D&D 5E I thought WotC was removing biological morals?

[MGibster]

No, we couldn't. Because the "humanoid" part ISN'T THE PROBLEM.

That was kind of my point.

 

[Bardic Dave]

Its not about form, its aobut how they're presented

Redcaps do not have culture, do not have civilians, do not have babies. They're born of blood, born of murder, and exist merely to create more murder. They'll just spontaniously pop up one day of the conditions for "Redcap" are arbitarily met

Orcs, meanwhile, are not the fiendish spawn of twisted magics, they're not fungus, they're just, regular guys who form their own cities, have their relationship drama and are basically normal.

An orc will go down to the pub for a pint and a parma with you. A redcap probably couldn't even conceive of it

I’m not saying there isn’t a difference, I’m saying the difference isn’t necessarily as conclusively important as you imagine it to be. It’s important, sure, but it’s not necessarily enough to allow redcaps to escape criticism.

 

[Charlaquin]

You’d be surprised how much pushback I’ve already received in this thread for making much the same point. Some people seem to really care about metaphysical distinctions in the lore (e.g. was the creature born or created?). These distinctions matter more to some than the plain fact that the redcap is basically 100% human in form.

Because the form doesn’t really mean much. If you had a race that had a completely inhuman form - I don’t know, maybe like an ooze race or something - but they were otherwise people with mortal lives and life cycles, cultures, superstitions, free will, all that jazz, I wouldn’t want them to be essentialized either. Who cares what shape they are, what matters is if they’re people.

 

[Charlaquin]

My point is that after that is worked out, they will inevitably continue this line of reasoning for all other intelligent creatures, leading to a fundamentally different game that may alienate fans.

The game is alienating fans as it is. That’s why these changes are being made.

 

[Charlaquin]

Says you

Yes, among others.

I’m being cheeky, but the distinctions you’re drawing aren’t as monolithic, unambiguous, or unquestionably important as you imagine them to be.

I don’t imagine them to be monolithic, unambiguous, or unquestionably important.

 

[Bardic Dave]

Because the form doesn’t really mean much. If you had a race that had a completely inhuman form - I don’t know, maybe like an ooze race or something - but they were otherwise people with mortal lives and life cycles, cultures, superstitions, free will, all that jazz, I wouldn’t want them to be essentialized either. Who cares what shape they are, what matters is if they’re people.

Interesting perspective. I think you’re on to something, but I still think form also matters significantly. They’re two different dials that can be adjusted and both feed into how “human” something appears.

 

[Charlaquin]

See, @Charlaquin, this is why I'm saying that this "essentialism" stuff is just clouding the issue. It's a deep, deep rabbit hole and all it does is provide ammunition to those who want to do nothing but throw up roadblocks. It provides a never ending list of "whaddabouts" that will just tie things up in knots forever.

Look at this specific conversation - we have the original issue - Redcaps. It's a clear cut, cut and dried answer. Redcaps were never used to denigrate real people, and, in game, they are murder elementals, not biological at all, so, the biological essentialism argument doesn't apply.

Now, we're talking about eladrin, satyr's, giants and who knows what else will get brought up. Even though no one has actually pointed to any of those races as being ones that are in need of changing nor is the topic of conversation actually focused on them, they keep getting dragged up for yet another round of "Let's play musical chairs", all the while making it look like there's an issue were none actually exists.

The thing is, I don’t think satyrs, giants, and whatever else are bad things to bring up in this conversation. They’re worth taking a look at too.

 

[Hussar]

Sure, it’s definitely a less urgent issue. But I think it’s still a present issue, rather than an issue someone some day might hypothetically take. And, you know, strike while the iron is hot and all that.

No, it's not a "present" issue. It's something that has kind of tagged along for the ride of the actual issue - which is "Does this depiction of this fictional element mirror the racist depictions of real life people, harming real life people, within the fairly recent past?"

Trying to expand the issue to "should anything in the game have alignment" is a much broader issue, the OVERWHELMING majority of elements of it have zero impact on real life people. Whether or not Satyrs are good, evil or something else doesn't actually matter to real life people because satyrs aren't being used to justify or promote racism. I'm having a tough time thinking that centaurs are going to feature prominently on Storm Front newsletters. I don't recall seeing Eladrin being held up as stand ins for dehumanizing anyone.

So, instead of trying to cloud the issue with a bunch of irrelevent garbage, how about we focus on the stuff that ACTUALLY impacts real people? If we're serious about making the game welcoming to all people, maybe not using the Tokyo Kid imagery might be a good start? I'm pretty sure though, that no one looks at Satyr's and thinks, Hrmmm, they're talking about me?!? Dressing up the Tokyo Kid in Japanese armor and making him a monster is kinda not the greatest way to promote the game to people?

 

[Charlaquin]

I’m not saying there isn’t a difference, I’m saying the difference isn’t necessarily as conclusively important as you imagine it to be. It’s important, sure, but it’s not necessarily enough to allow redcaps to escape criticism.

So let redcaps be criticized. Maybe that will lead to them being improved. What’s the problem?

 

[Hussar]

My point is that after that is worked out, they will inevitably continue this line of reasoning for all other intelligent creatures, leading to a fundamentally different game that may alienate fans.

No, they won't.

Because the point they are working out isn't the one that you're talking about. It's the one that some people want to hijack the issue towards, but, it's not the issue.

Your first question, whenever this conversation comes up, should always be, "Has this element been used to denigrate anyone?" If the answer is no, then the element in question isn't what WotC is talking about.