SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Attributes for Female Characters in a Campaign

Started by SHARK, August 03, 2021, 05:13:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

GriswaldTerrastone

#15
Since my games usually have a number of species, usually anthro but others with humanish characters, one must base each set of stats on the particular race or species. There are too many to list here.

Typically females are smaller, have less strength, lower constitution, but generally, all else the same, somewhat higher charisma- since they are usually non-combatants if fighting has not yet started they have a better chance of talking another group out of combat. Intelligence is lower in some respects, somewhat higher in others. Combat morale is lower, unless young are threatened. The chaotic evil shadow elves, the Ayundellian equivalent of the drow, are a notable exception. Likewise the grey hags of The Gloomlands.

Ayundellian fauns are much more likely to communicate with a group of adventurers if an attractive female (esp. elf or vulpinish) approaches peacefully.

Female Ayundellian dragons have somewhat weaker and shorter-ranged breath weapons as these are not supernatural.

For obvious reasons females tend to be more aware of their surroundings. All else the same they get a small adjustment against being surprised.

Auramancy is the closest thing Ayundell has to magic. Female auramancers tend to specialize in healing and diagnosis.

Due to smaller size a female can, all else the same, have a better chance of, say, edging along the ledge of an old ruin without it breaking. Hiding and slipping through smaller openings is another advantage.

Some females, like azuralupins and leofolk, are just naturally effective in a fight. Female greater orcs, half-orcs, and muscler-goons are naturally strong, as are the draconfolk. They are not sent into battle, though; at best they may be in defensive positions, e.g. female azuralupins may be in an infirmary both to help tend the wounded and defend against any enemies that may get through (because they are azuralupins).

I'm not especially politically correct.
I'm 55. My profile won't record this. It's only right younger members know how old I am.

Lunamancer

I generate ordinary (0th level) NPCs per the 1E DMG guidance. 3d6, counting 1's as 3's and 6's as 4's, then modifying the attributes according to profession (or class)--laborers getting +1 to +3 on STR, mercenaries getting +1 to STR and +3 to CON with a minimum of 4 hp, and merchants/traders having a minimum INT and CHR of 12.

If 90% of males are laborers and only 10% of females are laborers, then indeed you're going to find males on average will have higher STR. So that takes care of that. And if someone wants to just say, "It's fantasy" and do away with the disparities, when the occupation disparity vanishes, so does the strength disparity.
That's my two cents anyway. Carry on, crawler.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito.

Steven Mitchell

Quote from: SHARK on August 03, 2021, 09:20:14 PM

Did the wolf man survive? I have wolf-humanoids in my campaign as well!


He did.  At one point, one of his rescuers was barely suspended over an 80 foot drop with nothing but hard rocks below, held up only by 3 ropes anchored by the cat and two other characters on ledges.  Then the party got lucky. 

Zelen

#18
I've always liked the idea of mechanically representing differences between men & women, but I've never seen a very compelling way to do this in the D&D attribute set. I think realistically what you should be looking at isn't flat modifiers but a different numerical distribution of stats. But in general I think Str/Dex/Con/Wis/Int/Cha is just too crude to really represent male/female differences. For example, I think it's really hard to argue that women are more charismatic than men in the abstract, given that men overwhelmingly are leaders, entertainers, generals where actual charisma matters.

That being said, if a man (or woman) sits down at my table and they want to play a character and aren't happy with male/female character creation rules? My players having fun is a lot more important to me than 100% fidelity to some arbitrary ruleset.

GriswaldTerrastone

The few times I did DM at a "normal" game was long ago, with 1977 rules. Female characters were weaker, but that was the only difference. To even things up a bit I gave female characters a bonus on Charisma- remember this was decades ago so things were different. Today with human characters in a regular AD&D game I wouldn't bother.
I'm 55. My profile won't record this. It's only right younger members know how old I am.

SirFrog

In a fantasy game where wizards are casting fireballs left and right, I could care less about verisimilitude. This brings nothing but trouble. No need to pigeonhole female players or characters.

S'mon

Obviously sexual dimorphism is very real IRL. Generally speaking it doesn't work well in D&D style fantasy. For one thing the stats system very much assumes a male default, and the kind of adventuring PCs do would IRL be a nearly entirely male activity. Female NPCs are a different matter of course, eg I tend to have the average mundane female NPC STR 7 where a male is STR 11.

I think in a game like Pendragon or Game of Thrones though different PC stats works well, where the male knights go questing & warring while the women generally stay home. If the women are PCs too then they need 'home' stuff to do. Game of Thrones style courtly politics and other social interaction is an obvious place for the females to shine.
Shadowdark Wilderlands (Fridays 2pm UK/9am EST)  https://smons.blogspot.com/2024/08/shadowdark.html
Open table game on Roll20, PM me to join! Current Start Level: 1

S'mon

Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 06:57:02 PM
Except for all these ways that woman have better Constitution then men, I am going to give them lower constitution?

I remember doing army training, women got injured a lot more easily - because they had less muscle mass. Hit Points should really key off STR, if you want to be realistic.
Shadowdark Wilderlands (Fridays 2pm UK/9am EST)  https://smons.blogspot.com/2024/08/shadowdark.html
Open table game on Roll20, PM me to join! Current Start Level: 1

Pat

Quote from: S'mon on August 04, 2021, 02:58:54 AM
I think in a game like Pendragon or Game of Thrones though different PC stats works well, where the male knights go questing & warring while the women generally stay home. If the women are PCs too then they need 'home' stuff to do. Game of Thrones style courtly politics and other social interaction is an obvious place for the females to shine.
That would generally work better if you ran the men at war and the women at home as separate games, or in Pendragon had each player alternate running their knight and then their wife. There just isn't enough overlap between those roles to have a mixed game. Could even use completely different stats. It would be a good way to incorporate manor-level play.

S'mon

Quote from: Pat on August 04, 2021, 04:06:24 AM
Quote from: S'mon on August 04, 2021, 02:58:54 AM
I think in a game like Pendragon or Game of Thrones though different PC stats works well, where the male knights go questing & warring while the women generally stay home. If the women are PCs too then they need 'home' stuff to do. Game of Thrones style courtly politics and other social interaction is an obvious place for the females to shine.
That would generally work better if you ran the men at war and the women at home as separate games, or in Pendragon had each player alternate running their knight and then their wife. There just isn't enough overlap between those roles to have a mixed game. Could even use completely different stats. It would be a good way to incorporate manor-level play.

Yes, for Pendragon you'd want a male PC & a female PC for each player. GoT is mostly politics and would work ok with mixed group.
Shadowdark Wilderlands (Fridays 2pm UK/9am EST)  https://smons.blogspot.com/2024/08/shadowdark.html
Open table game on Roll20, PM me to join! Current Start Level: 1

Steven Mitchell

Quote from: S'mon on August 04, 2021, 03:03:15 AM
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 06:57:02 PM
Except for all these ways that woman have better Constitution then men, I am going to give them lower constitution?

I remember doing army training, women got injured a lot more easily - because they had less muscle mass. Hit Points should really key off STR, if you want to be realistic.

Which is another example of why if doing this for world simulation, a Size stat makes more sense than tying it to Str.  If I'm a player in the game, if we are going to be that fine-grained about human male/female differences, I want to know where are the relative differences represented in, for example, halfling mass, a war horses mass, a dragon, and so forth?

Of course, D&D isn't the best system for that either.  One of the things that makes it work so well for RQ is that Size is essentially a neutral stat.  High Size makes you tougher and hit harder.  Low Size makes you more nimble (all else being equal).  It is what it is, and your character makes the most of it.

It also matters whether you track encumbrance or not.  When I'm paying attention to size (if only as GM adjudication as it comes up), then I absolutely warn the players it will be a factor when hauling unconscious party members around, whether a tactical retreat or overland back to civilization.  If you have a lot of magic options (items or spells) to handle encumbrance to make it a null issue, then there is no point in focusing on relative size that much either.  If you don't, then a big character is more likely to be left for dead because the party has no choice.

HappyDaze

Quote from: S'mon on August 04, 2021, 03:03:15 AM
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 06:57:02 PM
Except for all these ways that woman have better Constitution then men, I am going to give them lower constitution?

I remember doing army training, women got injured a lot more easily - because they had less muscle mass. Hit Points should really key off STR, if you want to be realistic.
What part of hit points demands realism?

Godsmonkey

Personally, I find myself leaning more towards no attributes, instead basing everything on what you are good (or bad) at.

I recently had a brain storm for a western style RPG that is basically a dice pull, but uses cards. No attributes. Instead it's a series of broad skills, such as Shootn', Fightn', Gambln' and so on. (About 10 in total) So, a female character is a great fighter? OK, great. She doesn't have to get there by being strong. Maybe her combination of small size, reflexes and intelligence allows her to be more effective than the man she's fighting.

In this case, get rid of the attributes, and allow the narrative to work. This avoids any of this unnecessary debate of can a woman be as strong as a man? In the narrative of the game, it really doesn't matter.

S'mon

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 04, 2021, 08:53:07 AM
I remember doing army training, women got injured a lot more easily - because they had less muscle mass. Hit Points should really key off STR, if you want to be realistic.
What part of hit points demands realism?
[/quote]

The CON bonus?
Shadowdark Wilderlands (Fridays 2pm UK/9am EST)  https://smons.blogspot.com/2024/08/shadowdark.html
Open table game on Roll20, PM me to join! Current Start Level: 1

hedgehobbit

Quote from: Zelen on August 03, 2021, 10:46:05 PM
I've always liked the idea of mechanically representing differences between men & women, but I've never seen a very compelling way to do this in the D&D attribute set. I think realistically what you should be looking at isn't flat modifiers but a different numerical distribution of stats.

One possibility is to use the normal 3d6 range but have the effects of ability scores vary by race or sex. So a man, a woman, and a hobbit each with an 18 Strength will all be able to lift different amounts and have different damage bonuses.