D&D General New WOTC racism allegations regarding Hadozee and Spelljammer

[Minigiant]

This is why I have been stressing for new settings.

Because old settings tend to be inspired by things with older sensibilities for tropes. And therefore these tropes are near their tropes that have icky parts that without sensitivity or diversity reads will sneak through.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

No, naughty word the DND division of WoTC. They've done this before, they continue to do this, they don't often have people of colour involved in making content, and when they do they treat them like crap.

. . . Have any of the writers from Journeys Through the Radiant Citadel said that they were treated like crap? I know there were a couple of controversies from Candlekeep Mysteries's authors (both of which seemed like WotC's fault). But is there anything more recent?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

This is why I have been stressing for new settings.

Because old settings tend to be inspired by things with older sensibilities for tropes. And therefore these tropes are near their tropes that have icky parts that without sensitivity or diversity reads will sneak through.

This is new lore. Sure, the older Hadozee were problems too, but this stuff people are pointing out now is something new WotC made up for 5e. Newer settings/products isn't going to fix the source of this problem. They are the source of this problem.

 

[ReshiIRE]

. . . Have any of the writers from Journeys Through the Radiant Citadel said that they were treated like crap? I know there were a couple of controversies from Candlekeep Mysteries's authors (both of which seemed like WotC's fault). But is there anything more recent?

I am unsure, but that is a fair point. I was mainly thinking of Candlekeep Mysteries and other incidents from further ago.

I think I will bow out so as not to distract any further.

 

[Minigiant]

This is new lore. Sure, the older Hadozee were problems too, but this stuff people are pointing out now is something new WotC made up for 5e. Newer settings/products isn't going to fix the source of this problem. They are the source of this problem.

The new lore is of old inspiration. That's my point. Spelljammer invokes a lot of old sci fi and fantasy tropes. And that involves fishing in a lake with landmines of outdated ideas. Planet of the Apes is a book from 1963.

With a new setting, you have the opportunity to create new ideas suitable to the current over instead of peering into the old. Perhaps take inspiration from book writing in the last 2 decades?

 

[Eubani]

So SOME of the population of an ANIMAL SPECIES was captured to be used as beasts of burden. An attempt to enlarge them made them unintentionally intelligent and sentient, after which they were released. With this in mind why aren't all you heroes complaining about the horse and Ox entries in the Monster Manual? Throughout history people have captured populations of beasts and bred them to be more suited for labor. Once they became sentient it would of been slavery but they were released after an unspecified period of time I will admit but the writing implied right after transformation. One could make a fair statement that the few that they were captured were not slaves.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

I think most people were so fixated on the hadozee's Mach 2 gliding speed that they never got around to reading the lore.

I can guarantee you most people outside of the bird app are not talking about this at all and look at these sort of controversies with a weary sigh.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The new lore is of old inspiration. That's my point. Spelljammer invokes a lot of old sci fi and fantasy tropes. And that involves fishing in a lake with landmines of outdated ideas. Planet of the Apes is a book from 1963.

All inspiration is old. And the inspiration that comes from newer products was inspired by older content, all the way back to the first stories humanity ever told. You can take inspiration from older content without screwing up this badly.

With a new setting, you have the opportunity to create new ideas suitable to the current over instead of peering into the old. Perhaps take inspiration from book writing in the last 2 decades?

It's a bit difficult for a book from the last 20 years to have entered the public consciousness as much as one that has spawned a film franchise, like Planet of the Apes.

 

[Minigiant]

All inspiration is old. And the inspiration that comes from newer products was inspired by older content, all the way back to the first stories humanity ever told. You can take inspiration from older content without screwing up this badly.

POTA is 60 years old. Written in the 60s.

I would be very weary and very analytical of using inspiration from anything before 1970 for my RPG. That comes with a certain mentality.

As a black D&D fan of multiple black heritages, my own curiosity would have made me look info the lore of the monkey people within the first 2 hours of getting the book.

But I didn't buy the Spelljammer book. So that's why ENWorld didn't know about this last week. Cause I would told y'all if I had the book.

Constantly digging in the well of nostalgic popularity can be dangerous as you can be blind to the bad parts. If you do it, you must be cognizant of your perception and be extra careful to avoid holes.

 

[Hussar]

I understand that people have very strong feelings about this. Rightfully so.

The trick though is to be able to step back and at least try to come to some sort of resolution here. WotC is trying to be better. At least give them credit for that. I totally get that it's really hard not to get really frustrated with this sort of thing. Particularly THIS sort of thing where it's just mind bogglingly stupid. As in, "Really? You REALLY thought that a slave race of uplifted monkeys bred for sale was a good idea for a race source in 2022? Seriously?"

It's just so bloody stupid and for me, that's the most infuriating thing about this. We had a really good run for the last while, some great products, even the responses to Spelljammer have been largely positive. We just don't need this kind of crap.