Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4163589" data-attributes="member: 2067">You're taking your fantasy too seriously, here. The adjustments are for archetype. And, in 4e, there won't even be penalties! Just bonuses! Anyone who is &quot;upset&quot; about the difference might be missing the point that this isn't about commenting about the real world in any way, and instead is supposed to be about letting you play &quot;orcs are dumb and ugly&quot; and &quot;elves are graceful&quot; and &quot;halflings are good thieves.&quot;Yeah, it would. D&amp;D isn't supposed to be the real world, and even in my most hardcore &quot;rules are physics&quot; moments, I can't justify a fantasy world that adheres to our Western conception of male and female gender roles as a rule. Maybe if I want to reflect a society like that, the women just tend to be priests and ranged fighters, and the men just tend to be melee fighters and wizards (or something). I don't need piddly little &quot;gender modifiers&quot; to do it. Furthermore, it opens up an IMMENSE can of worms -- where's a woman's CON bonus for having a higher pain tolerance? A man's INT bonus for being more able at the mathematics? What about a matriarchal society? What about the famous myth of the Amazons? How can I represent a chivalric code? Blah, blah, blah....There's no appeal in it for me, so it offends me because it seems collossally ignorant, shortsighted, and, ultimately, completely useless in making my game any better.At the same time, the idea of, say, men and women having different roles in a society, or of cultural gender predisposition for certain classes, or of even alternate races that have pronounced gender features (especially if they're inspired by our real-world animals) is something that I think is pretty cool, in moderation.&nbsp; I don't have any need or desire to replicate that with something as simplistic as ability score alterations, really. Gender is much more complex than +2/-1/-1 or -2/+1/+1.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4163589, member: 2067"] You're taking your fantasy too seriously, here. The adjustments are for archetype. And, in 4e, there won't even be penalties! Just bonuses! Anyone who is "upset" about the difference might be missing the point that this isn't about commenting about the real world in any way, and instead is supposed to be about letting you play "orcs are dumb and ugly" and "elves are graceful" and "halflings are good thieves." Yeah, it would. D&D isn't supposed to be the real world, and even in my most hardcore "rules are physics" moments, I can't justify a fantasy world that adheres to our Western conception of male and female gender roles as a rule. Maybe if I want to reflect a society like that, the women just tend to be priests and ranged fighters, and the men just tend to be melee fighters and wizards (or something). I don't need piddly little "gender modifiers" to do it. Furthermore, it opens up an IMMENSE can of worms -- where's a woman's CON bonus for having a higher pain tolerance? A man's INT bonus for being more able at the mathematics? What about a matriarchal society? What about the famous myth of the Amazons? How can I represent a chivalric code? Blah, blah, blah.... There's no appeal in it for me, so it offends me because it seems collossally ignorant, shortsighted, and, ultimately, completely useless in making my game any better. At the same time, the idea of, say, men and women having different roles in a society, or of cultural gender predisposition for certain classes, or of even alternate races that have pronounced gender features (especially if they're inspired by our real-world animals) is something that I think is pretty cool, in moderation. I don't have any need or desire to replicate that with something as simplistic as ability score alterations, really. Gender is much more complex than +2/-1/-1 or -2/+1/+1. [/QUOTE]

Verification