Is this offensive?

[Dinkeldog]

I promised myself I wouldn't read this one.

So here's one of the big questions--why should women get a +1 cha (even a bonus to bluff checks against men)?

And as to the question of who thinks a built naked man looks good? Well, uh, that would be me. Out-of-shape, well, not so much. But woohoo! there's another Bowflex commercial on...

okay that's over now...

Basically the whole thing isn't worth it, but if the individual creating the character chooses, they should feel free to create the character they want to play within the strictures established by the DM and accepted by the party.

 

[Umbran]

Subtle? Nope, I was being pretty blunt I thought. But then again, only the thin-skinned people will get hurt about me stating the obvious & feel the need to reply to a butthead like me about it.

You know what, Oryan77? Attacking others is not acceptable behavior on these boards. You just earned yourself a boot - don't post in this thread again.

For everyone else - you've been doing a good job of keeping things civil, and I thank you for it. Please don't let things slip. Be respectful. Thank you.

 

[mmu1]

A heavy warhorse has a Str of 18. How much energy output do you think it's whole body can generate? Do you think there is any human being, anywhere, that can actually produce the amount of work (in physical terms) equal to a heavy warhorse? Yet by the rules, something like a half of a percent of ordinary humans in their early twenties should be able to match the performance of a typical warhorse. I think that's pretty strong evidence that Str can't be measured in joules.

Str is a game statistic, and more than anything else, measures results. It does not matter if you have muscle mass, adrenaline, sheer determination, or plot immunity, what matters is if you can break down a door or kill an orc.

A heavy warhorse is also Large, so it has double the carrying capacity of a 18 Str Medium creature, +4 on lots of strength-based checks, and natural weapons that don't just inflict sudual damage.

The system is actually a lot less vague than you're trying to present it as, and strength has a very clear and simple definiton: "Strength measures your character's muscle and physical power". Not adrenaline, and not sheer determination.

Though the real issue is that - for whatever reason - you're trying to deny the existence of a basic and extremely significant physiological difference, which (since I'm a biologist by training) simply drives me nuts. It's like listening to someone argue against the theory of evolution.

 

[Logos7]

there's a difference between denying a fact and its significance.

I don't think anyone here is really denying that their are men stronger than women out there.

What people are denying that it is tied to their sex for the most part.

and yes you can wiz the stats all you want, but the first rule I was taught in stat class is that stats lie. even if your absolutely correct about all these olympic athelets, that matter of fact is that most of us aren't olympians, and that any women could perform equally with any guy, given the right training, inclination, and background.

But hey, just keep telling me i'm stronger than all those athelete babes. Truely.

Logos
~I guess the moral of the story is that if you have to ask...

 

[Brimshack]

My first reaction is to start asking questions about how accurately the mods reflect real world differences. My second reaction is to think of that as largely irrelevant. The question is what kind of game dynamics do you wish to create with this? Is it important or useful to nudge male and female Characters in this direction, and will this add meaning to the game? If the answer is yes, then the value of theses mods will depend on the propriety of the goal and the degree to which this actually helps you get there. If the answer is no, then it's just minor math quibbles, and not much in the way of significance for gaming or politics.

 

[Rel]

there's a difference between denying a fact and its significance.

I don't think anyone here is really denying that their are men stronger than women out there.

What people are denying that it is tied to their sex for the most part.

and yes you can wiz the stats all you want, but the first rule I was taught in stat class is that stats lie. even if your absolutely correct about all these olympic athelets, that matter of fact is that most of us aren't olympians, and that any women could perform equally with any guy, given the right training, inclination, and background.

But hey, just keep telling me i'm stronger than all those athelete babes. Truely.

Logos
~I guess the moral of the story is that if you have to ask...

I don't think there has been any assertion that a given man is or is not stronger than a given woman. The entire idea is predicated on that notion that a an average man is stronger than an average woman.

 

[mmu1]

there's a difference between denying a fact and its significance.

I don't think anyone here is really denying that their are men stronger than women out there.

What people are denying that it is tied to their sex for the most part.

and yes you can wiz the stats all you want, but the first rule I was taught in stat class is that stats lie. even if your absolutely correct about all these olympic athelets, that matter of fact is that most of us aren't olympians, and that any women could perform equally with any guy, given the right training, inclination, and background.

But hey, just keep telling me i'm stronger than all those athelete babes. Truely.

Logos
~I guess the moral of the story is that if you have to ask...

In other words, your reasons amount to "because I say so" or "because I feel strongly about it". Exactly the sort of irrational thought I'm talking about. Thanks for proving my point, I guess?

 

[Piratecat]

In other words, your reasons amount to "because I say so" or "because I feel strongly about it". Exactly the sort of irrational thought I'm talking about. Thanks for proving my point, I guess?

Did you read Umbran's message just above? Please go and do so. This sort of rude post isn't okay; if you disagree with someone, you can discuss it without personal attacks.

 

[S'mon]

A heavy warhorse has a Str of 18. How much energy output do you think it's whole body can generate? Do you think there is any human being, anywhere, that can actually produce the amount of work (in physical terms) equal to a heavy warhorse?

You know the 3e rules give quadrupeds a big bonus to carrying capacity?
Actually I suspect the 3e "STR 18" for the war horse is too low, done so as not to give it excessive to-hit & damage, because the combat rules assume STR is used optimally, by bipeds . They work ok for feline predators but not for horses or even for dogs & wolves.

 

[Ipissimus]

I don't think anyone here is really denying that their are men stronger than women out there.

What people are denying that it is tied to their sex for the most part.

Short biology lesson: Men produce Testosterone. So do women but in much smaller amounts. Testosterone is what promotes growth and muscle in the human body and gives men a greater disposition towards aggression.

I can't speak for everyone but what I am saying is that a man who exercises will build more muscle than a woman who exercises the same amount. Therefore, at the high end, men are slightly stronger than women (which is why the olympic weightlifter point is important).

Yes, there are many women out there who can kick a man's ass. But that's more due to the fact that strength is only one component of skill in a battle. Knowing how and where to hit someone is more important, as well as being able to last the distance. Strategy and mental focus is also a factor.

Now, getting away from strength, I wouldn't be inclined to give bonuses/penalties to Charisma. I'd be more inclined to give men a bonus to Intimidation and women a bonus to Diplomacy. I wouldn't touch either of the mental statistics either, since measuring them is unreliable and the sex that got the penalty would be insulted. Instead, I'd be more inclined to give females a +1 Dex and males a -1 Dex (several studies have shown that women do have better reflex response times). I'd also leave Con alone, it's debatable which gender can last longer (though I'll admit, I don't really follow endurance sports like marathons or mountain biking, so my info here is sketchy).