D&D 5E Do you miss attribute minimums/maximums?

[Obryn]

Okay, that doesn't mean that differences between sexes may or may not exist. Ofcourse according to the rules published they don't.

Okay, so if we had to implement abilities affected by age, you would also object, because age is real?

I would also find it rather unnecessary. If Jimmy wants his character to be an old guy who swings around a huge sword; or Jesse wants a spry elderly lady who's a skilled thief - what's the issue? (I think both of those sound pretty awesome, especially the last one, actually.)

If you think your elderly character should have a lower Con, Str, or Dex, just give them a low score there.

(Also, AD&D had these, and it was kind of a nightmare. Totally optimal to make elderly wizards with all those Int bonuses.)

That is also true, but we are talking about ASI and Feats which allow one to increase their PC's ability to the maximum. Why are you even mentioning averages?

Because PCs are individuals, and population averages matter little unless you have literally picked the PC randomly out of the population. "It is likely that Sally would be weaker than Gutboy Barrelhouse" is not relevant, because we have their stats and can see the reality of the situation.

Not true. All I said was introducing such mechanics does not make one a sexist.
The statement you supported was "mechanics that differentiate between sexes is sexist"

Like I have said repeatedly, I think it's fair to question the motivations behind the things people choose to represent in their abstract elfgame. (And for real, quit with the XP police thing. If you have a problem with their post, take it up with them.)

 

[Coroc]

Please stop the discussion about different Strength (Starting) scores of male or female of one and the same race. It is not necessary to increase realism or to reduce disbelief.

That is a totally different thing than talking about attribute differences between half orcs and halflings.

If at all I would consider using it on an NPC race, namely drow (in the FR). The female would get higher Str Wis and Cha and the male higher int dex and con e.g. or such to reflect their archetypical society. Maybe the female higher Str and Cha and the male higher int and dex would be better in this case.

Would I use it on any other race usable as a PC !which in fact I would not! then the women would get 2 Points of Cha for every point of strength difference, that is not because I am sexist but because I am an old school chevalier (sorry for that I am educated / conditioned that way and I am proud of it and I will not change it)

 

[Sadras]

I would also find it rather unnecessary. If Jimmy wants his character to be an old guy who swings around a huge sword; or Jesse wants a spry elderly lady who's a skilled thief - what's the issue? (I think both of those sound pretty awesome, especially the last one, actually.)

If you think your elderly character should have a lower Con, Str, or Dex, just give them a low score there.

(Also, AD&D had these, and it was kind of a nightmare. Totally optimal to make elderly wizards with all those Int bonuses.)

The rules as published support a 80 year old human with 20 Strength. I prefer the rules assist in the regulation. It wasn't a nightmare as there was a regulated counterbalance which were physical stat decreases.

Because PCs are individuals, and population averages matter little unless you have literally picked the PC randomly out of the population. "It is likely that Sally would be weaker than Gutboy Barrelhouse" is not relevant, because we have their stats and can see the reality of the situation.

My 'rough solution' was an ability cap rather than a boost, but honestly I haven't really thought about it.

Like I have said repeatedly, I think it's fair to question the motivations behind the things people choose to represent in their abstract elfgame.

I think people are being alarmed for no reason. I don't think there are any sinister objectives by the posters I've seen. RL simulation for D&D is not a new phenomenon (consider the ever-continuing discussion on Hit Points, DoaM, Damage Reduction due to Armour, Speed Factor of Daggers vs 2-H Weapons, Vitality Points, Exhaustion Track, Natural Healing, Low-Magic, Halfling Strength, Drow Skin, Initiative, Arrows...etc). Even the designers included the differences between the sexes in the early versions of the game.

Personally, before I would bother with modifying/incuding differences between sexes - I would look at 'fixing' races. Personally I dislike that humans (males or female) can be as strong as orcs or half-orcs, nevermind the issue with halflings
But that is me.

 

[Obryn]

...
Even the designers included the differences between the sexes in the early versions of the game.
...

One earlier version of the game - AD&D 1e.

It was notably absent before, after, and contemporaneous to 1e (that being the BECMI line). I don't think there's ever been a time that the only published version of the D&D rule-set has included attribute caps by sex, unless Holmes has them.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I genuinely believe that anyone who thinks adding sexism to a game about fantasy and having fun should neuter themselves with a meat tenderizer before drinking everything they can find under the kitchen sink. It has no place in gaming and no place in society, it is unacceptable to think it is and still call yourself a human being. I despise the kind of people who think discrimination based on sex,colour and/or ethnicity is a fun thing to introduce, they are the same kind of people who drag humanity lower each day and make my soul just cringe at the thought of them ever procreating. /endrant

Look, I don't want to see discrimination in my gaming, either, but dial back the rhetoric a bit, okay? We're all friends here. At the very least, maybe the next time you propose an action plan to combat racism, it shouldn't be, um, eugenics.

 

[Igwilly]

Well, I'm not against having some mechanical differences between sexes - such as the Str cap - but of course there must be trade-offs.
However, I see two problems:
1st: it's another thing to balance.
2nd: if you go too overboard, it can become another thing to min/max or opt.
It could be done right, but it would require some work.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

To give females a Strength penalty without giving males a Dexterity penalty, would be sexist.

Giving male characters an advantage in one area, but giving female characters a compensatory advantage in a different area, is not the way to avoid sexism. The way to avoid sexism is just not to go there. Don't mess with abilities based on sex. Leave it alone. It may be "unrealistic" to have women just as strong on average as men. But it would be just as unrealistic -- and considerably more problematic -- to have women weaker on average than men but more agile, or more charismatic, or wiser, or whatever. However revolting it is to our sense of fairness, in real life no such compensatory advantage exists, at least not in a way that can be quantified as an ability score bonus. (There's no ability score for "power to create life".) So just do exactly what D&D has done for four editions, and assume physical equality. "Realism" isn't realism, and it sure as hell isn't worth it.

 

[Sadras]

There's no ability score for "power to create life".

Requirements are demanding (opposite sex assistant, co-operative skill challenge, time dependant, and a 40-week duration ritual . Certainly not useful in the pillars of combat or exploration and at times hinders those.
Certainly a downtime activity. Bhaal managed to exploit it.

 

[Caliban]

With all the standard races, the physical and mental differences between the sexes are minor enough that it's really not worth trying to model. Especially since PC's are generally exceptional examples of their race.

However, I think it would be interesting to have one or more races in the game with a more extreme sexual dimorphism. For example, one where the females of the race are built like Goliaths (i.e. Medium, but with Large build), and have bonuses to Str and Con, while the males are Small with bonuses to Charisma and Dexterity. The males also favor much more brightly colored clothing.

 

[Caliban]

Or a weirder one - I could imagine a setting where the Dragons are all female, and the Dragonborn are all male - and they are the same race. The Dragons lay many eggs and abandon them to be raised by the Dragonborn, and most of the eggs hatch into dragonborn. Every few thousand eggs, one hatches a female who grows into a Dragon.

Dragonborn champions adventure so they can grow powerful enough to seek out a Dragon and impress her enough to be taken as her mate.

Or you could flip the genders, but with size differences that extreme it makes more sense (in a biological context) for the female to be larger.