D&D 5E D&D's Inclusivity Language Alterations In Core Rules

In recent months, WotC has altered some of the text found in the original 5th Edition core rulebooks to accommodate D&D's ongoing move towards inclusivity. Many of these changes are reflected on D&D Beyond already--mainly small terminology alterations in descriptive text, rather than rules changes.

Teos Abadia (also known as Alphastream) has compiled a list of these changes. I've posted a very abbreviated, paraphrased version below, but please do check out his site for the full list and context.

• Savage foes changed to brutal, merciless, or ruthless.
• Barbarian hordes changed to invading hordes.
• References to civilized people and places removed.
• Madness or insanity removed or changed to other words like chaos.
• Usage of orcs as evil foes changed to other words like raiders.
• Terms like dim-witted and other synonyms of low intelligence raced with words like incurious.
• Language alterations surrounding gender.
• Fat removed or changed to big.
• Use of terms referring to slavery reduced or altered.
• Use of dark when referring to evil changed to words like vile or dangerous.

This is by no means the full list, and much more context can be found on Alphastream's blog post.

 

[Charlaquin]

@Gradine @Reynard @Tales and Chronicles @Crimson Longinus

I started another thread to get the gnoll discussion going. Check it out if you’re interested.

 

[Reynard]

What if they want to wear big Sombreros? Should that be a restricted piece of headwear?

Imagine for a moment that you are the manager of a restaurant. it's Taco Tuesday, where tacos are half price because everyone loves tacos. Note that you are a restaurant, so there is a significant chance that a number of your employees, especially bussers, dishwashers and prep cooks, are of Mexican descent. Then one of your idiot frat boy wait staff shows up to work with a big, Halloween costume style Sombrero. Would you let him wear it?

These arguments about how people's freedoms are being suppressed just by virtue of them being asked to be respectful of other people around them are, frankly, infuriating. Start by following Wheaton's rule, people.

 

[Staffan]

Does Magic: The Gathering have a Dark Sun-alike?

Not really. The closest would be Amonkhet, which is Egypt-themed. There's the "metropolis surrounded by deserts" thing going on, plus the place is secretly ruled by Nicol Bolas who is an exceptionally powerful dragon/wizard with designs on world universe multiverse domination. But going from there to "Dark Sun-alike" is a pretty big leap.

 

[Clint_L]

Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

As I mentioned, some of the changes are fine. Some I disagree. At what point it to far?

But yea as a company they can do whatever they want to their product for whatever reason. Doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it.

Okay but...all WotC are doing is modestly updating the language in the new edition of their game manuals. They aren't exactly bringing dinosaurs back to life (kind of the opposite, really). I just don't understand why people care so much.

Actually, I kind of do. Because mostly older folks have been complaining about mostly younger folks changing things for as long as there have been folks.

 

[Reynard]

@Gradine @Reynard @Tales and Chronicles @Crimson Longinus

I started another thread to get the gnoll discussion going. Check it out if you’re interested.

Me too. Oops.

 

[FrogReaver]

@Morrus I'm going to go ahead and bow out - it's obvious we just don't agree here and likely never will. I'm glad you afforded me the opportunity to share my thoughts. Thank you.

P.S. - Hope none of my comments were taken personally they weren't meant that way even if they were a bit pointed.

 

[Morrus]

I'm sorry - but criticizing your chosen expression isn't suppressing your right to express yourself.

But people aren’t ‘criticising’ it. They’re not evaluating its quality. They are objecting to its very existence on ideological grounds. There is a very clear difference.

Painting a critic as an oppressor just for criticism is the truly oppressive tactic, IMO of course.

Oh, shush. That’s just playground stuff. You’re better than that. And if you’re not, I certainly am.

 

[Charlaquin]

Does Magic: The Gathering have a Dark Sun-alike?

Not really. The only desert-themed planes I can think of are Rabiah, which is your standard early 90s Arabian Nights pastiche (the set it was introduced in was literally called “Arabian Nights”), and Amonkhet, which is a more modern, ancient Egyptian-themed plane.

 

[Charlaquin]

I vote for "Orwellian" as the most abused term of the last five years or so.

Orwell is definitely up there among most frequently misinterpreted authors as well.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Imagine for a moment that you are the manager of a restaurant. it's Taco Tuesday, where tacos are half price because everyone loves tacos. Note that you are a restaurant, so there is a significant chance that a number of your employees, especially bussers, dishwashers and prep cooks, are of Mexican descent. Then one of your idiot frat boy wait staff shows up to work with a big, Halloween costume style Sombrero. Would you let him wear it?

These arguments about how people's freedoms are being suppressed just by virtue of them being asked to be respectful of other people around them are, frankly, infuriating. Start by following Wheaton's rule, people.

If I or someone there expressed an issue with it, or if it was against the dress code, I would ask the employee in question to remove it (it's pretty impractical in any case). If the guy decides to be a jerk about it, he would be disciplined. That seems respectful to me. What I would not do is assume someone will be offended by it before an issue becomes apparent.