What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Faolyn]

While deciding what to play, I'd inform them that if we play DS that there is slavery in the setting but there will be no permission for player characters to participate in that system. No taking slaves, no buying slaves, no taking hostages and selling them into slavery. Nada, zip, zilch, zero. It exists for flavor and for possible story hooks that may bring the PCs into conflict with those who condone and practice it.

Edit: Short Version - Something existing in a setting is not the same as saying PCs can use it.

And according to many people in this thread, you would be wrecking Dark Sun as a setting.

 

[Thourne]

And according to many people in this thread, you would be wrecking Dark Sun as a setting.

I don't believe so. People have been saying you cant remove the slavery and have Dark Sun.
I believe most people are not advocating for characters to have their hands in it.
Something can be in the setting and off limits to the characters in all the icky ways.

 

[Maxperson]

I believe the argument was that WotC doesn’t want to be perceived as supporting slavery and that they (WotC) think including slavery in Dark Sun could be perceived that way.

So the argument is that people are too dumb to notice that having slavery in Dark Sun isn't support, so they will perceive it as support?

 

[AnotherGuy]

Just a brief mention of real-world stakes: in 2022, a county superintendent of schools in Iowa would not commit to whether it was okay or not for a teacher to say “Slavery is wrong.”

You can say this is a direct legacy of slavery or you could call this county superintendent a racist.

In Florida, textbooks are not permitted to mention Rosa Parks’ race.

This is so misleading, very much like most news outlets these days.
The article states it was one publisher which softened the Rosa Parks issue and didn't mention race. Was this publisher approved? Was this the only publisher considered for textbooks?...etc
Why don't we know the answer to these questions - because who cares about good journalism, amirite?

Just to show the non-theoretical nature of the concerns: more and more, the history and consequences of slavery are being wrapped up in official lies.

I would not jump to that conclusion but hey you do you.

 

[Irlo]

So the argument is that people are too dumb to notice that having slavery in Dark Sun isn't support, so they will perceive it as support?

No. The argument -- which isn't mine, remember! -- is that WotC is concerned that people will perceive the inclusion of slavery in Dark Sun as supporting slavery. [EDIT: And I'll add that supporting slavery doesn't mean supporting slavery in real life but rather supporting the practice of slavery by PCs.]

Maybe that means that WotC thinks people are dumb. Maybe that means WotC is dumb. Maybe WotC thinks DS fans are too dumb to accept a DS reboot without slavery included.

Maybe dumb doesn't factor into it. Maybe WotC thinks that people will be put off by the inclusion of slavery for good and valid reasons.

 

[AnotherGuy]

And according to many people in this thread, you would be wrecking Dark Sun as a setting.

Here is an alternate idea.
What if, the PCs acquire slaves with the purpose of making them free-persons? What if they're arming these free-persons and building a militia? I have never played DS, so I am just throwing out some ideas, not sure how feasible they are within the DS setting.

 

[Thourne]

So the argument is that people are too dumb to notice that having slavery in Dark Sun isn't support, so they will perceive it as support?

Based on wotc's recent track record can you really be surprised when the logic is bad? Lol

 

[CrackingKraken]

I don't believe so. People have been saying you cant remove the slavery and have Dark Sun.
I believe most people are not advocating for characters to have their hands in it.
Something can be in the setting and off limits to the characters in all the icky ways.

This is the approach that Gamma World took with the Knights of Genetic Purity. It is an overtly racist (species-ist?) organization that actively seeks to harm anyone or anything other then Pure Strain Humans, and it is officially off limits to the PCs. (whether players or GMs choose to do otherwise, TSR/WOTC absolved themselves of culpability within the rule book)

 

[AnotherGuy]

This is the approach that Gamma World took with the Knights of Genetic Purity. It is an overtly racist (species-ist?) organization that actively seeks to harm anyone or anything other then Pure Strain Humans, and it is officially off limits to the PCs. (whether players or GMs choose to do otherwise, TSR/WOTC absolved themselves of culpability within the rule book)

In HotDQ you come across the elf Dralmorrer Borngray, that is both a Cultist of the Wearer of Purple rank as well as a member of the Eldreth Veluuthra (an Elven supremacist faction). I thought it interesting to have that dichotomy of ideologies within an NPC, you could really play that up.

EDIT: I'm of the opinion that these ideas can create interesting characters that provide interesting dialogue and enrich the storylines. Just look at Al Pacino's character in the Devil's Advocate and the dialogue he used to try and persuade Keanu's character at the end. There was no question he was evil, but that speech he gave is just epic. I can still recite it all.

 

[Hussar]

Heh. I’ve only played one Dark Sun campaign.

Slavery afaik wasn’t mentioned at all. It certainly did t stand out if it was mentioned.

Guess I’ve never actually played Dark Sun. Really did enjoy that campaign though.