D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[Vaalingrade]

I personally feel like D&D is being held back by trying to be 'like D&D', especially with 50 years of baggage of no one being able to agree on what it even is. Better to do what it's always done and make a new 'fing what is D and or D'. than remain shackled and brainboxed to whatever people are trying to drag it down into being.

 

[Guest 85555]

But why does WotC need to promote and sell the “grim and racist” option? People keep trying to soft peddle the opposite of inclusive settings as “gritty” but let’s not shy away from what people are asking for shall we?

There are a thousand different sources for setting books. Why are we insisting that WotC must be the ones to promote a setting where racism and bigotry and xenophobia is the baseline?

I feel like this very much overstates what it means for D&D to include half elves and half orcs. I don't regard that as gritty or racist. I mean yes it includes very, very mild in world bigotry in some instances based on the half elf description. But it isn't like a setting based on the deep south during segregation or Germany during the Holocaust.

 

[MGibster]

Are you talking about the books or the movie? The D&D barbarian was based on the Conan movie entering D&D the year Conan came out. Conan in the movie was suspicious of and disliked magic,

The first issue of Marvel's The Savage Sword of Conan came out in 1974. Conan, desperate for money, dispatches some foes and notices a nice jeweled ring attached to a severed hand. When he notices the hand moving, he quickly deduces that it's a magic ring, he wants nothing to do with it, and just leaves it on the street. I couldn't imagine a D&D character doing this!

That's where I disagree. These issues aren't new. It's isn't a social climate issue. The social climate just brought it up.

And I'm sure the social climate will change. I'm certainly not going to argue that we should turn the clock back or anything like that. I like that people are actually conerned about these issues even if I don't agree with the solution. But when the creators of Coyote & Crow feel the need to specifically say it's okay for white people to play their game, I'd say maybe the social climate needs to be examined.

Saying it was based on the TV show is also either wrong or at the very least partially wrong. There was no quivering palm in the TV show. There was quivering palm in the movies. Kwai Chang also never had any of the other 1e monk abilities, some of which are reminiscent of kung fu movie abilities. Nor did Kwai Chang have the ability to move faster, hit harder than tank, etc. Those are Kung Fu movie based. In fact, other than having the name Monk, I see nothing else in common with the TV show.

I think the Kung-Fu series was simply one of many influences on the creation of the Monk for AD&D. The series Kung-Fu itself being influenced by the popularity of Chinese martial arts movies coming to the United States at the time. And the general Karate Kraze of the 1970s and 80s. I can't tell you just how cool you were in 1983 if you had a Chinese throwing star.

DnD should have settings for both those wanting fully inclusive content, and for those wanting darker and more gritty settings.

I don't think D&D can be all things to all people. New players probably need to be nudged in one direction or another just to get started. So the PHB needs to tell players a little bit about elves and orcs.

 

[Hussar]

I feel like this very much overstates what it means for D&D to include half elves and half orcs. I don't regard that as gritty or racist. I mean yes it includes very, very mild in world bigotry in some instances based on the half elf description. But it isn't like a setting based on the deep south during segregation or Germany during the Holocaust.

What would you call Dark Sun?

 

[Guest 85555]

What would you call Dark Sun?

I thought you were talking about half elves and half orcs. For Dark Sun, sure it is gritty, it has some stuff in it that is intense (including slavery). I wouldn't say it is Holocaust level or Jim Crow level exploration of bigotry and xenophobia in terms of intensity. But I also wouldn't say it is tame like Dragonlance

 

[Remathilis]

What would you call Dark Sun?

Nothing Grandma appropriate.

Actually, that's not fair. I'd call it a pizza cutter. All edge and no point.

 

[Guest 85555]

I think the Kung-Fu series was simply one of many influences on the creation of the Monk for AD&D. The series Kung-Fu itself being influenced by the popularity of Chinese martial arts movies coming to the United States at the time. And the general Karate Kraze of the 1970s and 80s. I can't tell you just how cool you were in 1983 if you had a Chinese throwing star.

I think people who missed this or were too old might not quite understand how significant this was culturally. Everyone was making chinese throwing stars out of paper. Cool kids had actual metal ones. I still remember going to see Pray For Death in the movie theater during the ninja craze (and I recall seeing Shogun with my cousins). Plus the kung fu craze was still resounding (Bruce Lee was legendary on the playground). And karate schools were everywhere. And you had stuff like Karate Kid. It all kind of got mixed up together in the popular culture.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So new players will come to the table with their own experiences.

Unless you are saying that only the older experiences are worth bringing into the game.


Because you know that even if they make a new setting, they're going to focus on the old ones. And, if you were to get your way, those older settings wouldn't change.

So either the system as a whole would die, or all the old settings would die, when in reality none of them need to die--they can continue to thrive. They just need to adapt.

That argument says they should never make anything new, because they'll just focus on the old. Pretty bleak to my mind. There's no reason that they can't make a new setting, tie it to a new edition, and make money. They might not make as much, but I don't think every company needs to maximize profits over quality product.

 

[Minigiant]

And I'm sure the social climate will change. I'm certainly not going to argue that we should turn the clock back or anything like that. I like that people are actually conerned about these issues even if I don't agree with the solution. But when the creators of Coyote & Crow feel the need to specifically say it's okay for white people to play their game, I'd say maybe the social climate needs to be examined.

The social climate will change. But the issues will remain until dealt with.

That's my point.

If D&D wants to copy LOTR orcs but divorce them from the lore reasons why they act the way they do, it wont make sense.

It's not social climate that made the issue. The issue with orcs and half orcs was always stupid. The technology just gave the ability to openly said "The lore for orcs is bad", "The default lore, look, and logistics of drow is just utterly dumb" or "The inspiration character for barbarian is smart but the D&D barbarian is an idiot".

Instead of your critic being only heard by your table and friend, the whole world can hear you. And if the issue is glaring,it won't be just you.

And 5e was successful. So it attracted more new people. New people without nostalgia goggles but with more tech savvy.

It's not a climate problem.
There have been "Drow is dumb and kinda racist and sexist" topics since AOL disc days of the 90s.

 

[Guest 85555]

The social climate will change. But the issues will remain until dealt with.

That's my point.

If D&D wants to copy LOTR orcs but divorce them from the lore reasons why they act the way they do, it wont make sense.

It's not social climate that made the issue. The issue with orcs and half orcs was always stupid. The technology just gave the ability to openly said "The lore for orcs is bad", "The default lore, look, and logistics of drow is just utterly dumb" or "The inspiration character for barbarian is smart but the D&D barbarian is an idiot".

Instead of your critic being only heard by your table and friend, the whole world can hear you. And if the issue is glaring,it won't be just you.

And 5e was successful. So it attracted more new people. New people without nostalgia goggles but with more tech savvy.

It's not a climate problem.
There have been "Drow is dumb and kinda racist and sexist" topics since AOL disc days of the 90s.

The problem with this is I don' think it will actually improve anything. I think you will get what happens when something is made to please 100% of the audience: things tend to get watered down, less compelling and interesting because creators become risk averse, more pablum, etc. Because you are listening to every single audience member now, and not as attentive to following more of a clear vision of a creative project. It will make design more collective I suppose. But I am just not convinced this is going to make things more entertaining or better. It just seems to combine the worst elements of design by committee but multiplies by 1 million. Maybe that is what D&D should be.

I mean just to take one example, I love the conan character from the books, but I don't think making the D&D barbarian more like him is going to improve the barbarian class (the class with all its Arnold elements and the hokier presentation oriented around rage, is what resonated with people). I think there is a very good, grounded and gritty fantasy RPG built around Conan you could make. But D&D has never been that game.