Racial variety

[Tonguez]

So it is not impossible to create a plausible fantasy Europe with an ethnical diversity without too much work.

Robin Hood (the TV show) had its Assyrian character
Othello and the Moors in Spain (and then their descendants in Ireland)
The Mongols reached Venice
and of course the Thirteenth Warrior

 

[gin]

First off, I am in no way trying to troll. I have not attacked anyone's oppinion or degraded anyone personally. I have stated my oppinions and thoughts on an issue which may not be as serious to everyone else but which bothered me. We talk about getting new gamers into the hobby and I look forward to teaching my son to play in a few years. However once again I am an experienced DM and I do change my world to play the way I want to play. That does not mean that inexperienced DM's (especially children) will be able to do the same. Already I have seen posts about miniatures being necessary to D&D. Are they? The old school gamers(those with experience running games) would probably say no. But I see alot of newbie posts asking how can they possibly run a game without miniatures. Why? Because they are new and it takes a certain familiarity with the rules to modify things. There was a black poster above who stated that as a kid he pictured his characters as white, I was the same way as a kid. I have never said gamers are racist or even that the game is racist. What I suggested was that a wider range of skin tones and maybe even features be incorporated for the various races in the core books. Some people believe skin color isn't important, but then why do we even take the time to write up a physical description of our characters? I still play D&D and if I thought that WoTC or TSR were companies that condoned racism I would have stoped buying their products long ago. I have also gamed with whites, asians and indians and yes they were some of the coolest people I met. I believe some people are taking my questioning of the "status quo" as an attack on them personally. Just to clear it up, I'm not. Once again I don't understand why it is so wrong to propose that these changes be made to the game. Wouldn't it be just as simple to dissallow dark skinned elves or golden skinned gnomes. And this way we don't alienate those who might otherwise be interested in learning and experiencing our hobby.

 

[Turjan]

Once again I don't understand why it is so wrong to propose that these changes be made to the game. Wouldn't it be just as simple to dissallow dark skinned elves or golden skinned gnomes. And this way we don't alienate those who might otherwise be interested in learning and experiencing our hobby.

Okay, but I think we already understood what you meant. Our answer was that the change you want to achieve is already clear from the core rules. There are dark skinned non-drow elves in the core, that's the wild elves. And most of the illustrations are simply raceless as far as human complexions go (some medium brownish skin tone and dark eyes).
So the solution to your problem would be to take out all Greyhawk-specific parts from the core rule books and just remove all references to skin/eye/hair colour out of the racial description text. Is it that what you want?

 

[med stud]

First off, I am in no way trying to troll. I have not attacked anyone's oppinion or degraded anyone personally. I have stated my oppinions and thoughts on an issue which may not be as serious to everyone else but which bothered me. We talk about getting new gamers into the hobby and I look forward to teaching my son to play in a few years. However once again I am an experienced DM and I do change my world to play the way I want to play. That does not mean that inexperienced DM's (especially children) will be able to do the same. Already I have seen posts about miniatures being necessary to D&D. Are they? The old school gamers(those with experience running games) would probably say no. But I see alot of newbie posts asking how can they possibly run a game without miniatures. Why? Because they are new and it takes a certain familiarity with the rules to modify things. There was a black poster above who stated that as a kid he pictured his characters as white, I was the same way as a kid. I have never said gamers are racist or even that the game is racist. What I suggested was that a wider range of skin tones and maybe even features be incorporated for the various races in the core books. Some people believe skin color isn't important, but then why do we even take the time to write up a physical description of our characters? I still play D&D and if I thought that WoTC or TSR were companies that condoned racism I would have stoped buying their products long ago. I have also gamed with whites, asians and indians and yes they were some of the coolest people I met. I believe some people are taking my questioning of the "status quo" as an attack on them personally. Just to clear it up, I'm not. Once again I don't understand why it is so wrong to propose that these changes be made to the game. Wouldn't it be just as simple to dissallow dark skinned elves or golden skinned gnomes. And this way we don't alienate those who might otherwise be interested in learning and experiencing our hobby.

There is nothing wrong at all to propose what you are proposing. I think many of the ones who have answered are trying to figure out why it is like it is. I even think it would be a smart move of WoTC to include more illustrations of people of different colours in the same way I think it was smart of them to add more women who arent dressed like playmates. It will make it easier to attract a wider range of gamers than the present.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Okay, but I think we already understood what you meant.

no, you may have, but he was directly responding to two different posters who accused him of being a troll and trying to just cause trouble...

People have been very 'helpful' in pointing out what is allowed, or possible, but the issue I think was orriginally broached isn't if non pale skinned humanoids are possible under the core rules, its how new players view the races... A lot of their view is going to come from the illustrations which (as has been pointed out) don't match up to the possibilities or even in some cases the descriptions in the phb.

I think the illustrations do matter in setting the tone of the game for many new players. Illustrating the paladin as a woman, for instance, had a direct effect on one new player I knew who (based on what I saw of her personally) probably would have felt it neccassary to 'cross-role' or to play a more passive character if the message hadn't been put out loud and clear "women can be warriors in this world" not just in a side comment, or simply "allowed" by not forbiding it, but by putting the image right there on the page. So suggesting that the racial variety allowed or possible actually be visually represented doesn't strike me as an unreasonable desire.

kahuna Burger

 

[D+1]

That does not mean that inexperienced DM's (especially children) will be able to do the same. Already I have seen posts about miniatures being necessary to D&D. Are they? The old school gamers(those with experience running games) would probably say no. But I see alot of newbie posts asking how can they possibly run a game without miniatures. Why? Because they are new and it takes a certain familiarity with the rules to modify things.

IMO this would be an entirely different subject because it has to do not with rule familiarity but underexercised imaginations and the reduced need to use them. Society today is not what it was 25 years ago when D&D was created. The game itself is obviously not what it was 25 years ago. Back then it was not just expected but vitally necessary for all participants to exercise a great deal of imagination because there just wasn't the mass of rules available to eliminate the need. Now, we have a mass of rules that work very well, with very few holes or exceptions needing fixing. It eliminates much of the need to make up even basic rules as you go along. For more experienced players this is a boon but for those less familiar with the game - those who are inexperienced at using their imaginations in the ways that the game requires - it actually removes some of the challenge that prompts creative activity.

Take miniatures for example. They are now featured prominently in the rules because over time more and more players used them. Recent polls here on ENworld show that most players DO use miniatures whether they have to scrounge for them or can afford to simply buy them. Now when a new player picks up the rules he isn't immediately aware that the game was EVER played without them. Their problem then is not that the rules use or don't use miniatures, but that they don't HAVE miniatures. Their solutions then are either going to be eliminating miniatures once again, or finding alternatives to use for miniatures. It is the challenge of solving those sorts of issues that will provide the next "revolution" in RPG's. Rule sets are well established and while they'll never be perfect we are HIGHLY unlikely to see a new edition that makes leaps as dramatic as we got from 2E to 3E as it's a matter of diminishing returns. But as new players come in and see a need for miniatures, but not having them due to expense or whatever, that is where their creativity gets applied - rather than in fixing the holes in the rules.

What I suggested was that a wider range of skin tones and maybe even features be incorporated for the various races in the core books.

And again - has anyone disagreed? They've provided background explaining the status quo but also said, "Sure. Why not?"

Some people believe skin color isn't important, but then why do we even take the time to write up a physical description of our characters?

That's a pretty obvious answer. We do it for the same reason we write up ANYTHING about our characters, it's what the game is about. Inventing details about our characters and then having those characters interact with the world around them - generally by killing things and taking their stuff. We write down skin color if it helps us better imagine our characters just as writing down their height and weight does. Or if it helps us to better describe our characters to others at the table. And besides, have you ever seen a character sheet that had an entry for "skin color"? It's generally left as part of "general description" for which there may or may not be an entry. It's only as important as you want to make it. Part of the reaction you're getting is probably because we're a little off-balance to discover that it seems to matter to you, when to us it doesn't.

I believe some people are taking my questioning of the "status quo" as an attack on them personally. Just to clear it up, I'm not. Once again I don't understand why it is so wrong to propose that these changes be made to the game.

And again, I don't see that anyone has even hinted that they think it is wrong to make the changes you suggest, only perhaps that it's unnecessary given the explanations for its current state and the clear recommendations within the game to alter or ignore whatever you don't like.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What I suggested was that a wider range of skin tones and maybe even features be incorporated for the various races in the core books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And again - has anyone disagreed? They've provided background explaining the status quo but also said, "Sure. Why not?"

actually a lot of people have disagreed. They've called it unneccassary and politically correct. They've accused the very suggestion of being trouble making and trolling. They've said 'this is why' a a justification far more often then there has been "sure, why not" with the why as a side note. except for the accusations of trolling its been fairly polite disagreement, but it has been contentious to say the least.

If you agree, thats great, but to catagorize that as the consensous of this thread is a little odd... There has in fact been disagreement, dismissal and denial. Maybe we've been reading different threads, but I honestly can't see how you got "sure, why not?" as what everyone has been saying, or could ask "has anyone disagreed?" with a straight face...

kahuna burger

 

[nHammer]

I can kinda see what gin means. I have just never seen a discussion of skin color turn out good.

I just find it sad that skin color should ever be an issue for anything. Of course I've never been discriminated against because of it.

I also believe that if you are stupid enough to base the appearance of your character just on the pictures in the book, you shouldn't be playing the game. Read the text and all will be made clear.

 

[Emiricol]

Maybe we've been reading different threads

It would seem so. I think the most contentious statements made on this thread so far have been your own, KB. You seem particularly upset about a topic the rest of us are just chatting about, in my opinion.

 

[Witness]

originally posted by nHammer:

I also believe that if you are stupid enough to base the appearance of your character just on the pictures in the book, you shouldn't be playing the game. Read the text and all will be made clear.

Its not quite that simple. The images in the books define how people imagine their characters. Also, their is an inconsistancy between how the races are described and how they appear; with the exception of half-orcs, almost all non-human characters are pictured as having caucasion (sp?) features.