Last month, I made a Twitter thread about racial ability score bonuses. I don’t like the way that races in D&D get numerical bonuses to their ability scores. I think it’s unnecessarily limiting. There are over 1,000 unique race/class combinations in fifth edition D&D, but only a small handful of them are worth playing from a character optimization standpoint. Not everyone feels the need to play optimal characters, and would instead rather play characters for their roleplay potential than their mechanical viability, but I don’t see why we can’t have both.
Halfling rogues are a classic class combination, for example, because they’re an optimal combo for all three pillars of D&D. Ever since The Hobbit, the idea of halflings being small and sneaky has been a staple of fantasy, giving us prime examples of how one might explore, fight, or interact with people as a halfling rogue. And D&D lets you do all that because of supremely synergistic racial ability score increases, racial traits, and the somewhat more ephemeral idea of being fun to roleplay. On the other hand, class combinations like a half-orc wizard have always been a harder sell. In previous additions, a half-orc’s penalty to Intelligence made being a wizard incredibly hard—and even in fifth edition D&D, the fact that the half-orc race doesn’t get a bonus to Intelligence makes it hard to excel as a wizard because you’ll always have a subpar spell attack bonus and saving throw DC.
This is to say nothing of the fact that linking ability score penalties (which are thankfully absent from the fifth edition Player’s Handbook, at least) to your choice of race has distasteful similarities to real-life racist ideology.
But the thing is, it doesn’t have to be this way. Ability score increases don’t have to be tied to which race you chose. They could be tied directly to your class, or more indirectly to your background, to some combination of the two options. Let’s take a look at some character creation house rules that you can use to decouple ability scores from race.
Step One: Remove Racial Ability Score Increases
The first step of this house rule is tremendously easy. Simply remove the Ability Score Increase trait from your character’s race and subrace, if applicable. In the case of the so-called “monstrous races” of orcs and kobolds from Volo’s Guide to Monsters, this removes their ability score reductions, as well.
If you’re worried about this making your character’s race irrelevant, or making the various fantasy races of D&D too homogeneous, don’t worry. Each race still has plenty of traits that help make them unique. For example, tieflings still have the Darkvision, Hellish Resistance, and Infernal Legacy traits, all of which make them unique and fantastical—and more importantly, these traits are interesting in a way that numerical stat bonuses just aren’t. Even without racial ability score increases, half-orcs are still strong and tough by virtue of their Relentless Endurance and Savage Attacks traits, and dwarves are still sturdy and martially adept, thanks to their Dwarven Resilience and Dwarven Combat Training traits.
There are few exceptions to this houserule for races and subraces that are highly impacted by their ability score increases. These are:
Human. The variant human presented in the Player’s Handbook is the default example of the human race while using this house rule.
Mountain Dwarf. Since the mountain dwarf subrace gains a +2 bonus to Strength in place of another trait, they gain a new trait in its place: Martial Aptitude. When you hit with a martial melee weapon, you roll an additional 1d4 and add it to the damage.
This trait originally appeared in a different form, which many commenters rightfully pointed out was much stronger than a +2 bonus to Strength. The older version is presented here for consistency.
Martial Aptitude. When using a martial weapon, you roll one additional damage die. For instance, when you hit with a greatsword, you roll 3d6 to determine the attack’s damage, instead of 2d6.
Half Elf. Since half elves gain more ability score increases than most other races, they gain a new trait in its place: Knowledge of the Elves. You possess one of the following traits: Cantrip (as the high elf trait), Elf Weapon Training (as the high elf or wood elf trait), Mask of the Wild (as the wood elf trait), Superior Darkvision (as the drow trait), or Drow Weapon Training (as the drow trait). Other traits, such as those from elves not in the Player's Handbook, can be used at the DM's discretion.
Half-elves originally had a different trait in an earlier version of this article, which several commenters pointed out had unpleasant social implications. The older version is presented here for consistency. Supernatural Charm. You know the friends cantrip. Starting at 3rd level, you can cast charm person once with this trait and regain the ability to do so when you finish a long rest. Charisma is your spellcasting ability for these spells.
Step Two: Reassign Ability Score Increases
Now that you’ve severed ability score increases from races, it’s time to relink them somewhere else in the system. Since almost every race in D&D gains a +2 bonus to one ability score and a +1 bonus to another, a total bonus of +3 should be assigned to all characters. My preferred option is for characters to gain access to improving their ability scores based on the training they undergo to become a member of a certain class. However, while discussing this option with other D&D fans, I found a not-insignificant number of people who felt that this would make all characters of a certain class feel too homogenous, regardless of racial traits.
While I disagree with this take, I’ve nevertheless presented three different ways to reassign ability score increases. Take your pick!
Option One: Class
You gain the Ability Score Increase feature when you choose your class at 1st level. If you gain levels in another class using the optional Multiclassing rules, you don’t gain this feature again.
Ability Score Increase (Barbarian). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution.
Ability Score Increase (Bard). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. You can increase any ability score using this feature.
Ability Score Increase (Cleric). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, or Wisdom.
Ability Score Increase (Druid). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Wisdom, or Charisma.
Ability Score Increase (Fighter). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Intelligence.
Ability Score Increase (Monk). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Wisdom.
Ability Score Increase (Paladin). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Charisma.
Ability Score Increase (Ranger). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Wisdom.
Ability Score Increase (Rogue). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. You can increase any ability score using this feature.
Ability Score Increase (Sorcerer). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Dexterity, Constitution, or Charisma.
Ability Score Increase (Warlock). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Charisma.
Ability Score Increase (Wizard). You can increase one of your ability scores by 2 and another ability score by 1. Alternatively, you can increase three of your ability scores by 1. The ability scores you can increase using this feature are Dexterity, Constitution, or Intelligence.
Option Two: Background
You gain the Ability Score Increase feature based on your background. This list includes the backgrounds from the Player’s Handbook. If you choose a background from a different book, consult with your Dungeon Master to determine one ability score to gain a +2 bonus in, and another ability score to gain a +1 bonus in.
Ability Score Increase (Acolyte). Your Wisdom score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Charlatan). Your Charisma score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Criminal). Your Constitution score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Entertainer). Your Charisma score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Folk Hero). Your Strength or Dexterity score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Guild Artisan). Your Intelligence score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Hermit). Your Wisdom score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Noble). Your Intelligence or Charisma score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Outlander). Your Dexterity score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Sage). Your Intelligence score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Sailor). Your Strength or Dexterity score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Soldier). Your Constitution score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Ability Score Increase (Urchin). Your Dexterity or Constitution score increases by 2, and one other ability score of your choice increases by 1.
Option Three: Class and Background
The third and final option is a combination of the two above. When you choose your class, assign a +2 to one ability score available to your class in Option One (or two +1s to two ability scores available to your class). Then when you choose your background, assign a +1 to the ability score specified by your background in Option Two. Since some backgrounds in Option Two let you choose between two ability scores to increase, you can choose either of them.
Would you use this house rule in your home D&D game? Which option is your favorite, or do you have a fourth option that you would use instead?
James Haeck is the lead writer for D&D Beyond, the co-author of Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Critical Role Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting, a member of the Guild Adepts, and a freelance writer for Wizards of the Coast, the D&D Adventurers League, and other RPG companies. He lives in Seattle, Washington with his partner Hannah and their animal companions Mei and Marzipan. You can find him wasting time on Twitter at @jamesjhaeck.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019No
Stop
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019I tend to view the DND races as more species than racial variants of the same species. Looking at biological taxonomic ranks in our own world, humanoid is probably the Genus where halfling, orc, human, dwarf, etc are species within that genus. DND term of Race goes back to Gary G. and the 70's. Unfortunately, in my eyes, it is a legacy term in the rules (and in RPG games in general) that should evolve and change.
Keeping the idea of taxonomic ranks in mind, I don't think it is out of bounds to suggest that one species, on average, be stronger or wiser or more durable or faster than other species. An elephant is stronger than a mouse. A chimpanzee is more clever than a alligator. It isn't out of the realm of plausible to suggest that one species (e.g. elves) be more intelligent on average than another (e.g. orcs). Or that Goliath's are, on average, stronger than gnomes. To me, this is what the PHB "racial" boons mechanic are trying to simulate rather than some racial difference between European, Latino, or Asian humans in our own world.
On the flip side, old school DND used to have ability caps on the max for certain abilities by species/races. It just doesn't make sense to me that the strongest gnome can achieve the same top strength as the strongest goliath or orc no matter how many weights said gnome lifts. That is probably a fairly accurate reflection of biology. The trouble, I think, that the rules writers were trying to address were ease and speed of game play in an effort to stay viable in a video game driven world.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019I would, and definitely will, use this optional rule. I love optimizing characters but also love roleplay and I feel like this unlatches the two concepts when choosing your race. I LOVE THIS. Now I can comfortably do both. :)
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019While there are certainly lines to be drawn between race and species in a dnd setting, the fact is that most races are capable of interbreeding with one another so race ultimately is, altho a flawed concept scientifically speaking, slightly more accurate.
Having said that, a big thing to take note of here is that dnd has had a problem with coding for decades. The drow are an especially bad take as well as classic orcs given you're making one hyper sexy dark skinned people defaulted to evil and often dread locked savages also defaulted to evil which harkens back to an issue with the over sexualization w african american women and seeing tribal peoples as inherently savage.
As well, from a eugenics stand point, if we do consider most of the races as having been a part of the same overarching species (if orcs can breed with humans and elves and tieflings what have you then they are the same species) then you get into some light flavor of racial superiority.
All in all, I'm not completely against it but coding is certainly something to look at in dnd as it has been there from the outset.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019Part of it isn't so much avoiding having any optimal choices, as it is avoiding very suboptimal choices. It's one thing to have dwarves possibly be slightly better melee fighters still, but something else to avoid, say, kobold barbarians being really awful barbarians.
But, you are right, it is just a few stat points, and mostly only matters in those first few levels. But in those first few levels, there's a lot of interesting concepts that can be suboptimal enough to that it impacts the fun.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019Firstly, let us be clear, I am categorically refuting any direct tie of a fictional creature to any real-world racial or ethnic group. As with any art form the interpretation is in the eye of the beholder, so the choice to draw those analogies is yours to make. For myself, if I were to actually believe that the author's intent were to propagate racial stereotypes it would very much detract from my enjoyment of the genre and the game.
Likewise, because we are discussing the author's intent, it is at this point that often the idea of unconscious bias raises it's head. I would like to point out that biases, unconscious or otherwise, cannot be drawn when the subject of that bias cannot be identified. Prior to my unfortunate encounter with the blog post from James Mendez Hodes that Mr. Haeck made the poor judgement to include in his article, it had never once occurred to me that anyone would consider the evil humanoids in fantasy to be direct analogs to human racial groups. I don't view this as naivete on my part, instead I think it takes a mind and heart already filled with hate and prejudice to draw those analogies.
It is my opinion that viewing the fiction through that particular lens is insulting to the authors of that fiction, and further that propagating that analysis as anything other than pure speculation and opinion is damaging to the fiction and genre as a whole.
Sipian, you ask that I "step back and ask yourself why you are getting so defensive." That's a legitimate question and I'd like to be very clear about what I think I am defending, and offer you a perspective you may not have had on the issue.
Orcs, Goblins, and many staples of D&D are now archetypal symbols in our cultural lexicon. Regardless of what one may speculate to have been true in the past, these icons have their own existence in our intellectual landscape today as their own thing not analogous to any group. Similarly, the game of D&D itself, and the players of the game, have their own symbolic existence.
Like any symbol however, they can adopt the ideas that are attributed to them, even negative ones. One cannot look at the mustache that Charlie Chaplain & Adolf Hitler wore without thinking of the dictator. One cannot look at a swastica without thinking of the horrors that it has come to signify.
In the 80's many saw the image of a group of young adults or children sitting around a table with a book containing fictional creatures to be an analog of and gateway to devil worship, and I know people today that still carry those negative associations. I think it is immensely irresponsible for a person in a position of authority or influence in the RPG community to map these associations onto the intellectual landscape that we share; and that we are stewards for the next generation.
Let us remember that D&D Beyond is not a site for college level academic scholarship. It is a site built to act as an aide for a game played by ages 10 and up. An Orc is an Orc, and if you are presenting them or any other creatures in LotR, D&D or any other piece of literature featuring them as an analog to real world human groups... you are doing something akin to telling a child there is no Santa Claus (no magic or wonder in the world), or worse telling a child they are not safe in a place they have the absolute right to feel safe in... and it is our job as the adults in the room to preserve this magic and preserve this safety for them, to say nothing about for one another.
Sipian, I hope that answers your question.
I have no qualms about the any of the optional rules, or role-play critiques presented in Mr. Haeck's article... in fact, truth be told, I have no qualms about the exercise of this sort of literary analysis and criticism in the right setting; and though I disagree with the thesis presented I could discuss and debate it in the right setting. That said, as a parent of 3 children from college age down to middle school, I have immense qualms over exposing children to critical theory they have no context for and for drawing such negative associations to the otherwise harmless fictional tropes upon which the foundation of the game is built.
As I said, I believe it is irresponsible, and if Mr. Haeck is writing his article for the purpose of improving the game and community he can do so without the comment and citation. To me, the citation does not support the premise of the article and instead only serves to showcase the author's academic scholarship; in other circumstances this may be harmless self-aggrandizement, but presented here I believe it is gratuitous and damaging.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019In my games I've basically taken this approach. I just have let players increase one ability score by +2 and another by +1. I don't see the need to tie them to a specific class or background and would rather let the players pick whatever best suited their vision for the character.
My replacements for the Mountain Dwarf and Half elf were a little different.
Mountain Dwarf
Sturdy Build. Your Strength counts as 2 points higher when figuring how much you can carry, lift, or drag.
Half-Elf
Skill Versatility. You gain proficiency in two skills and one tool of your choice.
I do like the idea of taking one of the Elf sub-race's abilities and I'll probably let my players have the option of swapping that out Skill Versatility for that in future games I run.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019I really like this
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 19, 2019Ahh okay sorry I clicked on one of my notifications and it brought me to that post And I thought it was you responding to me. My apologies on that front.
As for your commentary regarding fiction And racism: of course any author is going to be influenced by the various things they have experienced in life which will be reflected to a degree in their writing but to claim that the author of a fantasy novel was intentionally relating Specific aspects of their story to specific social or religious or moral ideologies of their real world society it’s a gigantic assumption that you have absolutely no proof whether or not is true. He could’ve been just trying to create conflict to drive the story and had absolutely no thought towards racism or social views… I think tolkien was simply trying to create a race of monsters to be villainess foot soldiers that people wouldn’t feel bad about the good guys killing… Absolutely no one of us knows exactly what he was thinking beyond that and anything else is you just pushing your ideals and opinions and thoughts onto others .
When it comes to creating rules for a fictional fantasy world game such as this one real world politics and societal rules have absolutely no bearing because were trying to create a GAME that has conflict, variety, villains and Heroes. ColdEnd makes some great points in his response to you that I think you should read/reread carefully if you haven’t already. We are defending freedom of artistic expression as well as defending the freedom of how players express themselves within this game. As soon as we start policing what is allowed and not allowed in fantasy or fictional worlds using real world ideologies as a basis or justification to do so Is a steppingstone to prosecuting people for thought crimes... and that is a slippery slope that can only lead to worse things.
I don’t have any problem with James’s actual article discussing various different ways to break up racial abilities and optimization meta. In fact as I’ve stated in many other responses I like his second and third solutions best but only as augmentation an adjustment to the base rules .
What me and many others don’t like was him bringing in real world racist social justice ideologies into the game as justification for why standard racial ability stats need to be removed or “corrected”. Many of us lived through the original witchhunt on dungeons and dragons were people for anyone who played D&D was a Satan worshiper, so we know how the social justice things can get out of hand and become quite a slippery slope.
In short what we are all trying to say is stick to talking about just the game mechanics and don’t bring any real world social justice warrior, politcal or religious ideologies or agendas into the conversation as it has no application to this game and it is only toxic, divisive and unproductive .
I mean look at us... The majority of us are at each other‘s throats on this forum not even talking about any of the specifics of the ideas in his article. Instead we are just going on and on about one sentence that introduced a toxic social justice ideology/agenda.
Had the author simply followed their site’s own rules of conduct and never brought that sentence into the article we would all be having a much more productive discussion.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019Big fan of opening up races to character options people might avoid out of fear of being sub-optimal. I think I might use option three but switch the plus 2 to the background to represent how up until level one that's what they've been doing with their lives and therefor has a bigger impact on their current abilities. Although that might encourage people to pick specific backgrounds for 'optimal' play... but I'm not sure you can ever really totally avoid that
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019Well that's a relief.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019I think this is a really cool idea. There are too few optimizations and this really opens up new and unique character ideas without a “penalty”. Seriously cool.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019Absolutely not.
Change the races themselves to make them worth playing in the first place.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019First, I would like to say that James did great work on his idea. It can work for many people. On the other hand, I believe that the system is good enough.
Racial ability scores exist as depiction among DnD fantasy races. Races meaning different species as many pointed before me. A classical example is gnome and goliath. You simply have to have some difference shown somewhere between the two. When you are gnome you are little and you have to overcome difficulties more with your mind then your brawn and that is why the gnomes as people are what they are (inventors, mages etc). It applies for goliaths too. While I like breaking stereotypes, there has to be something that validates these exceptions to rules. In order to orc or goliath be mage there has to be something special about such a person. Maybe Goliath had lost his tribe and was found and lived in mage tower WHILE being especially smart. In such a case, you can talk to your DM and together you can conclude that while our goliath in the mage tower did not hunt and climb the mountains so much he instead read a lot. Therefore, his plus is +2 INT and +1 CON. With Rule ZERO (The GM can do whatever he wants) that should be enough. Extra smart goliaths, extra nimble hill dwarfs or extra-strong Halfling without right reasoning break immersion and in my opinion are wrong.
In many fantasy worlds, some races are inherently evil/good. I believe that the article that James shared is oversimplification and generalization. Orcs in Tolkien worlds are not evil because they have slanted eyes and poor skin condition. They are evil because Tolkien’s equivalent of Lucifer corrupted them. Tolkien’s orcs do not dance, sing or make toys. They are tools of Morgoth to destroy what Ilúvátar created. They are not humans and you cannot apply the real-world politics and racial norms to them. In a way, they are more earthquake then people. I am not saying that their depiction in books with today’s point of view is not problematic. But he did not mean them as an analogy to Mongols. Something similar applies to his elves. They are supposed to be mortal paragons of good. There is a straight hierarchy of beings in his world:
Ilúnvátar
Valar
Maiar
Elves
High man
Man
(somewhere between are hobbits because nobody knows what they are and why are they more resilient to the One ring).
In Tolkien’s world, you have a certain level of goodness in you depending on what you are. With every age of Arda overall level of goodness lowers. That is why there are only a few elves left in Middle-earth. But the reason why I am writing this is because the world what you play in has to give some sense. Forgotten realms have similar orcs to Tolkien’s Arda in a way that orcs are under influence of Gruumsh and he is nasty and evil god and orcs follow him and his ways. As always, there are exemptions to the rule as with the Kingdom of Many-Arrows. In your world, you can have Orc kingdoms. Maybe your orcs are as smart as humans, maybe they are a little bit weaker for game balance or maybe your orcs have some kind of higher caste that is thinkers. Nevertheless, you always have to think about whether what you have is still orc or just green human.
Also, I think the original idea of adjusting ability scores would have gone much better without linking that article. Let players make their games as political as they want. DnD is in a great place right now and nobody wants another Gillette controversy. For me, DnD is a game about hunting dragons and facing devils with a group of my friends. Inserting real-life politics is just a way to ruin it.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019I actually think this fundamentally misunderstands the concept of racism in our world (I guess you could call it real life haha). In our world we are all the exact same race/species. There are no differences between ethnicities from a genetic standpoint; we are all the same. In that sense, it would not be racist to assert that a cat, a completely different species from a human, was not equal in intelligence to a human.
However, in DnD, the different races are, objectively, different creatures altogether. Orcs do come from other gods; they were created completely separate from the other humanoids , so it makes sense that they would be inherently different from other intelligent species.
Personally, I just allow my players to switch one of their racial ability scores for another, and we completely ignore racial penalties. At one point we had a Wisdom +1 Dex +2 Drow and, before Modernkainens Tome of Foes, we had a CHA +2 DEX +1 Tiefling.
Racial ability scores are a fantastic source of role playing material, and switching them around can make it even more interesting. An intelligent half-orc, a strong halfling, or even a weak Goliath being in the party can lead to some fantastic rp opportunities. Look at critical role; Nott continually reminds Fjord how NOT strong he is. No one sees that as racist, despite the common people always assuming that Fjord is strong.
I don’t know how to wrap this comment up, but I’ve already typed this much, so I’m just going to submit it now.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019I love this ^ some one stopping and logically thinking about what "racial bonuses" actually are, because that capuchin over there is going to exceed that gorilla's strength...
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019Forgets some of the actions of of the Elves like the kinslaying, etc.
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019How very racist of you. Typical racist trope with hate against social justice. When did justice become a bad word? Or virtues (another racist trope virtue signaling).
-
View User Profile
-
Send Message
Posted Aug 20, 2019As opposed to ignoring the concept of unique individuals in each. #facepalm