People would be more inclined to engage in the fantasy-fantasy ambiguity discussion if we could find examples that didn�t specifically disregard LGBTQ+, women, and people of diverse races, ethnicities, or origins.
For example, I find the teleportation portals confusing for worldbuilding. What�s the point of bears of burden, winged creatures, or carts if you can teleport half your journey? Sure, there are dragons and spells, but doesn�t teleportation break the world economy?
Yes, and I have similar feelings towards spells that revive people. For most people, death should be entirely meaningless. You can just buy a scroll or go to a temple to be revived. So when I see a cutscene of someone mourning a dead loved-one, I'm always asking myself... well, why not just go to a clerik?
There is this one guy in Waukeen's Rest in BG3 whose wife died in the fire. He is devastated, but he never once thinks to himself, "well I need to save some coin to revive her." It's kind of rude for him not to try, to be honest.
But for some reason, MY cleriks also can't revive dead NPCs. My PC can speak with her corpse, but why can't I revive her?
These things hurt the internal logic of the setting much more than: "OMG women cant's have 18 STR!!!"
