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

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

I was thinking minimum change to the lore.
A poster above mentioned that they are inherently evil - making them not evil is a change to the lore.
Positive aspects without changing their alignment does not solve that issue.
Disassociating them from asian culture through imagery does solve the issue.
Why is this so hard to understand.

Removing Evil changes the lore. Some Hobgoblin cultures will (tend) toward Lawful Evil in the sense of aggressive, brutal, and expansionist. But other Hobgoblin cultures will tend toward Good in the sense of altruistic and perhaps Lawful Good in the sense improving society for all. So it becomes possible to depict Asian borrowings in a positive light.

Conversely, switching from Asian cultures to Nonasian cultures solves nothing, because the Evil label will simply demonize the next cultures, whatever they are.

This is inherently an issue because the genre of fantasy itself, intentionally, explores premodern tropes from cultures around the world.

The only solution can be removing monolithic Evil if describing any human-like culture.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The only solution can be removing monolithic Evil if describing any human-like culture.

Or creating monolithically evil humanoids whose culture is not transparently based on any real-world influences, or on enough of a mix thereof that they can't be regarded as demonizing anyone specific.

(Personally I think the hobgoblins haven't been identifiably "oriental"-like for a long time, but if you really think they're still objectionable, just hire more original creative designers, who can come up with a hobgoblin look that's totally alien and can't possibly be equated to anything Terrestrial.)
 

Its a satire of an argument no one is making :p

Though there are game like Ryyutama and Golden Sky Stories that are such games where, gasp, you can have adventures, gain level and gain loot NOT while not killing anyobody. Not that I'd like D&D to be such a game, but they exist and are perfectly valid playstyle and preferences, even though some think this is crazy and infeasible :p

Consider Star Trek, and its utopian future of democracy, decentered leadership systems, egalitarianism, freedom of religion, sexual diversity, harmony among diverse ethnicities, and no poverty (not even a need for money). At least with the "points of light".

I love settings like this.
 

Consider Star Trek, and its utopian future of democracy, decentered leadership systems, egalitarianism, freedom of religion, sexual diversity, harmony among diverse ethnicities, and no poverty (not even a need for money). At least with the "points of light".

I love settings like this.

Star Trek portrays a very idealistic future, but most of the best Star Trek stories feature massive threats to that peaceful world (eg "The Best of Both Worlds"), and often involve the heroes having to compromise their morality for the sake of the greater good (eg "In The Pale Moonlight"). The stories which have lower stakes, and feature Roddenberry's "perfect" humans living in blissful harmony with no external threats, tend to be excruciatingly dull (eg almost every episode in the first two seasons of "Enterprise", before the Xindi came along in season 3 and did a lower-key version of the Dominion War from DS9).

Just imagine how much TNG and DS9 would have sucked if a bunch of naturally gray-skinned humans looked at the Borg and the Jem'Hadar as unforgivable racial stereotypes, and the writers were forced to rip the Collective and the Dominion out of Trek canon in the middle of a plot arc, leaving nothing but "Enterprise"-level storytelling for the entirety of both shows' run.

Storytelling tends to turn out better when it's not subject to tone-policing, when you're just allowed to tell a good story without worrying about who might interpret it the wrong way. Granted, when given such license to say anything, a lot of awful stories get told; as Theodore Sturgeon succinctly put it, "90% of everything is crap". But it's usually mostly when things are good that they become popular, and it's usually mostly when things become popular that tone-policing begins to happen. Quite the vicious cycle, that.
 

I'm genuinely curious as a I don't understand this concept very well, can you give an example?

For the sake of relatively clear example. Consider if people read the Bible UNCRITICALLY and repeat behaviors from the Bronze Age and Iron Age (and for Christians the Roman Era), such as slavery, clan warfare, gender division, and so on, behaviors that were problematic even back then. The ancients are humans like us, and we preserve some of their records because there is enduring wisdom within it. But it would be less sane (and more ethically harmful) to literally try reinact Bronze Age culture today, uncritically.

Fortunately, Biblical traditions are living traditions that tend to be critical and evolving, hoping for an ideal future that leaves the painful behaviors of the past behind.

To the credit of the Biblical authors, they were fairly honest about heroes being imperfect. Occasionally even God is imperfect, in the sense of when Abraham and Moses disagree with God, and God responds with liking the ethical debate.

I mention this for the sake of a relatively clear reallife example for how "literature" can become a problem. And otherwise, reallife religion in itself is less relevant to the discussion of racism within D&D literature.
 

Star Trek portrays a very idealistic future, but most of the best Star Trek stories feature massive threats to that peaceful world (eg "The Best of Both Worlds"), and often involve the heroes having to compromise their morality for the sake of the greater good (eg "In The Pale Moonlight"). The stories which have lower stakes, and feature Roddenberry's "perfect" humans living in blissful harmony with no external threats, tend to be excruciatingly dull (eg almost every episode in the first two seasons of "Enterprise", before the Xindi came along in season 3 and did a lower-key version of the Dominion War from DS9).

Just imagine how much TNG and DS9 would have sucked if a bunch of naturally gray-skinned humans looked at the Borg and the Jem'Hadar as unforgivable racial stereotypes, and the writers were forced to rip the Collective and the Dominion out of Trek canon in the middle of a plot arc, leaving nothing but "Enterprise"-level storytelling for the entirety of both shows' run.

Storytelling tends to turn out better when it's not subject to tone-policing, when you're just allowed to tell a good story without worrying about who might interpret it the wrong way. Granted, when given such license to say anything, a lot of awful stories get told; as Theodore Sturgeon succinctly put it, "90% of everything is crap". But it's usually mostly when things are good that they become popular, and it's usually mostly when things become popular that tone-policing begins to happen. Quite the vicious cycle, that.

This is why I couldn't get into Superman as a kid.

I didn't really like superhero comics they don't seem to translate well to other cultures.

I did like some of the movies and Batman movies are generally good to great.

Superman and Spiderman movies very hit and miss. Wonderwomen was good, 2/3 Blade were good, MCU bit hit and miss but nothing dreadful.

GI Joe didn't do it for me either. Had these though.

 

This is why I couldn't get into Superman as a kid.

I didn't really like superhero comics they don't seem to translate well to other cultures.

I did like some of the movies and Batman movies are generally good to great.

Superman and Spiderman movies very hit and miss. Wonderwomen was good, 2/3 Blade were good, MCU bit hit and miss but nothing dreadful.

GI Joe didn't do it for me either. Had these though.


Yeah, the whole "drop a nuclear bomb on Superman's head and his hair might lose it's curl" was what turned me off as well. I think the original superman (strong, tough, not godlike and invincible) was more interesting. But to maintain excitement every author seems to think they need to kick it up a notch.

Unfortunately it's the pattern with a lot of superhero comics and they have to keep coming up with more and more ludicrous things to challenge the hero.
 

What's stopping you from doing it in your campaign now? I mean, my campaign, the last 30+ years, we don't have halflings. At all. Like they don't even exist. They never have; never will. (Same for dragonborn and a few others.) I don't care what the rule books in any edition say.

It is a matter of gaming style.

I care about official WotC rules. I care about official mechanics. I care about official flavor.

And I want official rules that I either love or I can live with.



Also it is slightly relevant. English folklore often perceives the "elf" as small and flighty and shooting arrows, thus people who are more familiar with the reallife English ethnicity (and Shakespeare!) tend to view the elf moreso with Dexterity. But that English culture isnt really true in Scotland where the elf folklore often remained humansized. Scandinavian ethnicities have completely different views about what elves and dwarves are.

I am guessing, that Japanese D&D players might want to tweak the D&D "oni" for similar reasons

So being able to customize origins, not only helps representing literal humans of other cultures but helps soften the misinterpretations about or the appropriation of other cultures.
 



Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top