• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford on D&D Races Going Forward

On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty. @ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence...

Status
Not open for further replies.
On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty.


636252771691385727.jpg


@ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence debuff and the evil alignment, with a more acceptable narrative. It's a start, but there's a fair argument for gutting the entire race system.

The orcs of Eberron and Wildemount reflect where our hearts are and indicate where we’re heading.


@vorpaldicepress I hate to be "that guy", but what about Drow, Vistani, and the other troublesome races and cultures in Forgotten Realms (like the Gur, another Roma-inspired race)? Things don't change over night, but are these on the radar?

The drow, Vistani, and many other folk in the game are on our radar. The same spirit that motivated our portrayal of orcs in Eberron is animating our work on all these peoples.


@MileyMan1066 Good. These problems need to be addressed. The variant features UA could have a sequel that includes notes that could rectify some of the problems and help move 5e in a better direction.

Addressing these issues is vital to us. Eberron and Wildemount are the first of multiple books that will face these issues head on and will do so from multiple angles.


@mbriddell I'm happy to hear that you are taking a serious look at this. Do you feel that you can achieve this within the context of Forgotten Realms, given how establised that world's lore is, or would you need to establish a new setting to do this?

Thankfully, the core setting of D&D is the multiverse, with its multitude of worlds. We can tell so many different stories, with different perspectives, in each world. And when we return to a world like FR, stories can evolve. In short, even the older worlds can improve.


@SlyFlourish I could see gnolls being treated differently in other worlds, particularly when they’re a playable race. The idea that they’re spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat feels like they’re in a different class than drow, orcs, goblins and the like. Same with minotaurs.

Internally, we feel that the gnolls in the MM are mistyped. Given their story, they should be fiends, not humanoids. In contrast, the gnolls of Eberron are humanoids, a people with moral and cultural expansiveness.


@MikeyMan1066 I agree. Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls. Gnolls... the way they are described, do not. Having them be minor demons would clear a lot of this up.

You just described our team's perspective exactly.


As a side-note, the term 'race' is starting to fall out of favor in tabletop RPGs (Pathfinder has "ancestry", and other games use terms like "heritage"); while he doesn't comment on that specifically, he doesn't use the word 'race' and instead refers to 'folks' and 'peoples'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad


I suggest you re-read my post. Highlights:
  • I'm not really offended
  • Roman culture could be easily described as lawful evil by today's standard (and D&D's, sure, alright)
  • I'm just surprised that people advocating for a better depiction of orcs and drow, because they might be offensive the real world cultures, are now proposing to tie an evil fantasy race to a real world historic culture.

I think you're confused. "offending real world cultures" isn't the issue, particularly not violent slave-powered empires which have been dead for 1000+ years (I mean man what?). Perpetuating negative stereotypes and tropes about people of various ethnicities in this time, and this place, is the issue.

This whole thread was not merely about appearances, let's not kid ourselves. It has been about harmful, allegedly offensive fantasy depictions in general.

You brought up Tolkien's comment. It was a racist comment about appearance, made about people who lived at the same time as him. You linked this to the Romans by saying the Mongols were evil too. Of course they were. But either that's a random non-sequitur that makes no sense, or you're trying to say it's okay to for Tolkien to make a racist comment about Mongols who were alive in the 20th century, at the same time as him, because 600+ years earlier, some Mongols were bad people.

This seems like a really bad choice of line of argument on your part.
 

Sadras

Legend
No. We are noting that the Vistani bear a striking resemblance to existing stereotypes of the real-world Romani. Those same stereotypes were used to justify persecution of the Romani.

I'm sorry, but the repeated exhortations that, "this is fiction, this is fantasy, it doesn't mean anything," don't hold water. Fiction is not without meaning or real world impact..

And I was replying to the comment of the removal of the evil eye power from Vistani. The evil eye exists in both Romani and non-Romani cultures.
 


Olrox17

Hero
I think you're confused. "offending real world cultures" isn't the issue, particularly not violent slave-powered empires which have been dead for 1000+ years (I mean man what?). Perpetuating negative stereotypes and tropes about people of various ethnicities in this time, and this place, is the issue.
Are you aware of the "revival" of roman culture that happened in Italy in the previous century, down to renaming the Italian Kingdom to Roman Empire for a while? Are you aware of who was responsible for that "revival"? Are you aware that those people were very much lawful evil, and in charge of my country?
Do you have any idea how many times the name of the political party those people belong to was used to mock and insult me, and other italian citizens?
I'm sure you know.

I'm not offended by your hobgoblins=romans(fascists?) idea. I actually find it interesting and potentially fitting. However, I think you might be employing a dangerous double standard.

You brought up Tolkien's comment. It was a racist comment about appearance, made about people who lived at the same time as him. You linked this to the Romans by saying the Mongols were evil too. Of course they were. But either that's a random non-sequitur that makes no sense, or you're trying to say it's okay to for Tolkien to make a racist comment about Mongols who were alive in the 20th century, at the same time as him, because 600+ years earlier, some Mongols were bad people.

This seems like a really bad choice of line of argument on your part.
I believe he made a serious mistake with that comment. I'm not defending him.
 


Oofta

Legend
I suggest understanding viewpoints of others. Instead of making statements about being too sensitive. I suggest empathy before casual dismissal and flippant remarks.

So I can't have a different opinion? I agree we need to be sensitive to other individuals and cultures, but I also think it's impossible to please everyone. D&D has always been a garbage heap of ideas thrown into a blender. Sometimes they go too far.

Again, I prefer the 3.5 depiction because I do think the 5E can be viewed as problematic. On the other hand I don't see anything in the lore that specifically calls out to any real world culture. I just disagree with saying "OMG an organized militant culture is insulting because I make an association no one else is seeing unless I point it out."

For reference the 3.5 version. Well except maybe the spikes/stupid sword thing that I had kind of forgotten but it was a product of that era of art. Oh, and what's up with the eye thing?
Hobgoblin.JPG.jpg
 


So I can't have a different opinion? I agree we need to be sensitive to other individuals and cultures, but I also think it's impossible to please everyone. D&D has always been a garbage heap of ideas thrown into a blender. Sometimes they go too far.

Again, I prefer the 3.5 depiction because I do think the 5E can be viewed as problematic. On the other hand I don't see anything in the lore that specifically calls out to any real world culture. I just disagree with saying "OMG an organized militant culture is insulting because I make an association no one else is seeing unless I point it out."

For reference the 3.5 version. Well except maybe the spikes/stupid sword thing that I had kind of forgotten but it was a product of that era of art. Oh, and what's up with the eye thing?
View attachment 122972
Yep. Why better ourselves.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top