Can sexism be good for plot?

[Count Arioch the 28t]

I agree, that's crap.

there should be a male only PRC for every female only PrC.

(I've added Eye of Gruumsh and Cavalier to male only PrCs, for example. Might have more, but I can't think of it.)

 

[Tywyll]

Certainly

My campaign world is a very grey one. I base plots and conflict along a Chaos versus Law axis rather than Good Versus Evil (going so far as completely removing that aspect of alignment from the game). Racism and sexism are big elements of my world. Different cultures face it in different ways however. The Lawful societies are typically the most racist/sexist, and fit a more medieval style of life (the Church holds sway even over the nobles, typically the country is ruled by a King though currently a Queen holds sway... causing much political tension). Just about every race views itself superior to the others. Half breeds are looked down upon by both.

Of course, there are some lands that are more egalitarian (one country was once ruled by dragons, and even though they are gone, much of the culture is still the same, and since female dragons are just as potent and dangerous as their male counterparts, there tends to be little to no sexism in that country... racially they also tend to be a bit more accepting of half breeds and in face most nobles trace their lineage through dragon blooded ancestors).

Most of the female players I've had over the 12 years of the campaign have enjoyed it. They either have chosen to play the concepts that rebel against societies mores, or non-human races where such things are absent (elves don't have gender bias, for instance... dwarves do, but only because there is only about one female dwarf per ten males). Currently I have two female players and they've never had issues with the degree of "isms" in the society (one plays a female swashbuckler type that enjoys trouncing males who give her lip, the other plays a mix of male and female characters, all of which labor under some sort of dramatic tragedy, simply because she enjoys troubled characters).

I think handled maturely, such real world issues can add a sense of versimilitude to a setting. And, as heroes, players can feel a sense of empowerment when they overcome such attitudes.

I do make the setting very clear to perspective players though, and I try to help work on their backgrounds with them so that they are integrated with the world. So for me, its been a good boon.

Oh, and I would never let that element of the world dictate what a player can play, I would just let them know their character has to have some background that explains their derivation from the norm(when they come from a culture that would restrict gender/racial roles)... but few heroes don't have an odd background, so its not that big of a deal.


Tywyll

 

[barsoomcore]

Meh. I'm of the opinion that in a fantasy world, who cares? Barsoom is pretty resolutely non-gender-roled. I'm all in favour of having just as many butt-kicking chicks as guys. I take Henry's position: since strength, intelligence and toughness are equally distributed across the classes, there's very little built-in justification for strongly differentiated gender roles.

That said, it can be fun. My Kung-Fu Angels game posits a setting where WOMEN dominate and men live in a certain amount of trepidation. It hasn't really come out in the game yet (and may not ever), but things can get a little nasty for lads in the land of the Goddess.

And if I'm running a historically-based game, like Dead Man Chest was, I try to maintain reasonably accurate gender roles, at the same time without limiting player choices.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I'm not going to make a sexist world when 4 of my players are women, two of them are pregnant, and one of them is my wife.

I think that about sums it up.

 

[adwyn]

I've long run a campaign in which sexism is the standard in that most NPC's fall into tradditional gender roles. A few exceptions exist, perhaps more than in our world, but the differences are visible.

What's important thought is that female PC's are allowed to function with little hinderance. While I've had several women play in my game, none have complained or cared about sexism as long as their characters could do as they wished.

 

[Dark Jezter]

IIRC, 1st Edition AD&D did have different stats for genders. Female characters took a small penalty to strength, but recieved a small bonus to charisma.

 

[billd91]

Sexism can be good for the plot and for good role-playing encounters from time to time. I don't think I'd make a major theme out of it in a game with mixed sexes though. That's a good way to annoy too many players.

When it comes to the society at large in my campaigns, they generally aren't overtly sexist. There are typical gender roles, yes, but there are also exceptions to those, even if you don't encounter them every day.
I like to keep a reasonably historical feel to the game and thus women tend to be on the shorter end of the stick. But I think there are good historical reasons for a division of labor between men and women based on their sex and it's not at all unnatural for the path to political power to be along the male division in a violent world. As a result, in my campaign societies with less general violence tend to have more gender equality, more violence tends toward gender inequality.
In societies with a lot of wealth to worry about, people tend to worry more about lines of inheritence and keeping estates together and, because political power tends to concentrate among the males, the heir is generally the first born male. And the wealthier the society, the more strict this is. For poorer societies or more nomadic ones where this is less important, again, there tends to be more gender equality.
You can often see these things in the history of the world and I like to try to reflect them in my campaigns. It means that there are some areas worse for gender equality than others and I let players know this. It also means there are areas that are really good about gender equality.
I also tend to make more lawful areas a bit more sexist than chaotic areas. The idea here is that if there is notable sexism there, it's truly institutionalized in a lawful society. In a chaotic society where judgement is based more on the individual, women have more opportunities and equality.

But then again, aside from a few plot points and encounters, I don't generally make a big deal out of it. It's a background kind of thing.

 

[marketingman]

I have used the plot of sexism on my male PC' In the Waterdeep Campaign.

One of the PC's marriedan Npc that he recued from an evil temple turns out she is from a down and out merchant house that she has just managed to keep in one warehouse because here Grand Father is convence Women have no head for business.

So the PC is force to face sexims for his wifes grand Father is certain he can bring the Merchant house back to shape in no time. The agrements were really fun.

Or the group of burly field hand who are working to remove a boulder see an adventuress and yell' Lass thisis thirsty work get us some water. She walks over grabs the boulder that the five men are stuggling with and gingerly moves it to the wall.
say "no go get me an ale".

Another case from the Waterdeep Campaign was the Drow priestess of the moon goddes had the young noble of Waterdeep Dueling in front of the parties villa for the right to accomapny here to the High Moon Festival. She then figured out the why.
1) who ever is her escort for the night has scored bragging right to having "had" and encounter with a Dark Elf.
2) She is to dacne naked at the appex of the moon to celebrate the new year.

Sexim is a everyday problem even today so it can be a plot device in your games for the PC's to over come. But to have aworld filled with it would not be enjoyable for female PC's

 

[billd91]

IIRC, 1st Edition AD&D did have different stats for genders. Female characters took a small penalty to strength, but recieved a small bonus to charisma.

Unfortunately, you do not recall correctly. Female characters didn't really have a penalty to strength so much as a lower ceiling than male characters (18/50 instead of 18/00, yielding a net -2 to hit and -3 damage for the strongest females compared to the strongest males). And they didn't get anything in compensation for it. Nothing at all.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Unfortunately, you do not recall correctly. Female characters didn't really have a penalty to strength so much as a lower ceiling than male characters (18/50 instead of 18/00, yielding a net -2 to hit and -3 damage for the strongest females compared to the strongest males). And they didn't get anything in compensation for it. Nothing at all.

Ah. It appears I was wrong. Ah well, it's been years since I played 1e AD&D anyways.