Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Novem5er" data-source="post: 5119107" data-attributes="member: 57859">Really?Is it really such a leap of assumption that women would be more likely to play an RPG that had strong social mechanics? Or that, along that nature, maybe more women would play?I'm not saying millions of new women would start rolling d20's if only there were games that included rules for relationships. I'm not saying that a woman who liked The Sims would automatically like and play any tabletop RPG.But never mind... apparently, the RPG business is fine as it is. Game designers have already done a bang-up job at attracting women, as is evident by the equality of sexes around every gaming table. In fact, there is nothing that designers could do to attract the very slim number of women who aren't already satisfied with today's roleplaying games.And if there was something they could do, it would certainly not be including stronger mechanics for interpersonal relationships.Duh, what was I thinking?@ RangerWicket, I think you've got a great idea there, and that's how I'd handle it in 4e. We've done a pretty good job at just RPing social encounters with the odd Bluff or Diplomacy check thrown in. If one could make a "relationship template" of some kind, it would be easier to integrate skill challenges like that.I did recently see the demo for the Song of Ice and Fire and it does include some interesting social mechanics, as does the Mouse Guard game that I've run over the last 2 months. So, I'm not saying that there are no acceptable systems out there.To bring it back to Dragon Age, my wife simply noticed a big disconnect between the PnP game and the video game. She loved the video game because of the relationship building (and destroying), but when she saw nothing mechanically in the RPG rulebook, her reaction was one of "bah, it's just like D&D..."</blockquote>

Verification