D&D 5E Dark Sun, problematic content, and 5E…

[Justice and Rule]

I think part of the problem with having a slavery as a big part of the setting is not only do the players have to ignore if the want to do anything that doesn't involve that fighting against the institution itself, but how do you stop players from participating in it if it is just a socially-accepted thing in the setting? That part, I'd wager, probably plays a bigger role in why they wouldn't bring it back.

But I think the other thread brought up the idea of serfdom as a replacement (I didn't read all the way through it, mind you), and that would largely do the same thing while also making it difficult for the players to participate in (given that serfs are usually tied to a ruler/land-owner/noble).

 

[overgeeked]

What exactly are the community standards?

Content and Format Questions

What can I use in my titles on the Dungeon Masters Guild? When you create your own title for the Dungeon Masters Guild, you get access to a hoard of resources. Your work can use any of the 5th Edit...

support.dmsguild.com

 

[J.Quondam]

Is the poll intended to be specific to WotC/5e and WotC controlled IP, or to RPGing in general?
I voted "yes" assuming the question to be a more general one, but might amend my vote if it's truly intended to be specific to WotC.


RPGing is a form of fiction, and it's okay for fiction to deal with tough issues for tables that want that. If a creator in general wants to tackle that stuff, awesome.

That said, I understand why a big tent company like Hasbro would shy away from controversy. Just as I don't expect Disney to make animated films that include difficult themes as dominant elements, I'm not surprised that WotC acts similarly. If I want an edgier product, I can get it from a different company.

With respect to WotC-controlled IP specifically, like DarkSun? Well, it's theirs. Personally, I'd prefer them to keep it relatively unchanged, but I'd accept their decision to phase out certain things. I'd make purchase decisions based on what they actually produce, not what I think they ought to produce. And of course, the old stuff is still out there.

 

[MGibster]

I think part of the problem with having a slavery as a big part of the setting is not only do the players have to ignore if the want to do anything that doesn't involve that fighting against the institution itself, but how do you stop players from participating in it if it is just a socially-accepted thing in the setting? That part, I'd wager, probably plays a bigger role in why they wouldn't bring it back.

It's been a long time since I've played DS, but couldn't a character actually be a slave?

 

[overgeeked]

There's nothing wrong with that. For me, D&D especially, is not that kind of game. It's a fairly heroic game where Good beats Evil. Some properties turn that on its head a bit, but for the most part G vs. E with G winning.

Sure. And there's nothing wrong with D&D being that for you. But that doesn't mean D&D has to be that for everyone else.

 

[Emoshin]

I think part of the problem with having a slavery as a big part of the setting is not only do the players have to ignore if the want to do anything that doesn't involve that fighting against the institution itself, but how do you stop players from participating in it if it is just a socially-accepted thing in the setting? That part, I'd wager, probably plays a bigger role in why they wouldn't bring it back.

Well the OP does say it's "obviously, explicitly evil"...

But is that "evil" for the players, or is it Evil in the setting, or both, and if it's socially-acceptable in the setting, then is mostly everyone in the setting Evil?

The whole question makes my head spin, and that's not even including trying to separate the academic hypothetical from the real human sensibilities of folks in the community.

 

[MGibster]

Sure. And there's nothing wrong with D&D being that for you. But that doesn't mean D&D has to be that for everyone else.

I'm sorry, but I checked the DMG and it specifically says D&D has to be the same for me as it does for everyone else. Not many people know that because they read in the DMG once and forgot about it. I'm kidding. Most people didn't even read it once.

 

[overgeeked]

I think part of the problem with having a slavery as a big part of the setting is not only do the players have to ignore if the want to do anything that doesn't involve that fighting against the institution itself, but how do you stop players from participating in it if it is just a socially-accepted thing in the setting? That part, I'd wager, probably plays a bigger role in why they wouldn't bring it back.

You say "no" as the referee. I have plenty of times.

 

[billd91]

Depends on the content and why it's problematic. So the answer is Maybe.

 

[Reynard]

Acceptable to who? If it impacts sales negatively, probably not to the shareholders.