Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5560526" data-attributes="member: 4937">Is that a rhetorical question or do you not believe I have a reason?For one thing, I think that the strength modifier applied to halflings was applied only for the sake of 'playability' without any real in game justification.  It violates the game systems own guidelines for adjusting creatures attribute according to size, which in general state that going down one size involves a -4 penalty to strength and constitution and a +2 bonus to dexterity.  For another thing, in a nutshell, the house cat vs. commoner problem.  D&D has traditionally minimized the disadvantages of small size to the point that being small is an advantage.  In 1st edition, all large size did for you was make you more vulnerable to the most commonly employed weapons.  In 3rd edition, while there has been something of a nod to realism, being 'small' is often an advantage compared to being 'medium'.  For example, 'small' doesn't have a reach disadvantage, and actually gains a bonus to 'to hit' and AC - two of the most important numbers in the game.  The disadvantage of a small size weapon continues to decrease as the game goes on and the modifiers to damage increasingly outweigh the small random factor of the die throw.  There are some drawbacks (speed and grappling), but not as much as you'd expect for weighing 30lbs.So while I know all about chimpanzees and caracal's, I don't feel that the small-sized PC races are anything but gamist in construction.  I don't buy into them.  It's just a special case of the house cat problem, and until your system deals with the house cat problem well, I don't think you can scoff to much at my criticism of how it handles size nor are you on that solid of ground when claiming the system is within the realm of believable.No, no, no.  It stretches playability.  Don't mix up the needs of the game with the desire for simulation and internal consistancy.That might be too strong.  I agree that those are valid reasons for not having sex differences in your house rules.  I'm not sure that I agree absolutely within anyone here but myself.  For one thing, my position mechanically holds a middle ground between absolute differences and no differences, and if anything I've been thinking about after reading this thread expanding that middle ground with more options for emphasizing gender difference.  (I even have in mind an idea for a male only feat, and I'm brainstorming for ideas for additional optional gender related traits.)  For another thing, I don't agree as fully with your 'points of agreement' as you seem to agree with them.To stop judging each other and try to understand each other rather than trying to shut down discussion, to listen, to stop trying to force people to agree with you, and to not pass judgment on people's motives.  And beyond that to the extent that I have 'skin in the game', it's to get people to accept and be comfortable with gender differences so that we don't have to live in fantasy worlds in order to believe that men and women are equal.There is a quote by GK Chesterton that runs something like: "Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."  I'd be uncomfortable having my daughters read fairy tales where the heroines overcame dragons by main force alone, any more than I'd be comfortable with fairy tales that said strength didn't matter.  Really this trope is as old as dirt.  The oldest version of this story I can think of is Athena and Ares.  Athena represents the feminine virtue of war, and in the stories is held in higher esteem than her brutish but stronger male counterpart.  Athena always bests Ares in battle, not because she is stronger, but because there is more to her than just strength.  If as sexist of a people as the ancient greeks can be comfortable with this, I wonder why we are having so much trouble with it.</blockquote>

Verification