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

For example, a 10th level str-based Half-Orc fighter should be way stronger than a 10th level str-based Halfling fighter.

That'd be a big change, which is I think unlikely.

Right now, pretty much all 10th level STR Fighters will have 20 Strength, unless they're being weird or optimized in some odd way. Doesn't matter what race they are. All Fighters have 3 ASIs by level 10 (4,6,8). Assuming the standard array, a Half Orc Fighter will likely start with 17 STR, hit 18 or 19 at L4, then 20 at L6. A Halfling will likely start at 15, hit 17 at L4, 18 or 19 at L6, and 20 at L8. A Human will go 16, 18 at L4, 20 at L6.

There's no way this is changing in 5E. It's unlikely to change in 6E, as in general, it's not very interesting, and STR is the only stat where it's a concern. It makes no sense with any other stat.

Really, what you're pointing out isn't that STR isn't the issue you're concerned with - size is - hence the SIZ stat in games like Call of Cthulhu. And I don't see D&D introducing a SIZ stat.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Desrimal

Explorer
Well for this to work then writers should strip this "monsters" of all it's human traits, both in form and in culture. If humanity is reserved for humans, we should stop using harmful steriotypes to describe orcs and drows.
I don't think anyone is using harmful stereotypes. What culture does orc and drow cultures remind you of?

The only problem I see is that crazy ideas like this, takes the focus away from actual real-life racial issues.
 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
The FR already has an absolute ton of lore about non-evil Drow. It just keeps getting sidelined, retcon, or forgotten. Earlier in the FR, in 2E particularly, it's made clear that the Menzoberranzan-type culture is not the only Drow culture, just a massive one, that in other Drow cities, other ways, other gods, other ways, hold sway, whether that's merely Vhaeraun, or Tharizdun, or Eilistraee.

So calling it a retcon is misleading I feel. Is returning to older lore following a more recent retcon, itself a retcon? Certainly not in any negative sense.

That's probably one of the thing that flabergasts me the most with 5e and the whole positive representation stuff: most of the solutions were ALREADY there from previous editions!

- 4e has a super cool depiction of the Vistani (with maybe the whole evil eye thing a little too on the nose) as caravan nomad traveling the planes and adopting wanderers and exiles from many worlds. Why go back to the old Romani stereotypes? WHY?

- Chult, before the fall of Mezro, the whole unnecessary ''colonial'' phase and the really bad ''Arthur Cimber plays Pocanthontas' Jon Smith in Chult'', was a super cool Wakanda-adjacent, hyper-advanced nation.

- Drows have been playable in some ways since, what, 2e edition? There's probably hundred of thousands of players who played a good-aligned surface Drow. After a time, Drizzt and ''that one rebel adventurer'' cease to be exception and becomes just another side of the Drow personality.

- Drow had peaceful dealings with the surface in the Shaar in 4e.

- Orc are a big part of the citizenry of Thesk since 2e (?).

- Orcs have a peaceful kingdom in the north since 4e (seems to be retconned in the previews from Frostmaiden. WHY!?).

- Turmish is probably the only democracy in the realms.

- Orcs in Eberron have a complex society of nature-oriented protector since 3e.

- Drows in Eberron have a tribal society with varying alignments since 3e.

My question to WotC: why the hell did you pick the simplest, more shallow, less variable version of these people for 5e, only to have to change it now!? Read you own damn books, guys, most of the work is already done!
 
Last edited:


Bolares

Hero
I don't think anyone is using harmful stereotypes. What culture does orc and drow cultures remind you of?

The only problem I see is that crazy ideas like this, takes the focus away from actual real-life racial issues.
It's not about what they remind me of, it's about using the same steriotypes racists use to describe other cultures. It has being said over and over in this discussion, so it feels kind of pointless to keep arguing in circles on this.
 


G

Guest 6801328

Guest
So what you're saying is that the human race doesn't really have free will, that morale choice is just an illusion? :p

For Player Characters it's real. NPCs have to make morale checks, though, so for them it's an illusion.
 

G

Guest 6948803

Guest
My question to WotC: why the hell did you pick the simplest, more shallow, less variable version of these people for 5e, only to have to change it now!? Read you own damn books, guys, most of the work is already done!

I will give you an answer you won't like.
Because those shallow, less variable versions are usually more fun to play.
5e is better than 4e because it goes back to its roots as more pulpy, less "policed" game.
We love Critical Role not only because it's so inclusive, but because they act like real players, do stupid, inconsiderate things and talk smut.
I bet gold pieces against electrum that most of the people condemning "old tropes" in D&D, are abusing them in their home games.
My friend asked me once, why his kids tried RPGs and found them boring, while mine tried it and loved it.
At first moment I said "you know, kids are different, rpgs def aren't fun for everyone". But then, I asked what rpg system he played with them. Turned out, he was using something that translates in english as "Berry Forest", game written with kids in mind, with limited exposure to violence and enhanced educational value.
My kids (about the same age as his, 10 and 12) were playing D&D, killing goblins and exploring old wizard's tower.
Sorry, but killing evil goblins is more fun than talking to cute magical squirrel.
 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
I will give you an answer you won't like.
Because those shallow, less variable versions are usually more fun to play.
5e is better than 4e because it goes back to its roots as more pulpy, less "policed" game.
We love Critical Role not only because it's so inclusive, but because they act like real players, do stupid, inconsiderate things and talk smut.
I bet gold pieces against electrum that most of the people condemning "old tropes" in D&D, are abusing them in their home games.
My friend asked me once, why his kids tried RPGs and found them boring, while mine tried it and loved it.
At first moment I said "you know, kids are different, rpgs def aren't fun for everyone". But then, I asked what rpg system he played with them. Turned out, he was using something that translates in english as "Berry Forest", game written with kids in mind, with limited exposure to violence and enhanced educational value.
My kids (about the same age as his, 10 and 12) were playing D&D, killing goblins and exploring old wizard's tower.
Sorry, but killing evil goblins is more fun than talking to cute magical squirrel.

Can you cite anything in my post where I was talking about removing the killing and exploring stuff from the game?

Having advanced not-african nations, non-exclusively evil societies and better lore of the Vistani DOES NOT mean the game is policed and requires to be talking with cute animals.

EDIT to add: 5e does not sell better than 4e because its embraces shallow racial presentation, believe me. 5e sells well because they are making a conscious effort to move away from the the things of old you so desire to stay the same instead of embracing the statu quo.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Having advanced not-african nations, non-exclusively evil societies and better lore of the Vistani DOES NOT mean the game is policed and requires to be talking with cute animals.

No, but in order to rationalize a knee-jerk reaction opposing these changes one must assume that it does mean that.

A pretty obvious pattern has emerged: anybody who thinks this announcement is a bad thing ascribes to (or, at least, presents) a parade-of-horribles argument.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top