D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford on D&D Races Going Forward

On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty.

@ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence debuff and the evil alignment, with a more acceptable narrative. It's a start, but there's a fair argument for gutting the entire race system.

The orcs of Eberron and Wildemount reflect where our hearts are and indicate where we’re heading.

@vorpaldicepress I hate to be "that guy", but what about Drow, Vistani, and the other troublesome races and cultures in Forgotten Realms (like the Gur, another Roma-inspired race)? Things don't change over night, but are these on the radar?

The drow, Vistani, and many other folk in the game are on our radar. The same spirit that motivated our portrayal of orcs in Eberron is animating our work on all these peoples.

@MileyMan1066 Good. These problems need to be addressed. The variant features UA could have a sequel that includes notes that could rectify some of the problems and help move 5e in a better direction.

Addressing these issues is vital to us. Eberron and Wildemount are the first of multiple books that will face these issues head on and will do so from multiple angles.

@mbriddell I'm happy to hear that you are taking a serious look at this. Do you feel that you can achieve this within the context of Forgotten Realms, given how establised that world's lore is, or would you need to establish a new setting to do this?

Thankfully, the core setting of D&D is the multiverse, with its multitude of worlds. We can tell so many different stories, with different perspectives, in each world. And when we return to a world like FR, stories can evolve. In short, even the older worlds can improve.

@SlyFlourish I could see gnolls being treated differently in other worlds, particularly when they’re a playable race. The idea that they’re spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat feels like they’re in a different class than drow, orcs, goblins and the like. Same with minotaurs.

Internally, we feel that the gnolls in the MM are mistyped. Given their story, they should be fiends, not humanoids. In contrast, the gnolls of Eberron are humanoids, a people with moral and cultural expansiveness.

@MikeyMan1066 I agree. Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls. Gnolls... the way they are described, do not. Having them be minor demons would clear a lot of this up.

You just described our team's perspective exactly.

As a side-note, the term 'race' is starting to fall out of favor in tabletop RPGs (Pathfinder has "ancestry", and other games use terms like "heritage"); while he doesn't comment on that specifically, he doesn't use the word 'race' and instead refers to 'folks' and 'peoples'.

 

[Haldrik]

Quite franky I doubt that this would raise anything. Sure, with 60.3 million italians you can probably find at least 1 person that will be offended about anything one could possibly think of. But they could have hobgoblin armies carrying a SPQR banner and the number of italian gamers being offended would be miniscule.

Are you Italian?

An Italian just mentioned there would be an explosion because of how the salute was adopted by modern fascists in Italy.

It would be easy for an artist appropriating Roman imagery to not know this about Italian culture today.

 

[FireLance]

@Ash Mantle


How is that pronounced? Would love to use it!

Try this link.

 

[Olrox17]

Quite franky I doubt that this would raise anything. Sure, with 60.3 million italians you can probably find at least 1 person that will be offended about anything one could possibly think of. But they could have hobgoblin armies carrying a SPQR banner and the number of italian gamers being offended would be miniscule.

Most likely, yeah, although a SPQR banner would probably be a very poor choice, given it is an highly recognizable acronym with a precise meaning

 

[Haldrik]

Drawing inspiration from real life cultures and events can be a great resource, but it certainly should be handled with some amount of care.
That's why I agree that the Vistani and "japanised" hobgoblin could have been handled better, while I personally have no problem with the 5e depiction of orcs and drow.

If orcs were normal, capable of Good or Evil, there would be less of an issue.

Even so, with regard to the Hobgoblin, if I were Japanese, it would annoy me that "Not-Japan" got the ugly race.

 

[Bardic Dave]

Are you Italian?

An Italian just mentioned there would be an explosion because of how the salute was adopted by modern fascists in Italy.

It would be easy for an artist appropriating Roman imagery to not know this about Italian culture today.

Also, you know, nazis...

The nazi salute and the roman salute are one and the same. That bit of trivia may not be top of mind for the average person, but once you see the roman salute, there's no mistaking it. I doubt any artist would make that particular mistake (unless they're REALLY clueless, or a deliberate provocateur), but your overall point is sound.

 

[Haldrik]

Also, you know, nazis...

The nazi salute and the roman salute are one and the same. That bit of trivia may not be top of mind for the average person, but once you see the roman salute, there's no mistaking it. I doubt any artist would make that particular mistake (unless they're REALLY clueless, or a deliberate provocateur), but your overall point is sound.

Actually, I didnt realize they were the same. I guess there is a reason I have never seen such an image. I had another gesture in mind.

 

[Olrox17]

If orcs were normal, capable of Good or Evil, there would be less of an issue.

I wouldn't mind having both, honestly. The "normal people" orcs, and the crazy evil ones. Warcraft solved this quite easily years ago: orcs were a normal race of humanoids, neither good nor evil, until most of them were corrupted by the demon Mannoroth and turned into unstoppable killing machines with a lust for blood.
In D&D, the role of Mannoroth can easily be given to Gruumsh. Orcs under the influence of Gruumsh are little more than earthly demons, while those that escaped it are just people.

Even so, with regard to the Hobgoblin, if I were Japanese, it would annoy me that "Not-Japan" got the ugly race.

It's a bit unfortunate, because the armor in the artwork looks really cool. The hobgoblin warlord might be my favorite piece of art in the MM. Real badass look.

 

[Bardic Dave]

Actually, I didnt realize they were the same.

I had a feeling

 

[Haldrik]

The N*zi appropriation of other cultures ruined so many things for so many people!

 

[Mercurius]

I take it you didn't read much of the thread? Orcs are basically presented in a way that is extremely similar to how 20th century racists described the inherent characteristics of black people (fecund, stupid, aggressive, etc.), and they're humanoids and quite close to humans in appearance. And whilst you can say "Well people don't read those books anymore!", the ideas are still around - US anti-black racism (including specifically how the police are more violent towards black people) relies on those exact tropes (as does some UK police anti-black racism, note - it's nowhere near as extreme, but I've personally experienced it in quite a wild form, but that's a long story). Nowadays the ideas are passed more person-to-person, or by fringe pseudo-science websites, or Facebook, or far-right radio and TV and especially YouTube and so on, but they're if anything harder to get rid of, because they're somewhat underground.

I read the first few and last few pages. Forgive me for not reading all 95 pages!

I would refer you, again, back to @Galandris 's important point, that it is a bad solution--in some ways more damaging and perpetuating of racism--to strengthen the hypothetical connection of orcs to black people. Why not just strengthen the idea that orcs are orcs and have absolutely nothing to do with black people? They're an aggressive and generally evil humanoid race in a fantasy world. That's it.

I mean, by your logic we could comb through every race and find characteristics similar to real world racist stereotypes. I think a better solution is to strengthen the fantasy of it.

Drow are the only major very-dark-skinned race in D&D, and the only major matriarchy in D&D, and they're super-ultra-evil. And yes they're dark-skinned because there's cursed. You're sadly wrong to believe that it's gone as an idea. They've played it down, and I believe it's no longer part of the "generalized" backstory of the Drow, but it was certainly present in 2E and 3E, and I think it may even be in SCAG. As well as making it clear that the curse story is nonsense and coming up with some other clear story (instead of no clear reason why), they need to show more example of Drow who aren't evil. It's not like this would be a retcon - it's been a common theme for a long time, way back into 2E and 3E, it just keeps getting sidelined or hidden or retcon'd out of existence in favour of Menzoberranzan-style Drow.

You basically just proved my point: the "dark skin = cursed" thing has been played down and written out. We can recognize and agree that this was problematic in the past--and I agree that it is problematic--but also recognize that it has already been addressed, that there has been progress. I'm in the process of moving so don't have all my books handy, but would be very surprised if SCAG still included that, or at least the equivalency of "dark = cursed." If it does, I agree that it is problematic and should be changed, with the caveat that the problem isn't the cursing or even necessarily the dark skin; it is that the cursing darkened their skin.

There have also been unfortunate connections to African-American people, like the covers on 1E material (at least one reprinted in 2E, possibly others), and Jarlaxle dressing like a stereotypical "pimp" (and somewhat talking that way too), which recently has been retcon'd a bit, so now he's more just a guy with a big hat with a feather in it, and a lot less bling and dark clothes instead of eye-wateringly-bright ones.

Again, we're talking about decades ago for the 1E/2E material, like the infamous Keith Parkinson picture depicting drow as brown-skinned. But that is an inaccurate depiction by one artist, that TSR shouldn't have signed off on. The drow aren't brown-skinned: they're black, obsidian-like. I have no idea why Parkinson painted them that way, whether it was an innocent attempt to be unique or make them more naturalistic, or whether their was conscious or sub-conscious racism involved. I wouldn't want to make an assumption either way, but the point is that was an error according to canon, and TSR should have asked Parkinson to rectify it. I don't think that would happen today.

I don't think the pimp thing is all that problematic, because a pimp--even in the stereotypical mold--is already a seedy character, a criminal, and not a representative of black people or culture, in a similar way that a mafia boss is not representative of Italian culture, or a Spanish Inquisitor is not representative of all Christians. I have no problem with modeling a fantasy villain off of a mafia boss, so have no problem with the pimp thing. The problem only arises by a false equation of "pimp = black people."

You're flatly wrong to say that the complaint is subtly sexist re: matriarchy, because you're adding something to the complaint, which is on you. The complaint is simply that the only major matriarchy in D&D is stone-cold evil as all hell, like staggeringly evil (and in a somewhat sexist stereotype of female way - it's cruelty and torture-oriented, rather than brutally fascist or the like - misogynist men often complain about the "cruelty" of women or how they're being "tortured" by them). There's no suggestion that women can't be evil inherent to that. That's on you. However you are correct re: the solution, which is to offer more examples of matriarchies, ones which aren't evil as all get out. I get where this came from - it's a whole deal with the spider connection, but it should have been addressed decades ago. It was obviously deeply problematic even in the early 1990s (especially when all the BDSM stuff comes in as well).

Again, this is a false equivalency: saying tha because the most frequently depicted matriarchy is evil means that the depiction itself and/or the writers of D&D are implying that all matriarchies are inherently evil, especially when they provide examples of matriarchies that aren't evil. As you say, it is based on spiders, not human women. Drow worship the spider goddess, therefore are matriarchal. Kind of makes sense to me. Matriarchies--as with all forms of government--can be oppressive, and some men (and not only misogynist men) have and do experience the "cruelty of women," who--being human--can be just as cruel as men.

Personally I'd argue that a strictly matriarchal or patriarchal system is inherently problematic, so any such system is fair game to be considered evil.

The issue with Drow is less that they're connected directly to black people, and more than they're the only major very-dark-skinned race (where that's actually a major trait of their appearance, not a variable thing like humans), especially that is powerful and civilized, and they're incredibly evil. It'd be difficult to introduce more new races to D&D who were dark-skinned but not evil, because it would take years to make them "major" and it might seem very forced. So the better solution is to make dark grey the default skin-tone for Drow (distancing them from human skin-tones), whilst playing up the fact that they're not inherently evil, and it's not at all just a wild weird "Mary Sue" thing to be a non-evil Drow, that's there's just a large Drow culture that is evil (people are totally willing to accept that a culture can be evil). This will, of course, deeply offend some nerds who married to the idea that anyone who wants to play a good Drow or even has good Drow in their campaign is some kind of "Mary Sue" (god the inaccurate usage...) loser who loves Drizzt and so on, but I think that's fine, and they need to get over their juvenile deal.

I don't think your gray-skinned solution really solves any problems, to whatever degree the problems exist. You're changing them from one color not seen in our world to another color not seen in our world (there are no obsidian black-skinned or gray-skinned humans). Is obsidian black closer than gray to real-world shades of brown? Not necessarily. Real-world skin tones run the gamut, from very dark brown (but not obsidian) to shades of pink-white, but never black or gray (although sometimes blue if you take too much colloidal silver!).

But again, I think you are making the error that Galandris pointed out: doubling-down on a tenuous connection, which only strengthens it, and then trying to rectify it. This, I think, only makes the matter worse. Better to de-couple drow (and orcs) from these tenuous real-world connections. Orcs are orcs, drow are drow. The good thing is that they've already done this to some extent. I'm not saying that more can't be done, but I don't agree with the direction that you're suggesting.

Look, I get and agree with the underlying intention of reducing stereotypes and making the game more inclusive; I'm all for that. I just think there are better ways to go about it, and some of the commonly presented solutions only make the matter worse, and oftentimes throw the baby out with the bathwater. Saying that "orcs are brutish and evil, but not all of them!" or "drow are gray not black, and matriarchal and evil, but just a certain culture" not only carries subtle racist overtones but doesn't solve anything and actually re-inforces connections that we're probably better de-coupling.