with/jeopardize the popularity of their mainline products.