Cross-gender PCs

[Dausuul]

Re: the ban rule

A simple question: Why should DMs have all the fun?

After all, unless all of the NPCs in the campaign are the DM's sex, the DM is engaging in precisely the same form of roleplay- admittedly abbreviated by necessity- that the players are barred from trying.

While I don't hold with the "no cross-gender RPing" rule (I'd say I play about 50% male, 50% female characters), this logic is not entirely valid. DMs get to roleplay dragons and demon lords too. Getting to play stuff that the players can't is one of the perks of the job.

However, most of the reasons for not allowing dragon or demon lord PCs don't really apply to cross-gender PCs.

 

[Falkus]

I've never had any problems with it. In my experience, the sort of player who disrupts a game through opposite gender roleplaying would be disrupting it anyway if he was playing a character of the same gender.

Don't get me wrong ... I've seen men roleplay, say, a rogue and do a fine job of roleplaying a rogue. And occasionally that rogue might be female. But in those cases, anybody paying attention to the roleplay wouldn't be able to tell the gender of the PC, and that leads to two questions: (1) If someone can't tell your gender from your roleplay, isn't that not such a good thing? (2) So why bother playing cross-gender?

Could you please explain the exact sort of differences you're expecting to see between male and female characters?

 

[Mallus]

I have never seen a man roleplay a woman well.

Out of curiosity, why is accuracy necessary when it comes to cross-gender role-playing?

There are many logical differences between roleplaying a fantasy race and a real gender, or a genderless PC and a real gender. (At the most basic level, for instance, it's very difficult to tell somebody that they don't seem like a "real" elf, but it's quite valid to express that someone doesn't seem like a real woman.) Those differences are IME dealbreakers.

What about role-playing real, albeit anachronistic, professions? Do inaccurate portrayals of medieval pickpockets, musicians, or soldiers bother you in the same way?

I'm not criticizing your preferences, I'm just trying to understand what about gender makes it a special case.

 

[Mallus]

As for house rules, informal or otherwise, regarding playing a character of the opposite gender... put it this way, I wouldn't game with people who make that kind of rule necessary.

The real issue seem to be "can a player keep the offensiveness of their portrayals in check?" I don't want to play with folks who can't answer that in the affirmative (and for the record, my group is capable of marvelous feats of effortless vulgarity, sacrilege, and other Grandma-offending behavior... but we do that with an understanding of where each other's limits are).

 

[CharlesRyan]

I played in a lengthy campaign in which my character was a spy within the party. The faction that had planted her within the party was matriarchal and a known enemy of the other characters; for this reason the character was female--but was posing as a man. In other words, I played a woman who was pretending to be a man. For an entire campaign--her actual gender wasn't revealed to the other players until the last couple of sessions.

I don't know how good a job I did roleplaying the character's gender. I do know that the gender situation presented a lot of interesting challenges from issues as grand as philosophical approach to as petty as sleeping arrangements. I enjoyed playing the character and the way in which her situation contributed to the story.

There are lots of reasons players might play against their gender. (In my current campaign, my wife is playing a man--because its set in Crusades-era Europe and she wants to play a knight (an average, run-of-the-mill knight, not a Joan-of-Arc exception).) If players are serious about their character concepts, I don't see the problem. If they aren't--well, then, who cares?

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Out of curiosity, why is accuracy necessary when it comes to cross-gender role-playing?

The same reason "accuracy" is important to me in any role-playing. (The quotes are because it's not accuracy I'm talking about, exactly. It's ... believability, I suppose. Verisimilitude.)

What about role-playing real, albeit anachronistic, professions? Do inaccurate portrayals of medieval pickpockets, musicians, or soldiers bother you in the same way?

It depends on how "inaccurate" the portrayal is, which in turn is a function of how much I know about the matters in question. (Again, the quotes, because the believability I'm looking for is "fantasy fiction" believability, not "real world" believability.)

I'll say this: before I became a lawyer, I loved law dramas. Now I can't stand them unless I make a determined effort to turn the "needs believability" part of my brain off. This is easier for some shows than others. (The irony is that I'd hate believable law shows, too.)

Could you please explain the exact sort of differences you're expecting to see between male and female characters?

Nope. I just want believable differences. If an observer can't tell you're playing a woman, then what's the point? (On the other hand, if an observer can tell you're playing a woman because you play women exactly like every male gamer I've ever seen play women, you're being obnoxious, and stop it.)

 

[Set]

I just want believable differences. If an observer can't tell you're playing a woman, then what's the point? (On the other hand, if an observer can tell you're playing a woman because you play women exactly like every male gamer I've ever seen play women, you're being obnoxious, and stop it.)

Which leaves other people's role-playing options limited to what *you* feel is believable female behavior. Sarah Conner is a (fictional) woman. So is Lt. Ellen Ripley. So is Aeryn Sun, of Farscape. So is Faith, the Vampire Slayer. So is Zoe, from Firefly. So was Vasquez, from Aliens. 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. They didn't have to 'act' like women. They were just born that way, and were free to act like *people.*

Much like women in the real world, many of whom spend absolutely zero time worrying about whether or not some dude with an outdated sense of sex-limited-roles like 'that's a man's job' thinks they are 'acting enough like women' or not.

Boobies trump sexist stereotypes.

If the player is playing a female character, and she's not a female caricature, then he should be commended, not condemned.

 

[Mallus]

It depends on how "inaccurate" the portrayal is, which in turn is a function of how much I know about the matters in question.

Aha... thanks, now I get it. You know more about real women than you do about real medieval soldiery... that makes sense (note to self: avoid making cheap joke about how the reverse used to be true for many D&D enthusiasts).

(Again, the quotes, because the believability I'm looking for is "fantasy fiction" believability, not "real world" believability.)

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

Now I can't stand them unless I make a determined effort to turn the "needs believability" part of my brain off.

All adventure stories deactivate the "needs believability" center of my brain. I mean, adventurers (in any genre) do crazy stuff that should kill them all the time, and yet, the keep hanging on through the inevitable parade of sequels.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Don't get me wrong ... I've seen men roleplay, say, a rogue and do a fine job of roleplaying a rogue. And occasionally that rogue might be female. But in those cases, anybody paying attention to the roleplay wouldn't be able to tell the gender of the PC, and that leads to two questions: (1) If someone can't tell your gender from your roleplay, isn't that not such a good thing? (2) So why bother playing cross-gender?

I am confused by this and wonder as well what constitutes roleplaying a male character that makes it seem like a man. Do male characters have to chase the tail of everything female in order for them to be convincingly male? I find that the majority of our games are gender neutral 95% of the time. 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.

This is how I see real life as well. I am/have been friends with about 50/50 males and females. Just as I stated above 95% of the time things are gender neutral and the work or socializing aspect has nothing to do with the genders of the people involved. It is only when romance/sex becomes involved does the differentiation become pronounced.

So unless a game focuses heavily on the romance/sex side of things I see it as rarely being a problem. Although it just may be my particular group that doesn't choose to focus on romance/sex with the characters, and for that I am glad.

Edit: Grammar

 

[CharlesRyan]

If an observer can't tell you're playing a woman, then what's the point?

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

The truth is, in most RPG situations, your character exists almost entirely in your head and your head alone. It's pretty rare to really know much at all about the other characters. Ask the other players in your group what colour your character's hair is--unless they're looking at an accurately painted mini, I'd be surprised if they had a clue (or they might have an image--that happens to be quite different from yours).

Given that, I think the level of "roleplaying" required to make gender obvious to the other players probably exceeds the level of roleplaying you would likely expect normally. In other words, sure, you might not be able to tell, based on play, when that guy's character is actually a woman. But, based purely on how he plays, can you tell that his character is a man?