this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
48 points (100.0% liked)

LGBTQ+

6200 readers
5 users here now

All forms of queer news and culture. Nonsectarian and non-exclusionary.

See also this community's sister subs Feminism, Neurodivergence, Disability, and POC


Beehaw currently maintains an LGBTQ+ resource wiki, which is up to date as of July 10, 2023.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

to preface: as much as the title sounds like a critique, it's not. it's just a realization i had while thinking about baldur's gate 3, and it's good they provided the options they did, for me to have this realization in the first place

i'm a transgender man, and i've been on hrt for several years, i haven't had bottom surgery, and i'm intimately familiar with the effects testosterone has on a vulva. i've also been in trans femme circles long enough to know how estrogen affects a penis (if you are unfamiliar, you can read about each at https://genderdysphoria.fyi/en/second-puberty-masc#genital-changes and https://genderdysphoria.fyi/en/second-puberty-fem#genital-changes)

and it's really weird to realize that most people cannot visualize what i have going on in my pants. a cis woman's vulva is fundamentally not accurate (which is basically what's presented as your option). for me, obviously; for some trans masc people, it is accurate

i don't know how trans femme people feel, but i could see the argument for them going either way. i'd like to hear what you think, if you feel represented by feminine body shapes with a penis selected as your genitals

and also, it would be interesting to see bottom surgery options represented. even if that's just the same models but with the "is this from surgery" option ticked or something

finally. my concluding thoughts are that i'd really like to see how big a half-orc's tdick gets (presuming that half-orcs are subject to the same sex hormones humans are and/or that they can substitute their hormones similarly. i mean that's it's own can of worms there)

i know i'm not ending off on any kind of a question but i wanted to share my feelings about this with people and hear how this made others feel, as well

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dee@lemmings.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, random based Pathfinder take! I love seeing it get love over DnD because yes, it's so much more inclusive and interesting. From a lore perspective and a mechanic perspective.

That's not even getting into the issues with WotC as a company.

[–] AlexisLuna@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was interested in pf2 for about a year now, but only got into it after the ogl thing. Now I honestly am baffled how 5e maneged to be so popular when 4e, pf1, and pf2 are all so much better than it as tttrpgs, and that only sticking to fantasy.

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From just a TTRPG perspective, 5e is so much easier to get into than 4e or Pathfinder 1. Character creation is relatively simple and level ups are all outlined in tables. Have not tried 2e, but at least at first blush is still more complex. I have no love for Wizards, but as far as fantasy RPGs, I would call it medium crunch vs the heavy crunch of those you mentioned.

[–] Dee@lemmings.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As a long time GM and player of 5e, PF2 is much more intuitive. It just gives you more character options and people get intimidated, that doesn't mean it's more complicated though. It's still as easy as multiple choice, you just have more choices.

Combat is even easier and was a way smoother experience to teach to my players with PF2's three action economy, instead of explaining the esoteric action, move action, reaction, etc. of 5e. I'll die on the hill that PF2 is not more complicated than 5e simply because it presents more options at level 1 (and every level thereafter making ACTUALLY unique PCs). One of my pet peeves with criticisms against PF2, and it's normally by people who haven't actually played it.

If you try PF2, my advice is to drop your preconceptions. The biggest complaints from players was when they kept comparing to how they did things in 5e. It's not 5e, it does things differently and has a different game design philosophy. It's much more balanced so you're not going to be doing as much damage as a single player and you have to use team work. Don't even get me started on encounter design with 5e's garbage CR rating, I was flabbergasted when I saw how amazingly easy and balanced it was to pick monsters for an encounter in PF2. It's just a simple math equation for an exp pool, and then you "buy" monsters from the pool of exp. Once you use the entire exp pool, it will be balanced to the average party, the math is that tight.

I loved 5e for the years I played and ran it, but you're really missing out if you don't dive deeper into PF2. I'm frustrated I didn't switch sooner quite frankly, it would've made my job as a GM much, much easier and my players would've been making cooler characters way earlier. My partner just made a 4ft tall stuffed clown PC that has the juggler feat and can go limp to pretend to be an inanimate object Toy Story style, no home brewing, that's just options you have.

TL;DR: It's really not that complicated, you and/or anybody reading this should really give it a try. If you don't want to try PF2 that's fine but I implore you to at least move to another system because WotC is not a great company anymore (as much as it pains this nerd heart). Tales of the Valiant by Kobold Press is basically 5e with the serial numbers filed off if you're really in love with the actual mechanics of 5e. Shadowdark is another good, newer system that's really rules light and hearkens back to OSR DnD days.

/rant