D&D General D&D Assumptions Ain't What They Used To Be

[Hussar]

In other words, people can be blind to certain things because their experience is not universal.

This needs to be repeated many, many times.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The modern era certainly seems like it really wants anyone who grew up back then to feel bad about themselves, yes.

Mod Note:

No. And we’ve had plenty of threads on ENWorld discussing why this is not true. As I recall, you’ve been a participant in more than a couple of them.

Regardless, if you continue to beat this particular political drum on ENWorld, things will not go well for you. Understood?

 

[MGibster]

I have to say, I can't think of a single time I've heard anyone argue that I should feel bad because I liked material we might find "problematic" today. I think a lot of people are still trying to figure out the best way to reconcile their love of older material which contains aspects that go against their current values. The most difficult part of this is that it's a process rather than something you ever complete. You will constantly assess and reassess your opinion of works from the past.

As a fan of H.P. Lovecraft's work, I'm lucky in that I never have to contend with problematic content.

 

[Hussar]

I have to say, I can't think of a single time I've heard anyone argue that I should feel bad because I liked material we might find "problematic" today. I think a lot of people are still trying to figure out the best way to reconcile their love of older material which contains aspects that go against their current values. The most difficult part of this is that it's a process rather than something you ever complete. You will constantly assess and reassess your opinion of works from the past.

As a fan of H.P. Lovecraft's work, I'm lucky in that I never have to contend with problematic content.

I'd argue that it's not so much about "making people feel bad". It's about trying to move forward while getting people to actually acknowledge that a problem exists at all.

Lovecraft is a perfect example. I've argued repeatedly that Lovecraft's name should not be on the list of "recommended reading" in the 5e Player's Handbook. I do truly believe that. The recommended reading list is not a bibliography. It is not serving any academic purpose. It's a list of works that are being suggested to inspire people's games. And, while I'm also a Lovecraft fan, I do recognize that his works are filled with some incredibly brutal bigotry. Stuff that .... well... probably shouldn't inspire anyone's game.

Is Lovecraft a major figure in the genre? Of course. Any serious student of the genre absolutely should read Lovecraft. Totally agree with that.

Should the Player's Handbook and WotC endorse Lovecraft as something you should read to inspire your games? I don't think so. I think there are other works that are just as inspiring that don't make me want to wash my eyes out with bleach after reading. And, yes, different times, different whatever. Sure. But, in the Player's Handbook? Maybe it would be better to leave that one out.

Does that make me a bad person for reading Lovecraft and enjoying it? For listening to Lovecraft Week on things like Drabblecast? Dunno. Don't care. I do know that I don't really want someone's first dip into the genre to start with Lovecraft.

 

[MGibster]

And, while I'm also a Lovecraft fan, I do recognize that his works are filled with some incredibly brutal bigotry. Stuff that .... well... probably shouldn't inspire anyone's game.

I trust people to use good judgment to pick and choose what they're inspired by.

Should the Player's Handbook and WotC endorse Lovecraft as something you should read to inspire your games?

I think it should for many of the reasons you've already pointed out. The fact that his inclusion in a suggested reading list is not serving any academic purpose is irrelevant to me.

I do know that I don't really want someone's first dip into the genre to start with Lovecraft.

I don't think that's something you have to worry about. I don't think anything written by Lovecraft is anyone's first dip into anything these days. It sure as heck wasn't mine.

 

[Clint_L]

Yeah, a lot of pop culture from my youth has elements that haven't aged well. Such is always the way. Doesn't mean we were bad people, or that pop culture is without value. It just means that it, like everything else, has to be taken in context.

Older folks feeling judged by younger folks, and vice versa, is the way of the world. If it makes anyone feel better, consider that before too long, we'll all be safely dead and those whippersnappers will be the ones complaining about feeling judged and taken out of context.

As for that Dragon article: yeah, it's pretty on the nose for attitudes of the time. Consider that Revenge of the Nerds was a box office hit in 1984, and the titular nerds, our "heroes," commit crimes including breaking and entering, assault with a chemical agent, invasion of privacy, voyeurism, sexual trafficking, and any number of sexual assaults, including the infamous scene at the end, which is depicted as a glorious triumph. I'm pretty sure we know what they would have done with an invisibility spell or potion.

I watched 16 Candles with my kid, after telling him what a classic it is. About halfway through he looked at me and said, "You know this film is pretty messed up, right?"

 

[Clint_L]

My copy of The Making of the Original Dungeons and Dragons just arrived this week. I love it so much. And there's a lot of content that I now consider hideously problematic (e.g. the depiction of an Amazon warrior). Those things can both be true, and it's fine.

 

[Hussar]

I think it should for many of the reasons you've already pointed out. The fact that his inclusion in a suggested reading list is not serving any academic purpose is irrelevant to me.

Fair enough. And I know that people will disagree with me. But, I do stand by my point. As a parent of mixed heritage children, I'm not really going to point my kids towards Shadow over Innsmouth as an inspiration for their gaming. The hobby has enough massively bigoted works already. It doesn't really need to point to someone like Lovecraft, whose works are incredibly bigoted and say, "Hey, new player? Just getting into the hobby? Looking for something to inspire your game? Why don't you read this thing that is telling you that not only are you personally disgusting and evil, but you are a perversion of nature that should be murdered at birth."

I think that perhaps, just maybe, we could leave Lovecraft out of a list of "inspiring works". Kinda like how we don't have a bust of his head as an award for excellent writing.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I watched 16 Candles with my kid, after telling him what a classic it is. About halfway through he looked at me and said, "You know this film is pretty messed up, right?"

It really has not aged well.

 

[Seramus]

As a member of the Jewish community, I don't think that getting rid of liches having phylacteries is progress in the slightest.

There was even a petition by Jewish D&D players going around that affirmed they were fine with the use of the term phylactery. I think it got around 3k signatures before it lost steam.