D&D 3E/3.5 Diversity in D&D Third Edition

With 3rd Ed, our main goal was to return D&D to its roots, such as with Greyhawk deities and the return of half-orcs. By staying true to the feel of D&D, we helped the gaming audience accept the sweeping changes that we made to the rules system.

One way we diverged from the D&D heritage, however, was by making the game art more inclusive. People of color, for example, were hard to find in earlier editions, and, when they did make appearance, it wasn’t always for the best. Luckily for us, Wizards of the Coast had an established culture of egalitarianism, and we were able to update the characters depicted in the game to better reflect contemporary sensibilities.

dnd-party.jpg

A few years before 3E, the leadership at Wizards had already encouraged me to go whole-hog with the multicultural look of the RPG Everway (1995). In this world-hopping game, we provided players and Gamemasters with scores of color art cards to inspire them as they created their characters and NPCs. The art featured people and settings that looked like they could have come from fantasy versions of places all around the earth, and the gender balance was great. I once got an email from a black roleplayer who said that Everway had forever changed the way he roleplayed, so I know that the game’s multicultural look was meaningful to some gamers out there. With D&D, we took the game in the same direction, but not nearly as far. The core setting has always resembled medieval Europe, and we expanded the diversity of the characters while still maintaining the medieval milieu.

The characters that players see the most are the “fab four,” the four iconic characters that we used repeatedly in our art and in our examples of play. Two are men (the human cleric and the dwarf fighter) and two are women (the elf wizard and the halfling rogue). Given the demographics of gamers in 2000, the implication that half of all D&D characters are female was a bit of a stretch. The only complaints we got, however, were about the introductory Adventure Game, where the characters were pregenerated, with names and genders assigned to them. Some young men would have preferred fewer female characters and more males to choose from. None of us worried too much about those complaints.

In addition to the main four characters, we also assigned a particular character to represent each of the other classes, with that character appearing in examples of play and in art. The four human characters comprised a white man (the cleric), a white woman (the paladin), a black woman (the monk), and an Asian man (the sorcerer). The remaining four nonhuman iconics were three men and one woman. It was a trick to strike the right balance in assigning fantasy races and genders to all the classes and to assign ethnicities to the human characters, but the iconic characters seemed to be a big hit, and I think the diversity was part of the appeal.

Somewhat late in the process, the marketing team added Regdar, a male fighter, to the mix of iconic characters. We designers weren’t thrilled, and as the one who had drawn up the iconic characters I was a little chapped. My array of iconic characters did not include a human male fighter, and that’s the most common D&D character ever, so the marketing team gave us one. We carped a little that he meant adding a second white man to the array of characters, but at least he was dark enough to be ambiguously ethnic. Regdar proved popular, and if the marketing team was looking for an attractive character to publicize, they got one.

Back in 1E, Gary Gygax had used the phrase “he or she” as the default third person singular pronoun, a usage that gave the writing a legalistic vibe that probably suited it. In 2E, the text stated up front that it was just going to use “he” because grammatically it’s gender-neutral. Even in 1989, insisting that “he” is gender neutral was tone deaf. By the time I was working on 3E, I had been dealing with the pronoun issue for ten years. In Ars Magica (1987), we wrote everything in second person so that we could avoid gendered pronouns. The rules said things like, “You can understand your familiar” instead of “The wizard can understand his/her/their familiar.” In Over the Edge (1992), we used “he” for the generic player and “she” for the generic gamemaster, which felt balanced and helped the reader keep the two roles separate. That sort of usage became standard for Atlas Games’s roleplaying games. Personally, I use singular-they whenever I can get away with it, but 20 years ago that was still generally considered unorthodox. For 3E, I suggested that we tie the pronouns to the iconic characters. The iconic paladin was a woman, so references to paladins in the rules were to “her.” I thought we’d catch flak from someone about this usage, but I never heard fans complaining.

One topic we needed to settle was whether monsters that were gendered as female in folklore, such as a lamia, should be exclusively female in D&D. I figured we should ditch gender limits wherever we could, but an editor argued that gender was important for the identity of a monster like the lamia. I asked, “Is that because it is in woman’s nature to deceive and destroy men?” Luring and destroying men is a common trope for female-gendered monsters, with the lamia as an example. “Yes, it is” said the editor, but she was laughing, and I had made my point. You can see an illustration of a male lamia in the 3E Monster Manual.

While we incorporated Greyhawk’s deities into 3rd Ed, we had no intention of picking up Greyhawk’s description of various human ethnic groups, corresponding more or less to ethnicities found on Earth. For gamers who cared about the Greyhawk canon, the Asian sorcerer would be from a lightly described territory to the west and the black monk would be a “Touv” from the jungles of Hepmonaland. Touvs in 2E were defined as having a penalty to their Intelligence scores, and we sure didn’t want to send any players in that direction. In 3E, the Asian and black characters were just humans, full stop.

The good news is that the gaming audience rolled with the iconic characters featuring people of color and women. With 5th Ed, the design team picked up where we left off and have pursued diversity further. The diverse cast of characters goes a long way in making D&D look modern and mature.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jonathan Tweet

Jonathan Tweet

D&D 3E, Over the Edge, Everway, Ars Magica, Omega World, Grandmother Fish

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
3e still had the rubric of 'favored class,' probably had something to do with it.
oh god, I forgot all about favored classes. it's like they just couldn't let go of the idea of race/class restrictions and just had to have something about it left in 3e.
Eberron sort of avoided this question altogether by not really having any parts of it traceable to a “real-world” equivalent. In this way, basically any appearance could be suitable for a human.

If there is a “fantasy Asia” in Eberron, it’s probably Riedra, but that’s a tenuous connection at best. It’s described in a way that reminds me of authoritarian communist China, rather than generic “fantasy Asia”. Others may disagree.
I get not wanting to have equivalent everything in a fantasy setting, and copying and pasting every culture into a setting is boring af. idk I used to not care so much, but someone I know (who is a person of color) compared Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls, and how at least in Tamriel not only was there visible diversity among all races but also a history of where all these different people came from.

meanwhile in Thedas everyone is ostensibly white (though that may have changed in the last game??) except maybe your own character, but then it's like why are you the only non-white person in the world? Eberron does seem to strive for the melting pot model of things, which I guess is fair and at least it's a history of diverse people coming to one continent over time.
I sometimes include actual RL events or trends into my games, often in a satirical way. But I will not elaborate here, because there is a small border between satire and political incorrect these days and I do not want to hurt any ones feelings.
man, sounds like a real hoot. I bet you treat those events and trends with a good deal of respect even 😉
There are thousands of creators who can consult on a wide range of cost, including simply part of any money made on the product (usually this would be a job like editor or even a co-author).

A creator who is literally penniless can lean on various online communities.

There is always a way.
even better is when someone makes something based on their own experience but it goes largely ignored haha Orz
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Arnwolf666

Adventurer
ah yes, the long history of buddhist monks in europe learning martial arts is why we have the monk class in D&D I forgot, lol.
Exactly. It’s based on them. Not exactly the same. They may even just have unarmed fighting that developed in their fictional world and not something like king-fu.
 

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
Exactly. It’s based on them. Not exactly the same. They may even just have unarmed fighting that developed in their fictional world and not something like king-fu.
have you... ever looked at the Monk entry in the first PHB? they're very explicitly supposed to be East Asian monks who learn kung fu. there's a reason TSR decided they shouldn't be a core race in 2nd edition.
 


dagger

Adventurer
have you... ever looked at the Monk entry in the first PHB? they're very explicitly supposed to be East Asian monks who learn kung fu. there's a reason TSR decided they shouldn't be a core race in 2nd edition.
I fall to see the problem with the 1e monk in the phin except it needs a couple of small buffs.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
ah yes, the long history of buddhist monks in europe learning martial arts is why we have the monk class in D&D I forgot, lol.

Yeah they were gonna get cut even if Gary was in charge.

I'm not a fan of the Monk but have played it in 5th as no one else would and I wanted to test the mechanics.

Monks did kinda suck mechanically pre 5E (4E idk).
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
ah yes, the long history of buddhist monks in europe learning martial arts is why we have the monk class in D&D I forgot, lol
Martial arts exploded on the American pop culture scene in the early 70s. Bruce Lee in the movies, Kwai Chang Caine on TV, and, the nominal inspiration of the D&D monk, Remo Williams, in print.

Rather than say, "sure, your fighter can learn unarmed fighting styles," 0D&D gave us the Monk. Perhaps understandable, at time, but still orientalist.

Monks did kinda suck mechanically pre 5E (4E idk).
No class sucked outright pre-Essentials, the 4e Monk was just, perhaps a bit weirdly, made Psionic.
 

ad_hoc

(they/them)
This is a separate issue of a particular table's norms, which is what I was thinking of. Folks I play with are usually free to play what they want, but I haven't played with a crowd notably seeking much beyond fairly straightforward characters recently so it wasn't at the top of my head.

What is a "straightforward" character to you? Are they straight, white, and male?

Is a divergence from that no longer "straightforward"? Consequently, are people who diverge from that not "straightforward" people?

Is it a special character trait to not be straight, white, and male?

This is the crux of the issue. It's not a political topic until bigoted people make it one.
 

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
Martial arts exploded on the American pop culture scene in the early 70s. Bruce Lee in the movies, Kwai Chang Caine on TV, and, the nominal inspiration of the D&D monk, Remo Williams, in print.

Rather than say, "sure, your fighter can learn unarmed fighting styles," 0D&D gave us the Monk. Perhaps understandable, at time, but still orientalist.
oh no I know exactly why monk was there lol. not that I mind in of itself, I'm even playing a monk in the campaign I'm in right now, and honestly it would just feel weird if monk were just a class that just did unarmed combat ngl.
No class sucked outright pre-Essentials, the 4e Monk was just, perhaps a bit weirdly, made Psionic.
I never got to play the 4e monk, but I kinda liked that it was psionic? it made sense at the time.
 

Remove ads

Latest threads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top