D&D (2024) (+) New Edition Changes for Inclusivity (discuss possibilities)

[reelo]

This is actually a problem in modern issues like Climate Change. The Scientific community has around a 90% agreement on the problems, but to be "fair" and "balanced" they bring on people with a limited understanding of science, to spot nonsense and make it seem like there is a big debate that needs to be resolved before we know tht

Isaac Asimov's piece on the "Cult of Ignorance", as well as the term "false balance" come to mind.
The notion that "democracy means my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

 

[Sadras]

Personally, yes. I do want that amount of realism in my games. I've even had characters in my games (NPCs mainly, but an occasional PC) that has PTSD.

So we want THIS much realism but having men being able to outcap women in STR is too far (a 1e mechanic). M'kay.

EDIT: We had an entire thread about shamans.
We had numerous posts about the implication of rape with half-orcs.
But the suggestion that we include PTSD and other real mental illness gets a free pass? How is that even ok?

Now I got thread banned because I suggested a 1e mechanic. Got called on anti inclusionary content (sexist). The implication being 1e players are sexist. Swell moderation.

 

[Hussar]

So we want THIS much realism but having men being able to outcap women in STR is too far. M'kay.

Is the snark really helpful? I know, it gets frustrating, but, that's not helping anyone.

Frankly, personally, on the stat point thing, there is just not enough granularity between stats to have women and men have different stats. And, frankly, in a game where a halfling can be as strong as a human, I'm not sure we can really differentiate men and women that much.

But, I do understand your point. If we're going to strip out some realism, what about others? And, on this point, I think I agree with you. I'd rather leave things like mental issues out of the core game, and let 3rd party publishers have that one. D&D isn't really that kind of game where playing out someone's PTSD is expected by the tone or mechanics of the game.

Note, there ARE RPG's which do delve into this sort of thing. But, again, I don't really think D&D is one of them. This is a game of heroic fantasy after all. It's not a generic ruleset to cover all things and all times. I've been watching the discussion about classes and whatnot, and, honestly, I'm not sure I agree with a lot of it.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

What is the difference between a druid and shaman? Perhaps we should just rename the druid to shaman to alleviate the "only orcs and trolls have shamen" problem.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What is the difference between a druid and shaman. Perhaps we should just rename the druid to shaman to alleviate the "only orcs and trolls have shamen" problem.

Sure. Makes sense.

 

[Cadence]

So we want THIS much realism but having men being able to outcap women in STR is too far. M'kay.

Frankly, personally, on the stat point thing, there is just not enough granularity between stats to have women and men have different stats. And, frankly, in a game where a halfling can be as strong as a human, I'm not sure we can really differentiate men and women that much.

Yup...

Part of why this might not be a thing is that the level of versimilitude fail seems very small relative to how the numbers are used.

The difference in Str bonus between a Halfling and the typical Human is only a +1 in 5e. In PF it was +2 5/6th of the time and +4 the other 1/6th. The halfling doesn't even get the 3/4 multiplier for carrying capacity for being small in 5e. If the ability difference between a typical 3 foot, 40lb. halfling and a human adult is only represented by a +1 (or +2) - and there is nothing at all about how size variations within male humans affects things, for example - then how small should the difference be between an average human female 5'4" and 170 lbs and average human male 5'9" and 197 lbs (using American averages google spit out).

I imagine if the sexual dimorphism was as large as in gorillas (m/f weight ratio of 2.37) then it might be a thing. Or similarly, if you were doing a simulator of Olympic medalists in various sports like track or swimming, then separate stat distributions would be a thing. Of course in that case there'd be a huge effect by birth year too over the past century+.

As far as Str and verisimilitude, I'm still stuck on an Str 10 being able to carry 150 pounds just as easily as they would 0 pounds in 5e.

 

[Cadence]

What is the difference between a druid and shaman. Perhaps we should just rename the druid to shaman to alleviate the "only orcs and trolls have shamen" problem.

If classes are based on where the powers come from, then I can see a set-up where druids are the ones that get their powers from communing with nature and shaman's the ones who get their powers communing with spirits. In PF, for example, the spirits include Ancestors, Battle, Lore, and Tribe that wouldn't fit with a druid as I see them. While the spell lists may be fairly similar, Animal Companion and Shape Shifting seem mechanically different than having your spirit connection do something. It also feels like what kinds of spirits are out there could vary greatly from campaign world to campaign world and some may not have shamans at all, just like in some being connected to nature grants no magic, or in others there are no outer plains or gods to power clerics.

This feels to me like the reason druids aren't just nature priests. Getting ones powers from a connection to the outer plains and channeling positive and negative energy feels very different from getting power from the world, talking to it, and changing shape.

My solution to the humanoids only have shamans problem would be to start giving the Orcs clerics if their divine casters are getting the power from worshiping Grummush, the lizard folk have druids if they are all about communing with their swamp environs, and maybe some humanoids commonly have shamans if they get their power from communing with their ancestors or tree spirits or fire spirits or whatnot. Or maybe they all have a mix like humans do.

 

[Mecheon]

What is the difference between a druid and shaman. Perhaps we should just rename the druid to shaman to alleviate the "only orcs and trolls have shamen" problem.

Honestly, just bringing back something along the lines of 4E's shaman would also do the trick. Druid is its own thing and has had a D&D niche forever, but there's def a niche for the two of them given literately the most popular RPG out there at the moment has them differentiated

I'd def go with the spirit side of thing as their thing and maybe even tie a bit of the Binder side of things. Shamans deal with spirits, druids deal with nature. Shamans deal with specifics, druids deal with the wider. Close, but some differences between them

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

If classes are based on where the powers come from, then I can see a set-up where druids are the ones that get their powers from communing with nature and shaman's the ones who get their powers communing with spirits. In PF, for example, the spirits include Ancestors, Battle, Lore, and Tribe that wouldn't fit with a druid as I see them. While the spell lists may be fairly similar, Animal Companion and Shape Shifting seem mechanically different than having your spirit connection do something. It also feels like what kinds of spirits are out there could vary greatly from campaign world to campaign world and some may not have shamans at all, just like in some being connected to nature grants no magic, or in others there are no outer plains or gods to power clerics.

This feels to me like the reason druids aren't just nature priests. Getting ones powers from a connection to the outer plains and channeling positive and negative energy feels very different from getting power from the world, talking to it, and changing shape.

My solution to the humanoids only have shamans problem would be to start giving the Orcs clerics if their divine casters are getting the power from worshiping Grummush, the lizard folk have druids if they are all about communing with their swamp environs, and maybe some humanoids commonly have shamans if they get their power from communing with their ancestors or tree spirits or fire spirits or whatnot. Or maybe they all have a mix like humans do.

So shamans are more like warlocks (as defined by 5e)?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So shamans are more like warlocks (as defined by 5e)?

I really think that there are already too many classes with a lot of conceptual overlap. I'd prefer fewer classes with customisation done via subclasses. I'd get at rid at least one of wizard, sorcerer or warlock and I would prefer shaman not to be a new class either.