• Do fat men get a bonus on attractiveness?
• Will there be a bonus based on wealth?
• If I'm a noble, and I have instituded Prima Notcum, what is the number and frequency of marriages I can count on for potential offspring? Is that rolled or do we just roleplay that out? Will it factor into my conscription or hireling rates? It may not be worth the trouble otherwise.
• If someone drinks a potion of gender swapping, do they also swap Abilities? Like, attractiveness becomes STR and vice versa? Which ones swap? I mean, besides the penis and vagina.
• Are you going to have classes based on societal roles? Like, I want to play a female adventurer so my starting class options will be; cook, baker, bar wench, seamstress, field worker, prostitute, midwife, dutiful wife? I'm guessing the male adventurers fare a little better at the start? Because they can fight, ride, wrestle, read / write and travel the countryside defending the kingdom? Are females more inclined to be mages? THAT could be a fantastic -consolation- *ahem* I mean... option.
• Can female PCs earn experience back at home performing "womanly" duties? How do you foresee running the split party of adventuring males and homebound females? If the females are usually wizards, do they get a bonus for downtime work? It's going to be a little tedious watching the men adventure while the women work feverishly on magic items. And mending armor. And cleaning clothes. OOOOH. If the female "adventurer" cleans and repairs armor REALLY well can the male adventurers get a bonus on AC? What about REALLY good meals? Certainly if my female character labors over a fantastic meal AND makes a good roll, that should what... double healing rates?
• If one of the female characters performs her "womanly duties" for the returning adventurers does it heal fear affects? Curses? What about the hirelings. Can amazing sex increase the moral of hirelings? That would be cool. Probably should account for some kind of CON roll/save to see if she gets pregnant. That shit can ruin an adventurer's year, ya know? Sounds like a valid challenge. OOOOOH Pregnancy Skill Challenge! Yes. This would be fun. Ish. Honestly it will be a great way to limit magic item creation from the female Wizards.

You know, there is way too much deliberation on stats. Why not just give all females an 8 + d4 rolled in order. Then, roll %. If you roll a 25 or less your attractiveness is a 14 + 1d4 instead. I hardly imagine all these female focused "adventuring" activities really require any higher abilities. With a good design on female classes, you can bake in all the skill bonuses necessary to navigate those female duties with aplomb.

I can really see how now how the FATAL guys got sidetracked down this rabbit hole. I mean look at all the adventuring challenges females endure! So much opportunity for hardship, oppression and medically related death! If you set aside all modern science, all modern conventions of equality, all concern for player happiness and just LASER FOCUS on all that authentic realistic goodness, you could totally recreate ye olden days. It's like, right there in front of us!

So when I can roll up my dutiful wife female PC for the playtest? This shit is getting me excited. I'm going to look death during child birth right in the eye and tell it go fuck itself!!

Trentin, did I ever tell you you're my hero?

I believe there is a market for "realistic" RPG. AKA, a RPG where great pains were taken to bring realism to all aspects of the game from chargen to combat to monsters, and yet somehow made it playable.

However, I doubt there's a market for a "women have low stats" RPG.

In the ancient times, I gamed with a DM who imposed -2 STR, +1 WIS, +1 CHA for female PCs (min 3, max 18). It just meant nobody played females. I think one of us once played a Female Cleric, maybe. STR loss was too harsh for a fantasy game where everybody except the mage was expected to melee.

I would say that for the OP's project to generate that much response it can't be idiotic, or easily dismissed out of hand.

I submit that traditional RPGs, like D&D, deal with archetypes and anthropological constants found in the human psyche ; in medieval heroic occurences, those would be the archetypal Knight and the archetypal Princess. Though each of us, man and woman, has a kind of Knight image and Princess image in our psyche, it just happens that boys consciously identify with the chivalric image, and girls consciously identify with the princess image.

One advantage of structured make-believe games like RPGs is that a woman player can readily explore the male archetype of the Knight, in addition to the female Princess archetype ; the opportunity is reversed in the case of a male player.

This is the reason IMHO why neither a specific female nor a specific male set of characteristics are needed, and a universal set of characteristics is okay.

Now the OP's project seems to me to be a reaction to a feminist assertion of those last ten years, namely that there are neither female nor male specificities in the physical world (nor in the mental world, for that matter) : the misguided, idiotic and poisonous notion of genre identity.

Despite Trechriron's mockery I think that a medieval fantastic RPG devoted to the celebration of the differences between male and female identities would be interesting. I can imagine it would find its audience ; after all, didn't the Wheel of Time series of books prove that a strongly male/female dichotomous story can have a wide appeal ?

Go for it, PoxBox !

Quote from: Spinachcat;1095890However, I doubt there's a market for a "women have low stats" RPG.

Despite having with women in my group in pretty much every game since the late 80s, I've never had a woman want to play a huge, muscle-bound fighter type. So, while a STR limit on female characters is fine, I haven't found in necessary.

And I don't let male players play female characters. That always turns into a farce.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1095901Despite having with women in my group in pretty much every game since the late 80s, I've never had a woman want to play a huge, muscle-bound fighter type. So, while a STR limit on female characters is fine, I haven't found in necessary.

Why does it matter what they want? This is D&D, they get what they roll up. Or are you one of those commie point-buy guys?

QuoteAnd I don't let male players play female characters. That always turns into a farce.

As opposed to the deft subtlety with which they play dwarves, elves, halflings and half-orcs?

This whole thing is comical. The OP is not bothered by any lack of realism in D&D except this one thing. Why? You are not bothered by players' shitty roleplaying, except this one thing. Why?

But I guess, male nerds having issues about women is not exactly a new problem...

Quote from: ThePoxBox;1095852We have something to simulate training. They're called skills.

And skills apply to taking intelligence tests and lifting weights, the sort of thing you've probably considered for deciding what the raw attributes should be for STR and INT. More generally, the question of Nature vs Nurture could be seen as Nature(Genes/Attributes) vs Nurture(Cultural skill level imposition/acquisition).

As this is a long and ongoing RW debate, my recommendation follows some of the guidance above. Don't try to solve puzzles of the RW in order to make the game you want to make. Get on and make the game incorporating the overall outcome patterns you want from (Attributes + Skills + Training + ...) for the sexes and ancestries of your game world.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1095903Why does it matter what they want? This is D&D, they get what they roll up. Or are you one of those commie point-buy guys?


As opposed to the deft subtlety with which they play dwarves, elves, halflings and half-orcs?

This whole thing is comical. The OP is not bothered by any lack of realism in D&D except this one thing. Why? You are not bothered by players' shitty roleplaying, except this one thing. Why?

But I guess, male nerds having issues about women is not exactly a new problem...

Great. Just great. Now I owe Kyle a beer.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1095903This is D&D, they get what they roll up. Or are you one of those commie point-buy guys?

Players always choose what they play. Either through point buy or by re-rolling until they get the stats they want. At least the former method is fair.

QuoteAs opposed to the deft subtlety with which they play dwarves, elves, halflings and half-orcs?

If elves and dwarves existed in the real world, I'd probably limit those character to players of the same race. As it stands, all my players are human.

QuoteWhy? You are not bothered by players' shitty roleplaying, except this one thing. Why?

I'm bothered by all shitty roleplaying. Which is why I veto any character I know will go badly. Dude's playing chicks is just one of many red flags.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1095903Why does it matter what they want? This is D&D, they get what they roll up. Or are you one of those commie point-buy guys?


As opposed to the deft subtlety with which they play dwarves, elves, halflings and half-orcs?

This whole thing is comical. The OP is not bothered by any lack of realism in D&D except this one thing. Why? You are not bothered by players' shitty roleplaying, except this one thing. Why?

But I guess, male nerds having issues about women is not exactly a new problem...

This Guy Gets it.

Quote from: Malleustein;1095870To me, 18 Strength means +3 to hit, damage and break down doors.

Within the world it means very strong, almost certainly big and muscular.

If I were being "realistic" about the assumption that Strength 18 is the pinnacle of Human physique, I would demand the character spend hours daily weight training, eat a special diet and under no circumstances go on adventures due to the time it would take out of his regime and the risk of injury.

That is why I don't give a shit about realism.

As does this one.

Quote from: trechriron;1095877

• Do fat men get a bonus on attractiveness?
• Will there be a bonus based on wealth?
• If I'm a noble, and I have instituded Prima Notcum, what is the number and frequency of marriages I can count on for potential offspring? Is that rolled or do we just roleplay that out? Will it factor into my conscription or hireling rates? It may not be worth the trouble otherwise.
• If someone drinks a potion of gender swapping, do they also swap Abilities? Like, attractiveness becomes STR and vice versa? Which ones swap? I mean, besides the penis and vagina.
• Are you going to have classes based on societal roles? Like, I want to play a female adventurer so my starting class options will be; cook, baker, bar wench, seamstress, field worker, prostitute, midwife, dutiful wife? I'm guessing the male adventurers fare a little better at the start? Because they can fight, ride, wrestle, read / write and travel the countryside defending the kingdom? Are females more inclined to be mages? THAT could be a fantastic -consolation- *ahem* I mean... option.
• Can female PCs earn experience back at home performing "womanly" duties? How do you foresee running the split party of adventuring males and homebound females? If the females are usually wizards, do they get a bonus for downtime work? It's going to be a little tedious watching the men adventure while the women work feverishly on magic items. And mending armor. And cleaning clothes. OOOOH. If the female "adventurer" cleans and repairs armor REALLY well can the male adventurers get a bonus on AC? What about REALLY good meals? Certainly if my female character labors over a fantastic meal AND makes a good roll, that should what... double healing rates?
• If one of the female characters performs her "womanly duties" for the returning adventurers does it heal fear affects? Curses? What about the hirelings. Can amazing sex increase the moral of hirelings? That would be cool. Probably should account for some kind of CON roll/save to see if she gets pregnant. That shit can ruin an adventurer's year, ya know? Sounds like a valid challenge. OOOOOH Pregnancy Skill Challenge! Yes. This would be fun. Ish. Honestly it will be a great way to limit magic item creation from the female Wizards.

You know, there is way too much deliberation on stats. Why not just give all females an 8 + d4 rolled in order. Then, roll %. If you roll a 25 or less your attractiveness is a 14 + 1d4 instead. I hardly imagine all these female focused "adventuring" activities really require any higher abilities. With a good design on female classes, you can bake in all the skill bonuses necessary to navigate those female duties with aplomb.

I can really see how now how the FATAL guys got sidetracked down this rabbit hole. I mean look at all the adventuring challenges females endure! So much opportunity for hardship, oppression and medically related death! If you set aside all modern science, all modern conventions of equality, all concern for player happiness and just LASER FOCUS on all that authentic realistic goodness, you could totally recreate ye olden days. It's like, right there in front of us!

So when I can roll up my dutiful wife female PC for the playtest? This shit is getting me excited. I'm going to look death during child birth right in the eye and tell it go fuck itself!!

Damn...another one, maybe I need to lighten up about this place.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1095908I'm bothered by all shitty (IYOHO empasis inserted) roleplaying. Which is why I veto any character I know will go badly. Dude's playing chicks is just one of many red flags.

1. What are some of your other red flags?

2. Do you restrict female players from playing male characters?

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1095901Despite having with women in my group in pretty much every game since the late 80s, I've never had a woman want to play a huge, muscle-bound fighter type. So, while a STR limit on female characters is fine, I haven't found in necessary.

Never? Wow, must be a D and D thing, I guess. Most of the women I've played with in that span of time have play 'muscle bound' warrior types at some point or another of either or some alternate or no gender. But different strokes.

No women players have ever rolled up a high Strength character and kept it or do you use selection arrays or a point buy format of some kind? Point buy is my personal preference particularly if I'm worried about players getting a character they want to play.  But random can be fun from time to time to 'cleanse the pallet' and shake you out of ruts.

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1095908Players always choose what they play. Either through point buy or by re-rolling until they get the stats they want. At least the former method is fair.

Your players are pantywaists. My now ex-wife rolled her 3d6 in order and trounced some fuckin' dungeons rocking 6's and 8's on the stat line. Oh. And she was playing this dude:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3598[/ATTACH]

Tell your players to grow a pair.

To the OP:

If you create an incentive system in your character options, you're going to see a prevalence of the most favorable character option in the long run. Duh. You seem to understand economics, well buddy, that's econ 101. In the short-run, though? You're struggling to comprehend human motivation: people who come into your chargen system without fully grokking it are gonna get turned off real fast if it's sophisticated enough to obfuscate it's stat trends to casual observation. "Oh, I didn't want my character to be weaker, I just wanted to play a girl" is rapidly gonna become "I am not going to play this anymore" if your rejoinder is some turgid justification "WELL IT WAS RIGHT THERE YOU READ THE RULE ITS YOUR FAULT NO GENDER BENDING" etc. etc.

It's effectively sabotaging your game's meager chance of any financial success (I mean that structurally, not as an insult: RPGs aren't cash cows). I strongly suggest writing down some clear, concise design goals and communicating them up front so your game finds it's intended audience directly; otherwise, you risk garbling your intent and injuring your WOM, which is basically line suicide.

Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1095893I would say that for the OP's project to generate that much response it can't be idiotic, or easily dismissed out of hand.

For me, its more because I'm bored, its a quiet Monday morning and this is too damn funny to ignore. I haven't seen this "Gurls need limits to be REALISTIC schtick for pretty good while...it is a classic. But yeah, maybe some people are here to show off their deep intimidation and shaken belief structure created by TheoxBox (who totally didn't come here, answering a question no one has asked for years, in an effort to get attention and receive back pats for standing up to the SJWs, feminazis, etc. To be fair, given some of this board's rep, not an out there expectation...-

Quote from: Toadmaster;1095674Based on the 2018 Olympics the top women lifted a combined 331kg, vs 478kg for the top man, or about 70% or a max of 13.

Even though I've been arguing against getting too tied to "realism", my physicist side wants to consider modelling something like this. For the top male weight lifter, does anyone know the range of weights over which he'd go from 100% chance of success to 0%?

Is 100% chance at 400kg, 450kg, 460 kg?
Is 0% 479 kg, 480 kg, 500 kg?

My guess is that there results are a lot less "swingy" than most skill RPG systems and that variation in performance is a small fraction compared to overall ability. That's why world ranking work for weight lifting, tennis etc. without lots of volatility.  

In RPG terms it's more like FATE than d20?  

Now, I'm not saying that modelling that and then having to use it is what a game should do - but does anyone have a sense of how the real world work for these things?