D&D 3E/3.5 Diversity in D&D Third Edition

With 3rd Ed, our main goal was to return D&D to its roots, such as with Greyhawk deities and the return of half-orcs. By staying true to the feel of D&D, we helped the gaming audience accept the sweeping changes that we made to the rules system.
With 3rd Ed, our main goal was to return D&D to its roots, such as with Greyhawk deities and the return of half-orcs. By staying true to the feel of D&D, we helped the gaming audience accept the sweeping changes that we made to the rules system.

One way we diverged from the D&D heritage, however, was by making the game art more inclusive. People of color, for example, were hard to find in earlier editions, and, when they did make appearance, it wasn’t always for the best. Luckily for us, Wizards of the Coast had an established culture of egalitarianism, and we were able to update the characters depicted in the game to better reflect contemporary sensibilities.

dnd-party.jpg

A few years before 3E, the leadership at Wizards had already encouraged me to go whole-hog with the multicultural look of the RPG Everway (1995). In this world-hopping game, we provided players and Gamemasters with scores of color art cards to inspire them as they created their characters and NPCs. The art featured people and settings that looked like they could have come from fantasy versions of places all around the earth, and the gender balance was great. I once got an email from a black roleplayer who said that Everway had forever changed the way he roleplayed, so I know that the game’s multicultural look was meaningful to some gamers out there. With D&D, we took the game in the same direction, but not nearly as far. The core setting has always resembled medieval Europe, and we expanded the diversity of the characters while still maintaining the medieval milieu.

The characters that players see the most are the “fab four,” the four iconic characters that we used repeatedly in our art and in our examples of play. Two are men (the human cleric and the dwarf fighter) and two are women (the elf wizard and the halfling rogue). Given the demographics of gamers in 2000, the implication that half of all D&D characters are female was a bit of a stretch. The only complaints we got, however, were about the introductory Adventure Game, where the characters were pregenerated, with names and genders assigned to them. Some young men would have preferred fewer female characters and more males to choose from. None of us worried too much about those complaints.

In addition to the main four characters, we also assigned a particular character to represent each of the other classes, with that character appearing in examples of play and in art. The four human characters comprised a white man (the cleric), a white woman (the paladin), a black woman (the monk), and an Asian man (the sorcerer). The remaining four nonhuman iconics were three men and one woman. It was a trick to strike the right balance in assigning fantasy races and genders to all the classes and to assign ethnicities to the human characters, but the iconic characters seemed to be a big hit, and I think the diversity was part of the appeal.

Somewhat late in the process, the marketing team added Regdar, a male fighter, to the mix of iconic characters. We designers weren’t thrilled, and as the one who had drawn up the iconic characters I was a little chapped. My array of iconic characters did not include a human male fighter, and that’s the most common D&D character ever, so the marketing team gave us one. We carped a little that he meant adding a second white man to the array of characters, but at least he was dark enough to be ambiguously ethnic. Regdar proved popular, and if the marketing team was looking for an attractive character to publicize, they got one.

Back in 1E, Gary Gygax had used the phrase “he or she” as the default third person singular pronoun, a usage that gave the writing a legalistic vibe that probably suited it. In 2E, the text stated up front that it was just going to use “he” because grammatically it’s gender-neutral. Even in 1989, insisting that “he” is gender neutral was tone deaf. By the time I was working on 3E, I had been dealing with the pronoun issue for ten years. In Ars Magica (1987), we wrote everything in second person so that we could avoid gendered pronouns. The rules said things like, “You can understand your familiar” instead of “The wizard can understand his/her/their familiar.” In Over the Edge (1992), we used “he” for the generic player and “she” for the generic gamemaster, which felt balanced and helped the reader keep the two roles separate. That sort of usage became standard for Atlas Games’s roleplaying games. Personally, I use singular-they whenever I can get away with it, but 20 years ago that was still generally considered unorthodox. For 3E, I suggested that we tie the pronouns to the iconic characters. The iconic paladin was a woman, so references to paladins in the rules were to “her.” I thought we’d catch flak from someone about this usage, but I never heard fans complaining.

One topic we needed to settle was whether monsters that were gendered as female in folklore, such as a lamia, should be exclusively female in D&D. I figured we should ditch gender limits wherever we could, but an editor argued that gender was important for the identity of a monster like the lamia. I asked, “Is that because it is in woman’s nature to deceive and destroy men?” Luring and destroying men is a common trope for female-gendered monsters, with the lamia as an example. “Yes, it is” said the editor, but she was laughing, and I had made my point. You can see an illustration of a male lamia in the 3E Monster Manual.

While we incorporated Greyhawk’s deities into 3rd Ed, we had no intention of picking up Greyhawk’s description of various human ethnic groups, corresponding more or less to ethnicities found on Earth. For gamers who cared about the Greyhawk canon, the Asian sorcerer would be from a lightly described territory to the west and the black monk would be a “Touv” from the jungles of Hepmonaland. Touvs in 2E were defined as having a penalty to their Intelligence scores, and we sure didn’t want to send any players in that direction. In 3E, the Asian and black characters were just humans, full stop.

The good news is that the gaming audience rolled with the iconic characters featuring people of color and women. With 5th Ed, the design team picked up where we left off and have pursued diversity further. The diverse cast of characters goes a long way in making D&D look modern and mature.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jonathan Tweet

Jonathan Tweet

D&D 3E, Over the Edge, Everway, Ars Magica, Omega World, Grandmother Fish

Sacrosanct

Legend
So this got me curious, and I've never given much thought to it before. So I looked up the AD&D art of the monk in images I could remember. Are there any I'm forgetting? In addition to the Slavers series monk above, there are:

1575694343097.png

1575694408406.png

1575694585783.png


So there was some whitewashing going on there. Which makes sense, seeing as how the TV series Kung Fu was very popular right before D&D, and was the imagery most Americans had, and that show was the literal definition of white washing, sadly.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad



Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
Nah. the art and minis were also clearly inspired by wushu kung fu imagery as well. I have a grenadier mini of a monk that looks like this one from the early 80s:

View attachment 116648

and this is the art of probably the most famous monk in AD&D
View attachment 116649
Don’t recognize either of those.

I may have seen the art, but can’t place it at all. Haven’t looked at the Slavers stuff since I ran it back in the day.

The mini? Again, I MAY have seen seen that one, but it’s not ringing a bell. The first- and for quite a while, only- monk I had from that time had a semi-crouched stance similar to that one, but with western monastIc garb. It would have been Grenadier, Heritage or Ral Partha, because that’s all I had access to in the late 70s/early 80s. I still have it, but it will be some time before I can track it down.
 


Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
At least until Oriental Adventures, anyway.
Yeah, in 1985, by which time I’d been playing for 8 years, and many other gamers a few years more.

True but I'm guessing those Christian clergy didn't cast Flame Strike or Sticks to Snakes, either.

Nor did the diocesan priests upon whom the spells, powers and weapon restrictions the cleric class was based on*, despite both monks and priests having the same religious functions. The differences between the two involve the vows and conditions by which they live daily life. Several of the monks at the Dominican Priory and Cistercian Priory near me have both performed masses and other sacraments at churches around here.





* the old restrictions against edged weapons in battle; spells like Bless, Attonement, Ceremony; the aforementioned miracles associated with certain Biblical prophets, etc.
 

Now, tangentially, I’d love to see writeups for a European styled mystic martial artist,
Paladins.

The D&D Monk class is a representation of the legends of asian mystical/religious warriors and the feats associated with them. (Albeit viewed through the lens of western orientalism.)
The D&D Paladin class is a representation of the legends of western mystical/religious warriors and the feats associated with them.
 

Paladins.

The D&D Monk class is a representation of the legends of asian mystical/religious warriors and the feats associated with them. (Albeit viewed through the lens of western orientalism.)
The D&D Paladin class is a representation of the legends of western mystical/religious warriors and the feats associated with them.

Actually, believe it or not the cleric is more the western "monk', since it is based heavily on the Knights Templar, who were an order of religious warrior celibates who practised the martial arts*. Heck, they were even led by a "Grand Master".

* remember martial arts doesn't necessarily mean unarmed fighting. Outside of movies, very few warriors would prefer to fight unarmed. There is a reason every culture in the world invented some sort of weapon.

(As a side note, the cleric is also the victim of some bizarre views on history, ie, the whole blunt weapon thing. Priests weren't banned from using weapons (at least in the West), when the men of the first crusade passed through Constantinople there was much comment on the papal legate and other priests actually joining in on the fighting and swinging around swords. So in that respect the paladin actually bears more resemblance to a medieval priest...
 

and this is the art of probably the most famous monk in AD&D

Who is that? If he's the most famous monk in D&D that's a pretty sad commentary on monks.

As a side note, the cleric is also the victim of some bizarre views on history, ie, the whole blunt weapon thing. Priests weren't banned from using weapons (at least in the West)

It's because Clerics originally entered D&D specifically to deal with a PC (!!!) whose class was Vampire, way back in the day, and were based on Bishop Odo, who apocraphyal information suggested was forbidden from using edged weapons: Odo of Bayeux - Wikipedia
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
It's because Clerics originally entered D&D specifically to deal with a PC (!!!) whose class was Vampire, way back in the day, and were based on Bishop Odo, who apocraphyal information suggested was forbidden from using edged weapons: Odo of Bayeux - Wikipedia

To center in on the relevant quote:

"Although Odo was an ordained Christian cleric, he is best known as a warrior and statesman, participating in the Council of Lillebonne. He funded ships for the Norman invasion of England and is one of the very few proven companions of William the Conqueror, known to have fought at the Battle of Hastings in 1066. The Bayeux Tapestry, probably commissioned by him to adorn his own cathedral, appears to labour the point that he did not actually fight, that is to say shed blood, at Hastings, but rather encouraged the troops from the rear. The Latin annotation embroidered onto the Tapestry above his image reads: "Hic Odo Eps [Episcopus] Baculu[m] Tenens Confortat Pueros", in English "Here Odo the Bishop holding a club strengthens the boys". It has been suggested that his clerical status forbade him from using a sword, though this is doubtful: the club was a common weapon and used often by leadership..."
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top