Of female characters in RPG's

[Heroic Liberator]

And how would you respond then with the historical evidence of female Samurai warriors?

Status.

Tomoe's father, Nakahara Kanetō, was a strong supporter and foster father of Yoshinaka, having raised him since he was two. Her mother was Yoshinaka's wet nurse. Two of her elder brothers also served Yoshinaka as generals.

Same reason that you had plenty of commanders in early modern (& premodern, naturally) history who had attained their positions not by merit, but through nepotism (which doesn't mean that they couldn't subsequently prove their merit, only that it wasn't the criteria for their selection). As for some samurai daughters being trained in martial arts, that's probably more of a status thing among some of the more eccentric samurai families (just as one could imagine some European lord teaching his daughters how to hunt as a noble pastime).

 

[BruceVC]

Yes the article mentions mythology but it also says real examples like female samurais who were trained in archery and the Viking tomb of a female warrior who was buried with arrows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birka_female_Viking_warrior

The presence of grave goods does not necessarily indicate anything about the person they're interred with. All that can actually be said with certainty is that weapons were found in a woman's grave. That they're calling her a warrior is conjecture.

Regardless, the draw weight is not something that could ever be known considering all that remains of it is a rotted bit of the stave, moreover since this grave is from the dark ages, armor would not have been commonplace in Scandinavia and Northwestern Europe. Under that condition, lesser draw weights would suffice to kill a man, so it would be more plausible that she could have used the weapon in warfare. However, this is not the level of technology that is typically portrayed in high-fantasy RPGs, which is 14th-16th century.

And how would you respond then with the historical evidence of female Samurai warriors? They were archers as well, to quote from the link below

" Tomoe Gozen ("gozen" is a title meaning "lady") was famous as a swordswoman, a skilled rider, and a superb archer. She was Minamoto's first captain and took at least one enemy head during the Battle of Awazu in 1184. "


https://www.thoughtco.com/images-of-samurai-women-195469

Well, for starters, Tomoe Gozen is a fictional character possibly very loosely based on a woman that actually existed.
tale of the heike is not a historical account, it's a story.

Do you have the links that raise how Tomoe Gozen wasnt real because all the references I can find say she was real? That might not be her name but that doesnt mean female warriors didnt exist who was an archer


https://allthatsinteresting.com/tomoe-gozen

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Do you have the links that raise how Tomoe Gozen wasnt real because all the references I can find say she was real? That might not be her name but that doesnt mean female warriors didnt exist who was an archer


https://allthatsinteresting.com/tomoe-gozen

it's in your own link

Even though Tomoe Gozen is one of Japan’s most famous female fighters, much of her story is based on legend rather than hard fact.

One of the main sources for information about Tomoe’s story is the Heike monogatari, a compilation of ballads, tales, and disparate texts combined into one epic historical saga in about 1240.

 

[BruceVC]

Do you have the links that raise how Tomoe Gozen wasnt real because all the references I can find say she was real? That might not be her name but that doesnt mean female warriors didnt exist who was an archer


https://allthatsinteresting.com/tomoe-gozen

it's in your own link

Even though Tomoe Gozen is one of Japan’s most famous female fighters, much of her story is based on legend rather than hard fact.

One of the main sources for information about Tomoe’s story is the Heike monogatari, a compilation of ballads, tales, and disparate texts combined into one epic historical saga in about 1240.

Yes and I posted the link because Im aware they mentioned it but she lived 1000 years ago so most historical account of famous people from hundreds of years ago can be exaggerated or artistic license. That doesnt mean the person didnt exist

Its like the story of the Roman emperor Nero who is accessed of playing his fiddle while Rome burned, Nero was real and existed but its unlikely he played his fiddle because for starters the fiddle didn't exist in Rome back then. But Nero is real and the same reality can easily apply to Tomoe Gozen

https://www.history.com/news/did-nero-really-fiddle-while-rome-burned

 

[Haba]

Any man who has ever done physical work with women will know the realism of female upper body strength.

The very idea of a woman doing the same work as a man is absolutely retarded. The reality is that men have to carry extra weight when they have women filling up the ranks.

Even the strongest of women cannot match an average man. When I was doing my service, the women were sporty, highly motivated, wanted to become police officers in the future etc.

Yet they physically couldn't do the same things as even the dweeby comp. science students were doing. Lifting up and carrying heavy things, marching for long distances while carrying heavy things. When your team has a woman, it means there literally is a team member that can't carry their own weight. Super fun when you are working under high pressure, lacking sleep.

More and more kids today are distanced from any real physical work, making it easier for them to suspend their disbelief. But anyone who has any life experience will have trouble accepting this dumbfuckery. Fantasy is of course about suspending your disbelief, but basic physics should still function in the same way, even in a fantasy setting.

And then regarding the precious examples of daughters of the lords being skilled archers... sure, the lord's retainers will applaud her skill at a competition. Maybe there will be songs written about her, even. Meanwhile nobody will take them to the battlefied. Not because they are women, but because they would be useless.

It is one thing to fire a couple of shots at the shooting range, completely another to ski for 50 km while carrying full combat gear and dragging along an extra load of AT-mines on a sled and THEN taking those same shots.

We tried this, and surprisingly none of the women could complete the task. Even if they were expert marksmen at the shooting range.

 

[BruceVC]

Any man who has ever done physical work with women will know the realism of female upper body strength.

The very idea of a woman doing the same work as a man is absolutely retarded. The reality is that men have to carry extra weight when they have women filling up the ranks.

Even the strongest of women cannot match an average man. When I was doing my service, the women were sporty, highly motivated, wanted to become police officers in the future etc.

Yet they physically couldn't do the same things as even the dweeby comp. science students were doing. Lifting up and carrying heavy things, marching for long distances while carrying heavy things. When your team has a woman, it means there literally is a team member that can't carry their own weight. Super fun when you are working under high pressure, lacking sleep.

More and more kids today are distanced from any real physical work, making it easier for them to suspend their disbelief. But anyone who has any life experience will have trouble accepting this dumbfuckery. Fantasy is of course about suspending your disbelief, but basic physics should still function in the same way, even in a fantasy setting.

And then regarding the precious examples of daughters of the lords being skilled archers... sure, the lord's retainers will applaud her skill at a competition. Maybe there will be songs written about her, even. Meanwhile nobody will take them to the battlefied. Not because they are women, but because they would be useless.

It is one thing to fire a couple of shots at the shooting range, completely another to ski for 50 km while carrying full combat gear and dragging along an extra load of AT-mines on a sled and THEN taking those same shots.

We tried this, and surprisingly none of the women could complete the task. Even if they were expert marksmen at the shooting range.

And no one is suggesting that women are naturally as strong as men, we know they not

That doesnt mean there is no such thing as female warriors or archers in the history of mankind. I not saying that there were female archers who could use a British longbow because of the upper body strength it requires, I agree there weren't

But there are different kinds of bows that archers can use that women did and can use

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

And how would you respond then with the historical evidence of female Samurai warriors? They were archers as well, to quote from the link below

" Tomoe Gozen ("gozen" is a title meaning "lady") was famous as a swordswoman, a skilled rider, and a superb archer. She was Minamoto's first captain and took at least one enemy head during the Battle of Awazu in 1184. "

I would respond "Big if true, but it sounds like Samurai Hollywood." I'd have to see the primary source material making the claims and know medieval Japanese well enough to determine whether or not it's poetic license/ pro-Minamoto propaganda. "Join the levy and one day you may be worthy enough to glimpse Tomoe-chan through the falling cherry blossom petals."

She may well have done those things and been all that, but then I'd ask "A superb archer in what context exactly?" Hunting? Target shooting? War? If she had any kills, were they well-equipped retainers or unarmored peasants? The contention is not that women can't do archery, it's that women can't draw 120 pound war bows to punch through heavy armor, and it seems you acknowledge that.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

That doesnt mean there is no such thing as female warriors or archers in the history of mankind.

As a historical oddity, perhaps. But as a general rule, women have been sheltered from combat not only because they'd be weaker than their male counterparts, but also because they serve a much more vital purpose in replenishing the population (a male can inseminate as many females as needed; a female can bear children once every nine months, her window of fertility is much shorter than a man's and her childbearing potential is in turn complicated by the possibilities of not delivering, experiencing death in childbirth or having the kids subsequently die to the high infant mortality rates of premodern times). And in most societies, given the patrilineal nature of inheritance, they likewise served as a familial currency for cementing alliances.

 

[BruceVC]

That doesnt mean there is no such thing as female warriors or archers in the history of mankind.

As a historical oddity, perhaps. But as a general rule, women have been sheltered from combat not only because they'd be weaker than their male counterparts, but also because they serve a much more vital purpose in replenishing the population (a male can inseminate as many females as needed; a female can bear children once every nine months, her window of fertility is much shorter than a man's and her childbearing potential is in turn complicated by the possibilities of not delivering, experiencing death in childbirth or having the kids subsequently die to the high infant mortality rates of premodern times). And in most societies, given the patrilineal nature of inheritance, they likewise served as a familial currency for cementing alliances.

Yes I agree with your post, its historically accurate and logical. My contention was the point raised " that there were no female warriors\archers in the history of mankind"

 

[Saark]

Average man has ~33 more muscle mass than an average woman; because of men's dominant hormone testesterone. Also men are ~50 more stronger in upper body and ~30 more stronger in lower body strength.

None of that matters the moment you equip a Belt of Giants Strength.

 

[NecroLord]

It is also psychological. Women tend to have higher empathy and disgust for danger,highly physical work or violence.
Also how about putting a woman in a highly trained group consisting of only males? Yeah....

 

[Sunri]

It's fantasy game, they don't need to be realistic.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

It's fantasy game, they don't need to be realistic.

But they have to be internally consistent. So if you want to have humans in your setting, then you should accurately portray the sexual dimorphism of our species with all the societal ramifications that it entails.

 

[Saark]

The biggest issue with the entire "a woman can't do x" narrative that's citing a variety of statistics, is that it's not applicable to the actual game-world either.

But they have to be internally consistent. So if you want to have humans in your setting, then you should accurately portray the sexual dimorphism of our species with all the societal ramifications that it entails.

No you don't, because it being a fantasy world means that your perceived difference of women and men don't necessarily apply (within reason) in a made up world.

Yeah, the average harpy in the real world isn't gonna be able to pull a bowstring of a high-poundage bow. But the character you're talking about likely trained to do so for years, if not decades, so obviously they can. Some barbarian chick that grew up in a tribe where they eat bull testicles every tuesday and friday night probably has a higher T level than most of your body builders, and is certainly capable of more impressive physical feats than most codexers. It's not like you're playing some random barmaid in a tavern in a backwater shithole, you're playing a hero or a band of heroes who passed the power-level of your average NPC before they started growing pubic hair.

 

[Sunri]

It's fantasy game, they don't need to be realistic.

But they have to be internally consistent. So if you want to have humans in your setting, then you should accurately portray the sexual dimorphism of our species with all the societal ramifications that it entails.

Maybe humans on that particular world just look like humans, but in reality all women have giant cocks you just never see it because game needs to be pegi 12.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

if they don't have to be internally consistent then just make everyone ultra powerful and able to destroy anything by merely touching it

don't like it?
boohoo you whiny baby, it's ~FANTASY~

 

[Haba]

That doesnt mean there is no such thing as female warriors or archers in the history of mankind. I not saying that there were female archers who could use a British longbow because of the upper body strength it requires, I agree there weren't

But there are different kinds of bows that archers can use that women did and can use

A woman can throw a rock and kill a man, no doubt. Does not a warrior make.

A warrior would be someone who has been trained for the role and fought an extended campaign alongside his peers. From my experience, a woman can not be a peer to fighting men. Even in modern warfare.

So lets imagine you have an entire unit (or army) consisting of women. Either they are purely ceremonial (for perverts, which I approve) or then there is some serious desperation. In a desperate situation, you probably are lacking both in time and resources. Training female archers? It took years to train effective archers. A female shortbowman would still be much more ineffective than a man - like in the example I have, you have to be able to fire more than a couple of shots and manoeuvre. That takes a toll even on a strong man.

Unit of spear infantry? About a month of gruelling training. Can you even find an unit worth of women who can hold a spear and a shield at the same time? Highly doubtful. Just like any conscripted peasant, those are not really warriors, but mere fodder for the slaughter machine.

The term "female warrior" is a product of absolute fantasy, and ironically fantasy is probably the place where it should remain. Calling women "warriors" is an insult to all the fighting men who've bled and died throughout the history.

Just to clarify, I do not consider RPA "pilots" to be warriors either.

 

[octavius]

It is one thing to fire a couple of shots at the shooting range, completely another to ski for 50 km while carrying full combat gear and dragging along an extra load of AT-mines on a sled and THEN taking those same shots.

We tried this, and surprisingly none of the women could complete the task. Even if they were expert marksmen at the shooting range.

Women could probably make decent snipers who don't need to carry much heavy gear. IIRC the russians had whole companies of them during WW2.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

But they have to be internally consistent. So if you want to have humans in your setting, then you should accurately portray the sexual dimorphism of our species with all the societal ramifications that it entails.

No you don't

If you don't want a good setting, sure. Just because most people tolerate it doesn't mean that it doesn't negatively impact the worldbuilding.

because it being a fantasy world means that your perceived difference of women and men don't necessarily apply (within reason) in a made up world.

Not perceived, but empirically attested as a matter of human biology. But yes, you can add some lore explanation for why these things don't apply (pretty sure TES does that). Issue is that most settings don't, although in the case of older titles that's mostly due to laziness and/or lack of creativity in fleshing out the setting (unlike with more politically motivated contemporary works where it's either due to girl power ideology or to the delusions of the writers about the real world being projected onto their fictional work as well).

 

[Nazrim Eldrak]

OK not bad. Here are my findings.

1. A study shows that the average man is much stronger than the average woman in absolute terms.

Not investigated

"Though not investigated, making comparisons relative to body composition essentially eliminates any gender difference in strength."
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/brzycki/files/mb-2002-01.pdf

Keep in mind this doesn´t make EVERY man stronger than a woman. Some men are below average and some women are above average.

Despite the fact...

"Despite the fact that the average man is stronger than the average woman in terms of absolute strength, many women are much stronger than the average man."

2.
Regarding female archers, I have not been able to find 100% historical proof of their existence, but saying that women cannot use a bow is just plain and simply retarded.
Separately, I found this documentary about a Chinese warrior queen. Unfortunately it's in German so not everyone will understand, but if you turn on automatic translation it will tell you that she was a capable warrior and her grave shows it.

Fu Hao

4. Anything is possible in fantasy, no matter how much you cry. You automatically lose the debate .

 

[markec]

It is one thing to fire a couple of shots at the shooting range, completely another to ski for 50 km while carrying full combat gear and dragging along an extra load of AT-mines on a sled and THEN taking those same shots.

We tried this, and surprisingly none of the women could complete the task. Even if they were expert marksmen at the shooting range.

IIRC the russians had whole companies of them during WW2.

Which is nothing but Soviet propaganda.

 

[Saark]

If you don't want a good setting, sure. Just because most people tolerate it doesn't mean that it doesn't negatively impact the worldbuilding.

The assumption that people who train for something for their entire lives will excel at that thing, doesn't make a setting less believable. The question of sex doesn't even play into this.

Citing statistics from the modern world doesn't really help the argument. Women used to be a lot bulkier and heavy, and on average, women from 600-1000y ago would've been more likely to be able to achieve certain physical feats than women today. The same goes for men, by the way. Physical labor just isn't as big of a thing anymore, and when we're talking about regularly shooting high poundage bows, travelling with 80lbs+ of equipment an entire day, or fighting in full armor with swords made from actual steel, then the average man today certainly wouldn't be able to do that either.

Which leaves us with it being something that you do because you prepared for it most of your life, or honed your skills over the course of your life. As is the case with most barbarian tribes, warriors/knights/archers et al. The very real differences in physiology aren't that limiting of a factor that women are simply unable to do it, it's a matter of representation. If every other warrior figure in an RPG is a woman, that's definitely questionable. But it being a thing in general, is certainly nothing worrisome (unless it's accompanied by some fucked up SJW agenda ofc).

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

If you don't want a good setting, sure. Just because most people tolerate it doesn't mean that it doesn't negatively impact the worldbuilding.

The assumption that people who train for something for their entire lives will excel at that thing, doesn't make a setting less believable. The question of sex doesn't even play into this.

Citing statistics from the modern world doesn't really help the argument. Women used to be a lot bulkier and heavy, and on average, women from 600-1000y ago would've been more likely to be able to achieve certain physical feats than women today. The same goes for men, by the way. Physical labor just isn't as big of a thing anymore, and when we're talking about regularly shooting high poundage bows, travelling with 80lbs+ of equipment an entire day, or fighting in full armor with swords made from actual steel, then the average man today certainly wouldn't be able to do that either.

Which leaves us with it being something that you do because you prepared for it most of your life, or honed your skills over the course of your life. As is the case with most barbarian tribes, warriors/knights/archers et al. The very real differences in physiology aren't that limiting of a factor that women are simply unable to do it, it's a matter of representation. If every other warrior figure in an RPG is a woman, that's definitely questionable. But it being a thing in general, is certainly nothing worrisome (unless it's accompanied by some fucked up SJW agenda ofc).

Yeah, no. Both women and men of the middle ages were not bulkier. Nutrition played a huge role at preventing bulk, meat wasn't as readily available. If you want confirmation of this simply examine the dimensions of armor in museums and look at the tomb effigies. They were much leaner than modern men, and slightly shorter on average. Not as bad as the industrial revolution, but either way modern man has the physical advantage provided he's not indulging in the wrong foods.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

If you don't want a good setting, sure. Just because most people tolerate it doesn't mean that it doesn't negatively impact the worldbuilding.

The assumption that people who train for something for their entire lives will excel at that thing, doesn't make a setting less believable. The question of sex doesn't even play into this.

It does because we are not talking about outliers, but about averages. And perhaps more importantly, we are talking about societal constraints. Doesn't matter if a female outlier would've had the genetic potential to excel in martial pursuits if the society that she found herself in didn't give her the option to pursue that path in the first place. And the sort of medieval societies that your typical fantasy settings are based upon did not give women such options. And not only due to prejudices that you could handwave away in an enlightened fantasy setting, but due to demographic necessities that would translate over into such settings if the latter are to be internally consistent.

Citing statistics from the modern world doesn't really help the argument. Women used to be a lot bulkier and heavy, and on average, women from 600-1000y ago would've been more likely to be able to achieve certain physical feats than women today. The same goes for men, by the way. Physical labor just isn't as big of a thing anymore, and when we're talking about regularly shooting high poundage bows, travelling with 80lbs+ of equipment an entire day, or fighting in full armor with swords made from actual steel, then the average man today certainly wouldn't be able to do that either.

Which leaves us with it being something that you do because you prepared for it most of your life, or honed your skills over the course of your life. As is the case with most barbarian tribes, warriors/knights/archers et al.

Nonsense. The average person was indeed stronger back in the day, but the genetic potential that one could tap into was roughly the same. And if women that can attain such feats remain a minority today even among those females that dedicate their life to physical excellence while benefiting from a modern eating & training regimen that lets people achieve greater physical heights than ever before, then they were even more of an anomaly back then. Unlike the average men from back then who managed just fine. And once again, one must emphasize that this societal division of labor was inherently tied to demographic necessity and could not be overcome - if a society went all out on girl power, then each battle won due to the extra manpower would only represent a pyrrhic victory on the way to a demographic collapse and subsequent conquest by other societies that did enforce such a sex-based division of labor that excluded females from military pursuits.

The very real differences in physiology aren't that limiting of a factor that women are simply unable to do it, it's a matter of representation. If every other warrior figure in an RPG is a woman, that's definitely questionable. But it being a thing in general, is certainly nothing worrisome (unless it's accompanied by some fucked up SJW agenda ofc).

A matter of representation would be to portray them as the unicorns that they'd be. Not as a common occurrence within the setting, but as an exceptional thing that is to be acknowledged as such in-setting (think of Brienne of Tarth in ASoIaF). But most people that advocate for representation in fact desire overrepresentation since they greatly minimize the impact of those biological differences between the sexes (that range from things like skeletal differences which impact physical aptitudes regardless of muscular development, to hormonal which both limit the aforementioned muscular development and the sort of psychological molding necessary for long term high intensity combat exposure, to outright neurological differences that impact various cognitive aptitudes with things like spatial coordination and what have you which likewise play a significant role in one's martial prowess). Doesn't matter whether it's rooted in a conscious political agenda or not, it's still bad writing and it reduces one's suspension of disbelief if they actually want to immerse themselves into the setting and not just treat it as mindless entertainment to cons00m without too much reflection.

 

[thesecret1]

Greetings.
How do you prefer female characters to be portrayed in RPG's? Do you like them as chainmail bikini barbarians? Rogue/Bard type characters like Leliana or Sharwyn? Spellcasters?
Or do you like them "-4 Str go back to the kitchen"?

There are only two acceptable options:
1) -4 STR, -2 CON, etc. go back to the fucking kitchen (ie. basically a challenge run if you pick this option)
2) super hot bitch in a non-realistic setting with a fun personality

If the character is neither, then it shouldn't be in the game.