D&D (2024) The future of edition changes and revisions

[Remathilis]

Yeah, contradicting material within the edition is a bit of a bigger deal. It makes it harder to compartmentalize (which is my primary way of dealing with changes in the game I don't care for, and which has been increasingly more difficult in the last few years). Of course, being surrounded online by people who apparently love everything WotC's doing doesn't make it any easier.

I think the biggest thing was there was never the outside pressure to change the lore. You can almost feel the brakes slammed on after the famous "orcs and drow" column. What would be acceptable in 2016 was not in 2020. I think they had to find a way to change directions while speeding along the highway at full speed.

Lots of legacy media has been facing this problem. Even Paizo has been tackling this. Everyone is finding where the path will go next. Will mistakes be made? Absolutely.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What would be acceptable in 2016 was not in 2020.

I have to say I think the issue was that a lot of the stuff in Volo's wasn't acceptable in 2016. But as D&D had a much smaller audience, and even as it grew, relatively few people actually read the fluff sections of a DM-only book, few people even noted how wildly creepy the stuff on Orcs was. I think the idea that society changed or standards changed over those 4 year is misguided. What happened is that something which was already off gradually percolated up to the surface and became obviously wrong.

As supporting evidence I'd present the Vistani in 4E vs. the Vistani in early 5E. In 4E, the Vistani were significantly re-jigged to attempt to remove problematic elements. 100% successful? No. But like 80%. Then 5E just straight-up reverted to 2E on this. It's not that standards changed. It's that attention wasn't paid. The fairly-quick but equally quickly dismissed backlash against 5E's portrayal of Vistani kind of shows that.

5E was an apology edition, and part of that "apology" was taking the lore back to some old-skool places without really thinking through The Implications. I haven't read the 2E Orc description in the MM but I'm guessing it's less full of racist dogwhistles than 5E's one is, not more. Not intentionally, sure, but it shows an issue.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think the biggest thing was there was never the outside pressure to change the lore. You can almost feel the brakes slammed on after the famous "orcs and drow" column. What would be acceptable in 2016 was not in 2020. I think they had to find a way to change directions while speeding along the highway at full speed.

Lots of legacy media has been facing this problem. Even Paizo has been tackling this. Everyone is finding where the path will go next. Will mistakes be made? Absolutely.

Yeah, that's it right there. I don't care for this new pressure at all, and it's making me inclined to dig in my heels.

 

[Remathilis]

I have to say I think the issue was that a lot of the stuff in Volo's wasn't acceptable in 2016. But as D&D had a much smaller audience, and even as it grew, relatively few people actually read the fluff sections of a DM-only book, few people even noted how wildly creepy the stuff on Orcs was. I think the idea that society changed or standards changed over those 4 year is misguided. What happened is that something which was already off gradually percolated up to the surface and became obviously wrong.

I think perhaps I should have said "what they could get away with".

 

[Parmandur]

I have to say I think the issue was that a lot of the stuff in Volo's wasn't acceptable in 2016. But as D&D had a much smaller audience, and even as it grew, relatively few people actually read the fluff sections of a DM-only book, few people even noted how wildly creepy the stuff on Orcs was. I think the idea that society changed or standards changed over those 4 year is misguided. What happened is that something which was already off gradually percolated up to the surface and became obviously wrong.

As supporting evidence I'd present the Vistani in 4E vs. the Vistani in early 5E. In 4E, the Vistani were significantly re-jigged to attempt to remove problematic elements. 100% successful? No. But like 80%. Then 5E just straight-up reverted to 2E on this. It's not that standards changed. It's that attention wasn't paid. The fairly-quick but equally quickly dismissed backlash against 5E's portrayal of Vistani kind of shows that.

There have been pretty significant cultural shifts in the U.S. since 2016, and it's not just game rules.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I have to say I think the issue was that a lot of the stuff in Volo's wasn't acceptable in 2016. But as D&D had a much smaller audience, and even as it grew, relatively few people actually read the fluff sections of a DM-only book, few people even noted how wildly creepy the stuff on Orcs was. I think the idea that society changed or standards changed over those 4 year is misguided. What happened is that something which was already off gradually percolated up to the surface and became obviously wrong.

I don't think there was anything "gradual" about how this issue was presented publicly, and WotC's profit-driven refusal to make a clean break with a new edition is making it much harder to adjust than it otherwise would have been.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I have to say I think the issue was that a lot of the stuff in Volo's wasn't acceptable in 2016. But as D&D had a much smaller audience, and even as it grew, relatively few people actually read the fluff sections of a DM-only book, few people even noted how wildly creepy the stuff on Orcs was. I think the idea that society changed or standards changed over those 4 year is misguided. What happened is that something which was already off gradually percolated up to the surface and became obviously wrong.

As supporting evidence I'd present the Vistani in 4E vs. the Vistani in early 5E. In 4E, the Vistani were significantly re-jigged to attempt to remove problematic elements. 100% successful? No. But like 80%. Then 5E just straight-up reverted to 2E on this. It's not that standards changed. It's that attention wasn't paid. The fairly-quick but equally quickly dismissed backlash against 5E's portrayal of Vistani kind of shows that.

5E was an apology edition, and part of that "apology" was taking the lore back to some old-skool places without really thinking through The Implications. I haven't read the 2E Orc description in the MM but I'm guessing it's less full of racist dogwhistles than 5E's one is, not more. Not intentionally, sure, but it shows an issue.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't an accident either. These portrayals were very much about 'winning back' fans of earlier editions who they thought really liked this sort of thing.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There have been pretty significant cultural shifts in the U.S. since 2016, and it's not just game rules.

Sure, but seem my point re: Vistani. It already wasn't okay. People knew already that it wasn't okay. WotC decided "eh who cares" to that. The person who wrote the VGTM stuff on Orcs probably didn't realize how racist what he was writing was, probably didn't realize how perfectly it lined up with some horrific portrayals of certain races, but he definitely had to realize he was taking Orcs back to an older place, and unless he was a truly clueless numpty realized that what he was writing at least lined up with some RL racism.

WotC's profit-driven refusal to make a clean break with a new edition is making it much harder to adjust than it otherwise would have been.

No question that has been a problem, agree completely. I'm not saying they had to do a "new edition" on the spot when they realized this stuff wasn't going to fly but I don't think it's any accident Volos is one of the books going OOP, no doubt taking all that text with it forever.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't an accident either. These portrayals were very much about 'winning back' fans of earlier editions who they thought really liked this sort of thing.

Oh definitely not an accident, yeah. They were looking for old-school portrayals, and er... maybe they dug a little too deep and too greedily in their quest for them.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure, but seem my point re: Vistani. It already wasn't okay. People knew already that it wasn't okay. WotC decided "eh who cares" to that. The person who wrote the VGTM stuff on Orcs probably didn't realize how racist what he was writing was, probably didn't realize how perfectly it lined up with some horrific portrayals of certain races, but he definitely had to realize he was taking Orcs back to an older place, and unless he was a truly clueless numpty realized that what he was writing at least lined up with some RL racism.

Objectively, yes, but that level of background racism was more normal 7 years ago, not thwt we've made huge strides or anything, but...things have changed. People have changed. Inch by inch.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Oh definitely not an accident, yeah. They were looking for old-school portrayals, and er... maybe they dug a little too deep and too greedily in their quest for them.

That's the part I don't think was an accident. They heard 'I want a race it's okay to murder just like back in the day', so they used the traditional ways you make a race of people 'okay' to murder.

It's not like they weren't aware of the 40 year argument over this and just bumbled into it like Laurel and Hardy into a mummy. They saw what certain other games that appealed to their then intended target treated this, figured they weren't enough in the limelight to get much blowback and said 'yes. I want that.'.

Then pop culture said 'Hey, remember D&D? That's nostalgic and profitable. Let's all look in that direction now!' and they got caught putting terrible things in their books.