One of my favorite ideas announced about 5e during the D&D Next playtest was that it was going to be a very modular game with lots of optional and swappable rules so you could build a version of D&D your group loved or that fit your campaign. That was never really delivered.

There is a bit of this in some places, but not to the extent that many people, myself included, thought there would be. Any tabletop game can be hacked, but providing the framework, pieces, rules, and examples to do that makes a huge difference. It makes it PART of the game.

All that said, harmful rules and lore should not be part of the game, optional or otherwise. That is the kind of take a group of jerks SHOULD have to add on their own. Bigots and their views are unwelcome at the table. Send that message with your rules.

I think people rightfully get upset when they're asked to change rules themselves, especially those that are problematic and harmful. They paid for a product and are now being told to do the work to fix it.

It's good that WotC is making the strides to fix some problems in D&D. It's going to take time to see those changes and to see if they are good enough. I also think it's fair to be angry at harm already done and walk away.

This is all stuff I am still learning by listening to others and by paying people to advise, edit, and consult with me on my own work. Not only do paid collaborators help make games inclusive and accessible, they make them better: More original, interesting, and engaging.

And for the record we should see more marginalized voices not just working with but actually leading the design of D&D. @/DichotomusPrime talked with about this on the latest Table Top Babble, and he's got great points about it. https://dontsplitthepodcastnetwork.com/table-top-babble/182