Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 8514732" data-attributes="member: 7635">I actually don't think it's possible anymore.There was <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-rakshasa-and-genie-problem.685211/" target="_blank">discussion</a> elsewhere that settings that lack certain cultural representation shouldn't use monsters as stand-ins for that culture (IE. If your setting lacks an Arabia analog, you shouldn't use genies or at least don't use them as the stand-in for that culture). In short, D&D settings good and proper cultural representation to avoid issues of appropriation or stereotyping. Faerun is a notable example of a world with analogues to many different Earth cultures: Asia, Arabia, South American, African, Egyptian, Greek, Celtic, Norse, etc. All of it a stone's throw from their current Cash-Cow, the Sword Coast. They have a setting where they could release regional sourcebooks, done by cultural experts with proper sensitivity reading, they could be doing a regional sourcebook/MM/mini-adventure annually, filling out Faerun, adding new cultural representation, and making it all interchangeable so that a Kara-Tur Samurai and a Zakharan Sha'ir could go wander over to Baldur's Gate and fight Zariel in the latest AP module. It's a structure that serves Golarion and Pathfinder well.But they did Tomb of Annihilation. Badly. And they got raked over the coals for having done it badly. And after that, they pretty much retreated from going beyond the Sword Coast, and increasingly seem more interested in doing "one book settings" than doing anything from Forgotten Realms. (Last year was the first year none of the hardback books featured Faerun in any meaningful way). They seem to have gained a lot of interest into settings that stand in for one particular genre (such as Ravenloft = horror, Theros = Greek myth, or Strixhaven = magical school) rather than large all-encompassing monosettings. So right now, I wager WotC feels it's safer and more profitable for them to either leverage MTG properties (such as Kamigawa), or other properties (such as Rokugan) or even create something totally new rather than attempt to fix Kara-Tur and dredge up ghosts of OAs past. I just don't see WotC having the appetite to fix old problems if they can create something new instead.</blockquote>

Verification