What the fuck does this mean?

british empire actually outlawed slavery before the american civil war even began lol

i mean i also see it from my infowars obsessed dad

>reach as broad an audience as possible

Just like when they started putting romantic sub-plots into war movies. It only made them better and more successful.

As long as this diversity push only reflects humans, then it's fine. Any other race aside form humans and you're veering off into full on retard territory

unlike romantic subplots in war films, black people in rpgs arent inherently detrimental to the experience

wow as a black person this completely changed my life, i finally feel like a human and accepted.

God, I hate my american brothers. They think that insignificant shit like this is what stops racism.

But they are if they don't fit the setting?

>But for some reason it does drive away a certain kind of white player.

Which then brings in the black players. It's like poetry.

>Just like when they started putting romantic sub-plots into war movies
Ah yes, the 1920s. Or was it the 1910s?

forced anything is always a detriment. Artists should have free reign over their orks.,

Are you all daft? No-one cares that africans are included in the sourcebook, that's completely fine. It's the fact that they've seen fit to make an article implying they aren't clearly human that's offensive.

you'd have a point if you were talking about movies or videogames.

but if with tabletop games, it's entirely dependent on who you play with. If you think black people are being forced into d&d then maybe just play with people who roll white characters?

You have to admit that there is an overwhelming amount of white characters in fantasy. I don't get why it's such a big deal to have variety. It's more interesting and appeals to more people.

That's exactly what I mean though. No one seriously cares if the human in D&D 5E is a black woman.

What is extremely aggravating is that the SJW fucks will parade this around as some kind of victory, like they've defeated racism in the manner of their WWII ancestors because a stupid RPG has an illustration of a black woman.

>It's more interesting
not really tho

its a tweet by a literally who, that you would've never seen had it not been for /pol/ trying to stir up shit

well exactly, it's always up to the individuals at the end of the day in RPGS. This entire thing is fucking pointless for that exact reason.

more variety is inherently more interesting

>Trust me, I'm not racist and it's totally not a big deal but seeing brown people in RPG books pisses me off

Can you pick a place for your goalpost?

Also, what exactly stopped someone from making a black character during the white nationalistic Nazi era of RPGs?

>Am DM
>fucking normie brings character sheet and art
>fucking nigger
>give him +2 strength, -1 charisma, -2 intelligence lololol
>make everyone in setting call him a nigger
>make him roll to resist theft and rape
>quits after one session
>niggers have no place in rpgs

Too much variety can make things too chaotic and paralyze you with choice

>british empire actually outlawed slavery before the american civil war even began lol

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

here is your (you) good sir

What old war movies have you been watching?

a-are retarded?

nothing stopped them
is a black character in the book stopping you from making a white character or something?

Not him, but an example is "For Her Sake" from 1911.

It's called suspension of disbelief.

99.99% of settings are not-Europe! with not-European cultures, not-European technology, etc. Adding black people just breaks immersion because they almost never seem to come from not-Africa but are natives.

Inb4. muh monster.
Elves, orcs, dragons, demons, angals, etc. are all from European folklore.

Monsters like beholders and the way they act or look is completely made up from scratch. Black people and Europe are not.

That had nothing to do with slavery, retard.

He's right, though.

>any movie set before war time = war movie

wut?

>Adding black people just breaks immersion because they almost never seem to come from not-Africa but are natives.

I don't really follow. We're already dealing with pretty fantastical stuff here, black natives of not-Europe! isn't all that immersion breaking.

Why are racists so obnoxious about how racist they are? They're like furries. They just can't shut up about their fetish.

Do you know what slavery even is?

>For Her Sake is a 1911 American silent short war romance film
Would you stop being retarded? Please? This is absolutely pointless.

do these characters come with entire family trees so you can tell how native they are or something?

>it's a fantasy world
>with magic and dragons
>but if humans have different skin colors it becomes unbearably unrealistic and ruins my immersion
>it's not because i'm an illogical, foaming at the mouth racist bigot neo nazi who worships a green frog made famous in a comic about pissing

Nice strawman you got there

Can you explain to me something. So, black person cannot enjoy a game if black characters are not present enough in the art, even though nothing stops them from making such characters in the actual game. Or at least they don't feel welcome in the game, because not enough representation. But a white person is just being stupid and racist if they don't get represented enough in the art, even though nothing in the rules stops them from making those characters?

It's a bit confusing the logic here. You're telling me one group of people don't feel welcome because they're not represented, but the other is silly for not being able to play without representation?

>taking place right before the start of the American Civil War

Renaissance-era Europe was a pretty diverse place, user. Even in the Dark ages you had Middle-Easternern and Egyptian traders making their way northeast settling down and raising families.

A few blacks breaks the immersion, but dragon-people don't?

>fantastical stuff
That's the point.
Fantastical stuff isn't real. There's no point of reference.

Black people are real and so is Europe and I do have a point of reference.

Seeing blacks in European style fantasy wearing semi-historical attire is like watching those BBC "historical" dramas where they cast half of the people as Africans and pakis.

I know most of you are Americans and Europe seems like a fantasy but it's not and the dragons and magic you talk about comes almost entirely from European mythology..

i really dont get why people get so pissy about this sort of thing.

they could introduce a literal interracial cuckolding kingdom into D&D, and unless you actually played with people who were into that sort of thing you would never even see it in gameplay, and if you played with people who were into it while you hated it, wtf are you doing? Get new friends.

I dunno, why are you putting furries into everything and then crying fursecution when you're not getting your dicks sucked for being progressive while hiding behind the "furry demographic" card?

There has been a black minority in Europe since ancient times.

and european mythology "borrowed" much from africa and middle eastern mythology

>there are no white people represented in the art
That is complete bullshit and you know it

You also had European mercs in the middle east, so will the D&D book feature jungle tribesmen and desert nomads with pale skin, blue eyes and red hair?

>The Little American is a 1917 American silent romantic war drama film directed by Cecil B. DeMille. The film stars Mary Pickford as an American woman who is in love with both a German and a French soldier during World War I
Can you just shut the fuck up now? Thanks, faggot.

>there have never been non-white people in the art

While we're on the subject of bullshit...

when did i ever suggest that

Why not? It was well known that Vikings regularly traveled and traded in the middle east. Famous Vikings like Hardrada even settled there. It might blow your mind, but people traveled even before the 19th century.

It's Hasbro's typical SJW shit. Why people still Play D&D past the 80's is beyond me.

>quick, change the movie, maybe he won't notice!

I guess Casablanca was a war movies as well, since it happened during WW2.

>pretty diverse
Yeah, no.
That's a pretty much bullshit made up by people who hate whites and want to destroy their identity and history.

>middle eastern mythology
There was some crossover because of Rome and Christianity but most myths and legends are pretty place specific.

>much from africa
And that's just full retard. Unless you think WE WUZ KANGZ is real.

You have to be the most petty person ITT. The entire point of contention was whether or not romantic elements existed in war movies in the '10s and '20s. They did and now you're whining about it like the tiny little ignorant bitchboi you are. Pathetic.

>WE WUZ KANGZ is real.

aaaand the racism is just blatant know.

Vikings also traveled to America, so anyone complaining about Caucasian actors playing native Americans are ignorant of history.

So, again, where was the lack of representation that black people so desperately needed to be able to enjoy the game?

You can't reason with racists.

Around racists, never relax!

Was it? Because I'm pretty sure the point was about needless romantic sub-plots in war movies, not romantic movies set during war times.

There was no barrier stopping them. Does that mean the image depicting a human in the book should be a aryan superman to avoid hurting your feelings or something?

>Just like when they started putting romantic sub-plots into war movies
>Ah yes, the 1920s. Or was it the 1910s?
>What old war movies have you been watching?

The only difference between them and you is the race they fetishize. They adore whites, you worship blacks.

>if you dont shit your pants with rage every time you see a black person thrn you're a cuck

Yeah, notice the word "sub-plot" in there? Now, I do admit I haven't watched those two movies (I have my doubts you haven't either, just googled them to have this argument), but the description does make it sound like the romantic plot is the main plot and the war is merely the setting for the events.

This is literally how /pol/tards think.

You're an idiot if you thing WE WUZ KANGZ is anything other than a joke.

Fun facts:
Ancient Egypt was not black.
Ancient Greece was not black.
Ancient Rome was not black.
Ancient Spain was not black.
Ancient Ireland was not black.
Ancient Japan was not black.
Buddha was not black.
Charlemagne was not black.
Halfdan the black was not black.
Mozart was not black.

Does that mean the image depicting a human in the book should be a strong independent female bodied person of colour to avoid hurting their feelings or something?

Again, I'm not the one saying it's done to "broaden the audience."

Ancient Egypt most certainly was black

...

>Ancient Egypt was not black.
>Ancient Greece was not black.
>Ancient Rome was not black.
>Ancient Spain was not black.
>Ancient Ireland was not black.
>Ancient Japan was not black.
>Buddha was not black.
>Charlemagne was not black.
>Halfdan the black was not black.
>Mozart was not black.

Das not rite!

>saying it's done to "broaden the audience."
please point out where i said that

It means for once in 43 years the drawing of an example human isn't a white male and that it's going to make racists shit their pants with rage because they can't handle not being directly represented for once.

just because it wasnt white doesnt mean it was black

Well, I mean, that's where this whole conversation started:
>trying to reach as broad an audience as possible

>Ancient Egypt most certainly was black
Recent genetic testing showed that Ancient Egyptians were closely related to Ancient Anatolians and that modern day Egyptians have more black admixture than any Egyptian mummie.

that wasnt me, but regardless:
White guys already make up the majority of the D&D audience. They dont need to pander to us when we're already hooked.

>They dont need to pander to us when we're already hooked.

I mean if they really wanted to have characters resemble their audience half the characters would be obese and odorous.

>They dont need to pander to us when we're already hooked.

We'll see. I mean, if the theory is that you can't have the audience without the pandering, why would the majority of the audience stay if they're not pandered to?

...

>one black woman means there are literally no white men in the entire setting

Why are you even here on Veeky Forums?

>not having the strong independent female bodied person of colour as the main image means there's literally no strong independent female bodied people of colour in the entire setting

it was hyperbole as the guy i was replying to siggested that one black chick in the rulebook meant the devs didnt care about whiteguys anymore you fucking mongoloid

Except I wasn't the one who came up with the claim that it was done for pandering reasons, nor did I come up with the claim that unlike black people, white people don't require pandering to. You, how do you put it, "fucking mongoloid"?

>tfw parents are from Ireland
>tfw very white
>tfw when called slave owner by angry black man because white
>tfw can't even talk about Irish slavery in America
Is this white privilege?

> Not +2 Agi, +2 Con, -4 Wis

Shit system mate.

>the pointless shitflinging from everyone in this thread

Hasn’t there been black people in almost every D&D core book? With exception of 4e, which they were in PHB II.