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

[Umbran]

well thought out might have to quote that but what exactly can be done about refining d&d?

Well, I think a number of folks are already trying to address some issues. "Race" in character generation, for example - Tasha's takes a step. A recent UA article has taken that further. WotC is moving in that geneal direction, though a bit slowly. Morrus' Level Up project is working something similar, but of greater scope, as I understand it. WotC is startign to change how it addresses and speaks about cultures in game worlds, and so on.

Supporting those kind of efforts, and buying products that move that way, probably helps.

 

[Umbran]

Certainly a possibility.

Generational change happens, yes.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The article's view:

"It’s a game that was dominated by white dudes for decades and, because of that, it’s got some baggage. Some of its concepts—evil races, descriptions of orcs and half-orcs that mirror racist stereotypes, and the concept of racial disadvantages—don’t make sense anymore in a modern context. The game's publisher, Wizards of the Coast (WotC), knows that and is trying to move Dungeons & Dragons into the future. But many of its efforts seem half-hearted, and a lot of the work of making Dungeons & Dragons more inclusive has fallen to its fans."

A point of view shared by a lot of people after the revamps to Curse of Strahd were unveiled.

And Drums on Fire Mountain alone does a good job of saying that, yeah, D&D's got some racist baggage in its past, even if it wasn't necessarily meant with intentional malice.

 

[SehanineMoonbow]

This to me is a tealeaf reading moment.

Wizards is in a bit of a bind. After being stung by the backlash from the radical departures in mechanics and lore of 4e, WotC opted to make a totally safe and nostalgic version of D&D in 5e. And it was very successful, but with success brings increased scrutiny. WotC wants to invoke the rosy nostalgia of Keep on the Borderlands, but the climate is radically shifting away from the tropes that style invokes. Simply put, WotC wanted to create a timeless version of D&D where orcs can be people or orcs can be monsters, but the latter is rapidly falling out of favor. WotC is now stuck between attempting to address the concerns of their audience and gutting the golden goose again during one of the largest points of popularity the brand has seen. They've tried to have it both ways, which has resulted in these "half-measures" that have seemed to placate nobody.

WotC could take bold action: a complete rethink on race/lineage mechanics, a new system to address cultural elements, changing ability scores to be less ableist, ditching alignment, removing or renaming classes and elements which could be seen as insensitive, a wholesale reinvention of what a "monster" is, etc. All culminating in a new edition in the coming few years. Of course, such radical shifts to the paradigm could reinvoke the 4e "this ain't my D&D" problem we just came back from. Fix too little and you'll be called out for failing to address the problem, fix too much and you'll lose the fans that supported you.

I don't envy this position. One person's "good enough" is another person's "that doesn't address the issue". That said, I wager there will be a larger revision to the game sooner rather than later now, because the current climate is going to demand WotC treat these concerns with a little more finesse than what they've done so far. The question will be how far that revision will go.

Yeah, take it too far, and it may not resemble D&D (or fantasy at all, for that matter) anymore. I'm glad they're trying to be more diverse and inclusive (even though it feels a bit token at times), but take it too far, and you risk robbing it of what makes the species unique, the cultures (albeit evolving ones) unique. Don't go far enough, and there will continue to be accusations of racism, sexism, etc.

Fantasy as a whole is becoming more diverse (I myself read a lot of books with lgbtq+ characters), but it's a delicate balance between evolving with society and ruining the "flavor" of D&D.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Mod Note:

Folks,

The answer to this question should be RESTRICTED TO GAMING. I understand that this is limiting. But, these boards are not here to discuss all the ills of the world, and how to fix them. There are other forums for that.

Discuss what can be done in our games and at our tables.

sorry, in my head I was asking a question, and expecting an answer in the context of gaming. I.e., what are we being asked to "make up for it" as gamers. I could have been more explicit. And I'm still not sure what that is that we're being told we need to make up for. I mean, I've been an indie game designer for 20 years, and I never felt like I had to do something in my games to make up for how D&D was back in the day. Making design choices to reflect modern sensibilities is one thing, but I'm not be pressured to apologize and/or otherwise make up for how games were designed in the 70s and 80s. I didn't design D&D back then, so why would I be responsible for it?

 

[Istbor]

how is killing a thing not overcoming a challenge?

My two copper, killing a thing can be overcoming a challenge.

Just if killing is the only way that you can gain XP, then many of your challenges are going to be things to kill. This IMO can become pretty boring after a decade of playing just that way. Plus, if all of your challenges are just things in your party's way to be killed, then that is the default plan to overcome something. Kill it.

If found you can foster some pretty interesting ideas when there are other proven ways besides just murdering something, to overcome it.

I mean sure. I can always marvel at new and interesting ways my group will come up with to kill something, but I want to see what they come up with when killing isn't an option. Or at least, doesn't have to be.

Plus yeah. A lot of people I play with are pretty familiar with how videogames work, and completing quests is associated with getting fat XP.

 

[Minigiant]

Wizards is in a bit of a bind. After being stung by the backlash from the radical departures in mechanics and lore of 4e, WotC opted to make a totally safe and nostalgic version of D&D in 5e. And it was very successful, but with success brings increased scrutiny. WotC wants to invoke the rosy nostalgia of Keep on the Borderlands, but the climate is radically shifting away from the tropes that style invokes. Simply put, WotC wanted to create a timeless version of D&D where orcs can be people or orcs can be monsters, but the latter is rapidly falling out of favor. WotC is now stuck between attempting to address the concerns of their audience and gutting the golden goose again during one of the largest points of popularity the brand has seen. They've tried to have it both ways, which has resulted in these "half-measures" that have seemed to placate nobody.

That's what I see.

Essentially WOTC ran from the backlash of 4e and to the old school. However old school D&D was designed to "just be played" you weren't supposed to think about it.

But the fandom grew up and is thinking about it. And a lot of D&Disms don't make sense or are just dumb. Before you even get into racism, some of D&D is hard to wrap ones wrap around once you think about it and aren't just trying to force tropes. There's a multiple page discussion on halflings on here.

So if that is how the game is, it is likely at least some racism snuck in accidentally as well. Because the game used to run on the excuse of "Because reasons that's why" and WOTC returned to that era to rebuild the game.

 

[TheSword]

The hope is, that D&D is easier to get into without a long-time player to teach you the ropes now than it was in 2008, and even if 6e radically changes the game and drives all the grognards away, the game will still thrive, as it becomes more accessible and welcoming to a wider new audience.

I’m not confident WotC is ready to make that leap of faith, especially with the sting of the 4e backlash still weighing on the minds of the people steering the ship. But I hope I’m wrong.

To be honest, I don’t want longtime players to be chased away from D&D. The game has always been one in touch with its roots and it’s made 5e particularly successful.

Stories of old-timers playing Saltmarsh for the first time when it was released, or Ravenloft inform how we view the game today. As someone said in another thread each edition is standing on the shoulders of giants.

It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t progress. I personally would like to see a diversity charter that states key goals in design as well as hiring practices. WOC lays out its stall and says, these things matter to us. We can stop all the naval gazing then. Either something follows that ethical code, or it doesn’t get printed. Old timers can then decide if they’re in or out.

Don’t drive away all grognards - but for the grace of Grog and 5-10 years I’d be there myself no doubt. Drive away the bigots by being up front and honest about things.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

To be honest, I don’t want longtime players to be chased away from D&D. The game has always been one in touch with its roots and it’s made 5e particularly successful.

Stories of old-timers playing Saltmarsh for the first time when it was released, or Ravenloft inform how we view the game today. As someone said in another thread each edition is standing on the shoulders of giants.

It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t progress. I personally would like to see a diversity charter that states key goals in design as well as hiring practices. WOC lays out its stall and says, these things matter to us. We can stop all the naval gazing then. Either something follows that ethical code, or it doesn’t get printed. Old timers can then decide if they’re in or out.

Don’t drive away all grognards - but for the grace of Grog and 5-10 years I’d be there myself no doubt. Drive away the bigots by being up front and honest about things.

Grogs haven't actually had much impact on 5E's success. I forget the percentage, but the percentage of players over 35 is pretty surprisingly small compared to the rest.

In fact, I'd say it's wrong to say that "being in touch with it's roots" made 5E particularly successful, given the age of people playing. I think 5E's success comes from it being an accessible and pretty playable game, combined with streaming/YouTube and particularly Critical Role introducing it to a mass audience at exactly the same time a ton of '80s nostalgia was around (none of which requires 5E to be in any way like '80s D&D, indeed, it basically isn't), and also hitting at a time when a lot of 20-somethings were looking for stuff that was social but fun and yet also not necessarily super-drunken (board games got a huge boost from this at the same time - indeed at board game cafes in London, the "grog" percentage, i.e. people my age and above, was like 10-15% tops - most people were clearly in their 20s and highly diverse in terms of both gender and race (which was delightful to witness - seeing two Middle-Eastern girls in their 20s playing some serious LCG deckbuilder for example!). Accessibility and hitting at the right time are key to 5E.

As for racism, I do think there is a bit more in older D&D fans than I'd like, though, honestly, I'm skeptical about how it compare to the general population. Older RPG fans skew white and male, but they also skew liberal/leftist/open-minded - D&D fans less so because you get more people who like the black-and-white worldviews they see alignment as endorsing, and like to romanticize the past more - but still I suspect compared to the population in general it's not bad.

 

[Charlaquin]

To be honest, I don’t want longtime players to be chased away from D&D. The game has always been one in touch with its roots and it’s made 5e particularly successful.

Stories of old-timers playing Saltmarsh for the first time when it was released, or Ravenloft inform how we view the game today. As someone said in another thread each edition is standing on the shoulders of giants.

It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t progress. I personally would like to see a diversity charter that states key goals in design as well as hiring practices. WOC lays out its stall and says, these things matter to us. We can stop all the naval gazing then. Either something follows that ethical code, or it doesn’t get printed. Old timers can then decide if they’re in or out.

Don’t drive away all grognards - but for the grace of Grog and 5-10 years I’d be there myself no doubt. Drive away the bigots by being up front and honest about things.

Oh, don’t get me wrong - I definitely don’t want to chase anybody away from the game, including grognards. But making the game more welcoming to marginalized people is a higher priority to me than retaining grognards.