Goodman Games: Our Efforts Have Been Mischaracterized

Company reiterates opposition to bigotry and says efforts are well-intentioned.
Goodman Games' CEO Joseph Goodman made a statement via YouTube over the weekend*. The video itself focused on the content of the controversial upcoming City State of the Invincible Overlord crowdfunding product, but was prefaced by a short introduction by Joseph Goodman, in which he reiterates his company's commitment to inclusivity and diversity and its opposition to bigotry, something which they say they "don't want to be associated with".

Goodman goes on to say that the company's efforts have been "mischaracterized by some folks" but does not go so far as to identify the mischaracterization, so it's not entirely clear what they consider to be untrue other than the "inaccurate" statements made by Bob Bledsaw II of Judges Guild about Goodman Games' plans, which Goodman mentioned last week.

For those who haven't been following this story, it has been covered in the articles Goodman Games Revives Relationship With Anti-Semitic Publisher For New City State Kickstarter, Goodman Games Offers Assurances About Judges Guild Royalties, and Judges Guild Makes Statement About Goodman Controversy. In short, Goodman Games is currently licensing an old property from a company with which it claimed to have cut ties in 2020 after the owner of that company made a number of bigoted comments on social media. Goodman Games has repeatedly said that this move would allow them to provide backers of an old unfulfilled Judges Guild Kickstarter with refunds, but there are many people questioning seeming contradictions in both the timelines involved and in the appropriateness of the whole endeavour.

Despite the backlash, the prospects of the crowdfunding project do not seem to have been harmed. The pre-launch page has over 3,000 followers, and many of the comments under the YouTube videos or on other social media are not only very supportive of the project, but also condemn those who question its appropriateness. In comparison, the original (failed) Judges Guild Kickstarter had only 965 backers.

The video is embedded below, followed by a transcript of the relevant section.



Hi everybody, I'm Joseph Goodman of Goodman Games. We recently announced our City State of the Invincible Overlord crowdfunding project for 5E and DCC RPG.

In the video you're about to see, some of our product development team is going to tell you about what makes the City State so amazing and why we're bringing it back to 5E and DCC audiences nearly 50 years after it was first released. It really is an amazing setting.

But we could have rolled this project out with a lot more clarity. Now, to be clear, Goodman Games absolutely opposes any sort of bigotry, racism, anti-semitism, homophobia, transphobia. We don't want to support it. We don't want to be associated with it.

Our well-intentioned effort to launch this project in a way that refunds backers of a former failed Kickstarter from another publisher kind of backfired in the way we announced it. Rest assured, the funds from this crowdfunding will actually fund refunds to backers of the original City State crowdfunding for the Pathfinder edition from 2014.

Unfortunately, our efforts have been—you know, I didn’t clarify them perfectly when we rolled it out—and they've been mischaracterized by some folks since then. But please rest assured, we stand for inclusivity and diversity.

You can read a lot more detail in the post that's linked below, and there's another video linked below where we talk about this in even more detail. But for now, we hope you will sit back and enjoy as some of the product development team tells you about really what makes the City State of the Invincible Overlord so amazing, and why you might want to check it out when it comes to crowdfunding soon.

Thanks, and I'll turn it over to them now.

The statement refers to a post about this that is supposed to be linked below, but at the time of writing no post is linked below the video, so it's not clear if that refers to a new post or one of Goodman Games' previous statements on the issue.

I reached out to Joseph Goodman last week to offer a non-confrontational (although direct and candid) interview in which he could answer some ongoing questions and talk on his reasoning behind the decision; I have not yet received a response to the offer--I did, however, indicate that I was just leaving for UK Games Expo, and wouldn't be back until this week.

*Normally I would have covered this in a more timely fashion, but I was away at UK Games Expo from Thursday through to Monday.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

American racism is pretty particular and specific, but yeah, Europe is going through a pretty big anti-immigrant/refugee thing right now, but even back when they were pretending to be better they've had their issues. See also:
View attachment 428370
Canada has the exact same meme but replace "Romani" with "Indigenous"
Well, you know . . . you don't want to simply copy somebody else's racism, make it your own!!
 

log in or register to remove this ad



So, for example, a person who opposes rezoning for multi-family homes in their neighborhood may not realize that this means that people of color are unlikely to be able to afford to move into the community - the policy is racist even if the person was only thinking in terms of traffic and population density.
I think classism many a time finds itself to be mischaracterised as racist. Don't you think?

For instance, in my complex the Body Corporate rules are maximum 2 people per bedroom within an apartment (this includes kids etc).
Do we suddenly label this as racist?
  • because immigrants (PoC) are unlikely to be able to afford a place with those restrictions (at least initially, until they get their feet on the ground)
  • because say a certain cultural group of people tend to have above the average number of kids i.e. Hasidic Jews, Mormons ...etc
 

For instance, in my complex the Body Corporate rules are maximum 2 people per bedroom within an apartment (this includes kids etc).
Do we suddenly label this as racist?
If the goal is to create a "race-neutral" tool for the purpose of excluding people based on their race or ethnicity, yes.

There's definitely classism in the US, but it's hard to say where that starts and racism ends. One has to observe a person or institution's behavior toward people of lower classes who are also White. Absent that information, I would be careful of saying something is just classism.
 
Last edited:

If the goal is to create a "race-neutral" tool for the purpose of excluding people based on their race or ethnicity, yes.
The purpose is to ensure, no overcrowding (as there is limited parking space), infrastructure must also be able to meet the demand (sewerage, water, garbage removal), there is the consideration of noise pollution, health (as the trash has to sit on site until collected), this general rule exists for all Body Corporates in the nation - no matter the neighbourhood...etc

There's definitely classism in the US, but it's hard to say where that starts and racism ends.
I disagree that it is hard. I think it is very easy to assess.
Would people mind Denzel or Khabib or Shakira moving in next door?
Do the rules in place makes logical sense?

I would be careful of saying something is just classism.
I tend to lean the other way i.e. saying something is just racism
 
Last edited:

For instance, in my complex the Body Corporate rules are maximum 2 people per bedroom within an apartment (this includes kids etc).
Do we suddenly label this as racist?
Does it result in fewer PoC applicants and/or more PoC families denied/evicted, in comparison to white families in the same complex? If yes, then yeah, that's a racist policy. The intent behind it is irrelevant; if the impact leads to statistically significant differences in outcomes on the basis of race, it is racist.
 

Does it result in fewer PoC applicants and/or more PoC families denied/evicted, in comparison to white families in the same complex? If yes, then yeah, that's a racist policy. The intent behind it is irrelevant; if the impact leads to statistically significant differences in outcomes on the basis of race, it is racist.
I'm not sure if you read my second post where I state the reasons for why 2 persons (and please note I'm not a town planner, architect ...etc) so this is my layman knowledge.

But to your point...
I do not think the health, safety, town planning regulations etc are racist.
I think that is an extremely short-sighted reactionary view.
When I moved into the complex, it was predominantly white, but now it is predominantly PoC. This is 15 years on. The regulations never changed.

And again, this regulation of 2 people per bedroom for Body Corporates (BC) is country wide.
It is a way for people to protect their investment in the BC.
Your home is your biggest investment usually.
 

I'm not sure if you read my second post where I state the reasons for why 2 persons (and please note I'm not a town planner, architect ...etc) so this is my layman knowledge.

But to your point...
I do not think the health, safety, town planning regulations etc are racist.
I think that is an extremely short-sighted reactionary view.
When I moved into the complex, it was predominantly white, but now it is predominantly PoC. This is 15 years on. The regulations never changed.
I didn't address the "reasons for why" because they are genuinely unimportant; intention is literally irrelevant, only the impact is. That's not my opinion, by the way (although I do agree with it); that's the legal definition of racial discrimination (at least in my country of origin, anyway). It sounds that in your example the policy did not create any kind of racist impact, so it wasn't racist.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top