WotC WotC's Chris Perkins On D&D's Inclusivity Processes Going Forward

Over on D&D Beyond, WotC's Chris Perkins has written a blog entry about how the company's processes have been changed to improve the way the D&D studio deals with harmful content and inclusivity. This follows recent issues with racist content in Spelljammer: Adventures in Space, and involves working with external cultural consultants.

The studio’s new process mandates that every word, illustration, and map must be reviewed by multiple outside cultural consultants prior to publication.

Leveling Up Our Creative Process: Learnings From Spelljammer

In this blog post, I'll talk about how we in the D&D Studio are changing our review process following the problematic content that appeared in Spell...

www.dndbeyond.com

 

[darjr]

This "group of friends" is actually members of several other online gaming forums (not specifically RPGs) where all people just shake the heads and laugh when they hear about the latest scandal in D&D.
Might be because those forums tend not to be American but from my experience no, the ones having problems with Hadozee ect. are not the majority.

It’s a self selected group. And has power dynamics not in play in the wider world.

In part you see these issues when you step away from your circle because they are not under your control.

 

[Ixal]

It’s a self selected group. And has power dynamics not in play in the wider world.

In part you see these issues when you step away from your circle because they are not under your control.

Self selected by liking video games and rpgs? Or books and rpgs?
I am not talking about some small private forums but open forums frequented by thousands of people and so far I have seen no one who displayed the same outrage at all this stuff as seen here on Enworld, also a self selected group, by the way.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Absolutely. And I'm pretty sure I never did. But there's an important difference between being upset about something and deciding it isn't allowed to be published. I'm not allowed to read about enslaved alien monkeys because someone else finds it upsetting? That feels like it's one step removed from public book burnings.

my go to is pretty simple some people hate there names as nick names Joe to jooey rob to bobby ect... some don't. its easier to assume everyone does take offense then not to shorten until they tell you otherwise

 

[Umbran]

Because why?

Because, I'm afraid, none of us are entitled to relevancy.

If you are a third party to a problem, why do you think your opinion on that problem matters? Going back to my previous example of Joe and Sam. You didn't throw the punch. You didn't take the punch. Why are you relevant in this scenario?

 

[MichaelSomething]

I think WOTC should have a gorgnard sensitivity reader. That will help assure the OSR types that WOTC values them as a part of D&D.

 

[Irlo]

Absolutely. And I'm pretty sure I never did. But there's an important difference between being upset about something and deciding it isn't allowed to be published. I'm not allowed to read about enslaved alien monkeys because someone else finds it upsetting? That feels like it's one step removed from public book burnings.

No one has decided this can’t be published. It’s not about allowing or not allowing.

Would you suggest that it must be published because you want to read it?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Welp, five pages might actually be a new record before the inevitable set in.

Because the lost of an ultra-rare D&D slaver or slaver race is just that important.

 

[Incenjucar]

Self selected by liking video games and rpgs? Or books and rpgs?
I am not talking about some small private forums but open forums frequented by thousands of people and so far I have seen no one who displayed the same outrage at all this stuff as seen here on Enworld, also a self selected group, by the way.

The world consists of billions of people. Many of whom are treated rather poorly by others. I am also part of large groups of gamers, and they are quite serious about the importance of inclusion and sensitivity. Being kind to other people is not a horrible thing, nor an unpopular one.

 

[Ixal]

Because, I'm afraid, none of us are entitled to relevancy.

If you are a third party to a problem, why do you think your opinion on that problem matters? Going back to my previous example of Joe and Sam. You didn't throw the punch. You didn't take the punch. Why are you relevant in this scenario?

That works both ways though. Most people who complained about Hadozee being racist towards African American or Oriental Adventure to Asians were neither of those and also just a 3rd party and just assumed that they would be offended by those books, or even as the first post in this line of discussion said, assumed that they would make the same associations of Hadozee = African Americans instead of fantasy monkey people.

 

[darjr]

That works both ways though. Most people who complained about Hadozee being racist towards African American or Oriental Adventure to Asians were neither of those and also just a 3rd party.

And this makes dismissing those who are, OK with you?