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

[Lanefan]

So, we're never allowed to criticize a work?

Of course you are. That too is a part of free speech.

Where does it stop? Are we only allowed to criicize things that you agree with? Are not not permitted to criticize at all? Are all works, once published, absolutely free of criticism and must never be spoken of in any negative terms?

Obviously not. Again, freedom of speech is not freedom of responsibility or repercussions.

I fully agree. Responsibility and repercussions go hand in hand with freedom of speech, but I'd far rather that than the alternative.

 

[OldOwlbear]

That may be OK for some elements of the industry, but it's probably not going to work for the big tentpole organizations like WotC that have the largest segment of the market and, thus, the more to lose from backlashes within it.

Freedom of expression has always implied the freedom of response to that expression. And if the person or corporation considering making a statement is unwilling to weather that response, that's not a negation or limit on that freedom. They can choose to weather that response and take what consequences they are due. In this case, WotC is freely choosing not to weather the response that would come from publishing an updated Dark Sun at this time.

I certainly agree with your statement. My view is more from the perspective of the broader topic of this thread and the question of the poll, which is to say it’s important to let the industry as a whole know that there are customers who want settings that do not avoid difficult topics and themes. They might face backlash, but they should also know that there is a base of customers that may support their product. Essentially I want them to know why the answer to the poll should be yes from my own view.

 

[MGibster]

I personally doubt the current WoTC could handle this well. There are probably voices and people who can however.

Out of curiosity, how can it be handled well?

 

[billd91]

My initial response to this poll was Maybe, and so I didn't vote. But I have since come off the fence. If I were to read the question strictly, casting a problematic topic as evil and with the expectation of being fought does NOT make it acceptable. That treatment alone is not sufficient. Each topic would have to be handled individually and with care. Some would need more intervention than others and some may never really be widely acceptable.

 

[Faolyn]

That’s the crux of the issue I think and has been debated by political theorists and philosophers for centuries now. Tocqueville is the most prominent in my mind if I remember correctly. What is the point of a legal right to freedom of expression if private individuals can shout down each others’ expression through, in this case, subjective moral standards via tools such as social media.

Because government interference and individual people being upset are two very, very different things.

You have the right to be heard. But so do I, even if my opinions are different than yours.

One of the original points argued here as to why WotC is not doing Dark Sun is for fear of public backlash. My argument, and that of others I believe, is that this is unhealthy for the industry and for creativity.

Or as I said, maybe they don't feel comfortable writing such a thing because... they don't feel comfortable doing it. As it is, you're basically assuming that the writers have no opinions of their own but are acting solely out of fear of The Masses.

I mentioned before, I co-created, and did most of the writing for, a setting that has slavery in it. I know what my table's limits are on such things. But I also know what my limits are. I didn't include things in this setting that I would feel uncomfortable playing or running. The slavery in my setting has limits everyone at my table can deal with.

And again, WotC is not being censored or repressed or being forced to bow to the whims of the market. They're choosing not to revive a really old setting, just like they apparently have no desire to re-publish Birthright.

I'd go so far as to say that slavery probably isn't even the main reason they don't want to publish Dark Sun, just one of the reasons. It's the lack of a psionics system that's the main reason, since there's never been a consensus on how D&D should do psionics even after, what, three UA tests, and a lot of people have said they don't just want just psionic archetypes in DS, they want a full system. But it sounds better to say "we don't want to do slavery" than it is to say "we have no idea how to do a psionic system that you guys won't hate."

 

[Faolyn]

That's just it - TSR caving to the Satanic panic in how it designed 2e was a huge mistake then; I'd say very much more so and on a bigger scale than is WotC's decision not to reboot Dark Sun.

Caving to suppressionists like the Satanic panic crowd only serves to encourage them.

And yet, Dark Sun also came out of 2e, as did almost every other beloved setting. Dark Sun doesn't even have the demons and devils that Satanic Panic railed against, and, I think, would have been a lot less interesting if it had.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

We can agree about your freedom also means responsability for your actions.

But I want to know if an update DS can offend a lot of people, or only a little group of people who can cause a lot of noise.

I would rather to believe the return of DS is delayed because there are plans of an event where the D&D is going to be rebooted. Then part of the plot would be a group of no-Athasian heroes would travel to the past to avoid and cleasing wars and like this... and the champions of Rajaat are replaced with clones... and Athas is saved, and the ecological disaster relatively avoided, but there is a demiplane ruled by the sorcerer-kings. Then your favorite parts from the original setting can be "recycled" for your own game and Hasbro's writters haven't to start totally from zero again, only fixing possible mistakes of continuity and plot holes.

If a lot of things start to become taboo, then I am going to be who be furious, because it is as if they believed that we don't have enough maturity to talk about certain treats.

Why would they complain against DS and not against the Dark Eldars of Warhammer 40.000 or the Dark Elves of Warhammer Fantasy?

Really, the lack of a system for psionic powers is a good reason, and I can accept that explanation.... but then why are we here discussing about alleged problematic contents?

 

[Scribe]

I'd go so far as to say that slavery probably isn't even the main reason they don't want to publish Dark Sun, just one of the reasons. It's the lack of a psionics system that's the main reason, since there's never been a consensus on how D&D should do psionics even after, what, three UA tests, and a lot of people have said they don't just want just psionic archetypes in DS, they want a full system. But it sounds better to say "we don't want to do slavery" than it is to say "we have no idea how to do a psionic system that you guys won't hate."

?

I’ll be frank here, the Dark Sun setting is problematic in a lot of ways. And that’s the main reason we haven’t come back to it. We know it’s got a huge fan following and we have standards today that make it extraordinarily hard to be true to the source material and also meet our ethical and inclusion standards... We know there’s love out there for it and god we would love to make those people happy, and also we gotta be responsible.

I dont think it has even one word to do with Psionics being something they have 'no idea' how to do.

Its right from the horses mouth. They believe its a problematic setting. Problematic being a pretty key term in the discourse of these benighted days. He then leans in even harder that it would be 'extraordinarily' hard to be true to the source, and meet 'ethical and inclusion' standards.

They know people out there want it, and they want to make those folks happy, but...'problematic'.

Its insanely clear, unless (and I wouldnt blame you!) we want to just assume all words out of Wizards are lies.

 

[Irlo]

That's just it - TSR caving to the Satanic panic in how it designed 2e was a huge mistake then; I'd say very much more so and on a bigger scale than is WotC's decision not to reboot Dark Sun.

Caving to suppressionists like the Satanic panic crowd only serves to encourage them.

Did TSR do more than just change the names of the devils and demons as a response to the panicked detractors? I mostly played 1e and started using 2e in about ‘94 but I only used the PHB, so I’m not up on all the design changes.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That's just it - TSR caving to the Satanic panic in how it designed 2e was a huge mistake then; I'd say very much more so and on a bigger scale than is WotC's decision not to reboot Dark Sun.

Caving to suppressionists like the Satanic panic crowd only serves to encourage them.

Talk to folks like Tim Kask, and the Satanic panic directly drove D&D sales.