Of female characters in RPG's

[VerSacrum]

Napoleon (high Charisma, was a manlet and not that impressive looking, so probably low-mid Beauty)

Napoleon wasn't short by standards of that era.

People thought of him as short even back then thanks to British caricatures, photography not yet existing, and misunderstanding of his French nickname. A reputation that stuck to this day.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

And people thought memeing was so new. HA!

 

[La vie sexuelle]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

 

[gurugeorge]

I like separating Charisma and Beauty like Arcanum, but it's also contrived to give women a bonus. Yes, beautiful women walk on a red carpet…

They might have high Beauty, but low Charisma and Intelligence (they can't communicate effectively and are dumb and cannot have a grip on others …..

Oh, she can get a grip on something; she better be good at that at least. Who plays a chick other than to be a manipulative bitch or see her tits & ass jiggle? I guess you could have her do fetch quests and buy shit and craft if the game had it. Or just eat and sleep the day away with booze.

How many games really let you be a manipulative bitch? FNV lets you seduce and kill Benny. In F2 you can sleep around for favors (like freeing Vic). Is there anything in AoD(I can't remember)? My impressions is that there aren't a lot.

It's funny, I just had a bout of progressing my female character in BG3 for a bit, and what I instantly found interesting was that it was psychologically much easier for me to take the "don't know, don't care" options in dialogues

Also, for some reason, when I play a grumpy male dwarf, I find it much easier to play a lecherous character.

Yet when I play a human male, it's so close to me that I'm unable to play anything other than a namby-pamby goody-two-shoes Paladin who tries to save everyone and even redeem the villains if possible

 

[Modron]

True.
But short for modern standards, that's for sure.

He'd still be taller than a lot of people today, IIRC he was 5'8".

People thought of him as short even back then thanks to British caricatures, photography not yet existing, and misunderstanding of his French nickname. A reputation that stuck to this day.

The caricature was born because he promoted absolute giants (especially for back then) to be his generals, talking like one 6'5" dude, two 6'3" gentlemen, and the shortest was 6'1" thus when spied on the opposite hill he was the short one in the middle. The anglo political cartoons practically drew themselves.

 

[JarlFrank]

Napoleon (high Charisma, was a manlet and not that impressive looking, so probably low-mid Beauty)

Napoleon wasn't short by standards of that era.

True.
But short for modern standards, that's for sure.

... he was 4 cm taller than me

 

[Darkwind]

True.
But short for modern standards, that's for sure.

He'd still be taller than a lot of people today, IIRC he was 5'8".

5'8" is an absolute manlet for a Western Male, are you kidding? "Taller than a lot of people today?" He wouldn't even be taller than a lot of women today. Have you SEEN these kids that have been raised on all this hormone laden food? They are ginormous. Most Zoomers I've encountered are 6 feet tall (183cm) across the board at a minimum. Zoomettes are 5' 9" (175cm) on average. They are massive because of all the growth hormones, antibiotics, and processed chemicals they feed to animals they eat. The girls are also very thicc by teenage years (big thighs, big ass) and positively gross and fat by late 20s.

 

[Modron]

Zoomers are a fraction of the people alive today, napoleon would tower over billions of asians, pajeets, latinos, women, middle easterners, et cetera.

Sort by male average height and scroll down by the time you're at 5'8" you're not even a third of the ways down this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_human_height_by_country

 

[mediocrepoet]

Napoleon (high Charisma, was a manlet and not that impressive looking, so probably low-mid Beauty)

Napoleon wasn't short by standards of that era.

True.
But short for modern standards, that's for sure.

... he was 4 cm taller than me

Are you a hobbit?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in ww2 though

 

[VerSacrum]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in ww2 though

Collaborating with the Germans was the lawful good move.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in ww2 though

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in ww2 though

Collaborating with the Germans was the lawful good move.

It's all the fault of Le Front populaire, their cowardly politics and promotion of an existentialist mentality. They turned the bravery and patriotism of Clemenceau's times into shitty Parisian complaints in cafés.

I don't want to defend Pétain, but like it or not, he secured human resources for La Résistance Intérieure and then for de Gaulle.

Finally, the French nation showed true courage and drove the barbarians away from across the Rhine.

Results count.

 

[Lord_Potato]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in

Finally, the French nation showed true courage and drove the barbarians away from across the Rhine.

French could only kick Germans from their country (with no help from the Americans&The British of course) because Poles captured Berlin and forced Hitler to suicide himself.

What? That's about the same level of delusion

 

[La vie sexuelle]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in

Finally, the French nation showed true courage and drove the barbarians away from across the Rhine.

French could only kick Germans from their country (with no help from the Americans&The British of course) because Poles captured Berlin and forced Hitler to suicide himself.

What? That's about the same level of delusion

I don't underestimate the efforts of others, and you shouldn't underestimate ours. Also, don't forget that Berlin was occupied by the Polish annex to the Red Army, the same army that attacked your country in cooperation with Hitler.

 

[MerchantKing]

A yes. A WW2 debate. Just to remind you all that the only thing that matters are the 20 million jews (the objectively accurate Nuremberg trial numbers; modern numbers are from antisemitic revisionists) who were murdered by the evil nazis during the holocaust. It's a good thing Stalin died of a stroke otherwise there would've been khazarian pogrom where 30 million more jews would have been killed. Now make sure to wholeheartedly support Israel so that we can prevent that from happening ever again.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

20 million jews (the objectively accurate Nuremberg trial numbers; modern numbers are from antisemitic revisionists) who were murdered by the evil nazis during the holocaust

Damn, they coulda done better.

 

[Vic]

didn't more jews than that die since then from old age and shit

 

[MerchantKing]

20 million jews (the objectively accurate Nuremberg trial numbers; modern numbers are from antisemitic revisionists) who were murdered by the evil nazis during the holocaust

Damn, they coulda done better.

Cool it with the antisemitic remarks.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

20 million jews (the objectively accurate Nuremberg trial numbers; modern numbers are from antisemitic revisionists) who were murdered by the evil nazis during the holocaust

Damn, they coulda done better.

Cool it with the antisemitic remarks.

Cool it with the ADL outrage

 

[Serus]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in

Finally, the French nation showed true courage and drove the barbarians away from across the Rhine.

French could only kick Germans from their country (with no help from the Americans&The British of course) because Poles captured Berlin and forced Hitler to suicide himself.

What? That's about the same level of delusion

The French actually did it - but in an earlier World War. Or they would if the Germans didn't capitulate early. Frogs had help, obviously, but then choosing more capable allies than the enemy did is definitely something no to be ashamed of.

I hate with passion when all that people know about the french military is WW2. French were the f***g scourge of this continent for over 1,5 centuries. From Louis XIV to Napoleon they were one of the strongest military powers. It often took alliances of several other great powers to fight them - and not always win.

I dislike french people too but I at least do know why. I knew many of those pesky frog-people in my life. My advice: if you can, avoid. However lack of military ability in historical terms is definitely NOT the reason.

Edit: Pierre of Knights of the Chalice fame is ok, even if weird. Some french codexers might be too. I was talking in general, as a nation. There are exceptions, as usual.

 

[Zlaja]

6 million Jews killed was truly horrific. I mean, imagine if 600 000 Jews was killed today? How would YOU react to seeing 60 000 Jews being rounded up with your own eyes? And then seeing mass graves of 6000 Jews, as a result?

Never forget those 600 souls!!!

 

[Serus]

On subject. Mondblut had it right, female characters in CRPG should wear few or revealing clothes. Like chainmail bikinis. Or normal bikinis if modern setting.

IF going for heavy realistic approach, then the only stats women shouldn't be penalized compared to men probably are: dexterity (only if limited to actual dexterity and not agility), wisdom (if intelligence as stats exists) and charisma (but not charisma as in ability to lead people in combat, individual-only skill). But that isn't for every game though i wouldn't mind in modern or historical setting at all. Playing as a female should be more challenging there. You could give women some (serious) bonuses to interactions with men to compensate a bit.

If you don't care as much about realism and want the game to have similar opportunities for men and women then agility or intelligence and most things can be equal. Strength however even in non-realistic games shouldn't be equal, it is absurd. Give women an additional skill or bonus to compensate, say charisma counts as +2 for female doing any checks vs adult "compatible" males.
If you really want females as characters as strong or even stronger than males - in fantasy setting - make other races where women are stronger. Say a race where women are bigger, dominant and have a matriarchal society. THAT I wouldn't mind at all and could lead to something interesting. Instead we have races that are all, well, Americans/Europeans in 2000s only in different sizes and ear shapes. All equality, blah, blah. Real women and men ARE different, they have different "stats" in real life and have different social roles. But can't have this in a game so let's it be more boring and samey. Right? Why can't be choice between man and woman an actual choice mechanics-wise? Just like a race is? It would be both more sensible and gives even more varied choices when it comes to creating characters. Some crpgs tried to do it in the past (like Wizardry 6-7), some even still do (Knights of the Chalice 2) but it's mostly half-assed. One measly point more or less (in a 20 point scale), totals must be still equal, etc... Better than nothing, i suppose.

 

[skaraher]

I would gladly engage in debate on Philippe Petain's government and the actual stakes of Vichy vs Free France struggle, but the law of my country forbids me from taking a side in this discussion.

 

[La vie sexuelle]

The ugly and perverse British have been projecting their traits onto the French since the battle of Hastings.

They ain't the ones what surrendered in

Finally, the French nation showed true courage and drove the barbarians away from across the Rhine.

French could only kick Germans from their country (with no help from the Americans&The British of course) because Poles captured Berlin and forced Hitler to suicide himself.

What? That's about the same level of delusion

The French actually did it - but in an earlier World War. Or they would if the Germans didn't capitulate early. Frogs had help, obviously, but then choosing more capable allies than the enemy did is definitely something no to be ashamed of.

I hate with passion when all that people know about the french military is WW2. French were the f***g scourge of this continent for over 1,5 centuries. From Louis XIV to Napoleon they were one of the strongest military powers. It often took alliances of several other great powers to fight them - and not always win.

I dislike french people too but I at least do know why. I knew many of those pesky frog-people in my life. My advice: if you can, avoid. However lack of military ability in historical terms is definitely NOT the reason.

Edit: Pierre of Knights of the Chalice fame is ok, even if weird. Some french codexers might be too. I was talking in general, as a nation. There are exceptions, as usual.

I think you're confusing the French with the Parisians.

In Paris, only mulattos in short currants and milfs in jackets are good.

 

[gurugeorge]

On subject. Mondblut had it right, female characters in CRPG should wear few or revealing clothes. Like chainmail bikinis. Or normal bikinis if modern setting.

IF going for heavy realistic approach, then the only stats women shouldn't be penalized compared to men probably are: dexterity (only if limited to actual dexterity and not agility), wisdom (if intelligence as stats exists) and charisma (but not charisma as in ability to lead people in combat, individual-only skill). But that isn't for every game though i wouldn't mind in modern or historical setting at all. Playing as a female should be more challenging there. You could give women some (serious) bonuses to interactions with men to compensate a bit.

If you don't care as much about realism and want the game to have similar opportunities for men and women then agility or intelligence and most things can be equal. Strength however even in non-realistic games shouldn't be equal, it is absurd. Give women an additional skill or bonus to compensate, say charisma counts as +2 for female doing any checks vs adult "compatible" males.
If you really want females as characters as strong or even stronger than males - in fantasy setting - make other races where women are stronger. Say a race where women are bigger, dominant and have a matriarchal society. THAT I wouldn't mind at all and could lead to something interesting. Instead we have races that are all, well, Americans/Europeans in 2000s only in different sizes and ear shapes. All equality, blah, blah. Real women and men ARE different, they have different "stats" in real life and have different social roles. But can't have this in a game so let's it be more boring and samey. Right? Why can't be choice between man and woman an actual choice mechanics-wise? Just like a race is? It would be both more sensible and gives even more varied choices when it comes to creating characters. Some crpgs tried to do it in the past (like Wizardry 6-7), some even still do (Knights of the Chalice 2) but it's mostly half-assed. One measly point more or less (in a 20 point scale), totals must be still equal, etc... Better than nothing, i suppose.

I just had a sudden thought there. If you think of the canny, admirable "broads" in older literature (e.g. Chandler novels), they were able to wrap men around their little fingers, and not even by anything overt, just by the psychological manipulation of horndogs. They were psychologically tough, and had intestinal fortitude.

But as men become less horndoggy, more feminized, encouraged into faggotry, etc., that specially female form of psychological power - which formerly balanced out greater male physical strength somewhat - no longer works, males are less liable to be manipulated like that. Men and women become psychologically less polarized, more similar - men start trying to manipulate people psychologically, which was formerly the female speciality, and women start trying to emulate men as physically capable fighters, etc.

Not sure if that insight goes anywhere, it's kind of obvious, but it's interesting. The cause is probably the comfort and ease of civilization - "good times create weak men", but also weak women, in terms of what were formerly "womanly wiles" that a young girl would observe older females exercising, and would learn to emulate.