WotC Dungeons & Dragons Fans Seek Removal of Oriental Adventures From Online Marketplace

[Snarf Zagyg]

You can't be offended by something you don't know exists. Titles matter - they are what show up on searches.

If someone happens to stumble across something else offensive they can bring it to WotC's attention and they can deal with it then. There is no need for WotC to "comb through the entire back catalogue" - that is just yet another strawman.

Really. This is such an amazing position for you to take!

So the company is supposed to wait until ... what, the next twitter outbreak? Is that it?

And then they will get pilloried for not doing something, right? Just like this one, when Mr. Kwan kept saying that he didn't understand how they could be selling this?

I'm not going to list the examples because I don't want to be responsible for the next twitter nonsense (which is a tautology), but it will lead with people saying, "How dare they have had this up! They should KNOW BETTER. I can't believe that this company is FORCING ME to deal with this."

Remember this tweet-

"You show consumers that these legacy products are to be consumed. They aren't. What if someone looks to the optional "Honour" rules found in the 5e DMG or inquires about the "cultures" of Kara-Tur mentioned in the PHB? Kara-Tur is still being sold and this is a PROBLEM. "

Notice- not OA. All of Kara Tur, all the products. Which includes a lot of FR products that mention it. And we are just getting started!

So take your "strawman" nonsense somewhere else, thank you.

 

[billd91]

I don't disagree with the rest of what you wrote, but I have a problem here. Pulp stories have a huge problem with racism, which any modern adaptation has to worry about not copying. Darkest Africa and Yellow Peril are both big pulp themes that are basically racist, and the first has bad history in modern pulp and even in recent D&D publications. It's behind the changes just made in the 5E Chult book, for example.

Sure, I can accept that not everything out of pulp fiction is fine. But I'm mainly focused on the protagonist archetypes and their larger than life abilities, which is what the D&D tradition draws from in developing character classes and their equipment.

 

[MGibster]

No need to - "the entire back catalogue" hasn't been called out, just the one specific product.

Are you kidding? We've had multiple threads here about the problematic elements associated with orcs and drow in addition to racial penalties to attributes and even using the word race instead of species, folk, peoples, etc., etc.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

So the company is supposed to wait until ... what, the next twitter outbreak? Is that it?

Why not? Although it would be more sensible to contact the company directly.

ust like this one, when Mr. Kwan kept saying that he didn't understand how they could be selling this?

Well yes, because the offensive word is IN THE TITLE. If I where to publish an adventure entitled "Crystal Palace are W*nkers" I wouldn't expect it to take decades for someone to notice it was offensive.

"You show consumers that these legacy products are to be consumed. They aren't. What if someone looks to the optional "Honour" rules found in the 5e DMG or inquires about the "cultures" of Kara-Tur mentioned in the PHB? Kara-Tur is still being sold and this is a PROBLEM. "

Notice- not OA. All of Kara Tur, all the products. Which includes a lot of FR products that mention it. And we are just getting started!

Strawman strawman strawman. I could claim that "Snarf" is an offensive word in my language. That wouldn't make it true. It is generally accepted that keeping slaves is wrong and the words "W*nkers" and "Oriental" are offensive. It doesn't matter that "Oriental" was not offensive in 1985, or that slavery was not offensive in 185. No one is suggesting that WotC should invent a time machine and change the past. They are suggesting they should put things right NOW.

 

[prosfilaes]

If WotC didn't care about the problem they wouldn't have bothered adding a disclaimer. What exactly do you want out of WotC? As I said earlier, it would be a colossal waste of time and money to comb through products in their back catalog in order to write a unique disclaimer for each one.

They added a generic disclaimer to all their back catalog. You're specifically saying they don't know about the problems in their products and it would take too much work to figure out the problems. I don't know what I want, exactly, but tossing this disclaimer on all pre-5E works negates a lot of the effect it has on any particular one. I don't think such a generic disclaimer on so many works is going to dissuade people annoyed by particular works.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Why not? Although it would be more sensible to contact the company directly.

Because ... EVERY .... SINGLE ... THING .... will be offensive by current standards.

Have you been completely and willfully oblivious to all the conversations that are being had? I have to assume so.

Well yes, because the offensive word is IN THE TITLE. If I where to publish an adventure entitled "Crystal Palace are W*nkers" I wouldn't expect it to take decades for someone to notice it was offensive.

Thank you for forum-splaining this to me. Given that I had posted the links to this explaining why it was offensive, with the explanations, that was so valuable. Really. Your contributions are invaluable. I even provided the timeline.

You are a peach.

Strawman strawman strawman.

Goodbye.

 

[MGibster]

They added a generic disclaimer to all their back catalog. You're specifically saying they don't know about the problems in their products and it would take too much work to figure out the problems. I don't know what I want, exactly, but tossing this disclaimer on all pre-5E works negates a lot of the effect it has on any particular one. I don't think such a generic disclaimer on so many works is going to dissuade people annoyed by particular works.

What is the effect being negated you are referring to? I do agree with you, this generic disclaimer is not going to dissuade people annoyed by particular works. But you can't please everyone.

 

[Umbran]

A. You must remove Beyond Magenta, because we can't have books about trans people in the library.

B. You should keep Beyond Magenta, since free speech is good and we shouldn't keep people from information. Even if that information offends some people.

Umbran: Keeping books in the library, and demanding that those books be removed are BOTH CENSORSHIP.

Incorrect. Horrible strrawman.

We are talking about discussions with the creators/publishers. Not libraries. This aspect of it is a completely irrelevant fabrication on your part.

WotC (and any publisher) have a right to publish... or not. Their call. Attempts to force* them to publish a thing, or not, are of the same ethical form - application of force to someone else's voice.

I am reasonably sure you will reject this, because accepting it is probably uncomfortable. It is only fair, though, that you feel the same discomfort as you have been laying on others with the emotionally loaded approach to the discussion inherent in the word "censorship" in our shared culture.



*The force in involved is social pressure and voting with your wallet, it is apparently "force" and censorship to tell WotC you don't like a thing and not buy their products.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Incorrect. Horrible strrawman.

Oh, goodie. I literally wrote the following:

"Okay. Pretty sure we've been over this a few times, and I don't think you're suddenly going to get me to agree with your pithy formulations.

Are we good, or should I expect more of this?"

And you responded with this? You know I can't ignore a moderator, and you seem unable to take the hint. So, one more time:

Patricia Pulling: TSR needs to stop publishing those horrible D&D books.
Gamer: No, TSR shouldn't.

Umbran: Both Pulling, and Gamer, are attempting to CENSOR books.


Look, you're entiteled to speak your opinion. But I do not accept your Orwellian re-writing of language, nor will I accede to your bizarre argument.

I mean, I could believe you, or my lying eyes I guess.

But I'd rather you stop trying to pedantically explain a position to me that I have repeatedly rejected.

EDIT: And I would add that I am so glad that bigoted organizations like the American Family Association at least had the courage of their convictions when they were use economic coercion to go after gay and trans rights and representation, instead of this type of weasel-y "Trying to erase gay representation is EXACTLY THE SAME as trying to ensure accurate representation."

 

[Umbran]

Look, you're entiteled to speak your opinion. But I do not accept your Orwellian re-writing of language, nor will I accede to your bizarre argument.

What I find Orwellian and bizarre is the suggestion that folks voicing their opinion and making consumer-level choices is CENSORSHIP.

So, I guess we are pretty even.