When Bob wants to play a female PC

[fusangite]

Let me second BelenUmeria's remarks here. If people don't shape up, I'll start answering S'mon's question. To quote Trailer Park Boys, "when you're being pelted with s**t balls, deputy, you better take out a s**t bat."

 

[S'mon]

BTW Fusangite, it occurred to me that the sample problem PC you discussed seems exactly the kind of PC the Blue Rose RPG is designed to accommodate.

 

[S'mon]

Let me second BelenUmeria's remarks here. If people don't shape up, I'll start answering S'mon's question.

If you like you can email me the answer off-list at simontmn (at) postmaster.co.uk - I can think of various possibilities but I'd be interested to know if you actually believe any of them.

 

[Belen]

I have already alluded to the question of religion: do you permit secular players to be clerics? Surely the radical different (often totalising) world-views would place the player and the character at odds? Or is it rather the case that the initial premise is to allow the benefit of the doubt and only force change when the player proves to be incapable of adequately RPing a religious character?

Yes. I have told someone who was a blatant atheist that he could not play a cleric. He spent the previous year bashing religion at the game table. Funny enough, no one bashed it before a religious person joined the group, yet two people decided to constantly make off-color jokes about religion after the new person joined the group.

Why would I let them play a cleric?

Same reason I would never let my best friend play a female character. He has such a negative view of women that he could never pull it off, although he is in no way as much a jerk as the too anti-religion people who were once members of my group.

However, I am very secular, but love to play characters of faith. Go figure.

In any event, your argument in favor of cross-gender characters completely ignores the history of the GM and the dynamics of his/her group. If a GM suspects that the cross-gender character would be detrimental to the fun of the group, then it should not be allowed. Period.

If the GM has had a negative history with cross-gender PCs, then they should not be allowed. Period.

If the player cannot handle the different gender of the character, then it should not be allowed. Period.

There is no difference in banning cross-gender characters, than in banning evil, trollish, or marsupial characters.

 

[hong]

Let me second BelenUmeria's remarks here. If people don't shape up, I'll start answering S'mon's question. To quote Trailer Park Boys, "when you're being pelted with s**t balls, deputy, you better take out a s**t bat."

"Stop cussing, 'cause you're no good at it."

 

[Belen]

I'm curious. Did you take a poll? Did you ask your players if they were having fun? What led you to believe that they weren't having a "satisfying" game? I'm curious, because I'd really like to know. Did the game dissolve because the guy couldn't RP his female character properly?

The real question here, BU, is this: Did YOU have a less satisfying game, or did your players?

1.) Did I take a poll? Yes I did. I always have an after campaign wrap-up where I asked people what they thought went well with the game and what were the major problems with the campaign. Everyone mentioned the cross-gender PC, including the person who played that character.

2.) Did I have a less satisfying game? Yep. And I can safely say that the rest of the group felt the same way.

3.) Do I routinely make multiple female characters for my one shots at game day? Yes I do. Guys play them all the time, although I always give the player the option of changing the gender and name if they feel uncomfortable playing it. Cross-gender characters tend to be a non-issue for one shots.

As I have stated many times, I do not ban it from my game unless the person has proven that they cannot handle it. (Note: My current group just may do a good job of it, although my old group should never have had it introduced.)

Yet, I am not going to say that I enjoy it. IME, the game is far richer when people play their own gender. Of course, all my groups have an even male-female split, so I am lucky that way.

 

[Mallus]

In fact, the hot woman I'm with now took away some of my cool points when she learned about roleplaying from me.

I know the feeling...

Except she now plays too

I'll never know that one. On the plus side, she does come up with some doozy ideas. Example: Dracusaurus, the vampire dinosaur.

I realize more & more that most players play a more "goofy" type of game from what I've witnessed.

It took me a long time to accept it, but yeah, goofy is the default. Think of Gygax's old World of Greyhawk.

Men don't think women act like hornballs, but a man will roleplay a woman like one most of the time.

I've done it. In fact, I'm doing it right now en masse in the game I'm running. The PC's are trying to liberate the Shrine of St. Tart's Bodice --and its staff of semi-dressed courtesan-priestesses from the clutches of bunch of Polynesianesque sea raiders with a thing for white women.

But consider that stereotypes work well in RPG's. Characters that are instantly distinctive (even if they're cliche), are usually better than ones with "hidden depths".

 

[JoeGKushner]

Seems like a non-issue to me. Let a character play a member of an ancient race that once ruled the line but not of the opposite gender? M'eh. Not something I'm going to owrry about unless he tells me he's trying to discover his character's sexuality, at which point I'll have to explain that my game is not that TYPE of role playing game.

 

[Destan]

I have to say that I believe that you are a closet homophobe.

When I started this whole thread I thought I was somewhat open-minded. I felt a bit guilty about asking one of my players to change his back-up character from female to male. I came to the boards to see if, indeed, that was wrong of me. I truly believe I could have been convinced that my request was heavy-handed, and I'd have changed my position. As was mentioned, I've had gamers play female characters in the past (though, to be honest, I'd have preferred they hadn't).

So, in between that time and now, some things have changed. The hyperbole and bitterness displayed here has, ironically, made me more comfortable with the decision I first made. I think human nature tends to have us associate arguments with the manner they are presented; I've found it difficult to fairly digest some posts because the poster was unable or unwilling to present his/her thoughts in a diplomatic fashion. Maybe that's my loss.

A few of you seem to cling to a sentiment that if one is not 100% openly supportive of cross-gender roleplaying, then they must be a homophobe, a closet homosexual, weird, or otherwise freaky. (I'm using only those words that were used on me.) Take those labels, and reverse them. Hence: If you're a guy and you want to play a girl character, then you're a homosexual or a freak or weird.

Not nice, is it? Of course it's not. It's sounds pretty damned stupid, in my book.

Finally, I know common courtesy is not so common, but that doesn't make me any less disappointed to see it proven.

Thanks,
D

 

[Lasher Dragon]

I've done it. In fact, I'm doing it right now en masse in the game I'm running. The PC's are trying to liberate the Shrine of St. Tart's Bodice --and its staff of semi-dressed courtesan-priestesses from the clutches of bunch of Polynesianesque sea raiders with a thing for white women.

That sounds like a blast. Now if only I weren't so scared of roleplaying I mean being good at playing a female I would love to join in.

But consider that stereotypes work well in RPG's. Characters that are instantly distinctive (even if they're cliche), are usually better than ones with "hidden depths".

Indeed, most characters for me anyway start with a name and a general idea and develop their own unique flair from there.