What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Faolyn]

No I can understand that. But you're pivoting, once again in the argument (some call it goal post shifting)

You've argued genre
You've argued lets be sensitive to victims within the fiction
You've argued let's throw away this colour because we can draw with other colours
You've argued everything or nothing verisimilitude
Others have argued age recommendation (not sure if you have)

No, not really. Y'all have tried to bring in poor metaphors and I've gone with them.

You guys have tried to say that what's OK in a horror game should be OK in a lighter heroic fantasy, which says that you don't understand the difference between different types of games or what's appropriate in each genre.

You guys have said that people who don't want to play in a game that involves slavery should find another game, which says that you don't care about being sensitive to real people in the real world.

You guys have tried to say that you have to include every color for a game to be worthwhile or rich, which says that you think that slavery is necessary for verisimilitude, that games aren't as full or real without it, to the point that you are willing to ignore all the other things that make a setting interesting.

You guys have tried to say that slavery is needed for the game to feel real while not caring about anything else that feels real, which says that it's not verisimilitude you care about; it's treating slavery as a fun plot point.

Now if you're willing to stick with this pivot, this hopefully final pivot - my meet you half way remark (which was posted some 10-15 pages back) would be, how about a warning label? Eclipse Phase which deals with worse stuff doesn't have one but I'm meeting you half way and asking - are you ok with a warning label for a product that deals with this such as a Dark Sun setting book or a DS adventure? Can you meet me half way?

Sure, warning labels are fine. D&D is labeled for people who are 12 years old. No amount of warning labels are going to change that or make slavery appropriate for that age group, at least according to WotC and Hasbro, and it's unlikely that WotC and Hasbro are going to start producing an adult line. I don't know what age groups Eclipse Phase is marketed to, or if they're beholden to a major toy company that markets to children, which means comparisons between them and WotC are not useful.

 

[Minion X]

But, even in the 90's, you have Wild Wild West (terrible movie though it is) where the protagonist is black instead of white.

But, let's be honest here, when REH includes people who aren't white (never minding pretty much every other genre author of the time) they're generally not presented in the most culturally sensitive way, to say the least.

I was thinking of fantasy literature and roleplaying games, not mainstream media (though maybe Vampire embraced some of the MTV aesthetic?). And regarding early fantasy literature, that is part of the point I was making. Back in the 30s, a bit of racism was practically a selling point to the audience of magazines like Weird Tales (though I could argue that there is a lot of nuance in Howard's stories, especially Solomon Kane and some his historicals, but that does not really belong here), but there were actually black people in them. When racism started becoming more controversial and people began imitating Tolkien with secondary worlds and whatnot, black people disappeared. You got popular fictional worlds that have no black people at all, like everything by David Eddings.

 

[Scribe]

So, would you say that I'm being unreasonable here? That I'm only saying this because I "don't like it"? I certainly don't think so. I certainly would not tell my children, "Hey, you want to play D&D? Here's Shadows over Innsmouth. Yeah, I know that it's a thinly veiled allegory directly aimed at you, but, hey, you should read it because, well, not liking it isn't a good enough reason."

"Want to play D&D?"
"Yes!"
"Here's a story written in the 30s, by an openly racist individual."

Huh?

Maybe, pick another story/adventure?

We still have Cthulu Mythos floating around in D&D, how much of it plays on Lovecraft's tropes that are racist?

I wouldnt play an adventure, or read books that lean heavily into sexual assault. I put down one of the more recent Drizzt novels for just that reason, hits way too close to home.

I WOULD play an adventure, or read books, that lean heavily into mental illness/insanity, and that impacts the vast majority of my family as well.

Personal choices.

Yes, criticism has led to Paizo moving away from using slavery in their works. But what do you want, people to critique something and then say "But also, don't change anything"? The nature of criticism is to argue for a position, whether it be for change or status quo. Their argument was convincing, the argument for keeping it in was less so.

No, criticism should still have impacts, the fact there was a book or whatever where people could 'buy a slave' and the cost was listed, was clearly egregious. This is again though (in my view) a far wider, higher level shift in the hobby, not just one of slavery, but 'controversial content' as the thread states.

 

[Faolyn]

Hell no! Sure, some of them try; meanwhile others promote it and the rest don't care one way or the other.

Magic, as opposed to use of a different social structure or economic model such as serfdom or paid labour, can only make up for slavery if one or more of the following is true:

• the setting has magic widespread and powerful enough to allow for the creation of lots of golems and constructs, e.g. D&D's Eberron;

Or the Realms, or, quite frankly, nearly any other setting from about 3x onwards.

• the presence of large numbers of undead workers is tolerated by all, including those deities and religions to whom undead are anathema;

And as the GM, you can change those religions. Make the soul important, not the corpse.

• some sort of world-scale enchantment blocks the buying and-or selling of sentient creatures.

Or gods that send their clerics or angels to kill them, or their holy writ only says slavery is bad no matter what...

 

[Justice and Rule]

No, criticism should still have impacts, the fact there was a book or whatever where people could 'buy a slave' and the cost was listed, was clearly egregious. This is again though (in my view) a far wider, higher level shift in the hobby, not just one of slavery, but 'controversial content' as the thread states.

I mean, it is definitely wider, but I think the line is stuff like slavery right now because the argument is easier to defend compared to, say, colonialism "Civilizing the uncivilized" by saying you're just freeing the slaves. Now we've found a new line to try and defend against this sort of wider movement.

But honestly, it seems to me that the smarter thing would be to create worlds that actually focus on adult situations, that try to handle this stuff in a respectful manner and want to put it as a focus. People talk about being inspired by history, but you could actually try that s*** instead of using it in the same way a Cecile B. Demille picture might.

I just don't think that is something you do with D&D, the McDonald's of RPGs.

 

[Minion X]

We don't include Bill Cosby in lists of inspirational comedians, nor do we include Jimmy Saville on lists of musical inspirations.

Note that while Lovecraft was prejudiced (and very much so), he never actually harmed another human being (at least as far as I am aware) or even do something like engage in politics with the intention of enforcing his prejudices in society. Both of the people you mention are criminals who abused other people (one far more horribly so than the other), and besides, neither of them invented a revolutionary new genre that continues to have a massive influence a hundred years later. There are very few authors who come close to his influence on not only fantasy, but horror and science fiction. Lovecraft was also perfectly honest with his prejudices. On the other hand, someone like Marion Zimmer Bradley and her works should be treated with the utmost of suspicion.

 

[Kaodi]

There is actually a Cheestrings commercial right now that references, "Cthulhu, the World Eater!"

In any case how do you treat a despotic kingdom led by a dictator whose tax collectors kill people who fail to pay the oppressive taxes?

 

[Hussar]

I do think expecting Lovecraft's name to be stricken from a list of influential horror or fantasy writers is unreasonable. And while I won't care to watch a Cosby show these days, it would be silly for him not to be included on any list of influential comedians of the 20th century.

Well, this does explain why we are not going to agree here. Including Cosby on a list of inspirational comedians is a non-starter for me. Sorry, serial rapists don't get to go on inspirational lists. Nor do massive bigots who think my children should be killed.

But, I respect your point of view, although I will never agree with it.

 

[Hussar]

"Want to play D&D?"
"Yes!"
"Here's a story written in the 30s, by an openly racist individual."

Huh?

Maybe, pick another story/adventure?

We still have Cthulu Mythos floating around in D&D, how much of it plays on Lovecraft's tropes that are racist?

I wouldnt play an adventure, or read books that lean heavily into sexual assault. I put down one of the more recent Drizzt novels for just that reason, hits way too close to home.

I WOULD play an adventure, or read books, that lean heavily into mental illness/insanity, and that impacts the vast majority of my family as well.

Personal choices.



No, criticism should still have impacts, the fact there was a book or whatever where people could 'buy a slave' and the cost was listed, was clearly egregious. This is again though (in my view) a far wider, higher level shift in the hobby, not just one of slavery, but 'controversial content' as the thread states.

And, we're back to the "don't like it don't read it" line of argument. Thank you for completely sidelining my concerns, treating me as an other and not having a single shred of sympathy. "It doesn't bother me, so, it shouldn't bother you and if it does, well, it still doesn't bother me so I don't care". Yeah, that's all about promoting inclusivity in the hobby.

Again, I'm simply not going to agree here. And, the fact that it was pretty much precisely this sort of attitude that kept the genre and the hobby limited to straight white dudes for decades pretty much says it all.

 

[Hussar]

Note that while Lovecraft was prejudiced (and very much so), he never actually harmed another human being (at least as far as I am aware) or even do something like engage in politics with the intention of enforcing his prejudices in society. Both of the people you mention are criminals who abused other people (one far more horribly so than the other), and besides, neither of them invented a revolutionary new genre that continues to have a massive influence a hundred years later. There are very few authors who come close to his influence on not only fantasy, but horror and science fiction. Lovecraft was also perfectly honest with his prejudices. On the other hand, someone like Marion Zimmer Bradley and her works should be treated with the utmost of suspicion.

Again, please stick to my very, very SPECIFIC example. I never said Lovecraft should not be printed or read or removed from libraries or anything like that.

I asked for a very, very specific thing. Lovecraft's name being removed from the list of INSPIRATIONAL READING from the PHB. That's the sum total of what I am asking here. Nothing more.

But, it's funny to see how the reactions to asking for a pretty minor thing - can we not celebrate a massive bigot by giving him a prominent place in the history of the game - becomes a huge problem where I might as well be asking to eat puppies.