log in or register to remove this ad

 

General (Anecdotal) conversations with Asian gamers on some problems they currently face in the D&D world of RPG gaming

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
@Cadence - is anyone, to your knowledge, complaining about these things? Has anyone brought it up as an issue? To my knowledge, it hasn't been. So, why are you fishing for additional issues? Why not stick to the ACTUAL issues that people have brought up?

As I just posted, I had forgotten that you had said it wasn't problematic in your view about Japan. I went through the entire thread and did a brief google search, and was just surprised that it was viewed as having done such a relatively good job on the Japanese-based part.

And the second part of the original post I made was defending the panel and just fine with its make-up so I wasn't contesting that at all.

In defending the panel, I'd add that there are a lot of sizable ethnicities in Asia and panels only contain a handful of people (unlike, say, lists of those who contribute to books could).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

jasper

Rotten DM
Lets just cut to chase. How much money will WOTC make in these Unrepresented/underrepresented countries, if they put out the product? Will be more than paying the people to create the work and be on the panels? Or is this just an underground marketing campaign being used to gin up publicity for an up coming product?
 

Hussar

Legend
What's wrong with both?

Is being more inclusive, and getting good publicity for doing so, somehow less good if they profit from it? I mean, why do you think that 5e is by far the most profitable, fastest growing, and largest RPG ever?

To me, it's a lot like the smoking bans that we saw in Canada in the 90's. Restaurants were dead set against the idea of smoking bans, insisting that they would lose business. Then, suddenly, when they discovered that non-smoking restaurants make considerably more money than restaurants that allow smoking, they were all for it.

It's not like doing something good precludes capitalism. In fact, it's generally been shown that being more socially conscious leads to better profit margins. Whodathunk?
 

Scott Christian

Adventurer
Attempts to resolve these problems of cultural discrimination are going to be messy and imperfect, and which aspects of the problem get addressed in what order is going to be contentious and fraught with contradiction and paradox. Lots of mistakes are going to be made along the way.

What I find disgusting and weak is the argument that because it's going to be so hard, we shouldn't do anything.

Or, worse, that we should do only things that have no possibility of inconveniencing the people who aren't currently on the receiving end of the discrimination.
I would kind of state the opposite here about it being hard and with lots of mistakes.

It is easy. The part, as has been mentioned before, that is difficult, is what do you consider discrimination in the context of creating or borrowing from cultures. I mean, Asian culture, with its plethora of mythos and different societies and beliefs can easily be translated into a fantasy setting. The problem is it will take a very very very long time. You are not going to incorporate just one belief and style of culture from China, right? I mean there are four that I know of, and they are very different. And I don't study these things. Japan is the same. Southeast Asia is the same. Are you including the Polynesian beliefs? And then an even bigger question, from which age are you pulling these cultural ideas from? Because they change depending on the century.

And then how sensitive (definition) are you going to be? Can you lump some things together? I mean, if a Hispanic writer/gamer who grew up in Yukon, Canada made a modern US setting setting, is that okay? Of course it is. But, it might be fraught with errors and silly rumors when discussing its Gothic based New Orleans section. That is a possibility. The same will be true for any Asian setting unless you specifically narrow down the context and get experts from that area.

So difficult and error laden? I don't see it. Long? Definitely. Lucrative if done correctly? Maybe... Kind of doubtful, but with a side of hope.
 

TSR is guilty because it created a chop-suey nations based in Asian cultures, but also the same with Western countries and mixing monsters and myths from different places. Maybe this caused somebody to feel unconfortable but it was not with bad intentions.

Then I don't want to imagine the troubles about the nations of 7Th Sea based in real nations. Somebody can tell a story set in Castilla with all the anti-Spanish tropes of the Black Legend, and other all the opposite, a story where Castillans are the good guys who save the day and Avalon is ruled by secret vampires lodges who want to destroy the faith because the holy water hurt them.

We should see setting based in Asian cultures as jailbaits or hooks to know more about those countries and civilitations. But my fear is the predjucices by the own Asians against their own neigbors, or even compatriots from different regions.
 

Hussar

Legend
No, @LuisCarlos17f, you have it backward. TSR's problem wasn't that it made a mixture settings based on a bunch of different cultures, like it did with mainline D&D. TSR's problem is that it promoted a single culture (Japanese) as being representative of the entire region and ignored every other culture.

For the same reason that we don't have Chevalier's in mainline D&D is why you probably shouldn't name most of your classes after a single culture's archetypes. D&D works because it does draw from so many sources. Could it draw from more? Probably. But, even baseline D&D doesn't draw from a single culture and then pretend that that's the only culture that exists.
 

Yes, Japan has been and is still the main influence for Western fiction based in Asian cultures. But that is not a right reason to be complaining about that everytime. I also miss the rich mythology based in the folklore from the East and Latin-speaker countries of Europe (but the classic Greco-Latin myths). Most of famous fairy tales present in the media are from North-West of Europe.

The knight is an universal trope, not only in videogames and RPGs. In D&D it's the paladin class.

We shouldn't require a positive discrimination quota for China, Korea and other countries, but only allowing more doors being opened. In the internet age we can read free Korean webtoons in our language. This is a free market. The no-Japanese Asian authors are who have to create interesting lines. And even authors from the same nation may disagree and having totally different points of view about their own fatherland.

My advice is don't force anybody to agree you but to use positive stimuli when you want to convice. If you are too agresive while you are arguing, the other will not trust and will not want to keep listening you.

This matter needs better diplomacy and other social skills, wondering how to use speculative fiction to build a bridge between the different cultures.

Have you forgotten Hasbro have got any deals with Japanese companies and it wants a good relation with Chinese market?

Confucious said: The superior person is in harmony, but does not follow the crowd. The lesser person follows the crowd, but is not in harmony.
 

Greg K

Adventurer
Racial bigotry is bad. Racial bigotry that is backed up by the power to keep the ones being discriminated against down seems worse. Merriam-Webster recently took note of that distinction which has been made more and more in the humanities since Bidol wrote about it in 1970. Merriam-Webster Definition of Racism . That second definition has been the default usage of many for over a decade now, especially in parts of academia and in organizations fighting racism. It feels like most of those using that definition would like all racial bigotry to go away - but many find it absurd to worry about it all equally when it's practical impact is far from equal.
Actually the second definition in Webster's is the original for racism . It was first documented use was, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was by Pratt
"egregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or makes their growth very slow. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism. "

The second definition was also that used by early 20th century academics such as W.E.B. Dubois. According to one of my former professors, it was also Dubois' useage which is the basis for the academic definition.

The more common definition, which Webster lists first, was a redefinition that took root after World War II (I would have to back and check sources to see if this was in the U.S. or other countries as well).
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Actually the second definition in Webster's is the original for racism . It was first documented use was, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was by Pratt
"egregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or makes their growth very slow. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism. "

I hadn't looked into the earlier usage of the modern usage (?) of the term before. I'll have to google up DuBois some more. Thanks! It does make sense that back then (and beyond) that the one direction definition is the one that shows what needs to be worked on most.

The OED definition doesn't get at that idea as well as that 1903 quote does: "A belief that one’s own racial or ethnic group is superior, or that other such groups represent a threat to one's cultural identity, racial integrity, or economic well-being; (also) a belief that the members of different racial or ethnic groups possess specific characteristics, abilities, or qualities, which can be compared and evaluated. Hence: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against people of other racial or ethnic groups (or, more widely, of other nationalities), esp. based on such beliefs."

It also ties the term racism to racialism, and goes to a disgusting 1880's quote. I'm surprised it doesn't go back further (did your course say how they would have used, if anything in the mid 1800s, say?).
 

A bad reputation in the Asian market is the last one Hasbro would wish. This wants to sell its toys and other products to Japaneses, Koreans, Chineses and other people from Asia. It worries too much about losing truth by the Asian market because they weren't enough polite and respectful with its titles. You haven't to reprimand WotC when this is the first one who notices to be politically correct is necessary to make money in other markets.

In the past Japan has been the main influence about Western fiction based in Asian cultures, but this is not our fault, but thanks the manga+anime subculture. Then Korea and China have to produce more titles enoughly interesant for the Western fandom.

We should worry about how the update version of the OA PC races should be.
 

Greg K

Adventurer
I hadn't looked into the earlier usage of the modern usage (?) of the term before. I'll have to google up DuBois some more. Thanks! It does make sense that back then (and beyond) that the one direction definition is the one that shows what needs to be worked on most.

The OED definition doesn't get at that idea as well as that 1903 quote does: "A belief that one’s own racial or ethnic group is superior, or that other such groups represent a threat to one's cultural identity, racial integrity, or economic well-being; (also) a belief that the members of different racial or ethnic groups possess specific characteristics, abilities, or qualities, which can be compared and evaluated. Hence: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against people of other racial or ethnic groups (or, more widely, of other nationalities), esp. based on such beliefs."

It also ties the term racism to racialism, and goes to a disgusting 1880's quote. I'm surprised it doesn't go back further (did your course say how they would have used, if anything in the mid 1800s, say?).
I'll have to back and check. The documented known use by Pratt that I mentioned was important because it was regarding the dominant group affecting the opportunity of another ethnic group.

With regards to Dubois's first published book was in 1896 and one critical book that I recall was first published in 1940. However, we did not examine his work.
The professor, of whom I spoke, taught both African-American studies and Anthropology. The first class session, he spoke on racism. He discussed how race was a term that should be eliminated from our vocabulary as it is a human construct with no basis in biology and goes back to Blumenbach and others of his time. he stressed the use of ethnicity instead of race. He talked briefly about DuBois and the origin of the academic usage of the term racism, its difference from prejudice and bigotry, and introduced the academic term color structuralism (involving two groups in which neither is dominant in society). He then discussed that any ethnic group can be racist, but they have to be the dominant group with political power and provided examples from his own travels
He then challenged us to research the origin of the term racism (and anything else that stated during any class rather than taking his word). It was while taking his challenge that I encountered the usage by Pratt and found sources discussing both Dubois' and the academic usage and other sources discussing changes in the term's usage after World War II.
 
Last edited:

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top