D&D General The Rakshasa and Genie Problem

[Bedrockgames]

What I find a problem are people who solely come here to say they don't find these things a problem and find that these discussions are a problem and that we shouldn't be having them and these are what are making D&D bad. It's just a bunch of "How far do we go?!" instead of actually engaging with the topic being given, trying to act like people who are talking about this are one step away from banning violence in their games or something. It's inane.

If you are going to have these discussions, then people who disagree with the premise behind the discussions, and who are concerned about the impact the discussions are having on the hobby, are going to weigh in. No one is stopping the discussion from having. We are just making it a two-sided discussion because there remains multiple points of view on this topic. I don't think it is fair to characterize people who take a contrary position to you in a conversation as obstructing the conversation itself (we are participating in it). What we are pushing back against are some of the ideas being advanced in the conversation (which is what happens in threads on boards like this, whether that topic is cultural sensitivity or character optimization).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It actually is rather weird that extraplanar entities would have any cultural connection to any of the cultures of the material plane. Like even if there was a India analogue in the setting, why would some creatures from another dimension have any cultural similarities to it? This would make most sense in a paradigm where extraplanars are some sort of formless sprits in their natural form, and merely assume a form that is comprehensible to their summoners, thus assuming some of the cultural trappings with it.

 

[TheSword]

It actually is rather weird that extraplanar entities would have any cultural connection to any of the cultures of the material plane. Like even if there was a India analogue in the setting, why would some creatures from another dimension have any cultural similarities to it? This would make most sense in a paradigm where extraplanars are some sort of formless sprits in their natural form, and merely assume a for that is comprehensible to their summoners, thus assuming some of the cultural trappings with it.

Well the city of Brass is a Sultanate. Genies have an extra-planar culture that’s pretty well established.

Incidentally I do think Legacy of Fire is cool adventure path.

For pathfinder’s treatment of Rakshasa take a look at Curse of the Crimaon Throne which features an adventure exploring a noble house corrupted and ruled by Rakshasa.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It actually is rather weird that extraplanar entities would have any cultural connection to any of the cultures of the material plane. Like even if there was a India analogue in the setting, why would some creatures from another dimension have any cultural similarities to it? This would make most sense in a paradigm where extraplanars are some sort of formless sprits in their natural form, and merely assume a for that is comprehensible to their summoners, thus assuming some of the cultural trappings with it.

I think the honest answer is primarily that people just expect the monster and the culture to be connected. So it is an easy way to present something and have it be accepted by the players. But there is no law you have to do it that way. You can put a genie in any attire and against any cultural background you want. As long as the fundamentals of what a genie is, fit in with the cosmology or are adjusted to it, it shouldn't be a problem. Also genies are figures reminiscent of Q from star trek. i can easily see them adopting whatever attire or cultural characteristics they want, enjoy or think would make them most persuasive when dealing with people. That said though, I think most people heavily associate them with the Arabian Nights and Arabic culture, so you might be fighting that expectation any time you do something different with them.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Well the city of Brass is a Sultanate. Genies have an extra-planar culture that’s pretty well established.

I think what he means though is why does the city of Brass itself have to reflect a real world culture

 

[Voadam]

For me it feels uncomfortable to have Rakshasa and Genies be fantasy-counterpart Middle-Eastern/Indian people, but I also don't know if just taking the monsters out of their cultural context is cultural appropriation. Is it better to just not use the creatures if you don't have a Fantasy-Counterpart in your world of that culture in the first place? Maybe it would be better to just keep them in Al-Qadim and similar areas of certain D&D worlds instead of having them assumed to exist in most D&D worlds (Eberron, for example)? I honestly do not know the answer, and all of these answers seem a bit uncomfortable to me (at least at the moment).

Does anyone have any suggestions or thoughts?

I think there are lots of options that provide different aesthetics and cultural dynamics.

I think most of them are not generally problematic, but also individuals can vary on considering them problematic.

a) You can have D&D genies that were originally Arabic inspired and strip them of most all Arabian elements so they are elemental humanoid spirits who are wish powered. You can recontextualize them with different cultural traits and appearance. Maybe some Irish Leprechaun traits and presentation with an elemental cast recontextualizes them while keeping the core stats and narrative story elements. Maybe do it solely as elemental wish spirits with no real world cultural trapping hook.

b) You can have genies be Arabic and be the only really Arabic element of the setting. Arabic traits could be their indigenous extraplanar culture and so they are recognizable classic Arabic genies in your generally non-Arabic D&D world.

c) You can have Arabic genies be there alongside of a fantasy Arab culture in your D&D setting.

d) You don't have to have genies at all in your D&D.

The first can be seen as suppressing Arab representation in the game or inappropriate misrepresentation of cultures.

The second can be seen as turning the monster into the people, awful slave-owning bargain twisting Efreeti can be seen as the commentary on Arabs.

The third can be trying to force defined analogue kitchen sink aspects to your setting and its human ethnicity, which might be going with a specific concept or an undefined aspect. It can also lead to a superficial theme park/stereotype presentation of exotic Arab stuff depending on how it is done. This can create add on issues that not adding in a full fantasy representation of an ethnicity would have avoided.

The fourth can again be seen as suppressing and erasing Arab representation in the game. Choosing to do so is to consciously take out Arabic elements, and therefore Arab representation, you would otherwise have used.

Again, I feel all four options are generally fine, simply providing different specific flavor choices and aesthetics.

I would avoid racist caricature of Arabs, but otherwise I would feel fine running or playing in a game with any of those four genie options. Others could feel differently. There is no option that provides an out that does not have potential problems so you cannot just go with the one that avoids all possible complications.

 

[Cadence]

It actually is rather weird that extraplanar entities would have any cultural connection to any of the cultures of the material plane. Like even if there was a India analogue in the setting, why would some creatures from another dimension have any cultural similarities to it? This would make most sense in a paradigm where extraplanars are some sort of formless sprits in their natural form, and merely assume a for that is comprehensible to their summoners, thus assuming some of the cultural trappings with it.

Like, why does the "Greek inspired" part of my campaign world have Greek deities, or why would my choosing Greek deities have led to me having other things in that area be related to ancient Greece? (Which is the question I find myself asking myself now.)

 

[Bedrockgames]

The second can be seen as turning the monster into the people, awful slave-owning bargain twisting Efreeti can be seen as the commentary on Arabs.

I think this is the part I don't quite agree with. When I think this through with European or Christian culture for example, it doesn't quite pan out. For instance suppose you have a setting that is all China or all Aztec, and for whatever reason, decide to include biblical demons in your campaign. There are no Europeans or Middle Easterners in the game, but if the demons appeared vaguely European or Middle Eastern culturally, I would just see that as remnants of the tropes origin, not commentary on Christians, middle eastern people or Europeans. Or take a werewolf. Suppose you had a campaign world that was just Asian. And granted those would have shapeshifting humanoids like werewolves themselves, but say you decided to use a European style werewolf. And the werewolf was vaguely Euoprean in look and culture. That would be a little odd (since Europeans don't exist in the setting). But I would understand the reason the GM or the game did that, was not because it was a commentary on Europeans but because it just grabbed the trope with its familiar trappings and used it. And probably there is at least a way to do that and not make it incongruous (such as have werewolves have their own culture within the setting and it just happens to resemble medieval Europe---again I wouldn't see that as commentary on Europeans, just a product of the monster having a source in real world folklore, and the GM trying to make them recognizable)

 

[Micah Sweet]

Like, why does the "Greek inspired" part of my campaign world have Greek deities, or why would my choosing Greek deities have led to me having other things in that area be related to ancient Greece? (Which is the question I find myself asking myself now.)

I think there should be no requirement to insert a culture wholesale into a setting just because you want to use an element of it. As has been said, this severely stifles creativity and worrying overmuch about it leads to dry, tasteless games.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Also, changing a genie's clothes isnt going to make anyone think you're not using a genie, or prevent people from thinking about what culture genies come from. You're still going to have to deal with expectations, and make a point of not using them.