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

Yeah. And likewise the world is tricky. Reinforcing the trope...the stereotype...that the world is simple, that Good is Good and Evil is Evil, and you can tell the difference by looking at somebody's physical features, by asking what group they belong to, maybe isn't provably making the world a worse place, but it sure ain't making it better.

Yeah, I'm not persuaded by this rhetorical move, but as I said, it's a natural one to make, and then you can throw all of traditional epic fantasy on the pyre. You can't be creating worlds like Narnia or Middle-Earth or Krynn because our world isn't like that and therefore you're perpetuating harmful and dangerous tropes.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Even in the original version, it's pretty clear that all these groups are being brought together by the evil cultists to turn them against the titular keep and then, after that, the settled lands beyond.

I think the module makes it pretty clear that the situation in the module could be described as "Wednesday."

"The Realm of mankind is narrow and constricted. Always the forces of Chaos press upon its borders, seeking to enslave its populace, rape its riches, and steal its treasures. If it were not for a stout few, many in the Realm would indeed fall prey to the evil which surrounds them. Yet, there are always certain exceptional and brave members of humanity, as well as similar individuals among its allies - dwarves, elves, and halflings - who rise above the common level and join battle to stave off the darkness which would otherwise overwhelm the land."
 

Well looking at IRL humans, you're a sentient creature and hugely influenced by the environment you grow up in. From that you forge yourself an oppinion ond going from there your free will kicks in.

DnD's alignemnts are pretty weaksauce in how rigid they are and how badly they express the variety of nuance within spontaneous decision making in the heat of a moment. A dictator isn't beyond random acts of kindness, why would a Drow Matriach be?
Or just random acts of boredom/curiosity with the same result, what are you going to do as a teenager when willful destruction is normal and not woke enough to express yourself and your rebellion against society?
In case of the "oh so, so, soooo evil, you wouldn't believe how irredeemable evil, oh gosh you have no idea to what depths these things would be willing to sink..." entities like devils, demons or liches, what speaks against individuals who cares for humanoids the same way we'd care for an ant farm or a pet?
Their action would be virtually indistinguishable from i.e. Chaotic Good as long as their pet project keeps them going that way, which might be a decade or ten, who knows.

Oddly enough this is the moment where I remember Liches comminting suicide by not feeding their phylactery anymore is a thing. Because they have seen it all and don't have a drive to continue existing anymore. Just kinda lie down and die like a very, very depressed and mentally ill person.
Evil things are people too, maybe someone needs to open up a mental hospital for aspiring lords of death, Chromatic Dragons looking to defy their parents and eldritch thing who wouldn't mind musing a millenia on how something with as little brain capacity as a humanoid can cope with its place in the multiverse.

For all the "evil" in the DnD world someone had to make the claim that their culture is a bad thing. Dehumanising the enemy is step one to make your soldiers kill stuff without asking question, just saying.

On the flip side celestials are completely fine with feeding legions of mortals into the meatgrinder of their endless strife against "evil". "For the greater good" or something. Funny how that always is an endless cycle with no change in sight.

Good and evil are concepts based on human morals. Projecting them on demons and angels makes about as much sense as projecting them on bugs, dogs or great old ones.
Alignment as a whole is something you can grasp really fast and it works as long as you don't question it. It's been around forever, maybe that's the problematic part of DnD that has outlived it's usefulness and really needs to go the way of the dodo.
Figuring out where something needs to go within the very narrow scope of an alignment while designing yet another stat block, doesn't work in the slightest when combined with the 5E streamlining approach.
5E also chooses to not use specifics and give vague guidelines on how to run things, enabling a sandbox to play with, which actually has been a big complaint in comparison to 3.5E when pretty much every course of action had a rule or a system written in lawyer terms somewhere.

Alignment might have been better off with the sandbox treatment rather the streamlining one. Someone probably wanted to play it safe and decided it's too iconic and needs to be there to make DnD 5E. Understandable, yet 5E might finally be in a position to ditch the whole idea. Unlike earlier editions there's not a lot of mechanical ties to alignment left, so the prep work is done, just a few item requirements to retcon and we'd be good to go.

A well-reasoned and certainly competent argument, and absolutely a valid view of alignment and its utility (or lack thereof). Myself, I don't use alignment as much of an absolute when it comes to certain actions within a specific context. I use it as a general guide to roleplay, not a straighjacket I have no means to escape or explore.

Excising it from the game completely is certainly achievable, as you say, it's practically there in name only (and I don't disagree). Do I think it necessary to remove alignment from the written work as a means of appeasement for the perceptions of any particular community of whatever size? No, not even a little, but it's not my decision to make.

I don't particularly care if they do or don't. If it's still a fun game to play, I'll still play it.
 

Yeah, I'm not persuaded by this rhetorical move, but as I said, it's a natural one to make, and then you can throw all of traditional epic fantasy on the pyre. You can't be creating worlds like Narnia or Middle-Earth or Krynn because our world isn't like that and therefore you're perpetuating harmful and dangerous tropes.
And yet Greek myth, Arthurian tales, Beowulf and countless other stories would survive just fine, as would more modern works like A Song of Ice & Fire.

No one is going to be burning any books, but wanting new books, published today, to be held to a higher standard isn't a big ask.

(Also, Narnia is pretty gross in its thinly veiled depiction of Muslims. Even as a kid, there was a real WTF moment for me when I got to them. No book is perfect or should be treated that way.)
 

I think the module makes it pretty clear that the situation in the module could be described as "Wednesday."

"The Realm of mankind is narrow and constricted. Always the forces of Chaos press upon its borders, seeking to enslave its populace, rape its riches, and steal its treasures. If it were not for a stout few, many in the Realm would indeed fall prey to the evil which surrounds them. Yet, there are always certain exceptional and brave members of humanity, as well as similar individuals among its allies - dwarves, elves, and halflings - who rise above the common level and join battle to stave off the darkness which would otherwise overwhelm the land."
I'm very familiar with the adventure.

Why are all those creatures in the Caves of Chaos? Is it the only spot zoned for multi-family housing in the Borderlands?

Or are they an army being formed?
 

Racism is a systemic problem in which system, exactly?

I am ignorant to how things are in the rest of the world (ENWorld is a British website) but in the country where I live, racism is not systemic to U.S. culture or U.S. law. It was in the past, but that ended.
It ended?!? I am honestly speechless at this statement. There is not a hole deep enough in world to be in to be this ignorant on this topic especially right now.
 

My group has been wanting to play Al-Qadim since the early 90s, and I just started (finally) working on making it a reality. And man, it's so problematic. Didn't realize it at the time, but through the modern vantage, it's really odd. This is the kind of stuff that just can't happen anymore. (I was talking about this even before the statement.)
I wonder what modern D&D will look like without these stereotypical real Earth cultures put in?

What specifically is your issue with Al-Qadim? Not so long ago that I ran a game there and we didn't run into anything overly bad. It is a very harmonic place, where the different species/races are mostly in harmony.
 

And yet Greek myth, Arthurian tales, Beowulf and countless other stories would survive just fine, as would more modern works like A Song of Ice & Fire.

If Greek myth isn't problematic, we obviously don't have any issues with misogyny and toxic masculinity! Make sure the PCs go ahead and abduct a young woman during their next heist adventure! (Come for the Fleece, leave with Medea!)

I jest, but seriously, I'm quite certain you could Google any of the above followed by "problematic" and find hundreds of hours of reading material.
 

The game definitely changes from Law vs. Chaos or Good vs. Evil to something a lot trickier. Why are they "nasty"? According to whom? Are they really nastier than other peoples are or have been, including the peoples who consider them nasty? Why are they "nasty" (i.e. what made them that way)? How "nasty" does this particular group have to be before you can kill them and take their stuff? Who makes those rules, and how do they get made?
Can't you keep absolute alignment, while getting rid of racial homogeneity? If you like Good vs Evil then you can keep it except it's not orcs that are Evil it's this particular orc.
 

Yeah, I'm not persuaded by this rhetorical move, but as I said, it's a natural one to make, and then you can throw all of traditional epic fantasy on the pyre. You can't be creating worlds like Narnia or Middle-Earth or Krynn because our world isn't like that and therefore you're perpetuating harmful and dangerous tropes.

Not that you can't, but that maybe doing so has a cost that's easy to ignore, or not see, when you belong to the dominant group?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top