Are there any female RPG'ers on this forum?

Any female gamers reading this forum?

  • Nope, male

    Votes: 15 100.0%
  • Hey, I'm female

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    15
Adept said:
Rurik said:
Adept said:
You are coming across as equally inflexible as you are accusing the other side as being. You point seems to be that the 'new' advance of traits/advantages/disadvantages should be used in all modern games.

From my wery first post on the subject

Adept said:
PS. Oh, and I'm also not saying you can't run a beautiful, complex and character driven game on MRQ. You can pretty much do that with any system (and MRQ works better for that than, say D&D). It's just that the system does nothing to actually help you there.

I was trying to be constructive. MRQ aims at being a general use game. It would be good to keep eye's open to what is happening in the wider world of RPG development.
.

No problem there. Except that (1) Not everyone conisders Advantages/Flaws <i> a la </i> Gurps actually help that much either and (2) even if they did, they are hardly cutting edge in terms of RPG development (Me, I like the HQ approach. If you take a flaw it's to give you a chance to steal the limelight by highlighting it, so it costs points (Words in HQ) rather than giviing you extra to spend elsewhere)

I also find it amusing that you complain about D&D's mini-maxing and at the same time promote GURPS minimaxing systems as something to aim for.

The other great thing Disadvantages do for Munchkins is to allow them to justify their play as being "just playing their character". See in D&D I'd just be a munchin playing a fighter who killed the opposition and stole their treasure, but now I'm using disadvantages I've taken "Bloodthirsty" and "Greedy", so now I'm a "proper" roleplayer, and I get extra points to spend boosting my sills!

(This is, of course as universally true as all D&D players are munchkins, or all roleplayers are nerds, or all women would prefer character driven games all the time...)
 
there's also the issue of two players making and playing the same type of personality (shy, bloodthirsty or whatever) but one of them looked in the book and now knows how to fly a jetplane, because of it.

Ultimately though, RQ and the BRP games its related to, is that its based on realism to an extent. You get better at fighting because you've been practicing, not because you happen to be dyslexic.
 
gamesmeister said:
homerjsinnott said:
gamesmeister said:
That's another way. There is no "better" here - it comes down to what works best for the players and GM.
Besides, if nothing else, A/Fs can be useful just to generate ideas for yor character you might not have otherwise considered.

You aren't clear on whether you advocate actually using merits and flaws or just looking at them for ideas.

I would like to refer you to points I and others have made in previous posts on this thread, as you seem to be saying that they can be good, without being aware of the downsides or the actual view I hold on them.

You mean you want me to actually get down off this fence?? :P

All I'm disputing is Soltkass's assertion that anyone who uses advantages/disadvantages doesn't know how to roleplay, or must have their character rigidly defined before they can do so. I don't accept that, I think it's perfectly possible to roleplay with them, as long as you don't insist on using them to replace role playing.

In the games where I've used them (primarily V:tDA and Deadlands), I've liked them, and used them, and don't think any less of myself because I did :D


Fair enough, I agree.
 
gamesmeister said:
All I'm disputing is Soltkass's assertion that anyone who uses advantages/disadvantages doesn't know how to roleplay, or must have their character rigidly defined before they can do so. I don't accept that, I think it's perfectly possible to roleplay with them, as long as you don't insist on using them to replace role playing.

Assertion? No, suggestion perhaps.

It's just that some people I have roleplayed with who insisted on using Advantages/Disadvantages hemmed up their character so much that they didn't seem to be able to roleplay without them.

Clearly, people can use them and can roleplay, others don't use them and can't roleplay.

But, it makes it easier to rely on them in all situations rather than taking the gist of the character and using that.
 
Perhaps we should start a thread where we list what we think the Merits and Flaws of the posters on this board...

:twisted:
 
Rurik said:
Perhaps we should start a thread where we list what we think the Merits and Flaws of the posters on this board...

:twisted:

Rurik:

MERIT
Evil Comic Genius - 5

FLAW
Evil Comic Genius - 5

Nope, not a typo.

:D

- Q
 
Quire said:
Rurik:

MERIT
Evil Comic Genius - 5

FLAW
Evil Comic Genius - 5

I can't tell you how good that makes me feel. All warm and fuzzy, err.. no, wait, all evil and twisted (yeah, that's the ticket) inside.

frogspawner said:
A new thread just for the merits and flaws of Merits and Flaws might be good, too. This one seems to have run it's course...

God No!

No Mas, please...
 
Adept said:
soltakss said:
<snip>
Perhaps men have downtrodden lives which they can only escape through roleplaying. Since women have better, uplifting lives, they don't need to roleplay to escape. They just need Mills & Boon and chocolate. :D

*sigh*

It wasn't funny the first time. Furthermore it's starting to sound obsessive and misogynistic.

Was it there before?

I have Roleplayed with about 25 people regularly over the years. I know of more than 25 women, of all ages and backgrounds, who love nothing more than to spend their lunch breaks or quiet times sat reading a Romance novel (of which M&B is an example) - if they are feeling delicate then they will often eat some chocolates as comfort food. So, in my reality and experience, I know more women who exhibit this behaviour than I know roleplayers who I regularly play with. Others may have different experiences.

It was neither misogynistic nor supposed to be funny, it is simply a reflection of what I have personally observed.

Whatever helps people through the day - Roleplaying for some, romance novels for others.

Anyway, enough from poor, downtrodden, misogynistic old me and back to why people are still wondering after more than 30 years why there are more male roleplayers than females.
 
Quire said:
Rurik said:
Perhaps we should start a thread where we list what we think the Merits and Flaws of the posters on this board...

:twisted:

Rurik:

MERIT
Evil Comic Genius - 5

FLAW
Evil Comic Genius - 5

Nope, not a typo.

:D

- Q

At least he's a balanced character.

Jeff
 
Rocketman said:
um...could anyone post some of the L5R questons so I can get an idea as to what they are asking?

Thanks.


Yeh sure, sorry I meant to post them a while ago but had a power cut :cry:

Going to bed now, (23:50) will do it tomorrow.
 
There might be dozens of women lurkers across all the boards. But if there were, they're keeping the fact that they're women quiet because who wants all the freaks to come out and gamergate all over them?

For the record, long as I'm here, that's not going to happen.

I hear of someone going all MRA on a known female forumite attending these boards, it's the MRA who gets a quiet word from me.

He tries it on with me, next voice he hears is Matthew Sprange saying bye bye.

Now. That should really have gone out in a red voice, shouldn't it?

No matter.

Yeah, Legend really needs more of a female representation. The game really needs advertising far and wide as a really good introduction for women to take up roleplaying - come on, the PDF's still a dollar at Drivethru. What better motive can there be? :)
 
Well the Legend: Ancient Stones game I am running on RPGGeek has several females on it, but I don't think any of them are here. But there are certainly plenty of female gamers on that site and we've rarely had problems - they even have their own Guild! :)

I will also kick ass on anyone who singles people out. Not that I hold any clout....
 
Back
Top