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

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I am not sure language difficulty correlate exactly to number of words.

Think of all the hacky stand-up comedy in English about the disagreement about the slight differences in meaning between synonyms like "mad," angry," "upset."

Now try and figure out how to successfully get your meaning across at something more than a tourist level if English is your third language, knowing English speakers will definitely be judging you. It's rough.

 

[Argyle King]

Stuff like this is why companies shouldn't skimp on PR. "Inclusivity" and "Diversity" are part of a company building a relationship with customers and communities. A lot of companies go cheap on hiring a PR team -or they assume that PR is something which only happens when a problem already exists. A good PR team puts in work to help foster positive feelings toward a product (and company,) rather than just being a knee-jerk reaction to negative situations.

I think it will be tough to figure out how "monster" is defined in the future. In a game where I'm killing creatures for points (xp,) modern sensibilities indicate that I should stab sentient beings in the face in a way which doesn't cause emotional distress.

Certainly, there are/were products containing elements offensive to real-world people.

At the same time, D&D is currently attempting a balancing act of walking between two thought processes which don't always agree.

 

[Dire Bare]

I think Hussar's point may be that it may or may not be bigoted to Japanese people when talking about themselves, but can be very bigoted when talking to people who aren't Japanese. So, if you're Japanese, and being "half-breed" isn't bigoted when talking about Japanese people but is when talking about non-Japanese, don't use that term when talking to or about non-Japanese people.

I hesitate to go further with this . . . I do think I understand where @Hussar is coming from and his point. Totally respect that.

My point is . . . IF being of mixed-race isn't a big deal in Japanese culture and IF the term "ha fuh" doesn't have the same negative connotations that "halfbreed" does in English . . . THEN Japanese who refer to a mixed-race Westerner as "ha fuh" are not being bigoted at all. They are acting correctly from their own cultural perspective and are likely ignorant of the Western perspective. That's all IF that is true of Japanese culture and language . . .

Now, if @Hussar educated some folks over there about how these things are treated in the US . . . and they refused to learn and work to avoiding such language with him and others . . . then that would be bigoted.

But, I'm speaking from complete ignorance of Japanese culture, and don't mean to take anything away from what @Hussar has shared about his experiences over there.

 

[Dire Bare]

Hmm... interesting. For me, among the foreign languages that I've studied (English, French, German and Russian), English has been the easiest. Maybe comparable to French, but just because French is much closer to Italian than English is.

One thing English has going for it . . . . it's spoken all around the world. Western culture and media is widespread, and that influence and exposure can help folks learn the language quicker than they might otherwise. English is often taught as a second language in schools around the world also. But the language itself, crazy hard to pick up.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think it will be tough to figure out how "monster" is defined in the future. In a game where I'm killing creatures for points (xp,) modern sensibilities indicate that I should stab sentient beings in the face in a way which doesn't cause emotional distress.

I'm slowly working on an adventure for publication and coming up with intelligent enemies that everyone is OK with sticking a sword in, and who no one would would reasonably try to bargain with or see their point of view (because for an introductory adventure, sometimes you just want the players to learn how to do some basic combat and learn about the hazards of a dungeon) has been a challenge. They can't all be mindless undead, after all.

 

[Hussar]

Being called out for being mixed-race is offensive to you . . . but is it offensive within Japanese culture? I honestly don't know. And is it being called out as mixed-race that is the problem? Or the use of the word "half" or "halfbreed"? I don't speak Japanese, but does the Japanese word you mention (ha fuh) have the same connotation in Japanese that "halfbreed" does in English?

If being of mixed-race in Japan isn't seen as a big deal, if the Japanese word used doesn't have a negative connotation within that culture . . . then those folks aren't being racist, not even in a systemic manner. Of course, if folks of mixed-race in Japan are looked down upon, and the word does have a negative connotation, then they most certainly are.

It's understandable however, if being referred to as "ha fuh" or "half" bothered you. It's reasonable to educate your Japanese friends and co-workers on the issue when dealing with those of mixed-race from the US.

I only point all of this out (from my perspective), to make the point that . . . what's racist and what isn't is complicated and the answer isn't always the same depending on the context.

Sorry, had some time away, so swimming a bit upthread to something that I think others addressed, but, this was specifically addressed to me.

I'd say that yes, absolutely there's no malice whatsoever in the people who were calling my childrend half. It's a pretty common term here for anyone that is of mixed Japanese/whatever heritage. But, that's kind of the point. It's a term that is specifically applied to people who are different from the perceived "norm". And, frankly, I would not really lean to heavily on expectations of cultural sensitivity from a culture that is so highly homogeneous as Japan perceives itself to be.

I think the point I was trying to make earlier about being "right" is never the important part of the conversation. It really doesn't matter all that much if something is specifically racist, bigoted, annoying, or whatever. Correctly labeling the taxonomy of behaviour is the least important part of the conversation. The important part is that this is offensive to someone (me) and it causes someone (me) distress. And, again, it's something that costs the other person nothing. It does not cost them anything to not call out my children as half breeds to their face. All it costs them is a tiny bit of restraint on their part to just... not say that.

Where the people come from isn't really the issue. My children aren't from Canada. They were born here. Go to school here. Will likely live here their entire lives, just like any other immigrant family anywhere in the world. It's not about dealing with mixed Japanese (and note, half only refers to mixed Japanese heritage) heritage people who come from another country. It's about not being called out as different every time you meet someone. Additionally, since it only applies to someone of mixed Japanese heritage - someone who was mixed Chinese and English heritage for example wouldn't be referred to this way.

Even if it's not malicious, and it's certainly not frothing at the mouth, epithet screaming racism, it's still a really bad look and it honestly and truly pisses me off. Heck, I don't even think it bothers my children as much as it bothers me if I'm being 100% honest. But, it's still something that costs people nothing to fix. So why not fix it?

 

[Umbran]

It is not fair to ask someone in thread who was already banned from it and can't respond.

Quite right. My apologies.

This makes it sound as though you're not familiar with "dog whistling."

I am more than familiar.

However, if the context and details matter, as was suggested, that applies to both sides. To say, "You must listen to me for my context and nuance of meaning, but I can just say you are using a dog whistle," would be an unfair double standard.

If you want to be given empathy, you must also practice it.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I'm slowly working on an adventure for publication and coming up with intelligent enemies that everyone is OK with sticking a sword in, and who no one would would reasonably try to bargain with or see their point of view (because for an introductory adventure, sometimes you just want the players to learn how to do some basic combat and learn about the hazards of a dungeon) has been a challenge. They can't all be mindless undead, after all.

Faeries? Monsters that go "poof" and get back to their own dimension when killed (or reduced at X HP)? Honestly there is no intersection between "no one would reasonably try to bargain with" and "self-aware". As soon as something understands its own mortality, it will be open to bargain (at gunpoint, maybe).

 

[Hussar]

They are acting correctly from their own cultural perspective and are likely ignorant of the Western perspective.

"Ignorant" is the operative word here. Like I said, from their own perspective, they see absolutely nothing wrong with it. After all, it is literally true. But, that's the sticky part isn't it. It's not racist from their perspective, but, their perspective is 100% based in their own existence as the majority. Because Japan perceives itself as homogeneous, their perspective is the only one that matters to them.

Which is the heart of bigotry and racism. Only accepting a specific, singular perspective and never questioning it. It's not malicious, I truly believe that. As was mentioned up thread, one cannot be taken to task for not knowing something. But, it's the unquestioning ignorance that leads to so many bad things. Ignorance may be blissful, but it's ultimately a very, very bad thing.

And it gets to be a worse thing when people actively try to justify that ignorance.

 

[Vaalingrade]

A major problem is the tendency for people, when told that something is hurtful, to look deep inside themselves... and consider how they and they alone feel about that. And from they, formulate their reaction, including justifying that thing and its hurtful nature if it's something they have an attachment (no matter how distant) to.

"A species in a revived obscure D&D setting had to be changed because of racist tropes?

Well I like D&D and I know I'm a good and racism is bad, and therefor nothing I like or connected to something I like can be racist, so there must be some sort of foul play. Who is to blame for this foul play? That is the important objective here. No need to ask why it as considered racist, because like I said, I'm not racist and I wish people would stop calling me racist for saying something tangently related to a hobby of mine racist."