D&D 5E Honor & Sanity

[MasterTrancer]

FWIW, I see honor as a stat that gives how much a PC is going to actually HAVE a sense of honor. The "score" (i.e.: how much) should ne handled IMO like a specialized reputation.

 

[halfling rogue]

The truth is-- the "honor" thing is all a matter of translation. You REALLY don't think that concept exists just as strongly in the West?

....the only time I have heard Japanese people in a modern day setting prattle on about "honor" it was those written by white people. I've seen several dozen dramas made by Japanese for Japanese in Japan, I have lived in Japan for 5 years and I swear I have never once heard the word "honor" used ever. Only very rarely do I hear it in period pieces set during wartime. It is just white people who think Japanese use the word every third sentence they speak. Seriously-- it is a racists stereotype. Take any Japanese person written by a white person and see how long they can go before saying the word "honor". Maybe it occasionally comes up in a period piece, but even then it is RARE compared to when white people are writing it.

I can understand where you are coming from, except when you say it is a racist stereotype. If a white American/European thinks of another ethnic group as 'honorable', even if it is mislabeled, how can you call it racist? It might be a stereotype, but it certainly isn't a racist stereotype.

And that's the thing. Fantasy excels in stereotype. One might even make the argument that Fantasy requires stereotypes and once the stereotypes are removed then it no longer remains Fantasy. This is because stereotypes are actually symbols that speak to deeper truths that we cannot adequately relate in words. This, truly, is the almost unspeakable, hard-to-explainable draw that so many experience to Fantasy. In fact, the thing that troubles me most about the modern take on Fantasy is that in almost every facet it aims at removing stereotypes, to trash the symbols. Look at all of the popular interpretations (or more likely, re-interpretations) of the Fantasy genre in pop culture. Almost every example you will see the deconstruction of stereotypes. Moderns and 'postmoderns' drool over it.

Off the top of my head, take the movie "Maleficent" for example (spoilery). The once purely evil Maleficent now has a soft side. She is made into the hero and the king becomes the villain. The show "Once Upon a Time" essentially exists (seemingly) solely for this purpose, to deconstruct stereotypes in Fantasy. They give us a Rambo Snow-white and an angsty Capt. Hook, an evil Peter Pan. A Beast is no longer an actual Beast but a metaphorical beast within. Even Peter Jackson with the many stereotypes found within "Lord of the Rings" couldn't help it in some places. Faramir simply couldn't be as noble as Tolkien wrote him so they made him weak and conflicted, Aragorn, too, to a degree. They even took an extra step (in my opinion) with breaking down stereotypes in the "Hobbit". You'll notice Azog and the goblins of the Misty Mountains are not dark skinned. Another thing (quite small) is that there are residents in Lake-town who are black. I know many who would say I'm being racist just for pointing that out. Say what you will, but the real issue is that those decisions are intentionally made to kick against fairy-tale logic/stereotypes. Maybe the most relevant is that when the art for 5e was released the main thing discussed (before and after) was how stereotypes would/should be/have been broken.

I say all of the above, only to point out that Fantasy (or at least how we perceive Fantasy) has shifted in our day. I'm not necessarily saying that it is a bad thing that it has shifted, but I do think we've lost something. It's become less and not more. And (back to the point) one of the things that we've lost is the ability to realize (or speak plainly about) that there is such thing as a good stereotype and that stereotypes help produce good Fantasy. In this case, a culture perceived as "Honorable" is a good stereotype. It might be false to a degree, but every stereotype, when boiled down is false to a degree. The point isn't to dwell on the falseness of the stereotype (unless the stereotype is actually a false one), but to understand the intention of the stereotype within the Fantasy structure.

A knight rescuing a damsel in distress is about as stereotypical as you can get, and because of that, many deem it to be sexist. Why can't the damsel rescue the knight? Why should she be a damsel at all? Why shouldn't she be the knight? Why does she have to rescue anyone at all? By the time we're done deconstructing the stereotype we've lost Fantasy. The other problem we now have is that whenever anyone stands up to defend the stereotype, they are instantly lambasted as racist, sexist, or whatever-ist, rather than someone who simply enjoys Fantasy for being Fantasy.

So when you get to RPGs and folks participating within Fantasy, and you throw in a dash of that modern deconstructionism in the mix, you get a lot of people talking past each other. All of that to say...imagining Asian cultures as "Honorable" is certainly a stereotype, but it is a good stereotype, especially as a vehicle for Fantasy games. And as such, it is certainly not racist. That's just a flag being waved that gets us off topic.

 

[Parmandur]

To be fair, on like the very next page, maybe two after, there are rules for horror that do not involve a new attribute. Just another option

On practice, the Honor attribute is a reputation system; the DM gives the PC a point up or down every session to reflect in game role playing. But, the use of the score works like an attribute, so you can have Honor saves in social situations.

I totally see the point on Asian stereotypes, and if I used the rule, I'd be just as likely to use it as a reputation score in a Celtic style campaign, if anything. The mechanics are solid enough, not necessarily tied to a racist "Shogun"-style thing.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

I can understand where you are coming from, except when you say it is a racist stereotype. If a white American/European thinks of another ethnic group as 'honorable', even if it is mislabeled, how can you call it racist? It might be a stereotype, but it certainly isn't a racist stereotype.

maybe you don't understand what racist means...

a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

so by beliving that one race has superior honor you are racist...

I would go so far as to say it may not be the worst thing, but yu get to worse so lets keep going.

And that's the thing. Fantasy excels in stereotype. One might even make the argument that Fantasy requires stereotypes and once the stereotypes are removed then it no longer remains Fantasy.

I will respectfully disagree...

Off the top of my head, take the movie "Maleficent" for example (spoilery). The once purely evil Maleficent now has a soft side. She is made into the hero and the king becomes the villain. The show "Once Upon a Time" essentially exists (seemingly) solely for this purpose, to deconstruct stereotypes in Fantasy. They give us a Rambo Snow-white and an angsty Capt. Hook, an evil Peter Pan. A Beast is no longer an actual Beast but a metaphorical beast within. Even Peter Jackson with the many stereotypes found within "Lord of the Rings" couldn't help it in some places. Faramir simply couldn't be as noble as Tolkien wrote him so they made him weak and conflicted, Aragorn, too, to a degree. They even took an extra step (in my opinion) with breaking down stereotypes in the "Hobbit". You'll notice Azog and the goblins of the Misty Mountains are not dark skinned.

well I don't agree with everything here I was with you at least in theory... until

Another thing (quite small) is that there are residents in Lake-town who are black. I know many who would say I'm being racist just for pointing that out.

what?!?!?! why do you care what color an extra or two are? I may not have read the book in 10 years but I bet it never said "Everyone is white" in fact I bet a lot of people read books and just assume an intermixed batch of extras... I would say more but we have not yet gotten to my big WTF moment.

Say what you will, but the real issue is that those decisions are intentionally made to kick against fairy-tale logic/stereotypes. Maybe the most relevant is that when the art for 5e was released the main thing discussed (before and after) was how stereotypes would/should be/have been broken.

everything I saw and heard was positive saying how refreshing it was to be inclusive...

I say all of the above, only to point out that Fantasy (or at least how we perceive Fantasy) has shifted in our day. I'm not necessarily saying that it is a bad thing that it has shifted, but I do think we've lost something. It's become less and not more.

I firmly disagree it is much more now... more inclusive.

And (back to the point) one of the things that we've lost is the ability to realize (or speak plainly about) that there is such thing as a good stereotype and that stereotypes help produce good Fantasy. In this case, a culture perceived as "Honorable" is a good stereotype. It might be false to a degree, but every stereotype, when boiled down is false to a degree. The point isn't to dwell on the falseness of the stereotype (unless the stereotype is actually a false one), but to understand the intention of the stereotype within the Fantasy structure.

you almost got back to a good moment here... then came this bombshell...

A knight rescuing a damsel in distress is about as stereotypical as you can get, and because of that, many deem it to be sexist. Why can't the damsel rescue the knight? Why should she be a damsel at all? Why shouldn't she be the knight? Why does she have to rescue anyone at all? By the time we're done deconstructing the stereotype we've lost Fantasy. The other problem we now have is that whenever anyone stands up to defend the stereotype, they are instantly lambasted as racist, sexist, or whatever-ist, rather than someone who simply enjoys Fantasy for being Fantasy.

sexist is the word that comes to mind... Can a knight save a damsel, yes then can. we have hundreds of stories of it through out time. But why can't I (Disclaimer I am a woman) save the damsel, or even better, the hunky guy?

I find it hard to find positive heroic female lead characters. EVEN TODAY it is a nich within fantasy... so before you blow some "OMG IT ISN'T FANTASY, LOOK WHAT WE LOST" remember no one is taking your knight or your damsel from you... we just want our stories too. and when you have xxx pages to do it in, we need both...

So when you get to RPGs and folks participating within Fantasy, and you throw in a dash of that modern deconstructionism in the mix, you get a lot of people talking past each other. All of that to say...imagining Asian cultures as "Honorable" is certainly a stereotype, but it is a good stereotype, especially as a vehicle for Fantasy games. And as such, it is certainly not racist. That's just a flag being waved that gets us off topic.

the only reason the DMG isn't racist about it is because it DOES include the KNIGHTS idea... infact AsoIaF could very well use an honor stat (Eddard has a 16, Jamie a 9 but boosts it in play, and little finger has a -3)

 

[MasterTrancer]

Just a brief note: Brienne of Tarth rescuing Jamie Lannister in GoT doesn't impact on the "fantasyness" of the series (both written and filmed), right? I hope so... ;-)

 

[halfling rogue]

maybe you don't understand what racist means...

so by beliving that one race has superior honor you are racist...

I would go so far as to say it may not be the worst thing, but yu get to worse so lets keep going.


I will respectfully disagree...


well I don't agree with everything here I was with you at least in theory... until



what?!?!?! why do you care what color an extra or two are? I may not have read the book in 10 years but I bet it never said "Everyone is white" in fact I bet a lot of people read books and just assume an intermixed batch of extras... I would say more but we have not yet gotten to my big WTF moment.


everything I saw and heard was positive saying how refreshing it was to be inclusive...


I firmly disagree it is much more now... more inclusive.



you almost got back to a good moment here... then came this bombshell...



sexist is the word that comes to mind... Can a knight save a damsel, yes then can. we have hundreds of stories of it through out time. But why can't I (Disclaimer I am a woman) save the damsel, or even better, the hunky guy?

I find it hard to find positive heroic female lead characters. EVEN TODAY it is a nich within fantasy... so before you blow some "OMG IT ISN'T FANTASY, LOOK WHAT WE LOST" remember no one is taking your knight or your damsel from you... we just want our stories too. and when you have xxx pages to do it in, we need both...




the only reason the DMG isn't racist about it is because it DOES include the KNIGHTS idea... infact AsoIaF could very well use an honor stat (Eddard has a 16, Jamie a 9 but boosts it in play, and little finger has a -3)

There is much here. I will charitably assume that you weren't calling me a racist, but rather were making a point clear (I think there was a mixed signal somewhere, but I'm okay to let it go).

I also accept your respectful disagreeance that Fantasy excels and even thrives on stereotypes, as long as I can respectfully assume you don't understand Fantasy.

A word about inclusiveness. I'll still stand by my statement that I think our modern perception of Fantasy has shifted and that it has become less and not more. I am speaking about stereotypes. When we lose a stereotype of Evil (for instance) then Fantasy takes a hit. In Fantasy, when the Evil Queen/Wizard/Monster becomes simply misunderstood, and perhaps might even be the good guy wearing a black cape, then we've relinquished Fantasy and have moved on to something else. We've taken a step closer to real life. Those steps lead us away from Fantasy. In real life, villains might actually be misunderstood, and even might be the good guys. In Fantasy, good is good and evil is evil. That's the point I was making. I wasn't saying that inclusiveness is a bad thing. In fact you can find inclusiveness all over Fantasy. The Fellowship of the Ring jumps out at me. Many races working together for good. But if you want the inclusiveness to trump certain stereotypes then you start to leave Fantasy behind. If you want Sauron to be the secret good guy you've missed the point. That's what I'm talking about. If you want to have a Political Correctness campaign, have at it. It just might not work for Fantasy.

Now to address the "bombshell".
Sexist is the word that comes to mind because you equate stereotype with "-isms". The knight rescuing the damsel in distress is a Fantasy stereotype worthy of defense not only because it has been passed down for ages, but that in Fantasy it communicates things unspoken. The reason you are uncomfortable with it is because the things it communicates to you (or a particular society) is unsettling. Unsettling may be a good thing or may be a bad thing, but since neither you nor I, were the ones who invented the stereotype, the only thing we can do is accept it or reject it. I accept it, maintain the tradition, and am labeled a sexist. You reject it (and let me be perfectly clear: it is your right, I'm okay with it, reject away, no one is saying you cannot reject it), but you must accept the fact that it is indeed a rejection, that you are shifting/rewriting/retelling and therefore moving away from Fantasy as it has been handed down.

Let me flip it real quick. I love the movie Brave. It is a brand new legend and creates/maintains good stereotypes in its own way. I think it succeeds as Fantasy. But if I were to retell the tale of Merida as a male character I would be moving away from Fantasy as handed down. Especially if I were to use the excuse that She should be a He because it's not inclusive or tolerant otherwise. I've a right to do so, but what I've done is rejected it. I reject what it communicates to me as handed down and rewrite it so that I might be the one who communicates to myself because it makes me comfortable or it makes me feel empowered or whatever reason. The point is that I've moved away from Fantasy.

And that's my argument here, which is why I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying "Woe is me! Look what we've lost!" I haven't lost it. As you've said, I still have my knight and damsel. But in taking the stereotypes as they are handed down to me, understanding them for what they are within Fantasy, I am just one in a long line of stewards and, hopefully (as all who play Fantasy type RPGs desire) participators/creators of Fantasy. Those who deconstruct Fantasy should at least own up to it. I would assume that they'd wear such an accomplishment as a badge of honor.

 

[MechaPilot]

Why does "honor" have to be called out as though it were exclusively an "Asian-inspired" thing?

It doesn't "have to," but I think they did it as a callback to the Oriental Adventures books (which is, as far as I know, the only D&D product that included an honor mechanic/stat).

 

[Riley37]

If you take it ultimately to mean, "Asians are exotic and alien creatures!", I think you are getting a major head of steam to engage in an internet fight over something nobody is actually saying.

Yes and no. It's something that no one HERE is saying, and that the 5E DMG hasn't said.

It is something that's been said many times and places - see again, James Bond in "You Only Live Twice", or the depiction of Persians in the "300" movie. Whether Rudyard Kipling or James Clavell said it, is arguable. But that's not a topic specific to 5E, nor to D&D. It's a topic at the general level of all RPGs, and also a great topic for the personal blog of someone raised in the USA who then lives in Japan.

Dwarves, of course, ARE exotic and alien creatures, and their warrior class is stereotypically motivated by honor. They just don't talk like "this humble third son of Borin wishes to offer the honorable PC the opportunity to purchase this elaborately-forged sword". Instead, they talk with the same quasi-Scottish accent as Long John Silver.

 

[Mouseferatu]

But in taking the stereotypes as they are handed down to me, understanding them for what they are within Fantasy, I am just one in a long line of stewards and, hopefully (as all who play Fantasy type RPGs desire) participators/creators of Fantasy. Those who deconstruct Fantasy should at least own up to it. I would assume that they'd wear such an accomplishment as a badge of honor.

Stereotypes handed down from a time and place that were themselves sexist and racist. Like change or not, like deconstruction or not, it's vital to remember that these things weren't perfect even when they were created, and a flaw's age doesn't make it any less a flaw.

Fantasy hasn't lost a thing. It's expanded. New isn't innately better, but it's not innately worse, either. Nor is it any less legitimate.

If it involves the impossible, it is fantasy. Everything else is detail or semantics.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Putting it another way...

Lovecraft's writing includes a great deal of racism. Leiber's includes a great deal of sexism. Whether or not you feel that this is justified by the period and culture in which they were written, one can at least say that those were an accepted part of the period and culture.

They are not, however, an accepted part of culture now. (Of course they still exist. But we recognize them as bad.)

It's still perfectly valid to enjoy Lovecraft and Leiber for what they are. But I sure as heck wouldn't want anyone writing in the genres they shaped to feel they had to be equally as racist/sexist today. In fact, I'd be offended if they were.

That doesn't make today's fantasy lesser. It makes it greater, because it's grown beyond some of its initial faults.