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)

 

[Doug McCrae]

Likely not intentionally. However, D&D drew heavily from well-recognized genres burdened chock-full with colonialist overtones and undertones: e.g., Westerns, pulp adventures, or even Tolkien's whole Western Civilization at war with the Wicked East.

That's it I think. It's the best explanation for, not just orcs, but all the evil tribal humanoids in D&D. The one thing to add to this is that the writers of Westerns, dime novels, pulps, and other pro-colonialist fiction in the second half of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th, drew on the writings of race pseudo-scientists (who were extremely popular) throughout this period. Ideas of race, and particularly fears about race, were prevalent in the culture at this time. You can see it in Tolkien - when he says Saruman's great evil is blending orcs and men - and ofc very strongly in Lovecraft and Howard.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It just struck me: D&D depicts all humans of all skin colors the same. They are all humans with +1 bonus to all stats. No matter what your skin color in D&D all humans are equals!

I fail to see how this is relevant.

 

[FrogReaver]

I fail to see how this is relevant.

Why do you find it irrelevant?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Why do you find it irrelevant?

Because that's not what people are complaining about. Sure, humans don't have different stats based on skin color, but the depiction of certain real life human cultures in D&D books and settings can be problematic even without adding mechanical downsides. Kara-Tur can be problematic without having to make them mechanically different from standard humans.

Also, humans aren't the only race in D&D settings, and certainly not the only ones based on real life cultures. Sure, all color of humans are equal mechanically except not all humanoids are equal.

 

[dalisprime]

Really? That's been done several times now.

Umm, lessee - orcs are a violent race of pig faced humanoids whose god has twisted them over generations into evil pillagers who move, like locusts, from place to place, despoiling...

Oh boy. You think this description isn't racist? Whatever minority group is associating with orcs just got dehumanised (pig-faced) and compared to vermin. You realise both were used by racists to describe other minorities as lesser people, right? Even if not word for word, this verbiage is right on the mark for the racist language.

See how easy it is to make something unintentionally offensive? You claim I'm using the slippery slope principle and at the same time Sam Riegel is facing death threats over alleged homophobia due to an innocent remark his character made on critical role.

The biggest issue i see with this is that by blocking these words out, the minorities are ironically empowering the racists. Rather than making them common words to the point of losing their colonial era baggage, they give more credence to those particular meanings. "This is hurtful, please don't use it" makes it more enticing for a racist to use than "use it all you want, we don't care".
Those of us who don't attach the negative connotations to the people, don't use the verbiage with malicious intent, which is why it puzzles us why it should be removed.
The racists on the other hand are having a linguistics lesson, where a highlighter is being dragged over the terms they can use to hurt someone, knowing now how much weight the words carry.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Speaking as a member of more than one minority, I understand your point, but respectfully disagree.

The bigots already know which terms offend or hurt. Ignoring their use won’t magically make them reduce their use- knowledge of their nature is self-perpetuating because they’ll tell each other which terms are effective, even if we don’t. And even if certain terms fall into disuse, new ones will become en vogue. Such is the nature of bigotry; such is the nature of language.

So my personal position is that I’d rather terms fall into disuse, and when they ARE used with malice*, that they be met with backlash, not silence. I have never cared for the efforts to reclaim the n-word. I would rather it had been erased from popular use and be done, done and onto the next one.






* as opposed to their use in literature, film, television or theater for verisimilitude, for example.

 

[Aldarc]

That's it I think. It's the best explanation for, not just orcs, but all the evil tribal humanoids in D&D. The one thing to add to this is that the writers of Westerns, dime novels, pulps, and other pro-colonialist fiction in the second half of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th, drew on the writings of race pseudo-scientists (who were extremely popular) throughout this period. Ideas of race, and particularly fears about race, were in the culture at this time. You can see it in Tolkien - when he says Saruman's great evil is blending orcs and men - and ofc very strongly in Lovecraft and Howard.

Yeah, I don’t think that we are so much grappling with games designed by white supremacists or anything that malevolent. It’s more like kids turned adults who never properly reflected on the colonial and racial coding of their childhood nostalgic media.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because that's not what people are complaining about. Sure, humans don't have different stats based on skin color, but the depiction of certain real life human cultures in D&D books and settings can be problematic even without adding mechanical downsides.


Kara-Tur can be problematic without having to make them mechanically different from standard humans.

Also, humans aren't the only race in D&D settings, and certainly not the only ones based on real life cultures. Sure, all color of humans are equal mechanically except not all humanoids are equal.

Because that's not what people are complaining about. Sure, humans don't have different stats based on skin color, but the depiction of certain real life human cultures in D&D books and settings can be problematic even without adding mechanical downsides. Kara-Tur can be problematic without having to make them mechanically different from standard humans.

Also, humans aren't the only race in D&D settings, and certainly not the only ones based on real life cultures. Sure, all color of humans are equal mechanically except not all humanoids are equal.

Okay, but in more general terms, we are having a discussion about racism and d&d and pointing out that the d&d description of humans isn’t racist is certainly applicable to that discussion.

But more relevantly it primes the discussion for the idea that non-humans are actually non-humans and don’t actually represent humans at all. If you would just for a moment try to see d&d through that lens you might be able to acknowledge that D&d is not racists when viewed through that lens.

i certainly can acknowledge it’s racist and problematic when viewed from your lens.

Thus, our disagreement is over which way to interpret non-human races in d&d - essentially which lens to use.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yeah, I don’t think that we are so much grappling with games designed by white supremacists or anything that malevolent. It’s more like kids turned adults who never properly reflected on the colonial and racial coding of their childhood nostalgic media.

Agreed. We’re not dealing with the obvious irredeemable garbage like RaHoWa, we’re just trying to excise a little rot in mainstream games and replace it with good stuff.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But more relevantly it primes the discussion for the idea that non-humans are actually non-humans and don’t actually represent humans at all.

Great!

Then game designers should stop using descriptors for them that have actual real-world baggage of demeaning, demonizing or dehumanizing minorities.

Problem solved!