What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Voadam]

Chattel slavery? I don't see much reason to keep it on the table generally, for like, mainstream settings, unless there's a very specific reason to - it's a bit like rape and so on, you don't just put in casually or even, let's be real "because it would be realistic". It just doesn't help anyone, and doesn't make for a game people actually want to play, does it?

Plus historically it's unusual - most slavery through human history has been more akin to indentured servitude or "prisoners with jobs". Even Roman slavery which was technically chattel slavery tended to operate a bit differently from later forms, with more crossover with indentured servitude.

Obviously it would be extremely weird and problematic to set a game in say, the US pre-1865 or the Roman Empire and not have it as an element, at least in the background, but very few people play historical RPGs.

Dark Sun with indentured servitude but not chattel slavery would be a bit weird.

There would be no threat of slavers and no slavers to directly fight.

Gladiators as indentured servants can kind of work in a horrific ultra-capitalism critique/spin but it is a lot different than the typical Spartacus slave gladiator setup that Dark Sun traditionally has.

You would switch a bit of the fantasy ancient civilization vibe that Dark Sun has to a more European colonial capitalism one.

You don't breed muls for indentured servitude.

Escaping indentured servitude and freeing people from indentured servitude would have a significantly different connotation than from full on chattel slavery.

It would be a setup for a more cyberpunk/shadowrun escaping the wage slave paradigm rather than Spartacus killing the slavers thing that Dark Sun has built in.

 

[Faolyn]

Nope. Never have heard that one.

Lucky you. That's a very common belief. I used to hear it all the time when I would argue with homophobes.

No. You don't get to invent fiction about me and then accuse me of engaging in your invented fiction. I never said or implied that your argument fails. I simply answered your question.

So you didn't say that Dark Sun wouldn't be Dark Sun without slavery, thus meaning that my argument that it would be failed? Really?

It's an integral part of the Realms. It still exists in my game as a result.

First off, you didn't answer my question. Is the Forgotten Realms setting no longer truly the Forgotten Realms now that the Wall has officially been removed?

Secondly, doesn't this just mean that, if WotC were to produce a slave-free Dark Sun, you would be fully capable of adding it back in? Especially since you have all of the 2e and 4e books to show you how?

Thirdly, it doesn't bother you at all that the Wall is attacking a group of people who actually exist in real life? I'm not going to ask what your religious beliefs are, but as an atheist, it bothers me that this game thinks people like me deserve to be punished and potentially get turned into a demon. I get enough of that $#!% in real life.

The same as the force. It's fundamental also because it was "always there." These settings were designed with these aspects being important to them.

Reminds me of a bumper sticker I once saw, which said something about how traditional family values used to include beating your wife and kids (and how it's good that's no longer an accepted family value).

Slavery wasn't included in Dark Sun because it was important to the setting or because the setting needs it. It was added because it's a trope. It's only "important" inasmuch as every swords-and-sandals setting storyline has slaves. Which means that having slaves in Dark Sun is typical and, as a result, boring. It's up there with having ever advisor to the king be a goatee-sporting traitor.

So remove it from your Dark Sun. Nobody would be requiring you to keep or use it.

You have already suggested it would easy enough for you to add it back in in the same way it was easy for you to add the Wall back to the Realms, so there's no reason why it would need to be in a 5e product.

 

[Voadam]

First off, you didn't answer my question. Is the Forgotten Realms setting no longer truly the Forgotten Realms now that the Wall has officially been removed?

My understanding is that the 5e Forgotten Realms print Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide had a reference to the wall and that in errata they said to take out the reference, they have not however affirmatively said anything directly about the wall or its nonexistence. They are just officially leaving it unaddressed instead of something they have directly said affirmatively is a change from prior editions.

 

[HectorsNemesis]

Dark Sun was last released in 2010 and was used in public play in 2011.
So what changed in the last 12 years to make it "controversial"?

 

[Faolyn]

My understanding is that the 5e Forgotten Realms print Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide had a reference to the wall and that in errata they said to take out the reference, they have not however affirmatively said anything directly about the wall or its nonexistence. They are just officially leaving it unaddressed instead of something they have directly said affirmatively is a change from prior editions.

Just like a hypothetical 5e Dark Sun would presumably leave slavery out.

 

[Faolyn]

Dark Sun was last released in 2010 and was used in public play in 2011.
So what changed in the last 12 years to make it "controversial"?

People are more willing to speak out about how it's not cool. Especially because there's a rising number of really awful people since then who say it's not cool.

 

[Irlo]

Sure, but there are plenty of games that draw heavily from the periods you mention, while not actually being those periods point for point. Does it have to be strictly historical? Rome in particular has been used in whole or in part dozens of times in games. Are we not allowed to use Roman-style slavery in those situations anymore?

I’m not sure why this keeps coming up. This isn’t about what we’re allowed to do. No one here has the authority or power to disallow us from using any content in our games or to prohibit a business from publishing whatever they want to publish.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Just like a hypothetical 5e Dark Sun would presumably leave slavery out.

Slavery is a much bigger part of Dark Sun than the Wall of the Faithless is to the Realms, regardless of how any of us might feel about either.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Dark Sun was last released in 2010 and was used in public play in 2011.
So what changed in the last 12 years to make it "controversial"?

Well, in no particular order-

1. D&D is much more popular than it has ever been, and certainly it is more "on the radar" at Hasbro than it was in 2011.

2. Social media is a lot more prevalent, which means that anything can become a scandal.

3. The last major scandal (non-OGL category) involved the Hardozee, and they were raked over the coals not just because of the minstrel element of the illustrations, but also because of the former slave race part.

As you can see from the conversation going on here, there are difficult elements when discussing slavery, especially in America, especially right now, and most companies would probably rather avoid the topic.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m not sure why this keeps coming up. This isn’t about what we’re allowed to do. No one here has the authority or power to disallow us from using any content in our games or to prohibit a business from publishing whatever they want to publish.

Sure, but are you and others saying that, regardless of your personal ability to make sweeping changes, you want these topics to be off-limits in published material?