D&D (2024) How did I miss this about the Half races/ancestries

[Mirrorrorrim]

Disclaimer: I largely agree with you, and having ability caps based on gender is just something I'd rather not see, for many reasons. So my response to the bolded part is more in general rather than meant to be an excuse to justify gender differences in game.

That said..

I disagree that in fantasy there is no truth. There are lots of truths that we all make assumptions about. Unless otherwise explicitly noted, we assume the fantasy world works the same as our own world. Gravity. Eating. Breathing. Physics. Etc. The key is the "explicitly noted" part. For things that differ from the real world's expectations, we generally have rules for that.

I appreciate your insights, but game mechanics don't reflect truth because they don't capture real world physics or biology. They are designed mechanisms based on design preferences, not truth.

Here are many rules that don't reflect real world science, or the game just flat out ignores when convenient:
Ability Scores
Light
Vision
Hearing
Jumping
Swimming
Encumbrance
Armor Class
Hit Points
Species interbreeding
Gravity
Falling
Flying
Burrowing (30 feet in 6 seconds?)
Time (and what can be done in 6 seconds, to start)
... and that nowhere near an exhaustive list.

It is all made up pseudoscience at best. So if someone is designing the physics of a fantasy universe, design them in a way that makes it fun and inclusive. Let exclusionary preferences live in home games.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Hah!

My friend has just told me that, since they're nonbinary and therefore beyond gendered limitations, they get to have a Strength of 30.

If someone told me that my female human had a strength cap that a male human did not have, and for some reason I chose to play in that game, I would play an obviously transgender person who didn't have that cap, with charisma as my second highest stat, and I would play that character to the hilt.

 

[Maxperson]

The fourth guy is a classic moderate, what are you on about? He’s not far right, he just doesn’t care what his friends’ politics are and thinks we should all be able to sit down and be civil. That’s…literally the moderate stereotype.

Moderates care. What we are against are the extremes, which what Klansmen are. If I found out a friend was a Klansman, he would in that instant no longer be my friend. And I am most definitely a moderate.

There were no moderates in your example.

Edit: My bad. I didn't see the moderation yet. I will post no further about this.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I did not come up with magic items. I came up with non-magic item based ways a "realistic" fantasy woman could logically have a high Strength.

You picked a bad example that doesn't work. Good night vision does not a higher Perception score make. Especially since Perception also includes all of the other senses in addition to different types of vision (noticing details, noticing and tracking moving objects, color sense).

You picked the Berries of Power. You picked the blessing from a God of Strength. Then you complained that they shouldn't be needed.

As for the rest, you're assuming your own conclusion: "the only possible reason for Strength caps to exist is sexism, so everyone who likes them must obviously be motivated by hate and sexism." I was trying to have a discussion about simulationism vs. narrativism and the value that realism can bring to a game, but you can't even hear me over your own assumptions.

 

[Clint_L]

We're not litigating gendered ability caps. Come on. That ship thankfully sailed decades ago. It's not happening and it shouldn't happen.

But this discussion is illustrating why I think WotC is making a good move by getting away from a lot of the nomenclature around character creation.

 

[Incenjucar]

If someone told me that my female human had a strength cap that a male human did not have, and for some reason I chose to play in that game, I would play an obviously transgender person who didn't have that cap, with charisma as my second highest stat, and I would play that character to the hilt.

I would be more inclined to say "Ha ha no we're not playing that game and if you suggest it again I'm blocking your number."

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I would be more inclined to say "Ha ha no we're not playing that game and if you suggest it again I'm blocking your number."

I admit I can be more petty than that regarding this subject. I could absolutely see myself joining such a game to tease out if the DM had a problem with my character, placing a mirror in front of them to see if they see what I see. I would dare them to double down and reveal their true preferences. I can always block someone's number. But I can fight absurdity with absurdity. Everyone who posts on a message board has a little troll in them that can be inflamed. This topic is one of my hot spots.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You mean where they would torture and burn to death people for being accused of casting spells?

Now that is a campaign I can get behind!

 

[Horwath]

Now that is a campaign I can get behind!

played few of those. Always a caster in those campaigns.

 

[Umbran]

Limitations are the norm for games; virtually all of them will constrain aspects of play in some regard. If a particular game doesn't (easily) allow you to do what you want, that just means that it's not the game for you.

Is that intended to excuse or the sexism (or racism, or whatever-ism), and/or get people to ignore it?

Because... I don't think it'll have that effect. Attempts to excuse such usually go over like a lead balloon around here, and get ugly.

Folks may want to remember the inclusivity policy as they continue in this discussion.