If you want to do some reading, James Mendez Hodes has written many many blogposts about race in RPGs
I think he sometimes misses the mark but this is 100000% better than all the chuds who insist that race in rpgs is entirely unrelated to the concepts of race IRL
fwiw I think this is loaded by the weird way dnd traditionally handles stats. I don’t think anyone is nearly as bothered by the idea that the average member of subspecies x (and in dnd that’s really what the races are, subspecies) is stronger or more nimble than the average member of subspecies y as they are by the idea that the average member of subspecies x is stupider or uglier than the average member of subspecies y, because these attributes are more culturally linked and less amenable to objective measurement. But dnd stats don’t recognize that difference, it analogizes “dexterity” and “wisdom” as completely equivalent mathematical measures.
The way D&D stats are problematic is a whole other kettle of fish, and it kind of reinforced the underlying racism of D&D racial construction.
Yeah that’s what I said
I am 100% fine with orcs as a race having -2 charisma because culturally they don’t give a fuck, but having that stat on player creation reinforces bad ideas. The weirdness is magnified by the interesting/fun/maybe-even-morally-correct thing to do with orc PCs is give them high charisma.
Mildly related, I find it really interesting that in PF2 Goblins have +1CHA on character creation. They’re supposed to be ugly lovable fun creatures. But (probably because how I play my character) the way my GM runs the rules he just assumes I have low CHA. I was really hoping to play an ugly goblin that was so charming/sneaky that he’d ugly james bond his way out of tight situation, but I feel like the natural assumption by the GM is that I’m like some low rent thief.
Charisma is extra weird because it’s taken on some sense of “force of personality,” independent of interpersonal charm or attractiveness, that explains sorcerers’ magic and lets undead have positive modifiers. I guess you can have orcs be naturally introverted and driven more by faith or reason than by persuasion, which could be interesting. Of course “naturally” can be swapped out for “culturally” here, which is the original “race” problem again.
Ultimately the solution is probably just ditching the human-but model. Eberron got as close as D&D ever has: humans, dragons, robots, psychic parasites, no elves.
Pathfinder goblins upset me. They’re essentially evil, but cute, but kill your dog for fun, but pathetic, but murder them by the dozens for XP without guilt.
I had no idea they’re supposed to kill dogs for fun, but yeah that sounds about right. Goblins are essentially poor trashy redneck/ghetto people, and like… yeah. PCs playing into those patterns is gross, but you can’t avoid that unless you design the game mechanics around that.
Playing Dark Souls. Right now I am in the Duke Archives. I am a pyromancer with very high dexterity (and dex based weapons, Great Scythe and Uchigatana mainly). I also use arrows a lot.
I have very low intelligence and, until now, I have never bought a spell. Should I continue ignoring magic completely, and focusing on my best skills? Or will I need the best spells (such as Big Hat Logan’s offeerings)?
You can safely continue ignoring magic.
Pyromancy doesn’t scale with any stat in this one, so it can still be viable if you just upgrade the flame. Spells and miracles, not so much. But they’re never required for anything
Unless your stat levels are real high (I think most of them will have significant diminishing returns after 40?) you can just keep focusing on your strengths (Resistance isn’t worth it though).
Even when focusing on melee I do still like to put a few points in Int just to get access to some of the utility spells that don’t do damage and are mostly for fun.
Thank you guys.
i should resist talking souls mechanical crunch for once in my damn life but fuckit: if you ever decide to play with sorcery, there’s a magic catalyst you can get called the Oolacile ivory catalyst that you only need like 13 int for, but is really powerful for low-level magic because it’s fixed at a really high spell strength. you don’t need anything better until you get to like 30 int. it’s perfect for a magic-lite hybrid character
Dexterity pyromancer with the great scythe is like the most powerful character you can play in the game tho so you are definitely good lol
Are the three Zelda-y overhead view Dragon Ball GBA games any good?
I’m not a major DBZ guy but I did own a t-shirt in 97 and chatted about the unfolding Frieza battle before math class in high school. I just really like Crystalis and Willow and Ys.
I really hate what I’ve tried of them but everyone seems to insist the second one is good at least so maybe I’m just not a big enough fan.
The GBA one based on OG Dragon Ball is pretty sweet though.
no they’re fucking awful
considering the abundance of dragon ball games, they’re the worst i’ve played
I actually have a very similar question to Tony’s but for Dark Souls 3: I finally started this game for the first time, and I’m playing as a pyromancer. I typically enjoy dex-based characters but I also want my fire spells to stay powerful over the course of the game. Any advice on stats and items? I’m currently rolling around with the Uchigatana, but that was my main in Dark Souls 2, so I want to shake it up once I find something else viable.
40 is always the breakpoint in these games. Youll always be safe if your main stat(/s) are at 40
if I wanted to try one of the Ogre Battle games just to see if I like it, which one would it be?
tactics ogre: let us cling together is the consensus pick afaict
Ogre Battle: March of the Black Queen (an entirely different game from the tactics RPG) is still a unique, long-distance strategy game with killer style.