Cross-gender PCs

[mhacdebhandia]

Originally Posted by T-Bone JiuJitsu

I dont think I've ever had a rule against it, but to me it's just odd to have a grown man sitting across the table trying to put forth a female persona.

As DM, I often have to play a female PC, more out of necessity than desire to do so. So I guess on those occasions, I'm the grown man sitting across the table playing the female persona.

I just never really fantasized about being a chick. Sure, I've often wanted to be Lara Croft, Tomb Raider... like being in the situations and locations that she's been in. The hot chick part, not so much.

Lots of people don't choose to play a given PC based on what they fantasise about being.

I have never in my gaming life played an idealised version of myself, or played someone with whom I particularly identified, or played someone who had a life I wished I could have. I get that a lot of people do, but it's never been something I wanted to do.

I've never played a female character long-term, but that's not because I'm not comfortable with it; I guess it's just that I create my character to suit the specific game we're playing, and I haven't yet come up with a character who made more sense as a woman than as a man. That said, I've played in plenty of games with men playing women and women playing men, and it's never been an issue - with good, competent players, I don't think it ever is an issue.

[Ukyo, the undead]

Lurking off...

Many of my PCs were female.

In fact, my first PC was a female cleric of Mi Shakall in Planescape, who had a child of a god and died in very inglorious battle in the Realm of the Dread (Ravenloft). To these days I still wait for the day that I will play as her son and somehow rescue her body and specially her soul ,from thet demiplane.

My second PC was a female warrior, but she didn't last very much. My third was a uncharismatic male cleric who died trying to prevent a demon from taking his world.

My last female PC was a female ranger/rogue specialized in quick draw with her sword.

I'm wandering a little, but one thing hat I want to point out is that playing a PC of the opposite gender really helped me to get in character, specially if I'm playing a warrior type.

Lurking on...

[Brown Jenkin]

Originally Posted by Hella_Tellah

I run a game set in Victorian London, so gender roles are particularly important to my game. I have 3 men playing men, 1 woman playing a woman, 1 woman playing a woman cross-dressing as her dead brother (one of the finer character concepts I've seen in a while, although this short description does her little justice), and 1 man playing a woman. None of them has problems portraying a gender, but some of them have problems with anachronism, and that bleeds into gender issues quite frequently. Bluntly put, Victorian culture was very sexist, and sometimes it's hard to get in that mindset. I want the male characters to be shocked by a woman in trousers, and I want the female characters to be appalled at the ingallant behavior of a man who would not help a lady descend from a carriage.

My players have no problem playing a character of a particular gender; it's when that gender is defined by a different set of cultural norms than our own that it becomes difficult. And I rather expect that, really--it's fairly hard for me to imagine owning a human being, or living in a world where the germ theory doesn't exist, or being ruled by the edicts of an individual rather than a system of laws. Plotting changing gender roles across history is a wide-ranging field of study (one of my undergraduate advisers specialized in the study of ancient women), and I can't expect every gamer to be a historian. Maybe it's easier for people who run games set in the present day, I don't know.

TL;DR: Roleplaying gender in a society you didn't grow up in is straight up difficult, no matter what your real-life gender may be.

I can see this being an issue in a historical campaign. As you said modern day is different. So is D&D though, or so the game has made clear since at least 3.0 (I forget if 2.0 had sex stat modifiers) with both males and females accepted fully as adventures. If the DM chooses to set up a campaign world to have gender roles/biases then so be it but the default right now is a gender neutral world.

[The Green Adam]

This bugs the hell outta me. I can't stand when males play females or vice versa.

Now anyone who knows me, really knows me, might be shocked. I let my players play wildly bizarre aliens, cyborgs, unusual fantasy races, the very young, the very old and everything in between. I hate limiting my players style or creativity. That said, whenever a player wants to play the opposite sex I discourage it. Actually I cringe and then I discourage it.

Why?

First, in the 30+ years I've been gaming I think I've seen a decent, in depth and realistic portrayl maybe once. Maybe. Its almost always some horrible exaggeration, either way to slutty and oversexed or dramatically feminist to the point where feminists are saying "Please...just chill". That or there is no indication that the character is a different sex then the player except that its listed on the character sheet.

Second, its seems like a wasted opportunity if you have both genders sitting at the table, not to have them interact with each other with their nature mind sets. Its just so much more fun when you see different people who think differently approaching the same problem.

AD
"That was a hell of a thing."

[Brown Jenkin]

Originally Posted by The Green Adam

First, in the 30+ years I've been gaming I think I've seen a decent, in depth and realistic portrayl maybe once. Maybe. Its almost always some horrible exaggeration, either way to slutty and oversexed or dramatically feminist to the point where feminists are saying "Please...just chill". That or there is no indication that the character is a different sex then the player except that its listed on the character sheet.

Once more the question becomes what is an accurate protrayal. I understand the exagerated issue, but how does playing a normal person without exageration count as being no difference. And if there isn't a difference how is this wrong?

[SACERD]

I will chime in here.
Like some of the other posters I have never....ever....seen someone do a decent job of playing the opposite gender.
As for what I consider an accurate portrayal of a opposite gender...well thats easy.
Make it known that you are not your "real life" gender and make me forget that you are not not the gender of your character.

[Aus_Snow]

I wonder how many people who state that they haven't ever seen the opposite gender roleplayed convincingly/realistically, might ever have considered elves, dwarves, sorcerers, paladins, bards, and so forth to've been so. I'm pretty sure this has been asked or pondered before in this thread, but ooh and it makes me wonder.

[SACERD]

LOL I have not pondered that but I don't believe in elves, dwarves or magic, however I have met and married folks of the opposite gender.

[Aus_Snow]

. . . or, for that matter, personality types at odds with the player's. Skills, strengths, weaknesses, biases, beliefs, all that stuff, again when they're totally different from the player's.

It just seems to be a particular sticking point for some DMs. I mean, fair enough, but I still don't get *why*.

[SACERD]

Originally Posted by Aus_Snow

. . . or, for that matter, personality types at odds with the player's. Skills, strengths, weaknesses, biases, beliefs, all that stuff, again when they're totally different from the player's.

It just seems to be a particular sticking point for some DMs. I mean, fair enough, but I still don't get *why*.

Well personality type is easy, just don't act like yourself the other stuff is represented through game mechanics.

[Aus_Snow]

Originally Posted by SACERD

Well personality type is easy, just dont act like yourself the other stuff is represented through game mechanics,

So then, what are the defining differences when it comes to playing the opposite gender? 'Just don't act like yourself. . .' ? Or no, is it something else?

[Jeff Wilder]

Originally Posted by Mallus

For me, cringeworthy and flat-out wrong portrayals of women are a hallmark of fantasy fiction, but apparently, we disagree on the matter.

If we disagree, it's only slightly. I should have said "good fantasy fiction." Actually, "good speculative fiction" is even better, because I don't read very much fantasy. (Interestingly, all of the fantasy authors I actually make an effort to follow are women.)

Originally Posted by Mallus

All adventure stories deactivate the "needs believability" center of my brain.

Sure, but aren't there stages of suspension of disbelief for you? For me, for example, I can't stand wuxia in my fantasy. Conan -- oops, I mean Red Sonja -- ripping through an army pretty much single-handedly? Sure, no problem. Red Sonja walking on the leaves of trees? No thanks.

The 6'5, 300 pound dude -- that's me, BTW -- playing a female halfling goes beyond my levels of suspension of disbelief. I simply cannot immerse myself in that situation, and frankly, I think gamers who can -- either as the character or playing across from the character -- are exceptionally rare. As I said, I have, in 24 years, never seen one.

Originally Posted by Set

Which leaves other people's role-playing options limited to what *you* feel is believable female behavior.

Originally Posted by CharlesRyan

But why does the observer set the standard? If it makes a difference to the player's experience, isn't that good enough?

I, and the other players in my group, also limit options based on morality, species, squeamishness, in-character cooperation, and any number of other things. It's a cooperative game, and my group considers the fun of everybody else in addition to their own. (Although, as I said, with gender it's not been an issue.) In other words ... no, the fun of the single player isn't enough.

Originally Posted by Set

None of them acted effeminate or pranced around in dresses fluttering their hands, but they all had girl-parts, and that's the *only* qualifier they had to satisfy to 'count' as women.

I'm missing your point, unless you're implying that I believe playing a woman involves that sort of behavior. And if you believe that, well, that says more about your stereotypes of women than it does about my expectations at the game table, since I certainly never said or implied anything of the sort.

Originally Posted by Brown Jenkin

I find that the majority of our games are gender neutral 95% of the time.

As do I. And, given that, not playing cross-gender helps with immersion. When a PC refers to my character as "he," because it's understandably difficult to associate my hulking presence with femininity, nobody has to stop the RP to remind the player than I'm actually a "she." If anybody out there who plays cross-gender claims this doesn't happen on a regular basis ... well, let's just say I'm skeptical.

Originally Posted by Brown Jenkin

It is only the rare cases where the DM pulls out a situation where there might be a romantic/crush incident with a NPC. As long as those 5% incidents are done well the other 95% of the time it doesn't matter what gender a character is.

Right. So why play cross-gender? (Especially when playing cross-gender, IME, inevitably means that 5% of incidents end up being played badly.)

As a final word, please note that when I don't respond further, I'm not snubbing anyone. I feel as if I -- and a few others -- have tapped into a pretty big well of defensiveness, and I'm really not interested in engaging it, even in consideration of the productive discussion I think I could have with other posters. So I'm out.

[SACERD]

it is something else.
It may be intangible but it is there.
For example, because I have never met an elf their general behavior is elaborated on in various games/setting books, including their interactions with one another as well as their interactions with members of different races. I could therefore surmise how one would (in theory) play a typical elf and could objectively make a determination on how accurately one did so.
Same thing with gender. The difference lays in the fact that the writers of most rpgs feel it unnecessary to elaborate on the differences in genders among the human races. I would assume it is because the folks playing the game are human.

[Aus_Snow]

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

The 6'5, 300 pound dude -- that's me, BTW -- playing a female halfling goes beyond my levels of suspension of disbelief. I simply cannot immerse myself in that situation, and frankly, I think gamers who can -- either as the character or playing across from the character -- are exceptionally rare. As I said, I have, in 24 years, never seen one.

With that one alteration (sorcery, or surgery, perhaps ), how does the paragraph parse, in terms of truth value relative to the original, on a scale of 0 to 10, 0 representing 'not true at all anymore' and 10, 'absolutely just as true'. . .?

Oh wait, I actually missed the bowing out bit there. . . *sigh*. Oh well, as you wish.

Funny that you mention defensiveness, however.

[CharlesRyan]

Hi, Jeff, sorry to hear you're stepping out of this conversation. I was finding it pretty interesting. I'll post my response to you anyway, in case you change your mind.

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

I, and the other players in my group, also limit options based on morality, species, squeamishness, in-character cooperation, and any number of other things. It's a cooperative game, and my group considers the fun of everybody else in addition to their own. (Although, as I said, with gender it's not been an issue.) In other words ... no, the fun of the single player isn't enough.

So that implies that if someone in your group crosses gender, it makes the game less fun for the others--and based on your previous comments, that's simply because the gender-crossing player doesn't do a good enough job with the roleplaying.

I totally agree about putting limits on character types that are disruptive to everyone else's experience, but are you really saying that playing across gender consistently (or even frequently, within a gaming group that seems willing to work together for the group experience) causes this level of disruption?

[avin]

What's the point? As a DM i'm always roleplaying woman NPCs... have played one female char and other guys have been playing female with no problems at all.

[DeusExMachina]

I think I would sriously walk out on a game where the DM decided that I could not play any female PCs...

I actually have this idea for an infernal pact warlock half elf, who had to give up her first born as part of the pact and after that had a chance of heart about getting all this power and is now trying to get out of the pact and get her son back. Now you could say that this could work just as well with a male character, but it just doesn´t feel the same. In fact most of my characters have a very clear image to me that is usually decidely either male or female and it would just not feel right to not choose that gender...

That being said most of the time the gender of the characters we play doesn´t really influence the games directly, but sometimes it does and for those times, a player should be free to choose whatever gender (s)he wants...

[Brown Jenkin]

Jeff, I am sorry to hear you are stepping out as well. I wasn't trying to be defensive, just trying to engage in conversation. I want to reply to a couple of points as well even if you don't come back.

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

As do I. And, given that, not playing cross-gender helps with immersion. When a PC refers to my character as "he," because it's understandably difficult to associate my hulking presence with femininity, nobody has to stop the RP to remind the player than I'm actually a "she." If anybody out there who plays cross-gender claims this doesn't happen on a regular basis ... well, let's just say I'm skeptical.

I am sorry to hear that your group has problems differentiating and remembering aspects of each others characters. I guess I am lucky in my group because that has never been a problem. In each of our campaigns there has regularly been one or two cross gender characters. No one to my knowledge has ever referred to the characters by the wrong pronoun.

Our group consists of a variety of players from beer and pretzel to heavy roleplayers. For the Beer and pretzel types they don't play cross gender because for them if it doesn't have a modifier it doesn't matter to them and it is one less thing they have to worry about roleplaying. For the heavy roleplayers, they choose to go cross gender at times because it either fits their character better or they want to challenge themselves with something different. Yet no-one ever seems to forget who is a elf or dwarf or male or female, even if they are played fully in character or not.

You may be skeptical but I am laying out my data point nonetheless. You can choose to believe it or not.

Originally Posted by Jeff Wilder

Right. So why play cross-gender? (Especially when playing cross-gender, IME, inevitably means that 5% of incidents end up being played badly.)

I disagree with your counter argument that that the 5% of incidents inevitably end up being played badly. First off we agree that 95% of time it doesn't matter what gender a character is. So then we can focus on that last 5% as to what could causes disbelief in roleplaying ability cross gender. As has been pointed out both males and females in real life run across a full spectrum of personality types. Some are slutty, some are asexual, some are heterosexual, some are homosexual, some are masculine, some are feminine, some are dominant, some are submissive, some are romantic, some are in it just for the sex and many fall between all these extremes. In real life I have run into all these personality types in both males and females. There is no proper way to play a male or female. The important thing is that a personality type be chosen and then played consistently.

I guess I am still confused by what it means to play badly. As I don't see gender fitting into a neat little package that has to be a certain way, I don't see how playing a female as a masculine homosexual slut (A worst case scenario in game so some folks, but a female personality type that I have met in real life) is necessarily wrong as long as it fits the character background and is played consistently and not played to intentionally cause disruption to the game. I don't see this as worse than having to deal with a lawful stupid Paladin or a magic hating Barbarian, both of which would be acceptable in your games.

If in your experience, with your group and your players, it has never been pulled off then there is nothing I can do but say that in my experience, with my group and my players, that it has been pulled off to my personal satisfaction.

[Dausuul]

I continue to be bewildered by the claim that most gamers can't "accurately" portray characters of the opposite sex... mostly because no one has yet explained what would constitute an accurate portrayal.

[Dannyalcatraz]

Originally Posted by RefinedBean

Now I miss one of my favorite characters, a transgendered elf beguiler who had six different disguises, three women and three men. It was always fun to start a session off with a d6 roll, to see who I would be (so to speak). I've gone and made myself sad.

Now THAT is some frikken' ROLE-play! YEAH!

Whether or not you have the chops to pull that off, I would have felt privileged just to witness that in action. That is an awesome concept.

Its almost always some horrible exaggeration, either way to slutty and oversexed or dramatically feminist to the point where feminists are saying "Please...just chill".

And when someone plays a horrible exaggeration of their own sex, its OK?

So why play cross-gender?

For the same reasons you're playing a Lizard Man or an alien from Krypton- because it fits the PC concept.