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'.

 

[plisnithus8]

We’re all myopic, self-centered. We see the world through our own eyes. We don’t see a problem with X and claim it’s not a problem, But perspectives are not the same. Some things affect people differently, in ways we can’t imagine. Unless we stop and really listen. The majority of people didn’t see an issue with the way race in D&D has been handled. That doesn’t make it right. It makes people feel marginalized. It’s not that “people need to stop feeling offended over everything.” It’s that we should listen to concerns people have. Inclusivity is kindness. Insisting that the escapist fantasy game you like to play remain the way it has been despite the fact that it subtly and not so subtly reinforces negative stereotypes and makes people feel unwelcome is no longer ignorance but selfishness.

 

[FireLance]

Tangential to this - I'm inspired to write a 1st level adventure where the PCs come upon a peaceful farming/fishing/mild trading village composed of many humanoid folk - mostly goblins, kobolds, orcs. And they are being predated upon by a bandit group made up of dwarves, elves, and humans.

Real life and current events have been providing a lot of inspiration lately. In the paladin solo campaign I'm working on, the 3rd level adventure is centered around finding a cure for a magical plague. In the 4th level adventure, I'm going to have a group of nonhostile kobolds that rear chinchilla-like giant rats for their wool, in contrast to the evil kobolds that have been encountered so far.

 

[Umbran]

I am talking typical and average of each race that is what the standards in the book are based off of, typically.

The PHB is for making player characters. You figure the PCs are average?

 

[Mercurius]

People have given actual concerns. Yet you insist this is just degrees and not actually that negative. Really curious. Quite troubling.
Better to emphasize with genuine concerns. Actually understand them. Than keeping on insisting that no harm is meant. Blithely handwaving them away is insane. Working on these concerns is what should move us forward. Of course you are free to do whatever you wish.

We’re all myopic, self-centered. We see the world through our own eyes. We don’t see a problem with X and claim it’s not a problem, But perspectives are not the same. Some things affect people differently, in ways we can’t imagine. Unless we stop and really listen. The majority of people didn’t see an issue with the way race in D&D has been handled. That doesn’t make it right. It makes people feel marginalized. It’s not that “people need to stop feeling offended over everything.” It’s that we should listen to concerns people have. Inclusivity is kindness. Insisting that the escapist fantasy game you like to play remain the way it has been despite the fact that it subtly and not so subtly reinforces negative stereotypes and makes people feel unwelcome is no longer ignorance but selfishness.

I agree that we should listen to people - including those that view things differently than we do. But this doesn't mean we should automatically agree with their interpretation, nor does it mean that there's a monolithic solution that applies in all cases.

I do empathize with concerns. I do care about harmful stereotypes and inclusivity. But, again, despite what Xenonnonex seems to think, there are nuances and varying perspectives, and different possible solutions to addressing those concerns.

I very much agree with the statement that "we see the world through our own eyes." But I prefer the quote attributed to Anais Nin, that "we see the world as we are, not as it is." This applies to how we interpret depictions of orcs and drow and other fantasy tropes. We tend to confirm our own biases. We all filter data through our own ideology, assumptions, and general worldview -- and that includes whether or not we see racism. It isn't always so clear.

Just as the majority of people not seeng an issue (or less of a issue) doesn't make it right, so too should the opposite be applied: just because some people see a problem, doesn't make their interpretation accurate. And who exactly sees the problem? What is their worldview and biases? What are they basing it on?

People feeling marginalized is a problem. But there are different ways to address this. I maintain my view that strengthening the (for example) orcs = racist stereotype of black or Asian people interpretation only makes the problem worse.

 

[Umbran]

So...colonialism. The game is about colonialism.

If you want to be really picky, it is colonialism if you take over the place. If you come, kill things, steal stuff, and then leave, you're a raider.

Neither of which is an ethical lifestyle.

 

[Mercurius]

If you want to be really picky, it is colonialism if you take over the place. If you come, kill things, steal stuff, and then leave, you're a raider.

Neither of which is an ethical lifestyle.

True. And of course, an actor isn't perpetuating or supporting the worldview or actions of the characters they play. It is playing make-believe, and a powerful way to try to understand the mind of an Other.

As a side note, I personally don't like to play evil characters or do things in-game that are blatantly awful (rape, kill the innocent, etc). D&D provides a relatively simplistic set of tropes that allows "guilt-free" mayhem, even if it is stuff that we wouldn't do in real life. At least it is (generally/mostly) collaborative with the other players against a common enemy or for a common goal. I feel a bit more queasy playing, say, Monopoly, where everyone essentially is a hyper-capitalist bent on ruining other players. Especially when those other players are my daughters ;-).

 

[Zardnaar]

If you want to be really picky, it is colonialism if you take over the place. If you come, kill things, steal stuff, and then leave, you're a raider.

Neither of which is an ethical lifestyle.

Adventurers are raiders and the ye olde domain rules are Imperialism

It's a perfectly fair arguement but depending on how pure you want to be maybe it's better to just mothball the game?

 

[Mercurius]

Adventurers are raiders and the ye olde domain rules are Imperialism

It's a perfectly fair arguement but depending on how pure you want to be maybe it's better to just mothball the game?

I'm reminded of the film The Invention of Lying, and how bland a "lying"-free society was. Now I don't equate stories, myths and fiction as "lies," just more symbolic or allegorical. But I think it was a good point, and one that has some application to this issue.

My view is similar to the great Ursula K Le Guin's view on fantasy, that the primary role of it (be it fantasy literature or RPGs) is for wonder and enjoyment or, more prosaically, fun. The secondary role is to explore questions of meaning of any kind. When I taught a class on world-building to high school students I tried to emphasize the first part, that first and foremost the act of creation and imagination was a joyful and enriching process in and of itself, but I also incorporated educational elements--making a world that made sense. The meaning part was more behind-the-scenes; I found it quite interesting how each student would play out aspects of their own psyche and personal story within their world-building process, as if they were externalizing their inner worlds. Anyhow, I think that happens to some degree in RPGs, even if as a sub-text to the prime direction of enjoyment.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I agree that we should listen to people - including those that view things differently than we do. But this doesn't mean we should automatically agree with their interpretation, nor does it mean that there's a monolithic solution that applies in all cases.

I do empathize with concerns. I do care about harmful stereotypes and inclusivity. But, again, despite what Xenonnonex seems to think, there are nuances and varying perspectives, and different possible solutions to addressing those concerns.

I very much agree with the statement that "we see the world through our own eyes." But I prefer the quote attributed to Anais Nin, that "we see the world as we are, not as it is." This applies to how we interpret depictions of orcs and drow and other fantasy tropes. We tend to confirm our own biases. We all filter data through our own ideology, assumptions, and general worldview -- and that includes whether or not we see racism. It isn't always so clear.

Just as the majority of people not seeng an issue (or less of a issue) doesn't make it right, so too should the opposite be applied: just because some people see a problem, doesn't make their interpretation accurate. And who exactly sees the problem? What is their worldview and biases? What are they basing it on?

People feeling marginalized is a problem. But there are different ways to address this. I maintain my view that strengthening the (for example) orcs = racist stereotype of black or Asian people interpretation only makes the problem worse.

Increasingly some people are saying because they are not bothered by it it is not a problem. Fundamentally that is a broken worldview.
People are not wanting automatic agreeance. They have given viewpoints with points of concern. And reasons for that concern. Incredibly dismissive is saying that they want automatic agreeance. Shockingly dismissive. And disturbing. You want to air views. Allow others to.
Whether you want to hear them for their viewpoints is up to you. Or if you want to keep dismissing viewpoints. And keep insisting they just want agreeance.

 

[FireLance]

The PHB is for making player characters. You figure the PCs are average?

Well, if the average orc is stronger than the average halfling, I have no problems with the idea that an exceptional orc is stronger than even an exceptional halfling. I also have no problems with the idea that an exceptional halfling is stronger than an average orc.

That said, I think the best solution is just to have options, so that different groups can decide what works best for them, whether it is ability score bonuses by race, by class, by background, floating ability score bonuses, etc.