D&D General On Early D&D and Problematic Faves: How to Grapple with the Sins of the Past

It really is amazing watching JKR go from beloved to reviled over the years. I remember when she at least tried to keep the mask on. Now she reveals in her hatred.

I've heard WB (they own the publishing rights, right?) may buy her out. I think that would be wise. Get the brand away from her.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I just have to say this, because it’s a pretty directly relevant topic to me: it’s fine to enjoy Harry Potter. The books and the movies, on their own, are pretty harmless, and what media you choose to engage with is none of my business. But, if you consider yourself an ally to trans people, please, please do not spend money on Harry Potter media or merchandise, unless it’s secondhand. A not -insignificant portion of that money does make its way to J.K. Rowling, and she does spend her money to influence policy in ways that are directly harmful to us. It also just sends a really unfavorable message to us, that so many people want to call themselves allies, but then when it comes down to it will still spend money in a way that is actively harmful to us if it happens to be tied to a media franchise they enjoy. This particular issue isn’t just a question of if it’s ok to like art by a problematic creator, money spent on this particular art actually funds a currently-ongoing hate campaign. And unfortunately no, Joanne’s bigotry did not culminate in her transphobic murder mystery novel, she has done and continues to do far more damaging things than that.
 

It really is amazing watching JKR go from beloved to reviled over the years. I remember when she at least tried to keep the mask on. Now she reveals in her hatred.

I've heard WB (they own the publishing rights, right?) may buy her out. I think that would be wise. Get the brand away from her.
That would probably be a wise business decision for WB, but I’m not sure it would actually lead to a better outcome in the fight for trans rights. They’d need to offer her a lot of money for her to consider such a deal, so in the end it’d likely be a 6 of one, half a dozen of the other situation.
 

I just have to say this, because it’s a pretty directly relevant topic to me: it’s fine to enjoy Harry Potter. The books and the movies, on their own, are pretty harmless, and what media you choose to engage with is none of my business. But, if you consider yourself an ally to trans people, please, please do not spend money on Harry Potter media or merchandise, unless it’s secondhand. A not -insignificant portion of that money does make its way to J.K. Rowling, and she does spend her money to influence policy in ways that are directly harmful to us. It also just sends a really unfavorable message to us, that so many people want to call themselves allies, but then when it comes down to it will still spend money in a way that is actively harmful to us if it happens to be tied to a media franchise they enjoy. This particular issue isn’t just a question of if it’s ok to like art by a problematic creator, money spent on this particular art actually funds a currently-ongoing hate campaign. And unfortunately no, Joanne’s bigotry did not culminate in her transphobic murder mystery novel, she has done and continues to do far more damaging things than that.
In fact, it would be absolutely terrible if people were to enjoy that work in a way that literally took money out of her coffers.

Yaaarrrr
 

I've heard WB (they own the publishing rights, right?) may buy her out. I think that would be wise. Get the brand away from her.
The WB that yanks cartoons off of their streaming service so they don't have to pay streaming royalties for Infinity Train and Over the Garden Wall doesn't seem likely to be breaking out billions of dollars to buy Harry Potter any time soon.
 

A question I often ponder:

Does a topic being "problematic" (or other term you'd prefer to use) necessarily mean that including the same topic in a game makes the game "problematic"?

For example, let's use sexism, as that is related to the Gygax discussion.

I may be mistaken, but I feel confident in saying that most people would view sexism as a negative thing (even if there is disagreement concerning how it is categorized.)

Does it follow that including a sexist character or culture as part of a game means that the game itself is sexist?

My initial view is no. But I have also read and heard opinions that feel otherwise.
By itself, no, the inclusion of a sexist character doesn’t make a work sexist. But it’s important to ask what the work is saying about this character and their views. Are they criticized or vindicated by the narrative? Is the critique cogent? And is it saying anything worthwhile? These are all important questions to ask of any work, really. What is it trying to say, is it something worth being said, and is it being said clearly and effectively?
 

Is this a personal home game or a publication for the game? If the latter, I can see why a publisher might want to avoid the issue because a significant portion of the market they want buying their product may have to put up with it all day and want a refuge in their gaming pleasure.

I think that's a fair assessment from the point of view of a potential publisher.

From my own perspective, it's interesting to be having this discussion about D&D while also playing through Balder's Gate 3.

Larian constructed a narrative that makes use of adult-themed material as well as some rather harsh social conflict. None of it is glorified or "made light of," but there are times when it is highlighted as a source of conflict or even as something that a player might manipulate. (For example, I breezed through a lot of the Underdark by using magic to look like a female Drow and using skills like deception, persuasion, and intimidation to play upon the sexism upon which that culture is based.)

BG3 has been largely lauded (and rightfully so, as it is a good game with a compelling narrative).

If the same adventure path was put into paper form for tabletop D&D, I would be curious to see how the tabletop audience would judge the game.
 

I think that's a fair assessment from the point of view of a potential publisher.

From my own perspective, it's interesting to be having this discussion about D&D while also playing through Balder's Gate 3.

Larian constructed a narrative that makes use of adult-themed material as well as some rather harsh social conflict. None of it is glorified or "made light of," but there are times when it is highlighted as a source of conflict or even as something that a player might manipulate. (For example, I breezed through a lot of the Underdark by using magic to look like a female Drow and using skills like deception, persuasion, and intimidation to play upon the sexism upon which that culture is based.)

BG3 has been largely lauded (and rightfully so, as it is a good game with a compelling narrative).

If the same adventure path was put into paper form for tabletop D&D, I would be curious to see how the tabletop audience would judge the game.
Regardless of what the audience reaction would be, I don’t think the Hazbro-owned WotC would publish such an adventure. Not family-friendly enough for their brand image.
 

In fact, it would be absolutely terrible if people were to enjoy that work in a way that literally took money out of her coffers.

Yaaarrrr
Or engage with material that transforms or iterates on her work. It's like I'm more interested in post Lovecraft cosmic horror than Lovecraft in general.

One I'd recommend is the Simon Snow trilogy by Rainbow Rowell that's a very obvious Harry/Draco fanfic.
 

From my own perspective, it's interesting to be having this discussion about D&D while also playing through Balder's Gate 3.
From my perspective, Baldur's Gate 3 included a lot of elements that people here would complain about in a written campaign. The inclusion of slavery in the underdark, the general horniness of the game, the racism, blood libel in the Auntie Ethel quests, etc., etc.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top