• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! 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 General WotC’s Official Announcement About Diversity, Races, and D&D

Following up on recent discussions on social media, WotC has made an official announcement about diversity and the treatment of ‘race’ in D&D.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Following up on recent discussions on social media, WotC has made an official announcement about diversity and the treatment of ‘race’ in D&D. Notably, the word ‘race’ is not used; in its place are the words ‘people’ and 'folk'.

2A4C47E3-EAD6-4461-819A-3A42B20ED62A.png


 PRESS RELEASE


Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is strength, for only a diverse group of adventurers can overcome the many challenges a D&D story presents. In that spirit, making D&D as welcoming and inclusive as possible has moved to the forefront of our priorities over the last six years. We’d like to share with you what we’ve been doing, and what we plan to do in the future to address legacy D&D content that does not reflect who we are today. We recognize that doing this isn’t about getting to a place where we can rest on our laurels but continuing to head in the right direction. We feel that being transparent about it is the best way to let our community help us to continue to calibrate our efforts.

One of the explicit design goals of 5th edition D&D is to depict humanity in all its beautiful diversity by depicting characters who represent an array of ethnicities, gender identities, sexual orientations, and beliefs. We want everyone to feel at home around the game table and to see positive reflections of themselves within our products. “Human” in D&D means everyone, not just fantasy versions of northern Europeans, and the D&D community is now more diverse than it’s ever been.

Throughout the 50-year history of D&D, some of the peoples in the game—orcs and drow being two of the prime examples—have been characterized as monstrous and evil, using descriptions that are painfully reminiscent of how real-world ethnic groups have been and continue to be denigrated. That’s just not right, and it’s not something we believe in. Despite our conscious efforts to the contrary, we have allowed some of those old descriptions to reappear in the game. We recognize that to live our values, we have to do an even better job in handling these issues. If we make mistakes, our priority is to make things right.

Here’s what we’re doing to improve:
  • We present orcs and drow in a new light in two of our most recent books, Eberron: Rising from the Last War and Explorer's Guide to Wildemount. In those books, orcs and drow are just as morally and culturally complex as other peoples. We will continue that approach in future books, portraying all the peoples of D&D in relatable ways and making it clear that they are as free as humans to decide who they are and what they do.
  • When every D&D book is reprinted, we have an opportunity to correct errors that we or the broader D&D community discovered in that book. Each year, we use those opportunities to fix a variety of things, including errors in judgment. In recent reprintings of Tomb of Annihilation and Curse of Strahd, for example, we changed text that was racially insensitive. Those reprints have already been printed and will be available in the months ahead. We will continue this process, reviewing each book as it comes up for a reprint and fixing such errors where they are present.
  • Later this year, we will release a product (not yet announced) that offers a way for a player to customize their character’s origin, including the option to change the ability score increases that come from being an elf, a dwarf, or one of D&D's many other playable folk. This option emphasizes that each person in the game is an individual with capabilities all their own.
  • Curse of Strahd included a people known as the Vistani and featured the Vistani heroine Ezmerelda. Regrettably, their depiction echoes some stereotypes associated with the Romani people in the real world. To rectify that, we’ve not only made changes to Curse of Strahd, but in two upcoming books, we will also show—working with a Romani consultant—the Vistani in a way that doesn’t rely on reductive tropes.
  • We've received valuable insights from sensitivity readers on two of our recent books. We are incorporating sensitivity readers into our creative process, and we will continue to reach out to experts in various fields to help us identify our blind spots.
  • We're proactively seeking new, diverse talent to join our staff and our pool of freelance writers and artists. We’ve brought in contributors who reflect the beautiful diversity of the D&D community to work on books coming out in 2021. We're going to invest even more in this approach and add a broad range of new voices to join the chorus of D&D storytelling.
And we will continue to listen to you all. We created 5th edition in conversation with the D&D community. It's a conversation that continues to this day. That's at the heart of our work—listening to the community, learning what brings you joy, and doing everything we can to provide it in every one of our books.

This part of our work will never end. We know that every day someone finds the courage to voice their truth, and we’re here to listen. We are eternally grateful for the ongoing dialog with the D&D community, and we look forward to continuing to improve D&D for generations to come.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Sadras

Legend
Anyone remember the old world of Darkness books about the gypsies? Or "Kindred of the East" which everybody called "Stereotypes of the East"? That shouldn't happen again. Ever. And we have to work for that. It doesn't just happen overnight.

The entire WoD setting were stereotypes - EVEN THE VAMPIRES CLANS and I'm not referring to the nationalities of the vampires. It was not isolated to the East or Gypsies as some would have us now believe!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I am sorry that one is hard to grasp for me since it is a very abstract mathematical issue which in game not even the characters should be aware of.
I can (in game) admire the toughness and poison resistance of dwarves as well as the nimbleness of elves. That (in game) they eventually bear a grudge resulting from some historic fluff e.g. former conflicts between the two people or conflicting ideas about the usefulness of environment e.g. dwarves wanting to lumber the forest to dig a mine whereas elves prefer the intact forest, and expression that with stereotype banters about one another is more or less amusing and helps depicting them in a meaningful manner.
I am not understanding what you’re trying to say here, I’m sorry. The problem is not that like elves and dwarves have different traits or that their cultures clash or what have you. The issue is that the game mechanically incentivizing certain race/class combinations over others plays into real-world racist narratives like the existence of “warlike races.” Elves having increased speed, dwarves being resistant to poison, etc., these things don’t make them any better or worse at being certain classes, so they aren’t part of the problem. Elves having increased Dexterity makes them better at being rogues and dwarves worse at it.

It is the real world I am worried about, not some fiction and I strongly believe that the majority of D&D role-players is not racist, no matter how they handle interracial prejudice in game. If you think it helps what should be a common cause, then why not, but wouldn't it be better to just state that in game has nothing to do with reality or real life ethnicity?
You can say it’s just a game and it has nothing to do with real life, but that doesn’t erase the harm the racist tropes the game uncritically repeats do to real people, and in fact it shuts down critical analysis of those elements of the game.

I really like WotCs statement about the matter, and I find it interesting that eventually they bring out more Ravenloft stuff.
When I was explaining new players what Vistani are in game, I tended to use no negative stereotypes anyway. Their defining features were their divination skills, their style of living and their ability to traverse the mists, but not e.g. stuff like they are generally unsavory or notorious thieves or other prejudices applied to them by some people.

I think as long as you push for the positives and advantages of certain ethnics, like 5e does with eliminating the need for attribute maluses by its BA math and only leaving the bonuses, then that is sufficient already.
Ostensibly positive stereotypes are still harmful.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Just take the ability score bonuses away from the races/folk/peoples/whatever and assign them to the classes instead. For example, choose Wizard at first level? Then you get a +2 to Int and then each subclass has a secondary bonus for a different stat, so that you are getting two bonuses the same as before. Regular and variant Humans would just get their normal bonuses instead of the class bonuses.
Yeah, I think that would be a good change for the game.
 

Var

Explorer
Just take the ability score bonuses away from the races/folk/peoples/whatever and assign them to the classes instead. For example, choose Wizard at first level? Then you get a +2 to Int and then each subclass has a secondary bonus for a different stat, so that you are getting two bonuses the same as before. Regular and variant Humans would just get their normal bonuses instead of the class bonuses.
Yeah but one there is a reason the 3ft race has a +2 to Intelligence and the 7 ft race has a +2 to Strength and +1 Constitution.
And it's not racially motivated or accurate representation, the max is the same for both, so they already have the same potential.
The Goliath is bigger so gets a boost in what makes sense, the gnome needs to be balanced so he gets a mental stat to compensate, not because all Goliaths are naturally dumber than Gnomes.
What 5E racial stat boni do, is make you mechanically better suited to do something, especially short term at low levels and effectually raise the minimum score for the race. If you spend all your ASIs on it, achieving a 20 for any given score is already very much possible for any class. Racial negative scores are indeed at least a bit problematic, but that has been acknowledged already and isn't getting printed anymore (with i.e. Orcs not having a -2 to Intelligence for the last 2 books they got printed in).

Getting offended over Goliaths starting at a higher baseline for physical stats with the same overall potential than Halflings just seems misplaced.
This is just a game, spiting the odds and playing a GWM Halfling is an option that's yours to RP, not a racist statement from the designers.


Taking this further - Is it okay to have nicknames like Elfcrusher, Beardcutter, Orcslayer or Dragonbane? (No offense intended towards @Elfcrusher :p )
Those definitely invoke violence against a specific race in the DnD universe. In universe they're pretty insensitive towards the fictional people that inhabit the world.
Is playing the classic archetype of a low Int Dwarven Cleric who hates Orcs with a burning passion due to his ancestral heritage a racist statement? Or is it just RP?

Are we allowed to have dump stats for our PCs?
8 Str is a sound mechanical choice for my Gnome Rogue, but since I'm worried it enforces a stereotype I'll better pick up at least 10.

I hope we can agree that there must be a line in between what is a problem and what isn't somewhere in between the extremes.
 
Last edited:

Sadras

Legend
I am not understanding what you’re trying to say here, I’m sorry. The problem is not that like elves and dwarves have different traits or that their cultures clash or what have you. The issue is that the game mechanically incentivizing certain race/class combinations over others plays into real-world racist narratives like the existence of “warlike races.” Elves having increased speed, dwarves being resistant to poison, etc., these things don’t make them any better or worse at being certain classes, so they aren’t part of the problem. Elves having increased Dexterity makes them better at being rogues and dwarves worse at it.

Instead of coming it from the RACE angle why not target the real issue. Proficiency (skill) as opposed to inherent racial abilities boosts.
 


Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Instead of coming it from the RACE angle why not target the real issue. Proficiency (skill) as opposed to RAW talent.
Can you elaborate on what you think the real issue is and how this change targets it? (And also what specific change you’re suggesting cause while I think I follow you on that bit, it’s a little unclear.)
 

The entire WoD setting were stereotypes - EVEN THE VAMPIRES CLANS and I'm not referring to the nationalities of the vampires. It was not isolated to the East or Gypsies as some would have us now believe!

Oh, entirely true. But to me, it mostly seemed like the first batch of vampire clans were based on pop-culture vampire stereotypes (the Brujah were Lost Boys vampires, the Toreador were Anne Rice Vampires, the Nosferatu were ... Nosferatu vampires, etc), but it drifted heavily towards cultural/racial/national stereotypes afterwards. It was only a bit later, once they tried to expand the WoD setting beyond its initial relatively local scope (the town of Gary, Indiana...), that the cultural stereotypes started to get leaned on more heavily. Stuff like the Ravnos, the Assamites, etc would never pass muster these days, though White wolf/Onyx Path have been valiantly trying to re-define/retcon them from their original cringeworthy forms for well over a decade now. And Kindred of the East - wow, I reread some of my old sourcebooks a while back, and yeeeeaaaah, those guys who are shredding AD&D Oriental Adventures on youtube at the moment would have their heads explode if they took a deep-dive into the KotE line...
 


Sadras

Legend
Can you elaborate on what you think the real issue is and how this change targets it? (And also what specific change you’re suggesting cause while I think I follow you on that bit, it’s a little unclear.)

Sure. I have seen before threads where posters take issue that with the new 5e paradigm RAW talents (ability plusses, far outweigh proficiency benefit) as opposed to earlier editions where the character's actual proficiency quickly overtook the benefits granted by the ability.

We are talking about fantastical creatures like Dwarves and Elves we'd imagine their physical DNA would be different to that of a human - they might be physically faster, think faster, have a better grasp of magic, be more charismatic, able to reach a higher plane of consciousness, ability to learn faster.
And of course all these could be replaced with traits as opposed to ability improvements so as not to make certain classes niche for certain races. But I'd rather let the races shine in their inherent strengths. I do not want my human as strong as a minotaur.*

The human beats the minotaur not in strength but in skill. Proficiency and Feats. That is the fantasy trope that is the most common.

EDIT: To answer some of the other questions you had - I think flatten the curve with abilities - a +5 is huge. I think rather increase the benefits of training/procificiency. Perhaps have racial maximums (and allow the options of a supes game to break those rules).

*I'm not saying you cannot have a human as stong as a minotaur at your table, but rather let the base follow internal consistency of the average population and have the option to supe-up, then have the base be superheroes and have to work down if you want a more grittier game.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top