Neat, Add-On, d20 Rules???

[Greenfield]

Active Defense looks interesting, but I don't know that I'd put it in general use. Adding dice rolls adds to complication, and in some cases to frustration.

I might allow it for specific creature/builds. Tank type critters such as Golems wouldn't get it. Agile critters and "mobility fighter" types, as well as Monks, might choose it as an option. Repeat: OPTION.

Gender adjustments may look balanced, but they really aren't, particularly when you use the point-buy system for ability scores. My female Rogue or Wizard buys STR to 13 (numbers up to 14 cost one for one under 3.5 point buy) and lets it drop to a 10. Her 15 DEX gets bumped to 16, which would have cost her more than one additional purchase point. If I paid for 17 and it went to 18, that extra point was worth even more. Same for Con or Wis.

If someone wants to play the "Weaker Sex" that way, let them simply buy their stats accordingly.

We play with a couple of house rules that seem to work well.

Characters don't die at -10. They die at the negative of their CON. It adds to PC survivability at lower levels, and recognizes that some people are just harder to kill than others. (Note that this applies to monsters and bad guys as well, so some of those big-bads are really hard to put down for good.)

Iterative attacks come every 4 BAB points, instead of every 5, and each has a -4 penalty instead of -5. It helps the melee types keep up with the spell casters at higher levels, without massively warping a lot of other associated rules.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Active Defense looks interesting, but I don't know that I'd put it in general use. Adding dice rolls adds to complication, and in some cases to frustration.

I might allow it for specific creature/builds. Tank type critters such as Golems wouldn't get it. Agile critters and "mobility fighter" types, as well as Monks, might choose it as an option. Repeat: OPTION.

We play with a couple of house rules that seem to work well.

Characters don't die at -10. They die at the negative of their CON. It adds to PC survivability at lower levels, and recognizes that some people are just harder to kill than others. (Note that this applies to monsters and bad guys as well, so some of those big-bads are really hard to put down for good.)

Iterative attacks come every 4 BAB points, instead of every 5, and each has a -4 penalty instead of -5. It helps the melee types keep up with the spell casters at higher levels, without massively warping a lot of other associated rules.

That last one makes me chuckle at how many attacks a Cleric optimized for Spiritual Weapon would get, especially given metamagic. Divine Power, then Empower summon a bunch of them. Now if only weapons with funny crit mods like a khopesh's 19-20/x3 were favored deity weapons.

Die at negative Con? So if I had a Con of 20, it'd be -20 that I'd die?

 

[Water Bob]

You're certainly entitled to your beliefs, but what exactly are you basing them on?

Real life observation.

Take 10 men that you know of all about the same age, then take 10 women in the same age bracket, and let them all fight it out in a boxing ring.

Who would you bet on?

The men, of course. Because they'd win.

Sure, there are individuals here and there where a woman can be stronger than her male counter part, but as a whole, you're deluding yourself if you think that women and men, as a whole, are equal in the STR/Combat department.

Heck, a quick google turns up this, from a 2008 NY Times article:

MUSCLES

There has been a lot of controversy in the sports world about whether men's apparent physical advantage is on the wane. A look at the bulging muscles sported by some female Wimbledon champions proves that female sportswomen aren't the delicate flowers they once were - some experts have argued that women will eventually equal men's speed and strength.

But the fact is that men generally have bigger, stronger muscles. As Harry Brennan, an exercise physiologist at the Institute of Sport, says: 'There was a period in the Seventies when women equalled or broke more world records than men, but that was before the fall of the Berlin Wall.'
In other words, this was the era when Eastern Bloc coaches were feeding female athletes steroids like sweets.

'It now looks as if the gap is widening,' Brennan says. 'At a hormonal level, men have 10 per cent more testosterone.' Testosterone helps the body lay down more muscle. 'This is why men tend to be more muscly,' explains Brennan.

Still, if men are stronger, aren't women - with their smaller, lighter bodies - more agile? Apparently not. 'Agility depends upon the ability to decelerate and accelerate fast, and men - because of their larger muscles - will always have an advantage,' says Brennan.

But if men are stronger, faster and more agile, women are more flexible. 'Women's smaller muscle mass and joint geometry, and the difference in ligament structure, allows for more flexibility,' says Brennan. So, a woman could pick a dirty sock off the floor, no problem, while a man would have to bend. That's if he noticed the sock in the first place.

Weaker sex: WOMEN

If actual physiology was the only basis, then going through various medical books will most definitely show that the true differences between genders is negligible.

I doubt, seriously, that is correct. A quick google bears me out.

Remember, we're talking about pure STR and combat ability--not other areas where women are stronger than men (such as the realm of heart problems).

Assuming one does say D&D is medieval, a flat -3 to strength "racial" essentially means the woman could never get to the same power as a man.

No. It means that a woman could never get the top power as a man. But, there will still be plenty of instances where women are stronger than men.

A female character throws 4d6 -3, and gets 18 -3, for a total of STR 15. Then, let's go a step further and make her a Cimmerian (since I play the Conan RPG), which race gets a +2 STR.

So, this female gets a STR 17.

The next character, a male, throws 4d6 and gets a STR 10. He's Cimmerian, too, so he gets the +2 modifier also. He starts the game with STR 12.

The woman is obviously much stronger than the man.

But, as we begin chargen, it is the men that have a better chance of being stronger.

And, that reflects real life.

Are you really suggesting that women be treated as a different race?

I don't use the rule in my game, but I think it's a rule worth noting. And, I'm not suggesting that women are a different race, but I am suggesting that they are different, biologically, than men.

Anyone with an eye (doesn't need two of them) can see the difference.

Active Defense looks interesting, but I don't know that I'd put it in general use. Adding dice rolls adds to complication, and in some cases to frustration.

A lot of people say this. I find it really adds no time at all to the game but adds a lot of enjoyment. Players seem to feel more like they are participating in the fight rather than watching it.

Gender adjustments may look balanced, but they really aren't, particularly when you use the point-buy system for ability scores.

I never use point-buy when I can avoid it.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

On the topic of gender-based attribute differences: Regardless of what the differences between the genders may or may not be, I don't think D&D is granular enough to make that a real option. The difference between two entirely different species is only +2: long-lived fancy-pants elves who are legendary for their grace and agility only get an extra +2 to Dex, dwarves who can take an incredible beating and are practically immune to poison (alcohol especially) only get an extra +2 to Con, etc. Compared to that, the differences between the two genders of one species are so small as to be negligible.

If elves had, say, +4 Dex and the 3-18 starting ability scale were more granular, perhaps implementing something like that would make more sense, but as it stands I don't think it's worth the trouble.

 

[kitcik]

What's the point?

It's a FANTASY ROLEPLAYING game.

A man can play a female character and vice versa.

All this rule does is alienate the gender of players that this male-centric game needs more of.

 

[Greenfield]

That last one makes me chuckle at how many attacks a Cleric optimized for Spiritual Weapon would get, especially given metamagic. Divine Power, then Empower summon a bunch of them. Now if only weapons with funny crit mods like a khopesh's 19-20/x3 were favored deity weapons.

I don't think you can Empower Spiritual Weapons. There is no random die in the casting, not for duration nor for number. In any case, it wouldn't affect the BAB of the Spiritual Weapon, so it wouldn't lead to any more attacks.

Die at negative Con? So if I had a Con of 20, it'd be -20 that I'd die?

Yeah, that's exactly what it means.

Of course, the feeble Wizard with an 8 CON dies at -8. And CON draining poisons and effects now hold a triple threat: The CON loss itself, the loss of hit points, and the lower threshold of death.

 

[Water Bob]

I don't think D&D is granular enough to make that a real option.

That's an interesting comment. Worth thinking about.

A man can play a female character and vice versa.

We've had a few female NPCs or henchmen played by men. But having a female as a main character just seems...I dunno...wierd to me.

I'm not totally against it, but it does seem a little strange.

All this rule does is alienate the gender of players that this male-centric game needs more of.

I buy Conan running around in a loin cloth, because I can picture Mike Tyson doing the same thing and being a bad-(curse word free) doing it.

I don't buy Red Sonja at all, in her stupid chain mail bikini, and I can't picture Demi Moore or Anjelina Jolie kicking real butt believably.

This breaks my suspension of disbelief with the game.

 

[Greg K]

I buy Conan running around in a loin cloth, because I can picture Mike Tyson doing the same thing and being a bad-(curse word free) doing it.

I don't buy Red Sonja at all, in her stupid chain mail bikini, and I can't picture Demi Moore or Anjelina Jolie kicking real butt believably.

This breaks my suspension of disbelief with the game.

Go fight this lady and see if it changes your mind.

I can't believe I am mentioning her, because, at one point, she studied the same style I did (and doesn't list it), but had a falling out with instructors over becoming a professional fighter. She then went bad mouthing our style and had one of her style's top instructors challenge my second structure to a fight (in a ring)- my instructor knocked the guy out with a spinning backfist. She claimed it was a lucky shot despite her guy and "grandmaster" acknowledging the skill and effectiveness of the style of my instructor.

Still, she is a very skilled fighter with training in several styles. I can believe she can kick ass.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Well, this thread is going to explode (probably more than it has already) because someone mentioned gender differences.

Anyways, Greg K, I think you may want to use another example. You've very successfully demonstrated that women can be very skilled (31-0 record, 18 KOs). I don't think you've demonstrated what Water Bob was commenting on: Strength difference.

Of course, like me, Water Bob doesn't use point buy for stats, he rolls them, so "assign stats to reflect what you have as a concept" only goes so far. However, the point on "+2 Dex for elves' legendary grace" is interesting, and I can understand why people might feel alienated (depending on the person).

At any rate, I really don't think productive discussion can really be had on this subject (at least, not on these boards). I was a heavy contributor to a thread a couple months ago about ability changes based on gender (or a free feat to both), and there was simply too much opposition about even discussing it.

As always, play what you like

 

[Water Bob]

Still, she is a very skilled fighter with training in several styles. I can believe she can kick ass.

There are always individuals who break the mold. We're talking in generalities.

And, there are women I've "bought" in strong roles. I think Linda Hamilton in Terminator 2 was fantastic. She really sold it.