D&D General Two underlying truths: D&D heritage and inclusivity

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Okay. Let's return to the topic (sorry if I misunderstood someone). I stand by my point that the Satanic Panic is different from this situation.

The fact of the matter is, if someone says that they're hurt by something, you shouldn't ask questions, you immediately stop doing that thing. If people are complaining that they're offended by orcs or vistani, you change their depiction. As a DM, if someone says that they're offended by something or it makes them uncomfortable, you stop doing that. You change it to not be offensive, and apologize. That's what WotC was doing. Heritage and Inclusivity.

The Satanic Panic wasn't about either of these, but this is. This is about being inclusive.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I probably shouldn't step into this one, but there's a logical inconsistency that should be pointed out--that may be at the heart of what Maxperson is trying to express, and where the impasse lies. I can't speak for Max, but I don't think the issue is what it or is not worthy of being offended by, but suggesting that if we're going to respect one person's right to be offended, why not respect another's, even if we disagree on whether or not it is inherently offensive or offensive to us.

Now I personally think the Satanic Panic was absurd. I think the orc thing is over the top and misguided, but not (as) absurd. Meaning, I get it, I just think it is misguided and based upon a false equivalency. The Vistani is actually directly based upon a real group, and thus warrants more of a examination. But I don't want to rehash all that again, just putting my cards on the table.

But isn't the logic behind, "offense is real, even if unintentional or misguided," that we respect and don't rationalize what they're offended by, even if we see it differently? Isn't taking offense a subjective thing, based upon a subjective interpretation, so why not respect everyone's sense of being offended, regardless of what it is based on?

Again, understand that I am not defending the Satanic Panic and think that it was silly (to put it charitably). But you're drawing a clear line between two categories, and saying that one isn't worthy of offense and should be disregarded, while the other is -- based upon your own values. Whether or not I agree with you is beside the point, which is that you are choosing what others should or should not be offended by, which is exactly the same complaint waged against those who don't think orcs are offensive, and "should not have offended anyone."

Page 19-20. They have begun harassing townsfolk and other visitors demanding money and wine and threatening to put hexes on anyone who does not pay up.
Page 32. These evil vistani. They are searching for graves to plunder.
Page 96. The vistani are not very friendly. Vistani are not welcome in Vallaki.
Page 19 the vistani lie about their allegiance to Strahd
Page 19 the vistani lie about helping the characters
Erasmus was stolen by vistani. And sold to a vampire.

Vistani are neutral or evil. Almost all. Assassins. Bandits. Bandit captains. Thugs they are.

How do you feel about vistani written that way. Not very inclusive. Not very encouraging of integration.

 

[Mercurius]

Page 19-20. They have begun harassing townsfolk and other visitors demanding money and wine and threatening to put hexes on anyone who does not pay up.
Page 32. These evil vistani. They are searching for graves to plunder.
Page 96. The vistani are not very friendly. Vistani are not welcome in Vallaki.
Page 19 the vistani lie about their allegiance to Strahd
Page 19 the vistani lie about helping the characters
Erasmus was stolen by vistani. And sold to a vampire.

Vistani are neutral or evil. Almost all. Assassins. Bandits. Bandit captains. Thugs they are.

How do you feel about vistani written that way. Not very inclusive. Not very encouraging of integration.

First of all, I have repeatedly said that I don't know the Vistani well enough to have a strong opinion. But more to the point, evidently you didn't read what I wrote: "The Vistani is actually directly based upon a real group, and thus warrants more of an examination."

I literally just wrote that they should be examined and, as I have said in other posts, by someone(s) of Romani ancestry because of the clear connection. Pretty different from orcs, though, who have no direct or clear derivation from any particular group.

 

[Maxperson]

Except for your multiple posts supporting them. If you can't read your own words, I don't know what to tell you.

It wasn't support dude. It was just pointing out that you are doing the same thing you are telling others not to do, because one you agree with and one you don't.

 

[Xenonnonex]

First of all, I have repeatedly said that I don't know the Vistani well enough to have a strong opinion. But more to the point, evidently you didn't read what I wrote: "The Vistani is actually directly based upon a real group, and thus warrants more of an examination."

I literally just wrote that they should be examined and, as I have said in other posts, by someone(s) of Romani ancestry because of the clear connection. Pretty different from orcs, though, who have no direct or clear derivation from any particular group.

Based on what I quoted. And Romani stereotypes. What do you think.

Orcs as others have posted examples are based on multiple real groups. If vistani can be examined. Why should orcs not be.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It wasn't support dude. It was just pointing out that you are doing the same thing you are telling others not to do, because one you agree with and one you don't.

Okay, besides the fact that we're not discussing this anymore, you just used a laughing emoji to mock a post of mine. I know moderation has told you before to not do this, so please, don't do this.

 

[Maxperson]

First of all, I have repeatedly said that I don't know the Vistani well enough to have a strong opinion. But more to the point, evidently you didn't read what I wrote: "The Vistani is actually directly based upon a real group, and thus warrants more of an examination."

The rest of us on this side have also agreed that the Vistani are different, being based on the Romani and stuffed full of stereotypes. The issue we are having is with orcs.

 

[Maxperson]

Okay, besides the fact that we're not discussing this anymore, you just used a laughing emoji to mock a post of mine. I know moderation has told you before to not do this, so please, don't do this.

I wasn't mocking you. I genuinely thought you were joking about being unable to read my own words. I didn't think you could seriously expect me to be unable to read them. That's what the laugh was for.

Edit: I went ahead and removed it, though. I wouldn't want to offend.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Okay. Let's assume someone was offended by orcs. You would change the language describing them, right?

Now, you don't know if someone is offended by orcs, and you're fighting against the change.

How does it hurt you in anyway to make a change that possibly will stop hurting someone's feelings?

 

[Xenonnonex]

The rest of us on this side have also agreed that the Vistani are different, being based on the Romani and stuffed full of stereotypes. The issue we are having is with orcs.

Subtle racism. Or covert racism also exists