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

[Derren]

I can absolutely understand +1 Str to an agrarian society, for example, and the counterexample was disingenuous.

And what exactly do you find disingenuous?
Why would people living in an agrarian society/culture be stronger than other people?

 

[Scott Christian]

Culture would form the foundation on how you interact socially. It is likely to define how you approach social conflict in game the majority of the time. (As opposed to Class, which tends to define how you approach physical conflict.)

I really like this idea. As we know a D&D ancestry's culture would in fact lead them down different paths of social approaches. One group might fear magic? Just a neat way to look at things. Thanks for expanding the view.

 

[Scott Christian]

Why +1 Strength? Why are those people inherently stronger than others?
And before you come with "Because farmwork trains your muscles", not everyone in an agrarian society will be a farmer. So why are their clerks stronger too?

Have you never heard of farm strength? They discuss it in MMA and wrestling all the time. Of course it is not everyone, but what they say is that all the awkward lifting, pulling and pushing helps build a physique that is stronger than most (including people who just traditionally lift) because all the intermediary muscles are being used. Much like a sherpa has good constitution and endurance.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Have you never heard of farm strength? They discuss it in MMA and wrestling all the time. Of course it is not everyone, but what they say is that all the awkward lifting, pulling and pushing helps build a physique that is stronger than most (including people who just traditionally lift) because all the intermediary muscles are being used. Much like a sherpa has good constitution and endurance.

Also, in a pre-industrial society a person who isn’t nobility in an agrarian society will farm. Period. Your banker or whatever grew up on a farm. Farming.

 

[Scott Christian]

Again, why would a tanner or cobbler in a "urban port culture" be more charismatic than one from a different culture?

That's a good question. But if these cultures are not melting pots, there has historically been some truth to certain areas being better looking than others. And of course, I am not talking about race. A book published in the 1800's describes certain areas of Spain as hotbeds for beautiful people. Enough to make an Englishman lose his chivalrous nature. Even today, people talk about how there are more beautiful people in Miami, Montreal and LA than anywhere else. Of course there are people who are not good looking. But they say, the city as a whole, has more people per capita than other places.

These may be all urban myths, but the fact that they exist says something. That many believe in cultures of people for a specific place having a distinct look, strength, or endurance. I mean, how many times have you heard of Kenyans running and winning marathons? But, in truth, it is a small percentage that live in one area of Kenya. And their culture encourages running. A lot of running. Or the Copper Canyon natives of Mexico? They are discussed as some of the greatest long distance (like 50-100 miles) runners of all time. In the early stages of the ultra marathons (70's), they ran barefoot! With makeshift ponchos! - and they still crushed everyone. Or Jamaican sprinters? Pretty sure there are about a dozen documentaries on how the island cultivates runners. Sorry for the running tangent. But the sport has a great and fascinating history. And of course in thirty years it'll be a new group. But, it takes cultural encouragement for that group to become the best.

That is why when people say a D&D ancestry or culture can be stronger or faster they are stating it because it is an average. Not a singular individual. There are many slow Jamaicans. No doubt. But the fact that in school all the young boys look up to and admire Bolt, and they hang on his every word, including training, makes for many young sprinters.

I mean how many Austrians and Cali men try to become bodybuilders because of Arnold? They may not have been Mr. Olympia, but many developed a lifelong love of lifting. And in turn, it made a greater amount of men lift weights. I suspect Rhonda Rousey will do the same for Jui Jitsu or MMA.

Edited to add question marks where they belonged.

 

[Scott Christian]

Also, in a pre-industrial society a person who isn’t nobility in an agrarian society will farm. Period. Your banker or whatever grew up on a farm. Farming.

You are correct. But that is not how most picture the D&D world. There are farmers, bankers, wizard school teachers, blacksmiths, etc. It's not like people view it in reality - where a person really was all those things. Look at the skills of Lewis and Clark (and everyone they were with). They could do most things: hunt, fish, clean, tan, blacksmith, sew, read, cartography, navigate rivers, etc. But, D&D, for playing purposes, has a much different take. It is a mixture of modern day job association.

 

[Kinematics]

And what exactly do you find disingenuous?
Why would people living in an agrarian society/culture be stronger than other people?

I know a number of people who grew up on farms. Without exception, they are substantially stronger than other people I know that grew up in the city. This despite the fact that one is a librarian, and another is a computer programmer.

Their choice of profession later in life has nothing to do with how they developed growing up, and the point of the Culture mechanic (as I described it earlier) is to encompass what is learned and developed before a person begins making personal life choices.

Saying that there is a 'weaker' desk clerk living in the village does not invalidate the point of the Culture selection, which is designed to describe the broad mechanical benefits that growing up in an agrarian society would confer on an individual. You are not yet at the point of individual choices in individual creation; that begins at Background.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I know a number of people who grew up on farms. Without exception, they are substantially stronger than other people I know that grew up in the city. This despite the fact that one is a librarian, and another is a computer programmer.

Their choice of profession later in life has nothing to do with how they developed growing up, and the point of the Culture mechanic (as I described it earlier) is to encompass what is learned and developed before a person begins making personal life choices.

Saying that there is a 'weaker' desk clerk living in the village does not invalidate the point of the Culture selection, which is designed to describe the broad mechanical benefits that growing up in an agrarian society would confer on an individual. You are not yet at the point of individual choices in individual creation; that begins at Background.

This is exactly it. Well said.

 

[Dire Bare]

To be clear.

If D&D needs to be humans only, where each human uses magic to augment ones own physical and mental features. I can live with that.

Even so, it seems, species can be convenient silos to organize themes, if with a light-touch, as a suggestive narrative description that invites player choices.

Fantasy races, and alien species in science fantasy (Star Wars, Star Trek), most certainly do embody literary and mythic tropes . . . and that's okay as long as they don't do so in a racist manner. Which sometimes can be tough, when the trope itself is often racist, and subtle systemic racism at that rather than overt white-hood wearing racism.

Orcs, traditionally, do embody racist tropes. They can be presented, however, to simultaneously embody and subvert those tropes and escape from the racist baggage. We see this in Eberron, and in WarCraft, and I'm sure other fantasy stories and franchises.

 

[Dire Bare]

I disagree. Can’t really go further into it without spending time on the political stuff with no relation to gaming, but bears and dogs are different. One isn’t better than another. Saying that one is better would be racist. Recognizing the differences isn’t.

I agree with most of your ideas here and in other threads, although we disagree on the racism of ASIs assigned by race and/or culture (I feel they are inherently problematic and racist).

But I wouldn't describe a person claiming dogs are better than bears (or vice versa) as racist . . . as there is no oppression or discrimination involved as we're talking animals here. I mean, it's silly to claim something like that, but not racist.

Now when comparing cats vs dogs . . . cats are clearly the superior animal . . . I kid . . .