D&D General Drow & Orcs Removed from the Monster Manual

[Maxperson]

I'll trust Asian voices on how "okay" Oriental Adventures was, rather than folks in this thread who refuse to accept any progress towards a more inclusive D&D.

Well that's a gross misrepresentation of what we have been saying and what our positions are.

 

[Dire Bare]

Well that's a gross misrepresentation of what we have been saying and what our positions are.

It really doesn't feel that way.

 

[Maxperson]

It really doesn't feel that way.

But it is. Nobody has been against progress towards inclusion. Some things like removing the word phylactery(which simply means amulet in several different cultures), aren't progress. Taking the parts about a box with writing in it out would be progress.

The reason it probably feels that way to you is that when you get pushback on one thing like the word phylactery, and you(general you) argue in return, the discussion becomes very centered on that one thing, so it feels like everything, when in fact it's only one small part of it.

 

[Dire Bare]

What was the consensus of Asians at the time of publication? While I think OA was a good book, it was definitely a product of its time and has flaws. I wouldn’t expect anyone to publish a book inspired by Asian fantasy in the exact same manner.

Good luck finding that data! For any consensus back in the 80s or even today. Maybe in WotC's marketing data they don't share.

There is a story, not sure how true, that Gygax shared a pre-publication draft with four Japanese folks . . .

I've heard anecdotal stories about Asian American gamers who, as kids in the 80s, felt excited about the book and felt seen by having their culture included in D&D. But later in life, after realizing how awful OA represented Asian cultures, their viewpoint became more nuanced.

OA was definitely a "product of its time"! You would hope that publishers today would do better, and most strive to, but it's hardly something we can just consign to the past.

 

[Bae'zel]

If I hated myself enough to wade back into this debate, I'd point out that the fact that they chose OA as the product to re-introduce Comeliness is exactly the kind of exoticization and sexualization that the podcast hosts were talking about, and thus the stupid stat existing for different stupid reasons in earlier editions does nothing to negate the point they were making with OA there.

Not that a single minor and ultimately inconsequential factual inaccuracy should completely invalidate the entire rest of their argument or point of view, but then we are humans, and when we emotionally disagree with the topline argument we will do what we can to find and uncover any excuse to toss the baby out with the bathwater.

So this sexist rule was introduced earlier than OA, but was it handled differently in OA? Was it worded differently in that Asian fetishization way?

Because if so (ie, comeliness being handled differently in OA than its predecessors) then it certainly was worth bringing into focus.

 

[Gradine]

So this sexist rule was introduced earlier than OA, but was it handled differently in OA? Was it worded differently in that Asian fetishization way?

Because if so (ie, comeliness being handled differently in OA than its predecessors) then it certainly was worth bringing into focus.

I don't know that the way it was handled was much different (with exception to the usual differences between AD&D and 3.X stats), but that, out of all of the literal hundreds of official 3rd edition products, OA was the one chosen to mark the return of the stat. Why OA and not any other product*? Well... we've all heard the podcast, right?


*not even Song & Silence, which to misquote an old friend, was really a missed opportunity to name a book Lutes & Loots

 

[Dire Bare]

So this sexist rule was introduced earlier than OA, but was it handled differently in OA? Was it worded differently in that Asian fetishization way?

Because if so (ie, comeliness being handled differently in OA than its predecessors) then it certainly was worth bringing into focus.

To the best of my memory . . .

Comeliness was simply ported from Unearthed Arcana to Oriental Adventures, without any change to how it works or is used.

Comeliness, on its own, is a terrible rule and I'm glad it didn't survive 1E.

Adding it to OA wasn't likely intentionally racist or sexist . . . but that was the result. It doesn't matter than Comeliness didn't debut in OA, it still is part of the racist stereotype stew of the book. It matters how it is perceived, regardless of intent.

 

[billd91]

I don't know that the way it was handled was much different (with exception to the usual differences between AD&D and 3.X stats), but that, out of all of the literal hundreds of official 3rd edition products, OA was the one chosen to mark the return of the stat. Why OA and not any other product*? Well... we've all heard the podcast, right?


*not even Song & Silence, which to misquote an old friend, was really a missed opportunity to name a book Lutes & Loots

The treatment of comeliness between Unearthed Arcana, where it debuted (in official rulebooks) in spring 1985, and Oriental Adventures, which came out in fall 1985, is minimal - a little reformatting, a little better editing. But OA wasn't chosen to be the return of the stat - it was just the next rulebook that incorporated character gen rules after comeliness was introduced. It wasn't a special inclusion in any way.

 

[Dire Bare]

I don't know that the way it was handled was much different (with exception to the usual differences between AD&D and 3.X stats), but that, out of all of the literal hundreds of official 3rd edition products, OA was the one chosen to mark the return of the stat. Why OA and not any other product*? Well... we've all heard the podcast, right?


*not even Song & Silence, which to misquote an old friend, was really a missed opportunity to name a book Lutes & Loots

Wait . . . "Comeliness" wasn't in the 3E OA, was it?

 

[Bedrockgames]

Wait . . . "Comeliness" wasn't in the 3E OA, was it?

I could be wrong but I don't remember it being in there (and my book is at my old place). 3E OA was odd because it used the Rokugan setting as its default