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

[TheSword]

Except given that mindflayers also walk, talk (with their minds, perhaps), eat, mate (or reproduce somehow), mature, build, form societies, and act - and other than the tentacles they even superficially look like people - this line of argument falls a bit flat.

As such, should mindflayers also then be given the "any alignment" tag?

Yeah well that’s just not true is it, because mindflayers don’t eat, talk, mate, or mature like people. So I’m not really sure how you got that so wrong.

I picked them because they are so very very alien. Perhaps failure to see that denotes a lack of perspective.

 

[HJFudge]

Approaching this from a different angle. Hopefully this amounts to something . . .

Does this even matter?

Only in the sense that it sets up a bit of a false narrative, and even then...it really doesn't. But then, if it does not matter why are there so many pushing for it? It has to matter, to someone, on at least some level. To me? Nah. As you said in the next points...

Furthermore, why does it matter if D&D officially changes to be more inclusive?

Again, doesn't matter at all except for in the case that it sets up...again...a false narrative. Which, again, in this thin slice of culture we have here really doesn't make a whiff of difference. No one is going to be treated better or worse in the real world because of what WOTC puts in their monster manual.

Really its just the same reason they took out demons and devils references in 2E D&D.

Exact same effect for the exact same reason, its a cultural issue being reflected in the games presentation. Nothing more, nothing less.

No one is calling you bigoted/racist/sexist/transphobic/anything-ist for disliking/not-incorporating these changes, no one is forcing you to use these rules and options, and no one is burning your prized D&D books. Stop painting us as crazed, deranged idiots that don't understand the game and have no interest in it. It's not polite, and is likely one of the major reasons why this ongoing debate will not end.

P.S. If you do find people who are calling you bigoted or otherwise harassing you for any opinion you have on this matter, feel free to tell me about it, and I will happily call them out. I am more than willing to criticize people on "my side" when they are being jerks and spouting BS. If they are doing that, they aren't on my side and don't represent me or my opinion.

Got it?

Mmmmm I dunno. This seems to be a common theme:

Also, you can fail to "make a connection" and still essentially reinforce racist ideas.

The implication, of course, being that while WE may not be racists/bigots our IDEAS certainly are helping the racists/bigots win.

Though, when it comes down to it...does it matter what others think of my opinion? Only because its the internet and sometimes I feel a bit more surly than perhaps I should But this is an issue. You don't want to be painted as crazed or deranged? No one wants to be painted in a bad light.

Do I feel harassed? No. But I DO feel that there is a definite subtext. Intentional or not.

I am, maybe despite appearances, enjoying the exchange of ideas. It is an interesting topic.

 

[MGibster]

I find it fascinating that Oriental Adventures comes up so often given that it hasn't been in production for more than 30 years now (though I suppose we can order PDFs now). By the standards of 1985, it's not a bad product. At the time it was met with generally positive reviews as was the 2002 version but we don't talk about that for some reason. Maybe because it was Rokugan?

But there are certainly legitimate criticisms of Oriental Adventures and if I were to create a D&D setting inspired by Asian cultures I'd start from scratch rather than updating OA. I mean, heck, I wouldn't even use the name!

 

[Oofta]

okay if you do not care what the books say nor how people play their home game why do you even have an opinion on this topic?
it sounds like you should not care so why do you?

So I'm not allowed to express an opinion? Thanks for sharing.

 

[Alzrius]

Obviously unless we had the people involved to interrogate, or they recorded, in detail, their motivations for the changes, it's all assumptions.

EDIT: In an effort to prevent this from degenerating into anything acrimonious, I want to be absolutely clear about what we (that is, you and I) are discussing. In your previous post, you stated that the following image (from the 1978 G3 Hall of the Fire Giant King) "absolutely looks like the artist is trying to combine 'black person' and 'elf' to me."

I posted the altered image below, from the 1981 G1-3 Against the Giants, to preemptively rebut any assertion that the illustrations technical limitations prevented the depicted individual's skin from being shown as black:

Given that, your idea that the first illustration "absolutely looks like the artist is trying to combine 'black person' and 'elf' to me" seemingly rests on you either thinking that the white skin was meant to be representative of something it's not, or that you're presupposing that a character having hair that is black, short, and curly - regardless of their skin color - is meant to be representative of African-Americans. That second idea is one that strikes me as being highly implausible, and is solely what I'm objecting to with regard to what you said.

 

[Krachek]

Already 34 pages,
Seem that nobody agree on the definition of Racist, or the definition of DnD!

 

[Zardnaar]

Approaching this from a different angle. Hopefully this amounts to something . . .

Does this even matter? Seriously, does it matter at all whether or not I think D&D is "racist" or not? If you're playing the game, having fun as a group, and are not actively harming someone physically or emotionally, why should you care about this at all? So many of you old school players are getting riled up and trying to make a panic about the new kids that are playing the game and that are trying to make it something that they like. Who cares?!?! You have 5+ editions of D&D that you have played and enjoyed up until this point with no problem, besides other people being jerks and taking away/burning your D&D books 30ish years ago. That has stopped, and it won't happen again. If people try to take away your books and burn them, tell them to go away and report them to the respective authorities for harassing you. Whether or not orcs are evil at your table is no one's business except for your table and you. If they're being naughty words and telling you that you're racist/sexist/bigoted, ignore them and return to your table playing the game that all of us know and love. Seriously. There's no problem. If people are trying to convince you that you're playing the game wrong and being rude about it, that's just a pesky distraction that can be solved through the click of a button.

Furthermore, why does it matter if D&D officially changes to be more inclusive? You probably have older editions and groups of players already, you likely know the mechanics of multiple editions of the game, and a place to play any edition of D&D that you want. Why not sit back, take it easy, and let the newer people take the wheel for a bit? A lot of people want this change (no one will ever convince me that some Twitter mob is making a second Satanic Panic, that is plain BS, as many, many people on this forum, D&D Beyond's, Reddit's, and many others truly and honestly want this change), so let them have it. You're not losing anything, can go about freely playing D&D in the style that you like, and the other side gets a win. Our win does not equal your loss. We're evening out the field and letting people who want this style of D&D to play it easily and officially (and, yes, officiality does matter. It matters for D&D Beyond, Roll20 and other VTTs, and Adventurer's League).

And, finally, if we trust WotC's most recent UA, your opinion doesn't matter. Wizards of the Coast has already made up their mind. Races are now lineages, and thus will no longer have racially assigned ASIs, alignment suggestions, and cultural mechanics. They have made up their minds and stated that they want D&D to be inclusive. They have changed Vistani in Curse of Strahd (even if it was just a few small changes), have published TCoE's Customize your Origin feature, and will likely be officializing the Gothic Lineages in the soon-to-be-announced D&D book.

No one is calling you bigoted/racist/sexist/transphobic/anything-ist for disliking/not-incorporating these changes, no one is forcing you to use these rules and options, and no one is burning your prized D&D books. Stop painting us as crazed, deranged idiots that don't understand the game and have no interest in it. It's not polite, and is likely one of the major reasons why this ongoing debate will not end.

P.S. If you do find people who are calling you bigoted or otherwise harassing you for any opinion you have on this matter, feel free to tell me about it, and I will happily call them out. I am more than willing to criticize people on "my side" when they are being jerks and spouting BS. If they are doing that, they aren't on my side and don't represent me or my opinion.

Got it?

If they ham fist it or F it up it won't stick.

3E was sold as a return to the good ol days. Barbarians drinks, devil's are back etc. So was 5E.

If 6E flops JC and co get fired new designers are brought in and 7E is sold as a return to the old favorites.

The one thing no one her can predict is how it played out long term. 4E for example was the way forward tough luck until it wasn't.

Essentially all the opinions here are irrelevant the market will decide one way or another. That's the only reality that will matter.

In that respect perception is reality. The only truth here is no one can reliably predict which way it will go. 2E sold around half if 1E and 4E flopped.

As I said idk what way it will go but I'm fairly confident in how the end results will go.

 

[MGibster]

Furthermore, why does it matter if D&D officially changes to be more inclusive?

I really can't think of any of the recent changes that hurts the game. I don't care for getting rid racial state modifiers, but, as UA proves, my opinion isn't particular important (I accept that as I grow older I'm not in the desired demographic), and D&D is still going to be a fun game. Do I think it's silly that people connect attribute bonuses and almost always evil orcs to racism? Yes. But I don't think removing those things makes the game worse. (I mean, it makes any less difference now whether or not a Fighter is a halfling, human, or tiefling, but I've felt like that for a long time anyway so for me it doesn't matter.)

 

[Oofta]

I find it fascinating that Oriental Adventures comes up so often given that it hasn't been in production for more than 30 years now (though I suppose we can order PDFs now). By the standards of 1985, it's not a bad product. At the time it was met with generally positive reviews as was the 2002 version but we don't talk about that for some reason. Maybe because it was Rokugan?

But there are certainly legitimate criticisms of Oriental Adventures and if I were to create a D&D setting inspired by Asian cultures I'd start from scratch rather than updating OA. I mean, heck, I wouldn't even use the name!

It would be interesting to do an Oriental Adventures right, I'm just not sure it can be done even if you had consultants/authors that were experts in east Asian cultures.

I mean base D&D is loosely based on a western Europe that never really existed, but it kind of sort of reflects a time period from long ago. Long enough ago very few people today truly identify with it or will take offense that dwarves and elves are separate species.

Meanwhile the culture in many eastern Asian cultures are continuations of cultures that go back thousands of years. In other words, we can have Tyr as a god because even if people recognize the god from norse myth, it's just myth. If you tried to do that with eastern Asian religions from a thousand years ago you're (largely) talking religions that still exist.

Anyway ... enough of a sidetrack from guy that obviously knows little or nothing about eastern Asia.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Already 34 pages,
Seem that nobody agree on the definition of Racist, or the definition of DnD!

That's... Certainly one way to look at it.

Another way would be:

Already 34 pages! People sure are passionate about D&D and equity!

If this conversation were over and done with everyone in agreement after 10 posts, then it wouldn't be an issue worth talking over!

I know I have appreciated reading viewpoints from different perspectives, and I appreciate everyone for participating. This kind of conversation should get heated because it's about a hobby we love and a serious societal issue, though not so heated that there's name calling (which I'm thankful has not been happening).