WotC Dungeons & Dragons Fans Seek Removal of Oriental Adventures From Online Marketplace

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
So, applying your standards here to OA, what survives and what falls?
I don't see the need to change OA at all, there's no point. Either slap a warning on it or take it out of circulation. Moving forward is a different thing. We don't have a 5E OA to agonize over, just the Monk class maybe? IDK. I find it odd that the Samurai hasn't been as big a part of the discussion.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

prosfilaes

Adventurer
My inability to purchase Action Comics #2 or Tales From the Crypt #5 is not the destruction of art, is it?

It is, in some ways. Being copyrighted or probably copyrighted for 95 years has kept many works hidden from view until after anyone who read them new has died. Is a work of art not nearly as effectively as destroyed if it is completely hidden from view, then if it is physically destroyed? I recently transcribed The House of Death and it felt like a powerful story was hidden from light, being only seen by those digging for every scrap that HP Lovecraft ever wrote. What's the point in a work existing if nobody sees it?
 

Aldarc

Legend
I do have a "dog in this fight".

It is your comparison of OA to minstrel shows. Which you have since doubled down on. I think that shows you don't understand why and how minstrel shows are racist. Which makes me doubt the credibility of your assessments of OA as well.

You and @Aldarc and others have poo-pooed suggestions of "a little bit racist". But any serious discussion of racism, racial hatred, and social hierarchies and power dynamics needs to be able to engage with the differences eg between a minstrel show, a claim of cultural appropriation, and (say) the effect of names on prospects of getting a job interview - just to pick three different ways in which racism might be thought to manifest itself.
I said nothing here of minstrel shows. You claimed that OA was not written from a place of racial hatred. I agree, but I said that benign racism is still racism. Furthermore, there are a number of Asians in our hobby who find the content of OA offensive, racist, and harmful. That's what matters at the end of the day.
 

pemerton

Legend
I said nothing here of minstrel shows.
No. @Azzy did. And expressly compared OA to minstrel shows. I don't think I would have posted in this thread but for that. I think it's an inapt comparison.

You claimed that OA was not written from a place of racial hatred. I agree, but I said that benign racism is still racism. Furthermore, there are a number of Asians in our hobby who find the content of OA offensive, racist, and harmful. That's what matters at the end of the day.
I leave it for the East and South-East Asian community to come to a consensus on that. I don't think the consensus has emerged anywhere near as clearly as in respect of minstrel shows.

@Azzy upthread was dismissive of comparisons but I think they can help throw things into relief. I think the AD&D Monster Manual with its obviously derisive, dismissive and pulp-inspired "tribesmen" and "dervishes" and infiltrating Rakshasa is the place I would start for weeding racist tropes out of D&D.
 


Bluenose

Adventurer
I don't see the need to change OA at all, there's no point. Either slap a warning on it or take it out of circulation. Moving forward is a different thing. We don't have a 5E OA to agonize over, just the Monk class maybe? IDK. I find it odd that the Samurai hasn't been as big a part of the discussion.

I have seen suggestions that it could be left on sale with all revenues donated to an anti-racism charity. I don't know whether that would satisfy the complaints or not.

5e of course has its own problems. Some of the language used in descriptions of "monstrous humanoids" is hard to distinguish from the racist rants of 18th/20th century "Race Theorists", which is certainly problematic when the are almost invariably makes those "monstrous Humanoids" darker skinned than the "Good Races". WotC have promised to do better going forward, though what they actually do is yet to be seen.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
I have seen suggestions that it could be left on sale with all revenues donated to an anti-racism charity. I don't know whether that would satisfy the complaints or not.
Something that bugs me about this whole scenario is that OA is hardly the worst offender when it comes to unfortunate Asian stereotypes in RPGs. The whole cyberpunk genre is packed full of the same and worse in many cases, just to pick an example. That doesn't change the status of OA though. I have no love of stereotyping but I'll admit there's a part of me that resists mightily the notion that removing a 35 year old book from the racks is helpful in any way. I think a front piece of some sort would serve the need for an acknowledgement. Donating to charity also couldn't hurt. If WotC did decide to pull it I wouldn't complain though. It's their IP and they are free to do what they think is necessary with it. My personal convenience or the convenience of some OSR players doesn't really matter.

5e of course has its own problems. Some of the language used in descriptions of "monstrous humanoids" is hard to distinguish from the racist rants of 18th/20th century "Race Theorists", which is certainly problematic when the are almost invariably makes those "monstrous Humanoids" darker skinned than the "Good Races". WotC have promised to do better going forward, though what they actually do is yet to be seen.
I think the color of monster skin is an overblown issue. More variety would help, and certainly can't hurt, but I don't actually think that greens and blues and dark oranges of some of those skin tones actually index real-world racial groups quite as much or as directly as some people would like to argue. Eberron, for example, has already moved past intelligent humanoids as 'always X' and has moved them all 'into' civilization and thus treats them with a more appropriate amount of nuance. That seems like the right direction to me. D&D has enough actual monsters, demons, devils and whatnot that it can afford to stop 'othering' intelligent humanoids. Individual DMs can always forge a narrative in that vein if they want to.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I don't see the need to change OA at all, there's no point. Either slap a warning on it or take it out of circulation. Moving forward is a different thing. We don't have a 5E OA to agonize over, just the Monk class maybe? IDK. I find it odd that the Samurai hasn't been as big a part of the discussion.
WotC shrewdly placed a warning/box text in Xanathar next to Samurai and cavalier that says these two subs represent the popular media vision of Eastern and Western Knights, not the historical versions. I think it shielded them a little from controversy by flat out saying they are inaccurate but fun versions of popular character tropes.

I'm sure someone somewhere was still offended, but I don't recall a backlash to it.
 

Remathilis

Legend
Eberron, for example, has already moved past intelligent humanoids as 'always X' and has moved them all 'into' civilization and thus treats them with a more appropriate amount of nuance. That seems like the right direction to me. D&D has enough actual monsters, demons, devils and whatnot that it can afford to stop 'othering' intelligent humanoids. Individual DMs can always forge a narrative in that vein if they want to.

In fairness, one of Eberron's main tenants towards noir is that you can't judge a book by its cover. Meaning that with very few exceptions, all D&D monsters aren't bound to thier MM alignment. Specifically, the nation of Droaam is full of the "rest" of the MM that aren't necessarily filling there MM roles either, medusa stonemasons, harpy couriers, ogre laborers, gnoll mercenaries, etc. Now, it's not a utopia; many of it's residents haven't been "civilized" long and it's still got plenty of violence as a way of life elements, but it allows not just orcs and goblins into not-othered, but the whole freaking MM as well. (A small exception to nonsentient beings or planar monsters, and even then...)

That's a radical departure from the default Faerun/Oerth version presented in the MM. Because if orcs aren't all evil, why not ogres too? Why not trolls and giants, harpies and sahuagin? Why not vampires and werewolves? (there are plenty examples of nonevil ones in pop culture) what about color-coded dragons, or genies like Djinni or Efreeti? Why keep free will as a humanoid-only trait? Why have alignment in the MM at all?

Certainly, this works for Eberron and it's one of the elements that makes Eberron unique. It doesn't present the MM or PHB default versions of most everything from necromancer elves to druidic orcs to a organization of multicolored dragons obsessed with prophecy. But to do that, it yeets a lot of other existing lore, like Tiamat, Gruumsh, and the all the demon and devil Lords. I'm not sure the Eberron answer is the best one for the default game, much like how in 3e Eberron got the magic item economy right but it still wouldn't have made sense to import Eberron's magical creation forges or artificers to the Core game.

Honestly, I think Wildemount, not Eberron, is the future. The assumptions of Exandria are closer to that of the core game, right down to the planes and deities, but still creates more space to allow for greater exception. There is an entire drow nation of Drizzts who left Lolth's oppression, and while some orcs have gone and lived in society with them, others still feel the call to Gruumsh and act as raiders and destroyers. I see a future Faerun though which mimics this split easier than I could the Eberron "alignment doesn't matter" method. And I say this as a far bigger fan of Eberron than Exandria.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top