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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5557202" data-attributes="member: 59506">I keep seeing this throughout this thread - this assumption that mechanical differentiation of strength between sexes is de facto sexism. It's Not. Physical differences do exist. It's a physical fact. And those stating this are not automatically "Sexist" because they do so. I'm not denying that the reasons behind some in this thread wanting a mechanical difference, may be based in sexism - I can't read minds to be certain, and simple odds would make that a bad bet. But a mechanical modeling of this is not, in and of itself, Sexist. And not everyone who wants that mechanical differentation is pursuing it for sexist reasons. I'm not trying to single you (Nightson) out specifically (or Fifth Element), and I apologize if it comes across this way. I'm only saying this because there have been a lot of people making this implication throughout this thread, and it's really not fair. Saying that the desire to mechanically model physical differences between Males and Females, is automatically and inherently Sexist, is spurious and unfounded. I do agree however, that providing a flat Strength penalty in order to model this difference is a poor way to do it. A Strength cap is more mechanically accurate and reasonable - and Yes, that means capping Male Strength also. Looking at real-world examples, simply capping Female Human Strength at 21, and Male Human Strength at 23 provides a realistic mechanic, while still allowing for very strong characters (both Male and Female) of the same strength scores, right out of the gate (at 1st level and up). (*Cap at 20th level and below - in "Epic" games that are going to be played beyond 20th level or intend on exceeding 20th level, strict realism has already been set aside, and so should any Strength limits - IMO.) For those who ask why a cap is even necessary, I'll say it's not necessary...especially as an official core rule...but as a houserule, especially in certain types of campaigns, it may be significantly appropriate. (more on this below)  Absolutely Not. I agree with you and the many others in this thread that a Strength penalty is a poor way to go. It makes choosing a Female Human a suboptimal choice mechanically, reduces the "Fun" factor of such for a lot of players, and potentially turns off over 50% of the worlds population from wanting to play in the first place. It's Lose-Lose. Applying a Strength Cap, however, doesn't have the same problems. A Cap allows for equal levelled Male and Female Human Warriors with the same strength score, side by side in the same game/campaign...right up to the point where they each reach their realistic Strength limits. A perfect example of where this would not only be appropriate, but beneficial to the realism of the setting, is the campaign I've been planning (and hopefully starting soon): a Houseruled D&D campaign set in real-world 12th century England during the Anarchy. Ironically (due to the underlying implications of sexism in this thread), the period is centered around a civil war which had, as one of it's prime motivations (among others), a pervasive belief that a woman could not be monarch.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /> (My campaign plot involves the PC's being vassals of Queen Maude and loyal to her and her claim to the throne.) Also, although not sceintific or abslolutely representative, there are two woman in my game group (my Wife and her cousin) - neither of which have a problem with the above houserule/restriction. Not all D&D campaigns and games follow default D&D world-assumptions. In some D&D campaigns and gaming groups, realism is an appropriate and desired element.    edit: (P.S. - Even though I use 3E as the basis of my houserules, I've stolen the concept from 4E of using either Dexterity or Strength for "hitting". As it applies to the subject of this thread, that means that a Female Human of 23 Dex, will be just as lethal in combat as a Male Human of 23 Strength. Since IMO, Woman are no less or more dangerous than Men in real combat, this works for me - while still allowing that on average, Men can lift more weight than Women.)</blockquote>

Verification