Flamestrike
Legend
No I totally reject that.In the real world? Yes.
In a fictional world? No.
Like on every level.
No I totally reject that.In the real world? Yes.
In a fictional world? No.
Alighnments don't tell squat either. Lawful Neutral? Judge Dredd or Mike Ehrmantraut? Chaotic Good? Batman or Dirty Harry (though I'd argue he isn't good like at all, but anyway)? Lawful Evil? Anton Chigurh or Dick Chaney?Those don't tell me squat. Loyal and violent? Okay. Captain America or Harley Quinn? No clue. Greedy, opportunistic? Okay, stock market guy who nonetheless is a good guy or someone who is going to mug me in a dark alley because they can get away with it?
False Equivalences are false. First, I've never met anyone who did miss those things, but I've met lots who like alignment a lot. Second, those things were never, EVER, sacred cows that were a core part of the game like alignment is.I’m sure some people missed gender-based ability modifiers when they disappeared. Others missed race-based level restrictions when they disappeared. Others missed race-based class restrictions when they disappeared. Others still will miss alignment. The game keeps evolving. It will never stop. If it stops evolving, it will die.
You already could. From the 5e DMG, "In creating your campaign world, it helps to start with the core assumptions and consider how your setting might change them."Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who fully understand that listed alignments are meant to be most common and still don’t like it. Let me decide what is or isn’t common in my own worlds, thanks.
Except that in my experience, what he said is not accurate. The arguments are the same, because they involve removal of stat modifiers. However, I don't personally know if anyone who kept or wanted to keep the penalties for gender in place, yet I do know I lot who want to keep racial modifiers in place.arguments about removing them from stat blocks ring like many other arguments
I guess my response more accurately should've been "doesn't affect me because I don't use it anyway."If they removed a class or subclass that I never used and you did, how would you react to my saying great I never used it anyway?
In fact, I've seen YOU respond to people that don't want some additional rules that they simply don't have to use those rules but other people want them so why not be supportive of what others might use even if you don't. Why suddenly are you changing your principals on this topic?
Sure, just like the arguments for and against gambling on Cock fighting and Dog fighting will be very similar to those for and against gambling on Hold Em and 7 Card Stud. It's not the arguments that make it right or wrong.But do you understand the broader point he’s making that the arguments for and against racial stat mods are practically identical to the arguments for and against gender-based stat mods?