Quote from: Snowman0147;1095666You know I often treated female pcs as the exception to the rule instead of the general population.  Like the lady knight who has +4 strength mod, but isn't body builder muscular (don't get me wrong the knight has some meat on her bones) would know how to use her strength instead of using raw physical force.  While most women generally go for more traditional roles the knight sticks out because inspite of the physical flaws women have in combative fields this woman actually knows how to handle it.  

Like wise I had a entire army of amazons who fight just as good as men because they are eldritch rites they perform to give them that ability which explains why they have a army instead of one rare woman who can tough it out with the best of them.

That's how I do it - PC generating rules are for PCs, not the general population. The general population may average STR 10 men and STR 7 women, and you may not see many women in the city guard, but PCs use the same stat generating methods.

IMO using different generation rules for male and female PCs needs good game-specific reasons. It makes sense in Pendragon if you allow female PCs, but not in most genres.

I do recall Runequest 3 having lower STR rolls for female NPCs and this causing the 80s version of REEEEs in White Dwarf magazine even though PCs were unaffected.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1095674Why even mess with INT, I'm not aware of anything that credibly shows a significant difference between genders.

There are some small differences in measured IQ by sex, testing on white British Ehrwing found a small 3 point difference, men scoring higher. 3 points is not something you'll generally notice* and is less than 1 point on a 3d6/3-18 type INT generating system.

*Differences around 10-15 points start to become noticeable I'd say.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1095701Excellent. I look forward to this edition of D&D and its realism. Let's continue in the realistic vein, and remove demihumans and monsters, levels and escalating hit points, and of course magic.

Realism! We could call it RealManD&D. Let's get going with it! I'm on board.

There should be detailed and realistic rules for frequency, volume and composition of defecation too.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1095687This reads like a parody.

That could apply to the entire notion. I thought rpgers were over this kind of thing after FATAL was squeezed out.

Roll 3d6 to find out.

Quote from: tenbones;1095589What if I'm a female with the MSTN gene mutation and I suffer from dwarfism but I'm not an actual dwarf? What does my array look like now?

Roll 3d6 to find out.

Quote from: S'mon;1095630This doesn't fit with what I saw doing mixed sex army training, or what the instructors said - they said female recruits were more prone to injury, and that's what I saw. You get plenty of recent combat-deployment accounts that support this too. Women might in D&D terms have +1 to CON save, but fewer hit points.

This jibes with what one of my friends mentioned after getting out of service. But was it not more like a difference in how women react to injury? And more importantly. How they recover from injury?

Addendum: Saw your later post. So seems in some ways yes?

Quote from: Snowman0147;1095666You know I often treated female pcs as the exception to the rule instead of the general population.  Like the lady knight who has +4 strength mod, but isn't body builder muscular (don't get me wrong the knight has some meat on her bones) would know how to use her strength instead of using raw physical force.  While most women generally go for more traditional roles the knight sticks out because inspite of the physical flaws women have in combative fields this woman actually knows how to handle it.  

Like wise I had a entire army of amazons who fight just as good as men because they are eldritch rites they perform to give them that ability which explains why they have a army instead of one rare woman who can tough it out with the best of them.

Same here. Its allways been a core of my settings and RPGs. The average folk out there cleave fairly close to real world stat equivalents. Women tend to a little less in the strength area, but may be more agile. Whereas the adventurers are those that can through training rise above that. Same as in the real world a woman who has had military training is likely going to be stronger than one who hasnt. Or a woman who works on a farm for that matter.

Quote from: Aglondir;1095657What is Reedom?

Not poking fun, I make typos all the time. I'm assuming you meant Freedom, but I don't understand how your proposed rules are liberating, or what they are liberating the players from. Or am I reading too much into the title?

REEEEdom is a pun on the sound that SJWs make on the Internet when they see something they don't like. Suggesting that men and women are different is a big no no at this point to post modernists.

This design choice is coming from a personal experience I had with Skyrim. I elaborate in my response to RPGPundit. Basically making the game world feel like reality to make the magical and fantastic things really stand out is what I'm going for.

I'm not doing this to try and bait anyone. I just know what kind of response some people might give, and I'm mocking it.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1095642I'm always confused by demands of realism in a fantasy game.

If I'm playing an elf casting magic spells in a world with dragons and demons, I don't see why I would be concerned with any aspects of realism.

Also, RPGing is all about escapism. If I want to be a spell casting elf, I can't see why someone else can't play Conana the Barbarianess.

It's not a dig on the OP. It's my same stance as when gamers complain D&D doesn't match medieval history.




5e FATAL done as a super serious but bizarre parody RPG would sell just so people could own a copy of the madness.

All of the parts you mention are the product of fantasy writing and art. Elves, magic, dragons, and demons are fictional and therefore aren't the target of the mechanics concerning creating an immersive, believable baseline for the setting.

It's also not supposed to be about what you can and can't do. In my game there will not be restrictions on stats to become a certain class. Multi-classing feats will still maintain their stat minimums. I'm also warming up to the idea of all human PCs being 3d6 based and having NPC creation be different. As much as RPGPundit thinks I might be doing this for attention and that the idea is "idiotic" I will tell you that I've been mulling around this concept with friends for a while now, and we've finally found an array of numbers that feels right to start play testing.

Quote from: CarlD.;1095671ThePoxBox, I think I may be reading your modifications incorrectly. Wisdom, Intelligence, and Charisma seem to come out lower for female humans?

They do have lower maximums with less variance. To use a financial metaphor, males seem to have chosen small cap stocks, and females seem to have chosen bonds. It's almost as if the sexes have specialized and the union of them creates more than the sum of its parts.

Quote from: ThePoxBox;1095778As much as RPGPundit thinks I might be doing this for attention and that the idea is "idiotic" I will tell you that I've been mulling around this concept with friends for a while now, and we've finally found an array of numbers that feels right to start play testing.

Groupthink among your friends doesn't disprove idiocy.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1095711You may not be concerned with realism, but I bet you're concerned with versimilitude.

Exactly! Like how RPGPundit breaks down "Authentic" vs. "Realism", I do the same with "Versimilitude" vs. "Realism".

AKA, I focus on the internal logic of the game setting. In a setting like Godbound, kaiju just might be footballs. In a setting like Conan, they would certainly not be.

Quote from: ThePoxBox;1095778All of the parts you mention are the product of fantasy writing and art. Elves, magic, dragons, and demons are fictional and therefore aren't the target of the mechanics concerning creating an immersive, believable baseline for the setting.

Beyond male vs. female stats, what makes your setting more believable than D&D?

Especially if non-human NPCs are not built off the believable baseline?

Personally, since the OP mentioned this is for 5e, I think you could leave the stats alone (they should be based on 4d6 drop lowest for 5e anyway), but have bonuses (say 1/2 proficiency) to certain skills. Males being physically stronger on average might have a bonus to athletics, while females being, on average, better at reading social dynamics might have a bonus to insight.

If it must be ability scores, my recommendation would be that females should have a slightly higher average and equal maximum WIS score compared to men (better risk aversion and ability to read social cues in general seems like things tied to Wisdom) and put the Int and Cha scores back to 3d6 (the differences in recorded IQs aren't significant enough to filter into a 3-18 scores and Charisma is so subjective I'd be inclined to say that men and women tend to use it differently instead of having different scores for it).