I don't get the arguments for bioessentialism

[Faolyn]

Over 30+ pages, it seems that the conversation revolves around how D&D does bioessentialism badly.

How have non-D&D (ttrpg general) games done it better?

I know I already answered, but it occurred to me that Draw Steel does have another example: their Always Evil/Kill On Sight baddies, the War Dogs. They're brainwashed flesh constructs who wear explosive loyalty collars. So they have no inherent culture and are literally made to be loyal to their master and very, very violent.

 

[Argyle King]

I know I already answered, but it occurred to me that Draw Steel does have another example: their Always Evil/Kill On Sight baddies, the War Dogs. They're brainwashed flesh constructs who wear explosive loyalty collars. So they have no inherent culture and are literally made to be loyal to their master and very, very violent.

I appreciate the responses.

I'm glad to see attempts at productive discussion about a topic that has been divisive in the past. At the same time, I feel there is value in looking at more than one (D&D) game.

In your previous response (before the one I quoted) you had mentioned something about digestive differences. I've played games in which that is modeled through game mechanics. For example, GURPS Ghouls (which are some of the inspiration for Fallout's Ghouls) have traits related to stuff like that.

I'm away from books at the moment, but I think GURPS also has an "unusual biochemistry" trait that can be applied to a character -or a species template. I played in a game where that meant that one of the species options needed to buy healing potions made for them. They could still use normal ones but with reduced effect and a chance for negative side effects from doing so.