Genders - What's the difference?

[pawsplay]

The least we could do is drop some of the pretention with respect to other people playing a game since there is very little that can occur within the game that is ultimately serious.

I would classify hurting real people's enjoyment as serious.

In this particular case, it seems some people believe that they can infer from an aspect of the game mechanics whether or not someone is sexist and from that draw some bright sharp moral dividing line.

Who are those people? I'm not seeing what you are talking about. I see a discussion about some significant issues, some personal anecdotes, a little logic, and some pragmatic examination of facts. I haven't seen a bright, sharp line of anything since the beginning of the thread.

This is hardly surprising, since as I said, there has hardly been a topic I've been involved in where someone didn't accuse me of moral, emotional, and mental disfunctionality for disagreeing with them.

I am kind of baffled why you don't regard this thread as a breath of fresh air, but evidently you are seeing something I am not.

A full accounting of the number of times I've been called stupid, foolish and immoral on this site would number in the hundreds, to say nothing of the thousands of times I've seen such insults hurled at third parties.

Care to back that up with some quotes?

What I can't imagine is lumping everything in to one category.

... Still not feeling oppressed? Seriously, if you are, it's okay to say so. Other people do all the time.

Ultimately to me the matter does seem trivial. It is a trivial matter within an otherwise trivial gaming excercise.

I am sure this is not your intention, but.... Have you considered how this could be seen as saying the desire for equal respect for women is trivial?

 

[JamesonCourage]

I would classify hurting real people's enjoyment as serious.

Considering just how subjective "people's enjoyment" is, I'd say that while it has some place in this discussion, it's rather small. We're talking about theoretical and even potentially optional house rules. We're not talking about revising the game with these rules in place, and then making them the new default.

I am sure this is not your intention, but.... Have you considered how this could be seen as saying the desire for equal respect for women is trivial?

And with this, I think I'm going to step out of the thread. At least until things become much less personal to people when it shouldn't be. Nobody is trying to disregard how women feel*. Nobody is trying to discuss implementations that women object to*.

Perhaps reasonable discourse on theoretical mechanical implementations that are broadly acceptable are best left to another board, or a room full of friends.

As far as this thread goes, I didn't enter it to get into a moral debate. It was to explore possible mechanical differences between the sexes. It wasn't to offend people by even discussing the subject. If that is indeed the case (as it's inherently a moral issue to some people), then I think I have to bow out to a forum a little more private, where I can discuss this rationally.

Play what you like.

*I've been told not to speak for Celebrim.

 

[Umbran]

One thing I've learned posting at EnWorld over the years is that to gamers, pretty much everything about games ends up being a topic that carries moral value.

You know, frequently, I'd agree with that assessment. Some folks would put moral value on the average damage an Assassin could dish out, and that's a bit much. But in this case, you're discussing discriminating between genders in a society that is still working through it's gender discrimination issues, and some folks do still feel the effects of sexism.

It probably isn't dismissible as just gamer passion when people still have such problems frequently in the real world. You're touching on *real* hot buttons, not just gamerisms, and you should expect them to matter to people.

 

[nedjer]

Building models and testing them (aka games) is pretty much how we learn; but as learning is increasingly considered trivial, I guess highly effective learning media like RPGs and case-based learning are heading that way.

 

[pawsplay]

Perhaps reasonable discourse on theoretical mechanical implementations that are broadly acceptable are best left to another board, or a room full of friends.

I feel like I am trying to have a reasonable discussion. I can't speak for anyone else, but I feel really frustrated that the "discussion" seems to be acceptable only when it remains in the realm of agreeing or softballing. You do not seem to enjoy talking about what is "broadly acceptable." I don't understand how refusing to offer points up for discussion, or impugning the civility of this board, or expressing privileged-class martyrdom (not that I am accusing you personally of doing that) is "reasonable," how someone can propose to characterize men and women broadly and not expect their preconceptions to be challenged.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

There's a big moral difference between foolishly injecting a sexist rule that will unnecessarily alienate players and crafting a game that deliberately belittles racial minorities (like RaHoWa). And in any event, TSR fixed its gender-based state limitation foolishness over 20 years ago with 2nd edition. Atonement accomplished.

It's all how you want to frame the question, as one can see from your framing above. Me, I think if you are offending Jack Chick, you may or may not be in the wrong, but your enemies would seem to be in your favor. We've already had an appeal to the high priesthood on the main topic, and I think if you've offended the typical women's studies department, it is the same. You may or may not be wrong, but you've earned a point.

It is kind of hard to inject any rule on certain subject matter without offending Chick. Ditto for his equivalents on this issue.

 

[RedTonic]

What is "RaHoWa"?

 

[pawsplay]

It's all how you want to frame the question, as one can see from your framing above. Me, I think if you are offending Jack Chick, you may or may not be in the wrong, but your enemies would seem to be in your favor. We've already had an appeal to the high priesthood on the main topic, and I think if you've offended the typical women's studies department, it is the same. You may or may not be wrong, but you've earned a point.

It is kind of hard to inject any rule on certain subject matter without offending Chick. Ditto for his equivalents on this issue.

Wow.

You just compared women's studies to Jack Chick.

 

[Mallus]

I appreciate that. I'd much rather continue to talk about interesting implementations.

I think the approach S'mon described works best. Leave it up to the players how to model gender.

... and handled it by statting my Red Sonja type PC with STR 16, my Conan type PC with STR 18. This gave a minimal degree of versimilitude while keeping Red a playable PC, with Point Buy I could give her a higher DEX than Conan; her better AC matched his better attack/damage.

This works fine in any game with an existing, robust character generation system.

My group's playing Savage Worlds now, and apparently I must mention in every other post as if I were a new convert to a cult, or, perhaps an Amway salesman. SW sports an admirably complete yet compact list of advantages and disadvantages (called Edges & Hindrances) which allow for the mechanical representation of a broad range of characteristics/differences, but it's entirely up to the player which ones apply to their PC, in accordance w/a simple point-buy system.

For example, my character is a 12 year-old girl/whizkid engineer in a Flash Gordon-esque milieu. I chose to give her the lowest possible starting strength and hand-to-hand fighting ability. Seemed fitting.

But I could have chosen to play a very different 12 year-old girl; say Pippi Longstocking in space, and given her the highest possible strength and commensurate ass-kicking abilities, for good measure. Again, my choice.

In SW, there's a Hindrance called "Young", meant for lucky child protagonists/sidekicks like Short Round in the Temple of Doom. Even though my PC is 12, the system didn't obligate me to take it. It was merely an optional mechanical descriptor... one I didn't use it since it clashed w/my concept. Instead, I choose other disadvantages; she's pursued by several would-be kidnappers and she smokes.

The advantage to this approach should be clear, it accommodates a larger number of possible PC concepts. If someone wants to play an unreasonably skilled kid in a pulp sci-fi setting, so be it. Ditto a man-strong swordswoman in a pulp fantasy setting. In both cases, we've left realism far behind, as soon as we boarded that sparking, cigar-shaped rocket, and punched out the giant ape who was guarding the enormous ruby...

 

[pawsplay]

What is "RaHoWa"?

Racial Holy War. It's a white supremist RPG, reputedly written in such a fashion it calls into question how much the author understands what an RPG is.