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

[bloodtide]

No they can't. What version of the Player's Handbook do you have?

All of them? And not once in several decades have I had someone not be able to play whatever race or character or whatever they wanted too.

Why does what a player "is" in the real world matter at all?

 

[TheSword]

At some point you have to exclude those who refuse to change, though. Do you want to be so inclusive that you have a table with a Leftist and an Alt-right and an LGBT ally and a homophobe, etc?

If everyone can be respectful then why not. I don’t really see why a persons view on the economy or what I do in the bedroom should affect my ability to game.

I’d watch that livestream!

 

[Morrus]

All of them? And not once in several decades have I had someone not be able to play whatever race or character or whatever they wanted too.

No they couldn't. The whole current debate was sparked by the fact that up until recently you couldn't play an orc who wasn't evil and stupid, and now you can. I'm not sure how you missed that - it was the crux of the issue. I might recommend reading the other two ginormous threads, as I don't think people want to repeat themselves yet again in a third.

 

[Mercurius]

No they couldn't. The whole current debate was sparked by the fact that up until recently you couldn't play an orc who wasn't evil and stupid, and now you can. I'm not sure how you missed that - it was the crux of the issue. I might recommend reading the other two ginormous threads, as I don't think people want to repeat themselves yet again in a third.

I think you could play a smart and good orc if your DM allowed it. But I hear your point, that the rulebooks didn't provide guidance or rules on doing so, and I think that is the crucial point: WotC sets the tone for the majority of the D&D community, so what they print matters and should--at least to some degree--reflect the contemporary ethos.

 

[bloodtide]

No they couldn't.

It's a lot of text....are there some Cliff Notes?

And are you telling me the threads are about something nonexistant? Like sure, I have a book on a shelf next to me that says "dwarves can not be druids", and I ignore that and make a dwarf druid. So.....

Is the "debate" then that WotC will put a disclaimer in the front of every book that says "anyone can be anything, have fun"?

 

[Morrus]

It's a lot of text....are there some Cliff Notes?

And are you telling me the threads are about something nonexistant? Like sure, I have a book on a shelf next to me that says "dwarves can not be druids", and I ignore that and make a dwarf druid. So.....

Is the "debate" then that WotC will put a disclaimer in the front of every book that says "anyone can be anything, have fun"?

I'm telling you what I told you, nothing more. I honestly have no desire to recreate the same thread yet a third time and type the same things that have been typed over and over again, so you'll have to brave the text. Sorry! But I do recommend you acquaint yourself with the issues at hand before commenting on them.

 

[Mercurius]

It's a lot of text....are there some Cliff Notes?

And are you telling me the threads are about something nonexistant? Like sure, I have a book on a shelf next to me that says "dwarves can not be druids", and I ignore that and make a dwarf druid. So.....

Is the "debate" then that WotC will put a disclaimer in the front of every book that says "anyone can be anything, have fun"?

The Cliff Notes version (as I see it):

Those advocating for inclusivity want WotC to more explicitly offer rules/guidelines that represent greater diversity (e.g. good and smart orcs), and do away with any stereotypes that can be connected to real world ethnic groups.

Those advocating for heritage are wary of (what they perceive as) unwarranted changes that overly mess with D&D tradition, and dispute said linkages to racial stereotypes to varying degrees.

So the purpose of this thread is not to endlessly rehash those elements, but to recognize that both are valid perspectives and discuss how the two can be integrated.

 

[Morrus]

Just to be clear -- if this thread does just end up rehashing the existing two, we'll need to close it. The moderation overhead right now is immense, and we don't have the hours in the day to handle a third identical thread (the post reports number at the top of my screen is red and is not a small number, and it's 1am!) Just an advance warning.

 

[TheSword]

That’s all the encouragement I needed to go to bed. Night all.

 

[Derren]

The Cliff Notes version (as I see it):

Those advocating for inclusivity want WotC to more explicitly offer rules/guidelines that represent greater diversity (e.g. good and smart orcs), and do away with any stereotypes that can be connected to real world ethnic groups.

Those advocating for heritage are wary of (what they perceive as) unwarranted changes that overly mess with D&D tradition, and dispute said linkages to racial stereotypes to varying degrees.

So the purpose of this thread is not to endlessly rehash those elements, but to recognize that both are valid perspectives and discuss how the two can be integrated.

People can't even agree on to which ethnic group orcs supposedly are connected, so how can you remove said connection without removing orcs entirely?