Do We Still Need "Oriental Adventures"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Orientalism -- a wide-ranging term originally used to encompass depictions of Middle Eastern, South Asian, and East Asian cultures -- has gradually come to represent a more negative term. Should Dungeons & Dragons, known for two well-received books titled "Oriental Adventures," have another edition dedicated to "Eastern" cultures?

[h=3]A Brief History of Orientalism[/h]For a time, orientalism was a term used by art historians and literary scholars to group "Eastern" cultures together. That changed in 1978 with Edward Said's Orientalism, which argued that treatment of these cultures conflated peoples, times, and places into a narrative of incident and adventure in an exotic land.

It's easy to see why this approach might appeal to role-playing games. Orientalism is one lens to view a non-European culture within the game's context. We previously discussed how "othering" can create a mishmash of cultures, and it can apply to orientalism as well. The challenge is in how to portray a culture with nuance, and often one large region isn't enough to do the topic justice. The concept even applies to the idea of the "East" and the "Orient," which turns all of the Asian regions into one mono-culture. Wikipedia explains the term in that context:

The imperial conquest of "non–white" countries was intellectually justified with the fetishization of the Eastern world, which was effected with cultural generalizations that divided the peoples of the world into the artificial, binary-relationship of "The Eastern World and The Western World", the dichotomy which identified, designated, and subordinated the peoples of the Orient as the Other—as the non–European Self.


Game designers -- who were often admitted fans of Asian cultures -- sought to introduce a new kind of fantasy into traditional Western tropes. Viewed through a modern lens, their approach would likely be different today.
[h=3]The "Oriental" Books in D&D[/h]The original Oriental Adventures was published in 1985 by co-creator of D&D Gary Gygax, David "Zeb" Cook and François Marcela-Froideval. It introduced the ninja, kensai, wu-jen, and shukenja as well as new takes on the barbarian and monk. It was also the first supplement to introduce non-weapn proficiencies, the precursor to D&D's skill system. The book was well-received, and was envisioned by Gygax as an opportunity to reinvigorate the line -- ambitions which collapsed when he left the company. The book's hardcover had the following text printed on the back:

…The mysterious and exotic Orient, land of spices and warlords, has at last opened her gates to the West.


Aaron Trammell provides a detailed analysis of how problematic this one line of text is. The sum of his argument:

Although Gary Gygax envisioned a campaign setting that brought a multicultural dimension to Dungeons & Dragons, the reality is that by lumping together Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Mongolian, Philippine, and “Southeast Asian” lore he and co-authors David “Zeb” Cook and Francois Marcela-Froideval actually developed a campaign setting that reinforced western culture’s already racist understanding of the “Orient.”


The next edition would shift the setting from Kara-Tur (which was later sent in the Forgotten Realms) to Rokugan from the Legend of the Five Rings role-playing game.
[h=3]Controversy of the Five Rings[/h]James Wyatt wrote the revised Oriental Adventures for Third Edition D&D, published by Wizards of the Coast in 2001. It was updated to 3.5 in Dragon Magazine #318.

Legend of the Five Rings, a franchise that extends to card games, is itself not immune to controversy. Quintin Smith got enough comments on his review of the Legend of the Five Rings card game that he included an appendix that looked critically at chanting phrases "banzai!" at conventions and some of the game's art:

Now, I have no idea if this is right or wrong, but I do know that chanting in Japanese at an event exclusively attended by white men and women made me feel a tiny bit weird. My usual headcheck for this is “How would I feel if I brought a Japanese-English friend to the event?” and my answer is “Even more weird.” Personally, I found the game’s cover art to be a little more questionable. I think it’s fantastic to have a fantasy world that draws on Asian conventions instead of Western ones. But in a game that almost exclusively depicts Asian men and women, don’t then put white people on the cover! It’s such a lovely piece of art. I just wish she looked a little bit less like a cosplayer.


Perhaps in response to this criticism, Fantasy Flight Games removed the "banzai" chant as a bullet point from its web site. The page also features several pictures of past tournament winners, which provides some context as to who was shouting the chant.
[h=3]Fifth Edition and Diversity[/h]By the time the Fifth Edition of D&D was published, the game's approach to diverse peoples had changed. Indigo Boock on GeekGirlCon explains how:

Diversity is strength. The strongest adventuring party is the most diverse adventuring party. Try thinking about it in terms of classes—you have your healers, fighters, and magic users. Same goes for diversity. Different outlooks on life create more mobility and openness for different situations. Jeremy also explained that it was crucial that the art also reflected diversity, as did Art Director Kate Erwin. With this, they tried to make sure that there was a 50/50 split of people who identify as male and people who identify as female in the illustrations.


Trammell points out how these changes are reflected in the art of the core rule books:

First, there are illustrations: an East Asian warlock, a female samurai, an Arabian princess, an Arab warrior, and a Moor in battle, to name a few. Then, there are mechanics: the Monk persists as a class replete with a spiritual connection to another world via the “ki” mechanic. Scimitars and blowguns are commonly available as weapons, and elephants are available for purchase as mounts for only 200 gold. Although all of these mechanics are presented with an earnest multiculturalist ethic of appreciation, this ethic often surreptitiously produces a problematic and fictitious exotic, Oriental figure. At this point, given the embrace of multiculturalism by the franchise, it seems that the system is designed to embrace the construction of Orientalist fictional worlds where the Orient and Occident mix, mingle, and wage war.


A good first step is to understand the nuances of a region by exploring more than one culture there. Sean "S.M." Hill's "The Journey to..." series is a great place to start, particularly "Romance of the Three Kingdoms."

D&D has come a long way, but it still has some work to do if it plans to reflect the diversity of its modern player base and their cultures...which is why it seems unlikely we'll get another Oriental Adventures title.

Mike "Talien" Tresca is a freelance game columnist, author, communicator, and a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to http://amazon.com. You can follow him at Patreon.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

Celebrim

Legend
Goes to note that my Asian friends weren't offended by the book when we used it back in the 80s. Don't know how they'd feel about it now.

I always get the impression that the people who are finding the most stuff to be offended about, only know of people different than themselves in a theoretical manner through textbooks, history books, other media, and statistics. It's a magazine level relationship. And the problem I have with it, is I've never met any of the people described in those magazine articles. The real people I've met were complicated, unexpected, unique and didn't have these average consensus opinions or feelings or preferences that they were supposed to have based on someone's survey data and image 'Arab' or 'African' or 'Asian' or whatever label they are supposed to have conjures up. Offended by Oriental Adventures? Maybe. I've never heard that opinion, but it's probably out there somewhere. But probably for some less than they were offended when A New Hope was changed so that Han wasn't the only one doing the shooting, or when the content in World of Warcraft was 'dumbed down' to be more accessible.

For me, I see questions like, "Do we still need Oriental Adventures?", and I think to myself - twenty years ago, that was a racist question. Twenty years ago, the idea that we wouldn't publish content reflecting all sorts of diverse settings and cultures and not just Western Fantasy, would have been seen as a really crappy opinion to have. Back then, the sacred progressive opinion people would have been proud to have was that D&D was not just for Western Fantasy, and people saying that they didn't want Monks or other Eastern things in their D&D because D&D was some sort of Western cultural artifact and therefore should be uniquely Western would have been the marginal shunned opinions. And to be honest, I would have thought that's a fairly natural ordering. No one had to have monks in their game, but bravo for having Oriental Adventures if you wanted them.

Now, all the sudden the "woke" thing is to question whether we should even have Oriental Adventures?

Is this some sort of trick played by the groups 20 years back? Is it like one of those cartoons where the two characters are saying back and forth, "No, it isn't" and "Yes, it is." so long that when one of them switches sides, the other side switches too and now the trickster gets his opponent to agree with him?

Respect doesn't change. But the codification in some ivory tower of what respect looks like seems to change with every breeze. Some day this article will be problematic again, I suspect. I wonder what people will be saying then.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

He Mage
Respect doesn't change. But the codification in some ivory tower of what respect looks like seems to change with every breeze. Some day this article will be problematic again, I suspect. I wonder what people will be saying then.

Nice, poetic, comment.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
One of the things I find most problematic, is a normal D&Dism: the misuse of reallife names.

Especially when dealing with unfamiliar cultures, misusing slides into misrepresenting, and disrespecting.

If an author is going to use a reallife name − whether ninja or oni − research the reallife meaning of the word, to be familiar with its historical accuracy or mythological accuracy. If there is no interest in reallife, maybe avoid using the reallife name.

For a fictive creation that romps thru a culture for loose inspiration, consider a synonym, or neologism, or even a compound noun, to signal that the creation is distinct from reallife.

The simple rule of using real names in real ways avoids faux pas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yaarel

He Mage
For me, even the name ‘Mazteca’ ( = Mexico + Aztec) seems a bit too reallife. As a recognizably reallife name, its authors would need to be highly knowledgeable about Mexico today and Aztec civilization.
 



Could someone give actual examples of things from the previous editions of OA that are offensive? Beyond vague summaries or the fact that its existence may be offensive to some. Are there any specific game mechanics that show an overt racial bias, offensive stereotypes in example characters, or perhaps racist caricatures in the art? Unless I've missed part of this thread (quite possible), the only thing that seems to fit the bill is the use of the word "oriental".

This is a serious question; I'm not trying to pose a hypothetical. Over the course of this thread, one common recurring concept is that a new version of OA must be done respectfully. And when I think back to me 3e OA book, I think it was. However, I will admit that my glasses may be rose colored; it's been over a decade since that book got out of it's box in the basement. And I never owned the earlier version. So, I would really like to hear if there are specific things people found offensive beyond the initial concept.

When we want a new version of OA to be respectful, do we mean that WotC needs to keep doing it the way that it is, that they need to modernize it to brush off traces that were considered acceptable before but aren't now, or that they need to re-examine the product from the ground up?
 

Igwilly

First Post
One of the things I find most problematic, is a normal D&Dism: the misuse of reallife names.

Especially when dealing with unfamiliar cultures, misusing slides into misrepresenting, and disrespecting.

If an author is going to use a reallife name − whether ninja or oni − research the reallife meaning of the word, to be familiar with its historical accuracy or mythological accuracy. If there is no interest in reallife, maybe avoid using the reallife name.

For a fictive creation that romps thru a culture for loose inspiration, consider a synonym, or neologism, or even a compound noun, to signal that the creation is distinct from reallife.

The simple rule of using real names in real ways avoids faux pas.
Thing is, we do that, all the time. With everyone. Most classes and monsters with names from real-world mythos and folklore are *heavily* changed and adapted. No one complains about how devils and demons (or titans, or fairies.. ) in a setting are different from their real-world roots, even if the concept usually is completely different.
He, there are some cases where we don't even Know if it's accurate or not.
This doesn't mean lack of respect. If the fictional Orient was seen as inherently evil compared to the good West, for example, then you may have a point.
I tell you this because people use my culture and my religion in the exact same way and I have the same standards I'm telling you here.
 

unknowable

Explorer
The euro cultures are all kinda chopped up and mashed together in D&D, I think it is fine and should be setting dependent.

Arguably not leaning too heavily on any one culture from the real world or making "all asians are one people and look the same" is a bigger issue.
If it is divided up amongst different fictional cultures in the same way D&D handles the traditional western / european ones I am fine.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
Avatar: the Last Air Bender, is the ideal I want D&D to strive for.

It is simply a cool setting. Those who know, know and appreciate the thoughtful reallife inspirations from diverse Asian cultures. But for everyone else, it is simply awesome.

Personally I like the fact that it mostly uses English names for place names (Northern Air Temple, Earth Kingdom City, Serpent Pass), as well as a few select flavorful names (Kyoshi Island, Si Wong Desert). When it uses reallife names like ‘avatar’, it does so with reasonable accuracy (a powerful spirit that incarnates as a human).

That is what I want D&D exploration of Asia to look like. Simply a cool setting.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top