crisaron said:

What is so wrong with wanting to play canon? And Im glad you laugh at my argementation skills, because I laugh at your ability to read and understand a post. No seriously, all fake flame war and kidding aside.

It is folly to attack the people playing Deathwatch who want to play the GW setting as it is. I mean after all, they read the novels, they play the games, they know the backstory and they expect to play the RPG in that setting, not a setting altered by some sort of sense of modern morality.

Personally I could care a Skaven's Hindquarters on how each and every individual group plays the game and presents the setting/fluff or alters it. I am just saying that it is equally wrong to alter the setting for one players refusal to play a man then it is to have the so called "FLUFF NAZI" force the GM into changing his plots and plans.

Charmander said:

Yes but isnt telling that one player to "stuff it" just the same as telling the other player "deal with it, space marines are male!"?

In all honesty, if playing someone of the other gender is such a huge psychological issue that creates discomfort, then perhaps the player has other issues. I mean, I dont see many guys throwing up their hands playing Maid.

And Im not trying to be insensitive here. It just seems that if someone has issues with fictionalized cross gender playing, but not fictionalized genocide, then they may have thier priorities a bit off.

But back to topic, I completely agree that rank 9 dark heresy females and rank 6 or so rogue trader females are a completely acceptable alternative. More so then the FSMs (which I only wish, at this moment was refering to Flying Spaghetti Monsters). But at the same time, all the players should be given that option. And by this, a male player should also be allowed to say "well, Id rather play a rank 9 male guardsmen".

But for me, FSM will always be the gateway drug.

Peacekeeper_b said:

Yes, to a certain extent telling any player to stuff it is the same, but I'm going with the group here; if the group wants this player involved and doesn't mind having something altered in the setting, or DH folks in their DW, that shouldn't be an issue. f the group says 'oh come on, tell her to get over herself' then you should probably tell her better luck next time (and given that, the group and said player would probably not get along all that well anyhow).

My point about the cross play here isn't really about sexism in the Empire or fictionalized genocide, it's about acting out a role in front of a bunch of other people and being judged for it. Genocide is something all (I hope) of us can get behind and say is totally messed up and wrong, but it has it's place in the setting. Unless I'm playing with a survivor of an actual attempt at genocide, I'm not worried about it because most of us come from the same place of academic knowledge only, so most players aren't worried about being judged by their peers when their character acts out something like that- we all know it's super effed up.

A quick example; we had a guy back in a (non 40k) campaign years ago whose character was from China- a Buddhist. This was great in our given group- he was trying to stretch out his knowledge of a race, culture, and religion. We then had a player join our group mid-campaign who was originally from China, and had grown up Buddhist (not really so much anymore). He did not care that someone was trying to play that character (and was getting lots of actual facts incorrect), he just wanted to enjoy the game- he took no offense. The problem was the two players didn't know each other all that well, so the player of the Chinese character became very uncomfortable with his character out of fear that he would be disrespectful to someone's race, religion, or nationality, despite reassurances from the new player.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I don't necesarily agree that all players should be given the alternative. As I said before, I tend to give newer players a little more leeway in what they do in order to get over the new player jitters. To me "I want to be special and different" doesn't fly like "Wow the table is all men and I'm not sure I actually want to play if I have to try and pretend to be a man in front of all of them." But no one ever said I wasn't a hypocryte.

No matter how you slice it the GM is in for a good amount of extra work trying to accomodate 'awkward' players

Charmander said:

So the morale of the story is..... Play Dark Heresy LOL.

But yes, we seem to have cleared up both of our intents and statements and are relatively the same page.

However, I do disagree that the option to play non marines shouldnt only be availabe to females who dont want to play males. That becomes a double standard. Lets face it, some people might not want to play marines at all. They may be great role players and real good friends. Are you going to tell them to stuff it?

Peacekeeper_b said:

Or open up Ascension/Rogue Trader and crunch the numbers to make an appropriate mix and match for a Rogue Trader serving the Ordos Xenos as a condition in his warrent or a Throne Agent attached to the Kill-Team under orders from his master (and as far as most games are concerned it doesn't really need to be any more elaborate then "The Inqusition said so.")

The fact that the OP's original post was the question of "how to get our wives to play," might be the reason we were focusing on female gamers Peacekeeper. Otherwise the arguements made for sliding the "I don't wanna be a Spess Mahrine" noncomformist a copy of Ascension ultimately still stands. Sages, Magos, Assassins, and Inquisitors/Interrogators may not be as "killy" as Space Marines but they bring with them skills and options a Kill-Team might not necessarily have otherwise. From my (albeit limited) reading of Deathwatch core, Marines are crap at stealth in general and there aren't a lot of options for social skills either, two easy areas where Throne Agents can come in and clean up. Deathwatch was mostly made to be a hack and slash, but that doesn't mean we can't elevate it.

In the end... Ladies and Gentlemen we are making a problem infinitely more complicated then it has to be and have been for the last six pages. The best solution is easy (play something other then a killing machine,) the tools are all there (XP totals for crossovers,) and most of us should be smart enough to adjust accordingly when a problem invariably emerges. If this was indeed a troll thread... yeah I don't think I need to complete that thought.

Psion said:

Yes and I agree with this. Infact, Im sure many of us have said that six pages ago. And I understand that the focus was initially on female gamers, but it is wrong to open and option for female gamers and then say its not open to male gamers. That, in itself, is more sexist then the no female space marines aspect of the game.

Peacekeeper_b said:

While I do get your point, please let me remind you in general though that the old Gentleman's approach of giving women preferred treatment isn't sexism.

Alex

Best part about this post is the poor guy that asked the initial question has not even bothered to join in this non-productive hate fest. Truth is Females are in the military in most of the developed parts of the world, and will remain so even in the year 40k and beyond. Why? Because they don't seem to want to **** and pillage as much as the men and there are more of them. Either way really give it a rest this is the kind of thing I have really come to dislike about the forum.

Nimon said:

Yet the most powerful military in the world doesn't use women in a frontline combat role...

As for the 40k universe, yep, the Imperial Guard use both Male and Female Guardsmen.

Or the Sisters of battle, though that's mostly women.... Space Marines, though, are still a closed organization, as most Equal Opportunity advocates are shot with .75 caliber mass reactive shells, and heretechical adeptus find themselves stomped on by Titans if they try fiddling with the zygotes...

Nimon said:

sorry for total off topic.

U know how women in israel army are called ? U know how many US female soldiers were raped in iraq or afganistan by US soldiers? U know why only on propaganda movies women serve in combat zones? U know what usualy happens if female soldier is taken POW by enemy ? U know why most of male soldiers dont want to serve with female soldiers?

back on track

"Sisters of Battle in Death Watch, or how to get our wives to play". Answer to topic question is in same question, not even hidden. That thread was created to start flame wars btw.

boruta666 said:

You KNOW it was an women only army that took down the french monarchy? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Women%27s_March_on_Versailles

hungry angry mob made of mothers, sisters and wives with very noble quest still isnt army.

boruta666 said:

But then again roleplaying is to some degree wish-fulfillment. Don't know what that says about the people posting here.

Alex

I knew I would get some hate from people with that last post. To respond to some things, yes the us army actually does use females in frontline, not as common and you mostly see it in the MP units, but they are a needed asset when handling female prisoners. In fact when I was on the border of Iran the MP unit that served as convoy security for the CA team had two female gunners in the uparmored humvees and MRAPs.

As far as females raped, Males are actually raped more often.

As far as men not wanting to serve with females, at least in my experiance, is the double standards allowed to females and the general lack of comraditory twords other females, but they do have it twords men so thats something.

The nation with most females serving it is China, and though in america we might think we are the strongest ground forces, they are deffinatly the largest.

There's a slight difference between MPs and frontline infantry. The current environment our military operates in might seem like everywhere is front line, but MPs aren't front line infantry. I will point out that little word you had in your prose there.. 'security'.

In the current enviroment we are operating in thier really is no "frontline", if want to look at it that way. CoBs/FoBs are mortarted constantly, Civillian Affiars/Tacticle Human teams do raids, Infantry do peace missions, its all one big blur.

And yet, you won't find women in combat infantry, armor, airborne and so forth. They're still relegated to support unit roles.

Let us all remember that this is a "DARK GRIM" universe......There is a high feeling of xeno phobia in the entire empire. Whole planets are given over to destruction for just the hint of major Heresy. I don't see why its so far off to grasp a sexist society. Again this is the setting that has been painted for us from many different sources...Fluff from GW...BI...and FF.

As a GM I don't believe that real world issues "should" be involved in a gaming setting. You are playing an RPG to escape from your real world cares.

Now this is going to seem like Trolling hard but I promise I'm not trying to......Why not look at this argument from another point of view.

Now SoB are shown as an all Female organisation....why can't a male be part of the SoB? Isn't this the same core argument or has this not been brought forth just b/c no one wants to do this? This might help in thinking about how to construct your argument or at least present another view.

*AGAIN THIS IS JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT*

Hiromoon said:

There are indeed females in Airborne.

And for the record, combat camera has females and they accompany infantry units all the time and even go into battle with them. I had a female in my last unit that deplayed with me with 1-4 Infantry and just like all the rest of the guys lived on a tiny FOB in the middle of nowhere and was involved in several fire fights and attacks.

But still, females are not considered frontline troops, but th elines are changing.

However, the role of women in battle, be it fictional, historical or current does not alter the no female space marine issue. Since the no female space marine rule is not a cultural decision but a pseudo science issue.

Some game designers 20 some years ago decided that females could not accept the implants needed to be space marines. GAME DESIGNERS, not scientists or geneticists or anything. Its a piece of the setting, even if it is inaccurate.

YOu can pull up your science books and classroom knowledge and say "well blah blah blah" and counter that fact. And I could probably write a long essay on how the is NO FRIGGIN WARP, but whats the point? Until you can prove that the genetic cloned material from a powerfl psyker is indeed compatible with female DNA, then whats the issue?

Its a semi sci-fi, space opera, fantasy FICTIONAL SETTING that states orks are plants, space marines are male and psychic powers are real. Why bring real life into it?

Back to the primary focus, yes, SoB work as fine female warriors. Use them, use female Inquisitors, heck, pretend your space marines are females. Just move on.

Peacekeeper_b said:

I ment the boots they put on the ground in the Airborne. And for the record, my mother was in Bosnia, and her position had mortar fire put on it... poorly though. 2-3 klicks from the base. So while the lady reporter was there in her flak jacket and helmet, sheltering infront of the camera to give her report, there's the weather team from the airforce off camera trying not to laugh too loudly. She even beat up a frenchman who tried to force her to give him a kiss at knifepoint while there.

Anyway, nope, we'll keep arguing agianst the female space marine thing until the sister of battle accept male members, irregardless of name.

I don't understand...DW characters might as well not even have a gender. It's not like other games where the gender of your character has an impact.

[ ] Male

[ ] Female

[x] Asexual being

Peacekeeper_b said:

I do agree with the move on, which is really all I was trying to say when I did post. I will point out again that the guy that started this thread has not even bothered to take another glance at it since all anyone did instead of giving him an anwser was start on this male/female rant.