Diversity changes
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:24 pm
Your #1 Source for Dungeons & Dragons
http://toyintercept.com/padnd/official_forum/
http://toyintercept.com/padnd/official_forum/viewtopic.php?t=4314
Hahaha, that's so faqing ridiculousOther NPCs have some changes to their description as well: Ezmerelda, an NPC with a lower leg prosthesis (having replaced it after a werewolf bite), no longer “takes care to hide it from view,” and is not implied to be ashamed of it. And in the Haunted One background, the wording on one of the bonds has been changed to be more gender inclusive: I have a child to protect. I must make the world a safer place for him (or her)” has been changed to “I have a child to protect. I must make the world a safer place for them.”
Since when is "exotic" a bad word? It merely means "strange but erotic", or something along those lines. And strange is relative.where Chult was once described as “a distant and exotic land,” now it is simply “a distant land.”
Since the whiney libtards, started having the monopoly on what is and isn't racist..New Hegdeh wrote: Since when is "exotic" a bad word? It merely means "strange but erotic", or something along those lines. And strange is relative.
And tribal isn't a bad word either, it means "belonging or appropriate for a tribe" and a tribe is a type of social organization.
Which part is ridiculous, and what is ridiculous about it?New Hegdeh wrote:Hahaha, that's so faqing ridiculous
It's something you see a lot in high fantasy, though. You take a real name, change or add/remove a few letters, to make it sound more fantasy-ish. Like Game of Thrones, where you have characters named named Eddard instead of Edward or Robb instead of Rob.New Hegdeh wrote:(and Ezmerelda is not a name, the name is Esmeralda, and its Spanish not Romanian thus not vistani)
It's less to do with the words' definitions, then how they've been used in recent times. I mean, technically the word 'negro' is literally just the latin word for 'black.' But the reason it's bad to call black people that word is because that word has been used for centuries to demean them.New Hegdeh wrote:Since when is "exotic" a bad word? It merely means "strange but erotic", or something along those lines. And strange is relative.
And tribal isn't a bad word either, it means "belonging or appropriate for a tribe" and a tribe is a type of social organization.
And who do you believe should have that monopoly, I wonder? Do you even know what you're so angry about? Do you even play 5E? Do these changes affect your life in even the most slightest way, negatively or otherwise? Or are you just mad for the sake of being mad?garhkal wrote:Since the whiney libtards, started having the monopoly on what is and isn't racist..
That they focus on innocent words when they could be focusing on more important featuresJadedDM wrote:Which part is ridiculous, and what is ridiculous about it?New Hegdeh wrote:Hahaha, that's so faqing ridiculous
I find that name more offensive than anything else they are changing, it says "we rather lump you Spaniards and hispanophones with the Romanian and slavs that acknolwedge you are distinct people with your own features and I rather misspell your names than learn the basics of your worldwide-agreed-upon easy phonetic rules"It's something you see a lot in high fantasy, though. You take a real name, change or add/remove a few letters, to make it sound more fantasy-ish. Like Game of Thrones, where you have characters named named Eddard instead of Edward or Robb instead of Rob.New Hegdeh wrote:(and Ezmerelda is not a name, the name is Esmeralda, and its Spanish not Romanian thus not vistani)
"Negro" is actually Spanish for "black" (latin word is "niger" I think), but in English that "e" is the same "e" as in "reed" while in Spanish that "e" is the same "e" as in "red". Spelling aside the demeaning terms sound different, and yeah, exotic is an ethnocentric concept, but I wouldn't be offended if yo usaid lucumas are exotic to you nor you should be offended if I say that eating veal (that's the meat of the deer? Isn't it?) is exotic to me. Exotic is relative because strange is relative. But strange has a negative implication, exotic always implies that something is appealing.JadedDM wrote:It's less to do with the words' definitions, then how they've been used in recent times. I mean, technically the word 'negro' is literally just the latin word for 'black.' But the reason it's bad to call black people that word is because that word has been used for centuries to demean them.New Hegdeh wrote:Since when is "exotic" a bad word? It merely means "strange but erotic", or something along those lines. And strange is relative.
And tribal isn't a bad word either, it means "belonging or appropriate for a tribe" and a tribe is a type of social organization.
In this case, 'exotic' is often used to 'other' people of color. As you said yourself, exotic basically means 'strange.' And if you think about it for a minute, you can probably see how referring to another culture (or in this case, a fantasy culture that is based on real life ones) as 'strange' can be, if nothing else, at least ethnocentric.
Likewise, the word 'tribal' is often used to mean 'primitive,' 'uncivilized' and even 'savage.'
As part of the liberal left (by worldwide standards, not by those of the US that uses the misnomer "socialist" for the democrats which are centre right wing by worldwide standards) I should be offended at the use of the term libtard, but I am more offended by the idea that one should be playing 5E before one can get concerned with this. When efforts are placed in minutae time is taken away from handling the most important and pressing matters and those abuses persist, its fishing for the red herring when the white whale is nearby about to land on the shore.JadedDM wrote:And who do you believe should have that monopoly, I wonder? Do you even know what you're so angry about? Do you even play 5E? Do these changes affect your life in even the most slightest way, negatively or otherwise? Or are you just mad for the sake of being mad?garhkal wrote:Since the whiney libtards, started having the monopoly on what is and isn't racist..
Such as...?New Hegdeh wrote:That they focus on innocent words when they could be focusing on more important features
Ah, that's right. I knew I should have looked it up first before committing to it.New Hegdeh wrote:"Negro" is actually Spanish for "black" (latin word is "niger" I think)...
Yeah, in a perfect world. Unfortunately, words and symbols change meaning whether we like it or not. Originally, the words 'idiot' and 'moron' were both clinical terms for the mentally deficient. But now they are just insults. Same with 'retard.' Sometimes a word can be reclaimed (I still remember when 'queer' was considered quite offensive), but it's super rare and more times than not, once something is abused, it stays that way forever.New Hegdeh wrote:In general we need terms to mean the best thing they can mean rather than the worst they have been made to mean.
To me, no one should be dictating what words are 'offensive/hate speech'. But more and more it seems the liberal's (leftists) are the ones trying to define what is and isn't offensive, and anyone who says otherwise, often gets labeled bigots, racists, sexists etc..JadedDM wrote: And who do you believe should have that monopoly, I wonder? Do you even know what you're so angry about? Do you even play 5E? Do these changes affect your life in even the most slightest way, negatively or otherwise? Or are you just mad for the sake of being mad?
The vistani being untrustworthy no matter how much you sugar coat the words used to describe them, stuff like that. But that in this game, even worse is in real life the cops that kill people for their race or the people that calls the cops for someone being being black, that should be fined (and the fine must be expensive) in the case of first offender and repetitive offenders (those jimmy's that call wolf too much) should do time in prison.JadedDM wrote:Such as...?New Hegdeh wrote:That they focus on innocent words when they could be focusing on more important features
I dont believe death by thousand cuts is possible with paper cut level wounds caused by very minor stuff regarding words but I understand words can do great deal of damage, but agreeing that things like Mein Kempf must be censored and allowed as reading only for adults as part of a universtiy class is not the same as agreeing that these words are harmful, AD&D has never been Mein Kampf, its worst offense which I know of is the vistani and one instance of one of them being a drunkard isn't what I am thinking of.JadedDM wrote:Also, words are not always so innocent. They can do real harm when abused. Even very minor stuff, like the words in a D&D book, can add up over time.
but the pronunciation in Spanish and English are quite different, its not the same to say "negro" with the "e" of "red" that to say "negro" with the "e" of "reed", like "Esmeralda" has the "a" of "cat" but "Ezmerelda" has the "e" of "pet".JadedDM wrote:Ah, that's right. I knew I should have looked it up first before committing to it.New Hegdeh wrote:"Negro" is actually Spanish for "black" (latin word is "niger" I think)...
We must work hard on reclaiming words than on nullifying them, not with ancient words from prescientific eras like "idiot" and "moron" but with recent words fresh in our minds. Reclaiming worlds change them entality of people, deleting them is just a co op.JadedDM wrote:Yeah, in a perfect world. Unfortunately, words and symbols change meaning whether we like it or not. Originally, the words 'idiot' and 'moron' were both clinical terms for the mentally deficient. But now they are just insults. Same with 'retard.' Sometimes a word can be reclaimed (I still remember when 'queer' was considered quite offensive), but it's super rare and more times than not, once something is abused, it stays that way forever.New Hegdeh wrote:In general we need terms to mean the best thing they can mean rather than the worst they have been made to mean.
ITs more the inequity on who gets to label what words offensive, and the inequitability on how they're enforced..New Hegdeh wrote:
As for Garkhal's point of view I cannot speak on his name but I think it seems to him that "offensive" is an objective value and thus subjective values are not to be tolerated. And I can do an ad absurdum and say, imagine someone dressed all in black and you asked them if they are mourners (not sure if its an actual word but the meaning is obvious, someone that is mourning), and they say you offended them... It would piss you off to be told not to say something that innocent to that person due to their own personal reasons, wouldn't it? Offense is partially subjective howver and not fully objective but we must learn to negotiate the limits. But I wonder if people on each side are willing to.