D&D 5E Ray Winninger, in charge of D&D, states his old school bonefides.

[lingual]

Can you imagine if some sect of NFL fans demanded the new commissioner prove they were around before instant replay?

I'm sure many older Oriental Adventures makes sense. But I can see why some folks would consider it unfair to suggest that new fans should be equally cautious when perusing, say,

The creators who worked on products that weren't really problematic, but are having their works lumped in with material like Oriental Adventures, for one. Some of whom still work on the game today and are clearly working to make it better, like Jeremy Crawford. (Unless he's disavowed Heroes of the Feywild as an old shame and I missed it?)

And the fans who enjoyed said products (to include fans who jumped on with 4E just before the 5E switchover), and could read in that disclaimer the implication that the things they liked were wrong, whether or not that implication has merit in an individual case. Many take such things as implicit criticism of themselves as well as of the work.

Note, arguing that folks shouldn't be offended by something is generally a non-starter... all you can do is try to understand and accept why they might be offended.

I can't think of any real life person that would be offended by this stuff and my friends and I harken back ADnD. I thought it was the snowflakey hypersensitivity of the newer generations that was derided by some of the older players. And now some of them would get offended by a warning or disclaimer? I don't think they care. Just like the clown joke. It's probably only a few loud people that are actually upset by it. If they are, just boycott and don't whine about not getting catered too.

 

[Hussar]

The creators who worked on products that weren't really problematic, but are having their works lumped in with material like Oriental Adventures, for one. Some of whom still work on the game today and are clearly working to make it better, like Jeremy Crawford. (Unless he's disavowed Heroes of the Feywild as an old shame and I missed it?)

And the fans who enjoyed said products (to include fans who jumped on with 4E just before the 5E switchover), and could read in that disclaimer the implication that the things they liked were wrong, whether or not that implication has merit in an individual case. Many take such things as implicit criticism of themselves as well as of the work.

Note, arguing that folks shouldn't be offended by something is generally a non-starter... all you can do is try to understand and accept why they might be offended.

Do you have examples of this or are you just posting hypotheticals? Because, AFAIK, I haven't heard a single complaint in the vein that you are proposing. Creators of older works are not complaining, nor are fans. The only complaints I HAVE heard are from those who want the warning labels lifted entirely.

So, is this an actual issue or something you are thinking might happen? Because, well, it's been a few years now, and none of the complaints you seem to be concerned about here have surfaced.

 

[JEB]

Do you have examples of this or are you just posting hypotheticals? Because, AFAIK, I haven't heard a single complaint in the vein that you are proposing. Creators of older works are not complaining, nor are fans. The only complaints I HAVE heard are from those who want the warning labels lifted entirely.

So, is this an actual issue or something you are thinking might happen? Because, well, it's been a few years now, and none of the complaints you seem to be concerned about here have surfaced.

While I do largely speak in a theoretical sense (to answer the question of why someone might object to the labels being applied universally), there are in fact creators and fans with objections along the lines I've mentioned. Here's an example that came up in a quick Google search: The Eternally Problematic Yesterday

And I've seen other examples of the fan complaints I mentioned, on Reddit and other forums: folks criticizing the disclaimer as too broad and indiscriminate, folks that see the disclaimer as implying they're bigots for liking legacy products. (You can probably find them too with some targeted Googling.) I'm also reasonably sure there are folks here on ENWorld that feel that way, based on comments and likes I've seen both in previous discussions on the matter, and even in this thread.

 

[Hussar]

But, see, that's the point. The boilerplate isn't accusing anyone of anything. It's simply a statement of fact- stuff that was written before may contain objectionable content. Again, this isn't anything new or earth shattering. Pretty much anyone who has read even a small selection of fantasy will get it.

The warning label in no way blames or points fingers. It's simply an acknowledgement of the past and a promise to be better in the future.

I'm frankly baffled why anyone would find that objectionable.

As was said earlier in the thread, the point of the disclaimer isn't meant as a point of conversation or discourse. It's not. It's a stand being taken, that we, as a hobby, will try to be better in the future. Will we always succeed? Nope. Will stuff get missed? Of course. But, the attempt is there.

And that acknowledgement means so much to those who've been completely ignored and sidelined for decades.

I'm sorry if some people feel hurt over the acknowledgement, but, honestly? The price is more than worth it.

 

[Mordhau]

I feel it's a bit like walking into a library and seeing a sign over the door that says "Some books may contain offensive and objectionable content, particularly old ones". It's a kind of duh thing. Silly, because obvious, but really hard to reasonably object to. I'm not going to be offended because I'm borrowing the Three Musketeers and it happens to be an old book. I mean it would be really silly to walk out with it and think "Hey that sign's calling me a racist".

While I do largely speak in a theoretical sense (to answer the question of why someone might object to the labels being applied universally), there are in fact creators and fans with objections along the lines I've mentioned. Here's an example that came up in a quick Google search: The Eternally Problematic Yesterday

And I've seen other examples of the fan complaints I mentioned, on Reddit and other forums: folks criticizing the disclaimer as too broad and indiscriminate, folks that see the disclaimer as implying they're bigots for liking legacy products. (You can probably find them too with some targeted Googling.) I'm also reasonably sure there are folks here on ENWorld that feel that way, based on comments and likes I've seen both in previous discussions on the matter, and even in this thread.

That's guys not offended though. And he has a point. It's somewhat bemusing that they're putting content warnings on older stuff when they're busy rewriting their own stuff such as Curse of Strahd which was published within the last few years, but the point is they really can't get away without owning recent stuff, so a warning would be pretty useless as a deflection (and honestly, trying to do so with 4e content is pretty iffy to, but I don't think there's anyone who would actually care).

 

[GreyLord]

Going back a few posts, I really think the response is in regards to them putting Thaco the Clown in their adventure.

I know I find it very distasteful. It shows an attitude at the company towards the older audience (And as many of the new gamers probably would not get the "in-joke" it is definitely targeted towards older gamers), especially as it made it through editing. If it makes it that far, it probably is FAR stronger and prevalent in the company itself.

It's like someone who makes a bigoted joke in public when they are a public figure. If they are willing to say it in public, it probably means it is FAR WORSE when they are not in the public eye.

I can see why people say they weren't offended...but it's not just the joke that is offensive, it's the indication of the general attitude towards a certain segment of gamers (say any who are older than the age of 30) in the company itself.

I think they have a HUGE audience of gamers these days who are College age and younger, but I think the above 30 crowd still makes a big enough group that even offending a section of them (say 30-40%) could still have a decent impact on the bottom line should that audience decide to take their things and leave.

That's what I think the tweet was probably more focused on and about than anything else more recently.

PS: Though personally, if they were to take action, more than words, I'd love it if they made more items on DMsguild PoD. For example, they have G1-3, D1-2, and Q available as PoD, but D3 is not. You know how awful that is??? Make more items PoD and available for the Old School Crowd and announce it as a focus I think would show rather than say...

Just saying...

PPS: For certain individuals in the thread disparaging those who play AD&D or TSR era RPGs....also, yes I'm an old Schooler (in that I play TSR era games) but I also play 5e. Don't think that just because we play AD&D we can't play anything newer or are married to just one game or edition. 5e is good as it is (though I have several mechanical options I've been asking for...for years...but I don't think the tweet had anything to do with that, or much of anything else except the recent furor in some Older gamer circles regarding the clown issue), so no need to cater more to Old School gamers there (unless you release Greyhawk, Mystara, Dragonlance, and some other worlds as sourcebooks).

More stuff on DMs guild would be nice though...keep on catering to the OSR groups there...and preferably speed up what is PoD.

 

[Oofta]

I responded to him that it definitely counts, and also that I looked forward to when he revives Greyhawk as a 5e setting.

He just clicked like on it without a denial.

Just sayin!

You heard it here first folks. Mistwell just confirmed without a doubt that Greyhawk is coming!!!

 

[GuyBoy]

You heard it here first folks. Mistwell just confirmed without a doubt that Greyhawk is coming!!!

I’ll see you in the Barrier Peaks!

 

[GuyBoy]

Or below Castle Greyhawk

 

[MGibster]

I don’t expect WotC or any other game company to cater to my needs. Either they’ll make a game I like or they won’t and I’ll buy something else. I skipped 4th edition but I had no hard feelings against Wizards.

I do find the disclaimers on their old products to be silly though I’m not offended. They’re silly because just about anything published 30+ years ago is going to have something in it we balk at today that was commonly accepted back then. I feel as though most gamers likely to purchase something like Oriental Adventures or Ravenloft I-6 know this.