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...

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.


636252771691385727.jpg


@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'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't really agree with this. Frost Giants are based off of Vikings, and I'm descended from them, and I don't get offended with their depictions as stupid, evil, enslavers.
No, Frost Giants are not "based on Vikings*". They are based on creatures from Scandinavian mythology, just like Banshees are from Irish.

If dwarves' depictions are offensive in some way, change that, but I don't really see how it is.
Portraying Scottish people as miserly is offensive to Scottish people. As is usually the case, people who are not Scots probably don't know that (I'm half Scottish half English). So if you make dwarves Scottish AND miserly it's offensive. If you make your dwarves Scottish and generous it is fine, because "generous" is a positive trait.


*The word "viking" itself could be seen as negative, since it's literal meaning is a synonym for "raider", "bandit" or "pirate". However, most Scandinavians are proud to be associated with Vikings, despite it's literal meaning, so don't find being called a Viking offensive (same with the English and "buccaneer", another synonym for "pirate"). That is why you need people with specific cultural knowledge to have an idea what is and is not likely to be offensive. It's not about what you consider offensive, and without a very broad education there is no reason why you would know what someone from a different culture considers offensive.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

That is why you need people with specific cultural knowledge to have an idea what is and is not likely to be offensive. It's not about what you consider offensive, and without a very broad education there is no reason why you would know what someone from a different culture considers offensive.
And you need broad exposure. To other cultures. To other people. Actual understanding. And not baseless disagreements.
Detriments are closed groups. But that sometimes cannot be helped.
 

I think it shows a severe deficiency of imagination for all these unrelated species to have an essentially human psychology at their core. This was already a problem to begin with - all the different species felt samey even in previous editions, as if they had only cultural differences - and I'm disappointed that tyey seem to be deliberately doubling down on it.

If anything, they should be going in the opposite direction. It should be no more possible to interchange a human and an elf than it is to interchange a wolf and a lion.

EDIT:
And that metaphor actually significantly understates the differences between the two in the standard D&D cosmology. The elves, being the result of a divine act of creation by Corellon Larethian, wouldn't even be in the same biological domain, or even in the same phylogenic tree at all. Humans and elves don't have a common ancestor with each other, nor do either of them share a common ancestor with dwarves, nor do any of those three share a common ancestor with orcs.

EDIT:
It comes off like a low budget science-fiction program where the only difference between the aliens and the humans is that the aliens have a funny accsnt and an odd facial feature because the producers couldn;t afford writers or effects

EDIT:
They ought to be moving to something closer to Warhammer, where the orcs are physiologically similar to a fungus and the elves have emotions that humans aren't familiar with and it's been just overall been done right
 
Last edited:

Mirtek

Hero
Vikings don't exist anymore, and there's no reason their descendants should get offended by Frost Giants' depictions. (I'm descended from Scandanavians, so take my word on that)
That's like saying "samurai don't exist anymore, and there's no reason their descendants should get offended by Hobgoblins' depictions"

No, Frost Giants are not "based on Vikings*". They are based on creatures from Scandinavian mythology, just like Banshees are from Irish.
No. While the general idea that there should be a frost giant in the first place is drawn from the jǫtunn, the way they are then fleshed out was by making them them large vikings (as in popculture view of what a viking was, rather than anything vikings really were like)
 

I agree. It's because no one gets offended when you base a giant race off of Vikings. Vikings don't exist anymore, and there's no reason their descendants should get offended by Frost Giants' depictions. (I'm descended from Scandanavians, so take my word on that)

Similarly to this, I'm of Italian ancentry and am not offended by all the villains out there based on the Roman empire
 




dwayne

Adventurer
The PHB is for making player characters. You figure the PCs are average?
did i use that word no, and don't put them in my mouth i stated typical of the races in the book which most of which are used as player characters and have stats above average as it has always been. The issue i have is saying a halfling with an 18 strength is going to beat a Minotaur with his max strength, as the racial max for most is 18 standard as per players hand book. A Minotaur has a race bonus of 2 in strength , were as a halfling does not so even if both had rolled and 18 on the dice the one would always be stronger.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top