D&D (2024) (+) New Edition Changes for Inclusivity (discuss possibilities)

[MGibster]

I don't mind seeing him on a list of people that D&D has drawn from, but I don't think he should be on a list called "inspirational."

Why not? It seems quite clear that Lovecraft inspired the creative work of many other artists. That's what inspirational means.

 

[Cadence]

Why not? It seems quite clear that Lovecraft inspired the creative work of many other artists. That's what inspirational means.

Does a list of inspirational church songs contain songs to inspire the person who will sing them? It would be odd if they were somehow songs that helped create the religion.

I can see someone seeing the name and thinking it was books to inspire them (until they read the paragraph explaining it).

 

[Wishbone]

A list of inspirational church songs are songs to inspire the person who sang them, they didn't inspire the religion.

I can see someone seeing the name and thinking it was to inspire them (until they read the paragraph explaining it).

Yeah, perhaps calling his work "foundational" or "influential" rather than "inspirational" clarifies things on Lovecraft and his influence.

 

[Umbran]

maybe it’s the nitty gritty details of that solution that are an issue?

It seems more to me like discomfort in uncertainty is an issue.

If you are seeking some foolproof set of things that can and cannot be included in game materials, with resulting absolute certainty that you'll be "safe" from criticism - you're just out of luck. That's not how people work. Seeking absolutes in the realm of human communications is not a reasonable endeavor. you're selling into markets with millions of people in them - satisfying ALL OF THEM with one product is not a reasonable goal.

We have a set of tools and processes content creators can use to make their products better. Are they perfect? No. Are they 100% certain to yield results that nobody can find fault with? No.

Are they pretty likely to produce a product that won't raise a general furor over their content? YES! Will they keep content creators from being creative? NO!

Will they keep content creators from putting for their particular personal messages and ideas? If those messages are dumb racist, homophobic, and/or misogynist twaddle? Yes! Otherwise? NO!

In your product, you can list your research sources. You can give credit to your Cultural Consultants and Sensitivity Readers just like your writers, designers, artists, and editors. You can make it clear that you at least tried to do the right thing. But, you actually have to try.

 

[Azzy]

Why not? It seems quite clear that Lovecraft inspired the creative work of many other artists. That's what inspirational means.

The fallacy here, is that we're not discussing a list of authors that have inspired other artists—we're discussing what works of fiction that players and DMs should seek as inspiration for their games. An author that includes racist, anti-Semitic, and other bigoted and xenophobic ideologies in his works isn't one we should tell people to look at for inspiration.

 

[SehanineMoonbow]

A bigotry wrapped in the cloth of faith is still bigotry. Phobias in religious raiment are still phobias.

Part of the reason why slavery and white supremacy have the particular character and longevity that they do in the USA is tied up in certain strands of Christian “theology” that are mostly rejected in modern religious scholarship.

Faith/morality-based bigotry is a huge chunk of why we had to have the Loving case to allow mixed-race marriage. It’s why inhabitants of US territories and protectorates are considered natural US citizens BUT don't have the full suite of rights as those born in the US itself...or abroad. (Weird, that kids born in German, Japanese or other sovereign nations’ soil have more rights than Puerto Ricans or the inhabitants of the US Virgin Islands, Guam or American Samoa.)

And Christianity isn’t unique in this- distortions of the teachings of other faiths have been used to justify all kinds of evil, up to and including genocide.

Agreed. I actually like the idea of religion--I think having a spirituality can be meaningful--and I have enjoyed studying Shinto and Japanese Buddhism (also one of the reasons I am a fan of D&D gods). So I don't think religion itself is the issue. The issue is the distortions of it, as you have said, taking things out of context and ignoring the history around the original text (some cultures that today view homosexuality as immoral, for example, historically did not), and using it to justify actions. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter how you color it. We don't justify religious violence--we shouldn't with bigotry, either.

But it sounds like this may be veering off into slippery territory, so I'll leave it at that.

I really like when D&D settings make some of the gods Queer. Like, gender fluid Corellon is cool, but Erathis and Melora are lovers in one of the podcast D&D worlds (Exandria, I think?) which is rad as hell.

In one world I’m working on, Kord is gay, and has been the lover of many of the gods, and has an especially storied relationship with the as yet unnamed androgynous/Non-Binary god of Magic, Secrets, Thieves, Good Assassins, and Crows, who often presents as petite butch pixie who will stab you. (They’re one of the Gods of Revolution, who folks seek out when they are being oppressed and need to overcome that. They’re specifically the patron of knifing your oppressors in dark alleyways and taking their stuff.

This is awesome. I do believe it is indeed Exandrai that has Erathis and Melora as lovers. And yup, Corellon being genderfluid (and really all the Seldarine are depicted this way, Corellon is just best known for it) has been canonical for a long time. In the source book Cormanthyr: Empire of the Elves, for example, describes the city as having statues of the Seldarine in both their male and female forms, as the elves can't understand why they would only be gender. This kind of representation speaks both to genderfluidity and homosexuality, as the gods could have relationships with one another (Sehanine and Corellon are often portrayed as lovers, and Sehanine is known to take on male form at times) while being of the same gender.

 

[FrogReaver]

A bigotry wrapped in the cloth of faith is still bigotry. Phobias in religious raiment are still phobias.

As Umbran recently put it:

This is an unsupported assertion that cannot be debated under the rules of this forum.

 

[Aldarc]

As Umbran recently put it:

This is an unsupported assertion that cannot be debated under the rules of this forum.

You mean apart from the fact that he supported his assertion with historical evidence?

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

As Umbran recently put it:

This is an unsupported assertion that cannot be debated under the rules of this forum.

wait what how.

Bigotry is Bigotry.

 

[FrogReaver]

You mean apart from the fact that he supported his assertion with historical evidence?

none of what was support of that assertion.