Quote from: Lunamancer on August 17, 2021, 12:08:35 AM

Right. And that's a far more generous view of it than I hold.

Not really all that generous.  I'm saying that the designers pay lip service to tradition, but that is all it is--a style over substance thing.  I'd rather that when making a change, that they either really work hard to maintain the tradition in fact, or they own the change and then name whatever their real change is in such a way that it is obvious that it is a change.

Granted, I agree that it is not malicious.  It is, however, lazy, indulgent, and just a bit of a con game thrown in to aid sales more than play at the table.  Which are generally not attributes that I respect in design.  That most of the designers believe their own bullshit and thus aren't malicious is really a low bar for a charitable view of their behavior.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 16, 2021, 09:40:37 PM
The use of "hit dice" in 4E is an even worse example.  However, in this 4E is merely being more blatant about a change that had been happening for some time.

Just as a point of pedantic clarification; 4E never used the term Hit Dice for anything.

You're either thinking of how 5e used Hit Dice to have a bastardized version of 4E's healing surge mechanics (bastardized because it actually did the opposite of what surges did in 4E; adding an extra bit of healing where surges limited total healing) or how 4E used Saving Throws more as a duration mechanic (i.e. save ends effects) than outright resistance (which was handled by ststic defense scores).

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 11:03:38 AM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 16, 2021, 09:40:37 PM
The use of "hit dice" in 4E is an even worse example.  However, in this 4E is merely being more blatant about a change that had been happening for some time.

Just as a point of pedantic clarification; 4E never used the term Hit Dice for anything.

You're either thinking of how 5e used Hit Dice to have a bastardized version of 4E's healing surge mechanics (bastardized because it actually did the opposite of what surges did in 4E; adding an extra bit of healing where surges limited total healing) or how 4E used Saving Throws more as a duration mechanic (i.e. save ends effects) than outright resistance (which was handled by ststic defense scores).

Doh! You are correct.  That's what happens when the 4E books are boxed up, and I try to go off of memory. 

You'd think that 3E, 4E, and 5E would be distinct enough that they would stick in my mind better than that, but for some reason much of the details of WotC D&D are starting to blur into a memory sludge.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 17, 2021, 11:14:33 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 11:03:38 AM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 16, 2021, 09:40:37 PM
The use of "hit dice" in 4E is an even worse example.  However, in this 4E is merely being more blatant about a change that had been happening for some time.

Just as a point of pedantic clarification; 4E never used the term Hit Dice for anything.

You're either thinking of how 5e used Hit Dice to have a bastardized version of 4E's healing surge mechanics (bastardized because it actually did the opposite of what surges did in 4E; adding an extra bit of healing where surges limited total healing) or how 4E used Saving Throws more as a duration mechanic (i.e. save ends effects) than outright resistance (which was handled by ststic defense scores).

Doh! You are correct.  That's what happens when the 4E books are boxed up, and I try to go off of memory. 

You'd think that 3E, 4E, and 5E would be distinct enough that they would stick in my mind better than that, but for some reason much of the details of WotC D&D are starting to blur into a memory sludge.

You think that's bad; I've been running and playing in my own system (that started as a 4E spiritual successor and then morphed a LOT) for so long that I have to crosscheck that I'm not using terms and rules from own system when trying to describe things from any of the WotC-era materials.

Also, to be fair, a LOT of the core mechanics in 3-5e actually ARE quite similar. They all use the same ability score modifiers and resolve most tasks using a d20+ability mod+mod that represents training vs. DC to determine outcomes. All of them use ascending AC that is Base 10 + Ability Mod + Armor as the DC for hit checks. All of them use a 5' square for measurement with unencumbered humans moving six 5' squares. All of them had a standard action + movement + swift/minor/bonus action economies. They all had essentially Fort/Reflex/Will saves based on Con, Dex and Wisdom (even if 4E made them static defenses and let other stats apply and 5e just called them Con/Dex/Wis saves and had a few saves using the other attributes)

There is A LOT of overlap in the core mechanics of the WotC editions despite all the changes it also made between the editions.

Quote from: Gameogre on August 17, 2021, 07:11:39 AM
The funny thing is I have seen this exact conversation before from some of my players who happen to be female, they were fine with it.
The guys however had a fit when they got limited by the penalties for being male.

Sounds like you're saying that those men can't stand having limitations imposed by what they are. Is this what some call a privilege thing?

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 17, 2021, 09:37:22 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 09:20:56 AM

Quote from: Pat on August 17, 2021, 05:43:43 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 16, 2021, 09:33:13 PM
... and there weren't even rules for limb loss in that edition so the warlord would never actually BE shouting a hand back on... just restoring your morale and fighting spirit).

What edition of D&D have you been playing where losing hp leads to limb loss?

Talk to Mike Mearls. He's the one who made the claim in one of the D&DNext podcasts/interviews that warlords restoring hit points in 4E was "shouting people's hands back on" which is why warlords were badwrongfun and had to be excluded from 5e.

No goofier than the Exalted medicine charm combos which let you literally slap the injuries right off a person's body

If Warlords were divinely powered like Exalts, it probably wouldn't have clashed so hard with most people's perceptions. What they didn't like is a supposedly non-magical/divine individual shouting people's wounds away.

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 11:45:01 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 17, 2021, 09:37:22 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 09:20:56 AM

Quote from: Pat on August 17, 2021, 05:43:43 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 16, 2021, 09:33:13 PM
... and there weren't even rules for limb loss in that edition so the warlord would never actually BE shouting a hand back on... just restoring your morale and fighting spirit).

What edition of D&D have you been playing where losing hp leads to limb loss?

Talk to Mike Mearls. He's the one who made the claim in one of the D&DNext podcasts/interviews that warlords restoring hit points in 4E was "shouting people's hands back on" which is why warlords were badwrongfun and had to be excluded from 5e.

No goofier than the Exalted medicine charm combos which let you literally slap the injuries right off a person's body

If Warlords were divinely powered like Exalts, it probably wouldn't have clashed so hard with most people's perceptions. What they didn't like is a supposedly non-magical/divine individual shouting people's sounds away.

It makes sense if you can shout loud enough then you should be able to drown out other peoples sounds.

Quote from: Shasarak on August 17, 2021, 03:29:15 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 11:45:01 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 17, 2021, 09:37:22 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 09:20:56 AM

Quote from: Pat on August 17, 2021, 05:43:43 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 16, 2021, 09:33:13 PM
... and there weren't even rules for limb loss in that edition so the warlord would never actually BE shouting a hand back on... just restoring your morale and fighting spirit).

What edition of D&D have you been playing where losing hp leads to limb loss?

Talk to Mike Mearls. He's the one who made the claim in one of the D&DNext podcasts/interviews that warlords restoring hit points in 4E was "shouting people's hands back on" which is why warlords were badwrongfun and had to be excluded from 5e.

No goofier than the Exalted medicine charm combos which let you literally slap the injuries right off a person's body

If Warlords were divinely powered like Exalts, it probably wouldn't have clashed so hard with most people's perceptions. What they didn't like is a supposedly non-magical/divine individual shouting people's sounds away.

It makes sense if you can shout loud enough then you should be able to drown out other peoples sounds.

Thats actually pretty funny. Damn autocorrect. Obviously should have been "wounds" not "sounds" In my post.

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 03:31:00 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on August 17, 2021, 03:29:15 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 11:45:01 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 17, 2021, 09:37:22 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 17, 2021, 09:20:56 AM

Quote from: Pat on August 17, 2021, 05:43:43 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 16, 2021, 09:33:13 PM
... and there weren't even rules for limb loss in that edition so the warlord would never actually BE shouting a hand back on... just restoring your morale and fighting spirit).

What edition of D&D have you been playing where losing hp leads to limb loss?

Talk to Mike Mearls. He's the one who made the claim in one of the D&DNext podcasts/interviews that warlords restoring hit points in 4E was "shouting people's hands back on" which is why warlords were badwrongfun and had to be excluded from 5e.

No goofier than the Exalted medicine charm combos which let you literally slap the injuries right off a person's body

If Warlords were divinely powered like Exalts, it probably wouldn't have clashed so hard with most people's perceptions. What they didn't like is a supposedly non-magical/divine individual shouting people's sounds away.

It makes sense if you can shout loud enough then you should be able to drown out other peoples sounds.

Thats actually pretty funny. Damn autocorrect. Obviously should have been "wounds" not "sounds" In my post.

Who is talking about wounds though? In for E University take the slightest bit of damage until you're at least down half your hit points. That's what the bloodied condition means in 4E; the other side has drawn first blood.

4E also clarifies that until you've lost your last hit point you've probably only picked up a few minor cuts, scuffs and bruises. This is further reinforced by minions, who have 1 hp regardless of level.

So, in that paradigm, what is so crazy about some really charismatic warrior encouraging someone who's only a bit bruised and scraped up to get up and keep fighting and restoring their morale? The warlord's encouragement doesn't even do a thing if the target doesn't spend one of their own limited healing surges in the process; if they're out then they're utterly spent and all the encouragement in the world won't get them back up again (and only divine magic could do surgeless healing).

Honestly, the only problem I see in that scenario is tying the number of times it can be done in a battle to the warlord and not to the ones being urged to get up and keep fighting despite the bumps and scrapes (which is why I flipped it in my own system... warlord style restoration of Edge is an at-will ability, but the target can only do it a few times in a fight and each one costs them progressively more of their own resources to do (for a starting PC they'll run out of resources after rallying just twice).

The only thing that made it unrealistic in 4E is that association of hit points with meat. Which, again, was strong enough that calling them something other than hit points was the only way to get people to make the connection I wanted in my system of those "points until dropped" being entirely non-physical fatigue/morale/luck without having to fight their natural assumptions.

Words mean things and "hit points" has come to mean almost exclusively "meat points" in common vernacular.

Quote from: mightybrain on August 08, 2021, 06:27:26 PM
In the rules, Dex for the most part, is the archery stat. We have just had the Olympics so we have up to date data on the differences between the best male and female human archers. The difference is that there is no measurable difference. Although the men's and women's events are separated, if you take the final scores of Mete Gazoz and San An, and put them head to head, it would have been a draw.

  There is a measurable difference.  I think the average draw weight of the bow for men is around 48 pounds, and for women 33 pounds.   That is a 50 percent difference, and having a casual interest in archery, that is a big fucking difference.   I have a 50 pound recurve bow, and none of the women I know can even attempt at shooting it (both my wife and sister in law are strong, fit women, and no dice).  50 pounds is the bottom tier for a how used for war/killing man sized targets.   I also have an 85 pound draw longbow...do I need to go into how hard that is to draw and shoot?

   I have zero doubts a woman can be as accurate in archery (at least olympic archery where every bow is LOADED with gizmos, I have no idea what happens in natural shooting, for all I know Women might be better), but the caveat is that it will be with a significantly lower powered bow.  If olympic caliber athletes are using bows 50 percent weaker than the bows the men use, I think that says a lot as to where reality lines up.

  All that said, again I would not put statistical limitations on women or men for an rpg.

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 11:43:02 AM

Quote from: Gameogre on August 17, 2021, 07:11:39 AM
The funny thing is I have seen this exact conversation before from some of my players who happen to be female, they were fine with it.
The guys however had a fit when they got limited by the penalties for being male.

Sounds like you're saying that those men can't stand having limitations imposed by what they are. Is this what some call a privilege thing?

Personally I see it as a people being Silly, like my buddy and I arguing over what rpg game to take with us to a deserted island forever. Obviously it's Rules Cyclopedia!

If there a difference stat wise between males and females? Sure, that's pretty obvious. Does it need to be something codified into a rpg? No more than the differences between left and right handed people, people who are 6'1 verse 6'2. People with different skin colors, hair colors and maybe even eye colors.

Also it's important to note that Player Characters are just not average even for fantasy world characters. They are often far outside of normal limitations.

Like ok I can imagine that Giant Creatures can fly through the sky and breath flame and cast spells but a Girl as strong as a dude? Can't do it.

but I mean to debate about with friends? Sure it's fine....I mean it isn't like they are defending red headed left handed people or anything.

Quote from: oggsmash on August 19, 2021, 09:11:31 AM

Quote from: mightybrain on August 08, 2021, 06:27:26 PM
In the rules, Dex for the most part, is the archery stat. We have just had the Olympics so we have up to date data on the differences between the best male and female human archers. The difference is that there is no measurable difference. Although the men's and women's events are separated, if you take the final scores of Mete Gazoz and San An, and put them head to head, it would have been a draw.

  There is a measurable difference.  I think the average draw weight of the bow for men is around 48 pounds, and for women 33 pounds.   That is a 50 percent difference, and having a casual interest in archery, that is a big fucking difference.   I have a 50 pound recurve bow, and none of the women I know can even attempt at shooting it (both my wife and sister in law are strong, fit women, and no dice).  50 pounds is the bottom tier for a how used for war/killing man sized targets.   I also have an 85 pound draw longbow...do I need to go into how hard that is to draw and shoot?

   I have zero doubts a woman can be as accurate in archery (at least olympic archery where every bow is LOADED with gizmos, I have no idea what happens in natural shooting, for all I know Women might be better), but the caveat is that it will be with a significantly lower powered bow.  If olympic caliber athletes are using bows 50 percent weaker than the bows the men use, I think that says a lot as to where reality lines up.

  All that said, again I would not put statistical limitations on women or men for an rpg.

The YouTube channel Shadiversity had an episode as part of its "Fantasy Rearmed" series that looks at what weapons would realistically be most effective for various races/peoples. On what weapons would be best for women to use... noting that common fantasy tropes were for them to be archers or do some sort of two-weapon fighting style using short swords or daggers).

His conclusions though were that the ideal melee weapon for a female warrior would be the longsword (the real two-handed version not the D&D one) since it has excellent reach (a 3-3.5' in the blade alone vs. the maybe 2' blade of a short sword or maybe a foot if you're lucky with a dagger), allows the full strength from both arms to be employed and isn't significantly heavier than one of the two much shorter blades they'd be using with the two-weapon style (a real longsword is just 2-3 lb. while a short sword like a gladius is 1.5-2 lb. or 3-4 lb. for a pair).

His conclusion for the ideal ranged weapon noted precisely the same issues of strength you did and concluded that the best weapon for women at range would be the crossbow as the mechanical assistance makes raw strength less important. It would take them longer to load but, once loaded, the crossbow does the work of holding it drawn and the energy released would be the same as if a man fired it.

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 19, 2021, 11:14:23 AM
His conclusions though were that the ideal melee weapon for a female warrior would be the longsword (the real two-handed version not the D&D one) since it has excellent reach (a 3-3.5' in the blade alone vs. the maybe 2' blade of a short sword or maybe a foot if you're lucky with a dagger), allows the full strength from both arms to be employed and isn't significantly heavier than one of the two much shorter blades they'd be using with the two-weapon style (a real longsword is just 2-3 lb. while a short sword like a gladius is 1.5-2 lb. or 3-4 lb. for a pair).

A naginata or glaive would be even better, for the same reasons - probably why the naginata was the standard female home defence weapon of the Japanese samurai (also great for poking guys coming through doorways).

It's against all fantasy tropes that a 2hw (longsword, polearm) needs less strength than 2wf or 1h+shield; reality is funny like that.

Quote from: S'mon on August 19, 2021, 12:37:08 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 19, 2021, 11:14:23 AM
His conclusions though were that the ideal melee weapon for a female warrior would be the longsword (the real two-handed version not the D&D one) since it has excellent reach (a 3-3.5' in the blade alone vs. the maybe 2' blade of a short sword or maybe a foot if you're lucky with a dagger), allows the full strength from both arms to be employed and isn't significantly heavier than one of the two much shorter blades they'd be using with the two-weapon style (a real longsword is just 2-3 lb. while a short sword like a gladius is 1.5-2 lb. or 3-4 lb. for a pair).

A naginata or glaive would be even better, for the same reasons - probably why the naginata was the standard female home defence weapon of the Japanese samurai (also great for poking guys coming through doorways).

It's against all fantasy tropes that a 2hw (longsword, polearm) needs less strength than 2wf or 1h+shield; reality is funny like that.

To be fair, he did specify "Adventurer" in his assessment and the huge advantage of swords for adventurers in general is they're massively easier to carry without getting in the way than a polearm and are often "good enough" for the sort of fights adventurers get into.

Quote from: Chris24601 on August 19, 2021, 11:14:23 AM

Quote from: oggsmash on August 19, 2021, 09:11:31 AM

Quote from: mightybrain on August 08, 2021, 06:27:26 PM
In the rules, Dex for the most part, is the archery stat. We have just had the Olympics so we have up to date data on the differences between the best male and female human archers. The difference is that there is no measurable difference. Although the men's and women's events are separated, if you take the final scores of Mete Gazoz and San An, and put them head to head, it would have been a draw.

  There is a measurable difference.  I think the average draw weight of the bow for men is around 48 pounds, and for women 33 pounds.   That is a 50 percent difference, and having a casual interest in archery, that is a big fucking difference.   I have a 50 pound recurve bow, and none of the women I know can even attempt at shooting it (both my wife and sister in law are strong, fit women, and no dice).  50 pounds is the bottom tier for a how used for war/killing man sized targets.   I also have an 85 pound draw longbow...do I need to go into how hard that is to draw and shoot?

   I have zero doubts a woman can be as accurate in archery (at least olympic archery where every bow is LOADED with gizmos, I have no idea what happens in natural shooting, for all I know Women might be better), but the caveat is that it will be with a significantly lower powered bow.  If olympic caliber athletes are using bows 50 percent weaker than the bows the men use, I think that says a lot as to where reality lines up.

  All that said, again I would not put statistical limitations on women or men for an rpg.

The YouTube channel Shadiversity had an episode as part of its "Fantasy Rearmed" series that looks at what weapons would realistically be most effective for various races/peoples. On what weapons would be best for women to use... noting that common fantasy tropes were for them to be archers or do some sort of two-weapon fighting style using short swords or daggers).

His conclusions though were that the ideal melee weapon for a female warrior would be the longsword (the real two-handed version not the D&D one) since it has excellent reach (a 3-3.5' in the blade alone vs. the maybe 2' blade of a short sword or maybe a foot if you're lucky with a dagger), allows the full strength from both arms to be employed and isn't significantly heavier than one of the two much shorter blades they'd be using with the two-weapon style (a real longsword is just 2-3 lb. while a short sword like a gladius is 1.5-2 lb. or 3-4 lb. for a pair).

His conclusion for the ideal ranged weapon noted precisely the same issues of strength you did and concluded that the best weapon for women at range would be the crossbow as the mechanical assistance makes raw strength less important. It would take them longer to load but, once loaded, the crossbow does the work of holding it drawn and the energy released would be the same as if a man fired it.

  Yeah that whole smaller/less strong person is the archer trope was cooked up by people who have done about zero archery in their entire life.