Level Up (A5E) Changes to race (species?)

[doctorbadwolf]

Racial ability adjustments represent biological differences between species and subspecies. Culture rarely has much to do with RSIs.
Nonhuman races should not have parallels to real-life human ethnicities. However cultures most definitely do.

Because unlike species, you can draw direct parallels between fantasy and real-life cultures. Putting attribute bonuses on a culture will indicate value judgements on equivalent real-life races and cultures.



Do you really, really think it would be a good idea to put your name on, and try to market a product, in this day and age, that portrays USA Americans as mentally and physically superior to, say Africans, Europeans and Asians?

I wouldn’t put my name on a book that organized cultures as American, European, African, and Asian, firsts of all. “Asian” isn’t a culture. “American” is barely a culture.

But if we actually narrow things down, what I would do with RL cultures is create descriptions of cultures with simple names, and give examples of countries and cross-national cultures that fit that category.

So, there would be Intelligent and Strong cultures from every continent.

edit: of course, I don’t actually like the design of putting ASIs in culture, so this is academic for me, but I don’t think that such a product would be called racist by anyone but an extremely small minority, unless the descriptions and specific representation was problematic.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I wouldn’t put my name on a book that organized cultures as American, European, African, and Asian, firsts of all. “Asian” isn’t a culture. “American” is barely a culture.

But if we actually narrow things down, what I would do with RL cultures is create descriptions of cultures with simple names, and give examples of countries and cross-national cultures that fit that category.

So, there would be Intelligent and Strong cultures from every continent.

This is super terrible idea.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This is super terrible idea.

No, it’s not.

 

[TheSword]

Culture depends on campaign setting. I don’t really see how those two things can be separated.

Not designing ‘culture rules’ around a specific campaign setting seems guaranteed to leave some pretty massive gaps.

Designing it around a specific setting means there is a risk it won’t fit other campaign settings.

 

[Haldrik]

Culture depends on campaign setting. I don’t really see how those two things can be separated.

Not designing ‘culture rules’ around a specific campaign setting seems guaranteed to leave some pretty massive gaps.

Designing it around a specific setting means there is a risk it won’t fit other campaign settings.

It is true. At the same time, if everything relating to the setting gets siloed into the design space of the Background, then the compartmentalization makes it easier to introduce a new setting by introducing a new set of backgrounds.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

No, it’s not.

Please don't ever publish a game. If you don't see how what you suggest is a sure way to massively problematic territory then I probably can't explain it to you.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Culture depends on campaign setting. I don’t really see how those two things can be separated.

Not designing ‘culture rules’ around a specific campaign setting seems guaranteed to leave some pretty massive gaps.

Designing it around a specific setting means there is a risk it won’t fit other campaign settings.

It wouldn’t be completely absurd to define broad cultural profiles: rural culture, imperialistic culture, builder culture, warmongering culture, artistic culture, utopian culture, scholar culture, etc.

 

[Haldrik]

I wouldn’t put my name on a book that organized cultures as American, European, African, and Asian, firsts of all. “Asian” isn’t a culture. “American” is barely a culture.

But if we actually narrow things down, what I would do with RL cultures is create descriptions of cultures with simple names, and give examples of countries and cross-national cultures that fit that category.

So, there would be Intelligent and Strong cultures from every continent.

edit: of course, I don’t actually like the design of putting ASIs in culture, so this is academic for me, but I don’t think that such a product would be called racist by anyone but an extremely small minority, unless the descriptions and specific representation was problematic.

Every culture should have examples of every ability.

The Orc chieftain should have high Charisma. The Orc oracle should have high Intelligence. The Orc hunter should have high Dexterity. And so on.

Let every culture be made out of a deck of backgrounds. Let each background offer an ability.

Of course, there are also very different Orc cultures, including nomadic, rural, and urban. Each is its own assemblage of backgrounds.

 

[TheSword]

It wouldn’t be completely absurd to define broad cultural profiles: rural culture, imperialistic culture, builder culture, warmongering culture, artistic culture, utopian culture, scholar culture, etc.

I can see what you’re trying to do, but that method is extremely reductive. Which culture would Athens 430 BC fall into in this list... it looks to me like all of them.

I see a real risk that these are either so specific that they become meaningless or could be applied to anything which then just makes them another power boost of abilities. People will cherry pick culture for the mechanical benefits they’re looking for. Some become auto-takes because the abilities line up so well and before you know it, actual culture means nothing.

 

[Haldrik]

It wouldn’t be completely absurd to define broad cultural profiles: rural culture, imperialistic culture, builder culture, warmongering culture, artistic culture, utopian culture, scholar culture, etc.

Probably, the backgrounds in the Players Handbook already serve this function, to provide a vague sense of what a culture might look like. They seem a good starting point, to develop further from there.