Female characters in Runequest

Yeah CHA had some value in RQ2. In terms of Lunars. THe starting funds of CHA x100 or so seemed very artificial to me. And yes, there were thos CHAx5 rolls when seeing the cult exampiners. CHA was uselful in determining the nubmer of bound spirits you could have.

Still, that wasn't much. It not like the other stats that have thier effects felt all the time. THe problem is the "player-character threshold". Basically the point where the numbers for the character end and the brain and personality of the player take over. INT has a similar problem (If the player is an idiot, he can't play an 18 INT, yet it is unfair to take it away, since most peoplle can't "play" an 18 STR, SIZ, DEX or CON either). With INT there are things factored into the game rules to make it useful (at least prior to MRQ. So far, INT only factors into a half dozen skills plus initiative. Hopefully the Compainion will change that.

I think CHA needs a stronger presence in the game. Right now, after you roll up you charactersd, it is pretty much a throw away.

I don't think I would adjust INT in that case either. Or if I did, I am not sure whose INT to adfjust and in which direction.

While we are at it, stat mods for profession seem to make even more sense. Blacksmiths could get STR, Alchemists INT, Bards and Courtiers CHA, Craftmen DEX, Shamen POW.
 
King Amenjar said:
kintire said:
It has always puzzled me that a person who is quite happy for a female character to fly, call energy into existence from nothing and so on balks at the fact that they can have Str 18...
I read an excellent article once about suspension of disbelief in fiction (including rpgs) and why this argument doesn't hold. The author said that when fiction deviates from actuality, it does so in a defined way for a defined purpose. Outside of these defined areas, the deviation does not occur. Therefore, simply because a female character can fly does not mean she can have 18 Strength (given women in the real world can't) anymore than it means she can be a man.

I've read something similar in gaming, I think it was in EABA or HEROQUEST. It all has to do with the Joseph Cambell " monomyth" concept. Myths have a certain framework to them and deviations from the norm always serves the myth in some fashion (when a deviation does not, it is usually an idication of twomyths being merged).
 
atgxtg said:
While we are at it, stat mods for profession seem to make even more sense. Blacksmiths could get STR, Alchemists INT, Bards and Courtiers CHA, Craftmen DEX, Shamen POW.

Didn't Stormbringer 1-3 do just that? It sounds very familiar from some form of BRP.
 
RMS said:
atgxtg said:
While we are at it, stat mods for profession seem to make even more sense. Blacksmiths could get STR, Alchemists INT, Bards and Courtiers CHA, Craftmen DEX, Shamen POW.

Didn't Stormbringer 1-3 do just that? It sounds very familiar from some form of BRP.

No,. Stormbinger did modfiers for land of orgin. Much like what RQ3 did with Fantasy Earth.

There are a couple of RPGs out ther that modfied for profession. It wouldn't be too tough to adapt to RQ though. I was thinking something like 1D3-1 or so per 5 years (Or maybe just give some improvement rolls).

Probably the best way to do it would be to link to the controlling attributes for the skills. THe only problem would be that some skills in RQ don't reflect all the attributes used very well (STR is important to smithing, but plays no part in RQ).
 
atgxtg said:
RMS said:
atgxtg said:
While we are at it, stat mods for profession seem to make even more sense. Blacksmiths could get STR, Alchemists INT, Bards and Courtiers CHA, Craftmen DEX, Shamen POW.

Didn't Stormbringer 1-3 do just that? It sounds very familiar from some form of BRP.

No,. Stormbinger did modfiers for land of orgin. Much like what RQ3 did with Fantasy Earth.

I could have sworn that Stormbringer gave bonuses for certain professions, though not all. I know there were bonuses for nationality too. I can't verify though because I can't access that book right now.

I remember complaints about the fact that Craftsmen generally went first in combat over Warriors.

There are a couple of RPGs out ther that modfied for profession. It wouldn't be too tough to adapt to RQ though. I was thinking something like 1D3-1 or so per 5 years (Or maybe just give some improvement rolls).

It'd be very easy to do.

Probably the best way to do it would be to link to the controlling attributes for the skills. THe only problem would be that some skills in RQ don't reflect all the attributes used very well (STR is important to smithing, but plays no part in RQ).

I'd probably be flexible with it and let the players shift whichever stats were the most logical for the character. You could argue for STR, CON, DEX or even INT or CHA for a craftsman. You could argue for STR or DEX for a "typical" warrior.
 
Thinking about it today, I was thinking that males and females might get different skill bonuses, due to their different training.

In traditional Western Culture, for example, women were taught to sew and cook, while men were taught to hunt and make things out of wood. If a character wanted to do some crafting, I'd want to take that into account.
 
Utgardloki said:
Thinking about it today, I was thinking that males and females might get different skill bonuses, due to their different training.

In traditional Western Culture, for example, women were taught to sew and cook, while men were taught to hunt and make things out of wood. If a character wanted to do some crafting, I'd want to take that into account.

You might be interested in the starting skills from Pendragon. In that game the starting skill lists were differenrt between man and women. THe only difficulty is that MRQ base percentages are from stats rather than a base plus modifers.
 
hiffano said:
Utgardloki said:
I just got the Runequest book. (YEAY!!!!!). Now I want to change the rules.

Firstly, I've worked out size and weight tables that make sense for humans sized 3-18, so I can use a straight 3-18 range for human characters.

Secondly, I propose giving female characters the following modifiers: -2 Strength, +2 Constitution, +2 Charisma. Also, female characters with a Size above 8 get -4 to Size.

(I might change the Size figures after studying the rules in more detail. The intention is to reflect the difference in size between the average male and female characters. My tables have a Size 3 equivalent to 81 pounds and a Size 6)

The result is that females would do less damage in HTH combat, but would get other advantages to offset that. What I want is something that is fair and balanced.

Any thoughts?

It might make sense for peasents, but for actual adventurers, why will a woman not be as strong as a man. Anyone remember Chyna the woman wrestler, she'd kick my ass any day! just like a man can be a wimp, a woman can be strong, so why play with he stats?


"Wicked right knee so she has"
is what comes to my mind
 
Players should be able to play with the stats if they want - should a player want to roll lower Size for a female character, I don't see why the GM should stop them, but on the other hand, someone who announces they want to have a female character shouldn't get hit automatically with lower SIZ and STR. As I said earlier, what tended to happen in our group was that players who rolled lower SIZ would choose to play females.
 
King Amenjar said:
...someone who announces they want to have a female character shouldn't get hit automatically with lower SIZ and STR. ...

I concur. Bear in mind that on a 2D6 roll, as is used for generating SIZ, even the highest result comes up quite often - one in 36 times. The fact that characetrs can roll an extra die and ditch one makes it even more likely. So it actualy covers quite a large range of big people.

While it's true that the average woman is smaller than the average man, and many of the women you meet are likely to be smaller than most men you meet, it's also true that there are women out there that are way, way bigger than the biggest people most of us know. People like Grace Jones, or an average woman shot putter, or some of the women police officers I've had the good fortune to meet without getting on their wrong side.

IMHO women like that should be perfectly playable as player characters. I'm over 6ft, and my brother is the same height but much more heavily built so he's in the upper range of SIZ. Yet I do occasionaly meet women much, much bigger than either of us. Denying the upper ranks of SIZ to women completely would make these perfectly viable and potentialy interesting characters impossible. I'm not sure what good would be served by doing so.

Simon Hibbs
 
Well RQ3 essentially let you use either sets of stats for females, so you could have the smaller females, or the big amazon princess if you were so inclined.
 
It has always puzzled me that a person who is quite happy for a female character to fly, call energy into existence from nothing and so on balks at the fact that they can have Str 18...

I read an excellent article once about suspension of disbelief in fiction (including rpgs) and why this argument doesn't hold. The author said that when fiction deviates from actuality, it does so in a defined way for a defined purpose. Outside of these defined areas, the deviation does not occur. Therefore, simply because a female character can fly does not mean she can have 18 Strength (given women in the real world can't) anymore than it means she can be a man.


I've read something similar in gaming, I think it was in EABA or HEROQUEST. It all has to do with the Joseph Cambell " monomyth" concept

I am familiar with this argument, and with Campbell, and consider them both bunkum. That is, the original statement about limited deviations in fiction is true, of course, but fails to cover the question of which you do. The suggestion that fantastic elements can be as you like but realism is not the issue. Females can't have 18 Str in real life? Debatable, but even if they can't, males can't take 30 consecutive blows from a sword while wearing no armour and take no reduction in effectiveness either. I give you, the high level DnD fighter, who seems to exist quite happily!

I remain unconvinced that stat differences exist at all (Cha, Con), Are significant enough to bother about in the case of individuals rather than populations (Siz, Str) or are general as opposed to culturally dependent and hence inappropriate in a set of generic rules. Of course, if you are creating a specific culture you may wish to consider them, but otherwise? Lot of bother, small result, doubtful basis. I wouldn't bother.
 
kintire said:
I am familiar with this argument, and with Campbell, and consider them both bunkum. That is, the original statement about limited deviations in fiction is true, of course, but fails to cover the question of which you do. The suggestion that fantastic elements can be as you like but realism is not the issue. Females can't have 18 Str in real life? Debatable, but even if they can't, males can't take 30 consecutive blows from a sword while wearing no armour and take no reduction in effectiveness either. I give you, the high level DnD fighter, who seems to exist quite happily!

Well, many people,inclduing Greg Stafford, don't consider Cambell's theroy to be bunkum. The "Hero's Joureny" concept is pretty well supported.

As far ad the D&D fighter, it has nothjing to do with a fantasy setting, as in no mythics stories do we have such a character showing up. The D&D fighter exists in one envirnment, D&D, and exists happilily becuase D&D players enjoy having that sort of ability in that game. If they were to go around telling stories about thier characters who were hit 30 times with no imapirement and then went on to fight a few orgres with no harm, the sotires would not be believable and doesn't seem right to anyone other than a D&D player. Getting away from stupid stuff like that is one reason why I swtiched to RQ.
 
If somebody wants to play an 18 strength, 18 size female in my Tales of the Association game, I'd find a way to do it. The easiest way is to drop the Con bonus and give those points back to Strength.

I'm not sure how to handle rolling the Size attribute. Should I make players live with their role, or should I allow them to pick the Size they wish? My thought is to have players roll for Size, but while they may swap Int with another characteristic, they may not swap Size. This is to prevent Size from becoming a dump stat.

Maybe have players roll for Size, but then allow them to reroll if one of them does not like the Size value that he rolled.
 
As far ad the D&D fighter, it has nothjing to do with a fantasy setting, as in no mythics stories do we have such a character showing up. The D&D fighter exists in one envirnment, D&D, and exists happilily becuase D&D players enjoy having that sort of ability in that game. If they were to go around telling stories about thier characters who were hit 30 times with no imapirement and then went on to fight a few orgres with no harm, the sotires would not be believable and doesn't seem right to anyone other than a D&D player. Getting away from stupid stuff like that is one reason why I swtiched to RQ.

Actually, it's been stated time and time again in the D&D rules and discussion of the rules that only the last dozen hit points or so represent actual damage. The rest represent the heroic ability to dodge at the last moment so that a potentially killing blow only becomes a glancing blow; but eventually even the mightiest of warriors will get tired and finally a well-aimed blow can do him in.

MRQ now has a similar mechanic whereby a hero point can be used to reduce the severity of a wound.

Still, high level fighters can be frustratingly difficult to stop in D&D.
 
Utgardloki said:
If somebody wants to play an 18 strength, 18 size female in my Tales of the Association game, I'd find a way to do it. The easiest way is to drop the Con bonus and give those points back to Strength.
In the modern world, where women go down to the gym and pump iron with the men, I'd imagine there's quite a number of 18 SIZ 18 STR women about.
 
In the modern world, where women go down to the gym and pump iron with the men, I'd imagine there's quite a number of 18 SIZ 18 STR women about.

18 STR maybe. I have no houserules limitting how much a female character can increase her strength. Maybe not so many 18 SIZ women, since most women go to the gym to reduce their size, and no exercise that I know about will make you taller.
 
Utgardloki said:
In the modern world, where women go down to the gym and pump iron with the men, I'd imagine there's quite a number of 18 SIZ 18 STR women about.

18 STR maybe. I have no houserules limitting how much a female character can increase her strength. Maybe not so many 18 SIZ women, since most women go to the gym to reduce their size, and no exercise that I know about will make you taller.

it would intimadate some people i know
 
King Amenjar said:
Utgardloki said:
If somebody wants to play an 18 strength, 18 size female in my Tales of the Association game, I'd find a way to do it. The easiest way is to drop the Con bonus and give those points back to Strength.
In the modern world, where women go down to the gym and pump iron with the men, I'd imagine there's quite a number of 18 SIZ 18 STR women about.

If 18 is the maximum for either, this is a ridiculous statement. Yes, lots of women go to the gym and work out, and some of them do it to bulk up with lots of muscle, but there's still no comparison between the top end women and men in strength and size. The cap is very real, and pretty obvious to anyone who actually makes it to a gym...or outside their house. ;)

Still doesn't change my stance on allowing it in a fantasy game if someone wants it though... It's fantasy and doesn't have to match reality. Just don't try to justify something as being "realistic" when it obviously isn't.
 
Back
Top