D&D General WotC’s Official Announcement About Diversity, Races, and D&D

Following up on recent discussions on social media, WotC has made an official announcement about diversity and the treatment of ‘race’ in D&D.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Following up on recent discussions on social media, WotC has made an official announcement about diversity and the treatment of ‘race’ in D&D. Notably, the word ‘race’ is not used; in its place are the words ‘people’ and 'folk'.

2A4C47E3-EAD6-4461-819A-3A42B20ED62A.png


 PRESS RELEASE


Dungeons & Dragons teaches that diversity is strength, for only a diverse group of adventurers can overcome the many challenges a D&D story presents. In that spirit, making D&D as welcoming and inclusive as possible has moved to the forefront of our priorities over the last six years. We’d like to share with you what we’ve been doing, and what we plan to do in the future to address legacy D&D content that does not reflect who we are today. We recognize that doing this isn’t about getting to a place where we can rest on our laurels but continuing to head in the right direction. We feel that being transparent about it is the best way to let our community help us to continue to calibrate our efforts.

One of the explicit design goals of 5th edition D&D is to depict humanity in all its beautiful diversity by depicting characters who represent an array of ethnicities, gender identities, sexual orientations, and beliefs. We want everyone to feel at home around the game table and to see positive reflections of themselves within our products. “Human” in D&D means everyone, not just fantasy versions of northern Europeans, and the D&D community is now more diverse than it’s ever been.

Throughout the 50-year history of D&D, some of the peoples in the game—orcs and drow being two of the prime examples—have been characterized as monstrous and evil, using descriptions that are painfully reminiscent of how real-world ethnic groups have been and continue to be denigrated. That’s just not right, and it’s not something we believe in. Despite our conscious efforts to the contrary, we have allowed some of those old descriptions to reappear in the game. We recognize that to live our values, we have to do an even better job in handling these issues. If we make mistakes, our priority is to make things right.

Here’s what we’re doing to improve:
  • We present orcs and drow in a new light in two of our most recent books, Eberron: Rising from the Last War and Explorer's Guide to Wildemount. In those books, orcs and drow are just as morally and culturally complex as other peoples. We will continue that approach in future books, portraying all the peoples of D&D in relatable ways and making it clear that they are as free as humans to decide who they are and what they do.
  • When every D&D book is reprinted, we have an opportunity to correct errors that we or the broader D&D community discovered in that book. Each year, we use those opportunities to fix a variety of things, including errors in judgment. In recent reprintings of Tomb of Annihilation and Curse of Strahd, for example, we changed text that was racially insensitive. Those reprints have already been printed and will be available in the months ahead. We will continue this process, reviewing each book as it comes up for a reprint and fixing such errors where they are present.
  • Later this year, we will release a product (not yet announced) that offers a way for a player to customize their character’s origin, including the option to change the ability score increases that come from being an elf, a dwarf, or one of D&D's many other playable folk. This option emphasizes that each person in the game is an individual with capabilities all their own.
  • Curse of Strahd included a people known as the Vistani and featured the Vistani heroine Ezmerelda. Regrettably, their depiction echoes some stereotypes associated with the Romani people in the real world. To rectify that, we’ve not only made changes to Curse of Strahd, but in two upcoming books, we will also show—working with a Romani consultant—the Vistani in a way that doesn’t rely on reductive tropes.
  • We've received valuable insights from sensitivity readers on two of our recent books. We are incorporating sensitivity readers into our creative process, and we will continue to reach out to experts in various fields to help us identify our blind spots.
  • We're proactively seeking new, diverse talent to join our staff and our pool of freelance writers and artists. We’ve brought in contributors who reflect the beautiful diversity of the D&D community to work on books coming out in 2021. We're going to invest even more in this approach and add a broad range of new voices to join the chorus of D&D storytelling.
And we will continue to listen to you all. We created 5th edition in conversation with the D&D community. It's a conversation that continues to this day. That's at the heart of our work—listening to the community, learning what brings you joy, and doing everything we can to provide it in every one of our books.

This part of our work will never end. We know that every day someone finds the courage to voice their truth, and we’re here to listen. We are eternally grateful for the ongoing dialog with the D&D community, and we look forward to continuing to improve D&D for generations to come.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

They were avoiding breaking the forum rules. Discussing whether capitalism is moral is a political, and off topic, discussion.

Again, depends on what version you are talking about. A general conversation about capitalism and the business world or a political debate about Capitalist vs Socialist views. I try to never get into the political version with anyone because that is as bad as religion or sports. And when I talk morality, I don't bring politics into that either. But morality does not get discussed much here either because that one is very hard to separate from religious views, even when discussing a fantasy setting.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Warpiglet

Adventurer
By "critically analyze," I assume that you mean variations on critical theory. It is important to remember that critical theory is just that: a theoretical approach, and not one that everyone agrees upon as some kind of absolute truth. One can be "self-critical" without adhering to the specifics of academic critical theory; if that is what you mean, I agree. But I don't think one must adhere to or utilize any specific approach, academic or otherwise. Meaning, the basic problem with critical analysis is the old toolbox analogy: if the only tool you have in your toolbox is a hammer, everything ends up looking like a nail. We cannot separate our means of perception from what we perceive, but we can develop different tools of perception.

I use the word "conscious" to suggest that other paths towards the same (or similar) goals of inclusivity etc are possible, and that viewing the same phenomena from multiple perspectives are very important.



I was referring to oppression and murder.



You were talking about oppression and murder, so I was curious how you handled violence.



I think this is a matter of what school of thought you are speaking from. Psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder aren't the same thing, and are used differently. If I remember correctly, the DSM-V doesn't include psychopathy, but it is still utilized in some contexts (and the DSM is not absolute truth and is always changing; many therapists don't use it, or only use it for billing purposes--that is, for insurance coverage). I haven't looked at the data on ASPD so cannot comment on that without research, but I'm talking about psychopathy, which includes personality factors that ASPD doesn't include, which is more focused on behavior.

All psychological disorders are conceptual frameworks for describing phenomena--behavioral patterns, mostly, but also perceived psychological states. Korzybski applies: the map is not the territory. Now you may disagree with a particular map, and perhaps don't think psychopathy exists, but there do seem to be people with "psychopathic traits" that aren't adequately described by antisocial behavior.



Fair enough. It is an interesting topic, though, one that is not easily put to sleep. But it is relevant in this context only in that in the default D&D paradigm, evil does exist.

You are correct. ASPD is in DSM-5, psychopathy is not. It’s a trait that can be measured and many people may have aspd but not be psychopathic.

serial killers of course score higher on measures of psychopathy. Individuals with aspd almost by definition commit more crimes in aggregate than the general population and are more likely to be incarcerated.

some of the more aggressive tendencies in ASPD seem to cool down with age.

as with all psychopathology, there are both experimental as well as generic factors which make expression of the disorder more likely. ASPD is not an exception though the percentage of variability attributed to heritability is modest; it’s not huge.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Nice generic non-answer. There are multiple forms of capitalism, so you should probably say which kind you don't like. And no, capitalism is not about politics, unless you make it about politics. Anyone who believes in taking in more money than they put out is in some way a capitalist. Even Non-Profits. They are called that because they cannot keep the extra they take in, not because they are not capitalist in some form.
It was generic because I don’t want to break the forum rules. I have strong opinions on the matter and am not shy about sharing them, but this is not the appropriate place for it.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Again, depends on what version you are talking about. A general conversation about capitalism and the business world or a political debate about Capitalist vs Socialist views. I try to never get into the political version with anyone because that is as bad as religion or sports. And when I talk morality, I don't bring politics into that either. But morality does not get discussed much here either because that one is very hard to separate from religious views, even when discussing a fantasy setting.
I disagree that it’s possible to discuss capitalism without discussing politics, and I’m gonna leave it at that.
 

Remathilis

Legend
I think they should also have more diverse cultures, if that’s what you mean. Eberron is a good example of a setting where races aren’t mono-cultural.

Kinda? I mean, Eberron's races are all pretty norm-breaking, but most of the various races (and sub-races) share a common culture. Some members of the various races are far more integrated with the prevailing human culture (due to the fact that humanity has ruled Khorvaire for a thousand years) but dwarves, gnomes, halflings, orcs, dragonborn, and goblins all have a shared culture (elves have two, roughly equating with the two subraces).

Don't get me wrong, I love Eberron precisely for the reason they aren't the PHB depictions of elves, dwarves, etc. Each has a unique spin on them that wouldn't work in other settings. And I do love the fact that Eberron orcs (for example) have a nation, a unique culture, and a firm place in Eberron's history. But I don't know if such a model works for Faerun, Oerth, etc. Further, I think it would rob Eberron on one of its biggest selling points if all D&D setting ended up with nonstandard elves, orcs, dragons, etc.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Kinda? I mean, Eberron's races are all pretty norm-breaking, but most of the various races (and sub-races) share a common culture. Some members of the various races are far more integrated with the prevailing human culture (due to the fact that humanity has ruled Khorvaire for a thousand years) but dwarves, gnomes, halflings, orcs, dragonborn, and goblins all have a shared culture (elves have two, roughly equating with the two subraces).

Don't get me wrong, I love Eberron precisely for the reason they aren't the PHB depictions of elves, dwarves, etc. Each has a unique spin on them that wouldn't work in other settings. And I do love the fact that Eberron orcs (for example) have a nation, a unique culture, and a firm place in Eberron's history. But I don't know if such a model works for Faerun, Oerth, etc. Further, I think it would rob Eberron on one of its biggest selling points if all D&D setting ended up with nonstandard elves, orcs, dragons, etc.
That isn’t true, though.

Elves: Aereni and Tairnadal cultures, 3 or more distinct Drow cultures, Bloodsail Principalities, Fey-related elf cultures, the cultures of the 2 Elven Houses.

Dwarves: Mostly Mror, but there are also Dwarves in the northern arctic region IIRC who are little detailed.

Gnomes also have a culture in the Lazaar Principalities, and there are gnomes in the Feyspires and the Towering Wood.

Dragonborn: Argonessen and Qabarra

Orcs: Demon Wastes, Shadow Marches, Drooam, and the mountains where the Mror Holds are. (Ironroot?)
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Kinda? I mean, Eberron's races are all pretty norm-breaking, but most of the various races (and sub-races) share a common culture. Some members of the various races are far more integrated with the prevailing human culture (due to the fact that humanity has ruled Khorvaire for a thousand years) but dwarves, gnomes, halflings, orcs, dragonborn, and goblins all have a shared culture (elves have two, roughly equating with the two subraces).

Don't get me wrong, I love Eberron precisely for the reason they aren't the PHB depictions of elves, dwarves, etc. Each has a unique spin on them that wouldn't work in other settings. And I do love the fact that Eberron orcs (for example) have a nation, a unique culture, and a firm place in Eberron's history. But I don't know if such a model works for Faerun, Oerth, etc. Further, I think it would rob Eberron on one of its biggest selling points if all D&D setting ended up with nonstandard elves, orcs, dragons, etc.
Ok, if that example doesn’t work for you, look at Dragon Age. Every race there has at least two cultures, not to mention individuals who assimilate into other cultures. The dalish elves and the city elves, the dwarves of Orzamar and the surface dwarves (and as of The Descent DLC, the Sha-Brytol). The Qunari and the Vashoth. And of course each of the different human-dominated countries has its own culture.

EDIT: Forgot to mention the multiple tribal human cultures.
 
Last edited:

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
I've run games where the Elves slave trade in humans.

It's not so much fantasy racism but if I wanted to play in a liberal democracy with modern day values I would walk out my front door.

Trying to be a slavery will likely get you kicked from my game but slavery exists. Bad things happen.

Next game is happy pirates. Guess what the unhappy pirates are into? Sentient beings are slaves and food source for the Yuan Ti.
you... didn't answer my question, but okay.
I'm thinking of The Treachery of Images by surrealist René Magritte. The caption in the painting below reads, "This is not a pipe." You can't put tobacco in it and have a smoke so the statement is true. Your example of slave trade in elves is not actual racism because there are no elves or even real humans iinvolved. What you have is a representation of racism at best.

View attachment 123107

But I'd still find the scenario distasteful because I don't want my characters (representing heroism and good) to help out a representation of racism and evil.
okay if we take a very literal interpretation of the treachery of images then the Atlantic slave trade as we understand it wasn't real. literally no living person today was alive during the slave trade, all we have to go by is historical accounts and stories. if I read a fictionalized story about the slave trade, does that not mean events in the book aren't racist? keep in mind my scenario is deliberately based on a real world event.
 

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
But I don't know if such a model works for Faerun, Oerth, etc. Further, I think it would rob Eberron on one of its biggest selling points if all D&D setting ended up with nonstandard elves, orcs, dragons, etc.
y'know I could be wrong, but given that Eberron released around the same time as 3.5 and its use as the setting for DDO I'm pretty sure at some point WotC was poised to make Eberron the new default setting for D&D.
 

Remathilis

Legend
y'know I could be wrong, but given that Eberron released around the same time as 3.5 and its use as the setting for DDO I'm pretty sure at some point WotC was poised to make Eberron the new default setting for D&D.
Yet they didn't for either 4e or 5e. Eberron is great, but I don't think the plan was ever to make it the default vision of D&D.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top