Urban Arcana

[Felon]

Don't the publishers know that, as a white guy, my group should be represented most prominently? You're right, it really is a cryin' shame.

Sorry, in all the lame straw-man remarks, I didn't notice whether you agreed that there does actually seem to be a conscious decision to avoid making that central character on the covers a white male? The issue of whether it's a big deal or not is not the point. Overdramatize my comments and put words in my mouth to your snide little heart's content, but the point being discussed had to do with the whole notion of a "core audience familiarity" marketing strategy that Ranger brought up. If the core audience is white males, why avoid depicting them?

1) The front picture of a book is supposed to draw attention. These are drow (read: dark elves) folks! They're fantasy, but dressed as modern characters. That would be the point of the campaign setting. I'd say it's a pretty good representation of the content, personally.
2) You would prefer the Easter Bunny, perhaps Merlin?

No, I was thinking more along the lines of what professional adventurers would look like in a modern setting. Something along the lines of professional investigators or urban commandos decked out in action gear. The drow male looks decent enough for that purpose, with the rifle slung on his back. As for what the ladies should be wearing, ever seen any of the Bluebox Cygirls figures? This is more what I had in mind for someone who's supposed to be killing monsters for a living.

3) Face it, how many of us want our pictures on the front cover of an internationally published book?

Already addressed a similar remark in my last post.

5) The content is very good, and we're all really focusing on the cover.

Eh. It's the first obstacle I have to hurdle to get my jaded gang to play it.

The content's yet another hurdle. Shadowkind level adjustments are sporked, that's for sure.

6) This genre is one that's pretty intriguing for some people. It's just not everyone's cup of tea. Variety is the spice of life.

It's just core D&D in another setting. I was hoping for something fresh, not just trading out demonic armor and shield of fear for demonic biker jacket and riot shield of fear. The "why bother" factor is another hurdle I have to deal with.

7) Some people do play characters outside of their own ethnic and gender type.

Sure. I've done it a few times. That's why I said "predominantly".

Granted, the latter is usually the province of the GMs running amok out there, but it can be interesting stepping into someone else's shoes for a little while. After all, how many elves, gnomes, and half-orcs do you know in real life?

That's why I used the term "ethnic appearance" instead of race. I didn't need anyone pointing out that elves aren't aryans or what have you.

Now that I've managed to annoy Felon (and probably everyone else), I'm done. [/B]

Despite all else you've been civil, so you're OK in my book.

Originally posted by KDLadage
The setting came first, according to Stan! and the other designers. They cam eup with the UA concept, and then built a game to make it happen. d20M happened to be that game.

More settings will come. I think UA will boost interest in d20M in general, and then we'll see more games come out based on the moders SRD. Heck, the d20M-based Gamma World should be out soon.

Heh. I'm still hoping for the eventual production of a D20 Fantasy sourcebook, supporting a variety of fantasy settings, not just magic-loaded spellpunk settings. In fact, I'm looking to salvage some of UA as material for a pulp fantasy campaign. I especially like the notion of powerful effects like raising the dead requiring difficult and dangerous rituals.

 

[buzz]

Overdramatize my comments and put words in my mouth to your snide little heart's content, but the point being discussed had to do with the whole notion of a "core audience familiarity" marketing strategy that Ranger brought up. If the core audience is white males, why avoid depicting them?

3 of the 6 iconic PCs in the d20M core book are white males. 4 out of the 6 are white. 5 out of the 12 iconic advanced classes are white males, while 10 out of the 12 are white. There's a white male on the cover.

The majority of the non-fantasy-race artwork in UA features white people, and most of those are white men. There are maybe 4 or 5 African-Americans depicted in the book (unless you want to count drow), and virtually no one of any other ethnicities, 'cept for two Asian men (depicted as businessmen)...

The "base" world in UA and d20M is the West, and America in particular. America tends to be pretty diverse, particularly in the *urban* areas that tend to be the focus of the game. The world depicted in these books is no more or less diverse than your average episode of Law & Order, or a walk down the street in any major city in the US.

IMHO, you're making way too big a deal about the cover, as well as overstating WotC's "desire to avoid depicting white males."

This reminds me a lot of an argument a guy on rec.games.frp.dnd uised to make about how horrible it was that WotC were making female minis for Chainmail, seeing as their audience was all male anyway and that the idea of female warriors was just the dumbest thing ever.

No, I was thinking more along the lines of what professional adventurers would look like in a modern setting. Something along the lines of professional investigators or urban commandos decked out in action gear. The drow male looks decent enough for that purpose, with the rifle slung on his back. As for what the ladies should be wearing, ever seen any of the Bluebox Cygirls figures? This is more what I had in mind for someone who's supposed to be killing monsters for a living.

Then you go right ahead and make them look that way in your game. No one is stopping you.

(Assuming of course that every d20M/UA game is about "professional adventurers or urban commandos". Some could be about normal people caught up in extraordinary curcumstances... or even adventurers or commandos who pay attention to the fashions of the day. Your average Hollywood aciton movie, anyone?)

 

[Ranger REG]

Perhaps Wizards are going the wrong way. They should put out a clean book about the middle-class white family with 2.4 children and house with a picket fence. Let's call it Surburban Arcana.

That is something Felon may want: complete with a Rockwell image of the Stepford Family on the front cover.

Sorry, while Cover Art should be able to attract consumers upon first glance, I don't put too much stock in artwork at all (unless it is interfering/confusing my view of the text), especially when I'm here or on Wizards messageboard inquiring about the product's content.

 

[Kesh]

Personally, I'd love to see Genetech get the full-rulebook treatment. The Dungeon issue was just a morsel to tease.

 

[bwgwl]

Then again, from taking a close look at the central character depicted on each of the covers for D20M, UA, and the forthcoming D20 Menace, perhaps I can infer that WotC's marketing department has concluded that my group of age 30+ white males is no longer representative of that core audience.

let's hope it's not. really, if the only people who are playing role-playing games are a group of gradually-aging men who started in the early 80s, the hobby's going to die out. i don't mind WOTC trying to reach a younger demographic for gaming. it'll keep the hobby alive.

so while the style of dress of those on the cover may not appeal to you, the young gamers who *do* dress like that may be more inclined to pick it up because it speaks more directly to them than something aimed at the 30-something crowd.

FWIW, if an RPG marketing decision drives away one 30-something gamer but nets 2, 3, or more teenage gamers, then IMO it's a good decision.

[btw, i'm a 30-something gamer myself.]

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

Well, in the interest of avoiding strawmen

Whether or not putting non-white people on the cover is a sound business move or not, I say good for WoTC! We could use some new blood in this hobby, be it from black, white, asian, aborigine or purple people.

Anybody who wouldn't bother opening up the book to check out the rules just because the person on the cover didn't share their ethnic appearance is a person that I would not have in my gaming group.
What's that old saw about judging a book by its cover?

I don't see the D20 Modern covers as an attempt at being politically correct (All the PC BS in the world today makes me retch, quite frankly) I just see them as covers. Big whoop. The fact is, I was interested in D20M before anyone had seen a cover for it and that didn't change after I saw it. Not in the slightest.

So far I think the lamest remarks in this thread were the last sentence in your first post and the last in your second post, Felon.

Mmm Spelling.

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

Re: Re: It is not that I was unimpressed, but...

The setting came first, according to Stan! and the other designers. They cam eup with the UA concept, and then built a game to make it happen. d20M happened to be that game.

Yeah, now that you mention it, I remember hearing something to this effect.

Thanks for the memory jog.

 

[Felon]

3 of the 6 iconic PCs in the d20M core book are white males. 4 out of the 6 are white. 5 out of the 12 iconic advanced classes are white males, while 10 out of the 12 are white. There's a white male on the cover.

Point of order: I was talking specifically about the central character on the cover, that's all.

The majority of the non-fantasy-race artwork in UA features white people, and most of those are white men. There are maybe 4 or 5 African-Americans depicted in the book (unless you want to count drow), and virtually no one of any other ethnicities, 'cept for two Asian men (depicted as businessmen)...

That is a fair analysis of the general makeup of the book. WotC isn't yanking white males from their books across the board (yet ). But again--still looking for a yes-or-no answer from someone--does it look like WotC is actively making a decision not to make that central cover character a white guy?

The "base" world in UA and d20M is the West, and America in particular. America tends to be pretty diverse, particularly in the *urban* areas that tend to be the focus of the game. The world depicted in these books is no more or less diverse than your average episode of Law & Order, or a walk down the street in any major city in the US.

Sure, and that's great. But that means that a conscious decision not to make that character a white guy (if indeed that's what they're doing) is also not representing a big slice of the American community, does it not?

IMHO, you're making way too big a deal about the cover, as well as overstating WotC's "desire to avoid depicting white males."

Well, IMHO, other people made a big deal out of my comments about the cover. I said, in a fairly facetious manner, that it seemed like an odd decisiion on WotC's part to use iconics that look more like street punks than heroes (and to depict them on the cover at that), and that it seemed even more odd that they don't put any iconic white guys in that key central cover spot. When I suggested that it was an ill-conceived move to exclude a specific racial/gender combo that just happens to represent their core audience, people reacted like I was saying something preposterous. A few folks decided to blow things out of proportion like I made some huge inflammatory rant against the concept of racial and gender equality and the great American melting pot. Then when I don't fold, other folks jump on the bandwagon. And I've remained relatively calm, undramatic, and civil despite the number of folks that opt for cheap shots insted of any kind of actual rebuttal. I'm making a big deal out of this? I just can't bring myself to apologize for feeling obliged to defend myself when I'm maligned and my statements are misrepresented.

This reminds me a lot of an argument a guy on rec.games.frp.dnd uised to make about how horrible it was that WotC were making female minis for Chainmail, seeing as their audience was all male anyway and that the idea of female warriors was just the dumbest thing ever.

And since nothing in this thread has anything to do with what that Chainmail thread, it seems like you're falling into the same habit that a lot of folks do today, which is overreact when someone comments on race or gender, lumping together anyone who expresses a sentiment with politically-incorrect overtones and labeling them all bigots. Notice I never said it was a bad thing to depict a variety of races and gender types in gaming--that's one of the comments that Bran, Ranger, et al, have put into my mouth--I just said it seemed like a bad idea (business-wise) to consciously decide to make that central cover character anything but a white guy (if indeed that is the case; there's only been three covers after all so only time will tell). Kind of like how WotC uses the feminine pronoun in favor of the male pronoun. The notion there is that using the male pronoun is sexist. That's ludicrous IMO, but even if that's so, then favoring the female pronoun is also discriminatory, so why bother?

Then you go right ahead and make them look that way in your game. No one is stopping you.

True indeed, but beside the point really.

Perhaps Wizards are going the wrong way. They should put out a clean book about the middle-class white family with 2.4 children and house with a picket fence. Let's call it Surburban Arcana. That is something Felon may want: complete with a Rockwell image of the Stepford Family on the front cover.

OK, that's fairly amusing (and if folks are going to take pot-shots at me, then I do hope they'll at least try to be a little clever, because I could use a laugh) but I have in fact indicated numerous times that an all-white suburban Norman Rockwell family that looks like mine is not what I want in an RPG, so again we're back to straw-manning.

let's hope it's not. really, if the only people who are playing role-playing games are a group of gradually-aging men who started in the early 80s, the hobby's going to die out. i don't mind WOTC trying to reach a younger demographic for gaming. it'll keep the hobby alive.

Granted there is a degree of desirabiliy in reaching a broader audience, and I'm all for a broad representation of people (something I seem to have to keep repeating), but a decision to exclude a specific ethnic/gender combination from that center spot based on the fact that it is your current core audience makes little sense. In all the snideness, I have yet to see anyone explain the logic in that.

FWIW, if an RPG marketing decision drives away one 30-something gamer but nets 2, 3, or more teenage gamers, then IMO it's a good decision.

Then you're way off in that assessment. Driving off your core audience in the hopes of attracting a broader, more hip crowd has always been a self-destructive business strategy. Moreover, in terms of product quality D&D will not be better-off simply going for a lowest-common-denominator appeal. That was the approach taken with comics in the early nineties (poly-bagged collector's issue with chrome-plated trading cards inside!!!) and the industry still hasn't recovered.

Whether or not putting non-white people on the cover is a sound business move or not, I say good for WoTC! We could use some new blood in this hobby, be it from black, white, asian, aborigine or purple people.

That's a beautiful cause you're saluting, but see above.

Anybody who wouldn't bother opening up the book to check out the rules just because the person on the cover didn't share their ethnic appearance is a person that I would not have in my gaming group.

Sounds like you're engaging in the kneejerk labeling that I spoke of above. My gamers weren't turned off by the iconics because they are bigots, they were turned off because they felt excluded, like the game was designed for a different crowd. Yes, they are more close-minded than I'd like, but that's really not their problem. It's WotC's (because it cost them some business) and it's mine (because I really wanted to give this game a try).

I don't see the D20 Modern covers as an attempt at being politically correct (All the PC BS in the world today makes me retch, quite frankly) I just see them as covers. Big whoop.

OK, to clarify then: to my question regarding the design team's choice for central cover iconic, you do not believe that in the three-out-of-three cases that WotC did not make a specific choice to exclude white males from that spot?

 

[takyris]

Felon, to answer one of your points, I can see the logic of having center stage be occupied by something other than a white male.

1) Having a white male on the cover doesn't make it any more likely that said white male will buy the book, while having a woman or minority on the cover increases the chances that said person will think, "Hey, they're being all multicultural and stuff, maybe the game isn't just for white males!" Honestly, will anyone step forward and say, "I'm a white male, and I didn't buy the book because the central figure wasn't one of my people."

2) There are only so many poses available to nature, and most of the "white male holding sword/gun/crystal" things have already been done. It makes it look a bit more original, a bit more contemporary, to have a non-white-male center figure, and that can be a selling argument for the game as more up-to-date and contemporary as well. For a 1940's pulp action RPG, I'd expect a square-jawed white male on the cover, because that would be an accurate reflection of the game. For UA, a square-jawed white male is not necessarily the default, and it's good to reflect that.

In any event, there's some logic for you, or at least something close enough to logic that I can imagine the marketing folks coming up with the ideas while trying to figure out the cover. I'm not saying that it'll convince you, but it could have been enough to convince said marketers.

For what it's worth, I don't love the cover, but that's mostly because I think drow are overdone and slightly racist. Not that drow are perpetuating the common stereotypes about black people or anything -- just that it would be nice to have a race that didn't have an evil cousin race that just happened to be dark-skinned.

 

[King of Old School]

OK, to clarify then: to my question regarding the design team's choice for central cover iconic, you do not believe that in the three-out-of-three cases that WotC did not make a specific choice to exclude white males from that spot?

I do not believe that WotC made a specific choice to exclude white males from that spot. It's hard to accurately judge intent from such a small sample size, and easy (though not necessarily correct) to assume that you're seeing bias because you're actively looking for it. I don't think anyone's being any more or less unfair to you in assessing your motives than you are being to WotC in judging theirs.

The sample size is even smaller if you consider that, in choosing to put non-human fantasy races on the cover of Urban Arcana, that book should be removed from the equation. Or do you think that putting a male elf (as opposed to a female drow) in the center spot would have counted as a "white guy?"

And for that matter, I'm not certain that Adam Swift (Menace Manual) isn't white. Is he actually described anywhere as Native American, or are people just assuming that long black hair and funky tattoos couldn't possibly belong to a white guy? He's not even particularly dark-skinned, folks!

KoOS