D&D 5E The word ‘Race’

[Cristian Andreu]

The attribute adjustments fall way short of conveying any such thing like that. Even without the maximum attributes being set at 20, it is perfectly conceivable to start play with a human character who is most Dextrous than an Elf or Stronger than an Orc or with a greater Constitution than a Dwarf.

The attribute adjustments seem more just expressing that the average member of the race is naturally as good as a decently trained human without having to put in any extra training. In fact, the attribute adjustment doesn't even have to be particularly large. If a race gets a +2 in an attribute, then you are virtually guaranteed that everyone who plays that race is going to use that attribute as one of their top 3 choices, and almost certain highest or second highest-- almost no one is going to put an 8 in the attribute that they get a +2 bonus to. Even that +1 virtually ensures that a gamer making a member of that race is going to take advantage of it. This means that the absolute minimum score you are likely to see in an average member of that race is likely to be 13 in the +2 score and 11 in the +1.

But humans can have scores above 11 and 13, so a human can surpass those races even in their specialties.

I understand. My point was referring to why the ability score bonuses (and other mechanical differences, such as resistances and whatnot) are a reasonable way of expressing natural differences in the capacities and potentialities of different races, and that in such context it makes sense that some PCs would achieve levels of strength/intelligence/resistance/etc that not all PCs of all races can get to.

Doesn't anyone roll anymore?

We observe 4d6 drop lowest with almost fanatical zeal in our table. Stat rolling (and then HP rolling) is one of our favourite moments.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Mephista]

I know there is; Doctor Who: Adventures in Time & Space comes as close to a non-violent RPG that I can think of. However, I think the notion that RPGs give us genre trappings to justify certain behavior we would otherwise never condone is important when discussing issues of social justice in an RPG. I mean, if an adventure has you go into a drow temple and stop the priestess from summoning a demon, couldn't we claim that is really anti-social behavior (assault, murder, theft) against a members of a different race (drow), gender (priestesses) and religion (of Lolth)?

Nah, I even meant in D&D and World of Darkness, the two games the writer there quoted. I played entire sessions in the former without killing anyone, and that was when the plot had me as part of an army. Our group had a high capture rate for prisoners. In WoD? Its not hard to not be criminal. The problem is that the writer in question only had experience with certain types of players and games, and was treating them all like it. Kind of silly, imho.

Plus, many D&D groups are appointed missions by duly appointed authority figures - ie, they've been deputized. So, they're actually taking law abiding behavior here. The entire thing is amusing as a joke, but unrealistic for many play styles.

Doesn't anyone roll anymore?

Never

 

[Beleriphon]

Nitpick: "species" in real life can sometimes interbreed, because nobody can really agree on what a "species" is. For example, I'm told that polar bears and brown bears can mate and produce fertile offspring (even though they usually don't), and yet they're still considered different species because it's convenient for biologists to consider them so. I think you could legitimately consider humans and elves as separate species for the same reason: humans are short-lived and large, elves are long-lived and short-ish.

Humans and elves are probably more akin to homo sapiens and homo neanderthalis.

 

[steeldragons]

Doesn't anyone roll anymore?

Unfortunately, I think you and I (and our respective tables) are the last.

I am constantly on the alert for the Red Bull coming to take me away.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I just received the latest Fate World of Adventure, Masters of Umdaar, and it calls out its choice in terminology of using Bioform in place of Race.

In other news, I am a terrible human being who prefers to use RPGs for glorious, non-metaphorical, cathartic fun!

Is it too much to hope that you might also be dangerously warm in addition to terrible?

 

[aramis erak]

This seems like another episode of "When political correctness goes too far."

Any influence of it in fiction seems a bit too far for me.

Doesn't anyone roll anymore?

Not in games I tend to run.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

We observe 4d6 drop lowest with almost fanatical zeal in our table. Stat rolling (and then HP rolling) is one of our favourite moments.

Same here. We've been rolling PC's for 30 years dang it and we aren't going to stop now! The intro PC creation session is always a lot of fun.

 

[MG.0]

Plus, many D&D groups are appointed missions by duly appointed authority figures - ie, they've been deputized. So, they're actually taking law abiding behavior here. The entire thing is amusing as a joke, but unrealistic for many play styles.
Never

Not to mention that medieval style legal systems bore little resemblance to modern day ones. Trying to apply modern sensibilities in a sword & sorcery fantasy game is nigh near ludicrous.

 

[Morrus]

Not to mention that medieval style legal systems bore little resemblance to modern day ones. Trying to apply modern sensibilities in a sword & sorcery fantasy game is nigh near ludicrous.

Everything about a sword & sorcery fantasy game is nigh near ludicrous. Why is applying modern sensibilities more ludicrous than applying, say, magic? Or elves? Or hit points? Or anything else? What's so special about modern sensibilities that only they are ludicrous?

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. It's not a historical simulator; it is, as you say, a fantasy game.