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.

I don't see how it could be an issue if people are doing it in good faith, as Melissa et al say.

I have no issue with it so long as it's played well, I had an RPG last year where one of the male players was playing as a female and did so terribly.

 Manchu wrote:
Great post, zbg97. But I think I see where you are going with this:

zbg97 wrote:
... did he let humans play other races?

And I think it's a different topic. Stereotyping about fantasy races is nothing like stereotyping about real world categories.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@MGS - Sounds like you have been RPGing with schnucks. One of my favorite characters of all time was not only female but also insane. She was compelling enough to become one of the main anatgonists of the campaign after I stopped playing her. I also have seen guys play female characters very well even in their first RPG session.

I've been in many terrible groups, especially D&D ones in flgs, with too many adolescents or misogynists with very little actual interaction with real members of the opposite sex, it leads to 'we go to the inn to try and sleep with the barmaids' or one or other of them playing a 'sthuper-sthexy elven sthlut' who constantly indulges in 'I don't sit at the table with the rest of the party, I sit on the table, my long legs swinging back and forth, bored and looking coy' sort of gak.

Oh, your female character is exceptionally beautiful, what a surprise... Oh, she giggles a lot or looks sultry in inappropriate situations, most unexpected... Wait, she's bisexual and a bit of a vampire on the quiet despite her being rolled as a straight human, well shiver my timbers... Yeah, tropes and awful stereotypes can abound, I personally would really rather not have it in the game, especially given that I do love and always try to have a mixed gender group of players, as I think it adds a great dimension to the group's thinking and actions.

On insanity, VtM is my principal game for actual characters and roleplaying in any meaningful way, I've seen so many Malkavians done terribly, all rubber chickens and wakka wakka bs, the only two I ever saw done well were: A) a malkavian drifter played by two different players, who worked alternating shifts at a local shop, we never knew which one would show up and play the character in a totally different way each session, sometimes in the middle of an encounter the other player would show up and play the character, in game, the character's persona would just have suddenly switched, it made for some classic moments. B) a malkavian priest who was played dead serious all the way through, he never manifested his insanity in front of the other characters, just in front of the other players, so he'd wander away from the group in a scenario and begin to talk to God about the path, about his redemption, about the 'gift' afforded to him to continue the Holy Work and about the fates and futures of the other characters, in creepy, quiet rants. All the players were treated to his really dark and unpleasant delusions, but their characters never ever knew, so they had to rp around their ooc knowledge of just how messed up and dangerous he was.

I don't think I've ever played an RPG without trying to roleplay my character meaningfully.


Except maybe Paranoia.

On insanity: even if your portrayal is not offensive, it's also important that you don't get in the way of the other players' enjoyment of the game.

My best character was one who wasn't the most stable of individuals, but hid it well. The clues were there if you knew what you were looking for, but she was mostly functional. And when she wasn't functional, it was when a bound slaver was trying to commit suicide by escaped slave, so while it would have changed the party dynamic if she had punched his head off his shoulders without the party stopping her, it wouldn't have ruined the game for everyone else just because "it's what my character would do!"

One of my memorable characters was insane in a subtle way as well.

She was an incurable optimist in a Dark Heresy game. In fact, her optimism went so far it creeped the other people in the group out.

The best Malkavians I saw were the ones that weren't obviously insane. They kept their mental illnesses under wraps and hidden away, and unless you REALLY got nosy, with the best of them you'd never even know they had a derangement. I always appreciated players who were capable of having their own character's mental illness be a deeply personal thing, without feeling the need to broadcast it to everyone around them.

 Melissia wrote:
She was an incurable optimist in a Dark Heresy game.

Given the severity of some of the encounters that can be thrown at you in that setting, coming out of one of those with even a glimmer of optimism can be seen as something dangerously deranged.

 Melissia wrote:
I don't think I've ever played an RPG without trying to roleplay my character meaningfully.

A lot of 'rinse and repeat' dungeon bash style dnd and pathfinder where there is little to no time for interactive roleplay and instead a series of narratives, in character, by the dm and then into another series of corridors and encounters to kill and glean xp and loot from.

I don't enjoy them much but having moved around a great deal, I take what I can get.

I'm starting my own Rogue Trader in a couple of weeks, so whilst I will have to dm, at least I'll get some rp done.

gak man, I know that itch, I've been without a group since early Summer now. Not that I really miss the old group and GM, but I do miss it.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Unfortunately, it seems like every gaming group I've ever seen has at least one of those people.

There are just some gamers who, even if they are totally good players otherwise, just lack the maturity or self-control to play a cross-gender character without getting silly, offensive, or distracting to the rest of the group.

It's also not hard to find a guy that has some sort of problem/issue/neurosis regarding women. Put five guys around a table, and is anybody shocked that one of them happens to have some ax to grind with women? Hell, one guy in my gaming group seems like a really nice guy, but clealry has some massive hang ups with women.

I don't think gamer's are any more or less mysogenist, they simply have fewer ways to really express it.

The dude that played a woman in one of my RPG's had the opposite problem really, he just played his character as he would a male character regardless of the circumstances.

 Polonius wrote:
I don't think gamer's are any more or less mysogenist, they simply have more ways to really express it.

Fixed that for you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BrookM wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
She was an incurable optimist in a Dark Heresy game.

Given the severity of some of the encounters that can be thrown at you in that setting, coming out of one of those with even a glimmer of optimism can be seen as something dangerously deranged.

"Don't worry guys, I have a good feeling about this one!"

 Corpsesarefun wrote:
The dude that played a woman in one of my RPG's had the opposite problem really, he just played his character as he would a male character regardless of the circumstances.

In my Rogue Trader group we had one guy, who played the chaplain, which wasn't really by choice, but by chance, as he decided to randomly roll up his character, resulting in a noble born preacher who was always looking for donations for that big hole in the chapel roof. For the most part, he played his character as one of the guys, though this could've probably also had to do with us being navy characters, where all titles and whatnot are in male form only, though this could be due to the GM being a dick. Only real odd thing was whenever we got to a new world he had to get a fancy dress and would tell me that he still had to buy X more dresses until my demise. We also got into a big fight during a formal event, where (s)he wanted to dance with me, because I was the only other noble born character or something and I politely declined, which resulted in us bickering like an old couple until the captain had to pry himself free from his date and tell us to knock that gak off.

 Melissia wrote:
"Don't worry guys, I have a good feeling about this one!"

Out of curiosity, which class were you?

Adept.

She was also a blank, so the creepiness factor was probably multiplied by the fact that her Fellowship was in the low teens.

Hehe, when a mostly non-combat character says stuff like that, it can really get on the nerves of some.

Oddly enough, she was actually rather successful in combat. She used a hand cannon with manstopper rounds, and did aimed headshots with remarkable success. Including some reahter hilarious headshots of villains that caused the GM to facepalm and decide that the gun needed a name.

Sure she wasn't wielding a heavy stubber or an autogun but she could defend herself as long as she didnt' get stuck in melee.

Regarding the blank bit, how do the others in your group play around with that bit? Because usually it's really hard to be around a blank, just look at Lizzy Bequin and Wystan Frauka from Eisenhorn and Ravenor and how people react to them.

May want to start a new thread on that, BrookM.

Right, sorry guv.

Most interesting female character I've ever seen run...was run by a man, and it was incredibly fun.

That being said, i'm in a D&D 3.5 campaign right now running an artificer based off of tiny tina from Borderlands 2....and thats a blast as well.

If artificers weren't so terrible in 3.5 I'd do that in a heartbeat.

They aren't though...they just take prep and imagination, and you are essentially batman. I made myself an iron golem, and ride on its shoulders with wand bracers, firing off quickened twin-shot enervations at all foolish enough to try and stop me. I made fake gold piece coins that when thrown, are fireballs!
Ever heard of Pun Pun? There is an artificer exploit that beats that exploit...its horrifing. Called the Omnificer
http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1481596 (The build)

I am a little surprised by the results of this poll. The last time this topic came up the results where totally inverse whit most groups answering that they had banned men from playing women characters. The topic of women playing ... well actually the topic that women even existed didn't even come up. It seems clear things have changed.

Personally I don't have any kind of problem with people playing out their gender. It's kind of the point of RP. Your trying to experience something new. Your trying to be something else your not in real life.

I also don't like to judge another players RP. How do you judge RP? I have my idea of what I think the best RP is, but I bet that my idea is different then someone else idea. What makes my view more valid then your view or your view more valid then mine? (Exception is when someone is offending someone else.)

I'll take a look at that Omnificer but in my experience Artificers are just terrible wizards with a warlocks item crafting bonuses, which saddens me as conceptually they are my favourite class.

I looked at the Omniscificer, it seems to be mostly for stopping pun-pun...

My artificer at level 10 between wand metamagic feats, can fire 8 enervation off in a round, dealing 8d4 negative levels before anyone can act by using the belt of battle im using (Free full round action 1/day like Celerity).

Back on topic, men generally can't play women well,but it can make some funny/interesting situations.

Oddly, I've noticed that I find playing women feels a bit more natural to me than playing men (I'm a cis-gendered man, for the record). I think it's because I like to have a certain distance from my character, an area in which they are decidedly Not Me, or else I drift into simply playing them as a copy of myself and it gets a bit boring.

I think the format makes a big difference. Face to face, you're constantly being reminded of the player's actual gender. I've done a lot (the majority, for the last ten years) of RP online, in text format, in chat rooms or message boards. Suspension of disbelief is much easier there. I've seen several other writers who can play men and women with equal fluency, to the point where I honestly wouldn't be able to guess the writer's actual gender.

True, text chat is almost wholly superior to voice or face to face.

Text is best. Just don't be one of thous people who takes 3 paragraphs to do something. Less is more.

No, less is less. It's possible to have too much, but more often than not, people don't do enough. This is especially noticeable in voice/face to face games, but I see things like "Okay, I attack the goblin", and I'm instantly bored. At least describe the attack a bit!