D&D General Drow & Orcs Removed from the Monster Manual

[Parmandur]

It will always be certain that there's those that it bothers and those that it doesn't—people are funny that way. Both are valid. Is WotC over-correcting? Maybe? But I'm sure that they just want to avoid any more landmines like they had with Spelljammer. And, of course, they are late to the party (again)

Even if one were to grant that it is a limited issue...why on Earth should WotC decide to die on this particular hill? What do they gain by insisting on maintaining a link between blood-eatijg ritualistic serial killer Wizards and Jews?

Literally, why?

 

[Umbran]

I mean, "don't make it personal" is one of the basic rules of conduct on this forum. I'm not sure why you'd even make a statement like this, short of a veiled reference to things you know you're not supposed to say on here. Maybe don't do that from now on?

With respect, you very explicitly set this up:

"And when the majority of a minority (or even a different minority of a minority) tells you that your non-sacrifice is to the detriment of their sensibilities, you seem okay with that too."

This reads as if it is supposed to be some unresolvable conflict, a logical "gotcha". Maybe don't do that from now on?

And, I was going to let this pass, but given how this went, I feel I should be 100% clear:

But by that same token, people who aren't part of that group aren't really in a position to tell a member of said group what's in said group's best interests.

I don't feel I said anything to that end at all, having been speaking purely about my own experiences. I specifically made no reference to anyone's, "best interests", so this reads as a strawman statement, to me. A bit more, "maybe don't do that from now on," fits here too.

 

[Umbran]

Or tolerance itself, for that matter.

Mod note:
Locking logic horns is one thing. Personal insults are another. My apologies to the collected that I did not see this earlier.

You are done in this discussion. Please look to the number of warnings you have accumulated.

 

[pemerton]

... Oh. We have different settings for posts-per-page then lol, 'cause I only see 51 pages

The site default is 10 posts per page. Like me, though, you seem to be set to 20 per page.

 

[Gradine]

The site default is 10 posts per page. Like me, though, you seem to be set to 20 per page.

I can't imagine navigating the forum with ten posts per page; I think 20 used to be the default, long ago; I was confused when I had to figure out how to set it that way again.

 

[MGibster]

How do we KNOW you're not a cat?

Meow is not the time to start spreading rumors.

 

[Dire Bare]

Are you Jewish? If so, do you represent all Jewish people?

If you personally do not find the use of phylactery offensive, then no Jewish people do? Or since not all Jewish people do, it doesn't matter?

Multiple entertainment companies producing fantasy media and games HAVE listened and HAVE removed the use of the word.

So sorry that offends you.

 

[MGibster]

Are you Jewish? If so, do you represent all Jewish people?

If you personally do not find the use of phylactery offensive, then no Jewish people do? Or since not all Jewish people do, it doesn't matter?

Multiple entertainment companies producing fantasy media and games HAVE listened and HAVE removed the use of the word.

So sorry that offends you.

I don't criticize WotC or others for making the change as it isn't always easy to decide what should be changed. And it's not like WotC wants any static, right? I think this was an overcorrection, but at least they're trying.

 

[Scribe]

I can't imagine navigating the forum with ten posts per page; I think 20 used to be the default, long ago; I was confused when I had to figure out how to set it that way again.

Well you see, I have so many people on Ignore now, I couldnt even tell you what the correct count is for my settings.

 

[Dire Bare]

For me the only annoyance is once again a word was changed and there is no consistency on what word is used to replace it. It reminds me how there is no clear successor to "race" so everyone uses a different word with no consistency between them.

Does there need to be consistency?

For a while we had a degree of consistency, since most of the OSR and other fantasy heartbreakers borrowed so heavily from D&D. But if different games are using different words for a lich's soul box or to describe a character's ancestry, is that a problem?

I admit, it bothered me at first that different games were using all sorts of term to replace "race" . . . heritage, ancestry, species, origin, etc, etc . . . but now, it doesn't.