D&D General The New York Times on D&D

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Nope. No one is making this argument.

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

"Wider conversation" doesn't mean "this is what Belen thinks."

The culture war backlash across the wider internet absolutely includes people who want orcs to be killable because they're orcs and cite "the rules" as the reason for it.

EDIT: Not posting the examples that are including swastikas, eugenics discussions or what appear to just be garden-variety racists appropriating D&D terminology to talk about minority groups generally. Sheesh, what a cesspool Twitter has become.

 

[Bedrockgames]

If you read the wider discussion about this, people are absolutely saying that not only is it necessary to have intelligent species that PCs can kill because they look different, they're arguing that such a thing is fundamental to Dungeons & Dragons.

I think it is generally a mistake to draw conclusions about peoples real world beliefs based on what they think makes for a good game of D&D.

I am sure there are all kinds of positions one will find, but this doesn't seem an accurate representation of what people are saying by and large on the 'pro evil orc' front. The point isn't to kill orcs simply because of how they look. The point is they want a world where the forces of good and evil are colliding or where you simply have evil races of beings and they like the aesthetics and feel of having evil looking monsters.

If it doesn't apply to you, that's fine. (Good, even!) But it's definitely a recurrent argument being made.

Like I have said a bunch of times, I generally prefer more naturalistic explanations in my settings. I don't mind a 2E style default where orcs are generally described as evil (so you have this cool looking baked in conflict and threat, but also plenty of room to make them free willed and open to other ways of life), but I also like settings where orcs are just like any other group and most issues around stuff like morality are cultural, and I am also okay with the cosmic clash. I also don't see demihumans and monsters in fantasy RPGs as stand ins for real world people. You have to borrow cultural features to world build and give things flavor, but having an evil and savage orc tribe (even having that be the default orc) doesn't strike me as being commentary on real world native people or nomadic people.

When I made orcs for my own setting I did try to retain them being more warlike as a general cultural trait (because I think warlike orcs are cool), but they spanned the gamut in terms of moral systems, social structure and civilization level (and the chief thing that distinguished them physically was a much stronger sense of smell than the other races. In terms of bonuses, the way I did it in my system was gave the player a choice between a +1 rank in Wits, Command or Specialist Skill (system was skill based: specialist is a broad category of skills that include things like Trade, Survival, Talent, Medicine, Divination and Ritual). For smell they effectively got a +1d10 dice pool bonus to detection when smell was a factor. And they got a bonus called Resilient Mind that allowed them to cast magic spells without suffering some of the negative consequences.

 

[Belen]

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

x.com

"Wider conversation" doesn't mean "this is what Belen thinks."

The culture war backlash across the wider internet absolutely includes people who want orcs to be killable because they're orcs and cite "the rules" as the reason for it.

EDIT: Not posting the examples that are including swastikas, eugenics discussions or what appear to just be garden-variety racists appropriating D&D terminology to talk about minority groups generally. Sheesh, what a cesspool Twitter has become.

I guess I should have said "no one in this discussion." I had no idea why you were adding this point when no one in the current discussion was making it.

Nor have I seen anyone make it but I also do not use the cesspool of social media.

 

[Remathilis]

I guess I should have said "no one in this discussion." I had no idea why you were adding this point when no one in the current discussion was making it.

Nor have I seen anyone make it but I also do not use the cesspool of social media.

WotC is not responding to just this thread when it's making design choices.

 

[Belen]

WotC is not responding to just this thread when it's making design choices.

I really hope they are not making design choices as a reaction to social media.

 

[Remathilis]

I really hope they are not making design choices as a reaction to social media.

I didn't say they were. But clearly there has been discussion in the community that led to most of the Post-Tasha changes.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I didn't say they were. But clearly there has been discussion in the community that led to most of the Post-Tasha changes.

I would say the online conversations have definitely been a factor (which is why people on all sides of the issue should express their views on these things IMO). I don’t think one thread makes a difference, but many threads across several forums can help shape the overall culture the designers are seeing online. And I am sure they are wary of lending online opinions too much credence as things online can be very intense and concentrated, while offline attitudes can be quite different. But it still probably matters

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I really hope they are not making design choices as a reaction to social media.

I think it's definitely one of the things they take into consideration, rightly or wrongly.

 

[SteveC]

I think it is generally a mistake to draw conclusions about peoples real world beliefs based on what they think makes for a good game of D&D.

I am sure there are all kinds of positions one will find, but this doesn't seem an accurate representation of what people are saying by and large on the 'pro evil orc' front. The point isn't to kill orcs simply because of how they look. The point is they want a world where the forces of good and evil are colliding or where you simply have evil races of beings and they like the aesthetics and feel of having evil looking monsters.

I think this is incredibly important. I see a lot of "you're playing it wrong," and in those cases I just roll my eyes and move on since we all play the game differently. But when you get to "play this way and do this, or you are a bad person," I just have to object. People can definitely play a campaign with Good and Evil in it and leave out all the questions of morals. Just as they can make a game where everything is just a shade of grey. Neither of those games says anything about the real-world beliefs of the people involved. Once we start down a road of discussing what people believe in the real world based on their game play style, things may get very ugly indeed. And I don't want to break my New Years resolution so early in the year.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There are almost certainly people who can compartmentalize their beliefs. But before deciding this is true categorically, it's probably worth looking over those Twitter threads I posted and the other views those folks espouse.