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)

 

[Mercurius]

You literally object to someone running it past a person more familiar with that culture?

Which culture? My fantasy culture? I'm the only one familiar with my fantasy culture. But my influences include dozens of cultures, with no direct analogues.

If I'm writing a sourcebook that is intended to model "fantasy India," then sure - I'd like to talk with someone who is an expert on such things.

 

[Morrus]

If I'm writing a sourcebook that is intended to model "fantasy India," then sure - I'd like to talk with someone who is an expert on such things.

Exactly. My point is that it's just common sense. And it's not like you have to do what they say (you're still the writer) but they might say something which makes your book better.

 

[Mercurius]

It doesn’t need to be authentic, no. And we can’t change the past, merely illustrate its current context.*

But it would be nice if the writer of such an piece of fiction today didn’t rely on stereotypes. If it did, it’s probably dreck on more than one level. If I were reading a piece of fiction and a character like Mickey Rooney’s from Breakfast at Tiffany’s was used, the author wouldn’t have many pages to convince me he or she wasn’t being racist.



* assuming we’re not talking about actual reprints, which CAN be edited.**

** and classic literature is a different beast from an RPG book.

Nothing to disagree with here, Danny (drat! haha).

I see is as a spectrum, from "pure fantasy" to "historical realism," and everything in-between. The closer we approach the latter, the more authenticity plays a part.

 

[Haldrik]

But the disclaimer said "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."

If it was wrong then, it should have been a concern at the time. If that's the case, James Wyatt was wrong when he wrote Oriental Adventures and ENWorld was wrong when they gave the book an ENNIE.

It seems to me the WotC disclaimer implies that "Wyatt was wrong" to some degree when contributing to OA and wrong to some degree when receiving an ENnie. But these errors of judgment are facts of the historical record. Moving foreward, these and others strive to avoid making similar errors in the future.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Violence against "monstrous" cultures, and civilization vs barbarism on the frontier are such basic tropes of medieval fantasy that I don't know a way to use those tropes without potential problems, and if they are removed is it even fantasy?

I don't think The Lord of the Rings has the trope of civilisation vs barbarism. It has good vs evil but that's not the same thing. Sophisticated, knowledgeable (and thus "civilised") beings such as Saruman can be evil in Tolkien's work. Likewise creatures that lack much in the way of a complex society, such as the ents, can be good.

Conan has civilisation vs barbarism but barbarism, in the sense of the frontier life, is considered to be good and civilisation is considered to be bad. Becoming too much like a savage beast is also a bad thing in Howard's writing. The ideal position is that of the noble savage, somewhere between the two.

I'd consider it in terms of state and non-state societies. One could represent both without portraying either as good or evil. The "civilization vs barbarism" framing looks like it's saying the former is good and the latter bad. I'd avoid that.

 

[FrogReaver]

Exactly. My point is that it's just common sense. And it's not like you have to do what they say (you're still the writer) but they might say something which makes your book better.

Let’s take this to the extreme a little. Just to see what it looks like. I have a fantasy book with 12 races I just made up - likely all amalgamations of my knowledge real world cultures (Past and present), cool ideas and a healthy dose of verisimilitude for how they came to be the way they are presented in my book.

How many experts do I need and which cultures do they need to represent?

 

[GrahamWills]

Let’s take this to the extreme a little. Just to see what it looks like. I have a fantasy book with 12 races I just made up - likely all amalgamations of my knowledge real world cultures (Past and present), cool ideas and a healthy dose of verisimilitude for how they came to be the way they are presented in my book.

How many experts do I need and which cultures do they need to represent?

Ideally, all of them. In practice, any that you think share aspects of a culture you describe. I'd try the following. checklist:

• For each race you describe, list any defining or characteristics you present
• Think for yourself of which real-life cultures this might be considered a characteristic of (in reality or in stereotype)
• Do online searches for the same
• Search for experts who cover all those cultures.

So, if you describe a race as having "short flat snub noses" a web search will turn up rapidly the information that that description was used to indicate the low intelligence of Black peoples. So if you used that as a defining characteristic, you should run it past an expert to tell you if the descriptions is still problematic in view of the other characteristics of that culture as you define it.

In passing, I'd also suggest that if you have more than 3 new races, you have too many. Kill your babies.

 

[Morrus]

Let’s take this to the extreme a little. Just to see what it looks like.

I don't do slippery slope fallacies.

 

[MGibster]

Let's not be silly. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a company hiring someone to go over their game to make sure there's nothing in it that's offensive. Are they going to catch everything? Probably not. Does it guarantee that people won't think the product offensive 30 years from now. Absolutely not. But we should think of this a process rather than thinking we're done once we cross the finish line. I'm not in the RPG industry, but I do help put together presentations and communications that go out to anywhere between hundreds or thousands of employees. My presentations and communications are only enhanced by having a diverse pool of opinions to draw from for feedback.

 

[FrogReaver]

I don't do slippery slope fallacies.

That response tells everyone all they need to know.