"Differentiation of the Sexes in Character Generation" Topic

In most of the RPGs I've played, the character generation does not differentiate between male and female characters in terms of how stats are generated. Is there any strong science to support the modifying of stats in certain ways to accomodate such differences? I mainly play MERP, Shadowrun, Maelstrom and WFRP if that helps.

(So WFRP1 for example has a stat line of Movement, Weapon Skill, Ballistic Skill, Strength, Toughness, Wounds (this is like endurance), Initiative, Attacks (speed of attacks, basically), Dexterity, Leadership, Willpower, Intelligence, Cool and Fellowship)

Regards

1st edition AD&D had some differing stat caps for the genders within the racial stat cap chart. Another rpg called "Fantasy Wargaming"was a little more extreme. IRL I see more men injured by not knowing their limits than women, so possibly male characters have a better chance of pushing it but a greater chance of injury while doing so.

There was an article in Iron Crown Quarterly (Vol. 2 No. 6) that gives female characters in MERP ("except Hobbits and creatures of darkness") an extra +3 racial bonus in either agility or constituion, whichever is lower. In case of a tie, the bonus goes to agility. The article states that women generally have better agility and a better constitution than men.

Aside from the AD&D strength limits, that's the only character generation rule I've seen for creating male and female characters.

Is there any strong science to support the modifying of stats in certain ways to accommodate such differences?

Loaded question.

There are well established physiological capability differences between men and women (beyond the obvious) in general, and also statistically significant differences in the responses to physical training. But that's not what you asked.

But when you look at characters in an RPG (and specifically in the ones you mention), they are not randomly selected from the population at large. They self-select into the situations/careers that make them interesting PCs.

And, for the most part, the environment presents a fairly pure meritocracy for managing their progress. That is, in order to move from Level 3 XYZ to Level 4 XYZ, you need to be within a certain performance band, irrespective of how common that performance is to a person of your gender (or height, social status, etc.).

Looking at it that way, any individual who chooses to peruse a career as a fighter can reasonably be assumed to have a Strength value in an appropriate range, independently of how frequently that would happen in the population at large, or any specified subset of that population.

Put another way a human male with a strength of 16 may be in the top 15% of his gender at large and a human female with a strength of 16 may be in the top 5% of her gender at large, but it is having a strength compatible with the fighter class that makes you choose that career, not being in the top x%. Likewise, neither a male or female with a strength of 8 would likely choose the fighter profession, regardless of their percentile.

Dear Whirlwind

Ummm. why does there have to be hard scientific data? What does it matter. It's fantasy isn't it? I mean, there are so many blunders in RPG already -- why bother.

But why bother from a more important standpoint. We're not interested in comparisons to real humanity are we? We're already into archetypes already. The "idea" of Conan is already in what-- the top 1% of males that the rest of the population is really-- well of a different species almost.

Then again, it all depends. I once was a champion match fencer in my younger days. I was a big guy and I was very good, but I always had trouble with smaller more lighter and more agile opponents, especially women. I fought epee, never saber and while I could hold my own it wasn't like I was going to get on the Olympic team.

There's another factor. In any sort of combat what we tend to model in the game is woefully unrealistic. I KNOW from fencing that it takes only a few seconds to show who is the master, and who is the inferior and just as quickly you see that even a small degree of proficiency of one over the other gives the more proficient one a huge advantage. For example if Rhonda across the way there is only 10% better than I am, she has a 90% advantage and I am likely to be skewered (if we fought unguarded) in short order.

@ etotheipi,

It isn't meant to be a loaded question, it is meant to be an appeal for info so I can modify generation tables, in particular for NPCs. But Maelstrom in particular, but also WFRP and Shadowrun to an extent, can also involve using relatively average characters and the info might help with that. The only aim is to create a better illusion.

@ otto,

Ummm. why does there have to be hard scientific data? What does it matter. It's fantasy isn't it? I mean, there are so many blunders in RPG already -- why bother.

But why bother from a more important standpoint. We're not interested in comparisons to real humanity are we? We're already into archetypes already. The "idea" of Conan is already in what-- the top 1% of males that the rest of the population is really-- well of a different species almost.

Well I don't think it is a problem having an idea what 'real' might be, if only to depart from it. Again, if there is an easy way to eradicate 'blunders' from RPGs, I'm interested if it can be done simply.

There's another factor. In any sort of combat what we tend to model in the game is woefully unrealistic

I'm totally up for gaming it in a more realistic manner if someone fancies writing the system. I've never played RPGs because I think they make interesting tactical wargames, the combat systems are just a means to an end. Again, having a better idea of 'real' isn't going to hurt.

Regards

There I'd no such thing as realism in a wargame, its just a nonsense people throw around to pretend its not chess with toy soldiers.

The stats would range from one extreme to the other: Xena, Warrior Princess, who could throttle you with a thumb and pinkie, to the waifly Princess Stephanie, who would rely on her killer good looks for advantage (while in the middle would be the comely Gretchen the Milkmaid, who could contumeliously beat down an opponent with a milk pail and piglet if provoked.) People are all different, and I believe most RPG's leave it to the players to alter beginning stats to let them "define" their PC's character. But if in doubt (especially for NPC's), just go for "average", because it all pretty much evens out anyway…. ;-)

Comparing average adult humans of the same height:

A woman has roughly 75% the lower body strength of a man, and 50% of the upper body strength. Given that women tend to be shorter, having your average NPC female have 50% the strength stat of the male would be accurate.

The other two traditional physical traits are too general to be useful.

"Dexterity" covers body control, flexibility, and fine motor control. If I remember correctly, women are better at the third, and men are better at the first, and it's a wash for the second (though women's hips are much more flexible than guy's, for obvious reasons). If you divide the trait along those lines, then you can model a difference.

"Constitution" is the trickiest. Women tend to survive deprivation (thirst, starvation) better than men, but a woman's lack of muscle mass means that she can't really translate that into any major advantage for continued strenuous exercise. Women, in general, seem to be able to handle pain better than men.

There's much less data on mental stats, and it's less reliable. Women supposedly have a slightly higher average IQ, but the distribution of men's IQ is much wider. So the women will cluster between 8 and 10 on the old D&D scale; while the guys will range from 3 to 18.

Men also tend towards autism, the low end of which is actually slightly positive, if you're looking for engineers and so forth. Higher INT and/or WIS, but lower CHA.

Also, I agree with etotheipi — the PCs don't follow these rules at all. They're supposed to be special, otherwise the story wouldn't be about them.

Thanks very much Meiczyslaw, that is very helpful.

On one point:

Also, I agree with etotheipi — the PCs don't follow these rules at all. They're supposed to be special, otherwise the story wouldn't be about them.

Well, maybe. They are supposed to be special (up to a point, although in some games not *that* special), but being special doesn't necessarily require beefed up physical stats.

Regards

Also, is there any similar data about the effects of ageing? Of the games I've played, Maelstrom and Twilight 2000 have had a stab at this, but I wondered if there was anything more concrete out there?

Regards

If you think gender or age stats differences are difficult to model (either scientifically or without annoying players by shutting down their fun-to-play options), then just wait until you find a science fiction system that tries to do the same for the gravity of your homeworld. Biggest, buffest male bodybuilder on Mars will get beaten up by 80 year old ladies when he comes to Earth!

The weirdest age-related char gen I've come across is Aftermath. It had one sensible bit, namely you got a different skillset if you were born after the apocalypse (hunting, riding) than if you were born before (reading, driving). But older people also got more weapons, more armour and more clothes!

I have played one like this: SPI's Universe. IIRC all the characters have a little table of performance modifiers depending on the exact environment they were operating in. That could be hard work, although unless the environments changed really quickly during the game, it wasn't too annoying…

Also, is there any similar data about the effects of ageing?

Yes and no. When Indy jokes, "it's not the years, it's the mileage," he ain't that far off. The best work I've seen on physical aging curves has been done in the sports advanced stats community.

Generalizing that, men's physical performance peaks in their late 20s and goes downhill from there. It's usually a smooth slope down, unless there's an injury which could cause the player to fall off a cliff.

"I was an adventurer until I took an arrow to the knee."

Mental acuity doesn't follow the same pattern. People generally get smarter until … Well, there are a lot of reasons why somebody might suddenly get stupid in old age. Some of them are physical — CTE, Alzheimer's, etc. — but some of it might be attitudinal, especially in a field that's constantly progressing.

That might not be so debilitating in a medieval setting, where technology isn't advancing that quickly; but you really should keep updating your skills in a modern or futuristic setting.

Gretchen the Milkmaid, who could contumeliously beat down an opponent with a milk pail and piglet if provoked.

OK, so now I need a milkmaid figure in the act of beating someone up with a piglet. To the conversionatorium!

I actually put that onto my "to sculpt" list after I wrote that. ;-) Have to get some other projects out of the way first, though.

I have some (a bunch) Mexican camp followers for my new Battle of Puebla game that I'm building. I was thinking to use one of those for the base.

I liked the milk pail idea, too, but assault with a deadly bacon has to be the winner!

There's much less data on mental stats, and it's less reliable.

Oh, there is a great amount of data on 'mental stats' in comparing the sexes, much of it from the last twenty years. A lot of it is far more reliable than IQ tests.

However, so much of the "Differentiation of the Sexes in Character Generation" is in physical combat, most real differences aren't addressed.

For instance, to name a few, on average:

*Women have a better sense of physical surroundings, but men have a better sense of direction.

*On average, men have a better sense of spacial relationships on a physical level than women. Women don't read maps as well as men.

*Women speak 6,000 words in a day, men 2,000, so it won't come as any surprise that women are more verbally adept than men with a better memory for conversations than men.

*Women are more sensitive to the emotional content of conversation and interpersonal relationships than men.

*Women have better small motor dexterity and reflexes than men.

These and other differences have led some educators to advocate gender specific classes in the sciences and math. Research has shown that gender specific teaching methods in girl-only, boy-only classes make a positive impact on learning.

And of course, how much of these differences are influenced by cultural norms is another whole set of research studies.

But then what game combat system incorporates or could incorporate those kinds of differences? It's all about gross motor skills and strength…

But then what game combat system incorporates or could incorporate those kinds of differences? It's all about gross motor skills and strength…

I point you at classic DeadLands. Attributes are divided into 10 categories, rather than 6. The D&D version of dexterity gets split into deftness, nimbleness, and quickness; while the mental traits get a similar re-division.

Of course, DL is an Old West fantasy setting, which drives some of the difference.

dexterity gets split into deftness, nimbleness, and quickness;

That is really, really finely grained dexterity… "nimbleness"? They missed "adroitness".

In application, "nimbleness" is body control, so overlaps with D&D strength-based fu as well. Fightin' and ridin' are nimbleness skills, while shootin' and filchin' are deftness skills.

Similar division occurs on the mental side, too.

But then what game combat system incorporates or could incorporate those kinds of differences? It's all about gross motor skills and strength…

Well in the context of an RPG there are plenty of systems within the game which can incorporate these kinds of differences without necessarily involving combat.

Regards

McLaddie mentioned "Female Map Disorder" but missed "Male Fridge Syndrome".

M: Where is blah ?
F: It's in the fridge / cupboard:
M: No it's not..
F: Walks over "Yes it is" and fetches it out.
:)

ie Better Spatial Awareness vs Peripheral Vision. Of course the degree to which either is afflicted is not a constant.
:)