D&D 5E Don't play "stupid" characters. It is ableist.

[Charlaquin]

I have a feeling that some of us (myself included) are not really grokking what the OP is talking about because we've never gamed with anyone crass enough to do the ableist stereotyping of someone that they experienced.

I mean, look at like Grog from Critical Role for a pretty standard example of what I believe the OP is talking about here. Is Travis Willingham actively disdainful of folks with mental disabilities? I very much doubt it. Does his portrayal of a “stupid” character indirectly impact how some people who view it think about intelligence? Of course.

 

[cowpie]

That's based on the old Stanford-Binet IQ test. If you model IQ on the newer Wechsler test, the ratio between Intelligence score and IQ looks a little different.

I remember Gygax said something like that (1 INT = 10 IQ) in one of the old books or articles.

The OP seems to be saying that if you ever portray a comically stupid character in a game of make-believe, that it's going to permanently harm someone, and then proceeds to repeat a scolding "ableist" mantra. He also wants people to police their language to never say the words "stupid" or "smart", because it apparently do irreparable damage to someone just by hearing the word. I think this is catastrophic thinking, which stultifies creativity, and renders people incapable of being resilient. After all, there are lot of things you'll encounter in life far worse than hearing a word, and you can't control when you have to deal with them.

This also sounds an awful lot like censoring comedy or fiction for "punching down", adhering to an oppression matrix world-view without considering context or complexity, and that's what I'm criticizing.

I could see some serious problems with this as a DM, say if you portrayed a stupid Ogre that the PCs have a chance to outwit, or a mindless gelatinous cube. Surely there are creatures in a fantasy game that actually are well...stupid.

 

[cowpie]

I mean, look at like Grog from Critical Role for a pretty standard example of what I believe the OP is talking about here. Is Travis Willingham actively disdainful of folks with mental disabilities? I very much doubt it. Does his portrayal of a “stupid” character indirectly impact how some people who view it think about intelligence? Of course.

That's really what I'm getting at too. The OP says that we shouldn't even say the words "stupid" or "smart", because it will be too traumatizing for someone just to hear the words spoken aloud. Maybe I'm unique, but I've had to deal with far worse things in life plenty of times (life and death things), and once you've dealt with those challenges, words truly become sticks and stones that can't hurt you much (and hurt feelings pass pretty quickly).

Obviously don't try to hurt people or be a jerk, but walk around on pins and needles for fear of saying the wrong thing? That's just not fun in a RPG.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I remember Gygax said something like that (1 INT = 10 IQ) in one of the old books or articles.

The OP seems to be saying that if you ever portray a comically stupid character in a game of make-believe, that it's going to permanently harm someone, and then proceeds to repeat a scolding "ableist" mantra. He also wants people to police their language to never say the words "stupid" or "smart", because it apparently do irreparable damage to someone just by hearing the word. I think this is catastrophic thinking, which stultifies creativity, and renders people incapable of being resilient. After all, there are lot of things you'll encounter in life far worse than hearing a word, and you can't control when you have to deal with them.

This also sounds an awful lot like censoring comedy or fiction for "punching down", adhering to an oppression matrix world-view without considering context or complexity, and that's what I'm criticizing.

I could see some serious problems with this as a DM, say if you portrayed a stupid Ogre that the PCs have a chance to outwit, or a mindless gelatinous cube. Surely there are creatures in a fantasy game that actually are well...stupid.

I feel like you are taking the OP's post and cranking the hyperbole up to 11, which is a rather unfair way to respond.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, I wouldn't call it a "critique" exactly -- the OP makes a lot of assertions and demands, and is signalling they they support a popular political position in which it's considered virtuous to scold people for being "ableist".

Oh come on, let’s not start with accusations of virtue signaling. We don’t know the OP’s motivations and speculating about them doesn’t add anything of value to the conversation.

To critique the critique, one could just as easily argue that it's also harmful to scold people for being ableist. For example, someone on the autism spectrum might use the term "stupid" because they tend to process things literally, and are unable to police their own language all the time (it's literally too hard for them). So isn't it discriminatory to scold them for being "ableist" when in fact, they can't help but use less-delicate language? You've be punishing a neurodivergent person, based on the assumption that they don't care about neurodivergent people, which is obviously wrong.

If “one” did so, “one” would be making an argument predicated on the totally unfounded assumption that someone who is critical of ableist portrayals of characters in RPGs would also uncritically scold anyone who ever used the word “stupid” regardless of the context. Which would be a pretty terrible and easily dismissed argument to make. Good thing “one” is only making it hypothetically, or “one” might have made “one’s” self look quite silly.

To make another point, if everyone at the table is an adult, is making collective improvised fiction, and no one has any ill-intent, agrees to portraying silly caricatures, everyone knows not to believe the characters have any reference to people in real life, everyone understands what a harmful stereotypes are and separates them from reality, and the game occurs in the privacy of your own home, how is this actually going to hurt anyone?
Everyone here is saying "it might hurt someone". How will it actually hurt someone? Getting hit by a truck might hurt someone -- does that mean we should ban driving trucks?

I will grant that, in conversations like this, people tend to be too flippant with their use of words like “harm.” No, I don’t think playing a distasteful stereotype in the privacy of your own home with like-minded people who all agree they’re ok with distasteful stereotypes harms anyone. I do think that it’s good for the hobby to encourage a culture that does not tolerate distasteful stereotypes, so that people who for some reason want to play them have to do so in the privacy of their own homes, with other like-minded people, where they won’t be harming anyone.

 

[cowpie]

I feel like you are taking the OP's post and cranking the hyperbole up to 11, which is a rather unfair way to respond.

Sorry, I kinda am a little bit, got a little carried away. However, the main point I want to make is about being resilient and mature when it comes to handling feelings during a game that we're just playing for entertainment.

The OP does seem to claim that any portrayal of a low-intelligence character is going to be harmful. I'm arguing that in depends on the situation, and one shouldn't always assume the worst.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's really what I'm getting at too. The OP says that we shouldn't even say the words "stupid" or "smart", because it will be too traumatizing for someone just to hear the words spoken aloud.

They do not say any such thing.

Maybe I'm unique, but I've had to deal with far worse things in life plenty of times (life and death things), and once you've dealt with those challenges, words truly become sticks and stones that can't hurt you much (and hurt feelings pass pretty quickly).

Maybe I’m unique, but I have a lot of people in my life who have had lifelong harm done to them purely through others’ words, so the “sticks and stones” rings pretty hollow to me.

Obviously don't try to hurt people or be a jerk, but walk around on pins and needles for fear of saying the wrong thing? That's just not fun in a RPG.

Good thing no one is suggesting walking on pins and needles for fear of saying the wrong thing, then.

 

[cowpie]

Oh come on, let’s not start with accusations of virtue signaling. We don’t know the OP’s motivations and speculating about them doesn’t add anything of value to the conversation.

If “one” did so, “one” would be making an argument predicated on the totally unfounded assumption that someone who is critical of ableist portrayals of characters in RPGs would also uncritically scold anyone who ever used the word “stupid”regardless of the context. Which would be a pretty terrible and easily dismissed argument to make. Good thing “one” is only making it hypothetically, or “one” might have made “one’s” self look quite silly.

I will grant that, in conversations like this, people tend to be too flippant with their use of words like “harm.” No, I don’t think playing a distasteful stereotype in the privacy of your own home with like-minded people who all agree they’re ok with distasteful stereotypes harms anyone. I do think that it’s good for the hobby to encourage a culture that does not tolerate distasteful stereotypes, so that people who for some reason want to play them have to do so in the privacy of their own homes, with other like-minded people, where they won’t be harming anyone.

Good points, all.

 

[Charlaquin]

The OP does seem to claim that any portrayal of a low-intelligence character is going to be harmful.

They really don’t though.

 

[Maxperson]

Given some of the, umm, retrogressive attitudes of certain basement-dwelling gamers I've known over the years, I'm not convinced this is entirely true.

They didn't get that way from playing a PC as dumb or smart, though.