WotC Older D&D Books on DMs Guild Now Have A Disclaimer

If you go to any of the older WotC products on the Dungeon Master's Guild, they now have a new disclaimer very similar to that currently found at the start of Looney Tunes cartoons. We recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website, does not reflect the values of the Dungeon & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial and gender prejudice...

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you go to any of the older WotC products on the Dungeon Master's Guild, they now have a new disclaimer very similar to that currently found at the start of Looney Tunes cartoons.

D3B789DC-FA16-46BD-B367-E4809E8F74AE.jpeg



We recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website, does not reflect the values of the Dungeon & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time. These depictions were wrong then and are wrong today. This content is presented as it was originally created, because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed. Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is a strength, and we strive to make our D&D products as welcoming and inclusive as possible. This part of our work will never end.


The wording is very similar to that found at the start of Looney Tunes cartoons.

F473BE00-5334-453E-849D-E37710BCF61E.jpeg


Edit: Wizards has put out a statement on Twitter (click through to the full thread)

 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

MGibster

Legend
The problem here is that a surprising number of people don't think there is anything disturbing about depicting the genocide of fictional species as morally good. Because orcs, drow, goblins, terraformars, zentraedi, etc are fictional, then it is okay to arbitrarily kill, enslave, or otherwise brutalize them because by the rules of the fictional universe itself they are irredeemably monstrous.

Because it's just a game and it can have as much or as little meaning as I care to give it. When I play chess, I don't wax philosophical regarding the political causes of war, all those parents, spouses, and children who will miss their loved ones, or why one piece is privileged with the right to live while the other dies as I throw my pawn under the bus in order to protect my queen. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!
 

ccs

41st lv DM
The problem here is that a surprising number of people don't think there is anything disturbing about depicting the genocide of fictional species as morally good. Because orcs, drow, goblins, terraformars, zentraedi, etc are fictional, then it is okay to arbitrarily kill, enslave, or otherwise brutalize them because by the rules of the fictional universe itself they are irredeemably monstrous.

OK, fine. ALL Orcs, Drow, etc are not irredeemably monstrous & in need of killing.
Just all of the ones I, as the DM, am going to throw in your path. Don't fret, you'll have good reason to kill them.
 

Erdric Dragin

Adventurer
I find it funny, and sad, we have these types of people in the community. Take a look at a few of the comments. They're shouting nonsense that "history is being erased" and the "book will no longer be available soon" sort of cries. Which is all untrue and unfounded. It's just highlighting material in the books that clearly are not sensitive to the culture it's attempting to emulate.

 

Sacrosanct

Legend
All nazis are inherently evil and must be destroyed.---OK, no one really bats an eye.
All goblins are inherently evil and must be destroyed.--suddenly a lot of people are up in arms.

At least nazis were real people lol. Goblins are fictional, written to be worse than nazis (everything evil nazis did plus eating their enemies), and they get more of a benefit of the doubt than actual real people.


*Not saying nazis don't deserve to be labeled as such, just an interesting observation, that's all.
 


MGibster

Legend
I find it funny, and sad, we have these types of people in the community. Take a look at a few of the comments. They're shouting nonsense that "history is being erased" and the "book will no longer be available soon" sort of cries. Which is all untrue and unfounded. It's just highlighting material in the books that clearly are not sensitive to the culture it's attempting to emulate.

Given that we have some people arguing in favor of removing it from circulation, I'm hard pressed to come down too hard on them for worrying the book might not be available at some point in the future. However, I can't see any reason to be upset that WotC decided to add a disclaimer. At some point we're going to have to figure out a way to reconcile our desire to be inclusive with our enjoyment of media from the past. I think placing an advisory comment is a pretty good start.
 

Immeril

Explorer
I find it funny, and sad, we have these types of people in the community. Take a look at a few of the comments. They're shouting nonsense that "history is being erased" and the "book will no longer be available soon" sort of cries. Which is all untrue and unfounded. It's just highlighting material in the books that clearly are not sensitive to the culture it's attempting to emulate.

Not unfounded. There is a number of people that want OA removed. Just take a look at Daniel Kwan's twitter account, or the current most-liked thread on this forum.
 


Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
I find it funny, and sad, we have these types of people in the community. Take a look at a few of the comments. They're shouting nonsense that "history is being erased" and the "book will no longer be available soon" sort of cries. Which is all untrue and unfounded. It's just highlighting material in the books that clearly are not sensitive to the culture it's attempting to emulate.

That is not "nonsense", "untrue" (yet), or "unfounded".
That is experience from similar controversies in living memory.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top