fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Aug 21, 2016 3:50:52 GMT -8
Very interesting discussion on Historical misogyny/prejudice, which is moved on from the discussion elsewhere on this forum because its about Stu's dilemma about what to include in his Vast Dominions setting. Taking Wolfe's live-listening comment on board, that it shouldn't be a problem as long as the group just talks it through, that maybe OK for players, but Stu as an author has a weighty decision ahead of him. Given, of course, that players will do whatever the fuck they want with his setting, his ONLY opportunity to influence them is what he chooses to include or exclude. Excluding anything sends as much of a message as including it. So to the specific situation of suffrage in Vast Dominions. Arguably, Vast Dominions already has potential to be a "problematic" setting because its about the Great Powers carving up the solar system, just as in previous centuries they carved up what we now call the developing world. Its a setting that is about (so far in the AP at least) exploiting resources. Now, the resources mentioned so far don't include different coloured people, which is of course the resource us Europeans exploited so effectively for a couple of hundred years. I don't know if there aliens in Stu's settings, or how they will be treated, but we'll wait and see. However its great that Stu conflated (rightly) Temperance and Suffrage. Isn't it interesting that the characters are running bootleg Vodka to that Russian colony? I mean no drunk Russians ever beat up their wives eh? I thought it was also interesting to hear the German GMPC's reaction to seeing the Native American "sherpa" on the crew. Personally I think Stu should include the Suffrage movement, but with a note to GM's that that the lack of franchise should not limit the creation of amazing female characters like the ones in the AP. Just as there were amazing women who did extraordinary things despite the strictures of actual history. Women can still own stuff, like the ship, or represent their people in politics. They can be scientists (Marie Curie springs to mind) but might have to deal with male colleagues getting their Nobel prizes. Dramatically, such limits are a good thing as long as the GM doesn't enforce them too rigidly. Think of the narrative power of the Inukai saga, driven (among other things) by a Damio who could not seen to be Gay. Or as Sam (? or was it Gina) suggested, have suffrage be in the world but as something that has already happened, leaving a campaigning organisation in play to remind players how much the exploration of space has changed early Twentieth century society, and people like the German to show what attitudes may not yet have changed. If you ignore suffrage, leaving it out of the book, then you are make the decision not to change the world, because implicit in Vast Dominions is the idea that "its 1905 except for the changes stated herein". The dick players will still limit their female companions' choices because they'll say "Its 1905 man, just 'cos we're in space doesn't mean like, women have the vote or anything." And remember (controversy alert!): the vote didn't change anything for women really, the pill did.
|
|
fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Aug 21, 2016 5:05:21 GMT -8
As Pendragon was mentioned I thought I'd quote my my most recent edition of the rules:
Now I can speak with some experience here, having played a single Pendragon campaign over the last 30 years. Our GM runs a Dark Ages version of Arthur's world, so no plate, no fancy painted shields and PLENTY of opportunities for Women to lead warbands. Though of course, we are also playing through the Romano-Christian takeover of the early church, so that will change/has changed over time as the more Patriachal Roman Christian tradition demotes strong women to nuns etc. My previous character was the first of us to convert to Roman Christianity, and now he's been murdered, is 16 yo son (my current character, an entitled git) is not likely to do much for the cause of women.
We are an all boys group (from an all boys school) and looking back on the Pendragon campaign, I regret our failure to integrate female players into our game, especially when we've had such great female characters - we had a woman high king until recently, whose death has/will precipitate the war from which (I imagine) Arthur will rise as King.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 21, 2016 5:18:07 GMT -8
Also remember, historically, that during the suffrage there were entire classes disenfranchised (men and women both). After the passing of the Third Reform Act of 1884 only 60% of men were entitled to vote, the Forth Reform Act of 1918 introduced enfranchisement for women with caveats and abolished the previous property requirements for men. More interestingly the Forth Reform Act was impelled by the events of WWI and the returning soldiers in conjunction with the events of the previous year's Red October Revolution. Fearing a similar revolution in the UK Parliament enfranchised many of the previously disenfranchised but limited the number of women (by imposing an age, property, marriage and education restrictions) because, at the time and due to the loss of lives in WWI, women out numbered men throughout the British Isles. Aaron
|
|
|
HJRP 1712
Aug 21, 2016 8:19:00 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uncommonman on Aug 21, 2016 8:19:00 GMT -8
Also remember, historically, that during the suffrage there were entire classes disenfranchised (men and women both). After the passing of the Third Reform Act of 1884 only 60% of men were entitled to vote, the Forth Reform Act of 1918 introduced enfranchisement for women with caveats and abolished the previous property requirements for men. More interestingly the Forth Reform Act was impelled by the events of WWI and the returning soldiers in conjunction with the events of the previous year's Red October Revolution. Fearing a similar revolution in the UK Parliament enfranchised many of the previously disenfranchised but limited the number of women (by imposing an age, property, marriage and education restrictions) because, at the time and due to the loss of lives in WWI, women out numbered men throughout the British Isles. Aaron And just add to the fun, suffragettes where white and racist. www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/eleanor-suffrage/There is to black and white.
|
|
|
Post by greatwyrm on Aug 21, 2016 12:25:52 GMT -8
I think the only other thing I'd add is that the worse your bad guys are, the more satisfying it is when you beat them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 17:47:46 GMT -8
I must have missed something, but why is it considered bad that Shadowrun accounts for things like menstruation when using a pheromone scanner? Are we supposed to pretend that it doesn't happen? Or should we admit that it's a thing, but then say that it doesn't impact the scanner in any way? It's not like this is the only place in the system where they account for minor modifiers that would be ignored in many other systems.
Even D&D 5E gives sharks a bonus against bleeding targets, though. (Although granted, they assume that you're probably bleeding because you've been injured).
The only other game I know of where menstruation is called out specifically is in The Slayers d20, using the d20 version of Big Eyes, Small Mouth. Keeping true to the source material, sorceresses and priestesses lose access to their magical abilities for 2-3 days every month (which manifests as -20 to all relevant checks, in a d20 system). It is noted as an optional rule, though, and suggests that anyone who might be affected by the rule should get a bonus feat at first level to compensate.
Oh, and Testament d20 makes you lose points from your Piety score if you menstruate, or if you touch someone who is menstruating, until you can ritually clean yourself. Again, they're just trying to stay true to their source material.
Lots of games use stat modifiers based on gender, though. Mostly bad ones. It was more of a thing in the late eighties to early nineties. I think Spawn of Fashan is supposed to be one of the worst for that sort of thing, but it also turns up in generic stuff like Fantasy Imperium; and I know it's shown up in D&D before, but never in the core books (aside from very old editions having a limit to the exceptional strength that women could have - I want to say that they capped out at 18/50 or 18/90, where men could go all the way up to 18/00 - but that just put them on par with elves who were similarly limited).
|
|
|
Post by greatwyrm on Aug 21, 2016 18:48:16 GMT -8
Re: Numenera -- It is a pretty book, but there also seems to be a big community of people actually playing it, too. It's on my list to run, but in fairness, it's a long list. I should be running a limited superhero campaign in the Cypher System (Numenera's rule set), when my buddy's sci-fi game wraps in a few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 21, 2016 19:16:09 GMT -8
The dick players will still limit their female companions' choices because <clipped>Let me just pause things right there for just a moment. I want to specifically address this one line. Dicks will always be dicks. They're going to find a way to be a dick, regardless of what anyone says, or writes, or whatever. Never write to try to appease, or frustrate, someone. It's no good. They'll read what they want to read.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 23:00:26 GMT -8
I must have missed something, but why is it considered bad that Shadowrun accounts for things like menstruation when using a pheromone scanner? Are we supposed to pretend that it doesn't happen? Or should we admit that it's a thing, but then say that it doesn't impact the scanner in any way? It's not like this is the only place in the system where they account for minor modifiers that would be ignored in many other systems. Even D&D 5E gives sharks a bonus against bleeding targets, though. (Although granted, they assume that you're probably bleeding because you've been injured). The only other game I know of where menstruation is called out specifically is in The Slayers d20, using the d20 version of Big Eyes, Small Mouth. Keeping true to the source material, sorceresses and priestesses lose access to their magical abilities for 2-3 days every month (which manifests as -20 to all relevant checks, in a d20 system). It is noted as an optional rule, though, and suggests that anyone who might be affected by the rule should get a bonus feat at first level to compensate. Oh, and Testament d20 makes you lose points from your Piety score if you menstruate, or if you touch someone who is menstruating, until you can ritually clean yourself. Again, they're just trying to stay true to their source material. Lots of games use stat modifiers based on gender, though. Mostly bad ones. It was more of a thing in the late eighties to early nineties. I think Spawn of Fashan is supposed to be one of the worst for that sort of thing, but it also turns up in generic stuff like Fantasy Imperium; and I know it's shown up in D&D before, but never in the core books (aside from very old editions having a limit to the exceptional strength that women could have - I want to say that they capped out at 18/50 or 18/90, where men could go all the way up to 18/00 - but that just put them on par with elves who were similarly limited). It may be a thing, but much like using the bathroom it is unlikely to appear in the story unless a player draws attention to it. Hardly ever does the GM ask you if you've taken a shit yet today, it is assumed to happen off screen. That changes if you are taken prisoner and need an excuse to get away. Menstration is likely much the same. It is assumed to happen at some point until you need a convenient excuse, then you bring it up. Much like in real life, the benefit is that almost no one actually wants to verify the truth of your claim. The issue with the pheromone scanner is that it forces you to either track your characters cycle or be meaningless. At which point we must ask silly questions such as how often an Orc has her cycle (shorter lives, litters of kids, etc). Does an elf only have her period once a year? I don't know, and I don't want to either.
|
|
|
HJRP 1712
Aug 21, 2016 23:15:48 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uncommonman on Aug 21, 2016 23:15:48 GMT -8
I must have missed something, but why is it considered bad that Shadowrun accounts for things like menstruation when using a pheromone scanner? Are we supposed to pretend that it doesn't happen? Or should we admit that it's a thing, but then say that it doesn't impact the scanner in any way? It's not like this is the only place in the system where they account for minor modifiers that would be ignored in many other systems. Even D&D 5E gives sharks a bonus against bleeding targets, though. (Although granted, they assume that you're probably bleeding because you've been injured). The only other game I know of where menstruation is called out specifically is in The Slayers d20, using the d20 version of Big Eyes, Small Mouth. Keeping true to the source material, sorceresses and priestesses lose access to their magical abilities for 2-3 days every month (which manifests as -20 to all relevant checks, in a d20 system). It is noted as an optional rule, though, and suggests that anyone who might be affected by the rule should get a bonus feat at first level to compensate. Oh, and Testament d20 makes you lose points from your Piety score if you menstruate, or if you touch someone who is menstruating, until you can ritually clean yourself. Again, they're just trying to stay true to their source material. Lots of games use stat modifiers based on gender, though. Mostly bad ones. It was more of a thing in the late eighties to early nineties. I think Spawn of Fashan is supposed to be one of the worst for that sort of thing, but it also turns up in generic stuff like Fantasy Imperium; and I know it's shown up in D&D before, but never in the core books (aside from very old editions having a limit to the exceptional strength that women could have - I want to say that they capped out at 18/50 or 18/90, where men could go all the way up to 18/00 - but that just put them on par with elves who were similarly limited). It may be a thing, but much like using the bathroom it is unlikely to appear in the story unless a player draws attention to it. Hardly ever does the GM ask you if you've taken a shit yet today, it is assumed to happen off screen. That changes if you are taken prisoner and need an excuse to get away. Menstration is likely much the same. It is assumed to happen at some point until you need a convenient excuse, then you bring it up. Much like in real life, the benefit is that almost no one actually wants to verify the truth of your claim. The issue with the pheromone scanner is that it forces you to either track your characters cycle or be meaningless. At which point we must ask silly questions such as how often an Orc has her cycle (shorter lives, litters of kids, etc). Does an elf only have her period once a year? I don't know, and I don't want to either. OR you can use that fact (bleed, pheromones or bathrooms) as a complication for your adventure. In movies heroes don't use bathrooms (menstruate) unless it is vital to the plot and that should be the same in rpg.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 23:40:46 GMT -8
uncommonman The issue with this is simple, it's ackward to bring it up. "Soooo ... It's that time of month and you have to sneak past a pheromone scanner... What do you do?" Yeah, that's gonna go over well. Hold on, I'll try the drug lord trick and pack my pants with coffee to try and confuse the scanners? Yeah, this ain't ackward at all! Even worse is having to ask, "So you are trying to sneak throu the room and there is a pheromone scanner. By any chance are you... You know?" Yeah, that isn't going to get you punched in the face, absolutely not! On the other hand, you could have a really funny scene starting with needing to find a bathroom, NOW! Or that moment in the survailance van when you gotta go, but you can't go anywhere. God forbid someone mistakes the bottle filled with room temp yellow fluid for Mountain Dew... See, that could be played for comedy. I really don't see it working the other way around though.
|
|
|
HJRP 1712
Aug 22, 2016 0:26:37 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uncommonman on Aug 22, 2016 0:26:37 GMT -8
@stevensw you could roll a d20 to see about the period. /s
I was more thinking about the GM offering a bonus for extra complications or as a result of a critical miss.
The male version could be a untimely boner.
I don't really see a point to those things personally but some strive for realism in strange ways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 0:28:37 GMT -8
The issue with the pheromone scanner is that it forces you to either track your characters cycle or be meaningless. Not to get all Gygaxian or anything, but he had a point about keeping accurate time records. At least it's periodic, so it's not that difficult to track. Also, I'm 90% certain that the biological info for the different races shows up somewhere in one of the books. Given how much of the text is presented as factual information about how their world works, I would be surprised if they let that slip.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 0:37:07 GMT -8
@stevensw you could roll a d20 to see about the period. /s I was more thinking about the GM offering a bonus for extra complications or as a result of a critical miss. The male version could be a untimely boner. I don't really see a point to those things personally but some strive for realism in strange ways. This reminded me of a line I dropped in session tonight. I play a female reporter in a game of The Sprawl and the group hacker asked for my help getting a contact who was avoiding him to answer the door. So I do the sensible thing, put on a shorter skirt and go to knock on his door. After tricking the contact into opening up we get let inside. Thereupon a conversation takes place where the contact comments about gang leader that he, "doesn't go for girls with piercings in those places." Well, since my entire job was to distract and fluster him, I jump in with, "So where do you like the piercings on your girls?" I imagine she switched crossing her knees at that point. Very flustered, he was. I may not carry a gun in that game, but let no one tell you I don't come armed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2016 0:39:41 GMT -8
In movies heroes don't use bathrooms (menstruate) unless it is vital to the plot and that should be the same in rpg. I'm sure everyone has seen Pitch Black, so there are definitely times when it could be plot-critical. One of the things about Shadowrun, though, is that the rules are meant to portray the world as a real place. Things work a particular way, because that's how it makes sense for them to work, and not because it's necessarily supposed to come up. If it was just a story, and the rules onlyexisted to support that, then there's a lot that the could have glossed over but didn't.
|
|