Gender modifiers: the other side of the coin

Androrc

First Post
Gender modifiers make sense, but I don't think it is worth the trouble.

Probably the best would be giving a +2 bonus to Strength to men, and +2 to Wisdom and Charisma to women, but that would be unbalanced...
 

log in or register to remove this ad


RUMBLETiGER

Adventurer
I'm sorry, could someone repeat all that for me? All I saw was the picture.
You haven't missed anything Xigbar.

The balance between AC and actual amount of armor is between the actual AC bonus of the material of the armor, and the distraction bonus of the exposure of flesh.

Full Plate Mail has a high material bonus, but low flesh-distraction bonus.

Sonja here has a low material bonus, but high flesh-distraction bonus, and it all balances out mechanically to the same number.
 



kitcik

Adventurer
Gender modifiers: the other side of the coin

!B8R)ooQ!mk~$(KGrHqR,!lcEy+jCyFGmBM2lqTSTZw~~0_35.JPG
 

nonsi256

Explorer
Gender modifiers make sense, but I don't think it is worth the trouble.

Probably the best would be giving a +2 bonus to Strength to men, and +2 to Wisdom and Charisma to women, but that would be unbalanced...

Given Cha-based classes are either weaker than their Int/Wis based counterparts or Tier 3 and south, if it would by limited to Cha only AND one will not be able to break racial limits, there wouldn't be any significant imbalance.

Drawing from RL, where males can better endure physical punishment and females have greater willpower, you could also rule that males gain +1 to Fort saves while females gain +1 to Will saves.
The (dis)advantages in this case will be mostly campaign & DM derived, even though there are a bit more SoL Will-based attacks.
 

HoboGod

First Post
Putting numeric bonuses or penalties on gender adds a level of sexism that was never present in tales of heroic individuals, the basis of DND adventurers. Hercules was never measured against the strength of men or women, only against the strength of other people/creatures born from the gods. Joan of Arc's valor and wisdom exceeded all her peers, man or woman.

If you want to add sexism, however, do so moderately. If you believe that the average person can be represented by 10s and 11s across the board in all ability scores, then the biological difference between men and women seems pretty insignificant. In fact, I'd say if there should be any difference, it would have to be within 1 point, such as men getting 11 strength, women getting 10 strength. Applying that to DND adventurers, the scale would only look something like +1 Str for masculine men, +1 Intelligence for feminine men, +1 Charisma for feminine women, and +1 Dex for masculine women. No counterbalance penalties should be applied that makes anyone a full ability modifier better than their opposite sex/gender. If you insist on having counterbalance, -1 Wisdom for masculine men and masculine women, -1 Constitution for feminine men and feminine women. That's the only way I'd rule it. This represents actual sexism where slight differences are exaggerated into unfair suppositions. The average man and the average woman are mentally and athletically closer to each other than to every other creature on earth.
 

Ashtagon

Adventurer
Or just reflect the difference in your point-buy allocations / how you allocate your die rolls / how you role-play your character's impression of their own abilities.
 

Empirate

First Post
Gender modifiers make sense, but I don't think it is worth the trouble.

Probably the best would be giving a +2 bonus to Strength to men, and +2 to Wisdom and Charisma to women, but that would be unbalanced...

That part of irony has already been done... oh wait, you're not being ironic, are you?
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top