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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Banshee16" data-source="post: 5555509" data-attributes="member: 7883">Has this actually been proven?  My understanding is that the world records for men and women *are* significantly different.....the top men lifting about 45% more than the top women.  It stands to reason....in the absence of extreme training, I believe men have a much higher percentage of muscle tissue.I'll preface my statement by saying that I know I'm not a super muscular person.....I know my experience at the gym, I'm usually lifting about 6x as much weight as the women I've observed.  I'll see them straining at lifting 30 lbs, and I'm lifting 175-190.  I *have* met some pretty strong women.....one girl in my class in High School was known as very strong.  I remember running into her accidentally in a touch football game and being sent flying.  But that was an exception rather than a rule.  I'm not saying this to disparage any women.  Just making an observation.On that note, I know there are hardcore women who can lift far more than 170 lbs....but if you're talking about the average population.....then I think the differences are exaggerated.  I *have* known some women with incredible endurance.  But even there, the person I've known with the most endurance was a male.  Another lifeguard (my boss) I used to train with.  I remember watching him swim 120 laps without stopping one evening.  He was a machine.In previous versions of the game, I balanced things by applying a max strength or penalty to female characters...but giving them a bonus to CON.  In 3E, I didn't bother....though I usually just ruled that PC females were the exception, and had NPC females have a strength penalty.  I don't see a need to enforce limitations like this on PCs.  Sure, it feels realistic, but I'm not trying to create disincentives against my players choosing certain character types.Banshee</blockquote>

Verification