Discussion:
[Wargamer] DnD fans debate whether sushi is unrealistic in a make-believe game
(too old to reply)
Kyonshi
2024-09-06 07:40:14 UTC
Permalink
Source: https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/taco-sushi-debate


DnD fans debate whether sushi is unrealistic in a make-believe game

New art from the Dungeons and Dragons Player’s Handbook has sparked
debates about racism and what real-world foods fit in a fantasy game.

Mollie Russell

Published: 2024-09-05
Dungeons and Dragons

Bewilderingly, sushi and tacos have become the focus of a heated
Dungeons and Dragons discussion online, as art from the new D&D Player’s
Handbook happens to feature both of these foods. After a fan Tweet from
September 1 decried this artistic choice as “nonsense”, several members
of the D&D community rushed to defend sushi and tacos’ status as fantasy
game food.

That original tweet came from X user osgamer74, who shared new art for
the Heroes’ Feast spell from the 2024 Player’s Handbook. “Tacos? Sushi?
What the fuck is this nonsense?”, they comment.

That original post has gained a lot of traction (so much that its
creator has now muted the post), so osgamer74 has expanded on their
original thought. Apparently, their, er, ‘beef’ with the artwork is that
sushi and tacos are too “contemporary” for D&D’s mostly faux-medieval
settings. They equate them to McDonald’s meals, as osgamer74 can buy
both in their local mall.

For context, both these foods are closer to the current day than they
are Medieval times, which serve as the main influence for D&D’s
particular flavor of fantasy. Sushi in some form has been around for
centuries, but the dish as we know it today is thought to have been
invented in 1824, and it was already available in America by the early
1900s thanks to immigration.

Tacos are also an eighteenth-century creation, though there is some
debate about exactly when and how the food came to be. Both foods
reached Europe at a later date, with the first records of sushi
appearing in the UK in the 1950s, and the first UK Mexican restaurant
opening in 1982.

However, anachronisms have rarely bothered Dungeons and Dragons fans
before. Potatoes are often a staple food for the fantasy game, despite
only arriving in Britain in the 1580s. The Heroes’ Feast art also shows
pumpkin as part of the meal, and these weren’t available in Europe until
the 16th century. Nothing about this meal is particularly medieval.
Nevertheless, osgamer74 has said that they’re “fine with pumpkins” as
part of the feast.

Comments like this have led many online to call a spade a spade and
accuse the post of racism.

Dungeons and Dragons writer and presenter B. Dave Walters shared the
post, adding “People that complain about this sort of thing never seem
to be bothered with overtly western medieval food and customs in their
‘fantasy’ game. Weird, I wonder why.” “In addition to everything else, I
love that there are literally Samurai in D&D but Sushi is a bridge too
far”, Walters adds. This post is accompanied by an image that says
‘careful, your racism is showing’.

Ennie-winning RPG designer Alison Cybe shares a similar sentiment,
tweeting: “The reason folks get so pissy about artwork in D&D always
comes back to the idea of fantasy being history; specifically WHITE
history. Tacos & sushi are ‘too exotic’ to be real for them, because
their idea of the genre excludes non-whites.”

While much of D&D’s world building is influenced by Medieval European
fantasy tropes, the tabletop RPG has always taken inspiration from
non-white cultures. 1985’s Oriental Adventures is not a kind and
respectful portrayal of Asian culture, but it shows that all editions of
Dungeons and Dragons have taken images and ideas from diverse nations.
DnD Monks have been in the game since the ‘70s, and Samurai are also a
first-edition character option.

In modern Dungeons and Dragons, books like Journeys Through the Radiant
Citadel have created entire settings inspired by non-white communities,
with far more nuanced and respectful portrayals of such cultures. Plus,
there’s Pathfinder, D&D’s sibling rival, who recently proved in its Tian
Xia character guide that Sailor Moon, Zelda, and Godzilla references can
work in a heroic fantasy RPG.

Art depicting sushi and tacos has caused a divide on D&D social media,
but if the actual DnD books are anything to go by, such diverse
influences are here to stay for tabletop games.

For more Dungeons and Dragons updates, be sure to follow Wargamer on
Google News. We can keep you up to date with the DnD release schedule,
or we can help you choose the right DnD classes and DnD races for your
next character.



Author's bio: Mollie Russell Mollie Russell is Wargamer's resident D&D
and guides specialist. She has a degree in Creative Writing and English
Literature, and you can also find her writing at Pocket Tactics and in
various poetry magazines. She's covered some of the biggest and weirdest
releases for Wargamer - including the DnD movie, Frosthaven, and
Baldur's Gate 3. Mollie is constantly playing Dungeons and Dragons, but
she's still on her quest to try every tabletop RPG she can get her hands
on. An avid fan of MTG drafts and horror board games, she will take any
opportunity to info-dump about why Blood on the Clocktower is the best
social deduction game. (She/Her)
Ed P
2024-09-06 13:34:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kyonshi
Source: https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/taco-sushi-debate
DnD fans debate whether sushi is unrealistic in a make-believe game
New art from the Dungeons and Dragons Player’s Handbook has sparked
debates about racism and what real-world foods fit in a fantasy game.
Mollie Russell
Published: 2024-09-05
Dungeons and Dragons
Bewilderingly, sushi and tacos have become the focus of a heated
Dungeons and Dragons discussion online, as art from the new D&D Player’s
Handbook happens to feature both of these foods. After a fan Tweet from
September 1 decried this artistic choice as “nonsense”, several members
of the D&D community rushed to defend sushi and tacos’ status as fantasy
game food.
That original tweet came from X user osgamer74, who shared new art for
the Heroes’ Feast spell from the 2024 Player’s Handbook. “Tacos? Sushi?
What the fuck is this nonsense?”, they comment.
That original post has gained a lot of traction (so much that its
creator has now muted the post), so osgamer74 has expanded on their
original thought. Apparently, their, er, ‘beef’ with the artwork is that
sushi and tacos are too “contemporary” for D&D’s mostly faux-medieval
settings. They equate them to McDonald’s meals, as osgamer74 can buy
both in their local mall.
Better just to eat pizza while playing the game
Spalls Hurgenson
2024-09-06 16:31:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ed P
Post by Kyonshi
Source: https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/taco-sushi-debate
DnD fans debate whether sushi is unrealistic in a make-believe game
New art from the Dungeons and Dragons Player’s Handbook has sparked
debates about racism and what real-world foods fit in a fantasy game.
Mollie Russell
Published: 2024-09-05
Dungeons and Dragons
Bewilderingly, sushi and tacos have become the focus of a heated
Dungeons and Dragons discussion online, as art from the new D&D Player’s
Handbook happens to feature both of these foods. After a fan Tweet from
September 1 decried this artistic choice as “nonsense”, several members
of the D&D community rushed to defend sushi and tacos’ status as fantasy
game food.
That original tweet came from X user osgamer74, who shared new art for
the Heroes’ Feast spell from the 2024 Player’s Handbook. “Tacos? Sushi?
What the fuck is this nonsense?”, they comment.
That original post has gained a lot of traction (so much that its
creator has now muted the post), so osgamer74 has expanded on their
original thought. Apparently, their, er, ‘beef’ with the artwork is that
sushi and tacos are too “contemporary” for D&D’s mostly faux-medieval
settings. They equate them to McDonald’s meals, as osgamer74 can buy
both in their local mall.
Better just to eat pizza while playing the game
Oh, for the days when a gaming session revolved around pizza, crisps,
and soda!

[And after a particularly good session, maybe a run to
the donut shop to celebrate!]

Nowadays,* none of our group can afford such dangerous diets. Oh sure,
we might splurge on some junk food (because D&D without crisps isn't
the same; you need to have SOMETHING at hand to throw at the DM when
he makes a ruling you don't like! ;-)

But as often we're likely just do without the unhealthy stuff,
replacing it with stuff that doesn't destroy our aging bodies so
quickly. We just can't afford to do it anymore. Why, the other day*
somebody brought KALE to munch on! The horror!

....

As for the sushi/topic debate... it's just silly. Yes, it's
unrealistic that a completely different culture in a completely
different world would create a snack that looks exactly like modern
day food (especially tacos, which are heavily dependent on modern food
processing). But, at the same time, the ideas of these food aren't so
alien: pound wheat and water to make a tortilla, wrap it around some
meat and veggies and you get something similar to a taco. Eating fish
and veggies raw isn't that unusual either.

Plus, we're happy to overlook so many other anachronisms in the game
that drawing the line at taco and sushi is ridiculous. In a world
where elves are using rifles to shoot at plate-armored dwarves (who
happily munch on sandwiches in their downtime), _that_ is the hill you
want to die on in the battle about realism?

Although maybe it's all just lingering resentment over 2nd edition
D&D's much-maligned attack-roll system that is the cause of it all.
Taco is only one letter away from THACO, after all. ;-)






------------------
* sadly, it's actually been a while since I played, so references to
'nowadays' and 'the other day' should be assumed to mean 'a couple
years ago' ;-)
Kyonshi
2024-09-06 21:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Post by Ed P
Post by Kyonshi
Source: https://www.wargamer.com/dnd/taco-sushi-debate
DnD fans debate whether sushi is unrealistic in a make-believe game
New art from the Dungeons and Dragons Player’s Handbook has sparked
debates about racism and what real-world foods fit in a fantasy game.
Mollie Russell
Published: 2024-09-05
Dungeons and Dragons
Bewilderingly, sushi and tacos have become the focus of a heated
Dungeons and Dragons discussion online, as art from the new D&D Player’s
Handbook happens to feature both of these foods. After a fan Tweet from
September 1 decried this artistic choice as “nonsense”, several members
of the D&D community rushed to defend sushi and tacos’ status as fantasy
game food.
That original tweet came from X user osgamer74, who shared new art for
the Heroes’ Feast spell from the 2024 Player’s Handbook. “Tacos? Sushi?
What the fuck is this nonsense?”, they comment.
That original post has gained a lot of traction (so much that its
creator has now muted the post), so osgamer74 has expanded on their
original thought. Apparently, their, er, ‘beef’ with the artwork is that
sushi and tacos are too “contemporary” for D&D’s mostly faux-medieval
settings. They equate them to McDonald’s meals, as osgamer74 can buy
both in their local mall.
Better just to eat pizza while playing the game
Oh, for the days when a gaming session revolved around pizza, crisps,
and soda!
I mean, pizza is of course the best kind of dish for a lot of events,
and game nights are just one of them.
Beer was actually the drink of choice for a long time, as I found that
about one or two beers during a game helped with lubricating the game.
By now I should not drink anything anymore (meds...) and so that has
fallen to the wayside.
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
[And after a particularly good session, maybe a run to
the donut shop to celebrate!]
Nowadays,* none of our group can afford such dangerous diets. Oh sure,
we might splurge on some junk food (because D&D without crisps isn't
the same; you need to have SOMETHING at hand to throw at the DM when
he makes a ruling you don't like! ;-)
But as often we're likely just do without the unhealthy stuff,
replacing it with stuff that doesn't destroy our aging bodies so
quickly. We just can't afford to do it anymore. Why, the other day*
somebody brought KALE to munch on! The horror!
Well, but kale is perfect to throw at a DM doing bad rolls...
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
....
As for the sushi/topic debate... it's just silly. Yes, it's
unrealistic that a completely different culture in a completely
different world would create a snack that looks exactly like modern
day food (especially tacos, which are heavily dependent on modern food
processing). But, at the same time, the ideas of these food aren't so
alien: pound wheat and water to make a tortilla, wrap it around some
meat and veggies and you get something similar to a taco. Eating fish
and veggies raw isn't that unusual either.
Plus, we're happy to overlook so many other anachronisms in the game
that drawing the line at taco and sushi is ridiculous. In a world
where elves are using rifles to shoot at plate-armored dwarves (who
happily munch on sandwiches in their downtime), _that_ is the hill you
want to die on in the battle about realism?
I think the main issue is that people don't really see it as
anachronisms, because that's just how they think a medieval world would
be. I had this discussion earlier where someone linked to an article
(https://www.blogofholding.com/?p=7182) that was arguing that DnD is
basically anti-medieval. In fact, what I found to be a nice quote:
"There’s more explicit textual support in OD&D for Mars than there is
for fantasy medieval Europe."
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Although maybe it's all just lingering resentment over 2nd edition
D&D's much-maligned attack-roll system that is the cause of it all.
Taco is only one letter away from THACO, after all. ;-)
I occasionally understand THAC0, but even when I was playing with it it
felt like an enormous kludge. Either the old table-lookup method or the
simple Attack-roll system from 3rd edition always made more sense (and
were mathematically equivalent.
DnD has had this habit of keeping utterly baffling artifacts from the
early times of the hobby for way too long, long after everyone else
already switched to something way easier.
The same actually with descending AC. I know the arguments for it, I
just don't know why anyone would be making them in good faith.
Spalls Hurgenson
2024-09-07 16:28:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kyonshi
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Although maybe it's all just lingering resentment over 2nd edition
D&D's much-maligned attack-roll system that is the cause of it all.
Taco is only one letter away from THACO, after all. ;-)
I occasionally understand THAC0, but even when I was playing with it it
felt like an enormous kludge. Either the old table-lookup method or the
simple Attack-roll system from 3rd edition always made more sense (and
were mathematically equivalent.
DnD has had this habit of keeping utterly baffling artifacts from the
early times of the hobby for way too long, long after everyone else
already switched to something way easier.
The same actually with descending AC. I know the arguments for it, I
just don't know why anyone would be making them in good faith.
I'm a firm supporter of descending AC, but I can't in any way argue
for its inclusion in good faith. As much as I dislike a lot of stuff
in 3E+, I can't disagree that many of the changes they made _were_ for
the better. Especially stuff like changing AC going up as it improved.
Old-school D&D was really weird in how, in some cases, lower numbers
were better and in other cases, you wanted to roll high. 3E (and
onwards) fixed a lot of these oddities.

My preference for AC-going-down is almost entirely nostalgic. I like
it because it's what I learned, and I feel oddities like that are one
of the things that gave D&D its own character.

[There's maybe a little gatekeeping involved too; a bit of
"keeping the rules weird to keep the normies out." But
I'm not proud of that bit ;-)]

But, yeah, mostly when I argue in favor of AC-goes-down, it's meant
pretty tongue-in-cheek. Same with THAC0. I mean, I can do it in my
head and enjoy it, but boy did it discourage a lot of people from
engaging with the game. I mean, it was better than the constant table-
look-ups of 1E but not by much.

But, honestly, the rules and mechanics were never the most important
part of our games anyway. We stuck with old-school D&D because of
familiarity more than anything.
Justisaur
2024-09-13 22:34:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Post by Kyonshi
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Although maybe it's all just lingering resentment over 2nd edition
D&D's much-maligned attack-roll system that is the cause of it all.
Taco is only one letter away from THACO, after all. ;-)
I occasionally understand THAC0, but even when I was playing with it it
felt like an enormous kludge. Either the old table-lookup method or the
simple Attack-roll system from 3rd edition always made more sense (and
were mathematically equivalent.
DnD has had this habit of keeping utterly baffling artifacts from the
early times of the hobby for way too long, long after everyone else
already switched to something way easier.
The same actually with descending AC. I know the arguments for it, I
just don't know why anyone would be making them in good faith.
I'm a firm supporter of descending AC, but I can't in any way argue
for its inclusion in good faith. As much as I dislike a lot of stuff
in 3E+, I can't disagree that many of the changes they made _were_ for
the better. Especially stuff like changing AC going up as it improved.
Old-school D&D was really weird in how, in some cases, lower numbers
were better and in other cases, you wanted to roll high. 3E (and
onwards) fixed a lot of these oddities.
My preference for AC-going-down is almost entirely nostalgic. I like
it because it's what I learned, and I feel oddities like that are one
of the things that gave D&D its own character.
[There's maybe a little gatekeeping involved too; a bit of
"keeping the rules weird to keep the normies out." But
I'm not proud of that bit ;-)]
But, yeah, mostly when I argue in favor of AC-goes-down, it's meant
pretty tongue-in-cheek. Same with THAC0. I mean, I can do it in my
head and enjoy it, but boy did it discourage a lot of people from
engaging with the game. I mean, it was better than the constant table-
look-ups of 1E but not by much.
My only defense is it's to prevent players using loaded dice. As A DM
it was no issue as that's how I learned it (well thac0 with 2e) and I
just tell you if you hit or miss, you don't need to know it at all.

That and reverse compatibility. Easy enough to change it on the fly if
using the opposite for monsters or whatever.

The only other improvement I can think 3e+ made was allowing M-Us to
cast more than one spell at first level (not withstanding 2e specialists
and 1e cantrips)
--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'
Spalls Hurgenson
2024-09-14 01:18:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justisaur
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Post by Kyonshi
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Although maybe it's all just lingering resentment over 2nd edition
D&D's much-maligned attack-roll system that is the cause of it all.
Taco is only one letter away from THACO, after all. ;-)
I occasionally understand THAC0, but even when I was playing with it it
felt like an enormous kludge. Either the old table-lookup method or the
simple Attack-roll system from 3rd edition always made more sense (and
were mathematically equivalent.
DnD has had this habit of keeping utterly baffling artifacts from the
early times of the hobby for way too long, long after everyone else
already switched to something way easier.
The same actually with descending AC. I know the arguments for it, I
just don't know why anyone would be making them in good faith.
I'm a firm supporter of descending AC, but I can't in any way argue
for its inclusion in good faith. As much as I dislike a lot of stuff
in 3E+, I can't disagree that many of the changes they made _were_ for
the better. Especially stuff like changing AC going up as it improved.
Old-school D&D was really weird in how, in some cases, lower numbers
were better and in other cases, you wanted to roll high. 3E (and
onwards) fixed a lot of these oddities.
My preference for AC-going-down is almost entirely nostalgic. I like
it because it's what I learned, and I feel oddities like that are one
of the things that gave D&D its own character.
[There's maybe a little gatekeeping involved too; a bit of
"keeping the rules weird to keep the normies out." But
I'm not proud of that bit ;-)]
But, yeah, mostly when I argue in favor of AC-goes-down, it's meant
pretty tongue-in-cheek. Same with THAC0. I mean, I can do it in my
head and enjoy it, but boy did it discourage a lot of people from
engaging with the game. I mean, it was better than the constant table-
look-ups of 1E but not by much.
My only defense is it's to prevent players using loaded dice. As A DM
it was no issue as that's how I learned it (well thac0 with 2e) and I
just tell you if you hit or miss, you don't need to know it at all.
That and reverse compatibility. Easy enough to change it on the fly if
using the opposite for monsters or whatever.
It also (sort of, maybe, not really) put a cap on max AC. 10 was the
worst, and -10 was the best you were going to get.

[Technically, of course, there was nothing that prevented an
armor class lower than -10, but I never saw that happen].

D&D 3E lacks that limit, and I've seen ACs of 30 and higher after all
buffs have been taken into consideration. I've frequently complained
about the power creep in later editions of D&D -how 3E and beyond
started feeling like superhero adventures- and that's one of the
reasons.
Post by Justisaur
The only other improvement I can think 3e+ made was allowing M-Us to
cast more than one spell at first level (not withstanding 2e specialists
and 1e cantrips)
Yeah, 1st level Magic Users were always rough in old D&D I know the
logic is that their power scales upwards and by the time they're
twentieth, the fact that they've near-god level magic is supposed to
make up for how under-powered they are at the start, but we almost
never played our characters that long (they tended to get retired
around 10th level).

So our general house rule was that high Intelligence (which, natch,
every mage has) got you an extra spell, cantrips were free* and you
could swap out your memorized combat spells for 'utility spells' at
will*. We also heavily utilized the 2nd ed proficiency system, and
since number of proficiencies were also linked to intelligence, the
wizards greatly benefited there too. All in all, it gave the low-level
mage a more well-rounded role than the usual 'wait in back until the
perfect time to cast their one spell' tactic.

No relief from that d4 Hit-Die or the can't wear armor thing, though.
Or the general distrust all wizards faced in my campaigns. Gotta
balance those boons somehow ;-P






* these boons were understood to be at the whim of the DM, and if a
player abused the ability they'd lose them

David Chmelik
2024-09-07 04:19:04 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 12:31:32 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
[...]
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
Nowadays,* none of our group can afford such dangerous diets. Oh sure,
we might splurge on some junk food (because D&D without crisps isn't the
same; you need to have SOMETHING at hand to throw at the DM when he
makes a ruling you don't like! ;-)
My doctor said I shouldn't either, except if I eat healthy seven days/week
then one day/week I can have a meal whatever I want (though I was born
vegetarian/vegan... if I wasn't, don't know he'd say that or tells others
at least eat anything you want vegetarian/vegan).
Post by Spalls Hurgenson
But as often we're likely just do without the unhealthy stuff, replacing
it with stuff that doesn't destroy our aging bodies so quickly. We just
can't afford to do it anymore. Why, the other day* somebody brought KALE
to munch on! The horror!
Why not kale crisps/chips? Though price came down, they still cost more
than stuff I'd thow at Dungeon Master (DM). I usually get many discount
kale chip bags at overstock stores like Grocery Outlet. Some flavours
surprisingly taste better than some potato crisps/chips & nachos, which of
course baked (usually high-salted) and unsalted (usually high oil) ones
exist also... some people at a vegetarian society showed us they just cut
up corn tortillas and dehydrate/bake their own unsalted baked nachos. but
they're suprisingly almost as good... I even dehydrated my own potato
crisps similarly. Similar to kale crisps are seaweed snacks, though might
sometimes be cheaper, I avoid since Fukushima incident spread throughout
all oceans.

My doctor said don't eat junk food but said popcorn isn't junk food. He's
in a health philosophy against salt and oil though, and historically
against herbs/spices, but newer people in it found some can be very
healthy, so those and nutritional yeast can flavour popcorn and homemade
crisps/chips almost as good as Doritos. My sibling--a dietician--
disagreed with him and said we need some salt anyway, but don't overdo it.

I think nuts & seeds are healthier raw, but there recipes exist making
those similar to crisps/chips (like sticks) which unless have excess salt
I don't think are as bad as crisps/chips, so I buy such sticks in bulk.

So, I think there are still a fair number of healthy snacks for gaming. I
also always use suger-free soda/cola/pop, which I mean doesn't have (high
fructose) corn syrup--a sugar--either (careful if you ask because many
people are ignorant). Unfortunately fruit juice has almost as much, so I
use some (or mixed with) vegetable juice, or soda/cola/pop sweetened with
stevia (some people dislike the taste), or herb or green or black, not
necessary to sweeten, but one could use lemon/lime or sweeten with sucanat
or liquorice or stevia.

In classic D&D (DD) I'm an elf (played classic, and advanced (AD&D, ADD)
first (1st, 1E, 1) and second editions, and these using some aspects of
previous editions, all basically backwards-compatible... never played
2000s so-called 'third' edition, though have original 1980s third edition,
and I don't plan to play anything past ADD2.)
Loading...