D&D 5E D&D's Inclusivity Language Alterations In Core Rules

In recent months, WotC has altered some of the text found in the original 5th Edition core rulebooks to accommodate D&D's ongoing move towards inclusivity. Many of these changes are reflected on D&D Beyond already--mainly small terminology alterations in descriptive text, rather than rules changes.

Teos Abadia (also known as Alphastream) has compiled a list of these changes. I've posted a very abbreviated, paraphrased version below, but please do check out his site for the full list and context.

• Savage foes changed to brutal, merciless, or ruthless.
• Barbarian hordes changed to invading hordes.
• References to civilized people and places removed.
• Madness or insanity removed or changed to other words like chaos.
• Usage of orcs as evil foes changed to other words like raiders.
• Terms like dim-witted and other synonyms of low intelligence raced with words like incurious.
• Language alterations surrounding gender.
• Fat removed or changed to big.
• Use of terms referring to slavery reduced or altered.
• Use of dark when referring to evil changed to words like vile or dangerous.

This is by no means the full list, and much more context can be found on Alphastream's blog post.

 

[GothmogIV]

This water got deep fast.

 

[Irlo]

Printing, "The savage swords of chaos!" or some other silliness in a fantasy game book should not be grounds for mass upheaval and public shaming. It's all just gone too far and too wide, in my opinion. I was totally on board for a while, but the train has just gone off the rails for me.

Yes, it shouldn’t be. Also, it hasn’t been. Also, it won’t be.

Mass upheaval? Public shaming? Yeah, that’s not a thing.

 

[Reynard]

In the same vein, I have chosen not to use fennel in my favourite sausage pasta dish.

You.
Monster.

 

[Reynard]

Oooh. I missed that too. I LOVE the idea of orcs being a sort of magical "curse" for humanoids that have descended into anger and rage.

Although... thinking about the visuals... that actually might be an easy thing to misconstrue.

The "civilized" group loses control, descends into barbarity and rage and becomes an orc. Thinking about that... that might get icky in a serious hurry.

In one setting I created, most non human races were fey of some sort, and I made goblins and gnomes the same "species" but goblins were those whose mischievousness turned to malevolence.

 

[AstroCat]

Ah, OK, now I get it. I couldn’t work out why you were so upset. You’ve confused WotC with some kind of international law enforcement organisation which monitors and controls your speech.

No, when WotC uses or doesn’t use certain language, they are not saying that you are legally obligated to use or not to use those words.

In the same vein, I have chosen not to use fennel in my favourite sausage pasta dish. However, let me assure you that that does not mean that it is now illegal for you to use fennel. I am not an international spice police organisation

Hope that helps! WotC is just a game publisher using the words it wants to use. Use whatever words you want.

The word ‘savage’ is in no way, as you confusedly claim, “not allowed”, and WotC has no police who will stop you from using it.

Oh come on, really? You know that's not what I think, that's absurd, come on. You are just doing the standard very selective deflect with absurdity thing. You did it on my other post as well, it seems you are more interested in jaded responses, than actual discourse. Even when I smiley faced joked about trying to not make you mad, and was trying to avoid a negative discussion you went straight past that. I’m not sure what bucket you’ve put me in, but I’m not in it.

It's a long culminative effect of many changes over the last 2-3 years; mechanical, art, content and others that have soured me on the latest version of neo-5e wotc d&d. I even previously said we still play 5e, a version more resembling the launch version, mechanical and lore wise. So of course we tailor to our desires for the game. But these very current and the numerous other changes make reading, absorbing and participating in the latest iterations uninspiring and not enjoyable.

It is so strange to me to find this view, that I don't find the current version of wotc d&d inspiring and fun to spend time with so inconceivable, like it's affront to all that is good in the world, the brand loyalty is almost astounding.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Considering that orc is and continues to be used as a way to refer to entire groups of people as evil... you would have already lost that metaphor, considering how god damn harmful it is.

You can't lose a metaphor. You just have fewer people willing to see it.

 

[Nightfly]

Printing, "The savage swords of chaos!" or some other silliness in a fantasy game book should not be grounds for mass upheaval and public shaming.

Well, it's a good thing nothing remotely like "mass upheaval" or "public shaming" has happened! You must be so relieved.

I don't think innocent children should burst into flames whenever someone uses a decimal...and as it turns out, they totally don't! So that's nice. And also why I don't get bent out of shape about people using decimals.

 

[Lanefan]

Offense is not the issue here. The emphasis on female virginity as a virtue, and that its loss somehow spoils a maiden’s purity - in this case making their presence no longer tolerable to a unicorn - is a perpetuation of a longstanding cultural practice of using shame to control women’s sexuality. If one thinks a sexually liberated society is a thing worth pursuing, one would be ill-served by uncritically perpetuating such practices.

Agreed.

That said, is there a way to keep the myth without perpetuating the shaming of women's sexuality?

 

[AstroCat]

Well, it's a good thing nothing remotely like "mass upheaval" or "public shaming" has happened! You must be so relieved.

I don't think innocent children should burst into flames whenever someone uses a decimal...and as it turns out, they totally don't! So that's nice. And also why I don't get bent out of shape about people using decimals.

Telll that to wotc, not me. They are ones changing all their actual books to remove it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's clearly assumed in the core books and WotC products.
A group of orcs doing bad things is valid for combat. The orc that works the farm is not.

Well, there still seems to be confusion on that score, so maybe is shouldn't be assumed that everyone knows what WotC's trying to say here.