Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sadras" data-source="post: 7173311" data-attributes="member: 6688277">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?Stereotypical roles? You're aware FR has a fair amount of stereotypical elements right? And this is where you draw the line?So if we had to create an ability-age category, we would be emotionally hurting our hobby's grognards?That is true. However, given the lore I have read, all the common playable races mate/interact with each other in the same way as humans do, so by that logic I would find it fair to apply the sexual dimorphism to all the playable species should the DM want to. 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?-That is also true. That is why in an earlier post I mentioned that I would find the female character more appealing given that I was thinking along the lines of additional proficiencies in place of a possible 19-20 STR score. Just in case you missed it earlier, I have not made any houserules at my table regarding females/males characters - too much other stuff to tinker with first <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp;Not true. All I said was introducing such mechanics does not make one a sexist.The statement you supported was &quot;mechanics that differentiate between sexes is sexist&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sadras, post: 7173311, member: 6688277"] 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? Stereotypical roles? You're aware FR has a fair amount of stereotypical elements right? And this is where you draw the line? So if we had to create an ability-age category, we would be emotionally hurting our hobby's grognards? That is true. However, given the lore I have read, all the common playable races mate/interact with each other in the same way as humans do, so by that logic I would find it fair to apply the sexual dimorphism to all the playable species should the DM want to. 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? - That is also true. That is why in an earlier post I mentioned that I would find the female character more appealing given that I was thinking along the lines of additional proficiencies in place of a possible 19-20 STR score. Just in case you missed it earlier, I have not made any houserules at my table regarding females/males characters - too much other stuff to tinker with first :) 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" [/QUOTE]

Verification