Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So yeah like the title says what would that be like. I think people would cry unfair if you want to play a class but don't want to be de-buffed for the gender you choose (most likely your own unless you want to play as the other sex) but to me it makes sense even in a real life situation. Men have muscles but even when i was in karate you could tell women can generally stretch easier and possibly do more flexible things with their bodies possibly due to lack of said muscles which possibly get in the way (normally at about black belt men were about as flexible but still probably not as good whereas low level belts you could easily tell that men were less flexible). In this sense men would be better fighters and tanks and women would be better rogues and archers and such. This to me would work provided it doesn't really bother any players that want to play a class and don't want penalties based on the sex they choose. So i figure the choice should be up to the GM and players (or video game setting features) if they so wish for the rest of said game. I figure the buffs and debuffs for each sex would be fairly small but significant enough to make a difference (for instance if a race gets +5 for magic in this case men might get +2 to strength and women +2 to dexterity).

Anyway i figure this makes more sense in some ways. A woman can still be strong just like in the real world but it's probably tougher for them just as it's tougher for men (at least at first) to do all those acrobatics and super dexterity heavy moves women can do a bit easier.

I think some RPG's already use stats to differentiate men and women anyways I don't feel one way or the other about so long as it's balanced. Also is this a thread about pen and paper RPG's, video-game RPG's or Rocket Propelled Grenades?

I prefer rocket propelled grenades, but I didn't think they separated them on gender? I mean, rocket propelled grenades are pretty egalitarian, after all, they all want the same thing and frankly they don't have time in their short, very exciting lives for such nonsense.

We should all strive to be like rocket propelled grenades. Loud, fast, and explosively exciting!

 Melissia wrote:
Loud, fast, and explosively exciting!

And ends in seconds. Just like any sex that includes me ! Ok i kid.

Also when did melissia start having emotions other than anger and the desire to kill.

@cheesecat: This is kind of for everything really whether video games or pen and paper rpg's. It's more just rpg's in general. Wasn't sure on the best place to put it but more after the fact is when i noticed. I think it could work as an option for games. Gives things a bit more depth.

They did it in oblivion - argonian women were better spellcasters by a long shot but the men were better rogues.

I think in an RPG its a bit pointless as while gender might favour some aspects the whole point of a good stat system is that it allows for the natural variety in humans

Arbitrary and pointless.

I like how Dragon's Dogma did things. Your character's abilities were not affected by your gender, but by your build. Tall characters had wider strides and thus walked faster. Heavier set characters recovered stamina slower, but could carry more. There were quite a few different bonuses depending on the specific size and shape of your character.
It was entirely possible to build uber muscular gigantic men and women (or super frail and tiny ones), and both ended up with a believable set of bonuses/handicaps that didn't feel arbitrarily tacked on because of their gender.

I never played 'dragon's dogma' partially due to lack of funds for games i want as is. That actually sounds pretty awesome.

I don't think the things i mentioned are terrible exactly but i do notice it seems to effect the sexes somewhat. Depending on how strong or flexible somebody tries to be through training they can make such advantages seem more trivial but without getting stronger or better at dexterity it seems to be somewhat more pronounced.

Yes, but there are always exceptions.

I have a reputation for being very flexible, moreso than most women, yet I also have a reputation for being quite physically weak.
Being unable to represent such a circumstance just because of some arbitrary gender discrimination is just a silly idea at best.

Meh, seems pointless to me. While women are inferior to man in regards to physics, they make up with cognitive advantages; but since that's just on average, there might (!) be a woman that's stronger than a man and vice versa

I would say that while there is a noticable 'real world' difference (i.e. our lab-devised tests can determine that because of XYZ men are less ABC than women, and men are better at DEF because of LMN), when you scale things into a video game, those differences become largely unnoticable due to abstraction models.

I would say that unless your working in a percentile (x/100) system, there would be little difference between male/female dexterity and strength, particularly in the living conditions expressed in most fantasy tropes.

Real world... look at a Kung Fu master and tell me that women are generally better than men at dexterity. Likewise a woman weightlifter would put me to shame on strength.

To talk D&D, I like the system where you can convert 2 for 1. So if you perceive that men are stronger than women, you could say -2 Dex and -2 Charisma and add +2 to Strength. It allows you to make the character you perceive in your mind but at a heft penalty. So you can guarantee an 18 strength but you may have straight 10s in all the other stats.

shouldn't men get str+dex
and women get a bonus to cooking and sneaking?

 Grundz wrote:
shouldn't men get str+dex
and women get a bonus to cooking and sneaking?

Oh no you di'nt!

I like how Dragon's Dogma did things. Your character's abilities were not affected by your gender, but by your build. Tall characters had wider strides and thus walked faster. Heavier set characters recovered stamina slower, but could carry more. There were quite a few different bonuses depending on the specific size and shape of your character.
It was entirely possible to build uber muscular gigantic men and women (or super frail and tiny ones), and both ended up with a believable set of bonuses/handicaps that didn't feel arbitrarily tacked on because of their gender.

That's kind of awesome.

 Skarwael wrote:

 Grundz wrote:
shouldn't men get str+dex
and women get a bonus to cooking and sneaking?

Oh no you di'nt!

Youre right,
They only think theyre good at sneaking

 Fafnir wrote:
Arbitrary and pointless.

I like how Dragon's Dogma did things. Your character's abilities were not affected by your gender, but by your build. Tall characters had wider strides and thus walked faster. Heavier set characters recovered stamina slower, but could carry more. There were quite a few different bonuses depending on the specific size and shape of your character.
It was entirely possible to build uber muscular gigantic men and women (or super frail and tiny ones), and both ended up with a believable set of bonuses/handicaps that didn't feel arbitrarily tacked on because of their gender.

I didn't realize a game was actually that well designed. I wish everyone did that, that would be awesome.

 Amaya wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
Arbitrary and pointless.

I like how Dragon's Dogma did things. Your character's abilities were not affected by your gender, but by your build. Tall characters had wider strides and thus walked faster. Heavier set characters recovered stamina slower, but could carry more. There were quite a few different bonuses depending on the specific size and shape of your character.
It was entirely possible to build uber muscular gigantic men and women (or super frail and tiny ones), and both ended up with a believable set of bonuses/handicaps that didn't feel arbitrarily tacked on because of their gender.

I didn't realize a game was actually that well designed. I wish everyone did that, that would be awesome.

It's fantastic. My roommate recently got me playing it again after a long hiatus, and now I can't put it down. I can't wait for the new expansion/director's cut, Dark Arisen, to come out. And it really is quite amazing how they manage to go into so much detail in the game.

 Grundz wrote:
shouldn't men get str+dex
and women get a bonus to cooking and sneaking?

Making Sandwiches increased to 34.

That's probably what the male Japanese CEOs think..

So does the OP assume that every man is strong and every woman is lithe? Because I know I am not as strong as my ex, she is a massage therapist, but I tend to be a bit more nkmble than her.

Is that wrong?

And I'm stronger than a lot of my male friends (I actually exercise regularly, for one... and a lot of them are out of shape).

My argument is a bit simpler though-- the player character is, by definition, an exceptional character. They are not normal. They're the player character. The Commander Shepard, the Jedi Exile, the Dragonborn, and so on. There's no need to apply cultural norms to them specifically because they AREN'T normal.

 Fafnir wrote:
Yes, but there are always exceptions.

I have a reputation for being very flexible, moreso than most women, yet I also have a reputation for being quite physically weak.
Being unable to represent such a circumstance just because of some arbitrary gender discrimination is just a silly idea at best.

Yeah i understand completely that men or women can be strong or have a lot of dexterity. My point is if both didn't train it'd be more pronounced in some ways. If both did train the slight boost becomes almost invisible. I understand body shape and such matters too but i'd like to see a lot of this in a game. Normally there are more racial features with fantasy characters and to me in some ways that seems a bit ridiculous. While i'm sure a cat-man can see better in the dark and is probably more nimble it doesn't mean they all have to do that. It just happens that they're good at that overall.

I think the point of RPGs is to play the sort of character you want to play.

Love that concept for Dragons Dogma, shame the game has no further appeal for me.

In general I am of the same camp as Mel, the PC characters in general are portrayed as nearly always the height of their racial species, or the potential for it and any further restrictions/changes based on gender would be pretty much superfluousness to the game.

It's also going to 'risk' causing needless offence, so why would any games company want to potentially antagonise parts of their fan base?


Putting my mod-hat on for a sec, this is a fair subject, however it could easily turn into a gathering point for triangles of friendship, so please be aware of what you are posting and keep any 'ism' out of the thread.

Isn't that just reinforcing gender stereotypes?

I prefer games were you have some latitude in choosing your stats etc. regardless of gender.If I take a tank and want to put all my points into magic then that should be my choice, no matter how stupid

I thought WoW's approach was a great model. Minor stats differences to accentuate the traits of race right off the get go, but really, apart from the racially specific abilities, there wasn't a whole lot of differences between the races and genders by the end of the game. That was of course original WoW and Burning Crusade; I don't even know what they've done to the game since WoTLK.

The only major difference between races in WoW are the actual racial abilities, which do make a huge difference in certain cases and lead to a serious imbalance between races and factions for min/maxing. Humans are better for PvP, Trolls have one of the best (imo the best for casters) racials for PvE DPS, and Night Elves have a nice PvE tanking racial.


I don't think any differences between genders is a good idea. Too many PC problems.

 Melissia wrote:
And I'm stronger than a lot of my male friends (I actually exercise regularly, for one... and a lot of them are out of shape).

My argument is a bit simpler though-- the player character is, by definition, an exceptional character. They are not normal. They're the player character. The Commander Shepard, the Jedi Exile, the Dragonborn, and so on. There's no need to apply cultural norms to them specifically because they AREN'T normal.

Skyrim does actually change your stats if you are male or female, though it's different per race and not just limited to Dex/Str.

Well like i said i felt the difference should be entirely the player's choice in the options menu whether to turn 'on' or 'off'. A small boost doesn't take away your ability or inability to do something. You can be a strong woman in the real world just as you can be a a dexterous man. It's all your choice what you want to become good at. That's why eventually it's mostly pointless.

Agreed. That's why I like games like Fallout, Dark Souls and similar; the only real difference is how several conversations change, and how Fallout let's you sleep with different people.