Quote from: BedrockBrendan;480418I think this is an important distiction. Drawing on these like real world history for flavor doesn't mean the writer is advancing racism. He may be drawing on the theme of eastern invaders, because that is a theme in the history of the west. It is something that clicks in peoples' heads. That doesn't mean he is making a comment on mongol culture or eastern european culture.

It also might have something to do with the fact that decades' worth of world-building had kind of dictated how the story would play out geographically.  M-E maps were in existence in at least sketchy (at times VERY sketchy) form since the late 'teens/early '20s of the 20th century.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;480416So I think there is a lot of arguing for arguments sake here, but that doesn't mean everyone on the other side is saying we need to get rid of these tropes from D&D because it is somehow polluting us. I think a few have just been arguing in favor of their prefered approach to alignment and races, and didn't intend to endorse the OPs position (in the same way that D&D doesn't endorse racism

Always start like this though: it begins with "you know, I don't do that in my game". Then it transits to "if you're doing it, you are either a bad person, or you just don't realize what you're doing". Then it ends up with "we redesigned the game so there's no doubt we do not support this behavior".

Once upon a time, you could see this:



But now, you see that:



A cigar airbrushed away to use the picture on the front of the Britain At War Exhibition in Tooley Street, Central London.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;480416Maybe I am an optimist, but my reading is that people are mostly just arguing over the finer meaning of specific statements rather than embracing the OPs original statement. For example, when I said that this kind of stuff isn't a product of gaming. A few people took issue with my literal statement (which I clarified later) but also added they didn't agree with the OP. So I think there is a lot of arguing for arguments sake here, but that doesn't mean everyone on the other side is saying we need to get rid of these tropes from D&D because it is somehow polluting us. I think a few have just been arguing in favor of their prefered approach to alignment and races, and didn't intend to endorse the OPs position (in the same way that D&D doesn't endorse racism

!!!!

From the start I have been oe of those willing to accept that elements of D&D have parallels with racism.

My solution as I have been saying from the beinging is to do the opposite of what most people here argue. I bring the racism to the fore. If you choose to play a 1/2 ogre you will elicit a racist response.

It is entirely likely in my games that orcs will be villified as a race. It is also likely that this villification is a contributory factor in how they act.

I choose to examine possible racism because I think that makes the world more interesting but also I think it prevents others from co-opting it. No one  can say that we should treat like you treat because I can point to teh goodly cleric that offers them mercy and understanding or the fact that they are only treated that way by the evil tyrant you are trying to over throw.

Quote from: Benoist;480421Always start like this though: it begins with "you know, I don't do that in my game". Then it transits to "if you're doing it, you are either a bad person, or you just don't realize what you're doing". Then it ends up with "we redesigned the game so there's no doubt we do not support this behavior".


A cigar airbrushed away to use the picture on the front of the Britain At War Exhibition in Tooley Street, Central London.

Funny you use a photograph of a racist guy that believed in white man's burden and thought we should gas the Kurds on a thread where you are arguing that there is no taint of racism in your favoured hobby

Oh the irony

Quote from: Benoist;480421Always start like this though: it begins with "you know, I don't do that in my game". Then it transits to "if you're doing it, you are either a bad person, or you just don't realize what you're doing". Then it ends up with "we redesigned the game so there's no doubt we do not support this behavior".

And that is why I find the whole search for potentially "problematic" things in the game stifling.

Also to comment on the airbrushing thing, I think that whole approach of sheltering viewers from bad habits doesn't work in practice. My father was a pretty ardent pacifist. I wasn't allowed to view violent or R-rated movies growing up, and I wasn't allowed to have any kind of militant toys (including GI Joe). I was also told violence is bad etc. Yet I became a huge fan of action films, shows like 24, and I got into boxing. It is a little like the "just say no" thing. All the kids in my grade grew up on Just Say No, and most of them ended experimenting with drugs (largely because drugs turned out to be less icky and sinister than they were led to believe by the just say no campaign). In short, it oversimplified the issue. It almost generates a backlash.

Quote from: jibbajibba;480424Funny you use a photograph of a racist guy that believed in white man's burden and thought we should gas the Kurds on a thread where you are arguing that there is no taint of racism in your favoured hobby

Oh the irony

Dude, you go ahead on your sidetrek about whether or not Winston Churchill was a commendable person on your own. I guess we find irony where we can.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;480425And that is why I find the whole search for potentially "problematic" things in the game stifling.

Also to comment on the airbrushing thing, I think that whole approach of sheltering viewers from bad habits doesn't work in practice. My father was a pretty ardent pacifist. I wasn't allowed to view violent or R-rated movies growing up, and I wasn't allowed to have any kind of militant toys (including GI Joe). I was also told violence is bad etc. Yet I became a huge fan of action films, shows like 24, and I got into boxing. It is a little like the "just say no" thing. All the kids in my grade grew up on Just Say No, and most of them ended experimenting with drugs (largely because drugs turned out to be less icky and sinister than they were led to believe by the just say no campaign). In short, it oversimplified the issue. It almost generates a backlash.

I completely agree.

Quote from: Benoist;480426Dude, you go ahead on your sidetrek about whether or not Winston Churchill was a commendable person on your own. I guess we find irony where we can.

Oh come on you have to see the irony in that surely ?

So sweet Churchill stuff for yah .....

"Someone once asked Churchill if he had seen the film Carmen Jones, which starred Dorothy Dandridge. Winston replied that he didn't like blackamoors and had walked out early in the proceedings."

"When he was told that there was a very high mortality among Negroes from measels he growled 'Well there are plenty left. They've a high rate of production'".

"Churchill was irritated by Harold Macmillan's 1960 'Wind of Change' speech. 'Harold should not have gone to Africa encouraging the black men.'"

lovely chap no harm done, product of his age My house-master use to roger me silly never did me any harm : ) etc etc etc ....

Quote from: jibbajibba;480423From the start I have been oe of those willing to accept that elements of D&D have parallels with racism.

My solution as I have been saying from the beinging is to do the opposite of what most people here argue. I bring the racism to the fore. If you choose to play a 1/2 ogre you will elicit a racist response.

It is entirely likely in my games that orcs will be villified as a race. It is also likely that this villification is a contributory factor in how they act.

I choose to examine possible racism because I think that makes the world more interesting but also I think it prevents others from co-opting it. No one  can say that we should treat like you treat because I can point to teh goodly cleric that offers them mercy and understanding or the fact that they are only treated that way by the evil tyrant you are trying to over throw.

Where you see orcs as a race, I see orcs as monsters. Maybe in your campaigns orcs are hated because they are not human. In my campaign, orcs are hated and feared because they routinely maim and kill people, with little to no provocation. Your townsfolk would villify a half-ogre because it is a half-ogre and "unclean". My townsfolk would villify  half-ogre because they would be afraid the half-ogre would attack and try to eat them and their families... because that's what ogres do. Can you not see the difference in approaches? Our fantasy games posit the existence of actual monsters... not just bad people, but actual monsters. Orcs are one of those monsters in many people's campaigns. Monsters are not people, they are not a "race" any more than mountain gorillas are a race in the real world, they are a species. That they can impregnate humans is meant to be monstrous, not an indication that they are a type of humans, unless that's what the DM wants them to be. I mean, elves can impregnate humans too, but that doesn't mean elves are meant to be a type of human either. This shit is taken from myth, and if played closer to myth, elves could be more as much or more monstrous as orcs. In the raw D&D, much like in Tolkien, orcs are meant to be the counter-point to elves, so they are given similar traits. I see nothing that indicates to me that orcs were meant to be a RPG way of denigrating a real world race or culture. What Adam Dray sees is what Adam Dray wants to see, and that is brought to the game entirely by Adam Dray.

What I know is that this man and a handful of others played a pivotal role in me not speaking German as a native language today. For that, I am very thankful indeed.

You know? It's kinda cool this irony thing. I see it now. I ought to do that more often.

Quote from: Sigmund;480430Where you see orcs as a race, I see orcs as monsters. Maybe in your campaigns orcs are hated because they are not human. In my campaign, orcs are hated and feared because they routinely maim and kill people, with little to no provocation. Your townsfolk would villify a half-ogre because it is a half-ogre and "unclean". My townsfolk would villify  half-ogre because they would be afraid the half-ogre would attack and try to eat them and their families... because that's what ogres do. Can you not see the difference in approaches? Our fantasy games posit the existence of actual monsters... not just bad people, but actual monsters. Orcs are one of those monsters in many people's campaigns. Monsters are not people, they are not a "race" any more than mountain gorillas are a race in the real world, they are a species. That they can impregnate humans is meant to be monstrous, not an indication that they are a type of humans, unless that's what the DM wants them to be.

No I totally understand what a monster is but don't get me wrong my people are just liek your people they will villify a half-ogre because they think he will eat them, but the key is in the work Think right.

Most people in my worlds have no fucking idea about how orcs breed or if they have young or if they are intelligent the same is true of ogres and hobgoblins and everyone else. They live in towns surrounded by other people just like them so they fear that which they do not understand. that is why I like to highlight the fact that that which is different to us is not always evil and monstrous and trying to eat us.

Now I never said you can't do it that way. I just said that you need to spare it a thought when you are building your world and don't be suprised if someone you don't like, with views you disagree with, takes that monstrousness and co-opts it for their own ends.

Quote from: Benoist;480431What I know is that this man and a handful of others played a pivotal role in me not speaking German as a native language today. For that, I am very thankful indeed.

You know? It's kinda cool this irony thing. I see it now. I ought to do that more often.

Now I think that was sarcasm

Quote from: jibbajibba;480436Now I think that was sarcasm

Oh you do know about that one too? Darn.

Quote from: jibbajibba;480434No I totally understand what a monster is but don't get me wrong my people are just liek your people they will villify a half-ogre because they think he will eat them, but the key is in the work Think right.

Most people in my worlds have no fucking idea about how orcs breed or if they have young or if they are intelligent the same is true of ogres and hobgoblins and everyone else. They live in towns surrounded by other people just like them so they fear that which they do not understand. that is why I like to highlight the fact that that which is different to us is not always evil and monstrous and trying to eat us.

Now I never said you can't do it that way. I just said that you need to spare it a thought when you are building your world and don't be suprised if someone you don't like, with views you disagree with, takes that monstrousness and co-opts it for their own ends.

Ok. I am reluctant to say anyone "needs" to do what you're saying here, as they can make that choice for themselves. Otherwise, yeah I can see how someone could take something and twist it to try to make it illustrate a point it isn't designed to... it's what Dray has done after all.