• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford on D&D Races Going Forward

On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty. @ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence...

Status
Not open for further replies.
On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty.


636252771691385727.jpg


@ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence debuff and the evil alignment, with a more acceptable narrative. It's a start, but there's a fair argument for gutting the entire race system.

The orcs of Eberron and Wildemount reflect where our hearts are and indicate where we’re heading.


@vorpaldicepress I hate to be "that guy", but what about Drow, Vistani, and the other troublesome races and cultures in Forgotten Realms (like the Gur, another Roma-inspired race)? Things don't change over night, but are these on the radar?

The drow, Vistani, and many other folk in the game are on our radar. The same spirit that motivated our portrayal of orcs in Eberron is animating our work on all these peoples.


@MileyMan1066 Good. These problems need to be addressed. The variant features UA could have a sequel that includes notes that could rectify some of the problems and help move 5e in a better direction.

Addressing these issues is vital to us. Eberron and Wildemount are the first of multiple books that will face these issues head on and will do so from multiple angles.


@mbriddell I'm happy to hear that you are taking a serious look at this. Do you feel that you can achieve this within the context of Forgotten Realms, given how establised that world's lore is, or would you need to establish a new setting to do this?

Thankfully, the core setting of D&D is the multiverse, with its multitude of worlds. We can tell so many different stories, with different perspectives, in each world. And when we return to a world like FR, stories can evolve. In short, even the older worlds can improve.


@SlyFlourish I could see gnolls being treated differently in other worlds, particularly when they’re a playable race. The idea that they’re spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat feels like they’re in a different class than drow, orcs, goblins and the like. Same with minotaurs.

Internally, we feel that the gnolls in the MM are mistyped. Given their story, they should be fiends, not humanoids. In contrast, the gnolls of Eberron are humanoids, a people with moral and cultural expansiveness.


@MikeyMan1066 I agree. Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls. Gnolls... the way they are described, do not. Having them be minor demons would clear a lot of this up.

You just described our team's perspective exactly.


As a side-note, the term 'race' is starting to fall out of favor in tabletop RPGs (Pathfinder has "ancestry", and other games use terms like "heritage"); while he doesn't comment on that specifically, he doesn't use the word 'race' and instead refers to 'folks' and 'peoples'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Doug McCrae

Legend
In earlier editions, even going as far as 2e, you will find unfortunately few, if any. We find ourselves back at the point that the only dark-skinned people depicted in the game are the villains.
Just had a look thru the 1989 2e PHB and I couldn't find any depictions of non-white people. There are some in the Monstrous Manual, such as the desert giant. I think the unfortunately named Ember in 3e must be the first in a PHB.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Urriak Uruk

Gaming is fun, and fun is for everyone
I personally would prefer if they called them "Species" and the subraces become "races". That's how we, as the Homo Sapiens Sapiens, are a distinct species from Neanderthals, but I, a Caucasian male, is a different race from someone from India.

Species is too "science-y" a word. And brings in a whole debate about genetics and ethnic purity and a bunch of other nonsense that has no place in a place with kobolds and gnomes.

Most people are fine with the word "race" as it is used in fantasy. Its the depiction of some races people have a problem with, and why those depictions exist.

Is it a problem that orcs in Lord of the Rings exist? No, they're corrupted elves, nothing really racist there in a story about good vs evil. It is a problem that the orcs have poor cockney accents while the elves speak in the lofty tones of nobility (the takeaway being the pure and beautiful elves = the rich and privileged class, while the ugly and evil orcs = the poor unwashed masses).
 

Weiley31

Legend
Oh, no, no, you're right. My players are weird. One of them wants to make Crossbreed Priscilla for their next character.
I mean, you can technically reflavor Dragonborn and the Wildemount variants as Half Dragons if ya want. Or even reflavor Tieflings/Dragonborn as a "Crossbreed" Priscilla. I've been toying with the idea of reskinning Half-Elf lately as a Kitsune since the stats bonuses fit with it.
 

Caucasian male, is a different race from someone from India.

Actually, you're not - you're both "caucasians", race-wise. Americans misuse "caucasian" to mean "white" thanks to racist usage early in the 20th century, but an anthropological and archaeological sense, it refers to a particular population wave. Europeans, Indians, Arabic, Semitic and Persian peoples and so on are all "caucasian". Genetically, those groups are somewhat more similar to each other than they are to other groups, too, generally speaking.

Races are nonsense anyway, but if you're going to claim the "caucasian" race, let's at least get as close to a scientific meaning as possible. Many American "caucasians" have significant Native American and other non-"caucasian" (by any meaning of the term) ancestry too, complicating matters.

Cultures would probably be better than "races", and species is too dry a term ("peoples" or something might work better). Cultures makes more sense, though, because you don't have Elven weapon proficiencies from being born an elf, you have them from being trained by that culture. You (probably) don't have the Wood Elf vanish from being "born that way", but rather being trained that way. And so on.
 

Yep. The wallets will decide. I would not buy such a book. Nor would I apply the errata or buy a book that would have the errata in it. They would have to do an entirely new edition and I would not buy it anyway. D&D comes with a history. Denying this history is worst than letting those who play it decide what they want to do with it.
Feel free to do that; but, well, remember this?
1592340624729.png

That history might not be so important. The current fanbase is skewed towards younger players who don't have that firsthand experience of the old days. The game is perfectly capable of changing to fit a wider market consisting primarily of that younger demographic, preserving continuity with its past while not being trapped and bound by it.
 
Last edited:

I bet that it would not sell at all. Such a world would be bland and boring. If I want a sword and sorcery game, every one in it will be humans and they will either fight other humans or monsters/demons just like Conan does. If you have multiple races, you must then have evil races. Otherwise, what is the point?
Mass Effect says hello.
 

Did a bit more digging and I found a 2e book with maybe four or five illustrations of POC...

Unfortunately, it's the Complete Barbarian's Handbook.

Sigh...

Just had a look thru the 1989 2e PHB and I couldn't find any depictions of non-white people. There are some in the Monstrous Manual, such as the desert giant. I think the unfortunately named Ember in 3e must be the first in a PHB.
 

auburn2

Adventurer
What are the depictions of people of color in D&D at the time? In earlier editions, even going as far as 2e, you will find unfortunately few, if any.

From the 1e Drizzt and Akbar Al Akash (Azure Bonds)
From the 2e Mazzy Fantan, Yoshimo and Valygar (Baldurs Gate)
From 3e: Deekin

There are probably more, those are the ones that come to mind immediately and have dark skin. If we expand POC to include asians or other colors like blue and green skin there would be more.
 

Weiley31

Legend
Tieflings are already 1/2 planetouched/demon basically with Cambion and Alu-Fiends being the 50/50 spread in that regard.

So I'm not quite sure how you'd get 1/2 Tieflings when they are already 1/2 to begin with.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top