Is this really necessary?

5e's pronoun usage is pretty strongly codified. It's always second person ("you"), uses "he or she" when not referring to a singular character, or uses "it" when referring to "a creature."

It's in the roleplaying section, next to the part about Gender.
Personally the only "out of place" part is that they felt the need to include it in the first place.

As says, it's really a bit of a publicity thing and won't really amount to anything other than their book getting shared a bit more on social media, and people who genuinely care about that shit (usually a bit too much) fellating them for being so brave, and will thus spread their new product by word of mouth.

In short, it's not usual so it's a bit surprising, some people feel offended that they feel it needed to be said, and other people feel it's suggesting people play or include a quote of the "TI" section of LGBTI, which they object to.

Only Pathfinder does this.

I've seen it in old WoD books, but that might have made sense since their player base was, at one point, largely female (and there were so many edgecore that gals in that player base).

Honestly singular they is just simpler and it was good enough for Shakespeare and Jane Austen, it's good enough for some dust-covered asshole in Oxford.

in that case, contributing to an ebic thread
also is this like tbt bait or something?
this user has it right, but still i respect their decision to include a short paragraph about the whole thing. no reason for the worlds largest rpg to not have an olive branch to people who previously have been left out of the players handbooks etc.

Because 5E calls back to older lore wherever and whenever possible.
Futa elves have always been canon.

I honestly don't allow futa elves. It gets too fetishy right off the start and makes everyone but them feel uncomfortable. as such its usually an androgynous type of body where you can't exactly say they're male or female until you get under the hood which is left fade to black.

>and makes everyone but them feel uncomfortable
Speak for yourself

>toons
I am far more triggered by this shit than I am by a rulebook switching between "he" and "she" every other chapter.

I've had people boycott a game where the futa play literally shoved his fingers in his ears and screamed "lalalalala!" In the middle of a store. Most normal gamegoers find it creepy and weird.

No, this thread is in fact not necessary.

Prove it.

This.

Keep your sexual fetishes out of the hobby.

Why is this so hard for autists to understand?

No, but it's so easy to ignore that I don't even notice it enough to care one way or another.
Polite sage because you're a troll.

Sage goes in ALL fields. Only sage. Name, options, AND TEXTBOX.
Its not hard.

Shoving sexuality in the players' faces would be deeply annoying even if it was pure missionary for the purpose of procreation in the wrong game.

If you think the mere existence of people like that is inherently a fetish, it just comes off as sheltered.

>they think sage is a downvote

Reddit pls

>toons
This triggers me more than any tranny

what page? i've read the phb cover to cover and never saw that

you must have dug pretty hard, you massive autist

Chapter 4: Personality and Background

Page 121

You're obviously not very perceptive.

If I see a fucking futa I kill it, shit ain't fucken natural I tell you what, best part about being a human fighter with 8 wisdom and 8 intelligence is that I don't have to pretend to be tolerant.

I kill fags too. I kill elves too, I kill orcs too, fuck I kill a lot of shit. I've always been good at killin, most of the time its for coin, but sometimes it for fun. I had a paladin try and bring me into justice. I killed him too.

In the world in which poltards to be triggered by it would not it exist, it would not be necessary.
But they exist and so it is.

Didn't they also exist 40 years ago when D&D was born?

Why is it only necessary today?

>bigots triggered that the world continues to progress
delicious cis tears

>binary notions of-
stopped.
dropped.
rolled into nearest oven.

I want you to follow me in a little exercise Veeky Forums.
>place your fingers on your temples
>rub in small circles
>now repeat the following
Why is this garbage taking up ink? Why am I paying an extra .003 cents for this paragraph? In what way does this merit space that could otherwise be given to a nice table on manacle enchantments or the costs and advantages of various light sources? What is being said here that actually contributes to the setting or rules?

>Now with the thumb and forefinger of your favorite hand, pinch the bridge of your nose
>press firmly where the bridge meets the brow
>close your eyes
>inhale and exhale once with great feeling
>now remove your hand and tilt your inner brow upward to indicate a pleading disposition.
>read while spreading your hands palms-up, shaking them up and down occasionally for effect
This has nothing to do with rules, adventuring, or character building, and all politics aside, is a complete waste of valuable ink on the premise that it is as informative as telling players that they are allowed to choose what hair color and height their characters are. These absurdities have always been an option, and it is a given that the character can choose to play as such, providing that their DM is willing to put up with ERP in the first place.

>now furrow the brow to indicate concern and honesty
Please stop this. You haven't gone too far yet; you can still stop this. You make games, and people play them. You have no obligation to achieve some political endgame with your power over legions of obese Maori checkerboard forum enthusiasts.

>being this mad that it's not the 19th century anymore
lmao

>progress
you mean by doing things that people did like 3000 years ago and was decided to be retarded? sure sounds like progress

>having the reading comprehension of a 19th century field hand
please consider the word "why", and how it applies to this situation.

The amount of time it took you to write that post costs much more than the .003 cents of that paragraph.
Good job.

I not offended by it, but I might as well be told that I can decide how big my character's penis is or whether my character is a vegetarian.

The paragraph's presence says more than its absence would under the current cultural norms.

Honestly, I'm vaguely insulted at being told what I already know regarding shit that's been done since the first character was rolled.

But then I realized it wasn't me that paragraph was aimed at, but the actual bigots who go around projecting their own prejudices and insecurities on to everyone and everything that isn't them, and tell those people "if you don't say this you're a racist/transphobe/whatever we feel like calling you" for some weird form of affirmation.

So I don't really care, aside from a small sense of disappointment that Wizards didn't turn around and say something to the effect of "We've been doing these things for decades, where the fuck were you?"

>the amount of time you took to write that post costs much more than the .003 cents of that paragraph

Totally worth it. I'd pay to have that paragraph removed on sheer principle so my grandchildren won't have to deal with it in a more advanced form. Now if anyone can actually answer the question

>What is being said here that actually contributes to the setting or rules?

>being civil and accepting is retarded
bigots never change

This.

I don't think you're being very civil and accepting by calling people "bigots" who don't agree with you, tough cookies isn't it

>IN
>WHAT
>WAY
>DOES
>THIS
>CONTRIBUTE
>TO
>THE
>GAME

see
This has always been an option, there is as much need to mention it in-game as what kind of tattoo your character has on their ass.

>47569925
Why is suddenly cool to be transexual? I've played a female dwarf who felt she was a male once and everyone thought it was interesting. Why are we obsessing over this crap? I want sjws and neo nazis to all go fucking die.

You guys think that paragraph doesn't need to exist.

But if even one person read it and felt that it helped them to choose a character they might have shied away from otherwise, it served it's purpose.

For some people, having the book tell you that something is okay actually makes a difference.

Where I'm from, we don't need that paragraph, nobody would bat an eye if you played a queer elf or whatever.

But not everyone is so lucky, there are people playing the same game as you in an environment who still isn't entirely convinced that it's not some kind of satanism-light.

I mean, I think the paragraph is kinda silly and maybe a bit pandering, but then I read this fucking thread and I think to myself, nope, this totally deserves space in the book.

Maybe the next edition will have a paragraph about showering before going to the FLG, or about not touching other people's books if you're eating snacks. In an ideal world, nobody should ever have to bring that stuff up.

But you only need to go down to the store to realize that we're not living in an ideal world, and until then, it doesn't hurt to spell things out.

>Where I'm from, we don't need that paragraph, nobody would bat an eye if you played a queer elf or whatever.
Sweden?

Everybody wants to feel like a good person, so we just made a set of easy to fulfill criteria for being a good person and spammed it all over everywhere thanks to the internet. Being accepting of everything everywhere is on the list, and trannies are a hot topic right now, so it's only natural that it would be so popular.

>>What is being said here that actually contributes to the setting or rules?
It adds a positive confirmation for a certain demographic that they can play characters that are in similar situation to them in real life, and has at least small potential of shutting down people trying to declare that they shouldn't play such character.

>nobody would bat an eye if you played a queer elf
Most people just shorten it to "elf"

Germany. But go ahead, it's close enough, so make your jokes anyway.

>D&D 6.0 core rulebook
>now with over 40 pages of player etiquette!
boy, that's a swell idea!

>if even one person read it and it helped them to choose a character they might have shied away from otherwise, it served it's purpose

WHAT PURPOSE?!

This is empty rhetoric. It contributes nothing to the game. By this logic we should have an entire book giving you nothing but vague suggestions on what minute traits your character could have. No classes. No bonuses. Just "they could like Ice cream or they could have red hair or they could be missing a tooth or they could not like the smell of cabbages or-"

Again, I ask.
>What purpose does this serve in a rulebook?

> and has at least small potential of shutting down people trying to declare that they shouldn't play such character.

except the book say the GM word is final

Why not just say "Create your character, deciding their class, race, sex, appearance, personality and goals. You can even make up a backstory, if you'd like."

That covers all the bases.

I don't even understand why this needs to be here. Don't people understand this already? Aren't the people with these mores already holding them, and the ones that aren't, aren't?

This is like explaining why you're using non-gendered pronouns in your book.

>jokes
I bet all your raped woman are enjoying those "jokes" too. But sure liberty is working out real nice for you guys.

I am not a feminist. I don't like needless drama. I understand that some people need more labels to understand themselves, but I think less labels is actually a better way toward gender equality and overall tolerance and acceptation.

That being said, I find this particular passage interesting for non-shitstorm reasons. See, what they talk about is, awkwardly, a modern-day issue. Which I don't really care about when playing D&D. If I stopped here, it would make sense to consider this passage bait or bullshit depending on where you stand on the matter.

Except it doesn't have to be about real life matter. Fantasy has interesting and crazy stuff. Specifically telling the DM or PCs that crazy plots such as "I'm a gal trapped in a guy's body" which, in itself, is not inherently a shit idea (what some people would do with it, yes. Not the concept itself), and it's cool that they thought about it. I like about 5e that they really tried to get a maximum of ideas about what you can do with fantasy in there despite the system flaws.

Wow. Such rage.

>rolls white power quads
>calls us bigots

For shame.

Well, it's role playing, you're supposed to create a world with fantasy. I won't prevent you from creating the disembodied ghost of a cabinet if it's well made, I won't prevent you from playing "non-binary" characters if it satisfy the same requirements. As usual it depends on the setting, party and tone of the game.

Decent advice for first time players, I guess? IMO, it's completely unneccessary, but it doesn't hurt anybody.

Everything is a fetish to someone. Hermaphrodism isn't inherently fetishy. You could use it as symbolism (like Zeus separating the males and females to prevent the humans from becoming too powerful), or as a valid alternate sexuality (like in some plants and most gastropoda).
The existence of tileanon won't prevent me from using flooring in my games.

...

>it positively reinforces a demographic

Pandering. We call that pandering.

None of what was just said has any place in a rulebook. If you still have some reserve arguments that rely on more than feelings I'm still open to hearing them.

Are you actually retarded?
Gay or trans themes is a controversial topic in the country where the majority of the player base is. Having that paragraph there is a message that might encourage some people to play a character the might have been afraid to play, and to encourage other players to put a fucking sock in it.

Do you feel better now user? Is it like when you've had too much to drink and you just can't keep it down any more?

ah, my bad. poor choice of filenames. Now where did I put that folder...

>Pandering. We call that pandering.
Literally everything is pandering. Barbarian class is pandering to conan fans. Etc.

I think your guys had too much to drink to be honest
bbc.com/news/world-europe-35231046
But just live in your denial mr progressive and then explain to the raped woman how nice and progressive you are.

>Having that paragraph there is a message that might encourage some people to play a character who asserts modern political agendas into the game, and to encourage other players to not pay for a rulebook that encourages you to be vocal about shit no one wants to hear.
ftfy

>it is the obligation of a game to encourage people to take sides in a political debate

t. Muhammad
(I'm just presuming this is all the German)

You guys. You guys are the reason the paragraph is there.

It flushes out the retards before the game even begins.

>BUT THE SLIPPERY SLOPE! IF YOU LET ONE PARAGRAPH SOON THERE WILL BE NOTHING BUT SPLATBOOKS OF HOW TO ROLEPLAY TENTADICK MONSTERS

And that's why that paragraph needs to be taken out, and you need to be shot.

You don't achieve popular acceptance by making it such a big deal. You gain acceptance by making it such an insignificant detail that nobody cares anymore.

>more denial
Classic.
independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/iraqi-refugee-raped-10-year-old-boy-at-austrian-swimming-pool-a6857721.html
Bet you think that kid is retard too for not enjoying the progressiveness that everyone is sharing in your country.

Sure, but it's also a class with stats and in-game applications that affect how the game is effectively ruled. It has weight in a rule book because if a Barbarian said "I use rage" the Dm can pop open the book, say "You've already blown through all your uses today. You're outta luck."

It has a place in a rule book because it pertains to the RULES.

Now if they want to make a Tranny class or make it some kind of trait that actually effects how that character is permitted to function within a rule set then by all means, let them. They're a private company and I voluntarily pay for their products so I can simply disagree with them on a financial level and leave it at that. Nice and civil.

But there's no point in putting this shit in a core rulebook when it's as applicable as how hairy your dwarf's ass is in terms of in-game function.

And this is an insignificant detail of fluff in a book full of rules. Why are you caring about it?

We don't have widely available books about general roleplaying advice (i.e. not tied to a particular game), so most Player Manual have to include some examples like that for begginers.

The same book provides us with "To add a touch of distinctiveness, you might want to give your character an unusual or memorable physical characteristic, such as a scar, a limp, or a tattoo." Which is both really obvious and useless (adding a scar to your character won't make it good and memorable).

If you need to make the others players put a sock on it, it might be best to change group before playing with such concepts, or to ditch the idea entirely. Because RL ideologies clashing in a rpg is usually a bad thing unless the game is entirely focused on that kind of conflict.

How would you feel if there was a paragraph that said "You should include major villains in your campaign, like an evil chancellor who would put to vote a law that would allow unborn children to be slain in cold blood!" in the DMG? Politics have no place in rulebooks, and any attempt to insert them (no matter what side of the political spectrum they fall on) is contemptible.

I'd also care if the book explicitly told me that it's okay for my character to have a micropenis or irritable bowel syndrome.

Both of those are likewise traits that players might feel some unjustified shame over, but that doesn't make it the rulebook's place to tell them it's all okay.

Doesn't matter, pandering=pandering.

It stops bigots from having their views affect the players by disguising it as rules lawyering.

If a DM said "It quite clearly says Male and Female, so no Trans characters" a player can point to this passage and say "There is a literal Trans GOD"

I wouldn't care if that was in either.

No, you are the reason it's there.

It's appeasement to the tumblrtards who throw a fit at every videogame that has a white person potentially injuring a non-white person, who need at least one gay and one trans and one dolphinkin in every television show cast (but never as the villain), and who would literally decry D&D as homophobic, racist, and pro-Nazi if it didn't include that retarded paragraph.

You are the current equivalent of those angry mothers who made D&D have to rename Demons and Devils to Tanari and Baatezu.

>shaming the mentally retarded
my my, aren't we progressive.

You know what, I think you're right. We should promote tolerance in our rulebooks.

They should also include a section promoting the roleplay of the mentally retarded, the struggling pedarast, and the AIDS warrior.

and if you don't like my character choice, you can stuff it

>bigots

I don't think you understand what that word means. You're not using it correctly when you use it to describe sane people who don't allow crazies to spew their insane political propaganda all so they can feel pretty.

You mean typeface. Font is a misnomer.
Source: ten years Graphic design.

hook.jpg

>le slippery slope

"Ha! What a fallacy! You actually think that succumbing to my political agenda now will lead to a normalization of said agenda and a furthering of it in the future?! What an ass!"

"Oh, okay. We'll just assume that if he takes Poland he's gonna go for France too. Way to slippery slope, Churchill."

"Oh sure, if we give women the right to vote they're going to push for blacks next. Good one. Nice slippery slope Earl."

"Look, just because Virginia is getting its panties in a knot doesn't mean the entire south is gonna secede you moron. That there is a slippery slope."

also
>implying there aren't already splatbooks on how to rp tentadick monsters

Can you even read?

So you wouldn't be even a little put-off if the book contained "You can choose how long your character's penis is. You can also your vaginal capacity. It's your decision."

Not same user, but honestly the offensive part of that is that these books are supposed to be accessible to children, so I'd see it as inappropriate

You're not going to win this argument, because it is based on discomfort and shame; things your opponent was more than likely raised without. There is no winning an argument with the progressive on this basis. They have normalized any kind of deviance you can dream up and will accept it without second thought.

rev up those engines, we're going full pro-pedo by 2020

>inb4 "informing children of transpeople is inappropriate"

Offensiveness is subjective. Appropriateness is subjective.

There are societal norms, but most people will assume those norms are more or less in line with their own.

>accessible to children
For what purpose?

I mean, we all played at a young age I'm assuming but I must say actually letting me read the books was a terrible mistake on my parent's part.

>Aphrodite_Deities and Demigods_AD&D.jpg

>unjustified shame

Do you go around telling people that irritable bowel syndrome is great to have, do you eat foods to make your irritable bowel syndrome worse, do you push for unfair legislation that gives people with irritable bowel syndrome tax breaks and special privileges while using backwards logic built around false equivalence, and do you resist every single attempt to correct your IBS?

If you did, it wouldn't be unjustified shame.

Have you tried discussing it like two mature human being and reaching a consensus, instead of resorting to rule quoting and canon to solve issues purely related to the setting, that have no mechanical effect?

I've never experienced it but that doesn't mean there aren't assholes that would try this. Bigoted people will always try to disguise their bigotry as legitimacy, so I've got to assume that's the thinking behind this paragraph.

>It stops bigots from having their views affect the players
if I may remove the labels here.

>It stops people from having their views affect the players

>It stops people from having their opinions affect players

>It stops people's opinions from affecting people

>It stops people's opinions

>It stops opinions.

>It stops opinions.

>It stops opinions.

>IT STOPS OPINIONS.

This is literally no better than the people you so hate. It's literally nothing more than a justification of rhetoric.

I'm not sure what comparison you're making.

As an aside, I believe shame is only justified for voluntary actions: no shame for having IBS, yes shame for refusing to deal with it then complaining about the results.