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. Notably, the word ‘race’ is not used; in its place are the words ‘people’ and 'folk'.

 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.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Not a single word I stated was wrong.

Wow. Bold statement. Not many people can make that claim. You sure you want to say that? Too late, I guess I'll have to just prove that wrong. Your first statement was saying that D&D is dying:

It won't. WOTC, at least as it is today, is on its way out rather rapidly.

Which is based on exactly how much evidence? Oh, that's right: 0.
D&D is growing more and more popular. The pandemic isn't killing it, it's just moving D&D to online platforms, which are selling more and more content. If anything, it's becoming more popular because of the pandemic, at least online.
So, summary of my post so far: I immediately proved you wrong with quoting your first post. I'll keep doing this, though, because I don't want to be called a strawman.
Then, you said

WOTC survives on Magic the Gathering. D&D is inconsequential compared to it. Mtg needs game stores to survive. People are not going back to game stores right away after COVID. Parents aren't taking their teens or younger to go play Mtg with a group of people who are infamous for poor hygiene under good circumstances, during a plague or right after. Same thing with D&D. Game stores are going to fold in droves.

So, also, you make it seem like D&D doesn't generate revenue. This isn't true. Like I said before, D&D is growing, and still making money during the pandemic. A lot of people aren't going to game stores, but a lot still are in a lot of the USA where we've opened up (prematurely)m so that's also not true.
Also, the claim that "Mtg needs game stores to survive" is not completely true, as there is an online form of Magic: the Gathering that also generates money.
Also, I'm sure that game stores are not so crucial to Magic: the Gathering card sales, as you can buy them online and have them delivered as well.
So, here's how this whole statement of yours is false, divided up into bullet points:

1. Magic: the Gathering still would sell physical cards without game stores.
2. Magic: the Gathering sells digital cards, which also could help WotC stay afloat even if gamestores were as crucial as you claim.
3. Magic: the Gathering is not the only thing that gives WotC money. D&D is popular, still selling physical and digital books, and so WotC is not dying because of the pandemic.

Now you had to go ahead and say this:

Second, they have a politics problem. You cannot sell bibles to atheists. You cannot sell left wing politics to conservatives or a fairly decent chunk of moderates. Since WOTC is using their games to promote their politics, they're alienating customers. As we approach November, WOTC is going to get a lot worse. Remember, WOTC let one of their players deface their cards (Should be a game loss by the rules) and demonize an artist who'd been with them for decades on video to publicize their politics, they're not making it through November without using their products to push their staff's beliefs.

So, this is off topic, and definitely not true. The only thing I'm going to say is these 2 things:

• It's not politics to support inclusiveness. If you think that is political, you've got a problem with bigotry.
• People that stop playing the game because of their goals to becoming more inclusive won't lose WotC money, because, first, they're not a large part of the community to destroy D&D by leaving. Secondly, they already bought books and gave money to WotC, so that's not a loss of money.

So, again, this is false.

They'll alienate conservatives in droves, and depending on how tired of it moderates are, they'll alienate them too. So of the market they have left post-COVID, they're taking a hit of a 33% drop in customers guaranteed and potentially a 66% drop (Figuring equal thirds, which is fairly close). WOTC cannot survive drops that substantial, especially on top of COVID drops.

What the heck? How is making the game more inclusive alienating anything or anyone? The whole point of this is to not alienate anyone. Figuring that your math is nonsense and based on nothing, I can also declare this "wrong".
Also, it's disgusting that you think that supporting diversity in the community will push away more people than it brings in. Adding in your statement of all conservatives being against diversity or inclusiveness (whatever you meant with that), I can also declare that statement wrong.

Remember, Mtg and D&D are group games. You need a certain number of people to play them. Below that threshold, you lose the whole group. Losing 1 person can mean losing 8 people for magic as an example. So if you have a group of 7 left wing Magic players and 1 conservative, you'll lose all 8 when the conservative is tired of WOTC's politicking.

You're saying that it's impossible to play a game if they're more inclusive? Again, even if you are a bigot, or hate this change, you can just as easily ignore it. Also, have you never been in a D&D campaign? Losing one player doesn't destroy the game.
Also, I have played D&D one on one many times, and there's nothing wrong with it. If people are desperate enough to play D&D, they'll do it in any way they can, with any amount of people.
(Also, you seem to be forgetting that VTTs exist, which still generate revenue for WotC, and they allow people to play D&D without meeting in person)
Again, your statement here is false.

Hasbro will respond at that point. They're not going to tolerate drops that substantial. They'll either replace the WOTC leadership team, which will result in a new edition for D&D to separate it from the politics that characterize it now, or they'll sell off WOTC while they can still get some value from it.

So, first, there's not going to be drops. Hasbro will never have to step in. WotC is not rampant with incompetent people. Also, they are a company. They know how to make money. If this were to hurt their sales of D&D, which it won't, they wouldn't do it, which they are.
Also, apparently you're a seer, because you just predicted the end of the world of D&D. Generally, when people try to predict the end of the world, they're not correct. You're just a doomsaying troll that can't accept the fact that D&D is moving to become more inclusive.

No matter what, at this time next year, we'll be looking at a very different WOTC and likely a very different edition of D&D.

Okay, you got one thing correct here. By this time next year, we will have a very different playstyle of D&D, as there will be more strange class-race combinations in new player characters. The thing about having new management in WotC is most likely false. If the leadership does change, it's not going to be due to this change.

So, summary of your last post, and this post. 1, you got nearly everything wrong. 2, you said that you got nothing wrong.

 

[Zardnaar]

Wow. Bold statement. Not many people can make that claim. You sure you want to say that? Too late, I guess I'll have to just prove that wrong. Your first statement was saying that D&D is dying:

Which is based on exactly how much evidence? Oh, that's right: 0.
D&D is growing more and more popular. The pandemic isn't killing it, it's just moving D&D to online platforms, which are selling more and more content. If anything, it's becoming more popular because of the pandemic, at least online.
So, summary of my post so far: I immediately proved you wrong with quoting your first post. I'll keep doing this, though, because I don't want to be called a strawman.
Then, you said

So, also, you make it seem like D&D doesn't generate revenue. This isn't true. Like I said before, D&D is growing, and still making money during the pandemic. A lot of people aren't going to game stores, but a lot still are in a lot of the USA where we've opened up (prematurely)m so that's also not true.
Also, the claim that "Mtg needs game stores to survive" is not completely true, as there is an online form of Magic: the Gathering that also generates money.
Also, I'm sure that game stores are not so crucial to Magic: the Gathering card sales, as you can buy them online and have them delivered as well.
So, here's how this whole statement of yours is false, divided up into bullet points:

1. Magic: the Gathering still would sell physical cards without game stores.
2. Magic: the Gathering sells digital cards, which also could help WotC stay afloat even if gamestores were as crucial as you claim.
3. Magic: the Gathering is not the only thing that gives WotC money. D&D is popular, still selling physical and digital books, and so WotC is not dying because of the pandemic.

Now you had to go ahead and say this:

So, this is off topic, and definitely not true. The only thing I'm going to say is these 2 things:

• It's not politics to support inclusiveness. If you think that is political, you've got a problem with bigotry.
• People that stop playing the game because of their goals to becoming more inclusive won't lose WotC money, because, first, they're not a large part of the community to destroy D&D by leaving. Secondly, they already bought books and gave money to WotC, so that's not a loss of money.

So, again, this is false.

What the heck? How is making the game more inclusive alienating anything or anyone? The whole point of this is to not alienate anyone. Figuring that your math is nonsense and based on nothing, I can also declare this "wrong".
Also, it's disgusting that you think that supporting diversity in the community will push away more people than it brings in. Adding in your statement of all conservatives being against diversity or inclusiveness (whatever you meant with that), I can also declare that statement wrong.

You're saying that it's impossible to play a game if they're more inclusive? Again, even if you are a bigot, or hate this change, you can just as easily ignore it. Also, have you never been in a D&D campaign? Losing one player doesn't destroy the game.
Also, I have played D&D one on one many times, and there's nothing wrong with it. If people are desperate enough to play D&D, they'll do it in any way they can, with any amount of people.
(Also, you seem to be forgetting that VTTs exist, which still generate revenue for WotC, and they allow people to play D&D without meeting in person)
Again, your statement here is false.

So, first, there's not going to be drops. Hasbro will never have to step in. WotC is not rampant with incompetent people. Also, they are a company. They know how to make money. If this were to hurt their sales of D&D, which it won't, they wouldn't do it, which they are.
Also, apparently you're a seer, because you just predicted the end of the world of D&D. Generally, when people try to predict the end of the world, they're not correct. You're just a doomsaying troll that can't accept the fact that D&D is moving to become more inclusive.

Okay, you got one thing correct here. By this time next year, we will have a very different playstyle of D&D, as there will be more strange class-race combinations in new player characters. The thing about having new management in WotC is most likely false. If the leadership does change, it's not going to be due to this change.

So, summary of your last post, and this post. 1, you got nearly everything wrong. 2, you said that you got nothing wrong.

Online play seems to be a fraction bof overall games.

I don't think most people will care one way or another.

Doesn't take a huge amount of people to leave to impact the bottom line though. That's true for a lot of things.

 

[Charlaquin]

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.

Yes, racism that occurs in the game is only a representation of racism. But, in this representation of racism, racism is justified. It’s ok - good, even - to kill orc babies because they’re evil by their nature. And, this representation of justified racism was created by real people, who live in a world where the same justifications were used to attempt to excuse very real racism, and most of them belong to the group that still benefits from those acts of racism that their ancestors committed. They sell this representation as a product for other people who live in this world and may themselves benefit or suffer from that real racism, to consume, for entertainment. Can you understand why the folks who suffer from real-world racism might be more than a little uncomfortable with that situation?

 

[Bohandas]

Not one person has been moderated for that reason. Not a single one.

It wasn;t stated that the site was penalizing people under this logic, just that people were saying it

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Online play seems to be a fraction bof overall games.

I don't think most people will care one way or another.

Doesn't take a huge amount of people to leave to impact the bottom line though. That's true for a lot of things.

People might leave, but D&D is still growing. That growth alone will be enough to make up for the few racist bigots who are leaving.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I don't expect a huge amount of Muslims to line up to play.

Magic is Haram in Islamic culture even stuff like horoscopes.

Might get the odd one or ones that don't practice but yeah.

At least that's how my Jordanian friend explained it when we drunk tea and chatted about whatever.

Moderate Muslims have no issues with D&D.

Source: Had 4+ Muslim players in my High School group in the early 90s.

 

[Guest 6801328]

• It's not politics to support inclusiveness. If you think that is political, you've got a problem with bigotry.

It shouldn't be. Unfortunately, a lot of people get persuaded/manipulated into believing that things that shouldn't have political symbolism do. Not sure I can cite any current examples without crossing the line of forum rules.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Moderate Muslims have no issues with D&D.

Source: Had 4+ Muslim players in my High School group in the early 90s.

And I know a black investment banker! Guess that proves there's no racism in America!

Wait! I know a black cop, too!

 

[Zardnaar]

Moderate Muslims have no issues with D&D.

Source: Had 4+ Muslim players in my High School group in the early 90s.

By moderate do you mean secular?

Alot are secular now meaning they don't care about drinking booze or going to mosque.

They're Palestinians via Jordan she's quite funny as she often used to tell me to stop drinking. They're fairly moderate but observe the rules in regards to what's Haram.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

@Zardnaar you're treading close to the deep end right now.