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 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'.

 

[Haffrung]

Internet wasn’t around then. It’s the most powerful tool since fire was discovered. It exposes you to the world’s opinions.

Social media amplifies the most extreme and contentious voices. That's the foundation of its commercial model - generate engagement through anxiety, outrage, and the desire for validation. If an opinion strongly held by 10 per cent of users generates more engagement than an opinion moderately held by 60 per cent, then social media platforms will push the 10 per cent.

Just look at this thread. I'd wager it's the most active on this site for weeks. But I'd also wager 80+ per cent of people who play RPGs have no particular interest in this subject.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In general, I think the game needs identifiable bad guys for a lot of people. Although when I think about it more, while I occasionally use orcs as foot-soldiers and minor threats, in my current campaign I think I've used them once in past year.

But related to this - for the people that are in the "saying orcs are evil is racist" or believe that orcs are only evil because of their religion/culture I have a question.

Isn't it just as bad (or even worse) to say that orcs that follow religion X are evil? That if they just worshiped Y they'd be okay?

So as to not get into real world religions, lets say there were people that worshiped The Holy Cabbage. Cabbagers as they like to be called happen to be a different ethnicity and look different from you. In addition you of course are not a cabbage-head yourself.

So if I say that Cabbagers are evil (or at least the vast majority are), that's seems pretty danged bigoted to me. We're just substituting someone's appearance with what religion religion they follow. They're evil because they say different prayers, have different customs. Maybe cabbagers always walk backwards when they walk through the front door which is just weird.

How is that any better? Especially when we're assigning an alignment to a separate species that just happens to have the same general shape as humans?

The difference is that Gruumsh objectively exists in the default D&D world, and objectively exerts direct influence over the orcs.

It’s much more like saying that the Nazis were evil, but Germany as a society was fine once the Nazis weren’t controlling German society anymore. Except imagine that Hitler had a direct line to an evil extraplanar being of unthinkable power that probably created the Germans and who objectively, inarguably, wants the Nazis to be in charge.

I’m fine with saying that is a group of people that can come to the bbq as long as they don’t bring their evil violent ex with the swastika on his forehead.

 

[Morrus]

Did you really just assume my privilege? On a DnD forum?

Mate I'm German, so you guessed correctly. I'm a 30 year old white cis male.

Got it pretty much right. White middle aged Western white guy. Me too.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I had an epiphany last night, not sure if this take is lukewarm or flaming hot:

...

But in the end, it's not about the orcs. Or about the humans that they're fighting against. They're all actors in a stage play, and it's the play and its playwright that are the root of the problem. And the problem is that "this game is encouraging play that echoes racist colonialist narratives, wittingly or unwittingly". Substitute in any race/species/people as the actors in both roles, but if the story remains the same, then there still is a problem.

Boiling hot, I'd say!

You're right. OD&D and 1e AD&D both have rules for PCs to "clear" a wilderness area of monsters, build a military stronghold, and attract settlers.

OD&D Book 3 The Underworld and Wilderness Adventures: "Another advantage accruing to those who build their strongholds in the wilderness is that they will gain control over the surrounding countryside. Clearing the countryside of monsters is the first requirement."

1e AD&D DMG: "In territories hacked from the wilderness, the 'fame' of the owner will eventually spread so as to attract inhabitants to the safety (?) of the area. They will begin to appear after the player character’s stronghold is finished and patrols have generally cleared the area."

The default D&D dungeon adventure is similar in that PCs are in the role of invaders entering the territory of the monsters with larcenous or murderous (or both) intent.

 

[Remathilis]

D&D is a game about racism.

And thus, the answer is...

Your breakdown doesn't leave really any room for other "races" in nearly any fantasy or speculative fiction: no Elves, no Dwarves, no Hobbits, no Orks, no Taurens, no Khajiit, no Vulcans, no Wookiees, no Galleyfrians, no Kryptonians, no Kree, nothing.

Each of them is a vaguely monolithic homogeneities, described by convenient stereotypes and often limited physical differences from humans. Most are stand-ins for various human ideas, cultures, or norms. Some are positive, but just as many are negative. Every word you spoke can just as easily be used to describe Star Trek species and changing the term from "race" to "species" does nothing to alleviate that. They all reflect the human condition in some way because humans only know the human condition. They are all humans in funny suits and an exaggerated trait or three to make them "not us". Even a completely non-human, alien mindset ends up having to be human enough to make logic for our brains to accept them, be them Daleks or Demons.

But that returns me to the question: what do we do then? Do we never create non-humans again because we cannot escape the orbit of stereotyping humanity via it? Do we nuance them to the point they do become just humans with pointed ears? Do we resign ourselves to out loneliness in the universe because we cannot fathom what a true outsider would actually be like?

This a large can of worms, and I don't think people will like the endpoint of this train of thought...

 

[Umbran]

Don’t get me wrong — I’m not convinced orcs are an analogy for black people.

With respect, that may be because you are asking the wrong question.

Let's do some role playing. Anyone can join in! I have a pre-generated character for you.

Your character is a contemporary human in a contemporary world. He's never played D&D, does not know its history. He's dark-skinned, and lives in the USA. The primitive tribal origins of his people is often rasied, though that was centuries ago. His people are known for their physical prowess, due to their prominence in professional sports. When seen on the street, the initial reaction to his people is "very possibly a violent criminal", enough that passersby often physically shy away. Enough of the dominant culture around him feel he is sub-human, that a cop might just feel he could get away with casually and slowly killing him.

Now your character is given a description of orcs - dark skinned, strong. Dumb, primitive, tribal. Violent such that vigilante adventurers are often sent to kill them to protect society.

How does your character feel?

 

[Morrus]

With respect, that may be because you are asking the wrong question.

Let's do some role playing - I have a pre-generated character for you.

Your character is a contemporary human in a contemporary world. He's never played D&D, does not know its history. He's dark-skinned, and lives in the USA. The primitive tribal origins of his people is often rasied, though that was centuries ago. His people are known for their physical prowess, due to their prominence in professional sports. When seen on the street, the initial reaction to his people is "very possibly a violent criminal", enough that passersby often physically shy away. Enough of the dominant culture around him feel he is sub-human, that a cop might just feel he could get away with casually and slowly killing him.

Now your character is given a description of orcs - dark skinned, strong. Dumb, primitive, tribal. Violent such that vigilante adventurers are often sent to kill them to protect society.

How does your character feel?

I understand that.

 

[Var]

I would not. I would happily build a Ranger with "Favored Enemy: Walmartian" or whatever they were called. Part of the fun of D&D is getting to slaughter something that's a thinly veiled allegory for whatever obnoxious person has been making your life difficult recently. Your boss has been bragging about his latest golf vacation while the department he's supposed to be running falls apart around him? Next week's campaign features a villainous town alderman who wagers the city treasury on his favorite Pro Goatball League instead of repairing the old mill. It's a healthy catharsis for the frustrations of daily life.

That is hillarious and I love the idea.

Should probably offer the PCs a path where they raise money for public education to prevent a tragedy like the plague breaking out or something.
Shouldn't suspect malice where you can explain things with lack of an education. Sometimes I wonder what would have happened to me if my school system I grew up in refused to teach Darwinism in Biology and encouraged repeated brain trauma inducement in chase of a weird non spherical football as the leading desireable activity to pursue in life.

Got it pretty much right. White middle aged Western white guy. Me too.

Yay, that's two, counts as a we. Now we need a them to hate on!

Culture here in the suburbs is positively weird. Everyone hates the guts of someone else for completely ridiculous reasons. Yet they constantly change in between which specific group to pretend to have an ancestral feud with at any given occasion. Your supposedly worst enemy is also your best friend when he visits, because you're polite to guests and visits are reasons for drinking, duh.

Immigrants? We don't have Immigrants here. Those guys? The black guy is Ferdinand and the other one Muhammad. Both talk in a broad dialect with the best of them and have been living here forever, so have their parents. So as I was saying, no immigrants here.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Just look at this thread. I'd wager it's the most active on this site for weeks. But I'd also wager 80+ per cent of people who play RPGs have no particular interest in this subject.

Active is deceptive. Over 1300 posts as I write this and, at most, maybe 20 people are responsible for around 1000 of them? Some people comment so much that I mostly tune them out and skim over their posts.

And honestly, if someone has no interest in eliminating discrimination and racism and bigotry and homophobia is all their forms, which includes mass-published game books, then I have no interest in ever interacting with that person, unless I think I have a real chance to change their beliefs.

 

[Umbran]

I understand that.

I know, but you were an excellent jumping off point for the way of pointing things out. Sorry about that.

Plus, when we really understand it, grok it in fullness, I think we stop caring whether we white guys are convinced that orcs are analogous to black people.