Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Philip S

Rouge Trader (1987) era Sisters of Battle = Space Marines?

Recommended Posts

MILLANDSON said:

ak-73 said:

 

However one could argue that a number of organs might work for females while others have... hicc-ups. :-)

 

 

Just read over the whole "how to make a space marine" bit in Deathwatch now, and it seems all of the organs require a male host.

That's not surprising since it's been a part of the 'fluff' since WD98 (IIRC).

Of course, that doesn't stop the individual doing whatever the hell they want... gran_risa.gif

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quicksilver said:

Yeah, back to the OP's question.  In Rogue Trader (1987), that is before 1st edition Warhammer 40k, Space Marines wern't super-human, and therefore, were essentialy the equivilent of SOBs.

Quicksilver said:

Yeah, back to the OP's question.  In Rogue Trader (1987), that is before 1st edition Warhammer 40k, Space Marines wern't super-human, and therefore, were essentialy the equivilent of SOBs.

Respectfully, Rogue Trader pg 153

"Young recruits are subject to many hours of intense training and indoctrination, leading to physical and mental chamges. Their bodies are toughned by bio-chem, and their resolve is hardened by psycho-surgery. A special black carapace is merged with their natural flesh"

Though all the nuances later fleshed out in Chapter Approved, from the first edition they were in fact bio-engineered to be something more than a normal human.

Darq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

That's not surprising since it's been a part of the 'fluff' since WD98 (IIRC).

Of course, that doesn't stop the individual doing whatever the hell they want... gran_risa.gif

Kage

lol my collection goes back to issue 97 - how far does yours go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

@Quicksilver: if there were no serious hicc-ups, the Imperium would adopt the technnology and the female warriors (although one could create a game-world where tradionalist suppress this knowledge).

 

@MILLANDSON: That is because assumedly it has been tried with females and led to failure. That doesn't mean that a few millenia later there couldn't have been a scientist (or more) who created a secret branch to make this stuff work for females - with mixed successes. Sure it's a house rule but we're here working on a specific idea on how to allow for a female SM or SM-like character without breaking the canon background story.

What seems to be certain is that there are no authorized female SM according to the canon. Canon however hasn't ruled out the possibility that some females might have tried unofficially to become SM-like, gruesome genetic experiments included. What seems certain is that if they had succceded, the Imperium would have punished the traitors and adopted the technology. ;-)

 

@Quicksilver: Additional thought - there has been forming a small radical branch who support these female marine radical/traitors. If a male player ever decides to fink on their female player after they find out she is female and not a full marine, the person they report it to is part of that branch and will take appropriate measures. Whatever that means. :-)

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it can't be easy, other wise you are absolutly correct that we would expect it to be wide spread.  My point with the Abhumans is that there may be a particular planet among the billions in the Imperium on which some percentage have mutated enough genetics to accept the implants dispite the fact they shouldn't work.  If you want to have a secret unauthorized female marine group, this is a potential way to get around the psudo-science prohabition. 

As for your scientist, there's always Fabus Bile, the ex-apothicary who knows more about the genetics behind the Geneseed then anyone save the emperor himself.  He's not actualy pledged to chaos, he just works with them often.  It's also possable for a radical group of Genitors on Mars to have make some 'experements' of their own.

P.S. @Derq:  I've noted the correction about RT(1987), I was just copying from another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quicksilver said:

I agree that it can't be easy, other wise you are absolutly correct that we would expect it to be wide spread.  My point with the Abhumans is that there may be a particular planet among the billions in the Imperium on which some percentage have mutated enough genetics to accept the implants dispite the fact they shouldn't work.  If you want to have a secret unauthorized female marine group, this is a potential way to get around the psudo-science prohabition. 

As for your scientist, there's always Fabus Bile, the ex-apothicary who knows more about the genetics behind the Geneseed then anyone save the emperor himself.  He's not actualy pledged to chaos, he just works with them often.  It's also possable for a radical group of Genitors on Mars to have make some 'experements' of their own.

P.S. @Derq:  I've noted the correction about RT(1987), I was just copying from another thread.

 

Good thought. Still I think the Imperium needs a reason to not employ them on a publicly known scale. Or at all. I kinda like the Radical, authority-defying, anti-conservative approach (although in real life I am quite conservative myself). I would suggest calling them Scythians:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazons

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darq said:

Kage2020 said:

 

That's not surprising since it's been a part of the 'fluff' since WD98 (IIRC).

Of course, that doesn't stop the individual doing whatever the hell they want... gran_risa.gif

Kage

 

 

lol my collection goes back to issue 97 - how far does yours go?

Strangely enough, the same edition.  On the other hand, I have long since given them away.

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

Darq said:

 

Kage2020 said:

 

That's not surprising since it's been a part of the 'fluff' since WD98 (IIRC).

Of course, that doesn't stop the individual doing whatever the hell they want... gran_risa.gif

Kage

 

 

lol my collection goes back to issue 97 - how far does yours go?

 

 

Strangely enough, the same edition.  On the other hand, I have long since given them away.

Kage

I'm pretty sure it (97) came out around the same time as Rogue Trader hit the Hobby Shop shelves here in the US. I seem to remember getting the book, a box of plastic beakies and that White Dwarf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:


And they can be physically strong females too but the idea that physically strong woman is just as strong as physically strong man is just make-belief. And if a woman was annoyed at my stating so, I would reply that she seems to be at odds with reality. Objectively speaking (and not making this into some kind of gender competition) women aren't even as fast as men. Men don't get pregnant. Women don't get to be as strong as men (and we're talking about the top end here).

 

There's limitations and if women want to escape into a reality where it's not so, the SM background indicates that the 40K world might not be best to do so.

 

That entire response was contradictory to the whole idea of the gene-seed.  The entire point of a gene-seed was to develope physical and mental attributes inside the host making them equal, regaurdless of gender. The entirety of your posts either contradict the 40k story base or declare that your ideas or opinions of the 40k world are fact when they are not based on anything but your own stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eyelander said:

The entire point of a gene-seed was to develope physical and mental attributes inside the host making them equal, regaurdless of gender. 

With respect, no.  Marine zygotes and geneseed have always been linked to biologically male individuals, not both sexes.  (And if you want to be pendantic, gender is perhaps not the best of terms to use... gui%C3%B1o.gif)

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

Eyelander said:

 

The entire point of a gene-seed was to develope physical and mental attributes inside the host making them equal, regaurdless of gender. 

 

 

With respect, no.  Marine zygotes and geneseed have always been linked to biologically male individuals, not both sexes.  (And if you want to be pendantic, gender is perhaps not the best of terms to use... gui%C3%B1o.gif)

Kage

 

The geneseed has only been shown to work on males, though not much of the time and that info in itself was published years ago and if it still had any merit it would have been mentioned in the SM dex, but it isn't at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eyelander said:

The geneseed has only been shown to work on males, though not much of the time and that info in itself was published years ago and if it still had any merit it would have been mentioned in the SM dex, but it isn't at all.

It is, however, mentioned several times in the Deathwatch rulebook, with the same reasons people have said here (geneseed/zygotes are entirely incompatible with a female host). Sorry, but the fact that Space Marines are male and only male in 40k is just that, a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

 

 

@Quicksilver: if there were no serious hicc-ups, the Imperium would adopt the technnology and the female warriors (although one could create a game-world where tradionalist suppress this knowledge).

 

@MILLANDSON: That is because assumedly it has been tried with females and led to failure. That doesn't mean that a few millenia later there couldn't have been a scientist (or more) who created a secret branch to make this stuff work for females - with mixed successes. Sure it's a house rule but we're here working on a specific idea on how to allow for a female SM or SM-like character without breaking the canon background story.

What seems to be certain is that there are no authorized female SM according to the canon. Canon however hasn't ruled out the possibility that some females might have tried unofficially to become SM-like, gruesome genetic experiments included. What seems certain is that if they had succceded, the Imperium would have punished the traitors and adopted the technology. ;-)

 

@Quicksilver: Additional thought - there has been forming a small radical branch who support these female marine radical/traitors. If a male player ever decides to fink on their female player after they find out she is female and not a full marine, the person they report it to is part of that branch and will take appropriate measures. Whatever that means. :-)

 

Alex

 

ak-73 said:

omg girls have vaginas dohohhoho

The entire content of your posts, in one quote.


A good amount of the things you've posted are downright stupid, some even face palm worthy. I mean, really, did you actually look over what you typed? There's a large amount of BS to cycle through, so I'll attempt to address your major "points."

ak-73 said:

*Heavily overused plot*
Anyway, if a female player was bent on playing Space Marines, there is still the option of playing a male Space Marine. Deathwatch is ultimately a man's game, I think. Female players should be aware of that.

I find it funny that you claim to have all this knowledge of females, despite your obvious sexism. First off, establishing DW as a "boy's club", is a bit rude and detrimental to female gamers who just want to enjoy the game, isn't it? It's like excluding girls because they have cooties.I thought this kind of juvenile thinking should have died when you hit middle school.

 

 

ak-73 said:

Again I doubt that many females would appreciate it if they felt that one would have to put hard work into making their character just as "awesomez". To me, let the guys in most circumstances play the brutes. Let the girls surpass them in other areas if they want to: agility, dexterity, intelligence, charms.

In my experience most female players would be very at ease with that. It's just that they can't have the aura of the elite fighters of Mankind. Unless... you know unauthorized female chapter (see above).

Here is more of you assuming what female (and now male too) gamers would want. I have met quite a few male roleplayers who enjoy being the slippery thief, a charming rogue, or the spellcaster. I have met quite a few female roleplayers who enjoy being the mighty knight, a fearless barbarian, etc. I have met many roleplayers that think the opposite. The point is that you simply assume that YOUR gender roles mesh in well with the majority of the rping community out there, stating so matter-of-factly how correct you are

 

ak-73 said:

And they can be physically strong females too but the idea that physically strong woman is just as strong as physically strong man is just make-belief. And if a woman was annoyed at my stating so, I would reply that she seems to be at odds with reality. Objectively speaking (and not making this into some kind of gender competition) women aren't even as fast as men. Men don't get pregnant. Women don't get to be as strong as men (and we're talking about the top end here).

 

There's limitations and if women want to escape into a reality where it's not so, the SM background indicates that the 40K world might not be best to do so.

 

 

Yes, there differences between men and women. It's foolish however, to assume that we understand the full nature and extent of this. Humans have always been claiming they know the truth, only to be proved wrong time and time again. The capabilities of the different sexes in the past, especially women, have been purported to be true, yet have also been reformed throughout time.

I would reconsider your response to that woman. To you:

physically strong men  always > physically strong women 

It seems like an obvious and natural fact. Yet, haven't obvious and natural facts been questioned before, and disproved? How would our world today be if we still thought Earth was flat and at the center of the entire universe?

The statistical information provided to us on the sexes isn't a useful tool to determine characteristics on 1 out of the 6 billion individuals on our planet, and in the context of 40k, even less so when dealing with the countless quadrillions of citizens living in all sorts of worlds.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

afjk87 said:

 

 

 

ak-73 said:

 

omg girls have vaginas dohohhoho

 

 

The entire content of your posts, in one quote.

 

I would like to formally ask you hereby to not put words into my mouth anymore, thank you.

 

afjk87 said:


A good amount of the things you've posted are downright stupid, some even face palm worthy. I mean, really, did you actually look over what you typed? There's a large amount of BS to cycle through, so I'll attempt to address your major "points."

 

I would like to formally ask you hereby to refrain from describing me in sulting terms, thank you.

 

afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

*Heavily overused plot*
Anyway, if a female player was bent on playing Space Marines, there is still the option of playing a male Space Marine. Deathwatch is ultimately a man's game, I think. Female players should be aware of that.

 

 

I find it funny that you claim to have all this knowledge of females, despite your obvious sexism. First off, establishing DW as a "boy's club", is a bit rude and detrimental to female gamers who just want to enjoy the game, isn't it? It's like excluding girls because they have cooties.I thought this kind of juvenile thinking should have died when you hit middle school.

 

I didn't make the 40K world for what it is, first of all. Secondly, my statement that the 40K world is boy's dream world seems to be factual. Thirdly, I reject the accusation of sexism; it's in part an accusation flung easily by some females (yes, I understand that much too) because they have confidence as a woman or as means to an end.

To state it very bluntly: I didn't exclude females from being able to become space marines. The creators of the original 40K decided on that. What I would be personnally opposed to was rewriting the setting for political correctness or business reasons. Personally I like even such limitations once in a while as it asks for inventiveness of the players. In a game setting where human beings were pwned by other races and they couldn't play all the cool classes - would I feel discriminated against as a human being? Certainly not.
 

 afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

Again I doubt that many females would appreciate it if they felt that one would have to put hard work into making their character just as "awesomez". To me, let the guys in most circumstances play the brutes. Let the girls surpass them in other areas if they want to: agility, dexterity, intelligence, charms.

In my experience most female players would be very at ease with that. It's just that they can't have the aura of the elite fighters of Mankind. Unless... you know unauthorized female chapter (see above).

 

 

Here is more of you assuming what female (and now male too) gamers would want. I have met quite a few male roleplayers who enjoy being the slippery thief, a charming rogue, or the spellcaster.

 

Played all of those already. More than once, I think.

 

afjk87 said:

I have met quite a few female roleplayers who enjoy being the mighty knight, a fearless barbarian, etc. I have met many roleplayers that think the opposite. The point is that you simply assume that YOUR gender roles mesh in well with the majority of the rping community out there, stating so matter-of-factly how correct you are

 

Let me quote again what I said, to remind you:

"To me, let the guys in most circumstances play the brutes. Let the girls surpass them in other areas if they want to: agility, dexterity, intelligence, charms. In my experience most female players would be very at ease with that."

 

And now let me explain to you what I didn't say:  I didn't say 'All girls want to play all the time a PC who specializes in agility or dexterity or intelligence or charisma and will forever satisfied by that.' I'm suggesting most of time most females will feel at ease with such specialization. The logical inference to be drawn from that is that it will only be a minority of girls who will want to play the brutes most of the time.

 

And yes, ma'am, that is my experience with females. And I stand to that.

 

afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

And they can be physically strong females too but the idea that physically strong woman is just as strong as physically strong man is just make-belief. And if a woman was annoyed at my stating so, I would reply that she seems to be at odds with reality. Objectively speaking (and not making this into some kind of gender competition) women aren't even as fast as men. Men don't get pregnant. Women don't get to be as strong as men (and we're talking about the top end here).

 

There's limitations and if women want to escape into a reality where it's not so, the SM background indicates that the 40K world might not be best to do so.

 

 

 

 

Yes, there differences between men and women. It's foolish however, to assume that we understand the full nature and extent of this. Humans have always been claiming they know the truth, only to be proved wrong time and time again. The capabilities of the different sexes in the past, especially women, have been purported to be true, yet have also been reformed throughout time.

I would reconsider your response to that woman. To you:

physically strong men  always > physically strong women 

It seems like an obvious and natural fact. Yet, haven't obvious and natural facts been questioned before, and disproved? How would our world today be if we still thought Earth was flat and at the center of the entire universe?

The statistical information provided to us on the sexes isn't a useful tool to determine characteristics on 1 out of the 6 billion individuals on our planet, and in the context of 40k, even less so when dealing with the countless quadrillions of citizens living in all sorts of worlds.

 

What we do know however is the world records of men and women in various sports.

'Women don't get to be as strong as men (and we're talking about the top end here).' Notice my mention the top end here.

And SM are top end or near, thanks to their training and implants, chemo-therapy, etc. And I have seen no evidence that women have caught up in the 40 millenia or so. I don't rule it out either.

 

But given that there are no female SM because zygotes don't work for females (see 40K Compendium), I also stand to my assessment that Deathwatch will be a man's game unless they change the background completely.

 

And I have no problems with that either. And why not? Because I'd have no problem playing an Amazon RPG with a bunch of gals, playing a male among them.

Only insecure people have to prove their equality all the time. If I can play a Scum at the bottom of the social ladder via occupation, I can play a guy in an Amazon game too, at the bottom of the social ladder because of gender.

And it's Deatwatch it's not even that extreme; girls just don't get to play SM unless additional information comes out that I haven't heard of yet.

I would think of it as odd if an Amazon RPG would allow for male amazons. :-)

 

Alex

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

But given that there are no female SM because zygotes don't work for females (see 40K Compendium), I also stand to my assessment that Deathwatch will be a man's game unless they change the background completely.

Nope, no change in the background at all. I can post page references to where it states in the Deathwatch rulebook that only men can ever be Space Marines if you would like?

But yea, I'm with you on the last part of the argument. Just because gender isn't equal in a game is in no way meant as a slight to that gender. As AK said, I'd be more than willing to play a male who is at the bottom of the social ladder because he lives in an amazonian society, so no, it's nothing to do with sexism or discrimination on the part of the players/GM.

Generally, I think people overuse sexism, etc, as a way to discredit people, and wish political correctness would, in it's current form, take a running jump. That's just me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eyelander said:

 

The geneseed has only been shown to work on males, though not much of the time and that info in itself was published years ago and if it still had any merit it would have been mentioned in the SM dex, but it isn't at all.

Unfortunately, by that logic surely GW would need to publish all of their game materials at regular intervals for someone to consider them relevant?  As it stands, much information that remains relevant to the universe hasn't been republished in a 10-15 years or longer.

Just something to ponder regardless of what specific conclusion you come to.

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as some of the technical aspects of the specific toughness, strength, etc., many of the ascended careers for DH have traits you can buy unnatural strength, toughness, agility, etc.  This really puts them on pretty equal footing with the general power of space marines.  The specifics of exactly why, say an asssassin, has unnatural strength isn't really explained as far as I saw, but I believe it is left up to the fluff/background for the character to explain through body enhancements, etc.  After that is is basically in game term rules a matter of equipment that they buy to put them on equal footing with space marines.

A couple things, Deathwatch isn't out yet to buy, and neither is the new sourcebook for the Sisters of Battle.  But we won't have to wait long for either one it seems.  We will have to see if they have ascended careers for Sisters of Battle.

As far as the base lore, it is hard to have anyone compete with space marines, although in some stories at least others are more than a equal match for individual marines.  In tabletop games the assassins are better than marines at fighting, they cost more points also though.  They start out as normal humans also and can achieve that level without the geneseed of space marines.  There is no reason that Sisters of Battle can't do the same for the higher level ones at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

I didn't make the 40K world for what it is, first of all. Secondly, my statement that the 40K world is boy's dream world seems to be factual. Thirdly, I reject the accusation of sexism; it's in part an accusation flung easily by some females (yes, I understand that much too) because they have confidence as a woman or as means to an end.

To state it very bluntly: I didn't exclude females from being able to become space marines. The creators of the original 40K decided on that. What I would be personnally opposed to was rewriting the setting for political correctness or business reasons. Personally I like even such limitations once in a while as it asks for inventiveness of the players. In a game setting where human beings were pwned by other races and they couldn't play all the cool classes - would I feel discriminated against as a human being? Certainly not.

Let's go over the definition of sexism.

According to Merriam Webster: prejudice or discrimination based on sex.

 

ak-73 said:

To me, let the guys in most circumstances play the brutes. Let the girls surpass them in other areas if they want to: agility, dexterity, intelligence, charms.

 

In my experience most female players would be very at ease with that. It's just that they can't have the aura of the elite fighters of Mankind. Unless... you know unauthorized female chapter (see above).

 

I hope you realize those are sexual stereotypes.  On what basis do you have to assume most players would consider yet another slobbering hunk of muscle or dainty damsel as their top choices? There are all kinds of people with different tastes, and it's ridiculous to assert many of them would want to play these overused caricatures, especially among more mature audiences.

ak-73 said:


And now let me explain to you what I didn't say: I didn't say 'All girls want to play all the time a PC who specializes in agility or dexterity or intelligence or charisma and will forever satisfied by that.' I'm suggesting most of time most females will feel at ease with such specialization. The logical inference to be drawn from that is that it will only be a minority of girls who will want to play the brutes most of the time.

Again, you continue to categorize what people want to play or tolerate based mainly on sex, instead of the thousands of factors that can affect the choices of a player. Making these gross generalizations is a very stupid way to gauge what people would desire in their games. (Of which you do constantly)

 The wording of many of your posts comes off as sexist, even if you do not intend it do. Saying Deathwatch is a man's game certainly implies the attitude that women should me excluded from participating, if you ask me.

ak-73 said:


Only insecure people have to prove their equality all the time. If I can play a Scum at the bottom of the social ladder via occupation, I can play a guy in an Amazon game too, at the bottom of the social ladder because of gender.

And it's Deatwatch it's not even that extreme; girls just don't get to play SM unless additional information comes out that I haven't heard of yet.

I would think of it as odd if an Amazon RPG would allow for male amazons. :-)

Adding sexual discrimination for 'depth' is a very common excuse I've heard. I'm okay with it if it's implemented with maturity and care, but a person like you I have doubts for. You fall very easily into injecting the obvious gender stereotypes, like in most cases where this is inducted to the setting. I think players can find more interesting, and original ideas to enhance their RPG experience without always resorting to the noble underdog ****.

 

ak-73 said:

What we do know however is the world records of men and women in various sports.

 

This does not necessarily show the pinnacle of each sex. There may be undocumented exceptions, so we really can't draw a solid conclusion from this

ak-73 said:

And yes, ma'am, that is my experience with females. And I stand to that.

 

 

I'm male. :P

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

I didn't make the 40K world for what it is, first of all. Secondly, my statement that the 40K world is boy's dream world seems to be factual. Thirdly, I reject the accusation of sexism; it's in part an accusation flung easily by some females (yes, I understand that much too) because they have confidence as a woman or as means to an end.

To state it very bluntly: I didn't exclude females from being able to become space marines. The creators of the original 40K decided on that. What I would be personnally opposed to was rewriting the setting for political correctness or business reasons. Personally I like even such limitations once in a while as it asks for inventiveness of the players. In a game setting where human beings were pwned by other races and they couldn't play all the cool classes - would I feel discriminated against as a human being? Certainly not.

 

 

Let's go over the definition of sexism.

According to Merriam Webster: prejudice or discrimination based on sex.

Let me hear sth new then. :-)

 

afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

To me, let the guys in most circumstances play the brutes. Let the girls surpass them in other areas if they want to: agility, dexterity, intelligence, charms.

 

In my experience most female players would be very at ease with that. It's just that they can't have the aura of the elite fighters of Mankind. Unless... you know unauthorized female chapter (see above).

 

 

 

I hope you realize those are sexual stereotypes.  On what basis do you have to assume most players would consider yet another slobbering hunk of muscle or dainty damsel as their top choices? There are all kinds of people with different tastes, and it's ridiculous to assert many of them would want to play these overused caricatures, especially among more mature audiences.

I hope you realize that your thinking of it as sexual stereotypes is an expression of your own issues. I have merely picked out a few common role-playing attributes in which I see women having a chance to compete with men at a top level. I didn't pick strength and did not mention speed because women are sill a bit slower than men.

And I will like to explain to you again: you didn't read what I have written properly. I said that realistically speaking, men have an advantage when it comes to things as strength and speed. So much that the German women's world championship football team of 2003 (which beat the US team in the sem-finals by 3-0, btw) got crushed by a 3rd or 4th class male amateur football team. So overall men have this physical advantage: the strongest man is physically stronger than the strongest women and all. 

I never said that a woman can never play a brute in 40K Roleplay. Remember Vasquez, anyone (as you can see there is no basic trait that doesn't have its stereotypes)? But realistically speaking, a woman would do better specializing in where SMs might be lacking.


afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:


And now let me explain to you what I didn't say: I didn't say 'All girls want to play all the time a PC who specializes in agility or dexterity or intelligence or charisma and will forever satisfied by that.' I'm suggesting most of time most females will feel at ease with such specialization. The logical inference to be drawn from that is that it will only be a minority of girls who will want to play the brutes most of the time.

 

 

 

Again, you continue to categorize what people want to play or tolerate based mainly on sex, instead of the thousands of factors that can affect the choices of a player. Making these gross generalizations is a very stupid way to gauge what people would desire in their games. (Of which you do constantly)

 The wording of many of your posts comes off as sexist, even if you do not intend it do. Saying Deathwatch is a man's game certainly implies the attitude that women should me excluded from participating, if you ask me.

First, in my experience gender has a huge impact on psychology. And I am not inclined to pretend it's not so.

Secondly, I don't intend to come across this way but it's not like I am trying to dodge false accusations by all means either. It's a good occasion to explain a few things. And you'll have to ask yourself why I have developed in this chapter this idea of an unauthorized chapter with Quicksilver if I want to exclude women. It's not I want to exclude women; the setting of Deathwatch does that all by itself. The only thing I would argue against now was to rewrite the setting to please potential female customers.

 

Thirdly, in Deathwatch you play Marines and all Marines are male. That being so I have nothing further to add why I stand to the statement that it's a man's game.


afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:


Only insecure people have to prove their equality all the time. If I can play a Scum at the bottom of the social ladder via occupation, I can play a guy in an Amazon game too, at the bottom of the social ladder because of gender.

 

And it's Deatwatch it's not even that extreme; girls just don't get to play SM unless additional information comes out that I haven't heard of yet.

I would think of it as odd if an Amazon RPG would allow for male amazons. :-)

 

 

Adding sexual discrimination for 'depth' is a very common excuse I've heard. I'm okay with it if it's implemented with maturity and care, but a person like you I have doubts for. You fall very easily into injecting the obvious gender stereotypes, like in most cases where this is inducted to the setting. I think players can find more interesting, and original ideas to enhance their RPG experience without always resorting to the noble underdog ****.

 

 

You hear too much. Underdog? An Ascension level female Acolyte would be an Underdog? Not necessarily so. Anyway, it seems as if you haven't swallowed this yet: in 40K the elite fighters of Mankind on a troop level are male. That doesn't mean that there cannot be women that can't kick their rears. But it means that there is no official female fighting force that can.

 


afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

What we do know however is the world records of men and women in various sports.

 

 

 

This does not necessarily show the pinnacle of each sex. There may be undocumented exceptions, so we really can't draw a solid conclusion from this

ak-73 said:

 

And yes, ma'am, that is my experience with females. And I stand to that.

 

 

 

 

I'm male. :P

 

In science the default assumptions is that without evidence a hypothesis cannot be considered true (no solid evidence of God either, no?). There is strong evidence that the antithesis is correct: at the top level men are stronger and faster. On average probably too, no? At least I know who is moving heavy furniture when my friends are moving places. ;-)

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

afjk87 said:

ak-73 said:

 

What we do know however is the world records of men and women in various sports.

 

This does not necessarily show the pinnacle of each sex. There may be undocumented exceptions, so we really can't draw a solid conclusion from this

ak-73 said:

 

And yes, ma'am, that is my experience with females. And I stand to that.

  

I'm male. :P

 

 

AK-73. I have to agree with efjk87 here. At about every turn, I have seen you make sexist generalizations, and I'm not just saying against women. You're saying that every guy wants to be some hulking super powered mass of muscle as well. While I understand that is kind of what Space Marines are generalized as, I think I'll probably either be in Light Power Armor, or Scout Armor with my Marine for the most part, as I prefer agile fighters. In real life, I am not amazingly buff like a line backer, I am built like a running back. Yes, I have played football, though I don't now as I have been out of school a while. I do still however participate in local Amptguard fights, taking foam covered pvc pipe and using them like swords and spears. I would like to think because of my speed and agility, I am able to take down quite a few of the "stronger" people out there, due to skill and precision.

Now, while I admit some might not believe me, I do have a girlfriend. She is a gamer (something else others might not believe), and a bit of a tomboy. More that people might not be able to believe, is that she enjoys playing sports, and fighting in Amptguard bouts. I love to have her on my side in either of these events, because she can cream a lot of the guys that we play with. She's more than half a foot smaller than me, and she can still lay me out on the ground if she wanted to. On occasion she enjoys playing a Barbarian in games, or an Amazon where she's just as strong as, or sometimes even stronger than the men. I don't know if it's a pride or ego thing, but some guys just always have to be stronger than girls, but I like knowing that my girlfriend can lay me out personally. I guess I'm comfortable in my masculinity, and I don't have to be better than her in any way.

My girlfriend loves to push at men's egos, showing them up and watching them squirm as they realize she's better than them in sports and such. I swear, the sadistic smile that comes over her features after she just beat a guy in something is hot and scary all at the same time. Tackling a guy or beating a guy in Amptguard I believe is a bit of a turn on for her, it might just be the adrenaline, but I do think being able to lord over a guy adds to it considerably. Now, I know some of you are thinking "dominatrix", and I'd have to say... sometimes. However, it's kind of a switch back and forth thing.

So, I would have to say that there are girls out there that go against your generalizations. I'd also wager that there are many more than you think, due to sexism has waned considerably in the last 10-20 years. Womens sports are not just us saying "oh it's politically correct for us to allow them to play", there are a lot of good female players. I believe part of the reason why they haven't been allowed in men's sports as of yet, is the locker room and harassment issues that might pop up. Some might point out women's basketball and say "but they can't dunk!", and I just wonder if dunking is always necessary and prudent? There are times yes that it might be necessary, but that's when they'd pass it off to someone else, which is part of being a team, having others with skills that you do not have back you up.

Hopefully with this maybe some minds have been changed, or at least made to think about such things. Though I doubt I've really made that big of a dent, if someone is at least made to think about such, it's a step in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A majority of Ak's posts are filled with over-zealous assumptions that are completely wrong or he contradicts his own posts in order to attempt a counter argument. It seems that almost all of his information comes from his own blind ignorance or from /b/. Now i'm off to go burn my eyes to sterilize them from the massive ball of faggotry that is Ak-73.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree, Urban Dictionary is remarkably insightful on how context may differ.  Still, it probably reminds everyone that where possible we should strive to work around "low gothic," or whatever. :D

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...