D&D 5E Dark Sun, problematic content, and 5E…

[ReshiIRE]

Well, as far as I can tell Paizo still has their older products with slavery references in them up. I don't think they have ever unrelelased a PDF? But I might be misinformed.

So while they will probably convert more Pathfinder 1e adventures to 2e, as far as I can tell they don't limit others in doinjg those conversions themselves. That's pretty different to WoTC.

Then again, chattel slavery was limited in Pathfinder lore to one particular region for the most part (though Pathfinder 2e lore does mention it was only outlawed in Absalom just around the time Pathfinder 2e is set, which is yikes to me). That is also pretty different to Dark Sun.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I’m sure they would. And they’re being told quite honestly and clearly why that isn’t going to happen.

WotC can remove themselves as license holders of the setting.

Not sure why you’re bringing Paizo into this. They’ve clearly stated that they will not use slavery in their products going forward. Which means they will never rerelease any earlier products that used slavery without excising slavery from it.

And they get a hearty pat onthe back and a big thumbs up from the fandom.

WotC does EXACTLY the same thing. And we have multiple threads shouting from the rooftops that WotC is stoopid.

The irony here could built steam engines.

Why do I bring Paizo into this? Because Paizo have nothing to offer. No license. The pat on the back is likely from a loud minority. That's my guess. I can't imagine "fans of slavery" protesting to Paizo for the inclusion of slavery in their products. What you have are DS hardcore fans wanting the setting to stay intact by WotC, the current holders of the DS license. Its not apples and apples.

 

[Campbell]

I’m sure they would. And they’re being told quite honestly and clearly why that isn’t going to happen.

Not sure why you’re bringing Paizo into this. They’ve clearly stated that they will not use slavery in their products going forward. Which means they will never rerelease any earlier products that used slavery without excising slavery from it.

And they get a hearty pat onthe back and a big thumbs up from the fandom.

WotC does EXACTLY the same thing. And we have multiple threads shouting from the rooftops that WotC is stoopid.

The irony here could built steam engines.

I agree the same standard should apply. I also remember the Pathfinder Baseline being a contentious issue on theses forums in the runup to PF2's release.

 

[MGibster]

No. Actually it 100% is the responsibility of everyone to help people in need and be a positive force to help them “cope”. Your need to be entertained is far, far less important than easing someone’s pain.

This is ridiculous and I don't believe any mental health expert would suggest this as a coping mechanism. You simply can't remove everything from role playing games, novels, comics, video games, motion pictures, television shows, plays, and poems that might trigger someone. Expecting the rest of the world to revolve around an individual's pain is both unrealistic and not at all helpful to anyone. Do you know of any mental health experts who argue that we should avoid some subjects in fiction? Or do they provide their patients with useful ways to cope with their triggers?

 

[Cergorach]

I feel slavery is perfectly fine within a fantasy RPG.

'Perfectly fine' it is not, but as with anything, it depends on your audience and how you use it. In DS it's pretty much baked into the part of the setting of the Evil city states, without those, there is imho very little left of DS. DS is an Evil setting in a different way that Ravenloft is an Evil setting, DS is more gritty and touches some problematic RL related issues. In DS all the problematic RL related issues are constantly in your face and that's why WotC is seeing this as a no-win scenario. Dark Sun has always been a niche product, so sales would always be relatively limited. And WotC already messed up with the Spelljammer reboot, even with all the bleaching of the setting, still things got past the bleachers and they had to apologize publicly for it. While many old skool Spelljammer fans just didn't bother picking up the product due to the bleaching... So DS has a bigger chance to blow up in WotC's face while potentially getting even fewer sales due to old fans not accepting the thorough bleaching of the setting. Why would WotC even bother with it?

Imho, DS could get a proper treatment if it was treated like an adult expansion, like the old 3E Book of Vile Darkness. But I wonder if certain loud groups on the Internet wouldn't still blast away at WotC because of it.

Slavery is an issue, even though it's done in an Evil empire. While from the PHB you can play an Evil Necromancer that kills the masses and turn those into it's undead minions... The big difference: we can collectively ignore that possibility. We don't talk about fightclub!

So slavery isn't 'perfectly fine' in a fantasy setting. But that doesn't mean it can't be acceptable in your fantasy setting to you, your group or even a (large) DS fanbase. But it can be to many others not acceptable. Imho it completely depends on your group. Mine generally likes to play the heroes and fighting evil. The evil doesn't need to be detailed in gory detail, nor do they need to hear what a pack of rampaging Ogres does to a village in detail. They are playing in an action movie, not a historical documentary or a gore slasher movie... But I've also played in groups where more edgy subjects are perfectly fine.

Why are both Paizo and WotC going this way? Because this way they can reach the most amount of people while appeasing certain loud groups. Both companies have a large (potential) market that appears sensitive to these issues.

 

[Maxperson]

I believe you are correct. Slavery in DS is a ubiquitous evil that the PCs just have to tolerate much of the time.

Not tolerate. Endure. Until they are high enough level that they can do something about it. Not every horrible thing needs to be combatable starting at 1st level.

 

[Faolyn]

You feel this strongly about all entertainment or does the banhammer only come down on minor hobbies?

RPGs (and here I'm including video games and LARPS) are far more immersive than probably any other type of entertainment.

You watch a movie involving slavery, you are a passive participant. You play a game involving slavery, you are an active participant. People have pointed out that the first DS module involved the PCs being slaves. In other words, you were a slave.

Name one other type of entertainment that makes you the slave. Or the slave owner.

 

[Cergorach]

Why do you presume that WotC MUST make a product just for you that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, will make other people unhappy?

While I agree that WotC has moved into a position in the market that will result them making products that might no longer appeal to 'older' D&D fans (they already have from my perspective). And we should look at others to fill in the gaps.

Your premise is a bit faulty, because others insist that WotC MUST make a product that they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, will make other people unhappy! In the same way TSR ignored the people making the D&D=devilworship, WotC is now listening to other parts of society...

 

[AnotherGuy]

'Perfectly fine' it is not, but as with anything, it depends on your audience and how you use it. In DS it's pretty much baked into the part of the setting of the Evil city states, without those, there is imho very little left of DS. DS is an Evil setting in a different way that Ravenloft is an Evil setting, DS is more gritty and touches some problematic RL related issues. In DS all the problematic RL related issues are constantly in your face and that's why WotC is seeing this as a no-win scenario. Dark Sun has always been a niche product, so sales would always be relatively limited. And WotC already messed up with the Spelljammer reboot, even with all the bleaching of the setting, still things got past the bleachers and they had to apologize publicly for it. While many old skool Spelljammer fans just didn't bother picking up the product due to the bleaching... So DS has a bigger chance to blow up in WotC's face while potentially getting even fewer sales due to old fans not accepting the thorough bleaching of the setting. Why would WotC even bother with it?

Imho, DS could get a proper treatment if it was treated like an adult expansion, like the old 3E Book of Vile Darkness. But I wonder if certain loud groups on the Internet wouldn't still blast away at WotC because of it.

Slavery is an issue, even though it's done in an Evil empire. While from the PHB you can play an Evil Necromancer that kills the masses and turn those into it's undead minions... The big difference: we can collectively ignore that possibility. We don't talk about fightclub!

So slavery isn't 'perfectly fine' in a fantasy setting. But that doesn't mean it can't be acceptable in your fantasy setting to you, your group or even a (large) DS fanbase. But it can be to many others not acceptable. Imho it completely depends on your group. Mine generally likes to play the heroes and fighting evil. The evil doesn't need to be detailed in gory detail, nor do they need to hear what a pack of rampaging Ogres does to a village in detail. They are playing in an action movie, not a historical documentary or a gore slasher movie... But I've also played in groups where more edgy subjects are perfectly fine.

Why are both Paizo and WotC going this way? Because this way they can reach the most amount of people while appeasing certain loud groups. Both companies have a large (potential) market that appears sensitive to these issues.

I don't get bent out of shape about slavery in all its other forms within D&D as I don't worry about it in other forms of media - music, video/pc games, novels and movies/series.
It's perfectly fine TO ME and no one is going to tell me otherwise.

I don't like the suffering or murder of animals and yet I cannot tell you how many have been butchered within my games.
Why is that? Because it's perfectly fine.

There are things which are not perfectly fine TO ME. I have lines like everyone else - but slavery is not one because it's prevalent in D&D already - it's just been disguised well so that most ppl don't make the connection.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, but some people won't, and I don't think Wizards wants to get stories about people coming to a game and finding people interacting in the setting because "Well, it's not evil in the setting!" or something like that. Similarly I think when you have such an outrageous evil being committed, many players are going to feel like the entire game is going to be about eliminating that institutional system and will have problems interacting with other things while that still exists.

They already have that. I can sit down with the core rules and tell every kind of story I can think of and call it D&D. If they want to avoid horrible stories being associated with D&D, they need to stop making it.