Honestly, most people want to play someone who looks like them.
Honestly? Is that why people like playing elves, dwarves, and halflings? Is that why people like monster races for their PCs?
Try not to generalize, please.
I think it would be a great marketing idea to create other settings loosely based in other cultures and histories much like D&D is based in European history. The ideas of Oriental Adventures, Maztica, Al Qadim, and 3rd party publisher Nambia can attract new players from different cultural backgrounds. Honestly, most people want to play someone who looks like them.
I think rather than creating multiple, unsupported settings for culture specific regions, why not create and support a world that encompasses a few of the more exotic ones, such as Oriental, Arabic and Mezoamerican? Create a large continent (or 2) and place these cultures into the world, giving credence to an established world history. Meaning don't slapdash a Mayan Civilization right next to China with out an cultural, economic and historical ties shared and explained.
I think its a good idea to create such a setting, even if it amounts to just 1 or 2 source books.
giving credence to an established world history.
Man, it's that world history which should give credence to more recent ways of thinking and cultures...
I don't like this idea. Sorry for being blunt at times, it was not for flaming.
k.
Man, it's that world history which should give credence to more recent ways of thinking and cultures...
I don't understand what you say. Could you explain what you would do ?
IMFC (in my futur campaign) I will create culture by mixing real world and fantasy elements, so that there is both an exotic/fantasy feel and a familiar one. Example : a culture with names from ancient Mesopotamia, physical geography akin to south-east Asia, outfits from the caribeans, and the widespread use of zombis.
The sentence you quoted was just a mistake on my part, because I mixed up "giving credence" with "giving credit".
k.
Honestly? Is that why people like playing elves, dwarves, and halflings? Is that why people like monster races for their PCs?
No honestly, YES. Of course ones definition of "looks like them" might be vastly different from person to person but if you look at role playing in general we tend to reflect our own general culture on our role playing and tend to play role playing scearios that are closer to the preceived cultually based biases we associate with.
The problem with cultural settings is that if you design the setting to be familiar with the people of that culture then you have to really do your homework. A number of (in fact almost all) the "cultural settings" have been strongly panned by the cultures they were supposed to emulate.
What I was saying is that we should't just have an "occidental" fantasy setting on the one side and an "oriental" one on the other. Since arabic and chinese civilisation had not that much in common, I don't understand why we should put them together.
QFT
No honestly, YES. Of course ones definition of "looks like them" might be vastly different from person to person but if you look at role playing in general we tend to reflect our own general culture on our role playing and tend to play role playing scearios that are closer to the preceived cultually based biases we associate with.
Sure, if you completely change what the OP said to what you're saying, then yes, it does sound more reasonable. Of course, it's more reasonable because it's almost trivially true. Our own cultures affect how we do things. Nothing new in that idea.
Did you ever attend a Game Convention? Something like Gen Con or Dragon Con? Not a computer game convention but one that has the focus on card/ board/ and table top RPGs... Ever notice the lack of people of color?
Many cultures beside those with origins in Europe have rich story telling histories. Isn't it time we extended a hand and welcomed those potential games to join us?
Yeah my Latino friends can play a Eurocentric Wizards, Fighters, and Clerics. But they got real interested when I pulled out a bunch of Aztec minis from Ral Partha.
Thanks Tzor! You understand my concept.
Caeruleus did you ever notice that all Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Elves are WHITE? Oh I forgot the Drow Elves... but aren't they evil?
Did you ever attend a Game Convention? Something like Gen Con or Dragon Con? Not a computer game convention but one that has the focus on card/ board/ and table top RPGs... Ever notice the lack of people of color?
Many cultures beside those with origins in Europe have rich story telling histories. Isn't it time we extended a hand and welcomed those potential games to join us?
Yeah my Latino friends can play a Eurocentric Wizards, Fighters, and Clerics. But they got real interested when I pulled out a bunch of Aztec minis from Ral Partha.
Thank you for clarifying what you meant.
I too would like to see more D&D material specific to non-European-flavored cultures. Al-Qadim is one of my favorite settings. I'm also interested in seeing Kara-Tur (and Nyambe, but that's not up to WotC).
Also, don't forget that that the core D&D books have many non-European-flavored features. Genies, flying carpets, nagas, yaun-ti, rakshasa, etc. And Greyhawk has a region that has an Arabian flavor (and I'm fortunate that my Living Greyhawk region is Zeif).
However, I think that there could definitely be more. I want to see a 4e Arabian Adventures and Oriental Adventures.
I would love to see a book that explores fantasy cultures that look like Africa, the Middle East, Asia, India, and Central America! If you want to use Al Qadim and Kara Tur and set it in the Forgotten Realms I have no problem with that. If you want to just call it Silk Roads or Ports of Adventure and use it as role playing supplement and a campaign arc for Euro styled PCs to explore I am happy too!
Many cultures beside those with origins in Europe have rich story telling histories. Isn't it time we extended a hand and welcomed those potential games to join us?
What should change is to stop thinking about D&D as a fantasy game based off norse mythology and start thinking of D&D as a fantasy game.
Now, to this purpose a well-built setting might help. In well-built setting everything is built around the culture of influence. For instance, a Greek may want to play a fantasy game based on his wonderful myths, but may have some difficulties in enjoying the experience thouroughly if he must play a medieval warrior with a freaking full-plate. For each setting, the classes should be revised. Spells should be adapted (maybe in some culture a "wizard" would have never cast a [water] spell ecause water was sacred). Not to talk about monsters.
It's easy for people with an occidental background to accept and deal with the game that is D&D. It's an occidental game. Now, if they really wanted to get in touch with other mythologies while still respecting the background cultures of their new customers they ought to do a really good, elegant job.
Which I think it's not the case, here. Who to blame? This games sells in occidental countries.
Of course, we could just have an African-styled continent to send my uber-shadowblade to, so that I can chop the elephants' heads. It must be helluva fun, too. But...
k.
Uh... so as to make it clear that an occidental mythology based setting is separate from an oriental mythology based setting? And then we put oriental, arabic and mezoamerican cultures together, because the classification obviously is: occidental stuff vs. other stuff we don't know really well how it works.
Man, it's that world history which should give credence to more recent ways of thinking and cultures...
I don't like this idea. Sorry for being blunt at times, it was not for flaming.
k.
I meant an In-Game world history, not our own, sorry about that.
As for this setting, I do not mean just slapdash Chine next to Arabia and call it a night. What I meant was to take Arabian themes, Chinese Themes, Mezoamerican themes and blend them together for forge a new culture. Some nations would show a high degree of Arabianism while others Chinese influence.
I personally don't believe in making a China Setting and a Mayan Setting and an African Setting and an Arabian Setting, etc. They won't sell nor will they be supported to any degree that any fan would like. They'd be like Greyhawk, maybe a Gazetteers and then nothing else. That is a foolish plan for luring new players to the game because what would they do when they find out that their setting of choice has only 1 game product and noting more? Quit, perhaps. Be disgruntled, definitely.
That's why I am a firm proponent of a non-European setting that incorporates more than just the east, or arabia or mezoamerica. We need a setting that has depth and a unique flavor. To do that you should blend cultures together to get a new culture. One that can be spread across a new setting. This new culture will show blatant signs of each of its base cultures but they will seem as if they belong together.
What I was saying is that we should't just have an "occidental" fantasy setting on the one side and an "oriental" one on the other. Since arabic and chinese civilisation had not that much in common, I don't understand why we should put them together.
Actually China and Arabia have a lot in common. Ok, well maybe not 'Arabia' but Islamic Society. They border each other, they fought each other, they traded with each other. Heck China evens owns the land where many Muslims now reside. Granted the history of Islam and China isn't as compelling as the West and Islam but that doesn't mean China was not influenced by Islam and visa-versa. Elements of China and Islam can easily be blended together to make an interesting child for a Campaign setting. The same is true for Mezoamerica.
It's fair, since D&D IS an occidental product. But this kinda makes me sad, I would see a little step further to actually have a "D&D: The Russian Version", for instance.
You know, finding similarities throughout different countries is easy. It's understanding the differences at their core which becomes overwhelming.
Therefore, my popint of view is: I'd rather have a generic, traditional D&D setting than a sterotype of another one. This does not mean that the current settings aren't stereotyped, but I sorta got used to them, evidently.
k.
Caeruleus we agree!
Amazing what happens when we take the time to explain what we mean.
Actually China and Arabia have a lot in common. Ok, well maybe not 'Arabia' but Islamic Society. They border each other, they fought each other, they traded with each other. Heck China evens owns the land where many Muslims now reside. Granted the history of Islam and China isn't as compelling as the West and Islam but that doesn't mean China was not influenced by Islam and visa-versa. Elements of China and Islam can easily be blended together to make an interesting child for a Campaign setting. The same is true for Mezoamerica.
The Islamic empire also bordered Europe, so why not put it all into the core books? Because there are many differences right? Then why do you think China and Arabia share a common theme? The fact that they're different from the West doesn't mean they're the same.
I think rather than creating multiple, unsupported settings for culture specific regions, why not create and support a world that encompasses a few of the more exotic ones, such as Oriental, Arabic and Mezoamerican? Create a large continent (or 2) and place these cultures into the world, giving credence to an established world history. Meaning don't slapdash a Mayan Civilization right next to China with out an cultural, economic and historical ties shared and explained.
I think its a good idea to create such a setting, even if it amounts to just 1 or 2 source books.
Ever read The Years of Rice and Salt? Its alternate history where the Black Plage kills everyone in Europe. By the end of the book the major powers are Islamic states, China, Inda, and an odd Japanese-Native American hybrid culture (Incas were conquered by the Chinese). Though in some magic and you've got a great setting for some oddball D&D.
Amazing what happens when we take the time to explain what we mean.
The Islamic empire also bordered Europe, so why not put it all into the core books? Because there are many differences right? Then why do you think China and Arabia share a common theme? The fact that they're different from the West doesn't mean they're the same.
Once again, I'm not talking about slapping Arabia right next to China, I'm talking about blending their cultures to make a believeable FANTASY world. Nothing can be gained by releasing 12 different mini-campaign settings each describing a different IRL culture. That only creates problems because WotC won't support all of them (prolly not even a majority) and then we'll have people on these very forums begging WotC to update those settings to 5E just as people are with Spelljammer, DL, Greyhawk and all the other WotC owned settings that see no love.
What needs to be done is to release a Europe-Light setting that actually has elements of these oft-neglected IRL world cultures.
And I'm not saying they share the same culture, Arabia and China do not. But, historically and even in the contemporary, the two cultures have commingled. Look at places like Xinjiang, they show elements of both Islamic and Chinese culture. Everyone is acting as if it is utterly impossible to blend Arabia and China to make a unique and fun Campaign setting that can appeal to people who like the mid and far east. It is not impossible, far from it. This is about the only way I can see WotC releasing a new campaign setting (beyond the two as of yet unreleased settings they already own from the Design Challenge).
Look, I think people have misinterpreted my [poorly written] original post. When I said "cultural, economic and historical ties shared and explained." I meant in the game world, not IRL. Obviously IRL there aren't enough bonds to make that work. But in a game world, the sky's the limit. It can be done.
Also, as an aside, I would like to mention that there are several eastern elements, even in core D&D. That influence can be seen in the Monk. That class is anything but the typical European Monk. Its an eastern class added right there into the core system. In FR, Calimport is very Arabic-ish, and in the eastern realms the Shou play an important part, intermixing with the local European-esc society making for an intriguing culture.
~~
cetiken: Wow that sounds like a good book! I'll have to pick it up next time I'm at a book store!
Once again, I'm not talking about slapping Arabia right next to China, I'm talking about blending their cultures to make a believeable FANTASY world.
Well, that would be interesting. But then I'm not sure why you mentioned that the two cultures are similar and have had interactions, because that's irrelevant to whether you can construct a fantasy world.
Ever read The Years of Rice and Salt? Its alternate history where the Black Plage kills everyone in Europe. By the end of the book the major powers are Islamic states, China, Inda, and an odd Japanese-Native American hybrid culture (Incas were conquered by the Chinese). Though in some magic and you've got a great setting for some oddball D&D.
cetiken: Wow that sounds like a good book! I'll have to pick it up next time I'm at a book store!
Yes, in fact I plan on picking it up as soon as I can! Thanks for the reference.
Well, that would be interesting. But then I'm not sure why you mentioned that the two cultures are similar and have had interactions, because that's irrelevant to whether you can construct a fantasy world.
Very true.
I was in a rush when I wrote my first two posts, so I must have been connecting two wildly different dots to get my point across. I think I simply meant that it was possible for the cultures to intermix, they had done so to some extent in our history. Like I said, I was in a rush so... Ok I reread my post and well, wow, I really was in a rush. What I meant was that the two cultures didn't necessarily grow up and evolve completely in isolation and that there are areas in our world where the two culture intermingled and forged something interesting. What I'm referring to is the whole Silk Road culture that developed in western china during the middle Ages.
Still, you're right I erred a little in my implementation and explanation of my ideas, sorry about that :embarrass
Very true.
I was in a rush when I wrote my first two posts, so I must have been connecting two wildly different dots to get my point across. I think I simply meant that it was possible for the cultures to intermix, they had done so to some extent in our history. Like I said, I was in a rush so... Ok I reread my post and well, wow, I really was in a rush. What I meant was that the two cultures didn't necessarily grow up and evolve completely in isolation and that there are areas in our world where the two culture intermingled and forged something interesting. What I'm referring to is the whole Silk Road culture that developed in western china during the middle Ages.
Still, you're right I erred a little in my implementation and explanation of my ideas, sorry about that :embarrass
It's all good. Even though I can get quite critical at times, I don't actually expect highly polished academic treatises on these boards. I sometimes toss out rough ideas that I'm later embarrassed at, so I understand.
And the more I think about it, the more I'd like to see your idea as a fleshed out campaign setting.
But as mentioned in the Al-Qadim space: I could see there being a lot more space for the publishing of good material from freelance writers in the DnDInsider path, as there will be more room for errata and testing as part of the whole compilation process ... Hopefully they will look for people who can write about cultural areas, myths and magics, that are quite different, and see how they can enrich the core system.
k.
Once again, I'm not talking about slapping Arabia right next to China, I'm talking about blending their cultures to make a believeable FANTASY world...
I wouldn't find that to be believable. Arabian and European culture have far more in common than Arabia and China. China is an Eastern nation (or perhaps more accurately, a collection of nations) dominated by Eastern religions and belief systems. If Earth is to be viewed in the context of an East/West dichotomy, than Arabia is clearly a Western region dominated by a Western religion.
As Tzor mentioned, attempts to publish fictional campaign settings that are presented as analogous to real world cultures are often not well received. Merging Arabia and China, which have little in common, probably won't have great appeal to those of Arabian or Chinese descent if those people are well versed in the history of those lands.
I wouldn't find that to be believable. Arabian and European culture have far more in common than Arabia and China. China is an Eastern nation (or perhaps more accurately, a collection of nations) dominated by Eastern religions and belief systems. If Earth is to be viewed in the context of an East/West dichotomy, than Arabia is clearly a Western region dominated by a Western religion.
I think you missed his emphasis on fantasy. It sounds to me like a "what if" scenario. What if these cultures were to merge? After all, many different cultures merged in the forming of the Islamic empire. It might be interesting to ask what would have happened if the empire expanded further to the east (only one example of how these cultures could have merged). But I don't think it would be best served as an alternate history; I think it could work (if properly executed) for a completely new setting.
Merging Arabia and China, which have little in common, probably won't have great appeal to those of Arabian or Chinese descent if those people are well versed in the history of those lands.
It appeals to me just fine. ;)
I wouldn't find that to be believable. Arabian and European culture have far more in common than Arabia and China. China is an Eastern nation (or perhaps more accurately, a collection of nations) dominated by Eastern religions and belief systems. If Earth is to be viewed in the context of an East/West dichotomy, than Arabia is clearly a Western region dominated by a Western religion.
As Tzor mentioned, attempts to publish fictional campaign settings that are presented as analogous to real world cultures are often not well received. Merging Arabia and China, which have little in common, probably won't have great appeal to those of Arabian or Chinese descent if those people are well versed in the history of those lands.
I have a question then - do you find Japan's culture to be believable? By all accounts Japan has taken the best of ancient China, the modern west and their own culture and created something really unique and cool. Japan and the West's culture were on the other sides of the world, they had no contact with each other prior to the Portuguese arriving. Japan would definitely be put in 'eastern' category and yet looking at it today Japan is a border country displaying both Eastern and Western traits.
This is what I was thinking when I said blending. You make something unique from two different ingredients. And like caeruleus said, this is a fantasy world, so what if China and Arabia were blended?
so what if China and Arabia were blended?
When I first read this, I thought you were saying "so what" in the sense of "who cares"... "who cares if China and Arabia were blended?", rather than "so" as in "therefore"... "therefore, what if China and Arabia were blended?"
It's not a criticism of your wording, I just thought I'd share an amusing take on what you said.
I have a question then - do you find Japan's culture to be believable? By all accounts Japan has taken the best of ancient China, the modern west and their own culture and created something really unique and cool. Japan and the West's culture were on the other sides of the world, they had no contact with each other prior to the Portuguese arriving. Japan would definitely be put in 'eastern' category and yet looking at it today Japan is a border country displaying both Eastern and Western traits.
This is what I was thinking when I said blending. You make something unique from two different ingredients. And like caeruleus said, this is a fantasy world, so what if China and Arabia were blended?
That's a ridiculous question. Anyway, Japan's culture is influenced by other cultures, not blended with them. They may have embraced American pop culture, but Japanese culture is still overwhelmingly Japanese.
Japan is very much an Eastern nation. The reason why they play on the same international stage as Western nations has absolutely nothing to do with culture. Its because they have a leading economy. The perceived need and difficulties in coordinating Japanese political society with that of Western nations is what prompted David Rockefeller to form the Trilateral Commision in 1973.
If you want to blend two disparate cultures, knock yourself out. Just don't expect such a published setting to adequately overcome the participants needed temporary disbelief of reality, when reality is referenced in a highly inaccurate way.
If you want to blend two disparate cultures, knock yourself out. Just don't expect such a published setting to adequately overcome the participants needed temporary disbelief of reality, when reality is referenced in a highly inaccurate way.
Are you saying that there are no good campaign settings out there? Because I have yet to see one that is a perfectly accurate representation of any historical culture. I guess we shouldn't use campaign settings for our games anymore.
Are you saying that there are no good campaign settings out there? Because I have yet to see one that is a perfectly accurate representation of any historical culture. I guess we shouldn't use campaign settings for our games anymore.
Do you always take an absolutist misinterpretation of other people's posts to try to make your case?
All campaign settings have the ability to take liberties with achieving the temporary suspension of disbelief. There comes a point where people just see something as silly, and dismiss it.
Do you always take an absolutist misinterpretation of other people's posts to try to make your case?
The form of the argument is referred to as a reductio. I merely inferred the implications of your statements. It's important to think implications through when considering ideas.
All campaign settings have the ability to take liberties with achieving the temporary suspension of disbelief. There comes a point where people just see something as silly, and dismiss it.
Speaking of absolutism....
So, because there are people who see something as silly, the idea is inherently a bad one? Do you realize that many people dismiss all fantasy as silly? Does this make it so? There are different tastes, so if you don't like it, that's fine. But arguing that the idea has no merit at all is absolutist and without basis.
And I gotta say, I find it ironic that a guy who goes by "Genghis Cohen" is so dismissive of blending disparate cultures. :P
Now in D&D the focus is a European theme. Look at the art. The weapons. The classes. Now you can drop people from other ethnic background into such a theme but they loose the cultural part. It ends up with a person of color squeezed into a European world view. Not likely to attract someone of color to play since it "Americanizes" them or just makes them a shadow of a European world. Wouldn't a Native American like to see a Fighter who might look like his Dog Soldier ancestors? How about a Hmong who wants to play a Monk that doesn't look like Ember?
Just imagine all the great cultural sharing for the next generation of gamers! Ever notice how few people of color you see in your local game store? Isn't it odd since you see them playing video games and enjoying Sci Fi? It is an untapped market, one that is a win-win situation for everyone.
It is an untapped market, one that is a win-win situation for everyone.
Alas, like with the various (A)D&D settings whose return people (myself included) are clamoring for, it is far from obvious that there is a sound consumer base for such culturally specific settings. Indeed, the success of basic sword & sorcery fantasy in its common generic variety may well owe to the fact that rather than being precisely culture-specific, it is a mish-mash of some half dozen or more occidental cultures (with additional elements beyond that sphere thrown in for good measure), meaning it is vaguely recognizeable, but not too exclusive, to a consumer demographic of predominantly European heritage.
Some problems that do seem to exist with the concept:
A) Whose interest would it seek to capture and how? Bear in mind that if the thesis that a setting with too strong a cultural imprint will turn off those that do not feel party to that culture holds, then virtually every setting that plays strongly to non-occidental mores is going to be passed over by a majority of the existing consumer base for D&D, and seems unlikely to pick up enough new fans to compensate for that absent market share (since it would only appeal to those of the culture specifically addressed, whereas those of other non-occidental cultures would not pick it up because it would "look no more like them" than the standard fantasy). In some cases, while there may be an existing culture or cultures to base a setting on, it is not even clear that the targetted demographic would pick it up to a significant extent (it does, for example, seem as if it is far from obvious that a setting based on African cultures would in fact be a huge seller with African Americans).
B) Who would make the setting, how would it be received, and how much work would it require? If your primary sales pitch for a setting is that it is something that the player is supposed to identify with culturally, then it stands to reason that a setting created and sold by people corresponding to the demographic of the present-day gaming industry could face near insurmountable credibility and legitimacy obstacles, no matter how much research was applied to the project. We're not just talking about hiring a few new designers, it may be that the whole corporate structure and the perception of the gamer base and the hobby would have to be altered before legitimacy could be conceived. Even with that all achieved, it's not clear that any and all cultural communities would appreciate the transformation of their cultural themes into the RPG format as it predominantly exists today. Furthermore, you might need to go about a lot of work to adapt the setting into something uniquely in line with the cultural flavor needed: clearly, just taking for example a few Native American or Chinese traits and dropping them in with the same old Elves, Dragons, and magic system as exists in the core will not do. Production costs for such an adaption could likely swell to a point where development and printing costs begin becoming considerable.
Basically, if one were to think about this kind of project, one must to begin with consider the roots of the sword & sorcery genre. To see which cultures would make for a compelling new settings, one should consider which ones that within their own context have been turned into D&D:esque pop/pulp culture, see which of these that have achieved cross-cultural appeal, and then seek to do what these works seem to be doing, preferably with the backing of established authors in the genre. Anything else is sheer commercial folly.
Let's take an Arabian-themed setting for an example. We could see further development on the Baklunish lands in the World of Greyhawk. I'm sure many Greyhawk fans would like to see that, no matter their own cultural background. As for the Forgotten Realms, you don't need to do Al-Qadim (as much as I'd like to see that), but could detail Calimshan and Anauroch. Mystara could have a book dedicated to the Emirate of Ylaruam. Personally, I'd love to see that.
Caeruleus did you ever notice that all Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Elves are WHITE? Oh I forgot the Drow Elves... but aren't they evil?
Wild Elves bronzish.
Mountain Dwarves are ruddy brown.
Forest gnomes are green.
Halflings... well, halflings are gypsy midgets, it kinda makes sense that they are caucasian.
But OP is right there is a market for more "uniform" campaigns when it comes to various cultures.
I hope 4th with it's "setting neutral" rule books will deal with the issue.
It gets really out of hand when I start mixing in the fantasy cultures, but it works.
Mountain Dwarves are ruddy brown.
Forest gnomes are green.
Halflings... well, halflings are gypsy midgets, it kinda makes sense that they are caucasian.
Hmmm. Maybe. But I don't see these traits reflected in the artwork. They all look pretty white to me. That's not saying that 4e couldn't have some racial differences in the demi-humans....
I think the books still tend to focus upon the ideal white Eurocentric fantasy.
I think it would be a great marketing idea to create other settings loosely based in other cultures and histories much like D&D is based in European history. The ideas of Oriental Adventures, Maztica, Al Qadim, and 3rd party publisher Nambia can attract new players from different cultural backgrounds. Honestly, most people want to play someone who looks like them.
TSR brought out a range of historical campaign supplements during 2nd edition. They also brought out Legends and Lore. So it sounds like they went part of the way to developing your idea, but didn't join all the dots to make proper campaign settings.
I think that Kara-Tur (I hate the CCG version of OA), Maztica and Al-Qadim work very well with Forgotten Realms. So I'm not entirely sure that you need fantasy settings to be "totally realistic". I'm not buying the spin that Oriental Adventures tried to use to pursade me to go with their new gameworld.
The problem with cultural settings is that if you design the setting to be familiar with the people of that culture then you have to really do your homework. A number of (in fact almost all) the "cultural settings" have been strongly panned by the cultures they were supposed to emulate.
I come from London and hate Dick Van ****'s awful fake London accent. And when the Shadowrun London Sourcebook came out I bought it and wondered why it didn't have South West London in it. "Erm hello Mr Fasa, you have Scotland in this book but have deleted a quater of London!".
The "homework" issue is quite easy to resolve - don't use American RPG designers to make "accurate" campaign settings for other parts of the world. Set up a WotC office in Greece and get Greek roleplayers to make a Greek version of D&D with new classes (or prestige classes) based on Greek Mythology. Then after it has been playtested by Greek roleplayers, you can translate it into English and sell it to Americans who are interested in a Greek Roleplaying Game.
What should change is to stop thinking about D&D as a fantasy game based off norse mythology and start thinking of D&D as a fantasy game.
I thought that was what the SRD and the OGL were about. They allow 3rd party publishers to get the d20 System engine and add on any real world or made up mythology and culture that they want to use in a game.
Are you saying that there are no good campaign settings out there? Because I have yet to see one that is a perfectly accurate representation of any historical culture. I guess we shouldn't use campaign settings for our games anymore.
Lets face it D&D is a game. And games have rules, whereas mytholgy does what is best for the story. D&D rules try to emulate fantasy worlds or mythological concepts, but they are never going to be totally accurate.
Given that total accuracy is impossible, I'd rather play in a campaign setting that admitted it was inspired by a culture and wasn't trying to emulate it. A culture inspired setting allows you to have lots of playable monster races based on its mythological creatures.
I think it would be a great marketing idea to create other settings loosely based in other cultures and histories much like D&D is based in European history. The ideas of Oriental Adventures, Maztica, Al Qadim, and 3rd party publisher Nambia can attract new players from different cultural backgrounds. Honestly, most people want to play someone who looks like them.
This sounds like you want Mystara. Take a look in the other role-playing worlds forum. There's alot of fan support for the setting but nothing official since 1995 or so.
http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=291
Now if WotC would just listen to the players and make the sourcebook...but we're not overly concerned if they don't. We have our own monster's thread and gazetteers thread(s) and love to beat around alternate ideas about the setting and it's many culture based sub-settings.
I guess that I'm saying that there really isn't a need to reinvent the wheel but perhaps just putting on new tires would be just as good.
--Ray.
Wild Elves bronzish.
Mountain Dwarves are ruddy brown.
Forest gnomes are green.
Halflings... well, halflings are gypsy midgets, it kinda makes sense that they are caucasian.
Hmmm. Maybe. But I don't see these traits reflected in the artwork. They all look pretty white to me. That's not saying that 4e couldn't have some racial differences in the demi-humans....
I think the books still tend to focus upon the ideal white Eurocentric fantasy.
Sadly the artists don't always follow the canon... Look at the drow.
They are supposed to have somewhat dark grey, purpleish pigments, NOT brown melanine like our 'blacks'.
And on a related note, they missed the part that Drizzt is supposed to look moderatly young and handsome, yet he got a 'grizzled mature guy' serie of art.
I don't care if it's historically inaccurately and pulpy. I don't complain about the Druid being historically identical to the European version, so why should the Samurai or Dervish be exceptions? I'm just glad to see them getting put out there.
The first, which has already been somewhat covered by the thread, is that game settings about "other" cultures end up inevitably looking like a badly stereotyped error-filled mockery of the culture they're supposed to emulate more often than not. They tend to be much more about some white-guy game-designers' ideas about that culture than about the reality of the culture itself.
But the second, and more significant issue is that on the whole, gamers in other cultures don't really WANT to play culturally sensitive games about their own background.
I live here in Uruguay; and I can assure you that there is a large community of gamers here. And I assure you also that they are NOT interested in playing fantasy RPGs about the Charrua indians or the Incas or about the wars of independance or something like that. They want to play in Middle-earth with orcs and dwarves and elves; they might want to play harry potter, they want to play in an anime world; in other words, Uruguayan nerds like exactly the same stuff that North American nerds like.
This is because we live in a global culture.
The only uruguayan RPG published thus far is my own "Forward... to Adventure!" (which is definitely traditional sword & sorcery); but over in Brasil they've published several games. They've had one about giant robot mecha warriors; one about vampires, one about superheros, and a couple of traditional fantasy settings. They've had absolutely NONE about the amazon rainforest or bossa nova or portuguese colonialism or candombe or anything like that.
The whole "we have to be culturally sensitive! We have to produce SPECIAL BOOKS for minorities!" thing is way more of a concern of "progressive" white guys with some kind of guilt or social engineering complex than it is about anyone who is actually of the cultures those white guys are claiming to be so concerned about and supposedly speaking for.
RPGPundit
What I will agree is that cultural settings aren't for everyone. Even for the people who dwell in locations/ cultures that source material is pulled from. Hey I'm not big in the idea of playing a red neck who lives on a farm! One thing I don't agree with is that poorly done settings anger people anymore than I get mad when I see something poorly done in a typical fantasy setting that seeks to present a European setting. Do I get mad when I see knock Irish, Scottish, English, or German fantasy elements? No. Poorly done is poorly done.
Lets consider this: What attracts players of all ethnic backgrounds? Couldn't D&D discover this? Wouldn't new monsters, weapons, spells, and locations make the game fresh? Wouldn't that pay homage to the cultures?
Our game is not as popular as it used to be. It has to compete against the MMOs. A decade ago it was CCG's. Both MMOs and CCGs appeal to people of all backgrounds better than our beloved D&D. Why is this?
What I will agree is that cultural settings aren't for everyone. Even for the people who dwell in locations/ cultures that source material is pulled from. Hey I'm not big in the idea of playing a red neck who lives on a farm! One thing I don't agree with is that poorly done settings anger people anymore than I get mad when I see something poorly done in a typical fantasy setting that seeks to present a European setting. Do I get mad when I see knock Irish, Scottish, English, or German fantasy elements? No. Poorly done is poorly done.
There's no doubt that D&D fantasy settings based on "european" historical models are also goofy stereotypes; however, the main difference is that they're our own goofy stereotypes, written by us.
The "oriental adventures" or other such "ethnic" settings are usually not the stereotypes that foreign cultures have of themselves, written by them; they tend to be written by white american guys who are actually basing things off of OUR stereotypes about THEM. That makes it somewhat different.
RPGPundit
I have to agree to a large extent with RPGpundit with respect to the social engineering angle.
We (non-caucasian gamers) play D&D for the same reasons as everybody else. I find the supposition that that people of colour (a quaint phrase since, AFAIK, all humans dusplay some sort of colouring) would need culturally specific settings 'attuned to our contexts' to feel comfortable or attract us to gaming.
As for the comment 'everybody wants to play someone who looks like them':
1) the chars in D&D look like what they are supposed to be. IDEALIZED versions of white people. With cool, spiky armor.
A truly culturally conscious D&D will emerge when people within non-European groups feel the need to take a stake in it. But it wont do so at the behest of concerned white gamers. And, to be frank with you, it wont do so any time soon.
Pyrate, you wonder at the lack of people of colour i gaming events etc.
Whats there to wonder about?
These are places that are clearly uninviting to most uninitiated people regardless of ethnic background. Nevermind those outside the enchanted sphere of white-dominated gaming culture.
Churning out culturally specific settings wont change that because the purported target audience will never even hear of them.
What D&D would benefit from is the inclusion of elements from other cultures within its core. names for magic items, class/PrC concepts and so forth.
Caeruleus did you ever notice that all Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Elves are WHITE? Oh I forgot the Drow Elves... but aren't they evil?
Did you ever attend a Game Convention? Something like Gen Con or Dragon Con? Not a computer game convention but one that has the focus on card/ board/ and table top RPGs... Ever notice the lack of people of color?
Many cultures beside those with origins in Europe have rich story telling histories. Isn't it time we extended a hand and welcomed those potential games to join us?
Yeah my Latino friends can play a Eurocentric Wizards, Fighters, and Clerics. But they got real interested when I pulled out a bunch of Aztec minis from Ral Partha.
I actually think your idea is cool, and it's similar in concept to my homebrew campaign. One of the main nations from the north is an Elven nation which is a cross between ancient Egypt's religious belief structure and the ideals of Nazi racial superiority. On one of my continents I mixed the themes of the Dark Ages of Europe and the 3 Kingdoms Era of China (a lot of fuedal lords warring over the crown of an empire.)
However, I would like to point out that not all Dwarves, Gnomes, Halflings, and Elves are "white." A lot of Dwarves are described as having a deep tan color to their skin. Many of the elven subraces are also described as having skin tones which aren't white. I could sit here and go through all of the books I have and cite every example, but that would take forever. I will admit though that some people do like to play characters which resemble them; however, many people like to play characters which are the total opposite of themselves, so I don't think that really provides a definitive answer to base an argument on.
Overall, I think you have a cool idea, but I think that if you look through some of the racial descriptions for D&D races that you will find more variety than you expect to find. Getting back to the point though - a campaign world filled with various areas which were somewhat historically based actually probably would be a good idea to attract new players. Because, contrary to what I have previously said, there probably are enough people who would be attracted by something which looks like them that it would be a good business model; alternatively, the setting world would have enough variety to attract people who already play the game. The different areas wouldn't be totally seperate from each other though, and realistically the different areas would have some impact on each other in places that they are close or overlap.
Edit: It's possible that I don't run into a lot of the issues described in other posts due to the fact that my gaming group is fairly diverse when it comes to ethnicity.
So, perhaps that's what could be done with this idea. Take a map of Earth, and fill it with people who are based off of our history, but somewhat loosely based. The typical things would be there such as Pyramids being n Egypt, Samurai and Ninja appearing in the Orient, and many other things. They would need to be somewhat loosely based though so that the elements of fantasy and D&D could be mixed in.
There is one problem though. Who are the "bad guys?" I mean, sure there are monsters, but in the era of politcal correctness, you need to be careful not to offend anyone. If the DM creates a storyline in which the crazed barbarians of Canada sail across the sea and mercilessly slaughter the Japanese, I'm sure some people are going to take offense at that. Heck, there were people who were (and still are) opposed to Drow being dark skinned because they felt that it was racist in nature that a dark skin race would be used as an evil race.
Personally, I think it's a cool idea, but it's something that a large company such as Hasbro would have to be concerned about. A lot of tough decisions would have to be made as far as what offends people and what doesn't offend people, and "what do we do if something we've already published offends people?
During the summer I often attend Ethnic Festivals such as the Dragon Boat races, Irishfest, and African World Festival.
I'm ethnic now? There I was thinking I was plain old white all along....
Chahir, any suggestions on how we can make events more friendly for people of color?
I'm not Chahir, but I find myself in a similar situation and have some things I would like to see...
1) Changing the appearance of the races. Not just making illustrations of Humans more varied, but giving demi-human races fewer wetern European features in terms of physical appearance, dress, and traits. When reading the Races books, they all seemed like offshoots of western European culture, and aside from Orcs and some of the new races, pretty much everyone looked Caucasian.
I was really surprised with Races of Destiny. Even though they constantly focused on how diverse Humans were, every single image of a Human in the book depicted someone of Anglo-Saxon ancestry in medieval European-inspired fantasy dress.
2) Either introduce more base classes based on non- western-European archetypes, or create more generalized base classes that have less obvious west-European centered inspiration.
The fighter's abilities should allow me to make someone in heavy armor with a shield and longsword, someone in light armor with a bow, or someone with no armor and an axe. The spellcasting classes should allow for a voodoo-style witch doctor, or mystic, just as easily as someone like Gandolf.
New art can really help too. For instance, under the entry for fighter, there should be not only an image of someone in European style plate, but also someone in Chinese armor wielding a repeating crossbow, and then someone wearing a head wrap and long flowing robes with a khopesh, and then another dressed to look sort of like a Zuluu. The Rogue can have images of characters reminiscent of not only the "classic" western thief, but also an Arabic assassin, an east Asian pirate, or African merchant wearing gold rings, with an ornate dagger in his hand.
3) Introduce more weapons based on non- western-European archetypes, or create more generalized weapon mechanics that have less obvious. I'm more in favor of the latter than the former. I would like to see weapons divided more into "medium curved sword", which would include scimitars and tatagans, and "heavy bludgeoning weapon" describing all weapons like mauls and tetsubos.
4) Diversify environments. Most art and materials in the core books and supplements reference temperate forests, swamps, and farmland. It pretty much looks like Middle Earth. Some places have more snow than others, but they're still pretty much the same.
Add stuff like more steppe, hot and humid jungles, sandy and rocky deserts, tundra, etc. Also, don't treat these as far off places nobody ever visits or comes from. Put important people and things here. The Enviromental books were more helpful in this regard, but the lack of a jungle or grasslands book left me a little disappointed.
........................................................................................
I'd like to use this section to identify where I think good work is already being done in these regards.
1) The PHB did a pretty good job of adding some non-European Humans. Ember's definately of African descent, and Naull could be considered Asian. Mialee is also brown skinned, so playing an Elf like that doesn't seem as odd.
2) The Forgotten Realms continent of Faerun acknowledges that not all Humans look like historical Europeans. I very much enjoyed the Unaproachble East and Shining South books, and would love to see more on Humans from Mulhurond, Thay, Calimshan, and Chult (amongst other places) rather than more on the Sword Coast and Dales.
3) Eberron has done something interesting with its races and their cultures. Aerenal Elves take strong influences from Aztec and Egyptian stylings, while the Valenar illicit feelings of Persian or Mongol horse riders. Talenta Halflings give off sort of a Great Plains Native American Vibe, and Sarlonna, the distant home continent of all Humans is more Central/East Asian in tone, while the Dhakaani Goblinoids seem a mixture of Imperial Rome and China. Eberron never just lifts these cultures and transplants them into the setting. There are still enough differences so that each one retains an individualistic and fantastic feel, however, the subtle influences help.
4) The Complete series introduced base classes and prestige classes like the Spirit Shaman, Dervish, Wu Jen, Samurai, and Ninja. Whether you like these classes mechanically or not, they still helped to break away from the overwhelmingly Euro-centric styles of most of the other classes in the game.
5) The Enviromental books introduced elements of non-European cultures. Sandstorm had lots of fun Egyptian and Babylonian stuff, and Frostburn introduced some Scandanavian stuff. I was looking for maybe some Inuit influences, but aside from some people in animal fur parkas, I didn't see much of it. I really wish they had done one on tropical forests, grasslands, etc.
6) The Monster Manuals include some monsters from other mythologies. There's so many kinds of Dragon in many Human cultures though, that I have no idea why we ended up with just European and crystal Dragons and none of the others.
7) Unearthed Arcana's alternate classes and class abilities. They just gave more options, and with less fluff attached to them, there was more you could do. Also, the class defense bonus made an unarmored warrior- common in many tropical climates or amongst cultures that didn't don heavier metal armors- a more attractive prospect.
.............................................................................
I could care less about factual accuracy. So the assassins didn't do ABC exactly that way, or the Chinese weren't doing XYZ until the Han dynasty, and the Inca didn't have that particular custom. I'm not looking for historic or even mythologically "accurate" recreations. I don't ask that of my European centered D&D. I just want it to be fun and draw some inspiration from reality to give me a point of reference and give archetypes and ideas more resonance.
I just want more cultures implied or represented so when I decide to make a character based on an archetype found in non-European traditions, with a non-European name, and non-european weapons, I have the tools to do so, and I don't have to twist peoples' arms and make up such farfetched backgrounds to do it.
Now let me ask you what your opinion is? Do you enjoy things outside of your corner in this planet?
So are you saying it's all in the messenger? An Mezo-American setting is best written by a native of Central America? Oriental Adventures is best written by someone of Asian ethnic origins? An African setting written by a fellow African?
It'd be interpreted as being less offensive. Usually, the closer someone is to you, the lesser the negative consequences they suffer when they offend you. Best buddy can call you derogatory words and at most get a request to cut it out. Let a perfect stranger walk up and do it and the results would be more serious.
That's not the entirety of it, but taking something like this into account would be useful.
At the very least, make it clear that you put some sort of effort into researching and attempting to understand the cultures and their history. I'd like to point to the African Adventures Nyambe setting as a wonderful example of this. While not historically accurate, you could easily tell it wasn't the product of a group who's only exposure to Africa was a couple of documentaries, the movie Shaka Zulu, and Tarzan.
Arquinsiel: I'm not attempting to come off "high-and-mighty" and "ethnic". My goal was to say that today we are a culturally open society. We embrace and experience things outside of our own cultural upbringing (food, entertainment, clothing).
You'd be supprised just how dualist modern society can be about that kind of thing. I know my home still has quite a few "they took yer jerb!"-type problems, and worse on occasion.
Now let me ask you what your opinion is? Do you enjoy things outside of your corner in this planet?
My tastes are... odd. I'm not a good example. I tend to examine things on their individual merits as I see them rather than judge by where they come from or how they "should" be used. I have been known to like things for reasons best described as "being contrary." And I hate vegetables, resulting in me being less than adventurous about food.
Like with so many other things on this fair prime material plane of ours, I do not think there is any easy, simple solution to how to attract more non-white players to the game. But I do know that a lot of it has to do with perception and exposure. The fact is that (as I have already noted) gamer culture is overhwhelmingly a male, white pass-time. This is, in and of itself, neither inherently good or bad, but it does tend to recreate itself, so that you get the same group of people playing and therefore imposing their opinions of others (which they are completely entitled to do) all over their make believe cosmos.
Many people of colour (I count myself among this group) already feel that, despite the purported openness of our 'shared' culture (how much of it is shared is another thorny issue) we are oftentimes (by no means always) essentialised as mascot/archetypes significant more for their ethnic (because after all, only non-whites are 'ethic') 'shtick' than other facets of their personalities.
In a fantasy world, one would hope to be able to escape this and play for the reasons others do (e.g in my day job I stock shelves at the Quik e Mart, but on friday nights I am Skratch Fury, Destroyer of worlds)
But the stereotypes dont seem to sleep easy in their beds. Just the other day, I had a player blatantly tell me that you couldnt have black elans!
Now Im sure he wasn't trying to sound prejudiced, but it did hit a nerve with me that in a world where there are half-ogres, owl-bears, dragons, mind flayers and dryads walking around, the melanin content of a humans skin would cause this much aggro! I simply didnt want to believe it and it ruined what would otherwise have been a good session for me.
It rather reminded me of a time in high school when a kid who had been auditioning with me for the part of Hamlet came and told me that he thought I should not try out because 'Im not trying to be racist or anything (how I love that turn of phrase) but Hamlet shouldnt be black'! O-o.
He was my main inspiration for nailing the role and getting the part
This is fantasy, yet the hidebound prejudices of our real lives creep into it with alarming frequency.
Dont get me wrong, a lot has already been accomplished in terms of cultural sensitivity. The D&D community has come far from humble roots (take a look at the way non-european settings were described in 1st &2nd edition and you'll se why I say that), but a lot of work remains to be done. At least the dialogue has commenced.
I too liked Nyambe. Its bastardisation of real African cultures (especially the ever-popular-with europeans Maasai) is in many ways analogous to the chop-suey treatment D&D gives to medieval europe.
Frankly, the main problem I see in widening D&Ds appeal from a cultural perspective is that ATM most players do not WANT to see beyond the stereotypes; something that sometimes bears a worrying corellation to their fundamental attitudes towards people of different cultures in the real world.
Chahir
Nor hideous, real racism and all.
It's tiring to see 'Isms' dipping in our game.
And Hamlet should NOT be black - if historic and close to the base material. What they don't get is that the tale was set in medieval northern europe, Danemark! There ws NO black, sorry, then! Why should multiculturalism, as admirable it is, step in realism and history?
I see a growing trend of people saying 'PCness' has no role in literature, movies, theatre, sports, politics, our society in general. And it makes me question what these people are really so irate about? Did I somehow miss the meeting where it was decided that the promotion of acceptance and cherishing of human diversity were a BAD thing?
Some of us know what it is like to deal with the alternative to this PC shibboleth you speak of. And its not so good. Overt prejudice reinforced (oftentimes inadvertently) by the very social mores that condition the way we view the world and tacitly accepted as being somehow 'natural' or 'right'!
While the PC ideology undoubtedly has its flaws, they pale in comparison to what came before.
I find your statement that there ws NO black then (whenever that was) confusing. I was under distinct impression that my peeps have been around for a lot longer than Denmark itself. Please dont hesitate to correct me if Im wrong here. It kinda reminds me of when my granpappy used to say 'there weren't no **** sexuals in my day'/ Im sure the synergy doesnt escape you
Multiculturalism stepping into 'history and realism', to use your turn of phrase, has nothing to do with this discussion, since Shakespeare produced neither history nor realism. What he did excel at producing are universal stories.
This is on of the primary reasons why he is one of the greatest playrights ever (personally prefer Bertold Brecht, but thats just me). His plays have been endlessly adapted, interpreted and watched with great pleasure by countless people for centuries precisely because they deal with motifs that transcend their diverse settings and contexts in ways which evoke the common themes of our shared human experience rather than essentialising us based on what piece of land we were born on, what colour our skins are or what languages we speak (Othello ring any bells?).
With this in mind, asserting purported historical accuracy (which is, I might add, rather hazy in the original play) of a particular adaptation of Hamlet as a reason why I shouldnt audition for a part is just weak. Worse, it carries a distinct whiff of biggotry. I am truly happy the folks casting the play and the audience were more open-minded than you come across as being.
You havent seen many of the newer Shakespeare adaptations, have you :D ?
If so, I would ask you to carefully consider if the race of the actors (as opposed to their peformance) negatively impacted your enjoyment of the play. Would Hamlet's monologue to the skull of Yorick or Prospero's soliloquy in The Tempest be any less evocative and enchanting because the actors portraying them aren't white? Methinks not.
And if you actually get a chance to see these performances for yourself, I think you might agree with me.
Finally, D&D is dripping with Isms as it (sexism & racism being the two big ones). Saying that they shouldnt intrude on it is hence a moot point. The opening of a discourse on such things is the first step in affecting positive change. Acting as if the Isms werent there is just willful ignorance.
Chahir
I exagerate a bit, but if you wanted accuracy and historical stuff, no, and that come even as a bit offensive. okay for an avant-garde stuff, but otehrwise, no. Racist? No, just accuracy AND CULTURAL RESPECT.
Woudl YOU like yet another Genghis Khan or Sultan of Mali played by a white? Why Whitefaces are better than Blackfaces?
There was no blacks living in Danemark back then, historical fact.
Anyway, back to topic - D&D have no racism, only SPECISM - big difference. And sexism was very light if at all - more like a presence due to the time era where it was created than sexist views in it.
Again, D&D as a game should be free at base from PCness and Isms. If I wanted a political discourse, I would go at the town or colege library.
a)the concept of cultural respect
b)the extent to which D&D reflects the prejudices of those who created and play it. This is understandable and does not diminish my love for the game. But it has to be acknowledged, not swept under the carpet as you are trying to do. You would do well to peruse the ongoing flamewar caused by a womens forum on the boards before making the assertions you do
c)what is meant by the word politics
Read my original post carefully
Take all the time you need to absorb the points I made before responding. OTOH If you simply wish to pass bad analogies off as a response, that is your prerogative.I came here to discuss what can be done to attract people from other cultures into D&D through culture specific campaign settings. If you arent interested in hearing the PoVs of people who want to discuss this issue or have no contribution to make beyond repeating your mantra, perhaps you should be posting elsewhere.
P.S: You will forgive me if I dont take you word that there were no blacks in Denmark 1599-1601 (if that is when Hamlet is set). Im not arguing there necessarily were. But HISTORICAL FACTS demand sources and other things that you could probably find at your town or college library :D .
Chahir
As an anthropologist I'm quite familiar with the issues that can arise out of ethnocentrism and as RPGpundit noted, attempting to recreate a culture you don't fully understand can lead to offensive sterotpying. I think the best way around this is not to claim any sort of historical accuracy in adding different cultures and instead merely grab up a handful of interesting concepts, blend them together, change the names, and plop it down as a "new" culture. Not only do you have a legitimate claim that you weren't sterotyping anyone, but it allows for more original and creative cultures as well.
Create a large continent (or 2) and place these cultures into the world, giving credence to an established world history.
Gah! Why must fantasy worlds have no more than 2 or 3 continents? Why not a world with 5, 6, 8, or 11? Two dozen maybe? Seriously, since we aren't recreating Earth exactly, the amount of landforms possible is huge, even if you do rely only on ones that exist somewhere on Earth. Did RPG creators all sleep through their geography classes?
2) Either introduce more base classes based on non- western-European archetypes, or create more generalized base classes that have less obvious west-European centered inspiration.
The fighter's abilities should allow me to make someone in heavy armor with a shield and longsword, someone in light armor with a bow, or someone with no armor and an axe. The spellcasting classes should allow for a voodoo-style witch doctor, or mystic, just as easily as someone like [Gandalf].
I agree that the classes should be broad enough to apply to many different cultures as they are, and ideally the same with many weapons. In 3.5, though, they both are adaptable with little more needed than name changes. You can have a lot of different fighter builds, and since the basics of warfare were pretty similar throughout the world (nothing brings cultures together like killing one-another) you can tweak the fighter class alone to be everything from Mongol horse archers to Aztec jaguar warrirors. The DMG even lists what many of the PHB weapons would be equivalent to in other time periods or cultures. So basically, most of the cultural adaptation of classes and weapons is dependent merely on a bit of effort by the DM and players. Its far from being all-inclusive, but I think its a good start and could be improved merely by expanding the options a little.
New art can really help too. For instance, under the entry for fighter, there should be not only an image of someone in European style plate, but also ...
Just how much space in the books are they going to devote to artwork, though? The characters shown in the core books are meant to be "iconics." Thus they are intended to be sterotypical of characters played with the core system. It would be impossible for the artwork to cover all the possible permutations of fighters from around this or any other world.
The "homework" issue is quite easy to resolve - don't use American RPG designers to make "accurate" campaign settings for other parts of the world. Set up a WotC office in Greece and get Greek roleplayers to make a Greek version of D&D with new classes (or prestige classes) based on Greek Mythology. Then after it has been playtested by Greek roleplayers, you can translate it into English and sell it to Americans who are interested in a Greek Roleplaying Game.
If you have Greeks creating an Greek mythology RPG, who says they will get their own mythology right? They may be just as ignorant about it as we are. The key to getting historical accuracy in any product is scholarship and research. Consulting experts and members of a culture is the only way you can get anything accurate. besides, who says many of the cultural elements wouldn't just get lost in translation anyways?
Given that total accuracy is impossible, I'd rather play in a campaign setting that admitted it was inspired by a culture and wasn't trying to emulate it. A culture inspired setting allows you to have lots of playable monster races based on its mythological creatures.
This is definitely the way to go, but I don't think you ever want to even name a specific culture or limit yourself to one alone. It would be better to say that your setting was inspired by "Mesoamerican culture" than by the Maya or the Aztecs. That way if people claim something is insulting the that it wasn't inspired by them and they are inserting themselves into the picture. There are/were a lot more Mesoamerican cultures of note than most people realize. (After all, the Aztecs didn't just fall to the Spanish. Human sarifices had upset a lot of their neighbors.) Limiting yourself to only a few of the big names can reduce your options.
It rather reminded me of a time in high school when a kid who had been auditioning with me for the part of Hamlet came and told me that he thought I should not try out because 'Im not trying to be racist or anything (how I love that turn of phrase) but Hamlet shouldnt be black'! O-o.
He was my main inspiration for nailing the role and getting the part
I guess that made you the Fresh Prince of Denmark?
Just how much space in the books are they going to devote to artwork, though? The characters shown in the core books are meant to be "iconics." Thus they are intended to be sterotypical of characters played with the core system. It would be impossible for the artwork to cover all the possible permutations of fighters from around this or any other world...
1) Well one possible way would be to remove the "iconics" and the idea that they should be present in most (if not all) representations of the races/classes in the PHB and DMG.
For example, there are 6+ images of Clerics in the PHB. Only 1 of them is not a heavily armored guy with a blunt weapon. Incidentally enough, the one image of a Cleric that strays from this is the evil one with dark skin and a bald head, which has certain implications, even though they are unintentional.
Those images could have easily featured other presentations. They could have at least shown a Cleric in robes.
2) Make the images they do have space for smaller, or instead of having several large images showing single characters, have more group shots. This as done in many books after the PHB/DMG/MM.
3) Weapon variations in other cultures should be in the PHB, and mentioned in their description. The Dagger text should clarify that it also applies to stilletos, dirks, tantos, patos, semes, rondels, and most ANY weapon with a short handle and short blade. Also, we already know what a European Longsword and Longbow look like, so why not give us an Indian or a Persian equivalent in the artwork?
....................................................................................................
I'd like to point out Unearthed Arcana here. UA's image of Gnomes (page 6) features them in 4 different kinds of garb: the Aquatic Gnome is largely nude, but the Arctic Gnome looks more Inuit, the Desert Gnome looks like he's from Northern Africa/Middle East, and the Jungle Gnome is in generic jungle tribal feathers/wood/leather.
A single picture was able to display more cultural variety amongst Gnomes (or any race/class in general) than all the pictures in the PHB, DMG, and MM combined.
The Forgotten Realms campaign setting is another one I'd like to point out. Despite being the D&D setting most commonly associated with "classic" European high fantasy, there are plenty of images and characters suggesting influences from other races/cultures. The Chuultan Yuan-Ti hunters (one has a pistol!), the traders at Narfell, Sabuuti the Halfling Monk, bazaar in the Vilhar Sengal the Halfling Barbarian, and the unabashed use of the Egyptian pantheon all contribute to make Forgotten Realms seem more diverse than core D&D.
.....................................................................................................
I'd like to see it all of that taken to the next step in terms of artwork. I'm not asking for everyone to be represented, but when I can look through dozens upon dozens of images of people, and only find one or two that aren't proxies of white Europeans and European cultures, I believe there's plenty of room for variation.
I find your statement that there ws NO black then (whenever that was) confusing. I was under distinct impression that my peeps have been around for a lot longer than Denmark itself.
I believe he means there were none in Denmark at the time. In the context of a high-school play there's no problem, everyone should get their chance to shine and the best person for the job should get it. For something a notch or two higher on the professionalism scale I would hope that children are, for the most part, the same race as their on-stage parents. After that it's all a matter of adaptation and taste as to who plays what role.
As regards the preoffesionalism of the plays, let me suggest the adaptation one where Patrick Stewart plays Othello in a black culture. That makes my point for me
.I dont quite get what you mean about children being the same race as their parents, but fail to see how this infringes upon the quality of a performance.
More on topic I will be posting outlines I had fo an African campaign I ran
Chahir
So, while one rare slave may have been taken way up north in a viking raid or something.... nah.
It's the truth. Maybe you ascribe to africanocentrism (which for me is a form of racism, also), but it's not science-proof in such claims.
BTW, I think Othelo's race was not fully explained... he could have been a berber only, a 'swarthy mediteranean' to quote the feeling of the time.
Now its an ARCHAEOLOGICAL fact??? Has a team of archaeologists actually carried out digs with the aim of proving this???
Othello's race has been debated for a long time. However this simply proves my point that great theatre moves beyond its historical context and conveys something universal to those who parttake in it. Othello is an outsider, but I dont believe his race isnt important per se. He has, however, been successfully (IMHO) portrayed by both Lawrence Fishburne and Patrick Stewart.
The vikings were but a distant memory at the time when Hamlet was written. The historical evidence for black people in Europe before the modern time is well attested, do your home work. Scandinavia is scanty (which I at no point tried to deny). What I am saying is that you dont know (in the objective, HISTORICAL way you claim). You want to think things were a certain way, which generally tends to produce poor knowledge claims of any kind.
However, since you seem to think Denmark in the early 1600's was ruled by Vikings and speak of africanocentrism (for all those africanos out there :D ) I dont know how seriously I should be taking you in the first place.
Your apparent lack of in depth knowledge is not really covered up by the sweeping assertions you make and, frankly, this bores me.
Believe what you want. But dont make claims to historic facts that you cannot back up with facts.
Chahir
As regards the preoffesionalism of the plays, let me suggest the adaptation one where Patrick Stewart plays Othello in a black culture. That makes my point for me
I dont quite get what you mean about children being the same race as their parents, but fail to see how this infringes upon the quality of a performance.
Well, you played Hamlet. You should have noticed that both his mother and father's brother are living characters in the play and his father appears as a ghost. If you can't figure out why Hamlet the younger should share certain features with one or more of those characters then I really don't know what to tell you.
As to Patrick Stewart as Othello, well, actually it makes my point for me. If you figure out what I meant then I'm sure you'll agree.
Fact. To say otherwise is bad science with an agenda.
Look at LOTR, by example. Why Tolkien wrote it apparently as a 'white boys club'? Because he inspired himself from the old myths and the Dark Ages. The only 'non-whites' could only come from outside.
The only places where there was blacks in significant numbers before the modern era was Africa and the Muslims lands (due to arabic slavery).
It's not racist to say that! Racism is in placing ranks in 'races', superiority and inferiority! It have nothing to do here.
It's you who don't get my point - there was no significant numbers of blacks in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire (outside of Muslims-held lands perhaps) until the modern slavery era.
Fact. To say otherwise is bad science with an agenda.
I wouldn't say there were significant numbers even throughout the "modern slavery era", which began as far back as the 1500s. However, suggesting that there were an insignificant number of blacks is different from "There was no blacks in Europe in the past of Europe up to 'Modern, era, except for slavery in Roman era and Muslim-held lands."
Look at LOTR, by example. Why Tolkien wrote it apparently as a 'white boys club'? Because he inspired himself from the old myths and the Dark Ages. The only 'non-whites' could only come from outside.
It's not racist to say that! Racism is in placing ranks in 'races', superiority and inferiority! It have nothing to do here.
However, if Tolkien were trying to market his book to a diverse group of people and then went on to say, "There's no way anybody with brown skin could ever get into the lands of Middle earth, and the idea of Aragon, Gimli, or Frodo having anything but Caucasian features is not only impossible, but would ruin the story.", would certainly be.
I wouldn't say there were significant numbers even throughout the "modern slavery era", which began as far back as the 1500s. However, suggesting that there were an insignificant number of blacks is different from "There was no blacks in Europe in the past of Europe up to 'Modern, era, except for slavery in Roman era and Muslim-held lands."
However, if Tolkien were trying to market his book to a diverse group of people and then went on to say, "There's no way anybody with brown skin could ever get into the lands of Middle earth, and the idea of Aragon, Gimli, or Frodo having anything but Caucasian features is not only impossible, but would ruin the story.", would certainly be.
Well, an handfull, something like 10 to a million, it's pretty insignifiant. My point remains.
The problem is that here, we see a multicultural PCism who don't understand history and culture. Or at least, european ones. It was not racism as he quoted in wanting to create a sort of new anglo-saxon mythology.
It's understandable that his creatures, in the faux european mainland, have all caucasiuan features.
I am irritated by the calls for changing such things - if Tolkien had been a black guy, and the world of LOTR created as a sort of new african metamyth, it would have been called racism the calls for 'where are the white men?'. Or at least, the reractions would have been much worses.
So, why it's racial equity and multicultural egality when it's on a 'white work', but it would be a 'whitewashing reeking of racism' if it was a 'black work' (or an asian or native one)?
Why, in Tolkien's LOTR, the Hobbits or Elves should have black or asian features, when it's all based on Europe?
Well, an handfull, something like 10 to a million, it's pretty insignifiant. My point remains.
As well as the point that there likely DID exist some people of African descent in Europe (and Denmark) in the 1600's.
The problem is that here, we see a multicultural PCism who don't understand history and culture. Or at least, european ones. It was not racism as he quoted in wanting to create a sort of new anglo-saxon mythology.
It's understandable that his creatures, in the faux european mainland, have all caucasiuan features.
I am irritated by the calls for changing such things - if Tolkien had been a black guy, and the world of LOTR created as a sort of new african metamyth, it would have been called racism the calls for 'where are the white men?'. Or at least, the reractions would have been much worses.
So, why it's racial equity and multicultural egality when it's on a 'white work', but it would be a 'whitewashing reeking of racism' if it was a 'black work' (or an asian or native one)?
Why, in Tolkien's LOTR, the Hobbits or Elves should have black or asian features, when it's all based on Europe?
I'm not sure where you're going with this, since nobody in this thread has accused Tolkien of being a racist or demanded that the Hobbit or Elves be changed. It certainly wouldn't have hurt the story though, and might have helped the book (and movies) sell even better. Certainly moreso than making all non-whites evil savages.
It's a moot argument anyway. Tolkien and D&D are different phenomenon. D&D is not attempting to create a new European metamyth based on European history. It's not a personal passion/project like a novel.
D&D is a pulp/action/adventure fantasy role playing game aimed at a mass market. Unlike the LOTR novels, it's in the process of trying to improve its game and make better profits. As of right now, it's not seeing nearly as much growth as it's wanted to. More importantly, unlike the LOTR novels which stays the same story every time, D&D can reinvent itself with every edition. Indeed, it's done so many times.
Amongst the many reasons why D&D isn't doing as well as it could be is the common perceptions that the game is all about young white males expressing their desire to kill things in medieval Europe through lots of dice rolling and number crunching. If D&D wants to appeal to a larger audience, expand its own boundaries, and make more money, it's in its best interests to counteract those perceptions. The best way of doing so is adding material that doesn't conform to that stereotype such as...
Reducing the number of cumbersome rules and streamlining mechanics (doing that). Greater focus on storytelling and character development compared to killing things and looting their bodies (doing that). Trying to find ways to appeal more to female gamers (doing that).
That just leaves, attempts to appeal more to non-white gamers. One of the better (and easier) ways to do that is to ease off the whole Eurocentrism thing and introduce elements of other cultures. At the very least, it shouldn't be implied that all (or most) Humans and Human-like peoples in the game look Caucasian. Just become more sensitive to the existence of players who aren't white, and realize that some of them might enjoy playing characters that are also fantasy, but influenced superficially by mythology or images they're more familiar with.
Nobody's picketing or protesting WOTC about it (to my knowledge). However, I (and others) have noticed it, and it is one of the many things we'd like to see change. It's not that current D&D is horrible in how it presents women and minorities. It's that it could be better.
And what's wrong with that?
Which means, a black Hamlet is still wrong if you want a version really historic and all. It's as probably as a white in black africa, or in eastern asia, by middle age, holding such a rank. And if it was done, you'd hear 'whitewashing, criticism.
It's all PC multiculturalism, who want to adulterate the historical and societal truth of the past to include the non-whites. Europe (IE Christiandom) was white, and other races was fully unknown or very extraordinaire.
I want to be clear that I am not against the change from the typical european-like, faux medieval classics, but to change the settings and all...
My group loves to try new things and I hope that 4E will provide a few new introductions along with a couple of old faves. Perhaps I'm just dreaming. Most people who have responded on this thread seem to want to keep D&D Eurocentric with no a drop of other cultural flavor (except maybe a few monsters to kill).
Speaking of Star Trek, I don't know how many of you have ever attended a Star Trek/ Star Wars Con but they often feature a good number of persons of color (at least that is my experience). I wonder why when they might have a huge cross over market...
That means surely no native blacks. If at all - after all, we could be wrong there too. My point is still the stronger one. A possibility don't make a reality.
You think that having not one single person of African descent ever growing up in Denmark during the 1600's is more likely than it happening? In spite of the fact that African slaves were present in Europe nearly a century prior and that Denmark would become one of the top 10 slave trading European countries.
Really? I'd take that wager.
Which means, a black Hamlet is still wrong if you want a version really historic and all.
Which is by no means was the case.
It's as probably as a white in black africa, or in eastern asia, by middle age, holding such a rank. And if it was done, you'd hear 'whitewashing, criticism.
Either way, they'd be wrong as well.
It's all PC multiculturalism, who want to adulterate the historical and societal truth of the past to include the non-whites. Europe (IE Christiandom) was white, and other races was fully unknown or very extraordinaire.
Only it isn't. Cahihr didn't get the part because of some conspiracy to rewrite Denmark's history. he didn't get the part because someone wanted to be edgy and simply cast a non-white actor. He got the part because he was the best actor, and the fact that he was non-white didn't instantly disqualify him. It's an example of people being "colorblind" at its finest.
Historical accuracy- which I never recall seeing as one of Shakespear's goals- was not a hurdle here.
And neither is it a hurdle in D&D, or most fictional/fantasy works.
http://www.pbs.org/shakespeare/
Of course we are talking about D&D and not hard core history.
Speaking of Star Trek, I don't know how many of you have ever attended a Star Trek/ Star Wars Con but they often feature a good number of persons of color (at least that is my experience). I wonder why when they might have a huge cross over market...
Note that from now on, when I say "fantasy", I'm speaking of "Tolkien-esque": Elves, Dwarves, Wizards, Knights, etc.
I also speak for the more popular science-fiction in the past couple of decades. Earlier science fiction works were chock-full of evil space Chinamen, and planets full of un-evolved minorities.
In Trek/Wars though, there were notable non-whites, namely Lando Calrissian, James Earl Jones as Darth Vader, Uhura and Sulu. More importantly, they weren't treated like exotic outsiders, or even as token characters or the role of sassy/cool person. They were just like everyone else. Race or ethnicity was not a factor at all.
In science fiction in general, there tends to be a pan-human ideal, with all races and cultures united- at least against the alien threat. Aliens in science fiction also tend to break free of human racial/ethnic/cultural stereotypes moreso than the "races" in fantasy. What historical culture is the typical "Little Green Man" representative of? What about the typical Dwarf?
Also, the term "historically accuracy" is used far less often in an attempt to justify any kind of discrimination (racial, gender, age, sexual, etc) in science fiction the way it is in fantasy. That makes it more attractive to people in general.
I do rememeber that slaves where rare in Scandinavian lands much, a true minority. Like my own ancestors - the french settlers of north america - never had much slaves.
They where, but a true rarity - they where not really needed.
Note also, I have said if you made a very historic-based, realistic show. Otherwise, my point is moot.
But sure, a prince of Denmark would NOT be a black, for.
I don't have the time (right now) to read all of the posts that led up to this but why would THIS (Hamlet being white) be an issue? It's pretty obvious that a Prince of Denmark would be white, seeing as how all (or at least most) European Monarchs interbred with one another, and I don't believe I've seen any Black or Asian European Kings, and only a sparing number of 'Browns' (for lack of a better term). But this does NOT preclude Hamlet from being portrayed by a black or Asian or 'brown' person. It's fiction after all and as long as you are not going for historical accuracy, who cares?
As a side note, I've always wanted to see Avery Brooks play Hamlet. I think he'd bring a unique spin on the character... Plus his voice is so cool, lol! :D
In Trek/Wars though, there were notable non-whites, namely Lando Calrissian, James Earl Jones as Darth Vader, Uhura and Sulu. More importantly, they weren't treated like exotic outsiders, or even as token characters or the role of sassy/cool person. They were just like everyone else. Race or ethnicity was not a factor at all.
Don't forget Geordi La Forge (Played by LeVar Burton) and Worf (Played by Michael Dorn)!
... Though Worf is sort of an Outsider I suppose...Chahir, any suggestions on how we can make events more friendly for people of color?
There's an attempt to set up a board called Diversity in Gaming to discuss this kind of thing, as well as campaigns that reflect many backgrounds. If you'd be interested in helping to get it off the ground, please have your say here.
As for Star Trek, the only race I don't believe I've seen is a hispanic character. Not that I care...it's just an observation.
As for Star Trek, the only race I don't believe I've seen is a hispanic character. Not that I care...it's just an observation.
I remember a hispanic redshirt in DS9. Ensign Munez or somesuch.
As for Star Trek, the only race I don't believe I've seen is a hispanic character. Not that I care...it's just an observation.
If it helps, Marina Sirtis, who played Deanna Troi on TNG, originally auditioned to play as Lt. Macha Hernandez, the Security Chief.
Also, the Actor Robert Beltran, who played Commander Chakotay on Voyager, is of a mixed Latino and Native American ancestry. Of course the role of Chakotay was that of a Native American but the actor's heritage is Latino none the less.
I don't know for sure what her heritage is, but Roxann Dawson's (who played B'Elanna Torres on Voyager) birth/given name was Roxann Caballero... So she might be a Latino, though like I said, I don't know for sure.
I think rather than creating multiple, unsupported settings for culture specific regions, why not create and support a world that encompasses a few of the more exotic ones, such as Oriental, Arabic and Mezoamerican? Create a large continent (or 2) and place these cultures into the world, giving credence to an established world history. Meaning don't slapdash a Mayan Civilization right next to China with out an cultural, economic and historical ties shared and explained.
I think its a good idea to create such a setting, even if it amounts to just 1 or 2 source books.
It sounds like your looking for the mystara setting. this setting allowed for cultural flavor and ispiration. le principauz de lupus libre was a principality of lycanthropes but it had obvious hints of french language and culture. the atraughan clans were very inspired by the northern native american tribes. they were detailed in the gazeteer series and how each culture related to eachother both poiltically and geographicly reflected thier shared world history. look it up on the mystara board.
It sounds like your looking for the mystara setting. this setting allowed for cultural flavor and ispiration. le principauz de lupus libre was a principality of lycanthropes but it had obvious hints of french language and culture. the atraughan clans were very inspired by the northern native american tribes. they were detailed in the gazeteer series and how each culture related to eachother both poiltically and geographicly reflected thier shared world history. look it up on the mystara board.
Most campaign settings do this. Forgotten Realms has unabashed fantasy versions of Egypt, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, while Eberron has Chinese/Roman/Japanese styled Goblins living next to Elves resembling Persian/Hun horse riders, and Native-American flavored Halflings.
"With WotC's willingness to change so many sacred cows for 4e, I must say I'm disappointed to read that drow (in this article) will remain black-skinned. I have nothing against a black-skinned race (in fact I like diversity), but I do have a problem with having an evil race "marked" as evil by being given dark skin. Saying that Lolth wanted drow to look like her doesn't take away the racist connotations. I'm not saying anyone at WotC is racist, I just wish someone there had noticed the implications and done something about it.
Very disappointing."
Personally, I would love a setting which incorporated various cultures, however -with WOTC being a commercial company- I think it would be tough to do in a way that wouldn't offend someone. I mean, if people are complaining because they feel the skin color of Drow and Hobgoblins (black and yellow respectively) are racist, I think it would be hard to create a setting based on past Earth cultures without an outcry about political correctness.
I think that perhaps the best way to do it is by doing what many of the campaign settings already do-create areas of the world that are loosely influenced by Earth cultures. Forgotten Realms has a very diverse world, and I'm pretty sure that both Greyhawk and Eberron do as well. I agree that have more varied artwork in the books would probably be a good step to take though.
Personally, I would love a setting which incorporated various cultures, however -with WOTC being a commercial company- I think it would be tough to do in a way that wouldn't offend someone. I mean, if people are complaining because they feel the skin color of Drow and Hobgoblins (black and yellow respectively) are racist, I think it would be hard to create a setting based on past Earth cultures without an outcry about political correctness.
The Drow complaint is a weak one at best though. Drow are in no way mistaken for people of African descent, and the hobgoblin comment was only brought up to show the ridiculous of the Drow one, since Hobgoblins in no way really resemble Asians.
What it shows is not a tendency to belittle any race in particular, but the tendency to make races that are non-white (or non-European) into antagonists. Black skins, yellow skins, red skins, green skins, brown skins, gray skins, etc, are generally the antagonistic races, or exotic and out of the way, and treated as not being a normal part of the setting.
You can easily do other cultures and peoples in the setting. Just avoid the tendency of making non-white and non-European races and cultures any more negative than the white/European influenced ones. Make them more prominent, and not so much far flung or isolated lands, or their people and ways out of place and rare. Introduce diversity in appearance in the core races. One minority character isn't enough. Don't be afraid to have a white person in Samurai-styled armor while an Asian wears a Victorian-inspired dress. Don't be afraid to have a Halfling that takes more influence from Latinos, or a Dwarf that looks a bit Native American.
As I said, I'm all for the campaign. I think it would be a really cool idea. I'm just saying that I'll be surprised if WOTC (as a commercial company) creates such a campaign and stamps their name on it due to ethical concerns.
I wouldn't have any problem with it personally.
I agree that the Drow complaint is weak, but it's a weak complaint which seems to have a lot of support.
And will one that will have little support when you adress the real problem: that all non-white races tend to be bad. Start making non-white (including some of the black skinned) races not so bad, and people won't complain about the Drow. They're just the most obvious example.
As I said, I'm all for the campaign. I think it would be a really cool idea. I'm just saying that I'll be surprised if WOTC (as a commercial company) creates such a campaign and stamps their name on it due to ethical concerns.
They already have. Forgotten Realms goes with the more obvious, "every culture gets its own country", even to he point of ridiculous historical/racial stereotypes and parodies like some guy named Marco Volo (or someting similar) travelling to Toril's version of the far-east (Kara-Tur) and meeting cultures blatantly based on Japan, China, and India.
Then there's Eberron, which has taken something of a blended approach, by giving Elves a strong Egyptian/Mesoamerican flavor, styling Halflings after Native Americans, and Goblinoids with hints of China, Japan, and Rome.
It's not really risky from an ethical standpoint, since D&D is still mostly dominated by white males and receives much less attention from women and minorities. They've already made up their mind that D&D isn't for them. They can't really alienate these people any more than they have, so fear of a worsening image amongst minorities, ethical complaints, or something as far as legal action is much less likely.
However, by successfully pulling off a game that's more inclusive to females and non-whites, they can drastically increase sales. You can improve D&D's image in their eyes much more easily than you could worsen it. D&D has far more to gain than they have to lose from such an attempt.
I am aware that Forgotten Realms (and D&D in general) has already included other cultures. I don't think that's something which some people realize though.
I personally don't subscribe to any of the concerns which I mentioned about the publishing of a more diverse setting. I'm only mentioning concerns that I imagine a company would have about more openly portraying things which resemble real life. If I had a team of people to help me do so, and I had the money to publish a setting of my own, I'd most definately publish the type of campaign that this thread mentions as my core campaign. I'm not the one calling the shots though.
I am aware that Forgotten Realms (and D&D in general) has already included other cultures. I don't think that's something which some people realize though.
Enough evidence is given in he core setting book. It may not have Kara-Tur and Maztica, but it offers plenty of individual Human ethnicities and varied cultures (Thay, Chult, Mulharond, Calimshan, etc).
It's the generic WOTC books where this is missing though. The settings have it, but the core books need it to. I was using campaign settings as examples of what the Core books could do, and also show that the settings have themselves alread started moving down this path, and have much potential.
I personally don't subscribe to any of the concerns which I mentioned about the publishing of a more diverse setting. I'm only mentioning concerns that I imagine a company would have about more openly portraying things which resemble real life.
I didn't say you had concerns about anything. You just mentioned being surprised. I was just trying to explain how such an act would not be surprising, since the things you think the company might be concerned about aren't something they shouldn't really be concerned about.
Can I get an A/G/L (age / gender / location) on everyone watching this thread? Thanks.
First off, I believe going European Light is not only fun, but "exotic". It takes any campaign setting to a whole new level.
I have quite a few favorites among cultural elements, two of them being these oriental- and arabic-based cultures we speak of here. I have not heard of (what is it?) Al-Qadim? Sounds cool, though.
I also have a quasi-arabic campaign setting that I work with my partner on, called Si'ir (Sigh-ear), on the continent of Zendelon, on the WFR Guild's open gaming world, Jashnia (WFR - Jashnia). Its culture is also descended from Kanaal, a much older world that is a fantasy/SF version of a 'Dune' re-write (Kanaal).
I incorporate Meso-American cultures into a coming concept of mine, and will be placing more Hindu-related material in my Rakshasa-oriented campaign on Nym.
Best wishes to you all. Now clean up the bad attitudes, if you please. We are supposed to be a civilized culture here on Earth...
-will
First off, I believe going European Light is not only fun, but "exotic". It takes any campaign setting to a whole new level.
It's not that Europe isn't "fun" or "exotic", but in the US/Canada, where D&D does most of its business, European-style fantasy pretty much dominates.
Can I get an A/G/L (age / gender / location) on everyone watching this thread? Thanks.
Clicking on the names of posters should reveal their profiles. Age and location should be listed there. If not, then the poster probably doesn't feel comfortable sharing it.