WotC Older D&D Books on DMs Guild Now Have A Disclaimer

If you go to any of the older WotC products on the Dungeon Master's Guild, they now have a new disclaimer very similar to that currently found at the start of Looney Tunes cartoons.

We recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website, does not reflect the values of the Dungeon & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time. These depictions were wrong then and are wrong today. This content is presented as it was originally created, because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed. Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is a strength, and we strive to make our D&D products as welcoming and inclusive as possible. This part of our work will never end.

The wording is very similar to that found at the start of Looney Tunes cartoons.

Edit: Wizards has put out a statement on Twitter (click through to the full thread)

 

[Eltab]

I know right? Arguments can become pretty heated sometimes, but (I think and hope that) everyone at least tries to stay civil on this site.

The Be Polite paragraph of EnWorld's Terms of Use is under-appreciated. It makes the site welcoming and inclusive.

 

[HorusArisen]

It’s not on the books themselves so I don’t see a problem putting a warning up if it makes some people happy.

 

[The Glen]

They need to customize warning labels for a lot of the older modules so new players won't share the same disappointment the first players did.

Tomb of Horrors: "This module will chew you up and spit you out without mercy. Oh, and there's no treasure at the end."
Death's Ride: "The awesome cover art of a skeletal warrior riding a blue dragon over a lake of fire doesn't actually appear at all in this module."
Legacy of Blood "This module does not actually include any orcs or escaped princesses. The swamp is still there."
Quagmire: "We kind of forgot to finish this one. So you have to fill in all the blanks or your party is going to get really bored fast."
Endless Stair: "Somebody accidentally sent Ed Greenwood's setting notes to the editor instead of an actual adventure."

 

[Stacie GmrGrl]

That would only be true if every D&D game looked like the one you describe, but they don't. None of my games do, nor do any of the games of many people I know. We're all playing D&D though. So perhaps lets shelve our over-used colonial studies lens for a moment, shall we? What you're really talking about is the way some people play D&D.

No. I'm talking about exactly what the game itself is actually designed to simulate from a game mechanics design view.

You pick a race. Pick a class. Well over 90% of the games mechanisms are combat focused. The game's intrinsic XP system has predominantly been Combat focused and in older editions it was also about how much up in treasure you got. This is going back 45 years.

That is what D&D IS from a design perspective. How people choose to role play it is entirely subjective. Even 5e still has a great number of these trappings, despite WotC's best attempts to present it differently.

But if it's okay to ignore the colonial aspect of the game, then people really should also stop bringing up the imaginary racism as well and just play the game and have fun.

 

[Rygar]

This is a great example of why WOTC won't survive into 2021, at least not as we know it today.

1. One person on Twitter complained that a 40 year old and a 20 year old book is "Problematic"
2. WOTC then posts disclaimers asserting that all material produced prior to 5th edition was "Wrong then, and wrong now"
3. Effectively accusing all of it's creators, the people who built the entire hobby, of being some form of wrong
4. Effectively accusing all of the people who enjoyed the first four editions of D&D of being some form of wrong. The people who now have enough disposable income to collect their old products, and who pay for the products their kids are consuming.

They gained effectively 0 new customers by doing this, as not only are we talking about decades old material, but we're talking about decades old material only one person complained about on Twitter. They blanket labelled everything wrong no matter its contents, blanket declared that all of the best creators are wrong ensuring they'll never work with WOTC again, and blanket labelled all of their customers prior to the 2010's wrong. So it's a pretty safe guess that they lost a number of customers today.

There's no net gain, and net loss in terms of creative people and customers. No business survives long that way.

 

[Mecheon]

So it's a pretty safe guess that they lost a number of customers today.

The warning being slapped on everything with basically no effort doesn't meaning anything, really.

If people are so up in arms about that then I've several questions about why they are and reading too far into it.

 

[Sacrosanct]

They need to customize warning labels for a lot of the older modules so new players won't share the same disappointment the first players did.

Tomb of Horrors: "This module will chew you up and spit you out without mercy. Oh, and there's no treasure at the end."
Death's Ride: "The awesome cover art of a skeletal warrior riding a blue dragon over a lake of fire doesn't actually appear at all in this module."
Legacy of Blood "This module does not actually include any orcs or escaped princesses. The swamp is still there."
Quagmire: "We kind of forgot to finish this one. So you have to fill in all the blanks or your party is going to get really bored fast."
Endless Stair: "Somebody accidentally sent Ed Greenwood's setting notes to the editor instead of an actual adventure."

Forest Oracle: for making your eyes bleed with atrocious grammar and continuity.

This is a great example of why WOTC won't survive into 2021, at least not as we know it today.

1. One person on Twitter complained that a 40 year old and a 20 year old book is "Problematic"
2. WOTC then posts disclaimers asserting that all material produced prior to 5th edition was "Wrong then, and wrong now"
3. Effectively accusing all of it's creators, the people who built the entire hobby, of being some form of wrong
4. Effectively accusing all of the people who enjoyed the first four editions of D&D of being some form of wrong. The people who now have enough disposable income to collect their old products, and who pay for the products their kids are consuming.

They gained effectively 0 new customers by doing this, as not only are we talking about decades old material, but we're talking about decades old material only one person complained about on Twitter. They blanket labelled everything wrong no matter its contents, blanket declared that all of the best creators are wrong ensuring they'll never work with WOTC again, and blanket labelled all of their customers prior to the 2010's wrong. So it's a pretty safe guess that they lost a number of customers today.

There's no net gain, and net loss in terms of creative people and customers. No business survives long that way.

I bet you a copy of forest Oracle that they will be just fine going into 2021, and if not, it won't be because of this but probably more to the current pandemic

 

[Zarithar]

1. Effectively accusing all of it's creators, the people who built the entire hobby, of being some form of wrong
2. Effectively accusing all of the people who enjoyed the first four editions of D&D of being some form of wrong. The people who now have enough disposable income to collect their old products, and who pay for the products their kids are consuming.

They gained effectively 0 new customers by doing this, as not only are we talking about decades old material, but we're talking about decades old material only one person complained about on Twitter. They blanket labelled everything wrong no matter its contents, blanket declared that all of the best creators are wrong ensuring they'll never work with WOTC again, and blanket labelled all of their customers prior to the 2010's wrong.

Except they did't label everything wrong. The key word in the following statement is "some":
Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time. These depictions were wrong then and are wrong today.

 

[whimsychris123]

1. One person on Twitter complained that a 40 year old and a 20 year old book is "Problematic"
2. WOTC then posts disclaimers asserting that all material produced prior to 5th edition was "Wrong then, and wrong now"
3. Effectively accusing all of it's creators, the people who built the entire hobby, of being some form of wrong
4. Effectively accusing all of the people who enjoyed the first four editions of D&D of being some form of wrong. The people who now have enough disposable income to collect their old products, and who pay for the products their kids are consuming.

A lot of hyperbole here as they were saying that certain prejudices depicted in older modules are wrong, not the entirety of writing, writers, and gamers. Also, there has been more than one person on Twitter complaining. See internet for evidence.

 

[Baquies]

I just must stink to be one of the authors of those works. To have WOTC call you out, but still make money off of it.