Race Informs Violence in TTRPGs

Our relationship with violence is different.

Violence is a complicated topic in the United States. The history of violence in this country almost always removes the Black experience from the equation, and that’s calculated.

White culture provides a wide array of violent demonstrations. From these I’ll break down the different types of violence there are and who is allowed to use (and define) them.

Oppressive Violence is harm used to keep marginalized people in control. Examples of this have manifested through slavery, the cops (that’s a historical fact, not my opinion), Jim Crow, and domestic terrorism. The key to recognizing oppressive violence is identifying the power dynamic between participants as well as the goal of the action.

If Chad (white) punches Marcus (Black) because Chad is angry, that’s oppressive violence. Why? Because Chad is in a position where, historically, he won’t be punished for his actions. His act of violence aligns with the oppressive violence used against Black people in the country at large.

Before we move forward into other types of violence, let’s take oppressive violence and bring it over to ttrpgs.

Because of the framework surrounding euro-centric fantasy, the pervasion of white culture in sci-fi, the genocide-heavy backdrop of the old west, or the generally controlling cishet white male lense that our media is steeped in, violence in these games is immediately oppressive. Players are gifted individuals who control their surroundings through holding power over those around them. The fact that there are those stronger than the players is only present as an obstacle to grow beyond and overcome, of course using oppressive violence to reach that goal. Progress = becoming strong enough to bend your environment to your will.

Now, let’s go back to Black history and how white culture has influenced the perspective of violence.

Marcus and Chad stand in front of each other, Marcus having just taken a punch to the face. As explained, Chad has demonstrated an act of oppressive violence against Marcus. From what’s been explained up to this point, if Marcus hits Chad back, is Marcus taking part in oppressive violence?

No. But we’ve been taught otherwise.

Because we only differentiate types of violence when it’s displayed by white men, such as the ability to be a hero using violence, to be a defender using violence, to master the body and mind using violence, and to be a villain using violence, acts of violence by any other party is actively painted as oppressive.

If Marcus hits Chad and ends the fight, Marcus exhibited defensive violence. He was being attacked and he stopped the attack. But because of propaganda stemming back to the beginning of Black existence in this country (under white dominance), Marcus is seen as an oppressively violent individual.

And because “violence = bad”, modern white progressives are largely choose to leave the situation rather than inspect it.

There are many, extremely good reasons for people to feel uncomfortable with violence. Sexual violence is a huge issue that women and other sexually oppressed genders and persons fight to be recognized as a problem. Domestic abuse is a heavily dominant male issue. Abuse is a real and massive problem in the lives of MOST people in this country. However, in the discussion of violence, white people have consistently moved the goal post over from understanding violence to how Black people and other people of color participate in the previously mentioned types of violence. The dominant issue remains: violence outside of the hands of cis white men, and often cis white women, is pushed into a place where oppressive violence is the propaganda, which makes light of the situations where Black people (men) DO commit acts of oppressive violence. It becomes normalized and stands beside the rhetoric that denotes the physicality of Black people as superior in a beastial and dangerous way.

So. Now that I said alla that. Tabletop roleplaying games suck at violence.

This is because popular ttrpgs are written by white people who haven’t inspected violence outside of the established cultural perspectives. White progressives have largely adopted the idea that any form of violence is wrong, because someone is harmed and harm is bad.

This is a position of privilege that, ironically, ignores the methods by which marginalized people are taught to protect themselves. It stretched toward the ideal that no one should have to use violence in defense of themselves because oppressive violence shouldn’t exist. Having room to sit and think on that while Black people get punched by Chad is a space from which better understanding could be gained, but is often shuffled off into “I dont have to deal with this, so I wont.”

This is how violence is treating in TTRPGs. I won’t name games simply for the fact that, again this is about cultural impact rather than specific games (and that’s largely where these conversations are hijacked and replaced).

Games that don’t take into account that violent acts differ based on marginalization are often casting players into a place of discomfort. An example.

If I play a game where there are slavers, my character is going to kill those slavers. If those elements exist in my fantasy, I’m going to play out what I enjoy. Killing a slaver gives me the pleasure of knowing that the slaves are free, and that this fictional character will never be able to do anything of the sort ever again. Yay! Feels good even writing it.

In a game where violence in any form comes with the same mechanical response, which is always negative, a Black player cant even punch that slaver in the face without punishing the group they’re playing with. If your game functions on the mechanic that every action pushes over a negative domino, you’re not opening up the option for defensive violence to be an answer to oppressive violence. The reward of defensive violence, in reality, is equality. It’s moving the pin that has been pushed far to the right back to where it was prior. This next part is wildly important.

Believing that Black people are calling on a punishment for using defensive violence ignores the fact that we’re being oppressed.

People use the fact that Marcus punched back as the reasoning for the next act of oppression coming his way. If Marcus hadn’t punched Chad back, he would have suffered being beaten by Chad. There’s no winning because the perspective on violence is always “you did something wrong and must be punished.”

You lowkey wanna know why there are more Black people in D&D than there are in indie titles? I firmly believe that it’s not just exposure. I believe that, regardless of the obvious racial issues present, players have the ability to act without consequence. And that is a place of power that white progressives only view negatively, because white culture dictates that if someone has the ability to take over the world, then they will. Black people see an opportunity for justice and freedom.

Removing opportunities for exceptionalism makes a lot of sense if you’re only thinking about how white culture says “I must be the most exceptional.” Black culture says, “I want to be exceptional,” as do most marginalized cultures. That exceptionalism grows through community and our care for one another, because we know that when one person makes it, everyone who has participated in stabilizing our collaborative health gets to make it too.

Just because white guilt surrounds it, and because your culture strips its validity away from everyone else, doesn’t mean that the right choice is ignoring it. Because doing nothing means you’re leaning on the existing pretenses… *whispers* (which are raaaaaacist).

We do this shit for autonomy. If you’re stuck in the propaganda that anyone with a fist bundled wants to be an imperial colonizer, you’re not paying attention.

dip.