Bill Zebub
“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
Non-humans can still have different physiology.
I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism
- Thread starter Shades of Eternity
- Start date
Non-humans can still have different physiology.
The Firebird
Commoner
I'm confused. The quote was "if culture can explain/provide whatever explanations we need for groups of sentient beings to "be" a certain way, why do we even need bioessentialism?"
If they have a different physiology, then that isn't culture.
Is your idea that they can have different physiology but that should have no mechanical effects?
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yeah I ditched culture early on. I find it more problematic than old school D&D races. Much closer to real world rhetoric about “race”, because that’s all “race” is IRL, regional cultural groups that on average look more like eachother than like “outsiders”.
Instead I have Ancestry and Upbringing. Upbringing is stuff like “Hidden House of The Wise” or “Scion of Privelege” or “Grew Up Rough” or “Small Rural Community”, and they give you some skill ranks and some Contacts.
(Contacts are things like “The Bad Influence”, “The Mentor”, “The Small Town Official”, “The Old Family Friend”, etc and are basically each a person you get to either define or let the GM define who is part of your life and who you can call upon at need within a certain framework of what they know/are good at/have access to.)
Crimson Longinus
Legend
I really do not like replacing species with cultures that have mechanics tied to them. That easily gets way more offensive than the species having different rules ever did. Like to me it far less problematic to say that all bears have certain characteristics that are different than characteristics of the wolves, than to say that all Japanese have certain characteristics that are different than characteristics of the French.
As for professions, I really do not like how 5.5 D&D did backgrounds. Nobles are smart and charming, peasants are strong and hardy.
And ultimately it leads to unfortunate and not even realistic class/background pairings when people optimise.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
But not in way that affects anything.
Bill Zebub
“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
I guess I should have specified that I meant behaviorally, which was the context when Umbran made that point.
(FWIW, I've been saying all along that, from my perspective, racial attributes are bad game design, not a "bioessentialism" issue, and that cool racial abilities are cool....but of course there are lots of people in the thread and I don't expect people to remember what I said.)
MGibster
Legend
I think 2nd breakfast more than compensates the halfling for any penalties they might receive.
Bill Zebub
“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
serial...numbers...not...quite...filed...off.....
When he's the one carrying the human ranger through the snow instead of the other way around the difference will be clear.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
A human with 10 strength could carry a halfling fairly easily, and be able to see over the snow, so…that would only happen in order to make a meta point. To be fair.
