D&D 5E Thoughts on this article about Black Culture & the D&D team dropping the ball?

[Alexemplar]

I could very easily state the reverse, that there's no shortage of folks that will read into something, know why it's that way, and still call racist when it doesn't affect their lives at all. Can I see where the POC in the article could say that WoTC didn't care about him or her as a player because of the depiction of the Chult. Yes, I can see where someone might interpret it that way. But, it doesn't affect him or her at all. Just change it in your game.

The only black RPGs that exist for D&D inspired systems that I can recall are Nyambe and Spears of the Dawn. If there are more please tell me because I'm really starved for content in that regard. So the fact that the only "Africa" in Forgotten Realms is Chult or Mwangi Expanse in Pathfinder does kind of affect the article writer, the blogger they talked to, and people like me. It makes us buy competitor's products/homebrew. It makes us not want to go with particular campaign settings.

And if D&D does want us as players, does recognize the sad/origins of Chult and still decides that it's no big deal, well then we'll complain about it while asking for more.

And I'm not dragging the real world phenomena of how black people get judged according to their portrayal in various forms of media. I know it's hard for people to understand. I didn't get it myself until I actually experienced it.

The effort used to write that article would have been better spent volunteering to right real social injustices or even writing a congressman. As it is, it's intentional clickbait designed to draw traffic to a website.

You don't know anything about her. That's pretty presumptuous. Also, "If you don't write you congressman, you can't publicly comment on any perceived accidental faux paux related to racist traditions" is very demanding.

To be completely honest though, the real story here is that WoTC couldn't find a single writer of african background to contribute on the setting. That's really lame and to me entirely insensitive. Take a week to think about who is writing your content and maybe you avoid this problem altogether.

Nobody in the article cared to ask about who worked on it until after they read the adventure and noticed the stuff they took issue with. If they were concerned only with complaining about the racial makeup of the WotC staff, they could have done that without ever pointing to ToA.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Even then. if you want to avoid 1 on 1 comparisons, it'd probably be a good idea to make a character *inspired* by a Shaka-era Zulu warrior as one might exist in a fantastic world like D&D opposed to trying to recreate a historical one.

When I played an African-themed Ranger back in 2Ed, I used some elements of Zulu and Masai culture to do so, plus a bit of this & that. I had him using a particular south-central African variant of the assegai that was 6' long- 3' of handle, and a 3', longsword-like blade- from a book of old weapons. His armor epwas cured lion hide...with the head attached, stretched over a helm.

He was "cursed", however- several combats vs his Favored Enemies, I didn't roll higher than a 7...

 

[MoonSong]

I'm really torn on this, I personally have experienced what it's like to feel excluded by lazy stereotyping. In an incident that happened a couple of years back. It wasn't nice, it made me want quit this forum and leave the hobby. And well it really sucks when the content producers just gloss over the nuance and default to unsensitive stereotypes, but what was worse was being ignored and unheard. The apologism thrown around to justify it didn't help either.

Now, on the other hand I don't know about this specific piece of writing, I get the feeling, I've experienced it and it sucks. But at the same time I'm not entirely sold on this "POC" thing, who is a POC? What is the point of this label? I know I might sound silly, because it is all obvious isn't it? Well, it only is if you conflate race with ethnicity. I couldn't properly answer if I myself count as white or POC. I'm not American, nor of pure Caucasian descent and I belong to a different ethnicity altogether, but I would say I'm more on the melanin-challenged side of the population, so am I white or POC?. More so, is it really that all-encompassing? Does a higher-middle-class second-generation Nigerian-American and published author with an HBO deal have a more in common with a poor Mexican afrodescendant teenager with no schooling than that youth could have with another poor Mexican teenager with no schooling that grew in the same community just because both of them are "black"?

 

[Kobold Boots]

You don't know anything about her. That's pretty presumptuous. Also, "If you don't write you congressman, you can't publicly comment on any perceived accidental faux paux related to racist traditions" is very demanding.

Alright, now you're just being difficult. Otherwise I have no hope for you.

1. The author is a paid reporter whose job it is to drive traffic to kotaku.com. Link
2. Kotaku.com is a revenue based website that gets its money from advertisers and click-based traffic.
3. Kotaku was owned by Gawker, a company that got shut down for perpetuating slander. It's now owned by Univision.
4. Univision is actively pro-diversity (good thing) and has been pushing an agenda of "look at the racism" since the Trump election. (don't know if this is bad or not. Taken too far it could be, like most things.)

None of these four statements is hearsay or inaccurate. So when I say that the article is known clickbait, I'm likely right or it wouldn't be on the site to begin with. Motive + Money = likely. I'll apologize for having an opinion about something I looked in to first.

Last, I never said you had to write a congressman. I said the time may have been better spent doing so or actually helping people.

Now beyond this and on to your other point.

Nobody in the article cared to ask about who worked on it until after they read the adventure and noticed the stuff they took issue with. If they were concerned only with complaining about the racial makeup of the WotC staff, they could have done that without ever pointing to ToA.

My original point was on the other side of the matter and was actually anti-WoTC it just doesn't look like you read it the way I wrote it. I don't care that they brought up the racial makeup of the staff writing the work. It actually makes sense. What I was saying was that it would have made sense had WoTC brought in some writers of the appropriate heritage to check for cultural sensitivity and appropriate content before they started the project.

I'm going to ask you to know me as someone who can defend both sides of an argument and read my stuff before you start responding.. please. Thank you.

KB

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

...so am I white or POC?

Part of why the USA race situation is SO UNBELIEVABLY MESSED UP is the answer to this question: it depends.

The classic KKK rule would be "One Drop". That is, you're a PoC (to use a term they wouldn't) if you have one drop of nonwhite ancestry. (Fun fact: many of them are trying out those genetic ancestry services these days, and are NOT liking the results.)

OTOH, in certain circumstances, a man as black as night could go into "Whites Only" areas...if he were an African. The doublethink here being that Africans had their own countries, and thus, were different from and superior to those who lived in the USA.

Similarly, the same "it depends" answer could be given about your last question. There are places where the racists don't give a damn if you're black. Blacks are OK...BUT if you're Hispanic or Native American, there's going to be trouble.

"Racism: It simply isn't rational."™

 

[Alexemplar]

Alright, now you're just being difficult. Otherwise I have no hope for you.

1. The author is a paid reporter whose job it is to drive traffic to kotaku.com. Link
2. Kotaku.com is a revenue based website that gets its money from advertisers and click-based traffic.
3. Kotaku was owned by Gawker, a company that got shut down for perpetuating slander. It's now owned by Univision.
4. Univision is actively pro-diversity (good thing) and has been pushing an agenda of "look at the racism" since the Trump election. (don't know if this is bad or not. Taken too far it could be, like most things.)

None of these four statements is hearsay or inaccurate. So when I say that the article is known clickbait, I'm likely right or it wouldn't be on the site to begin with. Motive + Money = likely. I'll apologize for having an opinion about something I looked in to first.

The author has a long hisotry of writing about gaming/anime/nerd stuff, occasionally on social issues, and occasionally the intersection between the two for years before she started writing for Kotaku/Gawker or Trump announced his candidacy for president. You can find a list of her articles on her website.

Last, I never said you had to write a congressman. I said the time may have been better spent doing so or actually helping people.

By suggesting that she should write her congressman instead of writing stuff critical of WotC, you're suggesting that it's some kind of prerequisite or else you're wasting your time/just complaining for complaining's sake or something. Who is to say someone hasn't written their congressman when they aren't criticising WotC?

Now beyond this and on to your other point.



My original point was on the other side of the matter and was actually anti-WoTC it just doesn't look like you read it the way I wrote it. I don't care that they brought up the racial makeup of the staff writing the work. It actually makes sense. What I was saying was that it would have made sense had WoTC brought in some writers of the appropriate heritage to check for cultural sensitivity and appropriate content before they started the project.

I'm going to ask you to know me as someone who can defend both sides of an argument and read my stuff before you start responding.. please. Thank you.

KB

I totally misread that part. My mistake and apologies.

 

[Kobold Boots]

I totally misread that part. My mistake and apologies.

Accepted and thank you. For what it's worth, the conversation is a good one and I don't mind the back and forth. I just want to make sure we understand each other and my responsibility is to make sure I don't offend anyone or leave you with the wrong impression of what I'm about.

The author has a long hisotry of writing about gaming/anime/nerd stuff, occasionally on social issues, and occasionally the intersection between the two for years before she started writing for Kotaku/Gawker or Trump announced his candidacy for president. You can find a list of her articles on her website.

Yes, she's been working for either Kotaku or Vice for about three or four years from what I saw. I'm not saying that she has an agenda. I'm saying that her company certainly does and that agenda makes anything that comes off of her desk suspect to questioning about intent. Not questioning it is more dangerous than simply trusting her but whether or not anyone does has more to do with where their starting position is to begin with.

I don't know a journalist anywhere that would disagree with fact checking or being suspicious. It's part of the profession's DNA.

By suggesting that she should write her congressman instead of writing stuff critical of WotC, you're suggesting that it's some kind of prerequisite or else you're wasting your time/just complaining for complaining's sake or something. Who is to say someone hasn't written their congressman when they aren't criticising WotC?

I get where you're coming from but we don't live in a waterfall world where one thing necessarily has to be a prerequisite for another.

My meaning was "if the whole point of the article is to be clickbait to drive some traffic and earn Kotaku some money while meeting an article quota, then the time would have been better spent helping people or even writing a congressman".

Personally, and in my opinion writing a congressman is largely useless but there's never going to be a racial paradigm shift in this country based on one article on an obscure gamer news site... so the only thing it is, is clickbait.

Sorry that I may be continuing to annoy you Alex.

Be well.
KB

 

[Saeviomagy]

I don't think they dropped a new ball. I think they just continued to drop an existing one.

 

[Lychee of the Exch.]

Since you feel so strongly about it...Exactly what in the article did you disagree with?

Well, the author of the article does actually a fair job of summarizing the original Chult of the 80s, and then the Chult of 1993- which do not seem particularly inspired, and a bit cliched.

Then she shows how ToA rewrites the setting in something much more interesting, with lavish illustrations, evocating an african-inspired setting which breathes and beckons adventure (it does do that for me).

But she then writes
"Here’s the rub: While many players I talked to enjoyed how the history and political structures of Chult were expanded in Tomb of Annihilation (and enjoyed the adventure’s plot generally), they were still unimpressed by its execution."

They enjoyed it but were unimpressed by its execution. So, it's a matter of taste. All good. I think I'll enjoy it.

Then the author of the article quotes various black persons who nitpick on the work of the authors.

1.
“Their speaking patterns are described right down to having clicks. This creates a problem if white gamers were wanting to do an accent and do serious clicks and clucks based on what they’ve seen on TV about African languages.

I'm note sure what the problem is here.

2.
"Dace noted that Africa has upwards of 2,000 languages and only three language groups use clicks. It is one of the most stereotyped aspects of Africa.” Dace suggested using Swahili as another point of inspiration."

Click languages appear as very exotic to me, and I'm glad ToA authors make them prominent in their work. I like exotic things in my fantasy. But according to Dace, language clicks are a stereotyped portrayal of Africa... And ? Stereotypes are inherently bad ? When I think about (fantasy) Japan, I think about samourai and katanas (among other things). Is that bad too ?

3.
"Light, the writer from BlackNerdProblems, told me that, “To me, it did not feel offensive. It felt lazy.” She wished that Wizards of the Coast innovated more instead of falling back on well-trodden tropes about what a unified “African” culture would look like."

I can understand the need for innovation. Then, ToA feels innovative to me. I guess that's a matter of opinion. Perhaps the next work of WoTC with an african theme will please Light more. In the meantime, she could try her hand at writing a RPG supplement the size of ToA to grasp what an exercise in laziness it is (This last sentence is sarcastic).

4.
Graeme Barber, as quoted by the author the article, says: "“It’s not unfair or hostile to say that the genre of fantasy is riddled with racism."

G. Barber and I seem to have very different notions of what racism is (although I can only guess at his definition of racism).

To me, racism is the view of the human species as separated into discrete biological groups, (the black man, the red man, the white man, and/or the Jew, the Aryan, etc.), with precise characteristics, and then the classification of these groups in an hierarchical structure (the white man is more X than the black man ; the black man is more Y than the red man).

Racism - which is an outdated, obsolete and ultimately nonsensical world view - relies on stereotypes to constitute its various groups, but stereotypes are not inherently racist. it seems to me that Mr Barber too readily conflates these 2 notions of racism and stereotype.

Broadly speaking, G. Barber's worldview seems to me evocative of the victimization (the process of making a victim of oneself in order to achieve some symbolic or social gains) I spoke of in my first post.

To summarize what I think:
WoTC produced ToA with the ambition of making an original book with a new and broader take on an african-like fantasy place, which could appeal to people of different backgrounds (afro-americans among them), and an author from the Kotaku website wrote an article about it which suggests in a passive-agressive way that the authors of ToA are lazy and/or racist.

No good deed goes unpunished.

 

[Alexemplar]

Yes, she's been working for either Kotaku or Vice for about three or four years from what I saw. I'm not saying that she has an agenda. I'm saying that her company certainly does and that agenda makes anything that comes off of her desk suspect to questioning about intent. Not questioning it is more dangerous than simply trusting her but whether or not anyone does has more to do with where their starting position is to begin with.

I was pretty sure she didn't have an agenda- especially not a recent one- because I've been making, voicing, and hearing the exact same complaint when it comes to D&D and fantasy gaming in general for almost as long as I've been playing.

My meaning was "if the whole point of the article is to be clickbait to drive some traffic and earn Kotaku some money while meeting an article quota, then the time would have been better spent helping people or even writing a congressman".

Personally, and in my opinion writing a congressman is largely useless but there's never going to be a racial paradigm shift in this country based on one article on an obscure gamer news site... so the only thing it is, is clickbait.

With the implication being that she doesn't do the latter because she's so busy doing the former. I mean, we could always be doing something else in addition to complaining. Who's to say we aren't? And if you don't believe writing your congressman is a better way to spend time, why suggest it?

In any case, I don't think the aim of the article was to be the singular force that creates a radical paradigm shift. It's part of an ongoing conversation and issue that she (and others, including myself) have been making for some time. However, voicing concerns publicly (and voicing enough of them, and voicing them often enough, and backing them up when they're challenged) and pushing for positive representations in media absolutely does result in paradigm shifts. Her single article won't change the world. Neither will my single post. It's not about changing the world with a single post. She just happens to get paid for her writing while I have to do mine in my time off.

And sometimes things do change a bit...

Not too long ago, I mentioned Forbes' article in 2012 talking about how- adjusted for inflation- former Mali Empire ruler Mansa Musa was the richest man to have ever lived. it spread around various news and social media feeds. Google searches related to him immediately spiked and have been on an upward trend ever since. I certainly don't think raising awareness about Mansa Musa and the Mali Empire in general is what Forbes set out to do. I think thought people would be really surprised to read how some African guy they've never heard of was apparently richer than Steve Jobs and clicked to learn more. Nevertheless, it had a generally positive effect and did raise awareness that pre-colonial Africa had more than they might have thought, if only a little.

People in the US get a lot of their news and impressions about stuff- especially about Africa- from the games they play, the internet articles they read, and the stuff they watch. Precolonial sub-Saharan Africa is not something they really cover in US schools or a topic that many people devote independent research to. There's very little out there to challenge the impressions they get from the media or give them the vaguest idea of what more could exist. That's why it needs to be called out- and not just academically but through the same channels by which the misconceptions were (and still are) propagated.

Sorry that I may be continuing to annoy you Alex.

Be well.
KB

I don't know if I communicate it well, but these discussions don't bother me too much. I have them all the time and have been having them with friends, family, and people on the internet for over a decade now and I know that they can be difficult. I think they're worth having, though. Nothing ever got fixed by half of everyone sitting around unaware of it while the other half saw it but never said anything out of fear not immediately fixing it.