@Neprostoman "You have 27 attribute points to express your exceptionalism and lineage" - So stats have more bearing on WHO a character is than their choices, motivations and convictions and cumulative lore regarding their races history.
"Completely removing the racial bonuses hurts roleplay, because an orc with +2 intelligence does not symbolize someone who studied their whole life as a wizard apprentice, it just means that for some magical reason this orc has a bigger brain. If you are playing an orc for everyone to recognize you as an extraordinary orc, but for some reason you don't consider an orc with 15 intelligence clever, well. You try to compare different species as if they were one." - In one breath your previous quote says stats are how you express yourself then in the next attempt to minimalize their significance by saying I should be fine with a 15 and a +2 doesnt indicate cleverness. Which is it? They don't reconcile.
"You are allowed by the game to grind to the maximum intelligence through levels as any race, this is what makes roleplay and your orc special" - so my grind must be done in game and cant possibly be part of a backstory? Grind is what makes my character unique and must be gated behind an in game time sink instead of enjoying a narrative? I dont even know where to begin with this, so I wont.
"not starting with the same mental capacity as a gnome, which should be impossible because those were made as different species." Even if were to agree with this, unless im playing a newborn Im a character with experiences and convictions and have lived a life that has molded and shaped who I am far from what/who I was at birth.
"Why would we keep different races in the first place? May be I want to be so so special and have a tiefling tail, a dragonborn's scales, a githyanki's black dots on my ass, be short as a gnome and strong as a bugbear with the appropriate fur on my belly? " This is hyperbolic and off base. Im not advocating for creating my PC with a gene splicing CRISPR. Just that nature vs nurture is a thing. Some orcs can be surprisingly smart - some gnomes can be stupid and life experiences and time play a very relevant factor in that and to say it doesnt is to deny the relevance of the capacity of these experience to shape our motivations and drive us to become different and unique.
Respectfully, your reply is full of assumptions and what i gather to be contradiction. You're assuming that I have assumed takes - like 15 not being clever enough. In hindsight I should have seen this coming because many detracting takes on this topic are grounded in rigid assumptions yall wont let go of. My whole point is not assuming anything, I just want YALL to stop gating others based on what your assumptions are. An orc has the capacity to become learned especially if nurtured in a environment that can facilitate this especially if it were for decades. Just as a gnome that goes through horrible life experience at a young age could become a lush burnout that wasted the resources around him to become learned. Even if you rigidly want to assume they start in different places, where they end up can far more be a consequence of their choices and experiences. Good or bad. These sterotype breaking charcaters dont have to be common, just allow them to exist and stop vehemently saying they dont because thats sillyness.
@Edvin Black I was writing my other reply as I saw yours and you mention something i think is important Ive been trying to get out. Nurture vs Nature. There are so many narratively relevant ways to leave the "baggage" intact and preserve the natural starting point without hamstringing or punishing player choice statistically. An orc might take 2 decades to become as learned as a gnome become may in only a couple years. They are limited by their nature and it presents an obstacle but conviction and time can allow you to make longer strides than most of similar nature, if not overcome these limitations entirely.
Being special doesnt have to mean power. Being a god is relitive to all existence and races - I dont think its a stretch to say its realistic for an orc that spent decades trying to learn magic is a mediocre wizard. Not powerful in general, just surprising for an orc. These deviations dont have to be grounded in power either. A gnomish child with loathsome parents in academia has resulted in his spite of all things associated with his parents and bucks all things they hold in esteem never participating in their passion and intentionally taking to a life in the streets/crime intentionally overtly to bring them shame by their association as his parents.
To your third point i definitely agree and for some games im there with them. I just dont understand gating OTHERS in their game when this would not impact their game especially given that its an actual rule now as of Tashas. Inversely many players find it boring to have so many knowns and that much less to genuinely explore as both player and as a character. Ive no problem with people wanting to play the way of racially lock points, and happily play with many who do. I just hate the idea of people forcing that upon others, especially if they are using roleplay as a flag on that hill.
If I met a orc wizard NPC in this game I would immediately have so many questions. Do they know a powerful wizard that, have they made some pact with a higher power is it the result of some immensely powerful artifact they have in their possession (we see this play out with a particular character in this game and BEHOLD)? Depending on the answer what impact will this have on the story? Should i make this person an ally to gain access if its a wizard? Should i be afraid because they owe a potentially evil entity they serve whose interests are not aligned with my own and regardless of this orcs feelings about me his actions are subject to the whims of another I have no sway on.
TLDR: No problem with people playing with racially locked stats, just dont try to stop other people from enjoying things that dont impact the experience for you, especially when all they are asking is to allow an existing rule to be used. Ill concede deviation for the sake of deviation is boring to me (but let people if thats what they want) but theres nothing stopping narratively explaining how nurture over time can lead to these deviations that are consistent with even a hardlined view of nature at the outset. Its not even a stretch.
