D&D General (Anecdotal) conversations with Asian gamers on some problems they currently face in the D&D world of RPG gaming

[Remathilis]

I would not remove prior products because of it.

But I would not include Vistani that have stereotypes of the Roma without careful thought and consultation with someone familiar with those issues .... moving forward.

But isn't that what we're discussing here in regards to OA? Removing prior products because they are problematic?

 

[Immeril]

So, would this also apply to Al-Qadim, Maztica, Van Richen's Guide to the Vistani, the Old Empires, and The Horde? Asking for other minority groups...

This point has already been adressed a couple of times in this thread. No one has the right to decide that OA is bad, but Al-Qadim isn't, provided that both are offensive to a certain segment of the population.

I would not remove prior products because of it.

But I would not include Vistani that have stereotypes of the Roma without careful thought and consultation with someone familiar with those issues .... moving forward.

Exactly. I applaud WotC's statement that Curse of Strahd's insensitive elements will be removed with the next printing (although my wallet kind of objects to having to buy a new copy ). But Curse of Strahd is part of D&D's current edition. Revising the 1e Ravenloft module would be akin to censorship (and wouldn't have a very large impact).

 

[Immeril]

But isn't that what we're discussing here in regards to OA? Removing prior products because they are problematic?

Representing the Vistani in a non-offensive way in future products isn't the same as removing all previous products that featured Vistani.

 

[Remathilis]

Representing the Vistani in a non-offensive way in future products isn't the same as removing all previous products that featured Vistani.

I /get/ that. But like with OA, we were talking about a product in the past and if OA is deemed necessary to remove, why not Al-Qadim or VRGttV?

Once that door is open, there is enough problems in D&D's back catalogue for a number of similar bannings to come about...

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I /get/ that. But like with OA, we were talking about a product in the past and if OA is deemed necessary to remove, why not Al-Qadim or VRGttV?

Once that door is open, there is enough problems in D&D's back catalogue for a number of similar bannings to come about...

I agree. I happen to think that, other than the title, OA is one of the LESS offensive books from that era.

If OA is offensive enough to remove, there are very few TSR products from the 70s and 80s that would not be removed.

 

[5atbu]

Had anyone watched all 24 hours of this YouTube critique?

 

[Undrave]

I agree. I happen to think that, other than the title, OA is one of the LESS offensive books from that era.

If OA is offensive enough to remove, there are very few TSR products from the 70s and 80s that would not be removed.

There's always the WB school of doing things: simply add a foreword that puts the text in its historical context and point out that the stereotypes in it are harmful and outdate. Throw in a warning that people wanting to use the material should be careful of how they implement it. Maybe add suggestions on how to proceed.

 

[Myrdin Potter]

Looking at the original 5 questions in the OP, I don't get the question on the translation to different languages. The three core books have quite a few translations into other languages. I know that there is a Japanese one available for sale in Japan as I saw it. I bought a Japanese RPG book instead of a Japanese version of the PHB because it seemed more fun. Which is completely ignored in these discussions, there are plenty of Japanese RPG developed in Japan for a Japanese audience. As an example:

Sword World RPG - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(picture is my copy and they have a version 2.5 now ... darn it!)

I lived in China for about 5 years and I don't recall seeing a Chinese RPG available for sale in stores, but I never found many traditional game stores the way we think of them - internet cafes seemed to be an important gathering place instead. Japan, or at least Tokyo, had plenty of game stores.

Funny enough, that system does not appear to have Samurai and Ninja and such, it is heavily influenced by D&D and Runequest and has the same general range of classes.

I find the assertion that Asians are taught to be quiet as bad a stereotype as what is being complained about in OA. Especially since it is Asians (I really hate that term, I think it is Canadians and Americans) who are loudly complaining. It is quite dismissive to say there are not more voices from the supposed affected communities because they are just being quiet.

 

[Charlaquin]

There was a time, not too long ago, when people were using this exact line of argument to say that same-sex kissing, and couple, were too offensive for people to see or hear about. I don't give this type of censorship power to anyone, no matter how well-intentioned they might be, and even if (heck, ESPECIALLY IF) I agree with them.

Because, you know, principles.

There is a meaningful difference between banning material that features same-sex relationships and removing racist RPG material from print. The former is to appease the privileged majority by removing representation of an oppressed minority. The latter is to make the hobby more welcoming to people of an oppressed minority.

Now, personally, I think a better move would be for WotC to donate 100% of the profits from the book to an appropriate charitable organization*. But regardless, you’re drawing a false equivalence, and a pretty egregious one.

*of course, I’m not Asian, so take my opinion on what should be done with the book as you will, I’m fortunate enough not to be negatively affected by it.

 

[Charlaquin]

for WoTC to remove a book is capitalism. For a third person to approve it or request it is fascism, maybe unintentional.

No, it isn’t. Fascism is an ultranationalist, authoritarian form of government characterized by (among other things) dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy. Consumers utilizing their collective spending power to express their desire for the removal of a product to a corporation, and that corporation capitulating is 100% normal capitalism at work. If you’re recognizing that something about that seems vaguely authoritarian, well... welcome, Comrade.