When Bob wants to play a female PC

[marune]

In my current 6 players campaign, there is 4 male player, 2 female player, 3 characters of each sex. (One male plays a female character, all others are same gender).

I was thinking about our current situation while reading, and I have to say that I think that the female character of the male player is probably the more stereotyped... (a high CHA swashbuckler)...

But.. (little note, its an evil party) when they needed to get some info about a girl working in a "festhall" of Waterdeep, the two female players give out the idea of her characters to go at that "festhall" and ask for a job

 

[pogre]

I think I'm going to play across gender bounds for my next PC. There's some sort of middle ground between lame stereotyping and different-in-name-only PCs. I want to see if I can find that middle ground.

Jeff,

I know you do not get over here a lot but you need to fix your blog link - it does forward folks, but I thought I would let you know...

 

[MojoGM]

I can see non-perjorative reasons why someone would want to roleplay a character of the opposite gender.

I can also understand why some people would be uncomfortable with it.

I've got some theories to explain the various attitudes, but before I elaborate, I want to test something.

If my theory's correct, one outcome would be that of the "uncomfortable with it" crowd, some will say that they are equally uncomfortable with males playing females as they would with females playing males. Some will say that they are more comfortable with lady roleplayers with male characters than gentleman roleplayers with female characters. Practically none (unless they are being intentionally provocative) would say they were more comfortable with males playing females than with females playing males.

I'd love to know if I'm right...

I'd have to say that I'm against both concepts. My reasoning? It just makes things confusing and opens up the possibility of problems.

 

[kigmatzomat]

It happens in my games, although I am never that comfortable with it.
IME, males or females who play a character of the opposite gender usually cause minor problems. People tend to refer to the character with the pronoun that connects with the player rather than the character. It requires a bit more thought with NPC social interaction etc.
None of these problems are huge, but they do tend to cause a disconnect with the game. I find it much harder to get into the game when someone plays a character opposite their gender.

I'm in the same camp. I'm not concerned by it but it does tend to interrupt my mental train of thought when I find myself saying "Denise, he..." I appreciate it when those players remain in third person during non-social situations for the small reminders provided by saying "him/her" vs. "I/me".

My only real requirement for gender-transition gamers is that if they don't do special voices/mannerisms/etc for characters of their gender that they NOT do them for characters of another gender. Exploring other character concepts is fine but don't co-opt my game table to explore other lifestyles.

 

[John Morrow]

I've got some theories to explain the various attitudes, but before I elaborate, I want to test something.

I think any single theory to explain why people are uncomfortable with it or why people want to do it is doomed to failure (at best) because I don't think there is any one reason for either one. Both can be justified in a variety of ways, some good and some bad.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I believe that the only way to become a better role-player is to challenge yourself. If you have always for the last 20 years played only male or only female characters, then IMO the person who has only played for say 5 years yet has played the gamut of characters/races/sexes/classes is in all probability a better role-player. Note I said IMO.

I would be willing to bet that this poll:

Do you allow cross-gender characters in your campaign?

would have results that closely mirror this poll:

Is a goal of roleplaying to improve your ability to roleplay?

Lasher Dragon would be as unhappy in my campaign as I would be to have him as a player-- and it's not because of any psycho-sexual issues.

He's not weirding me out because he wants to cross-roleplay, he's weirding me out because he wants to see who is the "best roleplayer."

Wulf

 

[Lasher Dragon]

On Internet message boards, everything sounds a lot more hostile than intended because all of the body language and nuances that make a statement a "joke" are missing. It's not a great medium for certain types of "joking around".

6 of my posts in here contained one of the following: LOL, LMAO, and or a smiley. If you cannot infer that I have a smile in my face when I write it right into the post, that is your failure, not mine.

It's making you come off like an idiot and a bully. And given the rules of this forum, yeah, that can be a problem if you offend enough people.

As I said, if you are easily offended, ignore me - I can rub (certain uptight) people the wrong way. It's a character flaw of mine. Sorry.

Please take a look at:

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm

Particularly, the first item.

Yes, black or white, good or evil, blah blah blah. As I said in one of my first posts in here, I can see not allowing a certain gender based on the campaign itself. I personally in my opinion feel that barring opposite-gender PCs because it makes you feel funny is weird, and kind of immature.

 

[takyris]

I don't think it makes you weird to be weirded out by someone who insists on acting weird.

Wulf, that's less than entirely productive.

Maybe we could all take a five minute break from offering detailed psychoanalysis of people on the other side of the fence? Maybe? Ain't nobody gonna come out of that one smelling like roses, from the people railing against the people who "insist" on playing a certain gender to the people insisting that anyone who doesn't like players doing a certain thing has deep emotional issues. Come on.

Some people-- even some people in this thread, I suspect-- like to play female characters just to prove to everyone (including themselves) what mature, self-assured roleplayers they are. Frankly, that's even more annoying. Go play Vampire or something.

Helpful, man. Really brings the thread forward.

And some people had the gender as part of a character concept that they found interesting, and would be just as annoyed at being told, "Look, why not just make her a ranger instead of a rogue" as they are being told to change the gender that they had in mind.

And some people -- even some people in this thread, I suspect -- assume that because they're not very good roleplayers, that nobody else is a good roleplayer, either, because their conception of the world doesn't actually include people who aren't them.

I mean, not everyone. Certainly not everyone. Not the people who aren't like that. Just... some people. You know who they are.

What's that? Using "some people" as a kind of waiver that lets me make blanket statements to rile people up while I maintain the "No, no, I only said some, not all, and you have to admit that it's true for some people, somewhere" line of debate, despite the fact that it was clearly designed as an attack? I am shocked. Shocked. Can't a man simply say that some people are so narrowminded that they can't imagine other ways to play the game without people taking insults where none were given? Some people. That's all I said. Just like Wulf.

And mind you, Wulf, I'm coming down on the "If the DM is uncomfortable with it, it's not worth making an issue over" side of the fence. My first response was "If you are actually interested in trying it, do it in a mini-game with temporary PCs", to avoid exactly the kind of campaign problems you noted.

Lasher: Ditto John Morrow. Whatever you're saying as you type it, you're coming off as rude. For the record, a) I don't agree that the only way to become a DM is to challenge yourself, and b) I don't believe that allowing cross-gender characters is the only way for a DM to challenge himself.

 

[Gomez]

As the DM, have you asked or encouraged a player to not play a PC of the opposite gender?

No.

As a player, do you enjoy playing a character of the opposite sex? If so, why? If not, why not?

I have run several female characters. I would have to say 1 out of 10 of my characters. Mainly as a change of pace. I am a hetrosexual male so it's not some "fantasy" of mine. I have enjoyed playing all of my different characters.

As DM or player, do you get squirmy when Bob brings his attractive female half-elf to the gaming table?

Only if she can sit by the DM! Well seriously, no not in the least.

Was I wrong to encourage my player to switch from a female to a male PC?

Hey it's your game so do what you like. If I wanted to run a game with all humans then the players have a option to not play it that really offends them. But in "my" mind it not a big deal.

I know the best advice for a DM is to let the players play whatever character type they'll enjoy the most. This will benefit the campaign and increase everyone's enjoyment. Yada, yada, yada. I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment...but I can't get over the Bob As An Elf Maiden hang-up.

If Bob wanted to run a ugly as a stick female half-orc would it bother you as much?


I hope this helps you.

 

[John Morrow]

I've got some theories to explain the various attitudes, but before I elaborate, I want to test something.

I think any single theory to explain why people are uncomfortable with it or why people want to do it is doomed to failure (at best) because I don't think there is any one reason for either one. Both can be justified in a variety of ways, some good and some bad.