RevMark said:

Not always as bad as you think: http://www.eldacur.com/~brons/Maupin/LaMaupin.html But it is true that most women were not going to be so fortunate.

Really, I think this homoginization of the sexes is terribly boring and inappropriate for a setting so enthralled with ignorance and superstition as 40k. Yes, pcs may play those women who stand out above and beyond, but saying "all people are equal" takes away one very valuable tool for storytelling and generating atmosphere. Believe me, I used to be fully in the "women and men are equal" category, but historically, sociologically, and even in practice, it has been shown to me this simply isn't true ... at least not on the washed out, colorless way most people mean when they say so. Men and women have different strengths and different weaknesses - it is simply a matter of reality.

I am not going to get into a "which is better" argument here, (because the answer is: neither) but it seems as though the fear of sounding biased has caused people to become terrified of distinguishing between the two in game. Adding differing levels of chauvenism to different planets or systems can serve as another way to distinguish the regions and create biase in characters. ("Ah man, we have to go back to Osylisk!? Time to tape down and get the fake mustache ...")

Jack of Tears said:

There are always exceptions (you could have instanced Joan of Arc as well), but they are notable precisely for being exceptions, and there are obvious reasons why they managed to escape the condemnation of society at large. In Mme Maupin's case this was partly through living on the fringes of a rather liberal Court who were entertained by scandalous novelty - if she had been a real commoner her aping of the way of life of a chavalier would not have been winked at - and partly because she was married (as your source points out). Few female PCs in WFRP have these advantages.

Jack of Tears said:

I completely agree with you that assuming homogenisation of social roles for the sexes is nonsensical, which is why I do not play WFRP that way, and that it rules out some interesting opportunities for roleplaying, and that often people refuse to address it because they see it as too sensitive. However, at the end of the day it also produces real restrictions on the sorts of characters that those wanting to play female characters can play, which is often not fun. In a realistic setting, the unmarried flamboyant female entertainer is going to have great difficulty gossiping with any respectable man who does not want to attract scandal, which drastically limits her capabilities. In fact, social interaction (often a forte of female characters - and players - in my experience) is severely penalised by imposing realistic social conventions. In short, although it is interesting at times to explore life as part of an oppressed group, it does by definition restrict your options, and this is not always fun. (I take it for granted that at the end of the day we are all trying to have fun here, rather than just experience what life might be like living under an oppressive social system). For this reason I tend to moderate things from what might be a realistic historical level and create loopholes that may not have historically existed in Medieval Europe (though they may have in other cultures), for example, women who have been legally declared men and are socially treated as such.

Now, as far as DH goes, I think there is a good case to be made that within the common culture of the Imperium (as found on Imperial and Hive worlds and within the working culture of the Adepta) there is relative sexual equality (or at least equality of opportunity). A comparative lack of women in senior roles can be noted, but this can also be observed in most contemporary western countries which in theory practice sexual equality and can be explained more simply by reference to the effect of career breaks caused by childbirth and child-rearing than by assuming there is in fact a lack of social acceptance of women and that the women we know of in senior positions are all exceptions in a generally oppressive society. I do completely agree that this equality is not universal however, and that there will be planets or systems where there is marked inequality, and this sort of contrast creates wonderful potential for roleplaying. In particular, I would anticipate there generally being less equality for women on feral and feudal worlds. I would also anticipate finding other forms of discrimination and prejudice. Worlds on which racism is common, worlds ruled by a matriarchal culture, worlds where all men are expected to have beards or be treated as women... all of this is grist to the mill.

Jack of Tears said:

But that's when you bring out the other tools for storytelling and atmosphere generation.

Like I said in the first post, im pretty sick of the utterly mundane bull about interaction between the sexes, gender roles and equality etc. I have to deal with it every day in real life already so there is no need to fill the roleplaying sessions with the same crap. And that's why I like games like Dark Heresy, that treats topics so much larger than mundane human relationships.

It's kind of hard to let your thought wonder about oidipus-complex and sexual tensions between the males and females in the playing group when you have a nasty alien creature coming running towards you with a wicked alien firearm blazing away, or when you gaze in awe out across a starship viewport and witness the magnificent view of a busy Imperial spaceport, or when a manifested daemon starts to hack it's way through innocent bystanders, making all the witnesses vomit and defacate in fear.

It would be like playing Call of Cthulhu and go like: "Golly, we're trying to stop the malignant plans of an alien, tentacled, god-like creature and we travel to some of the most unknown, remote locations on earth and beyond! But still I'll have to explore my feelings towards that attractive looking flapper who is tagging along during our quest against the alien evils. Who knows? I might actually get inside of her skirts if im lucky! "

I mean: COME ON! There is an alien tentacled thingie sending cultists and magic your way, and you wonder about whether you'll be able to mount a certain woman in the near future? Do you stick with drinking your regular diet coke, when presented with the option of sampling fine wine as well? Sure the wine might taste like ****, and sure you might have gotten used to diet coke, but for a couple of grand a bottle wouldn't you at least want to try the wine out so you can die with the knowledge that you did experience something quite out of the ordinary, even when you could've gone with the same choice you usually go with?

Now im not saying that the more mundane and low-key human interactions are bad all the time. There are several, more low-key, RPG's for that sort of gaming. But when you have an RPG that include starships, aliens, galactic spanning empires, daemons, other dimensions, space marines, questions of morality that would've never surfaced on our real world simply because many of the aspects that those questions of morality regards do not exist, I find it to be somewhat inappropriate to shine much of the spotlight upon the mundane and boring stuff that we already experience in our daily lives. Sure, keep them in to make the setting seem realistic, but have the good decency to know what the game is about and shine the spotlight on that instead of emphazising aspects that only serve a purpose of novelty.

But, as always, we can't all think or like the exact same things, and no way of going about the game is more "right" than any other, and im not trying to declare that my way is the optimal one here. I just can't get why some people are so fascinated by the mundane stuff we experience every day in real life even when they're trying to roleplay in a setting that contains so many extraordinary and over-the top elements.

But then again, maybe I am a bit strange that way. You see if I saw an alien creature in real life, it doesn't matter if a hundred well developed women started to undress themselves in the vicinity. I would still stare in awe at the alien being looking like a stupid moron with my jaw slacked down to the floor. So given the choice of boobs or aliens, aliens would win in my book. But that's just me.

Varnias Tybalt said:

So given the choice of boobs or aliens, aliens would win in my book. But that's just me.

Ah, and yet Star Wars proves we don't have to choose between one or the other ... Twi'leks anyone?

Jack of Tears said:

Varnias Tybalt said:

So given the choice of boobs or aliens, aliens would win in my book. But that's just me.

Ah, and yet Star Wars proves we don't have to choose between one or the other ... Twi'leks anyone?

True enough.

But I don't like Star Wars either. Im more into the Lovecraftian type of aliens. The utterly inhuman and near incomperhensible sort that drives simple humans to madness just by looking at them.

However, sexual attraction towards an alien species definetly does not belong to the "mundane" I was talking about. So while I'd probably shine some spotlights on a character that is smitten with an alien being and see how that relationship develops, I wouldn't do the same with a relationship between two humans. It's just too ordinary to deserve my attention.

"Like a newborn baby, it just happens every day" like the Rolling Stones sang.

Jack of Tears said:

I agree whole-heartedly with both of these points. I am never one to turn down a chance to add color. Just as I stated earlier that I don't think in 38,000 years we will get away from love, I don't think we'll get away from our genetic predispositions either.

To Revmark's point about penalizing social interaction by imposing realistic social conventions- a solution is to play the assumption also mentioned previously that exceptional women are treated differently. AND to make sure that at least the male PC's have a reason to respect female PC's. Perhaps not 100%% socially accurate, but it keeps you from driving female players/characters away from the table because they are being treated like it is the Dark Ages by their peers.

Varnias Tybalt said:

I did laugh out loud when I read this, but the problem is that human beings DO do this. As Aethel said, I don't think we're going to grow out of our predisposition towards love, relationships etc. Even when confronting a hideous alien thing trying to suck my brains out I'm still going to find girls sexy. Especially if confronting hideous alien things trying to suck my brains out is my job, it's not the first time I've done it, and I can think of other things besides 'my God what is that thing', 'kill it now' or 'run away'. It may seem mundane or out of place, but it's part of what makes the people confronting the alien thing human, and thus part of the drama of what is happening. A strong sense of the mundane helps make the strange and horrific seem even more so - contrast is good. And this sort of contrast - the mundane reality of human relationships and the hideous strangeness of the alien threat - is so common in film, literature and TV shows in the area that it hardly needs illustrating. The obvious example that occurs to me, however, just because its subject matter is so similar, is Torchwood. Here you have a group of people confronting sometimes horrific alien menace, and yet very definitely a group of human beings who have feelings, sometimes sexual, for each other. And it works. Really, really well. Aliens do not become less horrific and strange because the people confronting them care about each other. If anything, they become more so.

I think if your players can handle it and don't feel like they personally are being persecuted, you can do whatever you want.

It comes down to the ability to distinguish the character from the player. Do we accuse actors of being racist/misogynist/gay or whatever if they play a character in that role (don't answer that, people do it all the time).

Obviously you don't want to persecute a character more than any other because the game loses its enjoyment. This is true of any social class or group. Psykers are universally feared and loathed, even the trained ones. Do we then persecute all psyker characters all the time in every game? Will that lessen the enjoyment of the player? Of course there is a difference between playing something you aren't and playing something you are. Gender is generally played 'straight' by people but no one is a psyker. Does that difference change the feeling of the player because any attack hits closer to home?

Should we apply a filter over it during the game? Apply moral judgements so as to distance ourselves from responsibility? Many times people have inserted sexism for the purpose of declaring it 'wrong' ie the female character proves she is better and thus takes the wind out of the sales of the male character. But should that be true? If the Imperium is sexist, then it is sexist. Making it appear wrong in the game creates a strange disconnect. Afterall, if sexism is 'wrong' than pretty much anything any of the characters will ever do is also wrong.

Ironically I think that visually 40k is quite sexually equal. Unlike D&D etc females that go into battle do so in the same type of armour as males. If there are scantily clad females, there are also scantily clad males as well. There are no midriffs and high heels (except in a very few cases) - I find high heels on a female warrior ridiculous rather than sexy.

Different parts of the Imperium function differently. GW's 'it depends' modus operandi. Some are misogynist, others are misandrist.

I take the approach that the PCs are exceptional in some way, otherwise they wouldn't be PCs. I don't believe in the superman form of exceptionality though. Fate Points are a good enough representation of their 'exceptionality'. Physically I would then go to say that both male and female PCs are in the same physical range. That might be the top 1% of females and the top 10% of males, but in the game the effects are the same. It simply means that from a statistical perspective, the female PCs are from a much smaller part of their gender than the male PCs. But unless gender statistics become important in the game for whatever reason, it has no bearing on it at all.

It would be like playing a character with 0 BS that never used a gun. Unless gun use suddenly became important, the fact of their 0 BS would be irrelevant.

The Imperium has an institutionalised racism, eugenics, and ethnic cleansing system supported by the church and government. Anyone not of the 'allowed' genetic sequences is ostracised or exterminated. Now in a society with that kind of system in place, gender inequality, racial inequality, and social inequality would exist as well.

40k has a very heaviliy institutionalised form of social class segregation and persecution. You are not free to become a noble. That fuedal system being reinforced.

However, the closer a social comment gets to the modern world, the less fictional settings wish to work with them. Sexism and 'conventional' racism are glossed over, because they are directly applicable to the real world. Xenophobia and mutophobia on the other hand are in the realms of SciFi and thus fairly safe from modern scrutiny.

The only time I've seen it mentioned overtly is in the WFRP Bretonnia source book. There is a note on the social status of women in Bretonnia (ie no rights, 2nd class citizens etc) in the introduction. it quickly goes to stress you don't need to pursue this and that the author and publishers don't agree with it - nor do they agree with murder or the worship of dark gods.

The DH book as a small paragraph in character creation on women in the 41st millennium. It does say in a round about way that they aren't treated as equally and are far less likely to appear in danger zones but that it's not a big deal and is really on their to put the setting in context.

Hellebore

RevMark said:

Yes, people might do this internally (meaning in their own thoughts). My concerns here are mostly regarding the story and narrative of which im the gamemaster in, and my point is that mundane human relationships (romantic or not) in my stories in a WH40K setting would not get much focus unless the relationship in questions plays a vital part in the story somehow. Sure it would be around, for noveltys sake and to make the world seem more realistic, but not much more than that. Warhammer 40.000 is about mankinds struggle against aliens and daemons and itself, not trivial and mundane love scenarios and sexual tensions/frustrations between individual humans.

For instance this is why I seriously dislike Buffy The Vampire Slayer. Here we have a setting where vampires, aliens, robots, werewolves and whatnot exists and you have this girl who are preoccupied with slaying them. But still the show heavily focus on her troubles in dealing with being a highschool student, strange love towards a vampire, relations towards her highschool friends and trying to stay out late at night in a juvenile manner and hiding it from her mom.

I mean, come on!? There are vampires and werewolves! Who gives a crap about Buffy's troubles in picking out the right panties to wear to school tomorrow? (not meant as a demeaning slur against women of course, more likely a slur towards the show's stupid narrative priorities. Had Buffy been a man instead I would've easily come up with an equally clever slur)

If we're gonna compare vampire slayers, then Blade the Daywalker is a more believable character than Buffy would ever be. His "line of work" pretty much demands living outside of society as a distant loner. His daily routine is hardly bothered by normal human concerns (you know, the **** that Buffy the vampire slayer consists of to at least 50 % every episode), and not because he is a half vampire but because he slays vampires. If Buffy had been more like Blade in those regards, then the show might actually have been worth looking into.

Luckily Joss Whedon can do some things right. Firefly for instance is frigging awesome, and should have gotten more attention while Buffy should have been tossed in a dumpster somewhere (perhaps that would rough up her personality enough to be interesting?)

And while I do believe that you will still consider women to be sexy even if a hideous alien is trying to suck out your brain through your nostrils, can you really say that you would be contemplating over a particular woman's sexyness at the same time as the alien brainsucking?

Sure, we might be human, but even the human mind has to prioritize. And while it is occupied with being completely flabberghasted by seeing an alien being for the first time ever, the attentionspan will probably not gravitate towards how sexy women are/can be... Unless of course the alien creature in question is of H.R Giger design and actively provokes thought about sex, but in a far more disturbing (and twistedly beautiful) and morbidly fantastic manner.

But that is a whole other topic...

//Varnias Tybalt - clearly a morbid piece of work himself

Varnias Tybalt said:

This is probably a bad time to inform you, oh player of mine.. that the TV show Angel is the number one yardstick I often, and consciously, hold my game design up against. When designing plot twists, I often ask myself "what would Joss do?" I seek the very balance of character personal life versus good and evil action plot that Buffy and Angel had. *snicker*

aethel is Varnias Tybalts GM!!!

excellent! heheheh Considering how much Varnias (no insult intended Mr V) seemed to loathe Mr Wheedon I am amused at this turn of affairs!

aethel said:

Well if that's the case, then I have to congratulate you on one-up:ing Joss Whedon regarding plot twists and narrativism and balance (no brown-nosing, my character might be a brown-noser but in real life im the painfully honest kind of guy). Since the campaign in question has held my interest (well, rather sunk it's claws into me and simply won't let go, but thats not the point) for a few months now, while I usually will try to move away from a television set within the first few minutes once I realize that Buffy the vampire slayer is on.

Then again, it might be because if the grossly different settings? I mean, the personal life of an acolyte in the Inquisition in the 41st millenium has a tendency to differentiate from the personal life of a high school girl in present day, even if she do slay vampires at night. It's not like Buffy has to deal with the political aspects of the Inquisition with radicals and puritans, monodominants, amalathians, Xeno Hybrisists and what not, or the fact that someone who you might believe to be a colleague, friend or a lover or even a relative might stab you in the back (litterarly!) at any moment. You just know on beforehand that neither Willow nor Xander would ever join any dark forces willingly and conspire against Buffy (disregarding from any eventual episodes where one of them gets possesed by a demon or something like that).

In your campaign however there is a very small number of people which my character (and partly myself) consider to be reasonably trustworthy and this goes for both PC's and NPC's. Poor Vincentius has no "Xander" or "Willow" to watch his back, although he might have a "Faith" on his side, and quite possibly an "Oz". (but you have to figure out for yourself which characters im referring to because some readers might take offense )

As for Angel, well let's put it like this: it's an improvement. Not great, not fantastic, and I don't actively watch it but it is a heck of a lot better than Buffy (from what I've seen so far at least). Sure it contains some of the sillyness that Buffy is notorious in depicting, but not nearly in equal amounts. And of course, Angel has a lot more darker setting, along with some reasonably good attempts to dark humour. (in which department our group of players has surpassed Angel several times, with their dark humorous shenanigans... Brain pie anyone? )

And then of course, there is Firefly. Which I love!

And I hate the fact that it got cancelled and buried with the rather unfulfilling movie Serenity where almost everybody died, putting the final nail in the coffin for the series to ever be resurrected.

So asking yourself what Joss would do would be very acceptable if you ask me (mostly thanks to Firefly, but also Angel to some extent). As long as one would refrain from asking: "What would Joss do if this was a Buffy episode?"

Another note I would like to interject here is the fact that I know that my usual preferences concerning plot elements can be a bit... Well inhuman or inhumane if you will. In games like Dark Heresy im usually most attracted to roles who are bound to dabble in the most extraordinary and far from the mundane as possible, which is why I usually prefer Adepts, Techpriests, Psykers, Assassins and the like, over the more social and "human" roles. Quite simply the ones who are pretty much destined to be involved with the "larger-than-life" elements of the plot, like alien civilizations and technology, sorcery, the heretical, the philosophical, the sort of stuff that the common man does not usually get involved with or even bother to think about sometimes, because the common man is usually more concerned with how he/she is looked upon by his/her fellow man and invest a lot of their time in personal relationships.

But because I'd like to consider myself a versatile person and I do enjoy variation and challenge, I opted to play a character that is pretty much my anathema in your campaign. That kind of character is pretty much lightyears away from my usual playing style and choice of character, and by god he can be difficult sometimes. Especially when trying to find the correct balance between "snobby *******" and "decent, sophisticated guy" so that he ends up more in the likable and sympathetic spectrum, rather than the superior ******* spectrum.

But I try my best.

So I hope my choice of character, and the way I play him proves to be some sort of testament to my willingness towards getting down to earth and be a bit more "human" for once. Instead of ending up like the genious, heretical, excentric, coldhearted, uncomfortable and sometimes downright evil character I'm usually the most fascinated by.

Sooo, I hope the thoughts I've vented here does not give anyone the impression that i'm obstinate (...regarding this subject anyway ). I know I have a peculiar taste in the fiction I consume and which parts i choose over others, but hey, at least im not the "wannabe-action-hero" who dreams of playing a power armoured superman gunning down hordes of aliens in a stereotypical, hollywood-action flick manner. We all know that the customer demographic around every 40K franchise has quite plenty of those, and, well variety just makes everyone happier, does it not?

//Varnias Tybalt - shamelessly addicted to the excentric villian and the dark anti-heroes, along with everything larger than life, but tries his best to kick the habit once in a while.

Ordo Hydra said:

Yes she is, and I consider myself a proud and grateful player in the Sin and Salvation campaign.

And my last post hopefully clarified my feelings towards Joss Whedon. I don't loathe him at all, while I do loathe one of the tv-series he is responsible for, but am slightly ambiguous towards one, and am cog-f**ing sold on another.

I guess he's just one of those directors/producers that sometimes miss the target horribly, but hit it spot on and even cleave the first arrow in two at other opportunities.

Almost like Uwe Boll! ...but a lot better than Boll of course, while he did great on the Postal movie, every other movie sucked big time (and not in the pleasant way). So far, Boll is a one-hit-wonder, while Whedon can by contrast keep up a standard.

Plot twists and character drama are alright, however, when the in-part drama overshadows the plot, that is bad, boring and game disruptive. Sadly, one of our other players seems to think that all party interaction should resemble his experiences in Vampire LARP. Yeah....it's *that* bad

Exactly but thats what the GM has to do. A careful balancing act of action, adventure and drama. Too much of any one and people get bored.

Ordo Hydra said:

Take a guess at which part a little upcoming game called Deathwatch will probably overdo in ridiculous amounts.

Okay, im sorry, I'll stop venting my scepticism towards Deathwatch.

"Shut up Tybalt! We know you hate the idea, we get the picture! Stop nagging about it already. We're sick of hearing it, even if you do manage to spin your remarks with funny witticisms and innuendoes." (even more:)