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

DammitVictor

Trust the Fungus
Supporter
I was asked to stop trolling in another thread when I asked for a date and time of when will the 2e book-burning will begin. Is it so far fetched. given what is happening?

Yes, it really is. You're being ridiculous, and you should stop.

Real talk, people have been demanding the changes Wizards of the Coast just announced for years with no results. The people who wanted this to happen are all more surprised than the people who are opposed to it.

And I have not heard a single, solitary person on "my side" of this argument saying that they want old products to be changed, removed from the market, or destroyed-- and you can believe I'm paying attention, because the reason I don't normally get involved in political arguments is that every time I stand up and face off against the forces of racism/sexism/fascism, somehow I always end up with all wounds in my back.

I am hearing a lot of people arguing points I won't support-- like having ability score penalties, or even bonuses, is racist in the first place. That having some races be better or worse fit for certain classes is racist. That having mechanical differences between "races" is racist. I'm a TSR guy, I'm a Classic guy-- I don't think nonhumans should be allowed to take Human Classes at all, and if a race has more than one class associated with it at all, there shouldn't be more than three of four.

And they're not saying I shouldn't be able to play my Classic D&D. They're saying they want WotC to make another version of D&D that's better suited to their sensibilities. Frankly, I've got no dog in that fight, because WotC already lost me as a customer. Given the changes they've announced? I do not see any credible, rational reason for people who like Fifth Edition to have a problem with them. They're making racial ASIs a little more flexible, and changing some Monster Manual writeups to reflect that some people like to play orcs and hobgoblins... like they've already been doing for thirty years.

Nobody's losing anything, here. I am certain that no Dungeon Master who believes that "nits make lice" is going to feel any more obligated to allow Orc PCs than they already do, or any less obligated to make that player miserable until they quit than they already do.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
Honest question: Are you ok with the Mind Flayers being depicted as a species seeking to dominate everyone in the multiverse?
in the grand scheme of things, it is a little weird. but also illithids are explicitly non-humanoid and only appear as such because they need a host body as part of their life cycle. it'd be interesting to have illithids who weren't explicitly evil, but having them as they are, fine, sure, and that pales in comparison to...
If yes, why do you have an issue with all orcs being depicted as tribal raiders?
orcs, who are very human-like and can even reproduce with humans without any real issues. if I can make a human tribe that's exactly like this group of orc tribal raiders you posit but still not be considered as bad because they're human, that's a problem.
Are you aware that WotC recently removes MtG cards from official play and even changed them in their online library because they were not PC (anymore)?
yes, I am very aware, and yet somehow I can still look up these cards and the words on them in their database and buy them from my local game store. it'd be one thing if WotC asked retailers to return all copies of said cards to destroy them, and something entirely different if they took legal action to do so, but removing cards from being used in officially sanctioned tournaments is a far cry from a "book burning".
 

DammitVictor

Trust the Fungus
Supporter
You totally can.

Except that no, I can't, because the D&D rules state that showing honor and compassion to humanoid enemies is objectively morally wrong, and prior to Fourth Edition-- every version of D&D that I care to play-- had mechanical penalties for deviating from the moral standards of your alignment.

The people complaining about colonialist propaganda in D&D aren't the people bringing politics into D&D. The people who wrote the colonialist propaganda into D&D are the people who made it political. The fact that you can sit there and tell me "heroes go into the uninhabited wilderness to eradicate the inferior people who live there to create living space for civilized people" isn't any kind of a political statement at all, but somehow "hey, guys, doesn't that sound a little bit racist to you?" is some kind of uber-left weirdbeard manifesto just... I don't understand how that works. It staggers the imagination.
 

Sadras

Legend
So your complaint isn’t so much about the changes WotC is making today, but about where you imagine this will lead?

That is one major aspect of it yes.
I agree with Shelby Steele's points on freedom and how that affects people who don't know how to handle it. They reinvent their oppression even as its faded away. They make it up in their mind all over again. Racism is around every corner.
In this instance it is the Orc, it is the word Race, it is the nullifying of a common trope.

The second issue, is that I wish that the change to enrich Orcs had come about because of inspired creativity and not because we cannot have racists PCs in our game or that we cannot just battle it out against the savage, the destroyers of civilisation (whatever the PCs civilisation may be).

My games will drink heavily and deeply from the new ideas birthed, as I have always done with every change. I just wish we were doing these changes to Orcs for creative reasons and not this perceived sense of correctness which must be applied to every part of our lives, including our fantasy gaming.
 

Nickolaidas

Explorer
in the grand scheme of things, it is a little weird. but also illithids are explicitly non-humanoid and only appear as such because they need a host body as part of their life cycle. it'd be interesting to have illithids who weren't explicitly evil, but having them as they are, fine, sure, and that pales in comparison to...

orcs, who are very human-like and can even reproduce with humans without any real issues. if I can make a human tribe that's exactly like this group of orc tribal raiders you posit but still not be considered as bad because they're human, that's a problem.

yes, I am very aware, and yet somehow I can still look up these cards and the words on them in their database and buy them from my local game store. it'd be one thing if WotC asked retailers to return all copies of said cards to destroy them, and something entirely different if they took legal action to do so, but removing cards from being used in officially sanctioned tournaments is a far cry from a "book burning".
And why should orcs have the exact same capability and affinity that humans have towards good and evil?
 


MGibster

Legend
Except that no, I can't, because the D&D rules state that showing honor and compassion to humanoid enemies is objectively morally wrong, and prior to Fourth Edition-- every version of D&D that I care to play-- had mechanical penalties for deviating from the moral standards of your alignment.

I'm curious where that rule might be found. With earlier editions of the game it's true that it'd be a rare group that followed all of the rules. But I cannot for the life of me remember such a rule in the 2nd or 3rd editions of the game.
 


ZeshinX

Adventurer
Except that no, I can't, because the D&D rules state that showing honor and compassion to humanoid enemies is objectively morally wrong, and prior to Fourth Edition-- every version of D&D that I care to play-- had mechanical penalties for deviating from the moral standards of your alignment.

Then break the rules. Ignore them. Reinvent them (along with your DM if you're playing, or establish the reinterpretation/reinvention for the group if you're DM'ing). Doing so is a pretty common thing among all groups I've ever played or run in the 30 years I've been playing.

If the group you're a part of is unwilling to do so (or even have the conversation), then I would guess that particular collective is not conducive to how you would like to enjoy your D&D. Totally cool, happens all the time. Challenging though they may be to find, there are doubtlessly others who would be only too pleased to explore such options with you.

I've never viewed the rules as a straight-jacket but as a flexible platform.
 

Sadras

Legend
Insulting other members
Yes, it really is. You're being ridiculous, and you should stop.

Real talk, people have been demanding the changes Wizards of the Coast just announced for years with no results. The people who wanted this to happen are all more surprised than the people who are opposed to it.

And I have not heard a single, solitary person on "my side" of this argument saying that they want old products to be changed, removed from the market, or destroyed-- and you can believe I'm paying attention, because the reason I don't normally get involved in political arguments is that every time I stand up and face off against the forces of racism/sexism/fascism, somehow I always end up with all wounds in my back.

I am hearing a lot of people arguing points I won't support-- like having ability score penalties, or even bonuses, is racist in the first place. That having some races be better or worse fit for certain classes is racist. That having mechanical differences between "races" is racist. I'm a TSR guy, I'm a Classic guy-- I don't think nonhumans should be allowed to take Human Classes at all, and if a race has more than one class associated with it at all, there shouldn't be more than three of four.

And they're not saying I shouldn't be able to play my Classic D&D. They're saying they want WotC to make another version of D&D that's better suited to their sensibilities. Frankly, I've got no dog in that fight, because WotC already lost me as a customer. Given the changes they've announced? I do not see any credible, rational reason for people who like Fifth Edition to have a problem with them. They're making racial ASIs a little more flexible, and changing some Monster Manual writeups to reflect that some people like to play orcs and hobgoblins... like they've already been doing for thirty years.

Nobody's losing anything, here. I am certain that no Dungeon Master who believes that "nits make lice" is going to feel any more obligated to allow Orc PCs than they already do, or any less obligated to make that player miserable until they quit than they already do.

It is so refreshing to hear someone from the other side have limitations because for a while there I thought half the posters on Enworld were absolutely insane especially when posters were calling racism on ability penalties or even the usage of the word race as being racist.
I think my above response to @FrogReaver sums up my position clearest.

Out of interest, what made you leave WotC?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top