D&D 3E/3.5 Diversity in D&D Third Edition

With 3rd Ed, our main goal was to return D&D to its roots, such as with Greyhawk deities and the return of half-orcs. By staying true to the feel of D&D, we helped the gaming audience accept the sweeping changes that we made to the rules system.

With 3rd Ed, our main goal was to return D&D to its roots, such as with Greyhawk deities and the return of half-orcs. By staying true to the feel of D&D, we helped the gaming audience accept the sweeping changes that we made to the rules system.

One way we diverged from the D&D heritage, however, was by making the game art more inclusive. People of color, for example, were hard to find in earlier editions, and, when they did make appearance, it wasn’t always for the best. Luckily for us, Wizards of the Coast had an established culture of egalitarianism, and we were able to update the characters depicted in the game to better reflect contemporary sensibilities.

dnd-party.jpg

A few years before 3E, the leadership at Wizards had already encouraged me to go whole-hog with the multicultural look of the RPG Everway (1995). In this world-hopping game, we provided players and Gamemasters with scores of color art cards to inspire them as they created their characters and NPCs. The art featured people and settings that looked like they could have come from fantasy versions of places all around the earth, and the gender balance was great. I once got an email from a black roleplayer who said that Everway had forever changed the way he roleplayed, so I know that the game’s multicultural look was meaningful to some gamers out there. With D&D, we took the game in the same direction, but not nearly as far. The core setting has always resembled medieval Europe, and we expanded the diversity of the characters while still maintaining the medieval milieu.

The characters that players see the most are the “fab four,” the four iconic characters that we used repeatedly in our art and in our examples of play. Two are men (the human cleric and the dwarf fighter) and two are women (the elf wizard and the halfling rogue). Given the demographics of gamers in 2000, the implication that half of all D&D characters are female was a bit of a stretch. The only complaints we got, however, were about the introductory Adventure Game, where the characters were pregenerated, with names and genders assigned to them. Some young men would have preferred fewer female characters and more males to choose from. None of us worried too much about those complaints.

In addition to the main four characters, we also assigned a particular character to represent each of the other classes, with that character appearing in examples of play and in art. The four human characters comprised a white man (the cleric), a white woman (the paladin), a black woman (the monk), and an Asian man (the sorcerer). The remaining four nonhuman iconics were three men and one woman. It was a trick to strike the right balance in assigning fantasy races and genders to all the classes and to assign ethnicities to the human characters, but the iconic characters seemed to be a big hit, and I think the diversity was part of the appeal.

Somewhat late in the process, the marketing team added Regdar, a male fighter, to the mix of iconic characters. We designers weren’t thrilled, and as the one who had drawn up the iconic characters I was a little chapped. My array of iconic characters did not include a human male fighter, and that’s the most common D&D character ever, so the marketing team gave us one. We carped a little that he meant adding a second white man to the array of characters, but at least he was dark enough to be ambiguously ethnic. Regdar proved popular, and if the marketing team was looking for an attractive character to publicize, they got one.

Back in 1E, Gary Gygax had used the phrase “he or she” as the default third person singular pronoun, a usage that gave the writing a legalistic vibe that probably suited it. In 2E, the text stated up front that it was just going to use “he” because grammatically it’s gender-neutral. Even in 1989, insisting that “he” is gender neutral was tone deaf. By the time I was working on 3E, I had been dealing with the pronoun issue for ten years. In Ars Magica (1987), we wrote everything in second person so that we could avoid gendered pronouns. The rules said things like, “You can understand your familiar” instead of “The wizard can understand his/her/their familiar.” In Over the Edge (1992), we used “he” for the generic player and “she” for the generic gamemaster, which felt balanced and helped the reader keep the two roles separate. That sort of usage became standard for Atlas Games’s roleplaying games. Personally, I use singular-they whenever I can get away with it, but 20 years ago that was still generally considered unorthodox. For 3E, I suggested that we tie the pronouns to the iconic characters. The iconic paladin was a woman, so references to paladins in the rules were to “her.” I thought we’d catch flak from someone about this usage, but I never heard fans complaining.

One topic we needed to settle was whether monsters that were gendered as female in folklore, such as a lamia, should be exclusively female in D&D. I figured we should ditch gender limits wherever we could, but an editor argued that gender was important for the identity of a monster like the lamia. I asked, “Is that because it is in woman’s nature to deceive and destroy men?” Luring and destroying men is a common trope for female-gendered monsters, with the lamia as an example. “Yes, it is” said the editor, but she was laughing, and I had made my point. You can see an illustration of a male lamia in the 3E Monster Manual.

While we incorporated Greyhawk’s deities into 3rd Ed, we had no intention of picking up Greyhawk’s description of various human ethnic groups, corresponding more or less to ethnicities found on Earth. For gamers who cared about the Greyhawk canon, the Asian sorcerer would be from a lightly described territory to the west and the black monk would be a “Touv” from the jungles of Hepmonaland. Touvs in 2E were defined as having a penalty to their Intelligence scores, and we sure didn’t want to send any players in that direction. In 3E, the Asian and black characters were just humans, full stop.

The good news is that the gaming audience rolled with the iconic characters featuring people of color and women. With 5th Ed, the design team picked up where we left off and have pursued diversity further. The diverse cast of characters goes a long way in making D&D look modern and mature.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jonathan Tweet

Jonathan Tweet

D&D 3E, Over the Edge, Everway, Ars Magica, Omega World, Grandmother Fish

log in or register to remove this ad



billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
What is overflowing from other media, though? What's the message that you're claiming to be fatigued with? And how is the mere presence of women and people of color in D&D art sending it?

If I had to venture a guess, it's not the presence of women and people of color in D&D art that's the fatigue-causing problem. It's probably more the endless talking and arguing about it that gets fatiguing. And I can see that point for people who have been seeing it from multiple sources. But, as I mentioned above, any single instance of the topic coming up may not be fatiguing to someone newly encountering it or engaging it in a new forum. So the prescription isn't for people to lay off the topic - the prescription is for people to back off when they feel they're being saturated with it and finding some other topic on the board to engage with.
 

Maybe you are confused. I'm not saying that anyone on this thread is a bad faith actor. That said, I've seen a lot of bad faith arguments from racists/et al. before. You can't say otherwise.



Did you not read my post? I was agreeing with you that being a [flat earther] doesn't invalidate their opinion on [vaccines]. That was the whole jist of what I was saying.
False.

Your post:
Being dimissive of bad faith arguments is not the same of blanket disagreement with everything that a person says. After all, there may be some flat earther who is pro-vaccine. That's not to say that their arguments against a spherical Earth are actually reasonable.
"That's not to say that their arguments against a spherical Earth are actually reasonable."

If this metaphor worked you would replace "against" with "for" and "spherical earth" with "vaccines".

You sir are appearing to argue in bad faith. You have twisted words consistantly and your metaphor is a broken one because the hypothetical you would need to work with for this to be valid is where the racist or sexist says something that is potentially correct. You fail to do so.
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
If I had to venture a guess, it's not the presence of women and people of color in D&D art that's the fatigue-causing problem. It's probably more the endless talking and arguing about it that gets fatiguing.
And as I said before, there wouldn't be argument about it, but for the people complaining about the art bringing politics into the game. It's rather circular, no?
 

Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
False.

Your post:

"That's not to say that their arguments against a spherical Earth are actually reasonable."

If this metaphor worked you would replace "against" with "for" and "spherical earth" with "vaccines".

No, because I'm pointing out that a [flat earther] can be right about [vaccines] even if their [flat earther arguments] are asinine.

You sir are appearing to argue in bad faith.

Whatever.

You have twisted words consistantly and your metaphor is a broken one because the hypothetical you would need to work with for this to be valid is where the racist or sexist says something that is potentially correct. You fail to do so.

Isn't that the part where the metaphor about the flat earther is right about vaccines?
 

No, because I'm pointing out that a [flat earther] can be right about [vaccines] even if their [flat earther arguments] are asinine.



Whatever.



Isn't that the part where the metaphor about the flat earther is right about vaccines?
maybe you just dont see the issue with your phrasing.

I assure you it is not arranged in a way that accomplishes quite what you were going for though if thats the case as what was being attacked (by the person you were replying to) was the position that would actually have been akin to ignoring said flat earthers pro vaccine argument thats what was being oposed by my argument (or by the hypothetical argument of a racist or a sexist or a flat earther. None of which describe me.)
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
maybe you just dont see the issue with your phrasing.

I assure you it is not arranged in a way that accomplishes quite what you were going for though if thats the case as what was being attacked was what would actually have been akin to ignoring said flat earthers pro vaccine argument.
No, Azzy's post means what they say it means. I believe it is you who missed the "not" in "That's not to say that their arguments against a spherical Earth are actually reasonable."
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top