D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[Mannahnin]

If you want to demonize something/someone in Western culture, you make an accusation of being racist, fascist, or having an inordinate fondness for playgrounds.

Whether it is actually true is secondary to the fact that these are the un-counterable insults of our modern times. If you are accused of any of these things, you are guilty without the chance of being proven innocent. You are DOUBLY guilty if you deny it.

This is nonsense.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If you want to demonize something/someone in Western culture, you make an accusation of being racist, fascist, or having an inordinate fondness for playgrounds.

Whether it is actually true is secondary to the fact that these are the un-counterable insults of our modern times. If you are accused of any of these things, you are guilty without the chance of being proven innocent. You are DOUBLY guilty if you deny it.

It's really very effective.

(I could cite possible historical precedents, but that would turn this discussion particularly ugly spectacularly quickly. I will leave that for braver students of history than myself.)

That is a genuine point, yes. However... I will just say this...

The people who are right now being accused of being racists, fascist, or pedophiles (and misogynists, ableists and the like) have up to this point in history... more times than should have occured over the last several hundred years been able to get away with it.

But now there has been a wider change of stance for the Millenial and Gen Z generations to try and "fix" that off-kilter scale. To "cancel" people for things they might have done, some of which has resulted in "guilty before being proved innocent." Can that suck for the person who is being found guilty? Absolutely. No argument. But does the instances of that happening nowadays in any way, shape or form balance against all the Black, women, LGTBQIA, differently abled, and seniors who have had their lives taken from them outright (if not just completely ruined) for the hundreds (and/or thousands) of years of history across the globe?

I am willing to suggest that No... we have a LONG way to go before the scales of White, or Male, or Cis, or Straight, or Abled individuals have fallen so far on their side that we could plausibly even suggest that they are the "persecuted" ones. So yeah... it kinda sucks, but then again, we kinda had it coming.

Yes, we'd LIKE to think everything would all be fair and equitable across the board and no one would suffer unduly for what they have or haven't done to people... but we know that's not going to happen. In America for example, we've had several centuries to see that no... not everybody has been treated equally. And thus for the various White, or Male, or Cis, or Straight, or Abled individuals that now feel they are being treated unfairly over this last decade...

well... welcome to the club. Now you know how the other side has felt for hundreds of years.

 

[Oofta]

I don't think this is true at all. No doubt I've missed a lot of discussions you've been in, though. I'm pretty new to ENworld.

There are some enemies which it makes sense to have as supernatural evil or as able to be killed or destroyed without moral qualms. Demons. Undead. Constructs.

Then there are enemies who wilfully choose to do wrong and threaten others, like those cultists. (Speaking as someone who's studied comparative religion and sociology, yes, in a sociological sense a cult is just a small religion, but a cult which kidnaps and sacrifices people is still evil). Or like bandits. Or marauding raiders.

Then there are predatory alien creatures with whom we can't communicate (Ropers, for example, among many other aberattions). Unnatural creatures of inimical magic who prey on humans and can't be reasoned with.

All of these are good options for antagonists without the same quasi-racist baggage/implications of describing an entire living, speaking & reasoning species as evil. IIRC James Maliszewski in his Dwimmermount campaign went with Orcs (his are pig-faced) being genetically-modified swine/boars anthropomorphized by magic and possessed by demonic spirits.

I think even in a regular D&D campaign world you could still reasonably have Orcs as black hats if your world also includes orcs of different cultures who aren't black hats. If THESE particular orcs are villains for cultural reasons/out of choice, but these OTHER orcs are not, then you avoid the racial essentialist stuff. I don't have to identify the villains by their tusks or green skin. I can identify them by the Eye of Gruumsh painted on their shields.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Orcs are no more human than demons and they can fill a different role in the game. Having said that, I almost never use orcs in my campaign.

In addition, the alignment of every monster in the MM is just a default, what I do in my game has no impact on yours.

Just for clarity: I also disagree with some of the verbiage in the PHB on half orcs.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

This has "old man yells at cloud" energy written all over it. I'll pass.

Also, the title (petty much?) and the channel name ("Old School DND") aren't doing much to inspire confidence.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

what I do in my game has no impact on yours.

Am I in the "D&D is(n't) racist", or the "system (doesn't) matter" thread?

It's odd, I've seen this line of argument in both places.

I don't agree with this argument in both contexts, for different reasons specific to each, but just noting something.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Orcs are an interesting case. They don't exist in historic folklore. There are a couple of poetic references, to the best of my recollection, before Tolkien invented the species. In Beowulf, from which he drew the name, orcneas is just a generic reference to an evil spirit or wicked creature.

Tolkien himself wrestled with them, and whether it made sense in his worldbuilding for them to be irredeemable or innately evil. He went back and forth on it. Later he opined in letters that orcs are really something of a metaphor (though he usually didn't care for metaphor or allegory) for the cruel, debased and warlike side of mankind, and that "orcs" were to be found among the worst people on all sides of WWII, for example.


Yes and no. I think there are some shallow and immature folks on social media who do indeed sometimes make mountains out of molehills. And that the nature of media is to amplify outraged and outrageous voices, especially as there are incentives for it. Advertising revenue and sharing/"engagement"/likes demand clicks. And sensationalism gets more clicks.

But I do think there are also plenty of people making a good-faith effort to understand and critically interrogate some stuff we've ignored or not thought hard about in the past. They're doing legitimate work to help society progress and make it more inclusive.

D&D definitely has some very colonialist concepts underpinning it, and some racist stereotypes have poked in here or there. Which makes sense. Human beings were responsible for writing it, and lots of humans have some pretty racist ideas. OTOH, the archetypal multiracial adventuring party also exemplifies different people from different backgrounds with different strengths and skills coming together to work in a good cause and fight evil. So D&D has some strong positive aspects as well.


I've seen both in the... 30-odd years I've been playing and interacting with other gamers. Some ARE bigots. Many others deeply take to heart the messages of diversity and of unity and tolerance seen in major geek media like Star Trek and Lord of the Rings.

a well thought out position.

 

[Alzrius]

So yeah... it kinda sucks, but then again, we kinda had it coming.

You don't find that stance to be somewhat hard to reconcile with what you said previously?

Don't ever ascribe traits to entire groups. That's always been the entire point of all of this.

 

[CleverNickName]

This has "old man yells at cloud" energy written all over it. I'll pass.

Also, the title (petty much?) and the channel name ("Old School DND") aren't doing much to inspire confidence.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing.

I'll watch the video when I get a sec, but if it turns out to be another "hot take" on racism from a pair of white guys, I'm gonna walk. But who knows, maybe it'll surprise me.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think we are making this more complicated than it has to be, largely because a lot of people have been personally affected by these issues and thus we're passionate about it. That, however, tends to lend towards hyperbole.

It's totally understandable why many people who love X, when told that X has elements of racism or bigotry, will take a defensive stance because they feel like you're associating them with the racism and bigotry directly, and that's not really being done. I really haven't seen any who has made comments like "Old school D&D has some racist or sexist elements" also say "fans of old school D&D are racists and bigots."

so if we avoid that strawman, understandable as it is for someone to feel that way (because we're human), then we can have a more productive conversation.

Let's admit some truths though. Old school D&D was dominated by white males. Mostly teenagers. That alone means that a whole lot of things that could be offensive weren't even noticed. There was no malice there. Or push to be racists or sexists. But by the very virtue of being white male dominated in the 70s and 80s, a lot of problematic things that impact people who aren't white males existed. We (white males) didn't notice them because we weren't impacted by them or saw how they impacted others. That doesn't make us bigots or racists. That makes us uninformed. And that isn't a bad thing. The only way it becomes bad is if we do become informed, yet continue to engage in problematic behavior. I certainly am not the same person I was when I was 13 in the mid 80s. I can admit that some of the things I liked and never thought as problematic back then was because of how society viewed things back then and how I wasn't knowledgeable of how it could detrimentally affect others. I can still enjoy THAC0, and Trampier, and save or die, and also admit that strength caps for women PCs was a bad thing.

some were obvious, like strength caps for women and nipples through chain mail bikinis. But some aren't so obvious to the white male, like how dark skinned races are almost all inherently evil. Or the tropes and stereotypes of Asians we saw.

So IMO, in order to have productive discussion, we need to admit that others who may be impacted have a valid point, and at least hear them out. If you've got several people from group X saying that Y aspect of this game is problematic to their group, listen as to why, because more often than not they will have a point. That's not being too PC, or caving into social justice warriors, or whatever. It's trying to understand others and make the game be enjoyable by everyone. Empathy. Putting yourself in their shoes for a minute.

 

[DEFCON 1]

You don't find that stance to be somewhat hard to reconcile with what you said previously?

I see what you did there.

But hey, if you want to use this as your GOTCHA! to ignore everything else I said and thus just keep living your life as you have been thinking everything is fine... more power to ya! Hope it works out!

But it does mean there's still a chance you're gonna possibly get cancelled at some point with that attitude. Even for something you don't think you did wrong. Better enjoy yourself while you can!