D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

Don Durito said:

If a bunch of journalists wrote articles about a virus quoted no science, and said "trust us" all the other journalists agree with us we'd rightly lose all faith in them.

Click to expand...

Fox News exists, and is doing reasonably well.

The Daily Mail would be my go to European example, but I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with their lunacy in COVID times.

Don Durito said:

One assumes that doctors have some evidence for their opinions. You know scientific studies and the like.

If a bunch of journalists wrote articles about a virus quoted no science, and said "trust u" all the other journalists agree with us" we'd rightly lose all faith in them.

Click to expand...

Not how journalism works, as @Sacrosanct pointed out. The level of evidence and the specific methodology you are demanding also does not 100% apply to sociology, anthropology, literature studies, and philosophy, which are the fields where the more in-depth discussions of race and representation are found. This is the domain of the soft sciences and the humanities; the methodology involved will differ from the STEM fields.

Deset Gled said:

Fox News exists, and is doing reasonably well.

The Daily Mail would be my go to European example, but I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with their lunacy in COVID times.

Click to expand...

Oh well. If your appeal to authority is able to meet the high and illustrious standards of FOX News then I guess there is no problem.

Sacrosanct said:

Look man, I've been doing art for 40 years. It it literally no extra effort to make a line drawing of someone who looks African, or Asian, or any non-white person. See my post above of very simple lineart that captures these traits.

Click to expand...

If you followed the thread, you'd see we're not talking about making people look African or Asian. We were talking about why dwarves, gnomes, etc. described as dark-complexioned in the text were drawn as white.

Why do you think orcs, goblins, and ogres are 'white' in the MM rather than orange-yellow or greenish-brown as described in the text?

Haffrung said:

I'd wager the term is more widely adopted among extremely online, educated whites than among Latinos themselves, to the extent that there are social media sites popular with said demographic where I would be admonished for not using it.

Click to expand...

I mean, yeah, probably.

Haffrung said:

Which gives us an insight into the narrow origin of these sorts of movements, and why some of us question their legitimacy.

Click to expand...

Whereas I question the motivations of those who are more concerned with a movement’s “legitimacy” than with its impact. Again, as both a nonbinary and Hispanic person, I’ve never really been bothered by the gendered language. But, other people have, and the degree to
which it inconveniences me to say “Latinx” or “Latine” instead of “Latino” or “Latina” is positively dwarfed by the positive impact it has on people who it does bother.

Deset Gled said:

Fox News exists, and is doing reasonably well.

The Daily Mail would be my go to European example, but I'll admit I haven't been keeping up with their lunacy in COVID times.

Click to expand...

Not only that, but what's happening is not what Don paraphrased. These aren't journalists who are saying "Hey, D&D has has some problematic presentation issues in its history, just trust me." They are saying things like "Here's all these Asian people we talked to who all have identified which parts of Oriental Adventures is problematic."

And yeah, we absolutely should be listening to them because they are the ones impacted and they are the ones who would know best.

Haffrung said:

If you followed the thread, you'd see we're not talking about making people look African or Asian. We were talking about why dwarves, gnomes, etc. described as dark-complexioned in the text were drawn as white.

Why do you think orcs, goblins, and ogres are 'white' in the MM rather than orange-yellow or greenish-brown as described in the text?

Click to expand...

yeah, and your reasons as to why they were drawn white have been soundly debunked and refuted. I myself have even given you examples how you can do non-white in a line drawing, and yet here you are, refusing to acknowledge the facts, and doubling down on debunked theories. Again, for what? You seem to be bending over backwards, arguing debunked reasons, for white dominance in the game.

PsyzhranV2 said:

Not how journalism works, as @Sacrosanct pointed out. The level of evidence and the specific methodology you are demanding also does not 100% apply to sociology, anthropology, literature studies, and philosophy, which are the fields where the more in-depth discussions of race and representation are found. This is the domain of the soft sciences and the humanities; the methodology involved will differ from the STEM fields.

Click to expand...

As I said, I'm not demanding anything.

This is pure distraction.

Scribe said:

Right. However I wonder if people who want that basic 'these are good, these are bad, they fight' even play Eberron?

Click to expand...

Does it matter? WotC has seen that one of their most popular campaign settings do not have "set alignments" for all prime plane creatures and that every individual is just that-- an individual. Some good, some bad, regardless of wealth, appearance, how or where they live, and so forth. Heck... the setting still splits the creatures up descriptively between "people" and "monsters"... and yet even the monsters are not described as inherently evil because they are "monsters".

And since there was little to no uproar with this idea when it came out when the setting was published... WotC would take that same proportional reaction and presume the entirety of the D&D populace will follow that proportion. The same way the Nielsen ratings don't measure every single person watching tv... they take a smaller percentage of viewers, see what they are watching, and then extrapolate that to the entire tv viewing audience.

And while sure... I suppose there could be this very large but invisible contingent of players that saw what Eberron did in not making all orcs evil-- and every single one of those people turned away from the setting but never actually SAID that was the reason they never played Eberron (and will suddenly come out of the woodwork to declare it come 6E time if/when WotC removes set lineage alignments)... my guess is that most people just actually don't care. If the book says "some orcs are good and some orcs are evil, just like some dwarves and good and some dwarves are evil"... most of the people who played past editions will shrug their shoulder and go "Okay, whatever."

Charlaquin said:

Whereas I question the motivations of those who are more concerned with a movement’s “legitimacy” than with its impact.

Click to expand...

This right here.

if someone advises that they prefer a gender neutral term even if that runs counter to how historically pronouns have been used, it takes me ZERO effort to accommodate them. It makes them feel better and is no skin off my back.

However, if I question their legitimacy as my first reaction, that speaks volumes about me. None of it good.