D&D General D&D Settings with No Problematic Areas?

[Ralif Redhammer]

Ah, I had tapped out on FR fiction by then, so I missed that development. Still, there's nothing that says it can't be brought back.

Yes, I think bringing back the Kingdom of Many Arrows (or a successor state) would be the obvious choice to allow for more nuanced orcs in the Realms.

I reckon WotC kind of shot themselves in the foot with that one by having the Many Arrows orcs “revert to type” and go on a suicidal rampage that resulted in the destruction of their kingdom.

Actually it has been destroyed during the Sundering novels. All gains from Obould's war have been lost, the Many Arrows tribe is back to the fortress they had just prior to that and the other tribes are no longer following them and disbanded back to their mountain caves

 

[GreenTengu]

I know it's easier to wrestle with strawmen, but this isn't really responsive at all to people's critiques of the settings. For example, even from "woke" authors I've never seen them bring up the dragonmarks of Eberron as an issue. Do better.

I've never liked that only the races who were PC races in 3rd edition got to have Dragon Marks. I always found that a bit concerning?.... Dull....?
Well, whatever it is, I kind of think they ought to have left the door open for a Hobgoblin Dragon Mark or an Ogre Dragon Mark and a Rakshasha Dragon Mark.

It was certainly odd when Dragonborn were made a default PC race over Gnomes and yet Eberron had a Gnome Dragon Mark House but no Dragonborn one (or did they add one for them?)

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

I’m not entirely sure what "problematic" is supposed to mean in this context. It seems to mean "which some groups of people may object to", but that seems to be a very broad definition, because of course that would apply to everything. So what do we mean exactly when we say that a setting is problematic?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Just tired of people telling me what is socially acceptable to play.

I can't think of or find any instance of anyone who wants wotc to change the text of adventures and source books telling you what is socially acceptable to play.

Can you genuinely not tell the difference?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I've never liked that only the races who were PC races in 3rd edition got to have Dragon Marks. I always found that a bit concerning?.... Dull....?
Well, whatever it is, I kind of think they ought to have left the door open for a Hobgoblin Dragon Mark or an Ogre Dragon Mark and a Rakshasha Dragon Mark.

It was certainly odd when Dragonborn were made a default PC race over Gnomes and yet Eberron had a Gnome Dragon Mark House but no Dragonborn one (or did they add one for them?)

There are orcs with the mark of finding, but otherwise, the idea is that the world has a repetition of numerical significance, where there are 13 of something, and then one is lost in some way, making there be 12 instead. 13 moons, one pushed out of orbit or destroyed. 13 Dragonmarks, one wiped out by genocide. etc

In fact, the 12 have seats and tower levels and the like for 13 Dragonmarks, even though they were formed before there were 13 marks, because they knew there would be 13.

Part of the design process of Eberron is to take what exist in DnD, and think about explanations and extrapolations. So, the races with dragonmarks are the mortal races with the biggest impact on history.

And they do leave it open for a new mark to appear. They leave it entirely open to the DM to determine what that would look like, how the Houses would respond to it, what it means in terms of the Draconic Prophecy, etc.


ANyway, I find the idea that some folk having a mark of prophecy on their bloodline being problematic a bit...difficult to take seriously.

 

[briggart]

Genocides came later in the original boxed set they mentioned nothing.

Even then it's in the ancient past. It's not advocating it and I prefer the original take.

Darksun was an allegory for the environment and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans.

I always got the impression that the overall history of the world was already in place at the start of the published DS line. I feel several things were not mentioned in the original boxed set just to generate curiosity and hype for the upcoming RPGs products and the original line of novels. The Verdant Passage explained the actual nature of dragons in DS, which was left vague in the boxed set, and the first glimpse of the Cleansing War was in The Crimson Legion. Both books came out within a few months of the original boxed set, and Troy Denning was one of the two creators of the setting (together with Timothy Brown) so I find it unlikely that at least some basic version of these ideas did not inform the original DS.

Also, I think that the association with the Yugoslav wars in the '90 came at a later time. DS came out in 1991, the Crimson Legion in April '92. The Bosnian War, which (at least where I'm from) it's the one more closely associated with ethnic cleansing, started in June '92. I'm not saying that the wars did not influence the authors, only that IMO the general idea was already in place.

 

[Aldarc]

Something worth keeping in mind is that often what makes something problematic in one setting but acceptable/tolerable in another is how it is framed in the fiction and mechanics of the setting and players' relationship to it.

I would expect, for example, a setting about playing in the Roman Republic to have slavery as that is historical fact. However, I would feel incredibly icky and uncomfortable if the game "rewarded" me as a player with more slaves as I gained levels.

There are orcs with the mark of finding, but otherwise, the idea is that the world has a repetition of numerical significance, where there are 13 of something, and then one is lost in some way, making there be 12 instead. 13 moons, one pushed out of orbit or destroyed. 13 Dragonmarks, one wiped out by genocide. etc

In fact, the 12 have seats and tower levels and the like for 13 Dragonmarks, even though they were formed before there were 13 marks, because they knew there would be 13.

Part of the design process of Eberron is to take what exist in DnD, and think about explanations and extrapolations. So, the races with dragonmarks are the mortal races with the biggest impact on history.

And they do leave it open for a new mark to appear. They leave it entirely open to the DM to determine what that would look like, how the Houses would respond to it, what it means in terms of the Draconic Prophecy, etc.


ANyway, I find the idea that some folk having a mark of prophecy on their bloodline being problematic a bit...difficult to take seriously.

Or you can make plot hooks that involve the Dragonmarks with other races. For example, maybe the goblinoid agents of Darguun discovered in the ruins of the Dhaakani Empire that originally goblinoids possessed the Mark of Sentinel before humanity arrived so they have begun researching how goblins lost it and capturing dragonmarked scions of House Deneith to see if they can somehow regain it as Dragonmarked goblins would give their nation and people greater socio-economic leverage.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Something worth keeping in mind is that often what makes something problematic in one setting but acceptable/tolerable in another is how it is framed in the fiction and mechanics of the setting and players' relationship to it.

I would expect, for example, a setting about playing in the Roman Republic to have slavery as that is historical fact. However, I would feel incredibly icky and uncomfortable if the game "rewarded" me as a player with more slaves as I gained levels.

Or you can make plot hooks that involve the Dragonmarks with other races. For example, maybe the goblinoid agents of Darguun discovered in the ruins of the Dhaakani Empire that originally goblinoids possessed the Mark of Sentinel before humanity arrived so they have begun researching how goblins lost it and capturing dragonmarked scions of House Deneith to see if they can somehow regain it as Dragonmarked goblins would give their nation and people greater socio-economic leverage.

Sure!
A DM could also make each race only have 1 Mark, and do the long work of figuring out what race would make house Medani interesting (Shifters?), and which house Humans get to keep.

Personally I’d give Goliaths or Hobgoblins Sentinel, Firbolgs or bugbears Handling, and Making would either go to goblins, kobolds, or something unexpected like Goliaths (if they don’t get Sentinel), while satyrs or Firbolgs (if they don’t get handling) would get one of the halfling marks.

 

[Flamestrike]

In trying to think about what the future of the hobby might look like, I'm looking at some of the past products to see what D&D might end up shaping into.

We can infer that certain campaign settings will not be the basis of the future of D&D. Forgotten Realms (unless you use only the Sword Coast) has too many real world parallels with Maztica, Al-Qadim, etc. Mystara is a perfect example of "what not to do" in today's climate. Ravenloft is based on almost entirely real world horror stories and myths, so that's out too. Dark Sun has slavery. Birthright is too Euro-centric/Arthurian.

Maybe Eberron? I don't know enough about it. Is it Wildemount? Is this going to be the default campaign setting?

Really curious what you think.

I see what you're trying to do with this post.

Uncool man.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I see what you're trying to do with this post.

Uncool man.

Lining up a bunch of strawmen to try and justify the use of offensive language via a "thin end of the wedge" type argument.