D&D 5E Should the next edition of D&D promote more equality?

[Dausuul]

So you'd also advocate no penalties for age, physical appearance, body type, or disability? You wouldn't want to prescribe limits for those real-life groups either, right?

What? To the best of my knowledge, 3E was the only edition that had modifiers for even one of those things (age). And those modifiers were mostly used by wizards to twink out their Intelligence scores. No edition has ever had penalties for physical appearance*, body type, or disability. I see no reason why 5E should change that. All questions of inclusiveness aside, it's a lot of fiddly rules that serve no useful purpose.

[SIZE=-2]*Yes, Oriental Adventures had a Comeliness stat; however, it was never core material.[/SIZE]

 

[WheresMyD20]

On that whole historical accuracy thing in games and arguing that the material in our games should totally reflect reality, I can think of a very historically accurate and realistic game that Hasbro could try to market. It would be set in the Confederate South, with PC's as bounty hunters tracking down escaped slaves. White characters would have ability scores; non white characters would have monetary value scores. The game would be called "(N-Word) Hunter" and feature liberal use of historically accurate language in reference to the objects of the game.

Very historically and factually accurate. And utterly unplayable. At least I sincerely hope it would be. You could make this game all right, but I don't think anyone is likely to find personally inspiring stories in it, or a world they want to explore.

Do we really need our games to reflect the ugliest things that human history has done, and argue vociferously for our own limits as a species? Or do we want to tell stories that are better than that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

[The Choice]

Do we really need our games to reflect the ugliest things that human history has done, and argue vociferously for our own limits as a species? Or do we want to tell stories that are better than that?

I'd argue it's possible to include those elements as long as they are portrayed as the ugly, repulsive things that they are, and that those who perform such acts or partake in those activities be considered antagonist as a base setting assumption.

 

[WheresMyD20]

How about:
A barbarian with 17 strength should have str 17
A rogue with 14 dexterity should have dex 14
A bard with 12 charisma should have cha 12
etc, etc.

You get to make up just how old, fat, or blind your character is.

It's not highly accurate applied physics. It's a game.

What happens if the rogue with 14 dex gets magically aged? Is it ok to penalize his (or her) dex or is that age-ist?

 

[bogmad]

What happens if the rogue with 14 dex gets magically aged? Is it ok to penalize his (or her) dex or is that age-ist?

You're subtracting from his already established base stat, so I wouldn't see the problem.
Before it get's brought up, let me say hard coding into the rules that a belt of gender swap affects strength is not an idea worth addressing. The degree it would alter a woman's ability to, say, climb a mountain is negligible at best, bigoted at worst. But let's not have that discussion.

 

[Obryn]

In other words...
A female barbarian should be just as strong as a male barbarian.
An elderly rogue should be just as nimble as a young rogue.
An ugly bard should be just as charming as a handsome bard.
An obese fighter should be just as effective as a fit fighter.
A blind ranger should be just as accurate as a sighted ranger.

Sure, all of those sound like awesome character concepts and I'd love to see players using them!

-O

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

While it is true that, on average, women don't build fast-twitch power muscle like men do, it is also true that men don't build slow-twitch endurance muscle like women do. Or tolerate pain as well. Or have the same kind of fine motor control that makes for being an excellent sniper...

But trying to hard-code human sexual differences into an RPG is a fool's game, not only because there are so many of them, but also because those differences are statistical averages. Almost by definition, adventuring PCs are statistical outliers.

I've stated before my personal best bench press was 300lbs. Last I checked, the women's world record was over 400- getting into NFL linebacker ranges. Sure, there are men who bench MUCH more, but its immaterial as to the functioning of a game.

 

[billd91]

What? To the best of my knowledge, 3E was the only edition that had modifiers for even one of those things (age). And those modifiers were mostly used by wizards to twink out their Intelligence scores. No edition has ever had penalties for physical appearance*, body type, or disability. I see no reason why 5E should change that. All questions of inclusiveness aside, it's a lot of fiddly rules that serve no useful purpose.

[SIZE=-2]*Yes, Oriental Adventures had a Comeliness stat; however, it was never core material.[/SIZE]

Uh, we had modifiers for age groups back in 1e too. And Comeliness was core or as core as things got with 1e's Unearthed Arcana.

 

[WheresMyD20]

You're subtracting from his already established base stat, so I wouldn't see the problem.
Before it get's brought up, let me say hard coding into the rules that a belt of gender swap subtracts strength is not an idea worth addressing. The degree it would alter a woman's ability to, say, climb a mountain is negligible at best, bigoted at worst. But let's not have that discussion.

I agree. In all honesty, if I were writing the new D&D rules, I wouldn't hard-code these modifiers into the rules. However, some older editions did, at least for gender, age, attractiveness, and certain disabilities (i.e. being blind gives a -4 to hit, etc.). I think it's an interesting intellectual discussion to see where the lines are, what is considered "ok" vs. "not ok" and ponder if there are inconsistencies in where the lines are drawn.

 

[Sunseeker]

But trying to hard-code human sexual differences into an RPG is a fool's game, not only because there are so many of them, but also because those differences are statistical averages. Almost by definition, adventuring PCs are statistical outliers.

Likewise it should be noted that sexual dimorphism is a very human conception. The further from human your creature becomes, the less likely sex is going to matter, what's worse is that unless WOTC puts soooooo much effort into every race as to border on silly, there's no "universal truth" to sexual differences. Not all species males are the stronger/faster/prettier ones, not all species females are weaker/maternal/curvacious ones. I mean in some renditions of high/grey elves/Eladrin the difference between male and female are not much more than an oh-so slight jawline difference and minor height difference. Males are not particularly bulky and women are not particularly curvacious. Throw in a race like the Drow, and you realize that much of why males and females are different in humans is because of the way society is structured. Men traditionally enjoyed a variety of privilege and were required to deal with hard labor tasks. Go to a society where women enjoy privilege and men are servants and housekeepers while women work in the fields and you're going to create a society where men are going to be slender and weak and women will be strong and muscular. Even if we claim that all women everywhere don't build muscle as men do, if your society favors breeding sexy but physically week men with the kinds of women who set those world records, then over time female genetics will start to favor greater and greater naturally occurring musculature, more rapid muscle development and so on.

Anyway I've kinda rambled, but numerical difference between males and females is nothing more than an answer looking for a problem...and by problem, I mean lawsuit.