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)

 

[Chaosmancer]

doesn’t matter. In this view Orcs are nonhumans. It’s okay to dehumanize a nonhuman.

See, this is where the human inability to find and discuss with other species of intelligent beings come into play.

"That is not human, therefore it is fine to say it is not human" sounds fine, but if you want to be somewhat more accurate in your reading "That is not human, therefore it is fine to treat it as not a person" is another way to see that.

And, we know that is emphatically not true. We know that if we tortured, enslaved, killed, and tormented another thinking, feeling being, that that is wrong. And Orcs are presented as thinking, feeling beings.

And, we have to be cautious with the line of thinking that "as long as it isn't human, it doesn't matter what we do to it." Because we are fast approaching an age where even if we do not find intelligent life amongst the stars, we will be creating and blurring the line between intelligent life and machines, to the point where we will open the doors to vast horror shows if we decide that something that can think and feel, but is not "human" has no rights and can be eradicated or tortured at our whim.

 

[FrogReaver]

What is a human?

Is it our typical range of skin and hair color, the relative un-pointyness of our ears?

Or is it our capacity for higher levels of thought; for language and culture?

Great question. You are right that It’s not enough to simply be not human - there’s more that has to be different than that.

 

[Aldarc]

Part of the problem with the "orcs are not human" line of argumentation is that it's not equally applied to the playable races. Arguing, for example, that since elves, halflings, dwarves, and the like are not human, then it should be perfectly acceptable to kill them on sight or inflict harm upon them without much guilt. But this is a suggestion that most players would find horrifying regardless of how "alien" long-lived races like elves and dwarves are. There is a double-standard in place, and it's important that we recognize how the "not really human so we can dehumanize them" is not a standard that people apply equally to all species in the game.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

sure they did. And they were wrong. but from this viewpoint, orcs are objectively not humans.

Elves aren't human either, and neither are dwarves, gnomes, halflings, dragonborn, half-orcs, or any other race of people in D&D, and we don't dehumanize them.

 

[Umbran]

It’s okay to dehumanize a nonhuman.

Not using language that is also used to dehumanize actual humans.

 

[FrogReaver]

Not using language that is also used to dehumanize actual humans.

Do you know of any language that can be used to dehumanize a nonhuman creature that hasn’t been used to dehumanize a human? I don’t, so I’m genuinely curious is such language actually exists.

 

[dalisprime]

Elves aren't human either, and neither are dwarves, gnomes, halflings, dragonborn, half-orcs, or any other race of people in D&D, and we don't dehumanize them.

Duergar, Derro, Drow (Dark Sun has cannibalistic halflings as well) are typically seen as antagonistic races - each with its own set of flaws so your example isn't exactly accurate. Plus we have the racial dislike between dwarves and elves and the high elven sense of superiority.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Do you know of any language that can be used to dehumanize a nonhuman creature that hasn’t been used to dehumanize a human? I don’t, so I’m genuinely curious is such language actually exists.

I'm pretty sure no one's been called a Flumph before as an insult.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Duergar, Derro, Drow (Dark Sun has cannibalistic halflings as well) are typically seen as antagonistic races - each with its own set of flaws so your example isn't exactly accurate. Plus we have the racial dislike between dwarves and elves and the high elven sense of superiority.

But do we dehumanize the races as a whole? That was my point. Sure, elves and dwarves may not get along, but we don't dehumanize them because they're different, we dehumanize the villains. When the villains are shown to have as much depth as the humans (Drizzt) we know that we probably shouldn't dehumanize them.
Sure, there are Duergar (which are a whole other discussion), derro (mind-warped, short duergar), and evil drow, but there are more good dwarves, elves, and halflings than bad ones. We don't dehumanize the good ones, and if we did, it wouldn't be because they're not human. We do it because we want to paint a race as evil.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

sure they did. And they were wrong. but from this viewpoint, orcs are objectively not humans.

Let’s try this again.

If/when you describe fictional Orcs using real world bigoted dog whistles or overtly racist language, it’s still problematic.

To make this perfectly clear: if a publisher were to give their Orcs RW slurs as tribal names- say....the N-word Heads, the K**e Noses, etc.- there is no question as to racist intent. It’s there, even though the Orcs are fictional.

If the same publisher uses normal Orc style tribal names, but describes them with RW stereotype, that’s still racist.* To assert otherwise is to play the same “I didn’t mean it THAT way, you’re just too sensitive” game** the smarter bigots have been playing for years.

So, the point stands: stop using RW stereotypes, and the problem is solved.




* at best, it’s lazy writing, and probably shouldn’t be rewarded anyway.

** Let‘s call it “Implausible Deniability”.