Originally Posted by professoryins
You are married to the idea that character attributes represents a uniform biological difference in dnd races. They have decided culture, training and individuality(ie varies more person to person, than culture to culture )is actually the dominant factor in attributes.

Yes, upbringing and personal direction IS the dominant factor, of course it is - no-one has, at any point, suggested otherwise. It's not the only factor, however, and you're mapping the distinction onto something real-world, which is part of the problem here. We are not talking about different phenotypes of what is functionally the same species of creature (as we are when we talk about race in humans) - we're talking about literally physically and biologically different entire species of creatures.

Cheetahs, by general propensity are capable of running faster than wolves in a sprint. Wolves, by general propensity, have more stamina and can run at their full chase speed for far longer than cheetahs. There will be outliers, but there is a tangible, very real biological difference here that is reflected when comparing their two distinct species of creature. Corvids have the awareness, information retention, detail processing and logic capability to solve complex spatial manipulation problems. Ostriches do not. Culture, training and individual self direction certainly have defining impact on a character, but they do not magically remove these baseline differences of biology.

Quote
It just comes down to your personal preference, you like the idea that race is the primary determiner of a character's potential.

I suspect you're not addressing this part to me, since it's the exact opposite of what I wrote... from my perspective, as I mentioned, one of the Most important parts of ALL of this is that an exceptional creature's individual potential is not controlled or capped by their race - that a character that focuses on being the best they can be in a discipline or area of expertise can literally become the best it is possible to be at that, regardless of where they started and what race of creature they might be. That's a very large part of the point; people are different, and that's good - despite our differences, which are things we should celebrate and cherish the uniqueness of, anyone who puts their mind to it can reach the same upper maximum of ability as anyone else, no matter how they were born or where they came from and that's also good. That is as it should be, and should remain so.

==

Our player characters are exceptional individuals, yes, but the ability scores are not there to represent the entire spectrum of all possible things that could ever happen to a creature. If we were to account for everything that could possibly happen, as well as every possible condition, abnormality, malady or prodigy that could be considered - and for any creature - then we would be required to throw out the entire character creation rule structure wholesale. You would have to choose to be any size between tiny and gargantuan, choose any speed between 0 and 500, and in any combination of flying, swimming, burrowing and walking, you would choose any lifespan between 1 and 5000, any height between 1 inch and 30 feet... any number of limb between 0 and 100... and even those limitations would not be enough, because all of these things are possible if we consider magical maladies, enchanted potions, divine diseases, demonic boons, planar influence and all of the other wild and fantastical things that occur in the realms.

In the video, it was mentioned that humans can now choose to be medium or small "because there are of course people of small stature in the world"... and this is a ridiculous move; writing selection rules into your system because "you might have a form of dwarfism" is beyond the pale for bad design. Yes, you might! And that's something you should discuss with your DM if you want to play a character that is unusual in that way. The rule structure cannot account for that, because if you do, you have to have it account for that for everyone, and you have to have it account for other similar things for everyone too - so, in order for that decision to make sense, you need to be able to pick large as well, because you might have a form of giantism... and they also need to not say that 'humans' are, mystically the Only species of creature that might have this; can elves not be of small statue in the same way humans can? Can orcs not? If humans can, then of course they can... but that's not being accounted for and it just ends up looking tokenary, as well as being mechanically othering, which is not good. ((And, because I just know someone will pick at this - I'm speaking here as a woman who is 134cm tall; in some places in the world, I'm small enough to be formally classified as a person of small stature; I can shop in the kids section of department stores. I'd still be a medium-sized creature; halflings and gnomes are much smaller than me.))

Ability score propensities are not about what is absolutely possible - as with height and weight they are about mapping the defining characteristics of your species within general bounds. The height brackets are not saying "Literally every halfling in existence is between these two height brackets". They are saying "the vast majority of halflings under normal circumstances fall into this scale"; you only need to read the language used in the books to understand that.

When you talk about "what if, in my background I was experimented on, or had this condition, or interacted with this archfey" etc., that's great - it's also Background; it doesn't change or obliterate the biology you were born with, it just adds to it (unless it does actually change your base biology in some significant way, and you're not actually a halfling any more; if you're playing something that extreme in your background, then you're playing a customised race already, and that's something you should be talking to your DM about; Customising is cool, but the rules themselves cannot ever account for the full spectrum of player creativity in customisation, and can't reasonably try without becoming devoid of meaning entirely)... More importantly - That Is What allocating Your Ability Scores Is. That thing that we do, when we've rolled our ability scores and are deciding where to put them? That's a background and roleplay decision. Allocating our ability scores is the representation of one part of our background. Racial bonuses are independent of that. If our character has brain damage, that's represented by us putting that 5 that we rolled into INT. If our character spent most of her young life running from guards and having to weave in and out of cramped city-scapes constantly just to survive, and is really pretty exceptional at slipping into and out of situations with agility and precision we are representing that when we put that 16 we rolled into Dexterity.

Cheetahs can run faster than wolves - this is to say that due to their pronounced differences in physical biology, a cheetah and a wolf with the same upbringing, opportunities, lifestyles and training will run at different speeds. There is nothing wrong with this; this is not a bad thing to say or acknowledge. It is not offensive or discriminatory or 'racist against wolves' in any way. If both of these creatures train and practice to the point that their abilities reach limits that begin to surpass mortal bounds and push them into demigod status, then those base physical propensities will functionally disappear in the face of how overwhelming both of their abilities actually are... but one will need to work a little harder to get to that point.

Maybe the cheetah has led a slovenly lifestyle, been pampered by comfort and luxury, and only really gets out for a run once every few days when he feels like he needs enrichment... maybe the wolf always aspired to be a track racer, and has trained to do that for years. That wolf will naturally be faster in a sprint than that cheetah - because that cheetah will not allocate their highest scores to their speed, while the wolf probably will - the cheetah still has a better natural propensity for speed, but the lifestyle choices of the two have overcome that base disparity; that absolutely does not mean that the cheetah is not a cheetah and does not have certain natural biological features any more - if the wolf had led as lazy a life as it had, they'd both be poor sprinters... but all other things being equal, the cheetah would retain a slight edge due to their native biology being suited to the task, and would win more often than not in that circumstance.

==

To the idea of different, racially dictated, ability caps - absolutely not. That is the very last thing that we need under any circumstance, and is a return to the exact thing that the twitter crowd is (falsely and in ignorance) accusing the current system of doing - limiting people's capabilities by their race. Absolutely not. Remember that in this system, a 20 is brushing on the limits of mortal bounds and beginning to tread the path of demigod status. We're not talking about Olympic athletes here (who are, in a conversion of this system, around about 16s in their chosen fields - do not underestimate the scale of the bracket or what our heroes are supposed to be capable of); the scale is larger than that, and edges onto things that are mortally impossible. If you are a being with a skill that is at that extreme degree of capability, the magnitude of it is not going to be affected by what mortal race you were born as; the halfling demigod of drink and brawling is not going to lose an arm wrestle with the orcish demigod of rock-punching because he is a halfling - they are both supreme representations of strength, at that point.

This matters, because it is important to acknowledge that different peoples are different, especially when talking of literal different species of creature entirely, and having racial bonuses is one important element of doing that that nevertheless does not actually create a hard limitation by race.

Who we are is, to use older terminology, contributed to by both nature and nurture elements; there are factors of who we are born as that we do not choose or control, and there are factors that we do have a say in, or that affect us outside of base biology. Both of these contribute and are important, but Neither limit our ultimate potential.

Our backgrounds are the nurture side of the equation of who we are; moving things like weapon proficiency, skill training, and other cultural and non-biological elements into Backgrounds is a Good move, because that's what that is supposed to be about. How we allocate our ability scores as per our rolls, or as we buy them with point buy, etc., is a part of this, and it is the greater part of determining out exceptional character's actual ability score spread.

The nature part of that equation are the things that our character did not choose; the biological elements of their birthright and lineage, the species of creature that they literally are, and so on. This covers natural features, opposite the aforementioned social and cultural training, and it covers racial physicality and native propensities (these are the racial ability score bonuses), opposite the aforementioned choices they personally made about their life. All of these elements matter in their own way and contribute towards making the unique people that our characters are.

Here's an exchange, as a thought piece:
(A conversation)

DM: "Okay, character creation... you said you had a concept for a character you wanted, but wanted me to walk you through it a bit?"

Player: "Yep. I'm making an emu aarakocra wizard"

DM: "Oookay, sounds amusing. Do you want to drop the fly speed, then?"

Player: "Yeah, I think she's going to want learn the fly spell specifically as soon as possible because of that."

DM: "Sure. I'll give you a boost to your land speed to compensate for losing that, if you like - say, give you 40 base walking speed?"

Player: "Oh, yeah, cool, that'd be neat. I wasn't going to ask for anything, I just though it wouldn't make sense to have flying, and it's kinda important to the character that she can't."

DM: "No worries, there's no harm in balancing it out. So, let's do this. Go ahead and roll your stats - four-drop-lowest, and we're playing a high powered game, so make seven rolls and drop your lowest one of them too."

Player: "Okay, I've got: 18, 16, 15, 13, 12, 8"

DM: "Great. So, talk to me about this character, where do you want to put things?"

Player: "Okay, so, I think she's spent most of her early life in a big library, and was raised there - I think she was probably a foundling? But I'd like it if the place had a big garden space, with lots of greenery and open air too, where she liked to watch birds, and was always sad about not being able to fly herself. I think she spent a lot of time doing pretty silly things when she was young, trying to fly, or trying to make it work, you know? She studied a lot, but was always causing trouble too, because she'd always break things, or knock things down, when she was caught up with a new experiment. The library folks love her had care for her like family, of course, but there's... you know... that sort of tired sighing and eye rolling, like, a lot."

DM: "Sounds good, I can work with that. So, break it down for me."

Player: "Well, I think I'll put the eight in her Wisdom, because honestly, as much as she reads, she's a bit oblivious, doesn't think things through, and she's pretty unworldly as well. She doesn't make the best decisions."

DM: "Sure, want to keep working upwards? What else is she not so great at?"

Player: "I think she's also pretty clumsy and uncoordinated, and that's really not helped her 'trying to fly' experiments at all... but um... 12 is a bit high, can I bump that down a bit? Like, maybe to a 9?"

DM: "You can, but maybe... is she really more silly than clumsy, in this case? Maybe take the 8 for Dex, if she's that bad?"

Player: "Nah, definitely more silly than anything else."

DM: "Okay, if you're sure. I can't give you a score increase somewhere else for it though... dangerous path that."

Player: "Yeah, that's fine. I'm making a ridiculous emu wizard."

DM: "Alright. I've often found it's good to flip over to the other end and work inwards, rather than fussing over the mid-range scores - so, what's she best at?"

Player: "Okay, so, I'm going to put the 18 into Intelligence, because she's grown up in this library and most of her upbringing has been spent studying books, remembering things, and so on."

DM: "Fair. That just leaves Con, Strength and Charisma; what's highest and what's lowest, of those three?"

Player: "Hmm... I think she's very friendly and affable in a ditzy, distractible kind of way. So make that highest, and I'd say con is lowest, because working the library still takes a lot of physical labour moving books and shelves and stuff, but she doesn't really get out much, or eat healthy, or look after herself as well as she should."

DM: "Alright; that's sorted then. You're an Aarakocra, so-"

Player: "Oh, can I reallocate the racials, like in Tasha's?"

DM: "Well, sell it to me... Aarakocra are quick and light, and sharp of eye, compared to most other playable races, but you are an emu, so I could see your biology following different lines. What are you thinking?"

Player: "Well, I want to put the +2 into Intelligence instead of Dexterity."

DM: "Er... you're really going to have to sell me on that... Emus aren't known for their smarts."

Player: "Yeah, but, she's grown up in this library and most of her upbringing has been spent studying books, remembering things, and so on... so... Plus Int, right?"

DM: "That's upbringing and background though - that's why you allocated the 18 into Int before... I think you even said the same words. This is about the creature you are, not how you were raised. Can you think of some other way to justify it?"

Player: "I mean... Emus are pretty dumb. Like, really dumb. I was thinking just, you know, raised with scholars, studied hard, trained her mind, so she's actually really sharp... playing against type and all that, you know?

DM: "Yeah... and you're doing that, I think - she's had that upbringing and studied hard like that; that's what putting the 18 there is all about, in this situation."

Player: "I can't just use the same reason for both?"

DM: "Not really, sorry... they're different things. I think it might make sense if her physicality was sturdier than other average aarakokra, naturally - might help with all the poor decisions all things considered - or a little stronger maybe... but I can't really see an emu aarakokra being natively better at handling information than other aarakocra, by virtue of being born with an emu phenotype."

Player: "Aww... I guess. I really wanted to start with a 20."

DM: "Level four comes fast enough..."

Last edited by Niara; 29/08/22 07:54 AM.