D&D 5E WotC: Why Dark Sun Hasn't Been Revived

In an interview with YouTuber 'Bob the Worldbuilder', WotC's Kyle Brink explained why the classic Dark Sun setting has not yet seen light of day in the D&D 5E era.

I’ll be frank here, the Dark Sun setting is problematic in a lot of ways. And that’s the main reason we haven’t come back to it. We know it’s got a huge fan following and we have standards today that make it extraordinarily hard to be true to the source material and also meet our ethical and inclusion standards... We know there’s love out there for it and god we would love to make those people happy, and also we gotta be responsible.

You can listen to the clip here.

 

[Scribe]

A friend of mine, who is of English ancestry, is a fan of Japanese samurai films. Someone (maybe his son?) gave him a bushido-themed t-shirt. (I am telling this story from memory, and never saw the t-shirt. Maybe it had Japanese writing on it?)

My friend wore the t-shirt to a Korean restaurant. It caused some sort of awkwardness (I don't recall the details).

My friend was not trying to communicate any beliefs about relations between Japan and Korea, about wars and killings and colonies. But so what? His t-shirt had the effect that it did.

Ah OK thank you for the explanation.

Intent doesn't matter, simply the validation of the feelings of the other person, regardless of if one agrees that the issue should or could, cause offense or ones own feelings on the matter.

Got it.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Ah OK thank you for the explanation.

Intent doesn't matter, simply the validation of the feelings of the other person, regardless of if one agrees that the issue should or could, cause offense or ones own feelings on the matter.

Got it.

I mean, yeah, that's kind of it, isn't it? You don't need to be racist or trying to be racist to do something that could be interpreted as such. You don't need to be actively exclusionary to someone to inadvertently make them feel unwelcome. That doesn't mean you're racist, but it also doesn't negate the feelings of the person that feels hurt.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yes, but his views on Italians were not as severe as his views on people of Asian or African descent. That was my point.

I was not just talking about Italians. I was also talking about his views on Jews and the Irish. Also I think he considered Jews asian because he often referred to them as predominantly asiatic (not sure, I just know he used this language a lot in his letters)

I don't know how to grade the severity of his views towards different races and ethnicities. One feature of the New England racism he seemed to subscribe to is that it is often just as suscipious of some white groups as it is of people of different races (because so much of it is about this idea of breeding). He was very obsessed with his New England genealogy and this idea of pure English bloodlines (though I believe he did consider his 'stock' to be of peasant origin---which might account for some of the insecurity underlying many of his views).

I do think though it is a little hard for people to understand just how hostile people were to Catholic groups in that time. And this gets bound up in his concern about Italians and other ethnicities. He did seem to think we were capable of being assimilated but he had a very, very dim view of that saying (and his views on the Irish here are pretty clear as well):

These elements [here is talking not just about Italians but Southern Italians, Portuguese and French Canadians] will form a separate Roman Catholic culture hostile to our own, joining with the Irish--who in a highly unassimilated sate, are the pest of Boston. Many of these stocks could be assimilated---such as the Nordic Irish of Eastern Ireland and such of the French-Canadians as are of Norman extraction--but the process will be very slow.

Or this (again not strictly about Italians but it expresses some of his views towards them---note this is gets pretty intense):

...Gawd knows what they are--Jew, Italian, separate or mixed, with possible touches of residual aboriginal Irish and exotic hints of the far east---a bastard mess of stewing mongrel flesh without intellect, repellent to the eye, nose and imagination---would to heaven a kindly gust of cyanogen could asphyxiate the whole gigantic abortion, end the misery, and clean out the place.

This has been widely quoted, though the last portion there often gets clipped (and it is the worsts part). This was I believe on his way to Chinatown, where he is describing the ethnically mixed area the lower east Side in NY. This is sometimes described as him depicting the people of Chinatown, but my reading of the letter is this is simply an area of New York where he is upset by the racial mixing (and mostly seems to think its a mix of Italians, Jews and Irish, which again is pretty much my heritage), before he actually reaches Chinatown (which he also describes)

I would say that is pretty bad. It is possible the bit about wishing people got gassed was a bad attempt at being funny and not sincere (I don't know, and this is well before the Holocaust but describing Jews in that way and following it with that kind of thinking certainly troubles me a lot). So it isn't like his ideas about race don't upset me. I find what he says to be very troubling here.

I am sure I could find equally, possibly worse, descriptions of other groups. But the point is his racism was not just about a black and white dichotomy or about black, asian and white. It was very focused on this idea of ethnic inferiority too.

And to be clear, this isn't a contest. I am not saying he reserved his deepest vitriol for Jews, Italians and Irish, I am just saying he sure had a lot of vitriol for them (and it is something instantly recognizable if you grew up in New England and were exposed to any of that thinking).

 

[Scribe]

I mean, yeah, that's kind of it, isn't it? You don't need to be racist or trying to be racist to do something that could be interpreted as such. You don't need to be actively exclusionary to someone to inadvertently make them feel unwelcome. That doesn't mean you're racist, but it also doesn't negate the feelings of the person that feels hurt.

Yeah totally, and I get it. I would not seek to cause offense or hurt someone intentionally.

The point at which we assign personal responsibility seems to be the sticking point here though in engaging with the content we wish to engage with.

 

[Bedrockgames]

And I repeat, if you think that can only be accomplished through slavery, I think you should reconsider. That comes off as a lack of imagination.

Again I don't know how many times i need to restate: I have used other approaches to demonstrate a setting is oppressive. Slavery isn't the only way, or the most fitting way. In the case of Dark Sun, I think it works. I think you could come up with something else, but I also think you lose a lot doing that. To me that doesn't show a lack of imagination (if you find me unimaginative, fair enough, but I know I am a creative and imaginative person so I am not that worried about your judgment of me on that front); it just shows that I feel the slavery element of the setting fits with all its themes. Not everyone has to agree with that of course

 

[Bedrockgames]

Maybe the joke was missed, but the point was that redemption is not so easy as occasionally having a moment of clarity. He should be condemned pretty roundly because he never came around nearly enough to forgive what he did. I don't see any reason to try and rehabilitate the man because we don't need to and it's not needed.

I never said he was redeemed. And I can't pretend to know where he would have ended up had he lived through the end of WWII. I only said I saw moments of clarity in his thinking. I also find many of his views pathetic, because they seem to be a product of his distorted mind and not just his times (his obsession with genealogy is very apparent if you read his letters, and while it wasn't uncommon at that time to want to trace your bloodline back to England to back to Charlemagne (even getting creative to make those bloodlines work), he goes on about it and ties so many of his own personality traits to individuals in his lineage.

He strikes me as someone who was very mentally disordered, could off on these alarming tangents about racial groups, but would have these flashes of empathy and understanding, which I just find intriguing (especially with the knowledge that he would have been quite critical of my own ethnic background). I also feel some empathy for him as a human being, even if I found a lot of his ideas repulsive because so much of this seemed to me, to be rooted in extreme mental illness and insecurity about himself (I feel like he is doing a ton of projecting onto these groups when he talks about them).

And I am not saying he needs to be rehabilitated. His writing are there for all to see. People can read his letters and make their own judgments. People can read his stories and make their own judgment. I think it is pretty clear how I feel about his ideas. But I do think if we are going to talk about what he believed, we should try to understand what he believed and how his thinking might have changed, if at all, over time. I afford that to any person from history I am taking an interest in.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I was not just talking about Italians. I was also talking about his views on Jews and the Irish. Also I think he considered Jews asian because he often referred to them as predominantly asiatic (not sure, I just know he used this language a lot in his letters)

I don't know how to grade the severity of his views towards different races and ethnicities. One feature of the New England racism he seemed to subscribe to is that it is often just as suscipious of some white groups as it is of people of different races (because so much of it is about this idea of breeding). He was very obsessed with his New England genealogy and this idea of pure English bloodlines (though I believe he did consider his 'stock' to be of peasant origin---which might account for some of the insecurity underlying many of his views).

I do think though it is a little hard for people to understand just how hostile people were to Catholic groups in that time. And this gets bound up in his concern about Italians and other ethnicities. He did seem to think we were capable of being assimilated but he had a very, very dim view of that saying (and his views on the Irish here are pretty clear as well):

His views on Asians and Africans are pretty well-known, but I suggest you look them up. I think they'll better-inform you of why he's harder to touch than you are making out.

Or this (again not strictly about Italians but it expresses some of his views towards them---note this is gets pretty intense):



This has been widely quoted, though the last portion there often gets clipped (and it is the worsts part). This was I believe on his way to Chinatown, where he is describing the ethnically mixed area the lower east Side in NY. This is sometimes described as him depicting the people of Chinatown, but my reading of the letter is this is simply an area of New York where he is upset by the racial mixing (and mostly seems to think its a mix of Italians, Jews and Irish, which again is pretty much my heritage), before he actually reaches Chinatown (which he also describes)

I would say that is pretty bad. It is possible the bit about wishing people got gassed was a bad attempt at being funny and not sincere (I don't know, and this is well before the Holocaust but describing Jews in that way and following it with that kind of thinking certainly troubles me a lot). So it isn't like his ideas about race don't upset me. I find what he says to be very troubling here.

I am sure I could find equally, possibly worse, descriptions of other groups. But the point is his racism was not just about a black and white dichotomy or about black, asian and white. It was very focused on this idea of ethnic inferiority too.

And to be clear, this isn't a contest. I am not saying he reserved his deepest vitriol for Jews, Italians and Irish, I am just saying he sure had a lot of vitriol for them (and it is something instantly recognizable if you grew up in New England and were exposed to any of that thinking).

Yes, but I think there are clear delineations between different ethnicities. At any rate, I feel like all this does is show why we should move away from the writer even if we continue to use his literature. The idea that we are using his bust for literary trophies seems pretty ill-considered given his views.

Yeah totally, and I get it. I would not seek to cause offense or hurt someone intentionally.

The point at which we assign personal responsibility seems to be the sticking point here though in engaging with the content we wish to engage with.

I mean, personal responsibility is understanding that you caused someone offense and trying to rectify it as best you can. @pemerton 's friend probably didn't mean to cause offense to the Korean business, but that is still on them regardless of how the mistake came about.

When it comes to the content we wish to engage with, there is a point to make that larger companies are trying to attract the largest audiences and something like D&D is going to be looking to appeal to that audience. There is a difference in avoiding content because it does not appeal to me (let's say Strixhaven) versus something that actively makes me feel unwelcome because of who I am and my cultural heritage. The former is going to happen and companies are okay with it, the latter is pretty different and going to cause problems.

Again I don't know how many times i need to restate: I have used other approaches to demonstrate a setting is oppressive. Slavery isn't the only way, or the most fitting way. In the case of Dark Sun, I think it works. I think you could come up with something else, but I also think you lose a lot doing that. To me that doesn't show a lack of imagination (if you find me unimaginative, fair enough, but I know I am a creative and imaginative person so I am not that worried about your judgment of me on that front); it just shows that I feel the slavery element of the setting fits with all its themes. Not everyone has to agree with that of course

I just find this unconvincing as an argument to keep slavery in the game because I think it just comes off as trying to not find a solution. I really don't see what slavery does in particular that other things can't do, other than being what was originally there.

I never said he was redeemed. And I can't pretend to know where he would have ended up had he lived through the end of WWII. I only said I saw moments of clarity in his thinking. I also find many of his views pathetic, because they seem to be a product of his distorted mind and not just his times (his obsession with genealogy is very apparent if you read his letters, and while it wasn't uncommon at that time to want to trace your bloodline back to England to back to Charlemagne (even getting creative to make those bloodlines work), he goes on about it and ties so many of his own personality traits to individuals in his lineage.

He strikes me as someone who was very mentally disordered, could off on these alarming tangents about racial groups, but would have these flashes of empathy and understanding, which I just find intriguing (especially with the knowledge that he would have been quite critical of my own ethnic background). I also feel some empathy for him as a human being, even if I found a lot of his ideas repulsive because so much of this seemed to me, to be rooted in extreme mental illness and insecurity about himself (I feel like he is doing a ton of projecting onto these groups when he talks about them).

And I am not saying he needs to be rehabilitated. His writing are there for all to see. People can read his letters and make their own judgments. People can read his stories and make their own judgment. I think it is pretty clear how I feel about his ideas. But I do think if we are going to talk about what he believed, we should try to understand what he believed and how his thinking might have changed, if at all, over time. I afford that to any person from history I am taking an interest in.

Yeah, but none of this is a good argument against moving away from him. Whatever he did was not nearly enough for the lifetime of racism he cultivated and put into his works. We shouldn't be using the person to advertise things.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Sometimes people who are flawed and have bad ideas make great works of art.

Sure. I think this is pretty uncontroversial - even if we tend to stereotype the "tortured artist," and are perhaps willing to afford them more latitude in their views and actions because of their art. But I also think that this tendency has been becoming less forgivable in many ways for quite some while; that mental illness has become less stigmatized: which is to say that you can't just be a prick just because you're a genius, and you can now take your meds without impacting your creativity. If you continue to remain a prick, then I'm sorry, but the fault now lies squarely on your shoulders.

I think everyone needs to decide for themselves how they want to handle and view Lovecraft (it is a bit like the ‘is it okay to listen to Wagner’ discussion).

An anecdote, for what it's worth.

I used to run a kitchen in a large Jewish retirement home, and one of the residents - I'll call him Leonard - was a rabbi, and a holocaust survivor. After Leonard died, and his personal effects were being removed from his apartment, a large collection of Wagner recordings from the 30s and 40s were uncovered among his LPs. Now, I cannot enter Leonard's brain; he was an erudite man. He was vastly better-read; better educated; more sophisticated than I; his life experience...I can barely begin to imagine.

I am not denying that Wagner was a genius. I am not saying that you should not listen to, or be moved to tears by Wagner.

But Wagner remains a prick.

 

[pemerton]

Ah OK thank you for the explanation.

Intent doesn't matter, simply the validation of the feelings of the other person, regardless of if one agrees that the issue should or could, cause offense or ones own feelings on the matter.

Got it.

Well, let's say there are three people: A (the t-shirt wearer, Lovecraft-works-sponsor, etc); B (the person who feels excluded by the presentation of themes and content that remind them of unhappy parts of their history, and even reinforce those things in their contemporary experience); and C (the bystander/observer).

Who is C apt to sympathise with - A, the person whose choice of t-shirt or RPG enthusiasm has been called into question? Or B, the person whose life keeps getting made that little bit more miserable by being reminded of this stuff again and again and again and . . .

It turns out that many of the Cs in today's world sympathise more with B than with A. They don't think that B should just have to suck it up.

 

[Bedrockgames]

His views on Asians and Africans are pretty well-known, but I suggest you look them up. I think they'll better-inform you of why he's harder to touch than you are making out.

Like I said, I read his letters and I have read his stories. I am aware he had bad views towards these groups. But as the quoted shows, his views of other ethnicities could be just as bad (unless you think wishing a gust of gas to asphyxiate the mixed Italians, Jews and Irish is someone more benign than his attitude towards black people/

Yes, but I think there are clear delineations between different ethnicities. At any rate, I feel like all this does is show why we should move away from the writer even if we continue to use his literature. The idea that we are using his bust for literary trophies seems pretty ill-considered given his views.

I am not really sure what you mean by the delegations point.

Again, people can do what they wish with him. I don't think moving away from Lovecraft is helpful, especially since his influence is undeniable. And I think we can both address his beliefs while also appreciating his work. A lot of figures in history are like this. And a lot of artists are extremely imperfect, even vile in their personal lives and views. Personally I find it helpful to be exposed to how someone like this thought. I don't like his views, but I think it is much better to be exposed to it, understand it, yet also have to reconcile that with his genius stories.

On the bust, I am not particularly hung up on that. Like I said I don't really care what an awards ceremony does. I do think it is possible to have busts of people and understand we aren't supporting everything they said or did, but are valuing some other contribution they made to the arts.