In most role-playing games, women seem to fall somewhere between "completely equal to men in status and ability" and a sort of compromise between that and traditional historical gender roles, where men have most of the power and perform most of the dangerous and important (non-domestic) jobs, but exceptional women who are on relatively even footing with men are not uncommon. That's a pretty safe, comfortable range that gives everybody the freedom to do what they want, and it's probably best for most campaigns.
But I'm interested in hearing about games where the role of women falls outside this range. Are women in your games little more than chattel? Or maybe they're put on a pedestal but kept safely away from danger? Or do they actually have an advantage over men in terms of status or ability?
Do people play characters of the disadvantaged gender in such games? How does that work out? How do the PCs treat "the lesser sex" in general? Are your players hesitant to fully embrace what they may see as sexist roles, or do they seem to actually relish them?
Note: I couldn't care less about your evaluation of women's capabilities relative to men's in real life. We're talking about role-playing games in fantastical, imaginary worlds here, and that doesn't really apply. I do, however, expect to see plenty of it and ask folks here not to derail the thread arguing against it, but rather to see it as people "getting into character" and espousing an in-game viewpoint.
Also Note: This is sure to get fetishy in short order. That's pretty much unavoidable, given where we are. I just ask that you don't stray too far from the topic at hand, and if that kind of thing bothers you, that you ignore it rather than bickering over it.
>>47544045
I usually go with
> a sort of compromise between that and traditional historical gender roles, where men have most of the power and perform most of the dangerous and important (non-domestic) jobs, but exceptional women who are on relatively even footing with men are not uncommon.
in most fantasy games. Remember adventurers are exceptional people, so I don't have a problem with "muh stronk empowered womyn" showing up as PCs. There are numerous historical examples of women acting in the IRL capacity of player characters despite most social limitations. So even if women have fairly limited rights in most of the setting, female adventurers are by nature outliers and the fact they've risen above those limits is implicitly part of their character.
I'll throw in socially enforced gender roles and that kind of thing because that's just how human society has always worked. But I won't force anyone who wants to play a woman be 100% beholden to those rules and norms.Mostly because I play a lot of women
That said I don't see this thread leading anywhere good.
>>47544045
>This is sure to get fetishy in short order.
No. You know what this will turn into? A cancerous cesspit of arguing and shitposting abut feminism, SJWs and identity politics that will make you wish for a fetish derail.
>>47544045
theres a conan like settings where women are basically nothing but rape meat.
it called gord or something
>>47544045
On a related note, is it possible to stray outside of the safe, comfortable default range without it feeling pervy? Also, does the "damsel in distress" shtick seem tired or awkward in this day and age? Do you find yourself tiptoeing around it or do you fully embrace it?
>>47544139
Way to get into character!
>>47544176
I think a distressed damsel character would just be annoying more than anything else. No player wants to go rescue someone who's just whiny deadweight. At least I certainly wouldn't.
You can make a captured princess able to handle herself without it coming off as a political statement, you know.
>>47544170
You mean Gor?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gor
Yeah, it's basically the world that FATAL was written for, only somehow even rapey-er. The fans are just as bad.
>>47544176
I like it when my dm uses the damsel in distress thing because it triggers any cunt sjws people may have invited, so we know who not to invite back
>>47544333
Wasn't that written by some sexually repressed college professor who wrote himself as the main protagonist?
>>47544170
>it called gord or something
Gor. Yeah, Gor makes me a bit uncomfortable. Most rapey stuff I've come across doesn't come across like the writer thinks that's the way it should actually be. But Gor is certainly an example of a setting where gender roles fall far outside the comfortable default range.
>>47544045
Pretty much going with >>47544133. It's often that I've got female players in the groups, many times making up the majority, and if they're all playing to their gender then they'd get pissed at me for setting up the setting as needlessly antagonistic for the campaign when they just want to go punch bears and stab bandits and such. If I feel the need to push the autism I'll just nudge them towards describing stronger characters as Brienne of Tarth rather than busty bimbo babe in armored high heels to make up whatever musculature difference there may be.
>>47544236
Pretty much. Take a queue from Leia or Bioshock Infinite and have the damsel able to handle themselves, though Leia is more PC than NPC.
>>47544333
IT HAS FANS?
>>47544381
I fucking love this houseplant stuff.
That said, you hit the nail on the head with
>Most rapey stuff I've come across doesn't come across like the writer thinks that's the way it should actually be.
Gor is disturbing because you feel the author genuinely views women that way.
I was once in a Sci-Fi game where the GM referenced Gor by name as a source for inspiration. I didn't know what it was at the time, but fortunately there wasn't any rapey stuff in it.
>>47544350
Bravo! Excellent performance!
For my part, I find that overusing the whole damsel in distress thing just gets boring.
>>47544236
>No player wants to go rescue someone who's just whiny deadweight.
Yeah, if a character's main personality trait is "I'm helpless and need to be saved", that doesn't make them very compelling.
>>47544426
>IT HAS FANS?
Obviously. There are all kinds of fetishists in this world, and that one isn't even all that esoteric.
>>47544426
>though Leia is more PC than NPC.
Leia started out as an NPC and then became a PC in Empire.
>IT HAS FANS?
There are entire freeform roleplay forums dedicated to this shit.
>>47544466
I can see a "help me please!" NPC work as a one-off quest, but if you're not gonna engage with the players and make the NPC interesting or useful then you might as well just send them after a MacGuffin.
>>47544496
Pretty much. For all the fantasy bullshit it's basically just dom/sub stuff which is pretty standard as far as fetishes go
The Taming of the Shrew
>>47544381
I've seen the houseplant stuff, but without knowing the context, I thought it was an analogy referencing things like 1984.
Now I'm just disturbed, and still have no context.
My groups are generally pretty evenly split in terms of gender, and the girl's I've played with would probably react badly to a setting where I imposed sexist bullshit on their characters for the sake of 'historical realism'. It's a fantasy game. It's a bit of fun. If I can fantasize about being a badass elf wizard, they can fantasize about being a woman who doesn't have to deal with sexist bullshit.
The only way I could see it working is if a large part of the narrative was set up to be about women overcoming sexism in an empowering way - a sort of Mulan narrative or something - but honestly that would work so much better with a female DM that I'm not sure I'd even bother running it myself.
>>47544683
It's actually a pretty good imitation of the Gor stuff, at least from the little I've read. Just replace the plants with women and the watering with nonconsensual sexing.
>>47544683
IIRC, it's an actual passage from one of the Gor books but every mention of slave girls is replaced with house plants.
>>47544045
When men and women are given their own choice of what jobs to take, they will almost unilaterally choose traditional roles for their genders.
All modern science points to genetics being the sole decider of our personalities, with upbringing comprising maybe 20% of who we are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E577jhf25t4
It's time to stop listening to sociologists who abandon science to coddle their own notions of how things ought to be.
>>47544778
I like your enthusiasm, but I'm not sure you're really selling your character. Maybe go for a less cerebral and more passionate portrayal?
>>47544778
Irrelevant points because adventurers are individuals and not statistics.
>>47544829
His points do suggest the notion that most "adventurers" would be men. Which, in most games they are, so there's not really a problem?
>>47544849
So the argument isn't that we should gimp female character because exceptions exist, but that we should severely limit the amount of players who can play female characters per game? That's stomping all over player choice right there for not much reason, and there's nothing that says exceptional women can't hear about each other and join up to form a party.
>>47544381
I gather from the thread that they're slavegirls but...do they actually have spikes? Why is he watering them? Is it actually water being poured on them?
>>47544914
>So the argument isn't that we should gimp female character because exceptions exist, but that we should severely limit the amount of players who can play female characters per game?
I don't think he was prescribing anything at all, actually. I know I'm not.
>>47544923
The spikes are just part of the plants, and are stand-ins for anatomy. Gorean slave girls do not have spikes.
"Water" just means rape.
>>47544971
> Sociologists
> They're the ones doing the science
This is what leftists actually believe.
>>47544778
Sociologists are the one that actually record societal trends. When idiots spout off misinformed shit like 'all women want to be raped,' they're misquoting sociologists; when people shill for different kinds of economic systems, they're misquoting sociologists. They're the ones doing the science, recording the changes that occur in society. Ignorant baboons.
>All modern science points to genetics being the sole decider of our personalities,
You didn't even provide a source for that, the video is not a scientific paper of any sort nor does the series even make or support your claim.
>>47544985
Do you know where all the data about the effects of laws on society comes from? Moreover you still haven't provided a source for your ridiculous claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology#Scope_and_topics
>>47544998
>trends
Oh, those things that biblical scholars say is their evidence that the end of days is nigh?
What hard data do sociologists refer to in their delusional quaking?
Watch the video before you cast judgement if you hold pretense to reason. There are many citations therein.
>>47544998
Sociologists do nothing but mooch off of the productive and babble about their own fantasies. It's not a science, it's a joke.
>>47544914
Even if you were to accept that women were scientifically 'less likely' to become adventurers in your made up fantasy setting, the sample size of single adventuring party is so low for that to be irrelevant. Plus it makes sense that women who become adventurers are relatively likely to team up with other female adventurers, skewing the results.
Like I know you guys freak out when people throw around phrases like this, but literally the only reason for giving women mechanical disadvantages or limiting the number in a party is that you hate women. Is it because they won't have sex with you?
>>47544970
>Gorean slave girls do not have spikes.
How dull.
>>47545022
>Do you know where all the data about the effects of laws on society comes from?
Behavioral scientists. Sociology is a belief system, not a science.
The real issue here is that people always hate science when it tells them something about the world that they don't like the sound of, especially when it tells them that they are limited in who they can be.
Sorry, but that's the price of admission to reality.
>>47545044
>refuge in ad hominem
And you were doing so well, too.
>>47545023
>Oh, those things that biblical scholars say is their evidence that the end of days is nigh?
Do you even know what a trend is? Statistically, I mean.
>Watch the video before you cast judgement if you hold pretense to reason.
I've seen it before. The entire series does not claim that genetics makes up the entirety or majority of our behavior.
>>47545054
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/under-the-influence/201307/do-genes-influence-personality
>>47545071
it's not an ad hominem because it's tangential to the argument at most
it is, however, an insult
Stop feeding the trolls/retards, people. You're only giving them what they want.
>>47545090
> psychology
> evidence of anything
Nice try. Another fake "science" for leftists who want to hide from the way the world actually works.
>>47545054
While I don't give a shit about this sociology debate,
>especially when it tells them that they are limited in who they can be.
is horseshit. No normal, rational woman or any person for that matter is going to discount their dream job--in this case adventuring--because some study told her she's genetically predisposed to hanging out in the kitchen.
Individuals are not statistics so again, this point is irrelevant to adventurers.
Also inb4
>woman
>rational
>>47545053
Who let the Dark Eldar in this thread
>>47545115
>implying leftists don't know how the world works
>implying reading Marx, Gramsci, Said isn't the real 'red pill'
>>47545115
>>47545054
>>47545026
>>47545023
>>47544985
>>47545090
>https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/under-the-influence/201307/do-genes-influence-personality
>psychology
>science
Lol, you're kidding right? Look up Positive Psychology for an example of their scientific rigor. They were fooled by a fluid dynamics equation that told them what they wanted to hear.
>>47544045
It's irrelevant as I don't have female PC's or NPC's in my games.
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
>>47545150
We have no proof Einstein ever actually said that, but the idea he predicted 4chan is pretty damn funny.
>>47545054
>>47544778
if women are genetically predisposed to want to stay in the kitchen, why is it always women who argue that they should be able to do other stuff?
>>47545044
>Is it because they won't have sex with you?
no, it's because they are inferior in every way but beta males such as yourself white knight them despite the fact they won't have sex with you
>>47545192
Because they want to reap the benefits of society without actually contributing anything.
>>47545192
>why is it always women who argue that they should be able to do other stuff?
women argue for the sake of arguing, they don't need a reason valid or not
>>47545204
>>47545201
That is as true as saying that all men are rapist molesters.
>>47545192
because people hate science when it tells them no.
That's why fools persist in belief of things like FTL. They even refuge in the logic of flat earthers; "Well, nothing is impossible, so..."
>>47545163
Gotta exercise proper cootie control precautions, am I right anon?
>>47545204
ok so
women want to reap the benefits of society without contributing anything
which is why they campaign to be able to work
makes sense
>>47545230
Women get away with it far more often. What does that say?
>>47544045
58 replies in a single hour. Not to mention the fact that your OP wasn't even trying to go for bait.
>>47544045
Ignoring the /pol/-spasm...
I actually want to explore these themes more deeply in my games, by having different cultures with different gender roles and expectations forced to interact with each other. I would not be claiming any kind of historical accuracy, because this is fantasy, but rather the fact that it is a fictional world able to include all things from real life and more. After all, don't novels deal with these themes all the time?
I intend to run a game soon, and in the geographic region it begins in women have many social disadvantages compared to men. I look forward to seeing how the players deal with it. (Place is somewhat inspired by Byzantium, so less "all women are chattel" and more "women should be kept safe at home, involved in the matters of men")
>>47545235
so the entirety of women's suffrage and feminist movements has been born out of a bizarre vendetta against science?
ok anon
>>47545247
> which is why they campaign to be able to work
> implying women work
They "work." Which mainly involves sitting around preening and badmouthing people behind their backs while the few men involved do the actual work. Seriously, look at any female dominated workplace and you'll notice that they're cesspools of bickering, laziness, and incompetence.
>>47545299
No, they've been borne out of the "grass is greener on the other side of the fence" mentality that all humans share.
It's also why people play dress up and demand recognition for it. They think all their happiness lies on the other side of the gender.
The truth is that nothing can make a person happy, other than accepting that fact.
>>47545274
See >>47544133
>That said I don't see this thread leading anywhere good.
I fucking called it.
>>47545255
I dunno.
But I think either sex doesnt feel guilty for the crimes of the minority. And when someone attack all women or all men, everyone gets mad because thats not the full picture.
Plus, there are crimens that women get off more easily, and there are situations when men get awat whit crimes more easily than women, just differente aproaches, but it's basically playing the same game.
>>47545238
Considering the people who I put up with, yes.
I also question why males want to play female PC's. "Play a dude, but with girly parts instead", which in that case I'll just cut out the middleman and say why not just play a man instead.
>>47545308
So you are a underage faggot that never had a job?
>>47545299
Yes. Science tells us that women cannot be trusted with the vote. They are simply too irrational to make the kind of determinations needed to vote intelligently. But they refused to accept that, and whined until people gave them the vote, and society has suffered because of it.
>>47545321
are you happy then?
>>47545336
>and there are situations when men get awat whit crimes more easily than women
Name a few.
>>47545330
Thread would have had a much better chance in the middle of the night when the American kiddies are in bed.
>>47545353
>>47545358
When you are content with what you have, then yes.
There is nothing more addictive than money.
>>47545366
Sexism.
>>47545353
[citation needed]
>>47544133
I go full traditional roles but for obvious reasons as you pointed out PC women are an exception. They do still face stigma from NPCs and other PCs from time to time but usually others react to them with curiosity or innocent novel amusement rather than outright scorn. My players tend to buddy up real quick, no matter what character they make theyalways tend to be loyal as fuck so slights against one PC are typicallytreated as a slight against all.
>>47545384
he said "crimes", not "natural order of things"
>>47545379
>I cannot think of a logical and well-refuted argument, so I'll post meme pictures instead
Adults are talking, go play outside.
>>47545341
Nice comeback kid. No, I've had the displeasure of having to deal with several workplaces dominated by women. The kind of pettiness and backstabbing that goes on there is ridiculous.
>>47545238
>playing shadowrun immediately gets you on 50% of this
nice
>>47544045
Depends on the setting. But that's a shitty discussion-stopper, so I'm not stopping there. Specifically, it depends on whether I'm running a pre-industrial setting or a post-industrial setting.
In a pre-industrial world, underpopulation is a dangerous thing and wombs are important, so women in general are going to be encouraged to raise children as the most valuable contribution they can make to a village. That sounds like an insult to a modern perspective but it's really not. Kids are important. A female character who isn't a mother or an ex-mother or too young to be a mother yet is going to have a reason for being an exception to the rule. Obviously, "I can kill a monster" is easily a good enough excuse, so this is more of a backstory detail than an actual in-play restriction.
In a post-industrial world, food production, wealth and military power are no longer primarily limited by population. None of the above applies. Same goes for a pre-industrial city. Cities have no shortage of people. The further forward you go, the less anyone is going to care; if you have time to care whether the street sam charging down the alley at you is a razor boy or a gillette, you should spend it shooting.
I don't tend to run sexist NPCs. I might if I could make them interesting, I suppose, but it's not really a prejudice that lends itself to stories more interesting than "hey, here's an asshole you won't feel guilty about beating up, so go nuts". Same for rape. Rapists are one step above giant vermin and one below zombies in terms of convenience as bags of free XP and loot. True in non-game fiction, too. Here's a bit of lazy cliche writing that everyone loved:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeYwkeX6xNI
>>47545338
I play a female characters a lot because as a writer I just prefer female characters. I could go on a lengthy psychoanalysis of myself to explain why but the simple reason is "I just like female characters".
My GM remarked I'm one of the only players he's met who doesn't make it weird, if that's worth anything.
>>47545371
While the Murica jab is kinda dumb, I agree the middle of the day during summer is the worst time for a thread like this.
>>47544045
I tend to think if Magic has existed for all of the setting's history, birth control would be a very simple cantrip, blocking sperm from fertilizing the egg.
Therefore, women have equal social rights and gender roles don't exist, but they still have to try harder to prove themselves, because they don't have the physical abilities.
So in the setting, there isn't many female fighters or barbarians, and even there is, they're DEX based. Of course, there are always outliers, so my players can be whatever they want. But the setting in general, I simply don't have them run into STR based females.
If I was (more) neurotic, I'd subtract 2 from every female's STR stat, but add 2 points to DEX, WIS, INT or CHA, divided between them. That's not worth the time investment, though, and I usually just build female characters without STR as their main stat.
That way, when I insert my fetishized 7 foot tall amazon with huge tits, it's all the more special.
>>47545384
Oh yeah i see a lot of poor, fat men with skinny rich women.
Oh wait no it's the opposite.
>>47545420
>That sounds like an insult to a modern perspective but it's really not.
proof the modern perspective is fucking degenerate
>>47545238
Is it necessary to say "White" in a fantasy setting that it is the theme park of medieval Europe?
>>47545386
The citation is his ass.
>>47545405
Your retarded post got the reply it deserves.
>>47545407
Yes, keep making it clear you never had a job.
>>47545407
Probably office workers am I correct? I've slso worked in female dominant workplaces and they've all been lovely with the exception of the office staff.
>>47544045
I'll be blunt here: I really, really don't like women. The very thought of them gives me a pit in my stomach. Ironically, or perhaps not so, that's why the role and ability of women in TTRPGs fascinates me so much:
The way gender dynamics work in my games tend to depend on whatever race they are, as well as a healthy dose of bro-science. Humans and elves generally occupy the extremes. Humans are the most "traditional" in that regard, with men being manly men and women being idealized homemakers: kind, caring, loyal, supportive, all that good stuff. Women serving in male roles (especially military ones) are considered not done, but a female human NPC would have little more obstacles in her way than incredulity and some minor ridicule ("You? Hunt goblins? Don't you have a husband you need to cook for?"). Despite the relative taboo, there have been multiple effective and celebrated human female warriors.
On the other extreme we have the elves, and this is where the bro-science kicks in. Elves have very low gender dimorphism so they tend to be very similar in terms of strength, ability, psychology and hormone levelsthat means elf men are quite literally low test, though still distinguishable at first glance. Humans consider male elves to be effeminate, but they're not traps (not unless they make an active effort, that is). Because of this their society, including the military, is entirely egalitarian, with men and women being equally competent. Most other races are somewhere in between elves and humans in terms of gender dimorphism and gender roles.
While I've never had the opportunity to run/create one, I really like the idea of a femme fatale BBEG. No idea how to play one without having it turn into a magical realm or downright awkward though. I guess I just like the concept but don't know how to execute it.
>>47545457
The chart is for all genres, not just fantasy.
>>47545470
>Yes, keep making it clear you never had a job.
Not that anon but I work in a hospital and everything he said is true.
>>47545432
Why would skinny rich men date poor fat women?
>>47545457
The moors, shitlord.
>>47545384
That's just being an asshole and as far as I know is not a crime in itself in first world nations, though it can be the motive for one.
>>47545484
I don't think hospitals are good cross sections because nurses are not well-adjusted people. Spending all that time and money for the training just to spend 24-hour shifts sticking tubes into peoples' dick holes takes a toll on you.
![stato-ozo-stato-berserk-guts-female-version[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NfAuoFj.jpg "stato-ozo-stato-berserk-guts-female-version[1].jpg")
>>47545238
>Rape survivor
>Criminal
>Vigilante
>Killing spree (humans)
>Blasé about killing
>Brooding loner
>White (considering they're in a fantasy 100 years war he's either "French" or "English")
>Writer is male
>Makes a living being violent
>No patience for politics
>psychological problems
>No skimpy armor, but is seen naked multiple times
>Underaged (at the start of the series)
>Borderline supernatural powers
>Ultra-edgy orphan whose mother gave birth to him after being hanged
Yeah, Guts sure is a female protagonist.
>>47545412
Using any form of seduction gets you like 4 of them, so a shadowrunning slutty orphan is like a free blackout so long as she's white
Game we're playing in, there's a lot less men because they keep getting killed, so women fill in the blanks but it doesn't confer much of a special privilege or importance. The most that reaches, is when a woman gets into a position of power she's just likely to remain that way, so like if the king and princes of a country get killed, then the country is going to switch over to a matrilineal monarchy. Since the less men thing of the setting has been going on for a long time though, most places are and have been like this for a long time as well so it's accepted and commonplace.
Only time it can take a big role in the setting is during the occasional period where there are very few men at all, so there may be a conscious effort or even laws perhaps, that men are supposed to go into protection. Depending on the culture that can be just going into hiding, or reporting to the nearest prison and spending time there for safety, stuff like that.
>>47545484
Playing doctor is not having a job in a hospital.
>>47545547
No you!
>>47545550
It doesn't take doctor to work in a hospital. The place needs janitors and cleaning staff too.
>>47545582
He is too stupid for those jobs.
>>47545477
For a persoon who says they hate women, your attitude toward fictional women in your setting appears to be close to what I would expect the normal range for an average male rpg-er. Where does your negative perception of women come from? Genuinely curious.
>>47545484
>workplaces dominated by women
>work in a hospital
Wait, are you nurse (male)?
>>47545627
>>47545582
Lab Tech
>>47545627
He is a underage faggot making shit up
>>47545384
I'm going to need a source on this one.
Does not allowing a PC to play a female character in any way improve the game? Does imposing mechanical penalties to a female character in any way improve your enjoyment of the game?
>>47545659
>Does imposing mechanical penalties to a female character in any way improve your enjoyment of the game?
Enhances the verisimilitude which makes it more immersive, so yes.
>>47545659
>Does not allowing a PC to play a female character
I generally don't allow PC's to play any kind of characters. Too meta.
>>47545659
No to both of those things.
>>47545659
>Does not allowing a PC to play a female character in any way improve the game?
No
> Does imposing mechanical penalties to a female character in any way improve your enjoyment of the game?
Double No.
>>47545678
>i can't get immersed in my game about magic and dragons unless people are punished for choosing to play as a woman
so why do you hate women, anon?
>>47545722
He's just gonna cite some statistic about how women are on average physically weaker.
Apparently unable to understand statistics mean jack dick when applied to a single person.
>>47545659
>Does not allowing a PC to play a female character in any way improve the game?
Yes, it keeps my players less distracted and I'm more comfortable playing male NPC's.
>Does imposing mechanical penalties to a female character in any way improve your enjoyment of the game?
Doesn't matter as I never use them anymore. When I did I didn't bother as I was lazy.
>>47545722
>can't get immersed
Don't strawman, I said it's less immersive not that I can't get immersed.
>>47545824
>talking about women makes me uncomfortable and my players creeps
christ on a bike sort ur life out
>>47545824
>NPCs
as the GM you need to be able to play both Male and female NPCs, unless you play one of the few settings where gender would never come up.
The PC cross play has some debate, but GMs got to play everybody and everything.
>>47545895
>I said it's less immersive not that I can't get immersed
>less immersive
>not that i can't get immersed
>less immersive
>>47545961
I had a GM once who absolutely hated playing female NPCs. Every time someone forced him to; like a paladin flirting with whores or my rogue looking for her sister, he got visibly uncomfortable.
Yet he had absolutely no problem describing homosex in unnecessary detail. Make of that what you will.
>>47545678
Makes it even better when they rise above and become Joan of Arc++ right?Or does that make you salty as fuck?
>>47546009
you realize there are a bunch of numbers between 0% (can't) and 100% (totally can), yes?
>>47545961
You may be right, but I am simply not comfortable playing females. So to make sure it never comes up, I never insert them in my own games out of my own volition.
>>47544045
In my games the higher the social standing of a woman, the more they are treated like a prized object.
For the peasants, everyone's gotta work so everyone can eat. Mom, Dad, kids, doesn't matter, they're all out working so they don't starve.
When it comes to the nobility, a woman's one an only job is to be sold to another house for marriage.
>>47546138
And popping out (male) heirs.Which doesn't mean they have to do nothing but that, and they often don't. How else are they going to occupy their time if not politics?
>>47546113
>never insert them
this isn't a matter of inserting. Women exist, unless you're going for a very out there setting, there are going to be women in it.
If you can't deal with that, then tell your players up front and don't be surprised when several of them decide they don't want you as a GM.
>>47546113
>feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeemales
>>47544236
You know not everyone needs to be a combatant to be useful or interesting right?
Why do retards always push "good female character" to be "amazing combat monster that fights on par with you".
Fuck not even the PCs need to all be combat monsters.
>>47545659
>Does not allowing a PC to play a female character in any way improve the game?
Depends on the player.
>Does imposing mechanical penalties to a female character in any way improve your enjoyment of the game?
No.
>>47546159
Inserted into the story, obviously. They exist, just in kitchens and bedrooms away from the players' path.
>>47546009
5 is less than 10, that doesn't mean 5 = 0.
>>47546195
>any rescuee needs to outclass the party to be likable
>im-fucking-plying that's what I said
>Leia
>combat monster
She could fire a gun but she's no better than Luke or Han. They did the bulk of the work, but Leia assisted in her own rescue which made her a lot more likable than some bratty whiner who just wants a knight to save the day.
Even a rescue character who just shuts up and stays out of everyone's way is a lot more likable than someone who says "this is YOUR job" every time they ask her to help.
>>47546158
to go by actual history, a lot were consultants and informers, or handling the social and public face of the company or land.
They were supposed to talk with people, plan parties, write letters, etc. Not that far from a press secretary, public relations manager, or intelligence agent.
That was the smart and good ones, often from families that could afford to give them the education and training they need to be able to do those things. See the Hapsburgs. And of course, to appear that they weren't doing any of those things except for being pretty and making things look pretty. Of course all of this relied on the husband/father letting them do those things, but it was a resource they were fools to not use.
In other cultures they might handle the books or the money, or other parts of the home front. That's how the VIkings did it.
>>47546159
See >>47546237
Minus the kitchen and bedroom parts. Women exist, they just never show up onscreen.
And I didn't tell them up front. I just started doing it about three years ago. Not a single complaint was heard, in fact I'm pretty sure no one has even noticed or cared. Amounts of time focused on the story and plot have also greatly increased since I've done that as well, so yes it's been a success on my end.
>>47544045
I don't penalize female characters, but in my games, there are a few standouts: First, there are comparatively few female adventurers. They're rare enough to be worth mentioning when they do show up, and most of them tend to be spellcasters. (It's because magic is the great equalizer: Men are physically stronger than women, but it doesn't matter when it comes to magic.)
It's also because no-one likes to see women get killed or harmed. It's the age-old question: What happens when a man gets captured by orcs? Well, he dies a bad death. What happens when a woman gets captured? She can look forward to literally being raped to death, which isn't a pleasant image. Since it wouldn't be realistic to just ignore all of this, the number of female warriors and so on are small so it doesn't come up as much.
Second, there's a general issue of male primacy. Inheritance (mystical or conventional) is through the male line. A magic sword keyed to a bloodline will pick the younger brother over the older sister. A male heir is praised more than a female one. There aren't any matriachial societies, for instance, and the most powerful warriors/wizards/clerics are all men.
No-one's actively sexist, but there can be this undercurrent of "Wow, you're an adventurer? You're pretty brave, because you might get defiled by goblins if we get captured."
>>47544333
Just skimmed the wiki.
Besides Moorcok being a hypocrite, what exactly are the controversial stuff? Most of the work describe sounds pretty darn good.
>>47546237
that's still a fucking weird world. And yes, I'm considering even the most gender segregated parts of history here.
At the very least why are their no female survivors or victims of. attacks?
Have you told you're players this? Because this is a. serious weakness as a GM that you know about,. and should tell. them.
>>47544045
I don't think I've ever played a game where it wasn't basically the first one, although it might be interesting to play a game in Amazon land where women rule or in a society that's really strict about women.
That said, I doubt my group would be very interested in that, and finding an online game for that is just asking for trouble
>>47545423
>While the Murica jab is kinda dumb
It's deserved. For some reason, Americans here spazz out in much greater numbers at the mention of women. I'm not saying all Americans are like that--I'm American, and I'm not--but proportionally, there's a big difference.
>>47546270
I am not implying she is a combat monster, but I am saying NPCs and even PCs don't need combat abilities to be likable, interesting or even useful.
And the whole "handle herself" shit is stupid since bad GMs usually take it for "lol every princess is a badass warrior".
Fuck, I'd actually enjoy a mission or two where you have to rescue someone and while they can't directly help they can do other things like say, hack a door, make repairs to the escape vehicle, or even just distract a group of enemies.
This doesn't apply to females only, but I've seen this trend where female characters NEED to be badass or they are " bad characters"
>>47544236
But damsels in distress are meant to represent pure, desirable feminity. They're innocent women in need of protection, women you'd want to save. Having her able to handle herself makes it kind of pointless, and a bit of a DMPC.
>>47544350
I have actually triggered a female player into quitting with a damsel in distress.
When the PCs found the captive princess, her main deal was that she was gorgeous. She was, however, completely useless in a fight. Savvy enough to keep her head down, but she was by no means able to contribute significantly to the party. She was there to be rescued, not to punch her way out.
One player took plenty of offense when - after discussion - the princess revealed that she was actively happy to be returned to her engaged marriage and life of comfort. The PC argued that she should have more respect for herself, and didn't she want to be able to wield power too? Didn't she want to pick and choose who she would marry, shape the face of the kingdom?
The princess looked at her as if she came from another planet, and said: "I have commoners to do things for me."
Thirty-minute argument, especially when she picked the Crown Prince over the knight who'd always carried a torch for her.
>>47546357
Again,
>im-fucking-plying that's what I said
>>47546330
>it wouldn't be realistic to just ignore all of this
yes, it is a scientific fact that a woman captured by orcs will be raped to death
>>47546337
If the players haven't noticed it it's clearly not a problem, so why bring it up?
>>47546382
Same if the woman is captured by bandits or anything attracted to women. She's going to have a really bad night unless there's some specific reason why she would NOT be raped.
>>47546373
You know, I do like what you've done with the princess-in-distress character (especially the 'The princess looked at her as if she came from another planet, and said: "I have commoners to do things for me."' part), I just don't like the motivations behind it.
Well, whatever.
>>47544820
Quiet houseplant! Or else I shall water you.
>>47546382
There was an article about it in Humanoid Quarterly. Try to keep up.
>>47546382
What if she's nobility? Wouldn't that spoil her value as hostage?
>>47546389
existing player base is one thing, because they've moved with you.
If a new player joins, expect a crash course when they want to talk to a sister/wife/mother etc and you stumble all to hell. Or get weirded out that their are never any women present in any social event ever.
>>47545621
Real women I imagine.
>>47546430
You do not dare to water me!
>>47546419
>>47546330
Female captives getting raped all the time is just a sign of laziness on the part of the DM.
>The bandit chief is out on a raid, and left specific instructions that she be saved for him
>The goblins plan on ransoming her back to her loved ones, and know they will get a better price if they don't rape her
>The pirates plan on selling her into slavery, and can get more for her being a virgin
>The cultists need her a virgin for an upcoming demonic ritual, and the party must save her before she's sacrificed
>The orcs have specific rituals regarding women defeated in combat, and the orc who defeated her must fight off any rivals and marry her in a ceremony
There are so many ways you can avoid raping the player while putting the party on the clock for a rescue attempt.
>>47544236
You know, you could just have compassion for an individual that's been captured by evil cults or whatever, even if they are not of immediate "use" to you.
>You can make a captured princess able to handle herself
By this you mean you have to. Anything else is political. But your by now very cliche set way does not have to come "off as a political statement" of course
>>47546419
so you're just going to ignore all the male rape that historically happened too.
Because male prisoners got raped all the time too. It wasn't considered gay for the rapist.
The danger of rape, compared to murder and torture was not the thing that was keeping women from being put in dangerous situations.
>>47546373
>I have actually triggered a female player into quitting with a damsel in distress.
wonderful
>>47546424
>I like it... I just don't like the motivations behind it.
fucking tumblrs
>>47544466
>For my part, I find that overusing the whole damsel in distress thing just gets boring.
Been RPGing 20+ years. I've never seen a damsel in distress scenario in one.
>>47546594
>fucking tumblrs
Do you really have to scapegoat everything that is said?
>>47544998
Women don't all want to be raped, but the majority have """""""""""""rape"""""""""" fantasies.
>>47546637
Oh, yeah, the "rich dashing stranger that gets you out of your boring life and has rough yet highly satisfying sex and then falls in love with you because you're his soulmate" fantasy. I guess that counts as rape.
>>47544045
I do tend to stick to the trope that women tend to be more likely to rely on light weapons or magic than heavy armor and huge battle axe. I often find that I make the BBEG a woman who is manipulative, and in general have more manipulative women doing their dirty work through subtle means rather than force. PCs can do what ever they want though as long as it doesn't break the setting. Adventurers are all individuals anyways, so mass trends in a society don't matter. I almost never make female human minions. You will never find a female mixed in with the town guard that the party has to fight - I do this mostly unconsciously though.
>>47546536
You're right. You don't have to make the princess able to handle herself. But if you want her to be a meaningful character, she should at least be something more than a sack of potatoes that the king is offering a lot of money for.
Have her be useless in a fight, but know some obscure information from all those tutors her father hired. Maybe she's just really good at diplomacy and social skills.
Just a little thing so the players can say, 'huh, the princess is kinda helpful' instead of 'wow this princess is so useless.'
>>47546616
>160 posts
>call 1 post tumblr
>everything
1/160 is clearly not 160/160, I guess you failed math repeatedly?
>>47546730
And now I want a BBEG woman who just wears heavy plate armor and wields a giant battleaxe
>>47546637
And how the fuck would anyone know that? Do you stop women in the street and ask them if they have time to answer a few questions about their rape fantasies?
>>47546711
>I guess that counts as rape.
It is if she didn't give a verbal yes at every occasion.
>>47546773
A verbal yes that can be proven post facto without a drop of alcohol in her for the past 24 hours. We live in the age of "yes means yes" legislation. Legislation with a deceptive name, it should actually be called "yes can sometimes mean no, unless it's a man".
>>47544045
>165 replies
>>47546732
I also like the reluctant rescuee myself. You know she's been kidnapped for whichever reason, but the villain has put into her mind that this is actually a good thing for her, because she'll be free, or fell in love with the villain or whatever.
She then proceeds to try and sabotage the get-away plans of the party every step of the way, or try to escape, or something like that.
>>47546816
That can be a good twist as well, though with a fantasy setting I get the feeling the party might default to assuming she's under mind control.
>>47546833
Does it really matter?
>>47546637
>Being forced to have sex
Men: 31%
Women: 29%
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/how-common-is-your-sexual-fantasy-9835480.html
>Forcing someone to have sex
Women:
10.8
Men:
22
>[...]30 per cent to 60 per cent of women had fantasies involving elements of submission - but, in contrast to the majority of men, many also specified that they never wanted these to come true.
Women who have submissive fantasies are more likely to also have dominant fantasies, also supported by a study reported in http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/1511322
from that article: [...]rape fantasies derive from a generally open, tolerant and guilt-free attitude toward sex.
>>47545530
You forgot formerly a sex worker.
>>47546760
I'm more of a fan of little girl with heavy plate and giant battle axe myself.
>>47544045
I was in a D&D 3.5e game a long time ago where the setting was very matriarchal (female ruler figures, women controlled where and when sex happened, sort of like reversed Muslim society.) I played a strength-based male rogue with a rapier who was basically a dashing homeless man.
I didn't really get to explore the setting though because the DM was fucking insane and threw a shitfit because I won initiative in an encounter, charged an enemy who was about to try and kill us, and stabbed him, downing him with one attack. I told him I forgot to roll my sneak attack and he said it did 4 dmg, and I politely pointed out it does 1d6 damage, causing him to get fucking pissed and say "If you do more than 4 dmg you will kill him and your alignment will shift."
Keep in mind I was A) Chaotic Neutral and it was self-defense, and B) he basically said that alignment didn't exist/didn't work the same in his game anyway.
Now I know better than to play with a DM who says "alignment is different in my game," in fact now I know better than to play third edition period.
I was in a 5e game recently where I played a Paladin in a society that was also very female dominant (this time, the DM was an actual woman.) Long story short, we were hired by Raven Queen Priestesses to retrieve a medallion or something from a dead sister of their church. When we found her body/ghost, the room was infested in undead, so I turned them. APPARENTLY her ghost had such a low max hp that it died from my level 4 Paladin's Turn Undead instantly, and they later chastised me for banishing her ghost to a terrible place in the Shadowfell. To that I simply said, "Well I mean she dedicated her life to the Raven Queen, who is the god of making sure you go to the right afterlife, isn't she? I mean come on Raven Queen, you had one job, am I right?"
>>47546922
>dashing homeless man.
If you say so, but I have my doubts. I'm just glad I haven't seen any mention of the Raven Queen in any 5e books. That deity just felt like a fat GM's girlfriend, and was probably one of my least favorite things about 4e
>>47546493
I will water you, houseplant.
>>47547056
Do not water me!
>>47547048
She is mentioned in the Dawn War pantheon in the Dungeon Master's Guide for 5th edition, along with all the other 4E gods.
I'm mostly being sarcastic when I say dashing homeless man, it was more incredibly witty and capable homeless man that nobody thought to make fun of for being a rogue/poor.
>>47544045
I tend to run the "completely equal" style of game, because it doesn't require any setting explanation, and it tends to make women feel more comfortable at the table. Also, it helps keep the games mostly "PG-13", since personally I'd rather not sit around with my friends and talk about rape, slavery, etc. At least, not in my regular light-hearted weekly games.
Of course, in a historical setting it's somewhat different. I've only played in a couple historical games and it's never really come up.
I think it could be interesting to run/play a game in a setting where there's different cultures with vastly different gender roles. PCs can choose to come from the more egalitarian cultures, or from the cultures with large power imbalances (playing either the powerful side or a rebellious underdog). You could have interesting interactions where the PCs are underestimated because of their gender, and they get to choose whether to fight against that sexism or take advantage of it (nobody will suspect a woman sneaking into the castle!)
But I think it's usually important to have a setting where that sexism isn't universal. Otherwise, it can quickly get tiring, and feel like the GM is punishing you for no reason.
>>47547128
I will water you.
>>47544381
An ironic sexual roleplay with cool girl in a plant costume sounds like it would actually be pretty fun.
Not sure where you would find a sexy plant costume though.
>>47545338
I tend to play supportive characters as female because the two most supportive people I know are my mother and sister, which makes it seem more natural to me.
I imagine it isn't uncommon that guys play female characters that are similar to prominent females in their lives for similar reasons.
>>47547180
poison ivy from batman
>>47547156
>Otherwise, it can quickly get tiring
I can see that. It's sort of like playing Cowboys and Indians (do kids still do that?) and having the black kid be a slave every time. Even if he's an escaped slave or some shit, he's probably going to get tired of his role in every game being tied to slavery in some way.
>>47544133
I like this because it makes player choices more meaningful while avoiding the "-4 str -4 int AMIRITE GUYS XDDDD." It also allows clever players to use societal preconceptions to their advantage.
Why is everyone responding to a bait thread that's just looking for (you)s?
Come on people grow something in that thick skull.
is it Summer already?
>>47547390
Because the OP asked an interesting question. The issue, though, is that due to the nature of *chans--or maybe just /tg/--, the thread degenerated into shitposting. As
>>47544133
>>47544139
predicted.
>>47547460
>opinions I don't like are shitposting
fucking tumblrs (that's 2/188 for the anon keeping track)
Personally I find the who sex and gender thing exhausting.
It's exhausting to play a game all about women stronk.
It's exhausting to play in game about men stronk, women weak.
It's exhausting to play the system injustices misandry revolution sexual typology cucking equality.
It's all so thick and murky and obscuring anything close to a real conversation or to real anything for that matter. Sex arguments are like some sort of pocket dimension of obtuse bile that one finds themselves slipping and falling into at inconvenient moments. I just want to fucking talk to people and have a reasonably good time.
I have no problem with chicks. I'v worked, been friends with and dated women who are perfectly competent and well intentioned. I'v also known plenty who can be spiteful, acid spitting bitches. Of course I'v known plenty of guys who were spiteful acid spiting bitches too.
But to answer the question, in vaguely historically accurate games I play the disadvantage isn't that big a deal unless the law or high society come into play. Most women have to help on the farm or whatever trade their husband is involved in. They make a part of the common community and have conversations and shit. They have their little cliques just as the men have theirs.
They get the short end of the stick in a lot situations. A man is allowed to beat or rape his wife but still it's considered a really shitty thing to do. Women aren't considered for or taken seriously for positions of authority unless they are the QUEEN. A women adventurer is considered very odd and will probably suffer some rude remarks and occasionally a violent pass by some (but most normal folk have a basic sense of decency.) Generally an adventuress is held to higher expectations than most men but if she passes them she earns solid, if grudging, respect.
So basically adventure story/game of thrones rules.
>>47544914
I took it more as limiting the number of NPCs operating outside traditional gender roles, not the player characters, who can be exceptions/rareities
cute meme
>>47547768
cont...
Usually the sex themes stay pretty far in the background even when there is a disparity.
Most of the time the players that really into the sexist bits are they type to already play vaguely sexist characters even out of the type of setting.
However the majority of players just don't care. They treat commoner women, they way they treat commoner men. They might takes passes at them but they sort of do that no matter what the setting. Players just like "rolling seduce."
Noble women are a little different but not much. They might be totally useless, friendly or the scheming type, but probably not likely the physically dangerous type.
Sometimes a player might play a female PC in this sort of setting. They might go full Bob and were a fake moustache and shit or they might just be an adventuring chick. If it's a guy playing the character they tend to make ample use of their womanly wiles, chicks tend to prefer duels of honour and swashbuckling shit.
If the game is about MIGHTY THEWS them all bets are off. Everyone is probably a sexed up combat god or lusty sorcerer/sorceress. "Sexual objectification" is everywhere by everyone so it all balances out. Any arguments of deeper political matters usually end up in sword fights, ultimatly working themselves out. I generally don't run this type of game unless the group is really cool.
>>47545238
I've played MALE characters that hit bingo on this chart.
>>47546848
Congratulations, you fuckin missed the part about 64.9% of women who wanted to be dominated sexually.
>>47548304
That's because the chary had been edited. Notice how some of the more female specific boxes have different font
>>47548463
Some of the edited-in ones aren't exactly difficult for a male character to satisfy.
>>47548537
My point exactly
I usually have RPG settings that are about as matriarchal as our society is patriarchal; ie not very, but women are still generally the most dominant. Guys have an overwhelming tendency to get killed by monsters, and a lot of races like dwarves, half elves, and elves live way longer than humans, so you have the population slanted towards women, and most men are young. This also leads to men having more of a culture of immaturity.
>>47544045
I like settings where some factions are gender based like
> All female Scholars who believe men have unruly and disorganized minds
Or
> Knights so chivalrous they would never allow women to fight alongside them for fear of them getting hurt
>>47545238
>Far left column
Albino Shota who once squired for an order of gun-wielding knights. Repeatedly got his pooper plundered by his master. His order was destroyed and now he wanders the land using is innocent beauty and arsenal of weapons in bloody quest for personal meaning.
>Second left column
A horrifically overweight, sociopathic ex-pornstar. He used to go by Lady-Big when he performed all manner of fascinatingly grotesque sex acts for the entertainment of the mob. However even that could not satisfy the Lady's desire for stimulation, soon he turned to the life of the bounty hunter to get his kicks.
>Middle
80% of all shadowrunners
>second right
A robot built to be the perfect man. A true adonis meant to inspire the world as a politician. However this is not the fate he would choose for himself. He ran away into the world to know the pleasures of flesh and passion. He became a professional cage fighter and soon, deathmatch gladiator. He wears as little as possible for his body is tough as steel and beautiful. Despite seeming so perfect he is actually quite down to earth, he's just one of the boys.
>last column
It's just a fucking serial killer dude
>>47545420
Anon deserves props for being the one dude actually discussing the thread topic and not being a White Knight or Fedora Tipper
>>47546335
Watch Outlaw of Gor.
>>47546335
Its a given that Moarcock is a hypocrite but what is hypocritical about this stance? Is there a great saga of female masochistic pleasure slaves that I have missed?
>>47546493
Is this what ERP is like?
>>47544045
From what I've seen, the games I've played are usually.
Settings where a nation's population is relatively stable, women are just as active in adventuring and being soldiers.
In societies that are more war like or where the threat of losing an entire generation is very real, women are relegated to roles intended to keep them away from danger. While they aren't the ones in positions of power, being married to the person in the seat gives them the influence that man carries. So those are kind of equal...in a way.
>>47546335
I think the fans it spawned says it all
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorean_subculture
>>47547768
This guy fucking gets it.
>>47549007
>White Knight or Fedora Tipper
those are the same thing
>>47549261
just going to jump in and make one small distinction.
There is the Goreans who live online, and are basically misogynistic pieces of shit and think all women should be slaves etc.
Then there are the Goreans who actually interact with people in the kink community, and because they actually talk to real people are much more sensible. For them, they feel this sort of formal power exchange is what is natural FOR THEM. They don't think all men or all women are like that, indeed some allow for dominant women and submissive men. It's long ways from the novel's, and most haven't even read them. It's just formal system of submission and dominance, which they believe reflects their personal natural way of being.
>>47549412
Fedora Tipper:
1. A nonfictional Mary Sue ("anyone I have the least bit of dislike for")
2a. An aggressive atheist
2b. Anyone with beliefs remotely different from my own, but not obviously belonging to a foreign religion (ergo I've been called a fedora tipper for arguing toddlers can experience suffering)
3. Someone who is vaguely reminiscent of a MRA
A white knight, on the other hand, is a male feminist.
>>47546056
Didn't she get burnt as a witch? And her best friend was a homosexual serial killer who targeted little boys?
>>47549496
>3. Someone who is vaguely reminiscent of a MRA
don't make up definitions, it refers to the guys that are all "don't worry m'lady I'll do anything you say" and "I'll protect your ehonor m'lady"
>>47549612
As in the modern era, a great way to smear someone is to make up nonsense about them being a child rapist. Also just like Joan was smeared as being a witch, he was smeared as being a wizard, so...
>>47549648
Giles was definently fucked-up, though. They found rotting bodies in his castle, and so on. Weird that someone who worked with Joan would go batshit.
>>47549639
nah, let him make up definitions, because doing so says much about the user of the definition.
I think we can tell quite a lot about that anon from how he would define that term.
>>47549496
In my experience MRAs are more about the ushanka than the Fedora.
>>47549148
Namely the quote of: "I don't believe in censorship, but I do believe in making it unprofitable." Paraphrased of course.
The main issue I have with it, is why the hell make that statement of yourself, and then totally shit on it within the next sentence? Is he delusional?
>>47549639
>don't make up definitions
I'm not, I'm listing various ways I've heard the term used.
>>47549687
You seem oddly salty.
>>47549801
google "m'lady", check images, and see how many fedoras there are. mra's are sure as fuck not the type of people to call a woman m'lady. the retards you heard using it that way used it the opposite of it's actual meaning.
>>47549753
The fedora tipping meme wouldn't be offensive if you were actually using it on someone you consider to actually like fedoras. Or perhaps its intended to be offensive to fedora wearers since it uses a trilby?
The most high profile example of MRA = fedora tipper would probably be in Beast, wherein Heroes are likened to MRAs and Gamergaters, and one of the sample Heroes uses a fedora and a katana.
>>47549843
It's a meaningless insult like sperg, retard, cuck, fag, nigger etc. None of them ever seem to be used appropriately, on people who actually fulfill the definition.
>>47549843
>the retards you heard using it that way used it the opposite of it's actual meaning.
In the circles I usually see it used, a fedora is either an atheist or someone of a very very teensily different set of beliefs. Presumably, the reason feminists use it to deride people who don't like them is because "m'lady" implies archaic gender beliefs.
Its a very versatile meme, used even before it gained a political/religious context, just for people looking cringy rather than classy in a trilby.
>>47549952
just like the term feminist, seeing how you are using it now.
>>47549844
The funniest part is that Hero, Thaddeus, is a superhuman who killed a dragon. He's also built like an Aryan ubermensch. If anyone can wield a katana unironically, it's him.
>>47549987
>just like the term feminist, seeing how you are using it now.
Ah, problems with reading comprehension, I take it? Don't sweat it.
All I said about feminists was... that I've seen them use the meme for people they don't like. Try again.
>>47549997
Not bad.
>>47549952
>Its a very versatile meme, used even before it gained a political/religious context, just for people looking cringy rather than classy in a trilby.
even back then it was used to refer to a cringy beta white knight type of guy though
>>47550052
and unsurprisingly, what is politically "cringy" will differ based off your politics
>>47550026
of course, so I take it you by no means meant to imply that feminists are a people you dislike and disagree with.
>>47550132
>you by no means meant to imply that feminists are a people you dislike and disagree with.
he couldn't have meant to imply that, feminists aren't people
>>47550132
>so I take it you by no means meant to imply that feminists are a people you dislike and disagree with.
Are you incredibly thin skinned or just bad at reading comprehension?
I don't "imply" anything one way or the other, but that I have seen feminists use it against people they don't like. I genuinely don't give a shit, except when they shit up RPGs, video games, movies, etc.
>>47550232
>Are you incredibly thin skinned or just bad at reading comprehension?
worse, he has a sjw agenda
>>47550277
There's no such thing as SJWs, my women's studies professor told me so.
>>47550335
My girlfriend's husband's daughter also told me so.
Aaaand here we go. Time to leave the thread everybody.
>>47545053
I'm going to go out on a limb, and admit a few things: I like rape fantasies, I like slave girls in my own fantasies, and enjoy reading about such things in fiction.
However, you're spot on about Gor. Dull is right. Dull as dishwater.
The good parts of the setting are various cultures transplanted from earth, the sword and sandals style fights, and the crazy scifi elements like the Priest Kings and the Kurii.
The slave girl stuff is badly written, boring, and worse, completely unbelievable. Even being one of those "shitlords" who gets his rocks off to rape, I can't fap to anything in Gor. It's awful.
Captive of Gor especially will cure you of any interest in the so-called "eroticism" of the Gor novels.
Now to answer OP:
>>47544045
In my own settings, the default middle-ground is where I set it. One of my longest running games had female players, and I doubt they'd have been pleased to have to deal with my magical realm.
Even if I were running a hypothetical magical realm game and my players were on board, I wouldn't force them into anything they didn't want or like. Maybe that seems out of character, considering the above, but whatever.
On the topic of playing female characters (which I do sometimes), I tend to play various types of women, not sticking to a particular type. However, I do rather like warrior women in fiction, and if I play a fighter/warrior/barbarian archetype, she's usually big and strong.
I know that the people who make these threads just want to have a normal discussion but how this kind of thing inevitably devolves into derailment, shitposting and trolling means that threads like these should just be removed and the maker sent a warning.
>>47544045
I haven't done this yet. I probably should.
The question is, how do I make women a hoardable currency? they are quite heavy and do not keep well.
Do I invent some kind of Pokeball?
No, someone's inevitably going to put female assassins or something in the Pokeball and use them as a weapon.
>>47544333
>>47544683
>>47544454
Rape is not a bad thing. It's just sex without consent, and consent is basically meme bullshit that only exists in people's feelz and imaginations.
>>47544176
>is it possible to stray outside of the safe, comfortable default range without it feeling pervy?
Bad question.
Better question: "Does it matter if it's pervy?" Of course not.
>>47550912
Bad things aren't really a bad thing. They're just things without goodness, and goodness is basically meme bullshit and only exists in people's feelz and imaginations.
>>47550820
>things I don't like are derailment, shitposting and trolling
fuck off back to your tumblr safespace, faggot
>>47544426
>they'd get pissed at me for setting up the setting as needlessly antagonistic
I suppose settings can be needlessly antagonistic, but how would women as chattel cause antagony?
>>47550980
This desu.
>>47544530
Eh, if you're sending the players after a MacGuffin, you might as well make the MacGuffin sexy.
>>47550373
That time passed a lot sooner than this
>>47550876
I don't think you'll really be able to separate those two factors. If you're making women into 'currency', and you want it to be along the lines of other treasure and currency that's small and easy to carry, you're going to have that issue.
After all, just as you could make a female assassin in a ball or whatever, you could just as easily coat a coin or some bills in poison.
Unless you outright put some weird spell on the entire world that prevents women from ever attacking a man, you'll always have the issue of female assassins being a thing.
>>47545192
>if women are genetically predisposed to want to stay in the kitchen, why is it always women who argue that they should be able to do other stuff?
The women that argue are the ones that are failures in the kitchen. Typically the single ones.
>>47544716
good b8 have a (you)
>>47550998
>Not liking off-topic political discussions on the traditional games board makes someone a tumblrite.
My point exactly. Take it to /pol/ everyone.
>>47545134
>Individuals are not statistics
The majority of individuals will be near the statistical average. Even among outliers, one human being is made up of many different attributes, and the majority of these attributes will be near the statistical average.
Every human being is a unique combination of different common stereotypes.
>>47551084
>off-topic
we're talking about aspects of traditional gaming on the traditional games board, as I already said take yourself back to your tumblr where you don't have to see what you don't like
>>47545247
>women want to reap the benefits of society without contributing anything
>which is why they campaign to be able to work
Hm, were women typically forbade work because of their sex (and not because they lacked the relevant ability)?
That's odd. Oh well, glad that doesn't happen now.
>>47544045
Time to bust out the popcorn
>>47546801
>Past 24 years.
FTFY
