D&D 5E Spelljammer Errata

[FitzTheRuke]

In looking back, I've found that racism was an ingrained feature of the game at the beginning.

Remember when, if you played an "unusual" character (like a half-orc, say) it was considered likely that you might get run out of town by human commoners with pitch-forks. I think this was meant to simulate the idea that small, medieval towns were superstitious, ignorant, and suspicious of strangers (whether historically accurate or not).

In addition, Dwarves hated Elves, Elves looked down on all non-elves, etc. Racism was everywhere (unless you made your own world "unusual" and didn't include those tropes).

I think Perkins, whose knowledge of old lore is top-notch (it's his job), tries to instill as much of the feeling of classic D&D as he can. I'm sure he's trying to avoid being insensitive, but it unfortunately can be so baked-in, some stuff must get past him.

I can see how it happens, but I do not mean to be making excuses for him. They need to pass the material through a sensitivity team. I think this one should have been obvious.

 

[Parmandur]

This is probably true for all of them. One thing about managing/editing a project, you've got a lot of contexts in which you are seeing everything, primarily from a perspective of being right down in the trenches doing the work. You may lose track of the longer distance views that the consumers will have. This is one of the reasons good software companies will have multiple levels of code review, unit testing, user experience testing, and so on. You've got various stages in which a broader perspective is injected into the process. And that's why a sensitivity reader looking at the whole enchilada could have caught this before it got out into the wild.

Absolutely true. Still, I hear some squeaking in the stairwell..

 

[Faolyn]

They have also issued an apology about the Hadozee

Statement on the Hadozee | Dungeons & Dragons

We wanted to acknowledge and own the inclusion of offensive material within our recent Spelljammer: Adventures in Space content. We failed you, our players and our fans, and we are truly sorry.

dnd.wizards.com

My friend who is planning on running Spelljammer has been ranting about how horrible and racist the hadozee were and had decided to not use them. If it was as bad as he says they were, I'm really surprised that nobody caught it before print.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

perkins seems less evil and more kinda ignorant no malice just unable to see problems correctly.

again, I don't care if it is malice or incompetence... I think we MAY* need new younger blood in there


*I said may, and I mean it, I'm not sure if I would sign such a petition but as it is talked about I am leaning toward maybe, to most likely

 

[Parmandur]

In looking back, I've found that racism was an ingrained feature of the game at the beginning.

Remember when, if you played an "unusual" character (like a half-orc, say) it was considered likely that you might get run out of town by human commoners with pitch-forks. I think this was meant to simulate the idea that small, medieval towns were superstitious, ignorant, and suspicious of strangers (whether historically accurate or not).

In addition, Dwarves hated Elves, Elves looked down on all non-elves, etc. Racism was everywhere (unless you made your own world "unusual" and didn't include those tropes).

I think Perkins, whose knowledge of old lore is top-notch (it's his job), tries to instill as much of the feeling of classic D&D as he can. I'm sure he's trying to avoid being insensitive, but it unfortunately can be so baked-in, some stuff must get past him.

I can see how it happens, but I do not mean to be making excuses for him. They need to pass the material through a sensitivity team. I think this one should have been obvious.

I don't think Perkins has anything against anyone. Every controversy in these books comes down to including an allusion to an older piece of fiction or trope, not some intentional dogwhistling. But this isn't coming up under the other book leads...

 

[Stormonu]

I am confused, what are you complaining about?

Apparently, because Hadozee have a simian look, it was felt necessary to include a statement "they evolved from smaller mammals" and "evolved wing-like flaps". D&D is full of races that come into the fantasy milleniu fully formed and developed without having to have "evolved" from some lesser creature.

Why did they feel compelled to pull in a subject that has real-world contention? They removed the other bits, why couldn't they remove the portions calling back to evolution. Just because of my faith, am I supposed to just gloss over it and ignore it?

And this is NOT something I am joking around with.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In looking back, I've found that racism was an ingrained feature of the game at the beginning.

yeah looking back at most things 50 years ago you will find things that were progressive for there time are often considered regressive or problematic by current standards.

I think Perkins, whose knowledge of old lore is top-notch (it's his job), tries to instill as much of the feeling of classic D&D as he can. I'm sure he's trying to avoid being insensitive, but it unfortunately can be so baked-in, some stuff must get past him.

and to be fair, I think I am pretty progressive and not just not racists but actively anti racist... but I missed it on my first read through until others were talking about it.

I can see how it happens, but I do not mean to be making excuses for him. They need to pass the material through a sensitivity team. I think this one should have been obvious.

 

[dave2008]

Apparently, because Hadozee have a simian look, it was felt necessary to include a statement "they evolved from smaller mammals" and "evolved wing-like flaps". D&D is full of races that come into the fantasy milleniu fully formed and developed without having to have "evolved" from some lesser creature.

Why did they feel compelled to pull in a subject that has real-world contention? They removed the other bits, why couldn't they remove the portions calling back to evolution. Just because of my faith, am I supposed to just gloss over it and ignore it?

And this is NOT something I am joking around with.

Why can't evolution and faith and gods coexist? Did I miss that memo? Or am I not understanding your argument?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I think I am pretty progressive and not just not racists but actively anti racist... but I missed it on my first read through until others were talking about it.

Before this all came up, I was enough concerned about the Hadozee that I flopped back-and-forth about including them in my Spelljammer game at all. (I really LIKE them myself, but was concerned that I might do something insensitive with them). I hadn't read their lore (still haven't), which I am sure would have put me off, if I had seen it. I was just worried about their LOOK.

The controversy didn't surprise me one bit.

Edit: Oh oh. I think I may be talking about the forbidden subject here. I am sorry in advance of moderation and will stop now. Oops.

 

[Faolyn]

Which is weird, because they've had sensitivity editors before, for books such as Ravenloft. I have no idea how this was allowed to pass muster, and I'm pretty sure they'll go over everything with a fine-toothed comb in the future.

Ravenloft was well-known to have problems (the Vistani) as well as having nearly all of their domains rooted in real-world places or issues. A sensitivity reader is very much necessary for that. WotC likely thought that Spelljammer was so fantastic in nature that it wouldn't have the same issues. Just dump the Aparusa, who weren't even remotely important anyway, make the elves not be fascists and the orcs not be Always Evil, and you're good to go.

Obviously, they were wrong about that, and I do hope that they always use a sensitivity reader in the future.