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

JiffyPopTart

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

Wait! I know a black cop, too!
According to this Link

Turkey itself hosted a gaming convention with 20, 000 attendees. The article claims Turkey is home to 30,000,000 gamers, and the games they play are mostly foreign created.

This refers to computer games, but the "haramness" of games involving magic should apply to physical or electronic.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Nickolaidas

Explorer
Isn't this what white supremacists throughout the centuries have done as well? They said that it was okay to enslave black people because they were a different species, inferior, stupid, and so on? Is this point not valid?

Honestly? Not for me.

I have played BECMI, a little of 3rd Ed, and 5th Ed. Both as a player and as a DM. I have never read somewhere in the rules that orcs were an inferior or stupid race. They were always labeled as a menace to humanoid societies (humans, dwarves and elves).

I didn't live in America, and certainly not in colonial times, so I don't know how black people were described as, nor what was the reason for enslaving them. It was definitely the darkest part of your history, and I'm sure your leaders did their best at propaganda to portray the slavery of black people as something which shouldn't give you any feelings of guilt.

This is clearly a sensitive topic to a lot of you (as it should be), and I do not intend to trivialize it in the slightest. I really don't.

But you must also realize that not everyone was born in America. Not everyone has a history with racism and therefore not everyone reads the orc description in the same way some Americans do. Not everyone gets sensitive vibes when reading that orcs are savages who live in tribes. For those people orcs being savages living in tribes is not insulting - it's lore, simple as that. And when other players come and wish to change the lore for reasons those other people do not understand, debates begin.

But I guess ... D&D is a really old game. And as all really old things, notions, ideas ... it needs to change. Get with the times.

But I can't help but be amazed with how much American culture has changed in the past couple of decades. I don't see any changes in the culture of my country, but I see tremendous changes in yours, mainly via pop culture.

We're talking about a country which used to have Duffy Duck being chased by a black man hunter caricature (and always the victim of many jokes) who now asks for a fictional monster's description to lose the word 'savage'. Truly remarkable stuff, from a culture standpoint.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
In the late 70's and early 80's there was not really any media at all for gaming. We bought the rules, we bought the modules, and we ran through all those dungeon crawls as they were written: kill everything and take all the loot.
I wasn’t just talking about gaming-related media. All media communicates messages, some consciously, some unconsciously. My point is, if I had children, “kill everything and take all the loot” is not a game I would want them playing uncritically. It might be a game I would play with them at first, so we could discuss its implications and whether or not they thought the messages it was sending were good ones and why or why not.
 

Panda-s1

Scruffy and Determined
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.
I know they didn't, but I remember reading the 30th anniversary book like "OH MAN LOOK AT OUR COOL NEW MODERN CAMPAIGN SETTING", not to mention the hoopla surrounding the contest that Eberron came from. afiak there's no concrete evidence this was going to happen, it just seems that way to me.
Taking it to a very literal interpretation isn't a road I'm interested in traveling. I'm not asking you to agree but trying to help you understand why someone might have a different viewpoint from your own. You expressed a fundamental lack of understanding about why people don't think the racism of your scenario is actually racism. It's the same reason people don't think the violence in D&D is actually violence. Sure, within the context of the game your PC totally chopped the head off that evil despot with his vorpal sword. But it wasn't real.
it doesn't matter if it isn't "real". I don't need Magritte to tell me the pipe in his painting isn't a real pipe, but I'm still gonna call it a pipe. if there's systemic or cultural prejudice against a specific type of people in a setting it's racism. calling it not racism makes no sense. by that logic if I see a castle in a setting I shouldn't call it a "castle" since it's not real. I guess I'll start calling them "fleppledoofs", and kingdoms "glepletiins", also are the humans the same humans in real life? like it's been stated numerous times here they can have kids with orcs and elves, but we have no real world evidence of this, so I guess they're not really humans.
And I know a black investment banker! Guess that proves there's no racism in America!

Wait! I know a black cop, too!
Forgive me if this was meant as a joke, but it can be hard to tell in conversations like this. But that’s an anecdote, it’s useless as far as data analysis goes. Also it was the early 90s. A lot has changed since then, for D&D and for the global political situation. I imagine a lot of Muslim people who may have been moderate in the early 90s’ views have changed since then.
uh, it's anecdotal, but it's also in response to someone else's anecdote with weird conjecture?

also not sure how I feel about conjecture made about whether or not Muslims have become more conservative since the 90's 😐
Not if there are not one-dimensional villains to highlight them.

I think the debate began when WotC (and TSR) made orcs and goblins playable. It made the players relate to them and think it cruel and unjust to kill those races on sight (since their orc/goblin character is a tiny representation of that race), unlike the Mind Flayers and the Gnolls.

It made the players step on to that creature's shoes and think 'I am a goblin. I am capable of good, ergo other goblins are capable of good. So why should ALL goblins be put to the sword'?



When the narrative tells me that the tribe of orcs who live a few miles across wants to invade the kingdom my family and friends live, and want to take them as slaves or worse, and burn my hometown, and will not stop unless I drive them off or kill them ... I think the game did its best to warrant orc genocide without making you feel as a piece of naughty word.

Because, in the end, that's what this is all about - I think. If they present all orcs and mostly evil humanoids as redeemable or morally complex as humans, it creates a lot of narrative problems. The goblins you killed had children and families - therefore killing them all is wrong and unjust. This immediately makes storytelling more complex - and as a result - more difficult.

And before you know it, killing the lizardfolk tribesmen who protect the Green Dragon Garaloth is wrong, because they're being bullied into its service. So how will four humanoids convince fifty lizardfolk tribesmen that obeying the big bad skyscraper-sized winged lizard is wrong, that they mean them no harm, and they're hear to overthrow it and are strong enough to defeat it? And why should the lizardfolk believe them when they witnessed said lizard burn to death their thirty best warriors? Or avoid killing the Drow/Duergar thralls who protect the Elder Brain because they're just mindless pawns in their game of dominance.

In real life, this would be realistic and would create psychological problems for the 'heroes' who perform genocide for the 'greater good'. They would be psychologically broken and tested, over and over again. Or they would have to come up with very clever ways to avoid bloodshed.

But this isn't real life. It is a tabletop game. It's meant to be stress-free. In order to protect your conscience, the creators attempted to create irredeemably evil creatures in order for the player to not feel guilt as he kills them. Was D&D about making the perfect world where everyone can live in peace and harmony? Or was it a game that made your players feel awesome by killing fearsome monsters?
is... is this what it's like to roll a nat 1 on a persuasion roll? "here's a really interesting adventure idea that sounds appealing, but it's stressful so that means it's actually bad, right? right??"
You used narration to explain the behavior of the illithid race, which I agree with.

By that logic however, orcs are made from an evil god who only wants to conquer and plunder. To quote the 5th edition manual:

"Grasping his mighty spear, Gruumsh laid waste to the mountains, set the forests aflame, and carved great furrows in the fields. Such was the role of the orcs, he proclaimed, to take and destroy all that the other races would deny them. To this day, the orcs wage an endless war on humans, dwarves, elves and other folk."

The narration tells me there's nothing redeemable about orcs and it gives me an in-lore reason to believe it, just like it gives me an in-lore reason to believe that Mind Flayers cannot be redeemed (dietary reasons and alien mindset).

I just don't get why one is ok and the other is not.
the same book says orcs are only evil because their souls are compelled by Gruumsh to do so. like this made me facepalm more than anything in 5e (that I've actually read), like they knew now it wasn't enough to just be like "lol orcs are all just evil despite being sapient humanoids with free will and thought" so they had to come up with some really weird excuse to make them all just evil. in my (admittedly limited) research this has never really come up in previous editions of D&D.
Because TSR/WotC designed this game to be narratively 'simple', in order to be easily approached by people of all ages. Talking out of my ass now, but they probably didn't want the game to be morally complex 'by default', so that people wouldn't find it daunting to role-play.

Game: "Orcs bad. Go kill, be hero."
12-13 year old kids: "YAY!!"
uh, a game doesn't need to be morally complex for kids to do things that don't involve killing. actually it seems a little ethically suspect to present killing anything, evil or otherwise, to kids without any moral complexity.
Race is actually the proper English word, not ancestry or folks.

Our group stuck with D&D 5e vs the new PF2 because we play to escape reality, not to have social justice warriors screwing with the game system.

So much for ever seeing Darksun for 5e.
oh no, thanks to those SJWs you can't.... uh, what exactly is it that you can't do anymore? why would Dark Sun be off the table, last I remember the slavers were generally presented as the bad guys, as were the people who magically screwed everything up.
 


Nickolaidas

Explorer
uh, a game doesn't need to be morally complex for kids to do things that don't involve killing. actually it seems a little ethically suspect to present killing anything, evil or otherwise, to kids without any moral complexity.
That's literally how BECMI edition rolled, back in the day. There were no moral conundrums. It was all about going to place X and kill monster Y.
 

MGibster

Legend
it doesn't matter if it isn't "real". I don't need Magritte to tell me the pipe in his painting isn't a real pipe, but I'm still gonna call it a pipe. if there's systemic or cultural prejudice against a specific type of people in a setting it's racism. calling it not racism makes no sense. by that logic if I see a castle in a setting I shouldn't call it a "castle" since it's not real. I guess I'll start calling them "fleppledoofs", and kingdoms "glepletiins", also are the humans the same humans in real life? like it's been stated numerous times here they can have kids with orcs and elves, but we have no real world evidence of this, so I guess they're not really humans.

Again, I didn't ask you to agree. You seemed genuinely perplexed by how someone might disagree with your opinion. I offered one possible reason. Understanding where someone is coming from isn't the same as agreeing with them.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
also not sure how I feel about conjecture made about whether or not Muslims have become more conservative since the 90's 😐
Yeah, in retrospect that post did not at all come off the way I meant it to, and I do apologize. This thread moves fast, I was skimming, and posted without fully understanding the context of the conversation thread I was chiming in to. It was certainly not my intention to suggest that Muslims in general have grown more conservative since the 90s, nor any Muslims specifically, and it’s not something I believe - I admit I don’t really know much about Muslim religion or culture at all. Of course, I am a strong believer that effects matter more than intent, so if anyone was hurt by what I said, I apologize, and if there is anything I can do to try and make up for it, please let me know. I’d be happy to edit the post, if that would help.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
But you must also realize that not everyone was born in America. Not everyone has a history with racism and therefore not everyone reads the orc description in the same way some Americans do.

What’s this got to do with the topic?

Enough people see the problem that wotc is addressing it. Because they want to make the big tent bigger. It’s simple.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top