D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[WayOfTheFourElements]

While overall the stereotype is negative, even positive aspects of it exhibit racist thinking. African-Americans still struggle today with this warrior race stereotype, especially the "positive" aspects such as the idea that African-Americans are inherently good at athletics. Native Americans still struggle today with the "noble savage" stereotype.

Um...what? I'm not sure I'd call Neil DeGrasse Tyson a warrior or Sherman Alexie a noble savage. Anyone who equates African-Americans with warriors or Native Americans with a noble savage has a brain virus. Skin color does not contribute to culture, character, or morality.

 

[S'mon]

Interesting, in that my own orcs have always been human-ish size (a bit bigger and burlier on average, much like gridiron football linemen are to the normal human population), generally CE, and will use (or soon enough learn how to use) any weapon they can find or loot. Green skin, sometimes tinged with brown (they'd blend in well in forests if they ever bothered to try!) with the brown tinge often indicating something else in their ancestry, and prominent tusks.

Their "tactics" usually consist of reliance on massive superiority in numbers: when in doubt, throw more cannon fodder at it.

Yeah, it's too bad they didn't present at least one major Good-aligned matriarchal and female-dominant culture (Wood Elves?) to balance this out right from the start.

So it would seem, though I've never read any of the books being referenced here.
What if a real-world ethnic analog - say, a pacifist culture in a cold-climate area with an obvious parallel to Canadians - was labelled "always Neutral Good"?

In theory that's the same mistake made in reverse, but how many people would raise a fuss? As a Canadian, I know I'd just laugh...and then make damn sure it got into my setting so I could dial it up to eleven...

I think designating a group "Always Lawful Good" can be a problem too as it can be used to justify abhorrent behaviour "ok Elves do commit genocide but they are Good so it's ok!" I don't think Gygax designating his Dervishes LG was intended as a comment on 19th century Mahdists and the ethics of Jihad, but it did give me a double take. As did BECMI's Desert Nomads, with the Lawful/Good Sunni-Analogue Alasiyans and the Chaotic/Evil Shia analogue Thuleans with their Master depicted as Ayatollah Khomeini.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I think designating a group "Always Lawful Good" can be a problem too as it can be used to justify abhorrent behaviour "ok Elves do commit genocide but they are Good so it's ok!" I don't think Gygax designating his Dervishes LG was intended as a comment on 19th century Mahdists and the ethics of Jihad, but it did give me a double take. As did BECMI's Desert Nomads, with the Lawful/Good Sunni-Analogue Alasiyans and the Chaotic/Evil Shia analogue Thuleans with their Master depicted as Ayatollah Khomeini.

Yep. Why Dragonlance is so bad with this. Good commits heinous acts. But because good they are good and fine. That does not fly.
Nuance is good for a lot more.

 

[Dire Bare]

I'd be interested to know if any Christian who knows D&D well thinks it has an anti-Christian message.

Demons and devils are presented as evil and so are their followers. The players can take on the role of clerics who have many spells derived from Christianity such as Raise Dead. Evil clerics reverse these spells. The lack of monotheistic religions was intended to avoid giving offence to Christians. Overall I'd say the game has a pro-Christian message.

The warlock, a class that can make a pact with an archdevil, and doesn't have to be of evil alignment, is the most un-Christian content that has ever appeared in D&D imo.

An argument could be made that certain elements in D&D trivialize Christian religion. The angels and devils of D&D are based on Judeo-Christian concepts, and of course some specific names are used with the archdevils in the game. The warlock class is a take on the Christian idea that the use of magic comes with dark pacts with Satan.

But I've never met a Christian who had a problem with those elements. Anti D&D Christians are against all depictions of magic and demons, whether pulled from Judeo-Christian mythology or not. They are worried that these depictions either are very real, or can lead kids down the path to worshiping demons. Ridiculous, of course, but the concern isn't with being offended or having their beliefs trivialized, it's with actual spiritual damnation.

Christian D&D players, in my experience, tend not to be bothered by this imagery at all. The angels of D&D are allies, just as they are within Christian belief. The devils and demons are adversaries. I even read about online (didn't actually know the guy) a Christian who looked at the warlock pact as a way to play out themes of temptation. Of course, Christians aren't a monolithic group and individuals will approach the game differently, but I've never encountered a Christian expressing concern over how their religion is depicted in the game.

I have encountered multiple people of color expressing concern with how race is depicted in the game. How unintentionally using the language of race and colonialism when describing the different fantasy peoples in the game has made them uncomfortable and feel unwelcome. So, race being problematic in D&D is a real problem affecting real people. Christian religion being problematic is a problem made up by folks in this discussion to try and win internet points and play devil's advocate (pun intended).

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Christian D&D players, in my experience, tend not to be bothered by this imagery at all. The angels of D&D are allies, just as they are within Christian belief. The devils and demons are adversaries. I even read about online (didn't actually know the guy) a Christian who looked at the warlock pact as a way to play out themes of temptation. Of course, Christians aren't a monolithic group and individuals will approach the game differently, but I've never encountered a Christian expressing concern over how their religion is depicted in the game.

Most Christians are not morons. They can compartmentalize and differentiate fiction from (perceived) reality.

 

[Aldarc]

IMO nothing needs to be removed. Save the Vistani these are a clear unmistakable caricature of real life culture. Others are just a stretch of what is written for personal purposes or simply misinterpreted.

Accusing "others" of "[stretching] what is written for personal purposes" is fundamentally accusing them of a bad faith argument. People are being quite genuine when they are pointing out the harmful rhetoric used to describe orcs and its parallels with real life harmful, racist rhetoric. You may find it a stretch, but I suspect that you are not someone whose people have been routinely subjected to this sort of language for the past several hundred years. But a number of staff members at WotC apparently share in our "misinterpretation" of orcs, so it will be changed regardless of how harmless you believe it to be. Just like a lot of misogyny and homophobia was slowly removed from the game too despite the protests of it all being a harmless fantasy game.

At the risk of a thread warning, putting my big toe into politics, we could hear similar language used by the alt-right and white supremacists groups around the time of the Charlottesville rally. And following that rally, I looked deeper into the alt-right, its language, and other white supremacist rhetoric (e.g., the Great Replacement, inherent violence, "race realism," etc.), and afterwards it was difficult not to see the similar undertones in the description of orcs. And when you read the language of pro-slavery voices, it's chilling and horrifying that a lot of similar language is (again) what we find in some of the descriptions about orcs: e.g., bestial, subhuman, inherently violent, requiring domestication, tribal, lacking intelligence, incapable of civilizing, etc. And as a Southern white man whose lineage stretches back to the South even in Revolutionary times, this sort of harmful language is something that I want to see discarded from my fantasy elf game. I remember being told that whites were outraged that were being told that minstrel shows were regarded as offensive, and they demanded that black people tell them what the harm is. This is one reason why minstrel shows and blackface lasted as long as they did in the United States. I'm currently living in Europe where there is still blackface aplenty and being told that it's harmless and that we Americans are just overly sensitive. Racism is alive and well.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Um...what? I'm not sure I'd call Neil DeGrasse Tyson a warrior or Sherman Alexie a noble savage.

Racist perceptions and stereotypes aren't necessarily rooted in fact. Many North Americans see more African-American representation in sports and athletics than science and politics compared to the overall proportion of the population.

Anyone who equates African-Americans with warriors or Native Americans with a noble savage has a brain virus. Skin color does not contribute to culture, character, or morality.

Skin colour is often connected to culture in perception. The various Native American cultures are associated with their skin colour. Likewise the African cultures that were historically described using the same language as found regarding some D&D races.

However, the argument is not about the stupid people who still use those words and phrases to denote a currently underrepresented-in-D&D demographic of real people. It is about those people who have had those words and phrases used to denote them.
It is unlikely that D&D was written with the purpose of making these people uncomfortable and pushing them away from the game. However offence given in ignorance should only really get excused once. Now that it is known that some of the language used is unpleasant and sometimes hurtful to that demographic of potential players, choosing to continue to use it is an active choice to continue to give offence.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Racist perceptions and stereotypes aren't necessarily rooted in fact. Many North Americans see more African-American representation in sports and athletics than science and politics compared to the overall proportion of the population.

Skin colour is often connected to culture in perception. The various Native American cultures are associated with their skin colour. Likewise the African cultures that were historically described using the same language as found regarding some D&D races.

However, the argument is not about the stupid people who still use those words and phrases to denote a currently underrepresented-in-D&D demographic of real people. It is about those people who have had those words and phrases used to denote them.
It is unlikely that D&D was written with the purpose of making these people uncomfortable and pushing them away from the game. However offence given in ignorance should only really get excused once. Now that it is known that some of the language used is unpleasant and sometimes hurtful to that demographic of potential players, choosing to continue to use it is an active choice to continue to give offence.

I would love to discuss this with you, but I think this discussion will eventually outside the Enworld rules, so I will refrain from further comment.

 

[Dire Bare]

Accusing "others" of "[stretching] what is written for personal purposes" is fundamentally accusing them of a bad faith argument. People are being quite genuine when they are pointing out the harmful rhetoric used to describe orcs and its parallels with real life harmful, racist rhetoric. You may find it a stretch, but I suspect that you are not someone whose people have been routinely subjected to this sort of language for the past several hundred years. But a number of staff members at WotC apparently share in our "misinterpretation" of orcs, so it will be changed regardless of how harmless you believe it to be. Just like a lot of misogyny and homophobia was slowly removed from the game to despite the protests of it all being a harmless fantasy game.

At the risk of a thread warning, putting my big toe into politics, we could hear similar language used by the alt-right and white supremacists groups around the time of the Charlottesville rally. And following that rally, I looked deeper into the alt-right, its language, and other white supremacist rhetoric (e.g., the Great Replacement, inherent violence, "race realism," etc.), and afterwards it was difficult not to see the similar undertones in the description of orcs. And when you read the language of pro-slavery voices, it's chilling and horrifying that a lot of similar language is (again) what we find in some of the descriptions about orcs: e.g., bestial, subhuman, inherently violent, requiring domestication, tribal, lacking intelligence, incapable of civilizing, etc. And as a Southern white man whose lineage stretches back to the South even in Revolutionary times, this sort of harmful language is something that I want to see discarded from my fantasy elf game. I remember being told that whites were outraged that were being told that minstrel shows were regarded as offensive, and they demanded that black people tell them what the harm is. This is one reason why minstrel shows and blackface lasted as long as they did in the United States. I'm currently living in Europe where there is still blackface aplenty and being told that it's harmless and that we Americans are just overly sensitive. Racism is alive and well.

99% agreement here, but have to "well, actually" you on your blackface comments.

Americans ARE more sensitive to blackface depictions than folks from other countries, both in Europe and elsewhere.

The reason is that the minstrel shows that we are reacting against were largely an American phenomenon, as was the extent of African slavery. We of course, weren't the only nation to enslave others, or even Africans, but the extent of the practice was uniquely (sadly) American. Not that Americans have a monopoly on racism either, but how long it took us to end slavery, and how much longer after that did we have a cultural movement to dehumanize African-Americans, which included the awful minstrel shows, was very American (and of course, this movement isn't really over).

Blackface in America is such a taboo that it blows my mind how many idiots who "aren't racist" get caught doing it at some point . . . politicians, comedians having to apologize after photos/videos surface of them doing blackface. It's such a taboo that even if you aren't mimicking the minstrel style of blackface, if you are darkening your skin color for practically any reason, it's seen as racist.

But outside of the U.S., blackface being taboo isn't really a thing, or didn't used to be. They didn't have the racist minstrel shows at the heart of the taboo. As more cultures become aware of why blackface is so taboo in America, it is becoming taboo in other places too . . . there was some controversy about a U.K. sitcom with blackface episodes not too long ago.

So, don't get too judgmental about blackface attitudes outside of the U.S., they don't have the same taboos we do, they don't have the same history we do.

 

[Dire Bare]

Most Christians are not morons. They can compartmentalize and differentiate fiction from (perceived) reality.

This might not be what you meant, but this is how it reads . . . . .

People of color are morons who cannot compartmentalize and differentiate fiction from reality. And therefore, we can dismiss their concerns about how race is depicted in D&D.