The thread is discussing how to mechanically represent sex differences in TTRPGs.

The premise for participation in this thread is that this is an area that is underexplored & underutilized in RPGs. Sex differences are real and have consequences in life which are not reflected well in RPGs as-is. Real Men & real women are able to be unique and interesting characters in despite having differing capabilities over physical and psychological traits.

If you are not buying into the premise then you are simply derailing the thread with pointless discussion.

Quote from: Dinopaw on January 26, 2024, 02:55:46 PM
The thread is discussing how to mechanically represent sex differences in TTRPGs.

The premise for participation in this thread is that this is an area that is underexplored & underutilized in RPGs. Sex differences are real and have consequences in life which are not reflected well in RPGs as-is. Real Men & real women are able to be unique and interesting characters in despite having differing capabilities over physical and psychological traits.

If you are not buying into the premise then you are simply derailing the thread with pointless discussion.

I can still point out when your attempts to math that are misguided, unrealistic according to your own stated goals, and bad for play. this is the design and development board. I'm here to talk turkey. If you just think I'm wrong, that's fine. A lot of people have posted stuff I think is wrong. If you're trying to discourage me from participating because you just don't like what I'm saying, get a thicker skin.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 26, 2024, 08:56:46 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 02:10:46 AM

Quote from: Cipher on January 25, 2024, 09:15:00 PM
Clearly, this is not a discussion for you.

I have plenty of design experience.

Like your Magnum Opus, Conquest Of The Universe.

A customer on Drivethru rpg had great things to say about your design experience.

Quote from: DriveThru CustomerWow, just wow. Nearly 10 years to get this and this is the "Final" product. I have seen better produced from using MS Word. I hope you have learned your lesson and never do another Kickstarter again. I know I have learned my lesson and won't ever be buying another product from Wandering Star LLC or whatever you decide to brand it as.

https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/453189/conquest-of-the-universe

Aww, you didn't even leave me any comments?

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 03:37:07 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 26, 2024, 08:56:46 AM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 02:10:46 AM

Quote from: Cipher on January 25, 2024, 09:15:00 PM
Clearly, this is not a discussion for you.

I have plenty of design experience.

Like your Magnum Opus, Conquest Of The Universe.

A customer on Drivethru rpg had great things to say about your design experience.

Quote from: DriveThru CustomerWow, just wow. Nearly 10 years to get this and this is the "Final" product. I have seen better produced from using MS Word. I hope you have learned your lesson and never do another Kickstarter again. I know I have learned my lesson and won't ever be buying another product from Wandering Star LLC or whatever you decide to brand it as.

https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/453189/conquest-of-the-universe

Aww, you didn't even leave me any comments?

Why pay you money to dunk on you, when I can do it here for free?

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 03:36:20 PM
I can still point out when your attempts to math that are misguided, unrealistic according to your own stated goals, and bad for play. this is the design and development board. I'm here to talk turkey. If you just think I'm wrong, that's fine. A lot of people have posted stuff I think is wrong. If you're trying to discourage me from participating because you just don't like what I'm saying, get a thicker skin.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, don't participate in the thread. Simple. The first post already discusses the objections you've had and starts the discussion beyond this point.

And nothing I've stated makes any proscriptions about math or anything else. Your objections are all entirely unrelated to the topic at hand and are trying to inject your personal political-religious sentiment where it's not required.

Quote from: Dinopaw on January 26, 2024, 04:53:01 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 03:36:20 PM
I can still point out when your attempts to math that are misguided, unrealistic according to your own stated goals, and bad for play. this is the design and development board. I'm here to talk turkey. If you just think I'm wrong, that's fine. A lot of people have posted stuff I think is wrong. If you're trying to discourage me from participating because you just don't like what I'm saying, get a thicker skin.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, don't participate in the thread. Simple. The first post already discusses the objections you've had and starts the discussion beyond this point.

And nothing I've stated makes any proscriptions about math or anything else. Your objections are all entirely unrelated to the topic at hand and are trying to inject your personal political-religious sentiment where it's not required.

I'm not stopping you from leaving this thread if you are really done and want to leave.

Quote from: Dinopaw on January 26, 2024, 04:53:01 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 03:36:20 PM
I can still point out when your attempts to math that are misguided, unrealistic according to your own stated goals, and bad for play. this is the design and development board. I'm here to talk turkey. If you just think I'm wrong, that's fine. A lot of people have posted stuff I think is wrong. If you're trying to discourage me from participating because you just don't like what I'm saying, get a thicker skin.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, don't participate in the thread. Simple. The first post already discusses the objections you've had and starts the discussion beyond this point.

And nothing I've stated makes any proscriptions about math or anything else. Your objections are all entirely unrelated to the topic at hand and are trying to inject your personal political-religious sentiment where it's not required.

Greetings!

Good to see you, Dinopaw!

Like the Prison Warden in the film, "Cool Hand Luke" told the prisoner character, played by Paul Newman--"Some men, you just can't reach."

So many people need to be treated to the special treatment that the Warden provided for Paul Newman. *Laughing*

*Sippon' that tall glass of sweet tea*. Ahh, yes. Such is in short supply nowadays.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Dinopaw on January 26, 2024, 04:53:01 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 26, 2024, 03:36:20 PM
I can still point out when your attempts to math that are misguided, unrealistic according to your own stated goals, and bad for play. this is the design and development board. I'm here to talk turkey. If you just think I'm wrong, that's fine. A lot of people have posted stuff I think is wrong. If you're trying to discourage me from participating because you just don't like what I'm saying, get a thicker skin.

If you don't want to participate in the thread, don't participate in the thread. Simple. The first post already discusses the objections you've had and starts the discussion beyond this point.

And nothing I've stated makes any proscriptions about math or anything else. Your objections are all entirely unrelated to the topic at hand and are trying to inject your personal political-religious sentiment where it's not required.

Don't let the assholes win.  There's nothing wrong with ignoring (either via the tools on this board or just not reading) trolls.  You asked a reasonable question, got some reasonable responses, and then got a troll mucking up the thread.  Ignore the derail attempt.  The dirty little secret here is that this troll, like all of them, thrive on attention.  It desperately needs people to validate its self-image (part of which is tied up in a view of itself as a crusader for righteousness based around its own self-mutilation).  Just pretend it never posted (or, if you must, a single, pithy response about it being the least qualified to opine on sex differences) and move on.  Otherwise, if you stop asking and talking, you've given the trolls what they want.  Power.  They must force others to adhere to their own view of reality, because any cracks in that delusion and they might have to take an honest look at themselves...

Yeah, whatever you do, protect your beliefs from the idea someone else might actually have a point.

Anyway, if you just want to say you don't care what I have to say, and don't want me participating, you can just say that. I don't know what the eff that little game is about pretending I'm not interested in the topic of discussion. It's not cute.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 28, 2024, 08:48:48 PM
Yeah, whatever you do, protect your beliefs from the idea someone else might actually have a point.

I handle it thusly:

Female Characters: (OPTIONAL):  IF you wish to use these modifiers then use them; if you do not, then don't. They are here for the sake of biological verisimilitude and nothing more.

Strength: Multiply a female character's STR trait value by 0.7 and round-up.

Dexterity:  Female characters get a bonus of +1 to their DEX trait.

Note: these do not apply to Drakes, Kobolds, or Trolls whose females are physically equivalent to their males.

If you are outraged on behalf of women, and cannot define what a woman is, shut your face hole. If you insist on tossing a fit regardless—enjoy yourself. Feel the rage; let the hate flow through you. If you strike me down I shall become more based than you can possibly imagine.

Ability scores are meant to represent the qualities that make one a good adventurer.  Men are much, much better adventurers than women, so we can expect men to have much higher ability scores.  Women have other strengths, most of which have nothing to do with adventuring.

Since ability scores are fairly abstract, I don't think it makes sense to quantify just how many more points of strength or dexterity a man should have.  After all, we only give Halflings a -1 Str in older systems and a -2 in newer systems, when in reality halflings should have a huge Str penalty.  Also giving a woman -4 Str or whatever doesn't make sense if she rolls a 5, because that implies that she is as weak as a toddler, which isn't true except for cripples.  We want a simpler system.

Therefore, the common sense solution is to give women 3d4 down the line instead of 3d6 down the line.  (Yes this means that you have absurd things, like 1/64th of them having 16 Str, but it really isn't going to break the game).  Then to make them evolutionary equal, they receive certain benefits: almost no one attacks them, people bend over backwards to please them, and their most important powers: they can give birth and produce milk.

This is assuming that we want something reasonable.  However, if you have women adventurers at all, you're already suspending belief quite a bit.  Her character is literally the only female adventurer in the world, in the same way the Eowyn is literally the only female adventurer in Middle Earth.  The woman that is playing is probably your wife or daughter, or you buddy's girlfriend.  If you're going to let her play, you might as well let her play what she wants.  Don't let men play female characters.

I don't find 1/64 female adventurers having a 16 Strength to be crazy.

While it is system dependent, 16 actually isn't beyond the limits of real women; it's being able to carry just about 70 lb. without a movement penalty in the 3e derivatives. That's a little more than a bag of horsefeed or a hay bail. My mom used to do that with her horses all the time and she was nothing special as far as ranch/farm wives go.

Hell, even in AD&D 1e, the 18/50 limit for female humans when you converted the coins into lifting weight was about where the female weightlifting record of the time was (about 300 lb. while today's clean and jerk in the women's 87+kg division is 411 lb.).

In 3e that same weightlifting level is a Strength of 18, the current women's record is a Strength 20 (400 lb.) and the male weightlifting record is about a Strength of 23 (c. 600 lb.) in 3e terms.

Basically, in 3e, even a top tier starting fighter (Str 18) is weaker than the modern female weightlifting champion and would need to hit level 20 to naturally get his strength to a 23.

In 5e the best Strength a human can have is lifting just 300 lb. (score of 20 x 15lb.) which is just 75% of real world women's record.

* * *

So, if anything, before you go assigning arbitrary numbers, you first need to figure out what your scale is so you can gauge it appropriately. Linear scales will look different than geometric ones as well (as is the case when 15 is double the value of a 10 in 3e).

If anything the real problem in D&D is that with the current numbers the MEN are too weak, not that the women too strong.

For 3e, you could just put a cap on natural strength at 20 for women and still be under the world record. You could also give human men a +2 modifier to Strength for free (which in 3e mechanics would put a woman at just 70% of a man's Strength score if they rolled the same raw number) so they can actually reach the real human limits before the campaign ends.

* * *

My own preference if you want genuine stat differences while keeping to biology, would be to have a separate "magic" stat from the normal D&D six (or fix the D&D stats in general and have one that exclusively attunement to magic/the divine).

Men get +2 Str, while women get +2 to Magic. There's now a reason for female adventurers because they're going to better than the average man at working with magic, while men are better at strength and combat.

What is this obsession by judging it just by lifting standards? The carry weights for Str in D&D are ridiculously low. Combat soldiers carry more weight than D&D musclemen. Str is way more than those low lifting capacities, don't get hung up on a single metric.

You're hung up on trivia, like carrying capacity.  Instead think in percentiles.

Out of 216 men, six will have strength 16, three will have 17, and one lucky guy will have an 18.  Let's scale that up by a factor of 8: out of 1728 men, 48 will have 16, 24 will have 17, and 8 will have 18.  Out of the total male population (size 1728), 80 will have a strength score high enough to get a damage bonus in AD&D 2nd Edition.

Out of 64 women, one will have strength 16.  Let's scale that up by a factor of 27: out of 1728 women, 27 will have a strength of 16.  Out of the total female population (size 1728), 27 will have a strength score high enough to get a damage bonus.

Now let's combine the men and women, for a total population of 3453.  We have 80+27 people with a strength of 16+.  These people are the top 3%, and yet we are supposed to believe that just over a quarter (27/107) of this brawny elite is women?  Find any group of 3453 young adults (adventurers) and I guarantee that you won't find similar results.

So yes, my 3d4 suggestion massively overrates female strength, but that's because I was going for something simple, that could apply to all scores.