D&D General WotC’s Official Announcement About Diversity, Races, and 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

So, as previously noted - I'm only talking about the published works. What you do at your table at home, I don't really care much about.

But, if you are a white guy... maybe your not seeing the issue is not really that important? As far as the published works are concerned, are you unwilling to accept that maybe a publisher is right to bow to someone else's sensibilities now and then?

I don't care what published materials do. I'll either take the pieces I like or I'll ignore it. I've never said otherwise.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Why? I mean that seriously. You have a problem with evil orcs, change it. I've explained my logic and reasoning repeatedly now ... I don't feel like doing it any more.

A big part of the game is killing evil monsters. Change orcs to green, call them a different species instead of race and I see no issue. I see no logical reason we can have (effectively) always evil fiends, dragons and undead but we can't have an evil monster that happens to look sort-of human.
I think the argument is why must every single orc be naturally evil apart form a few outliers. Not that there are many evil orcs and many who are not.
With the many that are evil you have the enemy your heroes can challenge as well as challenge the evil humans in their midst without going all racial.
 

No.

As has been said repeatedly, any existing evil NPC -- including whole cities of bondage fetishist drow -- can remain that way. Any changes would be to say that "but not every drow is necessarily that way."

Every setting, every adventure is still accurate. But the orcs in the slavers stockade (A2, for oldsters like me) don't mean that every orc is an evil slaver.
Great points. Probably, Wizards of the Coast publicity team needs your perfect response to those lamenting the erasure of past works of art.
 

I think we're witnessing the second coming of the satanic panic from the 80's.
The Satanic panic was saying "this is inherently evil and it's a dangerous to everyone, don't play it."

The current moment (whatever it's termed in retrospect) is saying "there are people who are hurt by elements of the game, can we expand canon a bit so that the uncomfortable stuff isn't the only way things are described, let's all keep playing."

If you find making other people more comfortable causes you harm, that's on you, I'm afraid.
 


What if we free ourselves from defining a people as evil? What if we look at the drow the adventurers are going to interact with.

If you want drow as enemies, have them be a raiding party of drow, or necromancers who want to raise an undead army, or assassins. Those can all be evil drow without having to say "all drow are evil."

If you want drow as interesting NPCs, have them be in a powerful guild, or merchants who sell magic items, or an authoritarian government.

If we don't start with "how many drow are evil" and instead think about the stories we want to tell with drow, it frees us up from these archaic modes of categorization.
Read the Dark Elf Trilogy. It's literally about Drizzt growing up in Menzoberranzan, a wicked city ruled by sadists and demons. The plot revolves around Drizzt having an attack of conscience and leaves his homeland.

The city has 20,000 residents. For that story to work, how many have to be evil?
 

Read the Dark Elf Trilogy. It's literally about Drizzt growing up in Menzoberranzan, a wicked city ruled by sadists and demons. The plot revolves around Drizzt having an attack of conscience and leaves his homeland.

The city has 20,000 residents. For that story to work, how many have to be evil?
Only those in positions of power, and usually, from looking throughout our human history of evil, not that many.
 

Read the Dark Elf Trilogy. It's literally about Drizzt growing up in Menzoberranzan, a wicked city ruled by sadists and demons. The plot revolves around Drizzt having an attack of conscience and leaves his homeland.

The city has 20,000 residents. For that story to work, how many have to be evil?
Bob Salvatore is apparently a very nice guy, but I don't think his novels can stand up to this kind of scrutiny.
 

Read the Dark Elf Trilogy. It's literally about Drizzt growing up in Menzoberranzan, a wicked city ruled by sadists and demons. The plot revolves around Drizzt having an attack of conscience and leaves his homeland.

The city has 20,000 residents. For that story to work, how many have to be evil?

This is still the wrong question.

Let me turn it around to you because you know the story better:

How many drow have to be contrary to Drizzt's moral perspective for the story to work?

Does the alignment really matter?
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top