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

[Minigiant]

I prefer my phonebook. It is it's only purpose in life for the last 25 years.
D&D books are to valuable to be damaged on some thick skull.

Phone book is too soft.

But you're right. Maybe I'll use an adventure book I've finished.

 

[Horwath]

Phone... Book? Is that like a an eBook or something? [emoji16]

It is the artifact of the Ancients.

It gives temporary +2 intelligence to dumb players when applied correctly.

 

[Horwath]

Phone book is too soft.

But you're right. Maybe I'll use an adventure book I've finished.

It's size compensates that it's too soft. Unlike some other thing...

 

[Umbran]

I don't think it's a good thing for the game if everyone has to come up with that level of detail if they don't want to. Having default bad guys without a lot of justification works for many DMs and stories.

The question isn't what you do at your table. You do whatever you want.

The relevant question is what shoud be the base presentation in the rulebooks. Yes the current rules effectively say that nuanced play is possible - call it a sidebar presentation. But, that's not a defense for keeping the presentation as-is. Maybe your mode of play can be the sidebar in future versions. If you think nuanced pay is sufficiently covered now, then your mode would be sufficiently covered then.

 

[Mannahnin]

Who said anything about violence? I'm talking about inspiration and reinforcement of ideas.

And, when research studies say "no causal connection" that does not mean "no influence".

My understanding is that there's been no support for the theory that violent games make people more violent, but certainly games and other conceptual play can influence thought and behavior.

After a couple of hours playing or watching Grand Theft Auto 3 as a twenty-something I certainly remember an odd effect on my thinking about lanes and traffic laws when I immediately went to drive afterward!

Or how when you assign a student the task of debating a given issue from one perspective, and of researching it to write a convincing argument for that assigned position, their own personal attitudes often shift at least a bit toward that perspective. The act of adopting it for purposes of study and debate tends to influence their own personal opinions.

 

[Oofta]

Who said anything about violence? I'm talking about inspiration and reinforcement of ideas.

And, when research studies say "no causal connection" that does not mean "no influence".

I think people will read into a game what they want. The game rules can't control if people of a certain subculture use a group as a stand-in for a real world group no matter what the books say.

There have been several studies on the impact of the current version of D&D (warts and all), they've generally stated that it helps with problem solving and teamwork. They may or may not have measured for it, but none say they increase racism. If it were a significant issue, where are the studies supporting it?

Whether it's "comic books are creating juvenile delinquents" or "video games cause violence", study after study has shown no causal effect. Violence is closely correlated to attitudes.

 

[Alzrius]

My understanding is that there's been no support for the theory that violent games make people more violent, but certainly games and other conceptual play can influence thought and behavior.

As I recall, such influences tend to be very short-term in nature, and are typically limited to reactions to what's being engaged with, e.g. watching an action movie will make people excited, reading a sad book will make people sad, etc.

 

[Mannahnin]

As I recall, such influences tend to be very short-term in nature, and are typically limited to reactions to what's being engaged with, e.g. watching an action movie will make people excited, reading a sad book will make people sad, etc.

Yes, the effect on my thoughts while driving was brief although notable!

 

[Horwath]

The question isn't what you do at your table. You do whatever you want.

The relevant question is what shoud be the base presentation in the rulebooks. Yes the current rules effectively say that nuanced play is possible - call it a sidebar presentation. But, that's not a defense for keeping the presentation as-is. Maybe your mode of play can be the sidebar in future versions. If you think nuanced pay is sufficiently covered now, then your mode would be sufficiently covered then.

There is nothing wrong with representing Orcs as MOSTLY evil and vile race/species.
Maybe that can be loosened a little with alignment description and some example of the opposite.

I.E. in FR, Kingdom of Many Arrows could be described as emerging civilization that have brokered unstable but lasting peace with their neighbours and mostly rejected evil orc deities, while the rest of orcs are still gathering in loose warbands and hordes.

To me heroes(PCs) should be ones that break the racial mold/stereotype, with few well placed NPCs to aid them in that.

What is the point of playing a drow elf if everyone does not want to hang you with your entrails as an example...

 

[Warpiglet-7]

My understanding is that such influences tend to be very short-term in nature, and are typically limited to reactions to what's being engaged with, e.g. watching an action movie will make people excited, reading a sad book will make people sad, etc.

There are a few meta analyses out there that can shed some light on this.

that said if you actually tied the characteristics of a player to rules about how they get treated in game I would have concerns.

not sure if the prison experiments would have any applicability here but I would not test it out.

bottom line: do rpgs and their assumptions shape us? I firmly believe that violence in game or pretending to worship dark powers has no sway on a person acting this out irl.

there are more studies about video games for sure but don’t know of any concerning trends with rpgs. In fact, the few studies I have seen referenced suggest players as a group tend to be more accepting and exhibit some pro social behaviors.

that said the issue here is one of two things. Do people with more racist beliefs play certain forms of D&D? And secondly can the game foster this ideology?

correlation is not causation of course. In older groups there may be more of a certain belief than in other groups. I dunno. Statistically significant difference? And if statistically significant is the effect size big enough to matter?

lastly, what do you really want to do with the data? Assume your worst fears. Now what? Baby with the bath water? Isolate whole groups because you barely rejected the null hypothesis? (I.e. there is a difference not due to chance) BUT it might not be that big.

what if player group A is 8% higher on a dependent variable? What do you do with that?

again, trying to label a group of D&D players this way only serves one purpose. It justifies a negative bias you might have and then you feel good about having it.

to hell with the OSR and it’s gray neck beards! See this study PROVES what I said all along!

so unproductive. It’s bad enough in my opinion that people keep getting told that they and their preferences are not the target anymore. “Hey dude! You’re obsolete! There are more of US now!” Happens quite often.

I have a graduate degrees in a few fields and one is business. I don’t need lectures about sales figures! I get it! I understand it! I don’t fault WOTC for doing what sells. At all. Not even a little bit.

what sucks is when a community uses that or something else to make part of the player base appear to be less than. And it happens here and elsewhere.

lastly, we need to check those assumptions too. WOTC may know or WOTC may find out. Some of us who are a little older have the purchasing power. I buy stuff for kicks. Lots of minis, books etc and I won’t use ALL of them. There are a lot of players like me.

if it is all financial this may be a thing to keep in mind too.

but it should not be. The player base should not try to carve people up. In the late 80s I was a teen and remember the JOY of finding other players.

male female other white black other was not a damn worry to me. I was just thrilled that they could talk about magic users and fighters and orcs and get giddy about their favorite character.

weird that it feels like their was more of that in my sphere then than now.