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'.

 

[Aldarc]

A fictional nonhuman race is dehumanized? Duh...

Yes, a fictional nonhuman race is dehumanized with the same rhetoric that real life racists employ against real people. That's the problem. The game unintentionally perpetuates harmful racist rhetoric. How does it feel to know your fantasy elf game talks about orcs with the virtually indistinguishable language that real life racists talk about ethnic minorities? Why exactly do people feel compelled to defend this racist rhetoric in the game again?

 

[Xenonnonex]

I agree with the gist of this, with a slight difference: I wouldn't say "it was wrong to do," because that is applying contemporary ethics to a different time frame. I would say, "it is wrong to do now" and discuss how and why we have progressed from that understanding (although my personal rhetorical style wouldn't use the highly moralistic word "wrong").

You think racism at all is acceptable.
You revealed the type of person you are. Thank you for that.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

There are many arguments put forward both by academics and by laypeople, both moral and practical, against both our intensive animal farming methods that supply most of the world's meat and against the consumption of animals and animal products period. The question is whether you find them convincing or not?

The question on whether I am convinced should have no bearing on whether it is absolutely wrong in an objective morality. The result of the question "Am I convinced?" should be whether I am behaving ethically or not.

And despite this being known some people claim that the values they currently hold are the absolute true ones for all eternity...

I'd more readily consider objective morality arguments put forward by people who would conclude that, themselves, are commiting absolute wrongs and are part of a society promoting absolute wrongs. I fear that "asbolute morality" arguments could be a way to impose one's value on others or to criticize other people for not adhering to their set of values.

 

[Sadras]

You think racism at all is acceptable.
You revealed the type of person you are. Thank you for that.

This may come across as offensive, but how old are you?
I have noticed (with at least 3 posters) that those who are more abrasive on this issue (both sides), tend to be in the younger category. This could be confirmation bias on my side, but I do find it telling. Of course you may choose not to answer.

 

[Xenonnonex]

This may come across as offensive, but how old are you?
I have noticed (with at least 3 posters) that those who are more abrasive on this issue (both sides), tend to be in the younger category. This could be confirmation bias on my side, but I do find it telling. Of course you may choose not to answer.

35. Profiles have ages.
Do not goddamn dare defend racism.

 

[Sadras]

The question on whether I am convinced should have no bearing on whether it is absolutely wrong in an objective morality. The result of the question "Am I convinced?" should be whether I am behaving ethically or not.

This is an interesting issue.
I recognise there are ugly practises in place within our meat industry. I could not bring myself to kill an animal and yet I am willing for others to do what I cannot which allows me to eat meat. I feel I am convinced that it is wrong, and yet by your statement you say I would not be convinced because of the way I behave. Do I have this correct?

 

[Xenonnonex]

Lovecraft. Beloved author. Damn racist. Product of his times. Yes. But because he made the choice to interact with others. The choice to share viewpoints. His racist views changed.

 

[Sadras]

35. Profiles have ages. Do not goddamn dare defend racism.

I feel we use the words racism and racist very freely these days - no thanks to the media ofcourse.
I do not believe people are defending racism here, far from it.

EDIT: Thank you for answering.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I feel we use the words racism and racist very freely these days - no thanks to the media ofcourse.
I do not believe people are defending racism here, far from it.

People who find racism acceptable reveal the type of people they are. Thank you for doing that.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

This is an interesting issue.
I recognise there are ugly practises in place within our meat industry. I could not bring myself to kill an animal and yet I am willing for others to do what I cannot which allows me to eat meat. I feel I am convinced that it is wrong, and yet by your statement you say I would not be convinced because of the way I behave. Do I have this correct?

Err, sorry, that's not what I meant (English is not my native language and there are easier topics than morality to discuss...). I was asking about how objective morality should work using a simple principle I felt was quite shared worldwide (no harm to animal) and less controversial than "no killing humans". Yet, I guess most people would draw the line the same as you do (and I do, because I am on the exact same behaviour as you). The answer was "if you are convinced by proponents of moral veganism, then yes, you could say all meat eaters are wrong". But the set of absolute wrong shouldn't be influenced by whether or not I am convinced by moral veganism. It is either a moral wrong, or it is not, and if I eat meat, I am either a good or a bad person.