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

[Emoshin]

Here's a working hypothesis so far:

When we indulge in these fantasies, we essentially ask ourselves and/or society for permission: is it a victimless fantasy that I'm about to engage in?

And then the producers of the TV show, movie, video game or rpg will also ask that question on behalf of their general audience.

For example, we watch a long car chase scene. The hero chases the villain down a highway at high speeds. There are multiple car crashes, and we never see the passengers -- are they dead or maimed? Is the hero ever prosecuted for dangerous driving and manslaughter? We don't care, we don't want to know. And we know that in real-life, this would never fly. So why do we buy into this consensual delusion that this is a thrilling good-guy-bad-guy car chase on the screen?

Because of the adrenaline rush and because there is no cohesive group of car accident victims who are hurt enough to come forward about gratuitous violence with car chases.

How about torture scenes? Gunfights that break out in the middle of the street? Superheroes who smash up office towers while fighting supervillains? Again, we have that adrenaline rush and there is no cohesive group of survivors (and their families) of torture, gun shooting or office tower destruction who will come forward to express their hurt at seeing these depictions.

How about a fantasy story where we indulge in a fantasy of being good saviors against an evil society? It depends. If you want to include X in your evil society, do you have a real-life group of traumatized survivors or families who are coming forward to say: this is hurts us? Because if you do, suddenly you don't have a victimless fantasy story anymore.

And that's why, I think, humans are weird, but there is a reason why glorified violence is different than slavery.

 

[overgeeked]

How about a fantasy story where we indulge in a fantasy of being good saviors against an evil society? It depends. If you want to include X in your evil society, do you have a real-life group of traumatized survivors or families who are coming forward to say: this is hurts us? Because if you do, suddenly you don't have a victimless fantasy story anymore.

There are families who have suffered all kinds of violence that have all kinds of advocacy groups and mutual support networks. They don’t tend to bother with trying to censor fictional depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered. They tend to rally around real-world change. To stop the real thing from really happening to some other real person. And when they do bother with fictional depictions they tend to advocate for and personally make more realistic depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered so that people can see the real horrors of that violence. In the hopes of, again, stopping the real thing from happening to real people.

Like cop shows. There are murder victims and they have families. The families don’t seem to be bothered with the deluge of murders on cop shows on a weekly basis. Because they’re too busy dealing with the real world issues associated with that situation.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I cringe when I think I cannot buy products that mimic popular fiction because someone somewhere does not like it.

Leaving aside slavery in dark sun…

When products to entertain are more concerned with being benign than exciting, it ceases to excite.

I think that is the direction D&D is headed. Magic schools and magic proms? Yes.

Terrible wizards conquering and subjugating people who struggle against them? No.

Do I blame WOTC? Not in the end. They are probably doing what they think is best for their product. Who do I blame? People that are not personally outraged but jump in and voice support for curbing options.

Who do I admire? People that can be adults and buy what they want and pass by what they don’t without infringing on others. It’s a vanishingly small group that promotes this approach. Actually it’s probably just a quieter group and as this poll hints at is probably not a small one.

I don’t think I have to boycott WOTC. I just don’t think they are going to make much that appeals to me. I am glad the OGL is back on. I would love to find some cool third party stuff. I have been reliant on WOTC. Probably time to branch out a bit.

 

[humble minion]

Absolutely no one is trying to actually explore slavery and its horrors, just have it as a backdrop because Howard had it.

Not so sure about that. Slavery was very front and centre in DS from the very beginning, not just a mere backdrop element. The first modules were all about being freed from slavery, pretending to be slaves, and overthrowing Kalak to free the slaves. The very first novel had the slave vs free dynamic at the very heart of it, including (fairly unusually for the time) a slaveowner who prided himself on being kind to his slaves and so thought slavery could be managed in a humane and functional way, only to eventually learn by the end of the book that he had been wrong and that slaves treated kindly were still enslaved and were oppressed & suffering as a result.

You can certainly criticise how well the DS line portrayed slavery and addressed the whole issue (and of course it varied from product to product and author to author), but it certainly tried to explore the issue, within the limitations of the time it was written.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

If I could answer "Yes, but..." I would have.

Because problematic content can be acceptable if it's evil and opposed...so long as it is executed well.

Drow being an evil empire of explicitly black-skinned dominatrices and their conniving male soldiers? Yeah, that's not good. It matters little that drow can be seen as a color-inverted version of elves; the expression is piss-poor and merits correction. Hence why I was happy they've decided to take the route of "the drow that people have met are a crappy culture, but there are several other cultures of drow, and some of them are perfectly fine!" That makes the evil something that isn't tied to skin color, gender, political structure, etc., but rather an elective choice for the people in power in their society, and there is valid room for a rebellion trying to pursue, y'know, any other way that drow societies might already exist.

Slavery is, unfortunately, still a thing some humans inflict upon other humans. Being able to talk about it, to explore it as a literary element, is important. Being an apologist for slavery is totally unacceptable, however, so there are limits on what should be done with it. I don't think it is a bad thing to recognize that slavery is an (utterly horrifying) institution that humanity has practiced, to one extent or another, for as long as there have been humans.

The critical components are that the story must actually do something worthy and interesting with this darkness. It's very easy to fall into laziness (just see the whole 90s "Dark Age" of comics) with the dark elements of a work.

 

[Emoshin]

There are families who have suffered all kinds of violence that have all kinds of advocacy groups and mutual support networks. They don’t tend to bother with trying to censor fictional depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered. They tend to rally around real-world change. To stop the real thing from really happening to some other real person. And when they do bother with fictional depictions they tend to advocate for and personally make more realistic depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered so that people can see the real horrors of that violence. In the hopes of, again, stopping the real thing from happening to real people.

Like cop shows. There are murder victims and they have families. The families don’t seem to be bothered with the deluge of murders on cop shows on a weekly basis. Because they’re too busy dealing with the real world issues associated with that situation.

Right and that's my point.

The producer of the cops have to feel out where to draw a line. Because there IS a line. And that line is drawn by actively respecting their general audience. If they cross the line, they'll know it.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

There are families who have suffered all kinds of violence that have all kinds of advocacy groups and mutual support networks. They don’t tend to bother with trying to censor fictional depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered. They tend to rally around real-world change. To stop the real thing from really happening to some other real person. And when they do bother with fictional depictions they tend to advocate for and personally make more realistic depictions of the violence and trauma they suffered so that people can see the real horrors of that violence. In the hopes of, again, stopping the real thing from happening to real people.

Like cop shows. There are murder victims and they have families. The families don’t seem to be bothered with the deluge of murders on cop shows on a weekly basis. Because they’re too busy dealing with the real world issues associated with that situation.

Funny you say. My family has twice been the victims of random crime. In one case violent crime.

I was hurt. Sent to ER etc. —for a year (maybe only 9 months?) I actually did not want to play violent video games and found D&D aversive (combat portion particularly).

The last thing I would have thought to do is push to have violence removed from the game. First, I had bigger fish to fry. Second, it’s on me to handle it—-not corral others’ fun so I don’t feel uncomfortable.

Don’t want to see depictions of war? Don’t go to a war movie. But don’t push a company to never release any war movies. Don’t buy a ticket.

 

[overgeeked]

Right and that's my point.

The producer of the cops have to feel out where to draw a line. Because there IS a line. And that line is drawn by actively respecting their general audience. If they cross the line, they'll know it.

No, there is no singular, universal line. That’s the problem. You think your line is universal. I think my line is universal. But there is no such thing as a universal line. It’s all 100% individual preference. You cannot, should not, and must not be allowed to dictate to others where their line is for them. It’s not your choice to make. It’s theirs. Same applies to me.

Point is we have to decide for ourselves.

 

[Emoshin]

No, there is no singular, universal line. That’s the problem. You think your line is universal. I think my line is universal. But there is no such thing as a universal line. It’s all 100% individual preference. You cannot, should not, and must not be allowed to dictate to others where their line is for them. It’s not your choice to make. It’s theirs. Same applies to me.

Point is we have to decide for ourselves.

But I don't care about my line, or your line, because it's moot. WoTC already drew the line, apparently (if the OP is really about that ultimately)

 

[overgeeked]

Funny you say. My family has twice been the victims of random crime. In one case violent crime.

I was hurt. Sent to ER etc. —for a year (maybe only 9 months?) I actually did not want to play violent video games and found D&D aversive (combat portion particularly).

Sorry you had to deal with that. If it matters, you’re not alone.

The last thing I would have thought to do is push to have violence removed from the game. First, I had bigger fish to fry. Second, it’s on me to handle it—-not corral others’ fun so I don’t feel uncomfortable.

Don’t want to see depictions of war? Don’t go to a war movie. But don’t push a company to never release any war movies. Don’t buy a ticket.

Exactly.