The problem with Evil races is not what you think

[Dire Bare]

Right, but Always Evil monsters elides the problem of potentially Evil monsters. The latter should be possible, but bad players make this problematic. The problem is bad players, not unreal Evil races, and that we really don't want to deal with bad players as fiercely as we should because they might be our friend or sibling. They need to go without question.

Hard disagree.

The idea that only "bad players" lean into the negative stereotypes embodied in our favorite fantasy races is hogwash, IMO.

It's systemic racism. The kind of racism you don't always realize you're engaging in until somebody points it out to you. Even if you are a "good player" . . . skilled, mature, tolerant, open-minded, and work hard not to be racist.

 

[Aging Bard]

Hard disagree.

The idea that only "bad players" lean into the negative stereotypes embodied in our favorite fantasy races is hogwash, IMO.

It's systemic racism. The kind of racism you don't always realize you're engaging in until somebody points it out to you. Even if you are a "good player" . . . skilled, mature, tolerant, open-minded, and work hard not to be racist.

No, that's exactly wrong. Systemic racism needs to be called out as wrong, not forgiven. If you don't realize it, you have a problem and are arguing for lack of agency. This is trying to forgive certain levels of racism as benign. No. All racists need to work at being non-racists.

 

[Cadence]

No, that's exactly wrong. Systemic racism needs to be called out as wrong, not forgiven. If you don't realize it, you have a problem and are arguing for lack of agency. This is trying to forgive certain levels of racism as benign. No. All racists need to work at being non-racists.

It doesn't feel like you read @Dire Bare 's post the same way I did...

 

[Aging Bard]

It doesn't feel like you read @Dire Bare 's post the same way I did...

Perhaps, but I know how to read, and I did read that post.

 

[Gradine]

Can't the problem also just be because it's boring, lazy worldbuilding?

 

[R_Chance]

You could create a brand new evil race, run past a dozen cultural consultants to ensure there is no unintentional points of comparison with any real world race or culture, and establish them as basically and inherently evil to use as unapologetic villains in the game...

And within 2 months you will have players wanting to play them.

And within 2 more they would be complaining that they shouldn't actually be evil.

The problem has nothing to do with racism, and everything to do with the contrary and perverse nature of humans in general and players in specific. The best way to get people to want something is to tell them they can't have it.

This is pretty much exactly what I thought on first consideration. Then...

Remember when Orcs were strictly "monsters"? Then came half Orcs which pretty much looked human and were playable. Different, but a hidden difference. Then the half Orcs looked more Orcish and were still playable. Now Orcs. There are several reasons for this beyond "forbidden fruit" (which is still a big one I think). The other reasons being: 1) challenging role playing, 2) the desire to have an excuse for evil actions, and one other more complex reason. The desire to play a marginalized character is number 3. This could be #1 of course, or the desire for a unique (relatively) character, or it could be a reflection of how the player feels about life for a number of reasons. Individual player motivations can be hard to judge though unless you know them well. It can be hard even then...

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

No, only bad players would make the problematic interpretation. Good players would see the problem and reject it. I assume players have agency and knowledge. If they lack these, I might cut them some slack, but only to a certain degree.

No, you're wrong. This is the "the offended people are choosing to be offended" BS claim that's been around as long as "I'm offended by this" claims have been. Whether or not the "I'm offended by this" claim is true, "you're choosing to be offended by this" is always an incorrect response. Always. You cannot be fake-offended/"choose to be offended". You can pretend to be offended. You can look for offensive things in something. However, telling someone that "you're not actually offended by this, and if you are, you're the racist" is wrong, especially when the people who are seeing the offense by something are the people that the language that is being used to describe that thing are parallels to language used to disparage their cultural/racial group in the past.

This is essentially the "Uno Reverse Card" of this issue. For as long as people have been raising concerns about this issue, people have also been saying "No u!" right back at them. And this isn't going to change until either of the following happens:

1. The people getting offended by the issue/raising awareness about the issue stop speaking about it.
2. The people who say "No, u!" start actually trying to be in the shoes of the people who are offended by the issue, and empathize with their offense.

Option 1 should not happen, because no one should have to be quiet about their pain just because others don't like admitting that their pain is real, and Option 2 can happen, but the people who act that way are almost always quickly replaced by other ignorant people that share the same viewpoints as they did.

 

[MGibster]

In a perfect world, we understand that games are not real, and anything we do is not real. WE have no such problems with chess, for example. But in an RPG, we embody a character that we act through. That character is not real, but the emotions we feel while playing that character are real. This is where the problems begin.

I don't really have any intense emotional feelings while playing D&D or other role playing games. At least not any more intense than those I have while bowling or playing a board game. I don't feel the same emotions my character does and in many situations what I feel will be completely different. For example, when my Rogue in Rise of the Runelords took an ogre's hook to the face and died instantly at the first hit I was laughing because it was hilariously awesome.

The problem comes in all other situations. I simply cannot trust when a player I do not know well wants to act out rape, racism, misogyny, or the like as anything but wish fulfillment. They may really be just role playing, but that requires trust, and trust takes time. To be frank, I do not think RPGs are the appropriate arena to act out wish fulfillment. That's what therapy is for, and I am very pro-therapy.

I would argue that the most popular RPG is an adolescent power fantasy and coincidentally a lot of fun. In my years of gaming, I don't think I've ever witnessed a player or DM act out a sexual assault in game. I don't doubt that it happens but I've never been worried when playing with new people.

And so we come to Evil races. Old cis-white dudes (which includes me!) need to be very clear that these are not racist or misogynist proxies, and it is NOT unreasonable to suppose this. Goodwill is not the default, it must be earned. That may be disappointing for those wanting to see good in most, but it is the truth that not everyone is good.

I think most of us have made it very clear that evil races aren't a proxy for racism. It's just that the other side either doesn't accept that argument or doesn't think it's relevant. (Which is fine, I'm not here to get into that particular argument again.) But you've got a lot going on in this post and I think I'm more interested in the emotional aspect of game play. Because I think we're pretty far apart on this.

 

[R_Chance]

Can't the problem also just be because it's boring, lazy worldbuilding?

Cut out the "boring" and "lazy" and you might be right. Could be right anyway But, it pretty much depends on the individual world. The last time I checked they are not all the same.

 

[MGibster]

Can't the problem also just be because it's boring, lazy worldbuilding?

I think there are competing philosophies behind world building. Personally, I view a game world's primary purpose as being a place where PCs can have interesting adventures. There are a whole swath of things I never think about because it doesn't lead to interesting adventures. Do I really care what that this kingdom's primary export is wheat or how their economy really works? Only if it has an impact on the adventure. But other people love creating a living breathing world that seems real filling it with details that may or may not someday become relevant to game play. Very often those worlds are more fun to read. Probably more fun to make too.