D&D General Old School DND talks if DND is racist.

[Umbran]

Let's admit some truths though. Old school D&D was dominated by white males. Mostly teenagers. That alone means that a whole lot of things that could be offensive weren't even noticed. There was no malice there. Or push to be racists or sexists. But by the very virtue of being white male dominated in the 70s and 80s, a lot of problematic things that impact people who aren't white males existed. We (white males) didn't notice them because we weren't impacted by them or saw how they impacted others. That doesn't make us bigots or racists. That makes us uninformed. And that isn't a bad thing. The only way it becomes bad is if we do become informed, yet continue to engage in problematic behavior.

This is an excellent way to put it. Thank you.

It is uncomfortable to be faced with one's own lack of understanding, with the possibility that something we care a lot about isn't as just as we thought. When that thing is part of our identity - we are GAMERS darn it - it feels like a challenge to ourselves.

When challenged, the first reaction most of us have is to defend and deny, to try to prove that it is not so, to make the source of the discomfort the enemy, shut up, go away, and leave us be. And maybe that'll work - faced with our defense, maybe the source shuts up, and leaves us in peace.

But, that defensive process doesn't change anything. We are the same. The thing we love is the same. The rest of the world is the same. So, it is very likely that we may have to confront the exact same thing all over again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The defensive reaction gives us short-term psychological peace, but is a poor long-term strategy.

 

[Zardnaar]

fixing the economy softens those problems not cures them

Different country. Softens things a lot. We're not perfect but generally in the top ten for for the good things in life.

You're never gonna get perfect none of the "best" countries are. You do avoid the extremism though and the lurching around though. Bad things happen everywhere it's the frequency and scale you can mitigate.

Different rulebook the people that wrote it would fail modern purity tests but you don't need to be pure.

 

[Umbran]

Who is telling you that being aware and respectful of injustices on marginalized people is not enough, and you have to "make up for it, here and now."? What is this "making up" that you're being asked to do, exactly?

Mod Note:

Folks,

The answer to this question should be RESTRICTED TO GAMING. I understand that this is limiting. But, these boards are not here to discuss all the ills of the world, and how to fix them. There are other forums for that.

Discuss what can be done in our games and at our tables.

 

[Mind of tempest]

This is an excellent way to put it. Thank you.

It is uncomfortable to be faced with one's own lack of understanding, with the possibility that something we care a lot about isn't as just as we thought. When that thing is part of our identity - we are GAMERS darn it - it feels like a challenge to ourselves.

When challenged, the first reaction most of us have is to defend and deny, to try to prove that it is not so, to make the source of the discomfort the enemy, shut up, go away, and leave us be. And maybe that'll work - faced with our defense, maybe the source shuts up, and leaves us in peace.

But, that defensive process doesn't change anything. We are the same. The thing we love is the same. The rest of the world is the same. So, it is very likely that we may have to confront the exact same thing all over again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

The defensive reaction gives us short-term psychological peace, but is a poor long-term strategy.

well thought out might have to quote that but what exactly can be done about refining d&d?

 

[Zardnaar]

This to me is a tealeaf reading moment.

Wizards is in a bit of a bind. After being stung by the backlash from the radical departures in mechanics and lore of 4e, WotC opted to make a totally safe and nostalgic version of D&D in 5e. And it was very successful, but with success brings increased scrutiny. WotC wants to invoke the rosy nostalgia of Keep on the Borderlands, but the climate is radically shifting away from the tropes that style invokes. Simply put, WotC wanted to create a timeless version of D&D where orcs can be people or orcs can be monsters, but the latter is rapidly falling out of favor. WotC is now stuck between attempting to address the concerns of their audience and gutting the golden goose again during one of the largest points of popularity the brand has seen. They've tried to have it both ways, which has resulted in these "half-measures" that have seemed to placate nobody.

WotC could take bold action: a complete rethink on race/lineage mechanics, a new system to address cultural elements, changing ability scores to be less ableist, ditching alignment, removing or renaming classes and elements which could be seen as insensitive, a wholesale reinvention of what a "monster" is, etc. All culminating in a new edition in the coming few years. Of course, such radical shifts to the paradigm could reinvoke the 4e "this ain't my D&D" problem we just came back from. Fix too little and you'll be called out for failing to address the problem, fix too much and you'll lose the fans that supported you.

I don't envy this position. One person's "good enough" is another person's "that doesn't address the issue". That said, I wager there will be a larger revision to the game sooner rather than later now, because the current climate is going to demand WotC treat these concerns with a little more finesse than what they've done so far. The question will be how far that revision will go.

Pretty much thiis. At some point they're just going to have to put age limits on it or something like movies. Don't like it don't buy it.

They can't change that much because then you've got it's not D&D problem.

5E didn't blow up because it was charting new ground it was a greatest hits edition.

Surprised no ones made a stink about the amount of killing in the game. They'll have to draw a line somewhere eventually.

 

[Charlaquin]

This to me is a tealeaf reading moment.

Wizards is in a bit of a bind. After being stung by the backlash from the radical departures in mechanics and lore of 4e, WotC opted to make a totally safe and nostalgic version of D&D in 5e. And it was very successful, but with success brings increased scrutiny. WotC wants to invoke the rosy nostalgia of Keep on the Borderlands, but the climate is radically shifting away from the tropes that style invokes. Simply put, WotC wanted to create a timeless version of D&D where orcs can be people or orcs can be monsters, but the latter is rapidly falling out of favor. WotC is now stuck between attempting to address the concerns of their audience and gutting the golden goose again during one of the largest points of popularity the brand has seen. They've tried to have it both ways, which has resulted in these "half-measures" that have seemed to placate nobody.

WotC could take bold action: a complete rethink on race/lineage mechanics, a new system to address cultural elements, changing ability scores to be less ableist, ditching alignment, removing or renaming classes and elements which could be seen as insensitive, a wholesale reinvention of what a "monster" is, etc. All culminating in a new edition in the coming few years. Of course, such radical shifts to the paradigm could reinvoke the 4e "this ain't my D&D" problem we just came back from. Fix too little and you'll be called out for failing to address the problem, fix too much and you'll lose the fans that supported you.

I don't envy this position. One person's "good enough" is another person's "that doesn't address the issue". That said, I wager there will be a larger revision to the game sooner rather than later now, because the current climate is going to demand WotC treat these concerns with a little more finesse than what they've done so far. The question will be how far that revision will go.

The hope is, that D&D is easier to get into without a long-time player to teach you the ropes now than it was in 2008, and even if 6e radically changes the game and drives all the grognards away, the game will still thrive, as it becomes more accessible and welcoming to a wider new audience.

I’m not confident WotC is ready to make that leap of faith, especially with the sting of the 4e backlash still weighing on the minds of the people steering the ship. But I hope I’m wrong.

 

[Zardnaar]

The hope is, that D&D is easier to get into without a long-time player to teach you the ropes now than it was in 2008, and even if 6e radically changes the game and drives all the grognards away, the game will still thrive, as it becomes more accessible and welcoming to a wider new audience.

I’m not confident WotC is ready to make that leap of faith, especially with the sting of the 4e backlash still weighing on the minds of the people steering the ship. But I hope I’m wrong.

They may have trained new grognards though.

6E comes out they clean it up. New 5E players go eeww. Idk it's possible I suppose.

 

[Mind of tempest]

They may have trained new grognards though.

6E comes out they clean it up. New 5E players go eeww. Idk it's possible I suppose.

impossible to know before 6e thus it not relevant, plus it is better to try and fail than to be static and rot to death.

 

[el-remmen]

A preview of the first five minutes:

Nick introduces the topic: A Stanford University Professor (Antone Garcia) argued that D&D has racist undertones. He reads the title of the paper, "How Technology and Gaming Shape Youth Learning, Literacy Practices, and Civic Identities." Both fellows laugh about the title, implying it "doesn't sound very fun."

Nick is careful to point out that the paper is a study of D&D fans, not D&D players. The professor heard from fans that the game is racist. Nick asks, "Is the game racist? or are you racist for playing it?"

Without a segue, Tieflings are brought up as a discussion point. Nick asks, "What is a tiefling?" and the other speaker informs him that a tiefling is a human character with an infernal heritage. To that, Nick asks "So is the article implying that the infernal regions (of D&D) are Chicago, Detroit, or anything like that? Like, I don't ever remember anything like that. Like when you're writing the Plane of Hell or the City of Brass or wherever, that it's supposed to look exactly like Detroit."

A few seconds later, he changes the topic without segue again. "Maybe here's the dividing line," Nick says. "Old-school D&D isn't racist, maybe this new-school D&D is racist."

This concludes my preview of the first five minutes.

So real rigorous and insightful good faith engagement and criticism. . . just what I expected from how it was introduced in the OP.

 

[Charlaquin]

They may have trained new grognards though.

6E comes out they clean it up. New 5E players go eeww. Idk it's possible I suppose.

Certainly a possibility.