D&D General Just sweeping dirty dishes under the rug: D&D, Sexism, and the '70s

[Mannahnin]

Well Midnight came out ages ago. But I wasn't saying these things don't exist. However can you provide more context to my 'narrow' remark. I want to answer his as accurately as I can and I can't remember the statement I made about narrowness exactly to do so. I mean Lamentations exists, but most designers and publishers wouldn't want to take the kind of social punishment that goes with making a product line like that. There is a real cost of putting out material people deem edgy. And it feels like it didn't used to be this way.

You wrote:

Again, there are more games now than ever. And most fly under the radar. But if you have any amount of visibility, you definitely have had to check yourself in the past ten years. I have seen it myself first hand and heard it directly from other designers, and you see it in end products on the shelves. I am not saying you can't do dark and edgy but it has to be done in a narrow way I think if you don't want push back. But importantly, that is changing. The tide is shifting in this respect and things do seem to be opening up again

I wrote:

What's "narrow" about the variety of dark content shown in, again for specific, real-world examples, Midnight, Xoth, Lamentations, Hyperborea, Viking Death Squad, and Shadowdark?

Sure, Midnight and Carcosa are more than ten years old. The others are current or new. Could you please tell me specifically WHAT kind of books and products are suffering "prior restraint" and not getting published?

Lots of people have been agressively dogpiled. It happens all the time on social media. And it happens all the time to designers when they put stuff out. Again, this is something that is so self evident to anyone online, I just think obvious is the only language to use. Everybody reading this knows what i am talking about here.

I'm dredging my memories and the only things I'm coming up with are the WS stuff in Star Frontiers: New Genesis and when WotC got a bunch of flak for the Hadozee writeup.

If it's happening "all the time" it should be easy for you to give me a few examples so I can understand what you're talking about. "Everyone reading this" definitely does not know what you are talking about here.

I think he's talking about trying to sell mature content to a general audience, and about their own publishing policy about portraying particularly brutal subject matter, like slavery. I think the particular "problematic" elements they're mostly dealing with are A) slavery, B) cannibalism, and C) Psionics, just logistically because they haven't figured out a way to do it that they like.

What's your alternative theory?

It isn't that we disagree on what the issues largely are, but I think we disagree on the why. I definitely think they are avoiding a game that deals with slavery because they know in the current climate in gaming culture, people will see it through the worst lens. They will equate its presence with an endorsement.

I think it's tricky for them to figure out how to portray a world where slavery is endemic and routine, and the players are nowhere near powerful enough to change that, and sell it to a general audience age 12 and up. Plus, ya know, cannibalism and psionics.

You think writing for LotFP tars one by association with edgy content? Or is the association issue the fact that James Raggi III strongly supports ZS, a writer who's a notoriously abusive and nasty narcissist, and apparent domestic abuser?

I think it is both. Before this even happened, one could get guilt by association with LoTFP.

Could you cite an example, please? I have hundreds of dollars of LotFP books on my shelf. I used to be a fan.

 

[Faolyn]

Perhaps WotC should open up the setting on the Guild and let other people do it then? It's not like that wouldn't be worth the squeeze.

Or, you could make and possibly even sell a game which is basically Dark Sun with the numbers filed off. Make a semi-post-apocalyptic desert-y Mad Max setting with psionics in the system of your choice (if the system has an OGL) or make your own system. You don't need actual Official Brand-Name Dark Sun(TM) to play Dark Sun.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or, you could make and possibly even sell a game which is basically Dark Sun with the numbers filed off. Make a semi-post-apocalyptic desert-y Mad Max setting with psionics in the system of your choice (if the system has an OGL) or make your own system. You don't need actual Official Brand-Name Dark Sun(TM) to play Dark Sun.

Of course. I'm just saying WotC could still make money off the property without having to produce anything for it if they chose.

 

[Faolyn]

Of course. I'm just saying WotC could still make money off the property without having to produce anything for it if they chose.

Right. But they choose not to. So if you want Dark Sun, make your own.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Of course. I'm just saying WotC could still make money off the property without having to produce anything for it if they chose.

They aren’t going to do that because Hasbro is a toy company. They need to maintain a family-friendly image. However you wash it, Dark Sun is an adult product. This may come as a shock, but they aren’t going to rerelease the Book of Vile Darkness either.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You wrote:


I wrote:


Sure, Midnight and Carcosa are more than ten years old. The others are current or new. Could you please tell me specifically WHAT kind of books and products are suffering "prior restraint" and not getting published?

Even Lamentations has been around forever at this point too. Well part of the problem with this question is it is very hard to point to games that were never made, which is kind of the point. All I can say is I think most publishers are going to think twice if they venture into anything dark or edgy (which again the big example to me, and the strongest evidence, is how WOTC came out said they couldn't do dark sun because it is too problematic). It is pretty evident in these conversations that any setting that deals with slavery for example, is going to have to be very careful because people are going to take a microscope to it (and I think that is the part that causes the chilling effect: publishers know things will be taken out of context and optics are going to matter more than the substance)

I'm dredging my memories and the only things I'm coming up with are the WS stuff in Star Frontiers: New Genesis and when WotC got a bunch of flak for the Hadozee writeup.

People have gotten dogpiled on any thread dealing with these issues. Take your pick, whether it is a thread about orcs, about whether races should be species, or dungeon delving as a stand in for colonialism. The thing that was notable to me, to bring it back to the video I made in 2016 that got brought up, is stuff that was said as a joke ten years ago when people raised concerns, became real (like the whole equating dungeon delving with colonial conquest and wringing hands over it). And I am not trying to dredge that topic up. But those were incredibly difficult topics to wade into without people really going after you if you questioned some of the assumptions that were beginning to take root

If it's happening "all the time" it should be easy for you to give me a few examples so I can understand what you're talking about. "Everyone reading this" definitely does not know what you are talking about here.

Again, everyone knows what I am talking about on this front. I don't see any value in finding individual examples of people who were dogpiled and resurrecting the dogpiling they suffered. You asked the question and I gave you my answer. I am not trying to be evasive

I think it's tricky for them to figure out how to portray a world where slavery is endemic and routine, and the players are nowhere near powerful enough to change that, and sell it to a general audience age 12 and up. Plus, ya know, cannibalism and psionics.

I think it really isn't. I was my teens when the first Dark Sun came out, and I totally understood it. I got how to play and use a setting like that. Again I think we are over invested in the search for problems here. You are taking away something that was a pretty big part of human history and ought to be part of fantasy world building. Cannibal halflings I just don't think that is a real problem for people. I don't recall anyone being phased by that. Part of my issue with how we approach this is there is a real 'thank of the children' argument. But Dark Sun isn't a setting that is intended for the very young. It is intended for audiences who are familiar with things like the Mad Max movies.

Could you cite an example, please? I have hundreds of dollars of LotFP books on my shelf. I used to be a fan.

I already told you I am not going to have a back and forth. I answered the questions. Some things I don't want to get into because it will open up a can of worms in the thread.

 

[Belen]

I loved your comment. But I want to add a little more context. The idea of self-censorship isn't just an idea- it is quite real. In First Amendment law it is referred to specifically as the "chilling effect."

It is core and foundational to the broad protections of the First Amendment. One of the most famous cases that has defined the contours of defamation law is on point - New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). That's when the Court first ruled that inadvertent false statements will always happen in robust public discourse, and therefore cannot be actionable. To allow a defamation suit because of inadvertent errors would deter people from speaking freely and engaging in protected speech, and the Court overruled the lower court because of “the chilling effect of the Alabama libel laws on First Amendment freedoms in the area of race relations.”

The basic idea behind the "chilling effect" is that we don't want to have vague or broad laws that might deter people from protected or expressive conduct. Another infamous example is US v. Stevens, where the Court voided a federal law banning depictions of animal cruelty (the, um .... "crush videos" law) because it would chill protected speech regarding hunting or documentaries exposing livestock slaughter. For that matter, cockfighting was still legal in Puerto Rico at the time, yet under this law a person could make a video of that lawful activity and then be prosecuted for it.

But again, this is about state action*- we never want the government to be able to put us in the pokey or fine us or deter us from speaking.

Which gets us to the heart of the issue. As I said before, the state should never be able to sanction** speech.*** But all people adjust their messages based on all sorts of factors. For example, maybe you curse a lot normally around your friends. But when you are talking to your boss, you "self-censor" because of the "chilling effect" of not wanting your boss to think you're a degenerate moron like Snarf. In fact, the reason that speech can be so powerful is because there are those who don't self-censor, who are fine with provoking, offending, or shocking - and they then deal with the social consequences for doing so, either good or bad. I keep hammering this point home, but I just don't know why people don't get it (you seem to, great post).

Asking for people not to respond to your speech in a negative manner? That's NOT free speech. Say what you want- but people are perfectly able to react as they want to as well. That's life. If you walk into a cocktail party and start telling everyone that the Austrian Painter had "some good ideas" then you shouldn't be surprised when you aren't invited again.



*Now, I know some of you might say, "Wait. Isn't a defamation action between two private parties? The actual answer is, not always. But yes, in modern times it is almost always by one private party against another. So why is there any First Amendment protection? Because you are using state action for it (defamation is a law, enforced by a court).

**ARGHHH! Contranyms.... well, I mean the bad sanction, not the meaning of "allow."

***Never doesn't actually mean never.

Great post.

I will say that I think that 1) People need to be taught to be cautious and that it is good to be courteous in any public or semi-public space 2) I would support laws that protected people from getting fired for what they say as private people.

Someone who doxxes you etc should not be able to destroy your life and should be a crime. (I am not being nuanced here and I do believe that some exceptions prevail)

I do not want to get into this topic more and I agree that some speech should have consequences but I do worry about the chilling effect and whether it is creating more hate.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right. But they choose not to. So if you want Dark Sun, make your own.

Sure. Not a business decision that makes sense to me, but whatever. I would do the same for any other setting WotC has (IMO) mangled. Their track record doesn't indicate to me I would be any happier with WotC Dark Sun than I was with WotC Ravenloft or WotC Spelljammer or WotC Dragonlance.

WotC Planescape was pretty much fine.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They aren’t going to do that because Hasbro is a toy company. They need to maintain a family-friendly image. However you wash it, Dark Sun is an adult product. This may come as a shock, but they aren’t going to rerelease the Book of Vile Darkness either.

Why did WotC make the latter in the first place? 3e was still WotC.

 

[soviet]

Why did WotC make the latter in the first place? 3e was still WotC.

Pre-Hasbro