D&D General Drow & Orcs Removed from the Monster Manual

[Parmandur]

The latest (and last) promo video for the 2025 Monster Manual states that there will be statblocks for Menzoberranzan Drow in the upcoming Forgotten Realms book.

Setting specific info in a Setting book? Makes sense.

 

[SkidAce]

Ok, since we've now hit the rationale for gender based ability differences (thankfully skipping the halfling vs goliaths and going straight to women aren't as strong as men) there is only one last rail to touch. So I'll say it.

Bring back Thac0 you cowards!

I assume this includes descending AC?

 

[Parmandur]

Ok, since we've now hit the rationale for gender based ability differences (thankfully skipping the halfling vs goliaths and going straight to women aren't as strong as men) there is only one last rail to touch. So I'll say it.

Bring back Thac0 you cowards!

WotC already did, and it was great:

 

[Remathilis]

I assume this includes descending AC?

The only way to fly.

And none of this "attack matrix" bull. REAL MEN use subtraction. And addition. Simultaneously. In their head. For every attack.

 

[ezo]

On average, men do tend to be stronger than women, but not by much.

Actually, by about 30% in overall, but it depends greatly on which measure you are using and depending on the strength move, of course. Since we're talking caps, all you have to do is look up weight lifting records. For example: at 55kg womens' and mens' records are:

(Source: World records)

At equal weight-class, male is 20-25% greater than female. You might consider that "not much", but I do.

If you compare the highest weight-class for women (+87kg) to men (+109kg), it becomes much more in absolute terms. Even based on a ratio of body weight: 335/87 = 3.85 to 492/109 = 4.51 it is a 17% increase simply due to men generally having more muscle mass than women.

Now, as I've said a few times now, would this make sense in terms of a general STR cap for 5E? Of course not. STR in 5E isn't just physical strength, but also athletic ability and your ability to utilize that strength. In those respect, I've agreed there would be no need (or even desire) to differentiate male from female. I've never said a female can't be as strong as the average male, or even stronger than most men, just that their maximum capacity is less-- and a weight carry cap would represent that.

Their tone?

I think your tone speaks volumes in this thread. Ick.

You are free to ignore my posts and responses anytime you wish.

 

[ezo]

I was THIS close to calling out Halflings being capped at 14 or so Str....

No need, you just have to start enforcing that small creatures should have half the carry cap of medium ones. I know why they went this route--for simplicity. After all, halfling plate would not weight the same as medium-size plate, and a halfling-size longsword shouldn't do the same damage as a medium-size longsword.

After all, you double capacities for Large creatures, but halve them for Tiny, not Small?

Other differences are better represented via features, such as Goliath's powerful build.

 

[Faolyn]

Given your tone, this isn't something that will lead to any further useful conversation. You asked, I answered. I could counter just about every point you make with one of my own, but that will not accomplish anything.

How conveeeenient.

5E ability scores are too broad (and how they are used) to cap them based on male or female, which is why I specified I would do weight carried cap. I've made house-rules for women having a 0.7 weight-limit multipier (IIRC) while gaining advantage on saves vs. disease and to resist pain. I've run drow campaigns where the weight numbers were reversed due to females being physically stronger than males.

But do you include similar penalties for men and the places where they're weaker than women? Will you houserule a penalty for men on Con saves, or let women regain extra hit points during a short rest?

If not, why not?

My point is this would be optional material for people who want to run their games with such considerations, the entire "sidebar" (or variant or appendix or whatever) route. IMO it is better than pretending such difference don't exist, but that is just my preference.

It is optional, as you've proven by houseruling it and then posting it here for all the world to see. It doesn't need to be in the books to be an optional rule.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The only way to fly.

And none of this "attack matrix" bull. REAL MEN use subtraction. And addition. Simultaneously. In their head. For every attack.

I actually do prefer the old AC system. Thac0 can be tricky but we used to chart it out on the sheet as players. As a GM it it’s easy once you get used to doing the math (I would say 3E was just as hard, if not harder because you often had to add large numbers in your head on the fly, whereas in 2E the numbers were fairly contained). I don’t see us going back to it for the current editions but some of this stuff feels less wonky than it sounds or than how it is often remembered (I expected Thac0 to be very tricky when I went back to it, and at first it was initially but that passed pretty quickly (especially when I realized at times it was easier than some 3E math)

 

[Scribe]

That's 81 lbs, btw, at the top end there. Anyone who has lifted, trained, performed at anything above a casual level in sport, knows that is not a 'small' amount.

 

[Faolyn]

Love it! If we cap Str for women, we also have to cap Wis, Con, and Dex for men.

The stereotypical differences between men and women are just that, largely stereotypical. The differences that do exist are mostly cultural, rather than biological.

On average, men do tend to be stronger than women, but not by much. Representing this with a Strength cap in D&D is really stupid. As we have PLENTY of examples in the real world of men who aren't that strong and women who are. Anyone who regularly watches women's athletics and feels putting an arbitrary cap on their abilities in an abstract game . . .

Exactly--and it's especially dumb in a game where all the men in the party could be wizards and rogues and all the women could be warrior-types. Sure, my greataxe-toting barbarian just isn't capable of carrying, relatively speaking, as much stuff as your scrawny cutpurse can, because she has boobs.

(And speaking of realism, smaller creatures can have greater lifting capacity in relation to their size and weight than larger creatures do. Halflings should get a bonus to the amount of stuff they can carry.)

(Edit: An elephant can carry about a quarter of its weight on its back before experiencing pain. A harpy eagle can fly carrying half its weight.)