As a woman who has been using male-dominated systems for years, looking at art of men, using sample male characters to set up my own, using character sheets with pictures of men or miniatures of men or, worse, miniatures of women made to appeal largely to male sexual fantasies, I have only one thing to say:

YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FREAKING KIDDING ME.

It's called using your imagination. Of course your character doesn't look like that. So you print a picture that represents your PC if you need a visual aid. As a woman, I'm delighted to see that they're using females as 'standards' of character classes nownot just for the throw-away RP classes that nobody would play anyway, but as half of the representations of the people on the cards.

Honestly, what you're asking is that the hobby go back to being more sexist. I've had to use my imagination for years to get around images of overly-muscular men in embarrasingly masculine poses, and I still have to use it when I use miniaturesthere are SO FEW female figures not entirely made of boobs! And yet there's another thread on here complaining about the lack of female players. It's not rocket science, that.

"Yes, Pippin! My point is, she's clearly overreacting!"

Honestly.

Honestly what, exactly?

ETA: This does agitate me, and maybe more than it should. But it always ticks me off when someone won't endure a bit of inconvenience for the sake of being inclusive.

If you have a problem with the portrayal of your career on the card, then you are going to have some serious issues when you are in a fight with four groups of beastmen, and only one of the four standups has a picture of actual beastmen on it.

Llanwyre said:

If it's any consolation, I feel your pain. I had to go to the Off Topic area of a non-RPG forum to get this one of my chest.

Cheers

Sparrow

Orientalist, have you looked at the pictures of the classes in the D&D books? Does that mean my female elf fighter appears as a male human fighter?

Llanwyre said:

What are you talking about? Who was making comments promoting exclusion? I'm at a loss, I don't see it.

Some players sometimes gain inspiration for a character from art. The very art on some of the various parts of this RPG can be used to help craft a character. In such a case it is as if the RPG elements in the game help to solidify and conbtribute directly in the characterization of the PC. If this is possible, then the reverse is possible where the game components detract from a particular character concept. Is it a big deal either way? No, certainly not. We can all use our imagination and if the art is that jarring to the player, might I suggest they use a chess pawn for the character stand-up.

As for me, I think the art on each career card and character stand-up is kinda nice. And if that art also provides my mind with a character seed then all the better, I'll have a carreer card and stand-up with art pretty darn close to my actual PC. If the art shows a female then maybe I'll play a female PC, and if it shows a male maybe a male PC. Or maybe not, it's not a big deal either way.

Doc, the Weasel said:

Demand your GM buy enough box sets to acquire the requisite standups such that each adversary or group of adversaries are represented by appropraite stand-ups .

In all seriousness, I was thinking of buying GW beastmen figures and painting them up to use as stand-ups. I also have tons of D&D figures already and feel I have something that could reasonably represent most opponents/enemies.