Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9706347" data-attributes="member: 7006">Having multi-species parents in the D&amp;D game would have been fine if every single species had that opportunity.&nbsp; It's the fact they singled out just TWO of them, both of which have a Human parent who is never distinguished by their species in their name and thus always assumed Human to be the &quot;default&quot; species in the game (just like if someone was to say they were &quot;half-Asian&quot; everyone would immediately think &quot;Oh, along with White of course, because what other possible pairing is there?&quot; which is not something we should be aspiring to.)&nbsp; At barest minimum, if people HAVE to have game mechanics taken from both parents to truly feel like they are from bi-species parents (which is a whole different argument that I also think is ridiculous based upon how lame and stupid pretty much all species mechanics are), then the game can make a paired species system wherein players can select features from ANY two species to represent their parents, and we won't call those folks &quot;half&quot; anything.It's more or less the naming convention and the fact that there are only two options for bi-species parents, one of which HAS to be Human that has always been the problem.&nbsp; That's not the positive representation some people seem to think it is.EDIT: And this doesn't touch upon the fact that one of the only two bi-species parenting was almost always described as being the result of sexual assault.&nbsp; Yeah... great representation there!&nbsp; Good job D&amp;D!&nbsp; Let's make sure we keep these in the game!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9706347, member: 7006"] Having multi-species parents in the D&D game would have been fine if every single species had that opportunity. It's the fact they singled out just TWO of them, both of which have a Human parent who is never distinguished by their species in their name and thus always assumed Human to be the "default" species in the game (just like if someone was to say they were "half-Asian" everyone would immediately think "Oh, along with White of course, because what other possible pairing is there?" which is not something we should be aspiring to.) At barest minimum, if people HAVE to have game mechanics taken from both parents to truly feel like they are from bi-species parents (which is a whole different argument that I also think is ridiculous based upon how lame and stupid pretty much all species mechanics are), then the game can make a paired species system wherein players can select features from ANY two species to represent their parents, and we won't call those folks "half" anything. It's more or less the naming convention and the fact that there are only two options for bi-species parents, one of which HAS to be Human that has always been the problem. That's not the positive representation some people seem to think it is. EDIT: And this doesn't touch upon the fact that one of the [I]only two[/I] bi-species parenting was almost always described as being the result of sexual assault. Yeah... great representation there! Good job D&D! Let's make sure we keep these in the game! [/QUOTE]

Verification