Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 750659" data-attributes="member: 7240">Until I read last night's posts, it hadn't really dawned on me that anyone was taking the position that I, as a DM, didn't have the right to prohibit certain character types. Obviously, only a tiny minority of those who disagree with my position hold this view but I am nonetheless amazed that anyone out there thinks this way. I also prohibit Monks because they, like men playing women, harm suspension of disbelief in a medieval fantasy environment, in my experience.I'm also fascinated by people's comments about Vancouver, the city with the second- or third-most drag queens per capita in North America and the densest geographic concentration of homosexuals on the continent. I'd suggest that people head back to the drawing board to explain the geographic coincidence of so many GMs who prohibit men playing women. If anything about our city is a factor in our work, I think it's probably the maxim put forward by Teflon Billy: "Men can't play women; they can only play female impersonators."One final thought on the gender subject: since 1990, every single game I have GMed has had at least one female player. Maybe this has something to do with the high standards I have for the portrayal of female characters.Here's a related question that may assist me in understanding the position of those of you who disagree with me: I recently ended a campaign early that was set in the modern period in part because I became dissatisfied with my portrayal of NPCs who were North American aboriginal people. For those of you who have run or played in campaigns in the modern period, have there been members ethnic or other minorities that you have felt unable to represent in an effective three-dimensional way?</blockquote>

Verification