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

[Umbran]

I'm tired of all the PC crap and virtue signalling.

Mod Note:

And, you have earned yourself a ticket out of the thread.

 

[Justice and Rule]

But to me that sounds like: A group of people were worried about the impact that the game was having, especially on children. There were no widespread peer reviewed studies to prove this, but people were seriously concerned.

Now, I agree. Racism is real and blatantly racist depictions (i.e. Vistani) should be fixed.

But ... and you knew this was coming ... we can't just dismiss the fears behind Satanic Panic just because some took it to an extreme. Both then and now people sincerely believed harm was being done.

In any case, I don't have much to add that I haven't already stated. I just don't think it's fair to some of the people behind the Satanic Panic to be dismissive because we know it was baseless and some took it to an extreme.

I think when you simplify it down like that it loses all meaning. At the end of the day, you can't just detach the Satanic Panic from what it was about: a moral panic about imagined Satanic conspiracy that was kidnapping, abusing, and killing children. There's no basis in reality for it, and how it manifested literally ruined lives. I mean, the McMartin Daycare tragedy is just naughty word godawful to read about.

But none of that really compares to what's being debated today: we know that systemic racism exists. We can debate how much it influence things, whether certain portrayals feed into that, etc... but we can agree that it's a real problem and that it exists within stuff like D&D to varying degrees. But it's not the same as saying that Mike Mearls is a Satanic Pedophile who abuses kids in his basement, and that the game he made helps lure them in.

From a factual standpoint, I think you are correct that the Satanic Panic has a little in common with what's going on now.

From an emotional standpoint, I think it feels the same to some players. It's a defensive reaction. It's like we're being accused of being part of some big evil plot (i.e. satanism or racism) simply by enjoying our hobby.

Personally, I have zero issue accepting the fact that D&D has a racist history. And I am 100% in approval of trying to make D&D more inclusive. But it's still jarring when someone tells me I'm racist because I like the fact that 3e dwarves have a +2 Con -2 Cha modifier.

No, I get it, and I get why they are defensive. I know I was at one point, and then I started talk to other people about it. It's one of those things where you don't just flick a switch, but it's a journey where you become more aware of how other people view stuff. Though c'mon with that last sentence.

 

[Umbran]

A succubus has very little in common with a person beyond appearance and sex though. On a kinda fundamentanal biological level.

You realize that biology has nothing to do with the issues at hand, right?

It looks, walks, talks, and acts like a person. The issues are about how we treat PEOPLE.

 

[Oofta]

A succubus has very little in common with a person beyond appearance and sex though. On a kinda fundamentanal biological level. They’re created from the ooze of the abyss fully formed. They eat mortal lust. They can be yanked into other dimensions and turn to smoke/ooze/a blast of light when they die away from their home plane and reappear back at home.

There is an artificial line. It’s got a blurred edge.
Is anyone getting concerned that Succubi and Incubi or Mineflayers are reinforcing RL racist stereotypes? No.

It sounds like you’re saying because it doesn’t make sense to divorce alignment from some creatur, and sometimes the line is blurred. Then we shouldn’t divorce anyone from default alignment?

Not being able to do something good for everyone, isn’t a good reason not to do it for some that you can.

Either way you’re arguing against something that has already happened. It’s a matter of record. It’s in print.

But that's a judgement call. Beautiful females that embrace their sexuality are all evil temptresses out to corrupt helpless men is very much an issue.

I'm just pointing out what I consider a double standard. I don't really need to repeat my thoughts on the subject, but if you care:

Spoiler: What I think on least bad options

But most games, stories, superheroes have good guys and bad guys. We can be somewhat sympathetic and understand what Thanos did and why, but he was still the bad guy. The reason The Joker exists is because he's easily identifiable as the bad guy.

If you have a game that (at least for many people) is about heroes saving the day you need a nemesis, an enemy. That's why you have things like a Monster Manual not an Alternative Species book.

The thing is there's only so many ways of having a group that represents evil.

Organization: so you have group. Whether that's Hydra, The Empire or Evil Inc, the assumption pretty much that everyone that belongs to that group is evil. Except what about the child soldiers? What about the people who were just desperate and saw no other choice? How is it different from warring political parties? How many people on the Death Star were just janitors?

Religion: Those darn cultists are at it again. Won't those crazies ever learn? Don't they know that the religion I grew up with is the one true path? Oh ... wait. How is that better? How is some followers of some mythical deity not just a representation of [pick your "militant" real world religion].

Culture: Well obviously orcs are only evil because that's the way they were raised. If we only taught those ignorant savages the correct way of speaking, dressing, and proper manners they could be good citizens. Just like the U.S. shipped all those American Indians off to boarding school to "civilize" them. Ugh. No.

Race/Species: It's okay to have bad guys, they just have to be demons, outsiders, undead, xenomorphs that don't look much like humans. Because everybody knows what you look like defines who you are, right? Somehow it's okay to be evil if you stray far enough from looking like a person.

Personally? I don't have a problem with orcs being evil. They are not humans, much less real. They are the equivalent of genetically engineered species designed to be a destructive force by an evil entity Gruumsh. Is that an over-simplification? Absolutely. So is AC, HP, levels, classes, ability scores, healing ... I'm sure we could go on. If every single ogre has the same ability scores and attributes I don't see why alignment is any different.

Except that's not the end of the story. I don't use "monstrous humanoids" in my campaign all that often so I've never expanded them that much*. But the MM tells you that these are just the defaults (even if it could be more explicit). The DMG talks about how to modify and tweak monsters and NPCs to fit specific stories.

IMHO having the simplified option of good and evil is part of the game. It's part of most "heroic" fiction and games. I just don't think there is one way to have that which is "acceptable" while others are not. Reinforce that the culture presented is the default whether that's for orcs, gnomes, dwarves or drow but that the possibilities are as varied as the campaigns they appear in. But don't get rid of the concept of good and evil altogether because sometimes I just want to be a good guy fighting the bad guys without risking PTSD.

The real world is messy. I want to be able to play a game to escape reality for a few hours now and then. Orcs are not human. Since they are not human than any assumptions we make about how they think is up to the fiction of the campaign.

*Most bad guys in my campaign are human, although the real power behind the scenes is sometimes not human.

 

[TheSword]

You realize that biology has nothing to do with the issues at hand, right?

It looks, walks, talks, and acts like a person. The issues are about how we treat PEOPLE.

I’m sorry no it doesn’t act like a person: for the reasons I said before. It superficially resembles a person in appearance. But in many crucial ways it is utterly alien.

Nobody that I’m aware of are claiming that demonic Succubi should be reclassified as anything other than evil.

This argument is being used to try and delegitimise reasonable claims that humanoids shouldn’t be viewed as any alignment.

I think it’s wrong and flawed. We weren’t asking for the baby to be thrown out with the bath water.

 

[Oofta]

I think when you simplify it down like that it loses all meaning. At the end of the day, you can't just detach the Satanic Panic from what it was about: a moral panic about imagined Satanic conspiracy that was kidnapping, abusing, and killing children. There's no basis in reality for it, and how it manifested literally ruined lives. I mean, the McMartin Daycare tragedy is just naughty word godawful to read about.

But none of that really compares to what's being debated today: we know that systemic racism exists. We can debate how much it influence things, whether certain portrayals feed into that, etc... but we can agree that it's a real problem and that it exists within stuff like D&D to varying degrees. But it's not the same as saying that Mike Mearls is a Satanic Pedophile who abuses kids in his basement, and that the game he made helps lure them in.

I agree that the extreme ideas of Satanic Panic were a bit goofy.

That does not mean that we should dismiss some of the concerns some of the people had simply because some people went too far. To me, it smacks of religious bigotry if we do.

For the record I personally think the whole thing was stupid. I do not think we can just dismiss that some people had legitimate concerns.

 

[TwoSix]

You realize that biology has nothing to do with the issues at hand, right?

It looks, walks, talks, and acts like a person. The issues are about how we treat PEOPLE.

But isn't that the divide in viewpoints? In the real world, if it looks, walks, talks, and acts like a person, it is a person, because there's nothing else it could be. In a fantasy world, it can look just like a person but actually be a puddle of evil goo, because cosmological evil is something that exists in the fantasy world.

 

[Oofta]

I’m sorry no it doesn’t act like a person: for the reasons I said before. It superficially resembles a person in appearance. But in many crucial ways it is utterly alien.

Nobody that I’m aware of are claiming that demonic Succubi should be reclassified as anything other than evil.

This argument is being used to try and delegitimise reasonable claims that humanoids shouldn’t be viewed as any alignment.

I think it’s wrong and flawed. We weren’t asking for the baby to be thrown out with the bath water.

Actually I am. I think the alignment for all creatures that currently have an alignment entry should clarify that it's just the default. Saying one intelligent, thinking creature has free will and another does not because they look or act too differently from us is the foundation of racism.

On the other hand I think D&D is a game. It needs bad guys. The books should just be better at reinforcing that the alignment, culture and fluff text is just the default.

 

[Wishbone]

A succubus has very little in common with a person beyond appearance and sex though. On a kinda fundamental biological level. They’re created from the ooze of the abyss fully formed. They eat mortal lust. They can be yanked into other dimensions and turn to smoke/ooze/a blast of light when they die away from their home plane and reappear back at home.

There is an artificial line. It’s got a blurred edge.
Is anyone getting concerned that Succubi and Incubi or Mineflayers are reinforcing RL racist stereotypes? No.

Have you seen the movie Under the Skin with Scarlett Johansson? There's plenty you can do to tell a human story with a succubus/alien type creature at the center even if they are a foe or have a negative influence on those around them (such as transporting victims into a void dimension where they are submerged in black goo and hollowed out so only their skin remains).

A fiend coming to terms with the corruption or negative concepts from which it is born or a mind flayer trying to reconcile its predatory feeding habits with living in a world with other sentient beings can make for a pretty compelling story of redemption. Foes don't necessarily need to be evil, and folks who happen to be evil don't necessarily need to be foes. Non-evil fiends and nonevil aberrations exist!

 

[Umbran]

I’m sorry no it doesn’t act like a person:

In what ways does it fail to act like a person?