D&D (2024) "The Future of D&D" (New Core Books in 2024!)

Charlaquin · Sep 30, 2021

Micah Sweet said:
I care about the topic quite a bit. I also feel these concerns are leading to a dearth of fiction, where only certain people are allowed to tell certain stories, and you're a monster if you're not ashamed of your childhood favorites.

And I wasn’t addressing you. If you feel strongly about the subject, by all means, say your piece on it; that’s how discussions happen. But that’s not what Filthy Lucre was doing. They came in to proudly announce how little they care about what was being discussed, which is… just kinda pointless?

Scribe · Sep 30, 2021

Micah Sweet said:
..and you're a monster if you're not ashamed of your childhood favorites.

I wouldnt go so far.

There are plenty of things that have not aged well, if we go back to re-read or watch those old movies we may have enjoyed when we were younger.

It doesnt mean we need to be ashamed about it, only that sometimes things change and what was once acceptable, is no longer seen in the same way.

Sometimes these things are good, sometimes its an overreaction that leads to readjustment, I still have good memories regarding original Star Wars, Dragonlance, and LotR experiences, and D&D as well, even if there are things people will say are wrong about them today.

squibbles · Sep 30, 2021

Filthy Lucre said:
If you solved this problem by saying "Ok, D&D is specifically only going to represent European myth/fantasy" you'd then catch flak for NOT including other cultures. Exclude them -> You're racist; Include them -> you're racist.

D&D isn't really European fantasy, it borrows broadly and has lots of weird conventions built in; its earliest iterations incorporate creatures of myth from all over, and the sword and sorcery, science fantasy, and wild west frontier influences are a lot more American than mythic European. Its a melange that lots of things from lots of different national contexts already fit in. So, imo, there's no need to assert that first premise.

To your second premise, I'm not convinced that anyone is asking for D&D to include class or subclass options for specific warrior traditions (or mystical or mythic or whatever) as a means of representation, that's usually more about artwork or setting fluff. Calls for samurai or shaman to be in the game are usually in the vein of: "they're cool", "I liked them in edition ABC", or "I like XYZ fantasy mileiu, give me mechanics to play it please"--at least as far as I can tell.

Also, I amended the post which you quoted with the answer @Marandahir gave earlier in the thread--I think it's a good one. Writing subclasses with broad themes, that fit a range of concepts which are not obviously specifically European, is probably enough that it lets people play what they want.

And to your conclusion, its easy to feel like a lot of harsh and uncharitable criticisms are being made of D&D and other media, and like things are being demanded instead of requested. That's fair, the 21st century is contentious. But, you know, being harsh and uncharitable in return only raises the temperature in the room, and no one is persuaded.

squibbles · Sep 30, 2021

Micah Sweet said:
I care about the topic quite a bit. I also feel these concerns are leading to a dearth of fiction, where only certain people are allowed to tell certain stories, and you're a monster if you're not ashamed of your childhood favorites.

I'm not even close to finishing everything that's in Appendix N yet... there's just so much fiction to read.

But I agree with you in principle, people should get to write what they want to write and enjoy what they want to enjoy without being pilloried--though it would be best if they didn't do so uncritically.

LuisCarlos17f · Sep 30, 2021

I suggest to keep the concept or archetype of shaman for a future class with a different game subsystem, for example the reboot of the pact binder, or the incarnum totemist. The martial adepts (Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords) should return, and they are perfect for settings with a wuxia touch, and not only Kara-Tur or Kamigawa.

I imagine the swashbuckler class like a light-armor martial adept (class with (ki) martial maneuvers).

Shaman, cavalier/knight, gladiator, samurai and ninja should be classes, not only subclasses, or at least the Athasian gladiator should be an "archetype", a fighter with an optional list of class features.

Dannyalcatraz · Sep 30, 2021

Filthy Lucre said:
In our current culture, you'll never win the "please everyone" battle since people have a vested interest in being offended. It's a waste of effort. People say "be respectful" but they never really give explicit/actionable/objective methods of achieving that.

ALSO... I don't believe that "exclusionary" is always bad in every incident. If it is, do you consider Motherlands to be exclusionary? Are you saying that every game has to cater to every conceivable ethnicity? sexuality? political orientation? This entire argument is so ham-fisted.

Mod Note:

For this and other anti-inclusive posts in this thread, Filthy Lucre has earned a warning point and a threadban.

Don‘t emulate this behavior.

Dannyalcatraz · Sep 30, 2021

Micah Sweet said:
I care about the topic quite a bit. I also feel these concerns are leading to a dearth of fiction, where only certain people are allowed to tell certain stories, and you're a monster if you're not ashamed of your childhood favorites.

Mod Note:

Traveling further down Filthy Lucre’s chosen path will be rewarded with similar reactions from the moderation staff. Consider this before continuing to post in this thread.

Remathilis · Sep 30, 2021

Dire Bare said:
Terms like knight, paladin, and ranger are equally culturally specific to Europe . . . . but D&D is a game that springs from European myth, folklore, and literature. How we incorporate elements from other cultural regions deserves more mindfulness than the community has traditionally given in the past.

Maybe that's the problem: D&D is too European.

D&D subclasses are a hodge podge generic names (path of the beast, circle of the moon) and specific (assassin, necromancer). A few generic names (way of shadow, college of war) suggest historical concepts (ninja, skalds) but aren't tied to just that one culture. It doesn't seem odd for either of those subclasses to exist in other cultures, save for the oddness of thier base calls l class (monk, bard) existing.

An ideal solution, if we're serious about removing offensive stereotypes in class naming, would be to use that descriptive method of naming classes and subs rather than using classical names. That would mean at the very least changing some sub names (samurai to oathbound for example), with perhaps reworking of the druid, monk paladin and bard to make them work for multiple different types of characters less tied to a certain cultural archetype.

Then, you could have a duelist rogue or an oathsworn fighter without the cultural baggage of a swashbuckler or samurai baked in.

Marandahir · Sep 30, 2021

Micah Sweet said:
I care about the topic quite a bit. I also feel these concerns are leading to a dearth of fiction, where only certain people are allowed to tell certain stories, and you're a monster if you're not ashamed of your childhood favorites.

I’m sorry if I gave that impression with my comments above. Male-identifying authors can write female characters, and vice versa. LGBTQ authors can write straight cisgendered characters. Japanese authors can write European ones and White-Americans can write Subsaharan African mythological tales, too.

There are many examples of sensitive nuanced stories written by people without personal experience of the subject matter. And Fantasy itself is a genre that embraces this because much of the subject matter is inherently unknowable.

But there’s also a LOT of insensitive stories written from outsider perspectives, and they often dominate perceptions of their subject matter in the eyes of the target audience, especially when these stories are written by people with cultural, racial, gender, sexual, or economic privilege within the society of the target audience.

D&D has long occupied the latter in what material is published officially by WotC, by virtue of the brand originating at tables of white male American gamers. That doesn’t mean they haven’t made strives to be more inclusive and celebratory! 5e is the most inclusive and celebratory edition yet. But the work never ends. There’s always more we can do.

I started this subthread because I believe that a revision of 5e in 2024 is an optimal chance to bring the values now espoused in books like Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything into the core rulebooks. WotC have said as much that that’s what they want to do. I also think they have a chance to go a step farther. By the time we get to 2024, it’ll have been more than 4 years since writing on Tasha and Curse of Strahd Revamped completed. A lot can happen in those years. A lot has happened, already.

I suggested that “Samurai” could become a core rules option but under a new name, to both allow continuity of character concept and tweaking of the Fighter to be more like what the designers have said they wish it was in hindsight. I recognise that the republishing of Xanathar’s Guide in next year’s gift set makes that less likely, but I still think it’s worthwhile.

doctorbadwolf · Sep 30, 2021

Dire Bare said:
Good. I'm usually in tune with your posts, but you came across as dismissive of the idea to me. Glad I did misinterpret.

Asian-Americans are, of course, hardly a monolith all living the same experience. Some think having the samurai as a discrete option is a great idea, others find it extremely problematic, others don't even register it as an issue. Asian-Asians come from a completely different lived experience.

But increasingly, more and more voices are asking folks to recognize the institutional bias Western culture has to orientalize (exoticize) Asian tropes like the monk or samurai. It's a difficult and fraught discussion, and too many Western gamers would rather dismiss the issue, which of course, is part of the problem.

Terms like knight, paladin, and ranger are equally culturally specific to Europe . . . . but D&D is a game that springs from European myth, folklore, and literature. How we incorporate elements from other cultural regions deserves more mindfulness than the community has traditionally given in the past.

And . . . . I'll step down from my soapbox now.

I agree with most of this. For sure. Fact is, D&D needs more diverse creators on the primary team.

Remathilis said:
Maybe that's the problem: D&D is too European.

D&D subclasses are a hodge podge generic names (path of the beast, circle of the moon) and specific (assassin, necromancer). A few generic names (way of shadow, college of war) suggest historical concepts (ninja, skalds) but aren't tied to just that one culture. It doesn't seem odd for either of those subclasses to exist in other cultures, save for the oddness of thier base calls l class (monk, bard) existing.

An ideal solution, if we're serious about removing offensive stereotypes in class naming, would be to use that descriptive method of naming classes and subs rather than using classical names. That would mean at the very least changing some sub names (samurai to oathbound for example), with perhaps reworking of the druid, monk paladin and bard to make them work for multiple different types of characters less tied to a certain cultural archetype.

Then, you could have a duelist rogue or an oathsworn fighter without the cultural baggage of a swashbuckler or samurai baked in.

I really think that cultural baggage should be embraced, not shied away from. It is worth the effort to do so with care and intentionality.

I do think the Monk is a bad name unless the class were to consume the cleric, and basically become a different class. If the class should stay fundamentally a “warrior powered by discipline and esoteric/mystical wisdom” then it should drop its hyper-focus on unarmed and Unarmored combat, and get a name change, and broaden out its cultural inspiration quite a bit.

Mystic, esoteric, warrior orders, are a damn near universal thing. Every region of the world has them. The East Asian Shoalin, Sohei, Samurai bushi absolutely, but also the various Muslim Dervish orders (carefully, bc western fantasy has not been careful here in the past, and hasn’t done well as a result. Saladin Ahmed has a great treatment of a dervish order in his novels), the Irish Fianna, and many others I don’t know enough about to speak on. Hell, even the Hermetic Alchemy inspired sword masters of the Renaissance, especially Thibault and the Spanish Circle, fit here.