Hey. We've all been exposed to stereotyping, racism, or some other form of prejudice in one way or another, whether it was some crazy guy on a street corner shouting about how homosexuals will cause the apocalypse, or seeing something awful on TV.

I'm talking today, though, about something much closer to SP's heart. Video games.
My question is this:
Have you ever seen discrimination in a video game? Even if you liked a game, maybe there was something strange in it. You can be general or specific. For example, in RPGs in general, female characters are weaker than males, and are more likely to be mages, who can't equip anything stronger than a 'bonk branch'. Also, with your generic RPG love sidestory, the female is all doey-eyed and obsessed over the hero, but he's too brainless to even notice.

Another, more specific example, (remember these can be ANY game, regardless of genre) is the case of Command & Conquer: Red Alert II. Basically, in multiplayer mode, you can choose from several different countries. All the countries are either Soviet or Allied, but each one gets a unique unit that supposedly reflects on that country's military. I.e., the Americans get paratroopers, the British get Snipers, etc.

Libya's (a Soviet country in the game) unit is a man who gives his life for his country, he runs up to enemy soldiers and detonates a bomb strapped to his chest. The Soviets already got such a unit, a guy named Crazy Ivan. The Libyan suicide bomber is stronger, and has a bigger blast radius. The problem?

The Libyan unique unit, reflection of his country, is called the Terrorist.

Anyone else have examples, or am I just crazy?

The Soul Forever Seeking, there is a strong chance that you are crazy.

Do you really believe that an average woman is as strong and tough as an average man?

LOL. :D

I don't think any of the examples that you gave really support your hypothesis. Special units by country is not really "stereotyping, racism, or some other form of prejudice". As far as the RPG side story, those are archetypes, not to be taken seriously. So the Lybians have a unit called a "terrorist". This is unrealistic? How?

I do agree with your basic premise though. I just think you need some stronger examples though. You could certainly cite the Drow, the "dark" elves, as an example of racial sterotyping. i.e. Black = bad

I think that "stereotyping, racism, or some other form of prejudice" can be used responsibly in a game as well. For instance, in Jagged Alliance 2 (a game that uses broad archetypes as well), certain American mercenaries would not stay on your team if you hired Russians. This demonstrated that prejudice exists in the world and makes you deal with it. If realistic (or at least believable), this can provide a new element to team building.

If you want to see some realy racist games, see these (http://resistance.com/catalog/default.php?cPath=28&osCsid=ea1b1fc1ecc5447bb3b3ba66eb930cba) . Unfortunately, nazis have already put their hands in the gaming industry.

In my opinion, there's enough sexism in fantasy-based RPGs, especially when it comes to pen-and-paper D&D.

Do you really believe that an average woman is as strong and tough as an average man? It's a fantasy world. Women can fantasize that they're the physical counterparts, just like men can fantasize they're super-duper Fighters or Mages. Besides, it's simply unfair to female players who want to play effective female characters (replace "female" with "Asian", "Black", etc. here).

Or, hey, let's just take it a step further and say that women characters can't be Clerics, Paladins, Monks, and all those other things unrealistic for a women back in the day (and in the day too).

You could certainly cite the Drow, the "dark" elves, as an example of racial sterotyping. i.e. Black = bad
Please. Everyone knows Drow Assassins and Rangers are cool. :D

Interesting topic, although I think you are overanalyzing. Video games, particularly the ones we play (rpgs), seems to be very fair.

Using the example of RPGs, women seem to be just as powerful and important as males.

Baldur's Gate had Jaheria and Viconia (the protagonist could be a female also). Final Fantasy 4 had Rosa and Rydia (who was the most devasting character in the game). Torment had Annah and Fall-from-Grace. Look at Valkyrie Profile. You play a extremely stern and powerful goddess.

Almost every fighting game has multiple female characters (they always seem to be the agile ones...)

True, in games females generally are mages, or agility-type fighters. But isn't it obvious that females are smarter and agile than males. ;)

My favorite non-RPG series, Cultures, is sexist but try and play the games without women. I would like to see a few changes but only a few. Equal does not mean identical. I alway play BG as a female and Arcanum as a male. IMO the newer RPG's are fair.

It's a fantasy world. Women can fantasize that they're the physical counterparts, just like men can fantasize they're super-duper Fighters or Mages. Besides, it's simply unfair to female players who want to play effective female characters (replace "female" with "Asian", "Black", etc. here).

Or, hey, let's just take it a step further and say that women characters can't be Clerics, Paladins, Monks, and all those other things unrealistic for a women back in the day (and in the day too).Sorry, but you're missing the point. I don't say women can't bulk up etc. Or that they can't become priests (Where is that from? Earth has a long tradition of priestesses in Eastern, Greek and Roman religions), paladins (well, I can only think of St Jeanne D'Arc, but I'm sure there's a few I can't just recall ATM), warriors (Lady de Montfort was a kickass one), rangers (cliche female elven ranger!) and the like. Why not?

I say that per average, women are weaker and less tough than men. And thus a woman needs quite a lot of training to match an average man evenly. I fail to see how this is unfair if it's reality. If it's not reality for someone, he can always arm-wrestle his sister, mother and gf.

If a female player wants a Lucy CN female barb with 16 STR, let her have it. Sure, why not. She's only going to be quite more unusual than her Arnold CN male barb with 16 STR ;)

If that's unfair with someone, he needs professional help ASAP.

It's also ridiculous to maintain the difference in build - ie women are, per average, left shorter, lighter and slimmer than men in general, while trying to give them the same average strength and toughness. That's downright inconsistent.

News: males with strength and stamina of women don't really become warriors.

To sum up, I have no problems with female characters having whatever scores they have. Even if this means equality in point buy or roll min/max points. I, however, have a moon-sized problem with the illusion that average scores are equal for both genders. And with setting a fixed quota of female warriors. Stupid. More than just wrong. Stupid. Wrongfulness can be corrected, amended, rectified. Stupidity can't. And that's what the almighty PC-ness is.

Yea, and remove quotas from parliaments. I want people chosen for their qualification, not for their gender. I don't care what is in the MP's pants. I care what his programme is. Same for ministers and others.

Last time I checked, Elves were skinny and short (several inches shorter than humans). They suffer no penalties to Strength. Dwarves are considerably shorter than humans. They suffer no penalties to Strength. Gnomes in the AD&D games suffer no penalties to Strength.

Oh, wait. Those are fantasy races.

And the women in CRPGs are in a fantasy world.

Maybe we can call someone from Greyhawk or FR to check how strong and tough women are in fantasy worlds.

Well let's see, Elves suffer a hit to con, while dwarves gain a bonus. Elves gain a bonus to dexterity based upon their litheness (the same reason for losing points in constitution, their physical build), Halflings (which you didn't mention) actually do recieve a penalty to their strength based on their race. Both gnomes and halflings recieve a penalty to all things which strength affects (such as their encumberance limit, damage, and the types of weapons they may weild). I believe that gnomes in third edition did recently gain a bonus in constitution, but I believe this was intended to reflect a mental thing (such as their stamina and endurance, forcing themselves on so to speak) rather than a physical. Half-Orcs gain a bonus to both srength and constitution.

Dwarves if anything should gain a bonus to their strength based on their stockiness and build, I assume this is balanced out to nothing to even up with their size.
So you can see that all, or at least most of, the modifications are actually in place, most based on physical stature.

To me, the biggest event of sexism in games is that females do not sometimes recieve a penalty to strength and toughness when they should, as it is a reflection of the average person. A female character can still have a strength that surpasses a male, based on stat-rolls and training of course, and so if you want to 'fantasize' about higher stats, then you can 'fantasize' about a character which has such stats, not that all do.

Hell, following that reasoning why not just give everyone +40 to all their attributes, or make them invincible.

Keep in mind that while it is based in a fantasy world that is merely the name of the genre, and that all things within that world are tried to be kept realisitic, and representative of realistic laws, such as size affects strength, as does gender. All, or at least most, of the things in said world are rooted in fact or legend from our own universe. There is really not much at all that peeople have made up just for the hell of it becasue they think it would be nicer, except of course when the discordance between gender (which in older games was always present) is removed, for political correctness and general placation.

They are not 'women in fantasy worlds', they are women, who are in a fantasy world. If the general rules of common sense can apply to everything else, I don't see why it shouldn't here.

I agree that certain "stereotypes" based an sex and race (within reason) are acceptable in games beacuse art is meant to imitate life.

Also, you cannot neccesarily fault the greator of a game beacuse all things created are in part a reflection of the time and place in which they are created.

But I think that we are getting a bit off of topic, which was to think of examples of this phenomenon: In the old Gi-Joe video games, as well as cartoons, the "Cobra-La" bore a striking resembelance to the "Hisbo-La" (sic?) and, needless to say, were framed in an unsavoury light. Also fantasy games and books in general tend to give middle eastern personas to many a mage and sorcerer, which coincides with CRUSADE AGE views on the middle east. Thats 600 years of prjudice and counting.

While you can't argue the fact that there would be statistical differences between the sexes I don't think it's clear to everyone how large a difference of 1 in stats is supposed to be. In 3rd edition DnD ruloes it takes 4 levels to increase a stat by 1 and an item that permanantly increases a stat by 1 costs around 27,500 gold pieces. Is the difference between sexes THAT much that it warrants stat changes? I don't think so, but if you do, please realize that there should be as few amount of rules possible that prevents a player from playing what they want to play.
And as for the whole Drow debate; Drow have been around as long as Elves have which is why they are black, coming from the old European beliefs that darkness is symbolic of evil. So just get over it. Hopefully we're all intelligent enough to distinguish the difference between Drow and Africans.

Is the difference between sexes THAT much that it warrants stat changes? I don't think so,Take a few girls to the gym. Have them lift as much as they can. Add up the scores. Divide by the number of the girls. Look into the table for STR: weight allowance and stuff.

1 point difference in STR is like 10 or 15 lbs weight allowance difference. It' even more than an average man gains over an average woman.

Look, there have been court cases of 14 year old boys (wimpy compared to grown men) raping 25 year old full-grown women.

but if you do, please realize that there should be as few amount of rules possible that prevents a player from playing what they want to play.I don't ***** so much about there not being an adjustment. I ***** all the time about ridiculous pretensions that average woman STR and CON be equal to average man STR and CON. Well, it's quite funny to pretend men are equal to women in DEX, too, per average.

we're all intelligent enough to distinguish the difference between Drow and AfricansAfter all, Viconia is Pam and not Naomi or Tyra :shake:

@Elendrile
And as for the whole Drow debate; Drow have been around as long as Elves have which is why they are black, coming from the old European beliefs that darkness is symbolic of evil. You have a source to back this up? Or are we to accept that it is true because you say it is? Why was darkness symbolic of evil?

BTW, I am over it. I think all of this PC stuff is nonsense. We were asked for examples, so I provided one.

Additionally:

Hopefully we're all intelligent enough to distinguish the difference between Drow and Africans. And hopefully we are all intelligent enough to recognize that, on average, women are not as physically strong as men. That dwarves don't exist. That these are games. That this is a fantasy world.

Why are we having this discussion again?

In mainly Teutonic and Norse folklore, the elves were originally the spirits of the dead who brought fertility. Later they became supernatural beings, shaped as humans, who are either very beautiful (elves of light) or extremely ugly (dark / black elves). They were worshipped in trees, mountains and waterfalls. The Danish elves are beautiful creatures, but they have hollow backs. The Celtic elves are the size of humans.... all taken from
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/e/elf.html

that should backup that darkness aint good

and dwarf's do exist, not as a race of their own, but hey

@ Jack Funk: we're having this conversation because TSFS was bored.

Yes, these are just games. But, we take our gaming seriously, hence the existence of SP.

Drow are not from Afrika and my wife can kick my butt anyday.

Nuff said.

Actually, I believe I read somewhere that the Drow originally lived as surface elves in some jungle area of Faerun, hence the dark skin. They only moved underground later.

Obviously their skin wouldn't get dark if they went underground, just the opposite.

*Wonders just how sarcastic Tal is being with the above remark*

:mommy: :mommy:

History of the Drow, The Descent:

We know very little of the Ilythiiri, or "Elves of the South," before this crucial event. Even then they were known as "Dark Elves," for the hue of their skins. They dwelt in the jungles and hot forests of the South. A proud, warlike, culturally advanced (some sages of other elven peoples say "decadent") folk, the Ilythiiri attacked all neighbors, including other elven tribes. Their cruel raids and depredations, ordered by warlike nobility and the clergy of their two cruel deities, Ghaunadaur and Lolth, forced elves, humans, dwarves, and others to ally against them.

Defeated in a series of titanic magical battles, the dark elves fled into underground warrens they had earlier discovered. This event, known as "the Descent," marked the end of the drow as a surface-dwelling race.

history of the drow. part one from bg.

So, I was right. What are you talking about, Shura?

Libya's (a Soviet country in the game) unit is a man who gives his life for his country, he runs up to enemy soldiers and detonates a bomb strapped to his chest. The Soviets already got such a unit, a guy named Crazy Ivan. The Libyan suicide bomber is stronger, and has a bigger blast radius. The problem?

The Libyan unique unit, reflection of his country, is called the Terrorist.
Actually, that's the Cubans, the Lybians have suicide-trucks. :D

They should include the Polish and give them the Drunken Trooper :D

Take a few girls to the gym. Have them lift as much as they can. Add up the scores. Divide by the number of the girls. Look into the table for STR: weight allowance and stuff First, you're taking real-life girls, not FR/Greyhawk girls.

Secondly, (and this is important for the roleplaying freaks, and especially in P&P) female players will naturally want to play female characters. There is no reason their characters should be penalized or perceived as unusual just because they're women. Note that in d20 Modern P&P, there is no statistical difference between the genders.

If Elves existed in the real world, I think it'd be unfair to give them racial penalties/bonuses, since Elven players would want to play Elven characters, and it would be unfair in a game if Elves were naturally good Rogues* but crappy Barbarians**.

* - insert other Dex-based class here.

** - insert other Con-based class here.

IMO, the Grayhawk/FR girls should be made to imitate the real life girls. Art should imitate life, as someone stated above. Let us not delude ourselves.

Oaz, what you are talking about is not sexism, but political correctness. The topic is about discrimination in games, not political correctness.

No-one is being penalized or percieved as unusual, in fact it is just the opposite, it is the way things are. There is no stopping a female character surpassing a male character in any and every respect. Chevalier has allready stated that females are on average more agile and that he wishes this too to be included, so no-one is singling out females for penalisation here. I'm sure we are all aware (if from nothing else than from Martial-Art Movies) that men can be just as agile, but as a rule, most are not. This is what we are talking about here, rules of thumb. The individual statistics of the character shall define how much better or worse they are than normal.

To say we should pretend that such differences between the genders do not exist because it is nicer to people who may be offended is what over-the-top political correctness is.

More closely related to the topic at hand is mostly within the Command and Conquer games, which do seem sterotypical and enhance all the negative minorities within each nation, but I think that they are done more as a friendly joke than any sort of discrimination, if anything the Amerians have even more exxagerated accents than the other nations.

But I try to avoid any war game that isn't an RTS, as they all seem to portray the other side unfairly, and I think that there is a lot of the home-nation and associated world-views within any game. Play a coupe from Europe and a couple from Asia and a couple from the US and you can see the changes are drastic. I think that the discrimination mostly is perhaps more evident to people outside of the overmind culture that produced the game.

If I can think of any other examples I'll post more, but I think that mostly this sort of thing is a generalisation or cultural interpretation rather than actual discrimination.

(Hey, anyone notice that in ToEE the only black guys were the pirates -who were all black- and a certain NPC who is a traitor. I don't thik it was deliberate, it was just funny is all).

*sigh*

It always states that the player characters are not average, yes? So a female with exeptional strength would be comparable to these really bulked up ones you sometimes see on bodybuilding competitions and such. Make any sense?

Yes, but if you get your freakish female bodybuilder, and put her up in an arm wrestle against a freakish male bodybuilder who has trained the same way for the same time as the freakish female bodybuilder, logic dictates that the male should win because males are built to be stronger, with more muscle mass.

@Greenlion - questioning why we are having this discussion was sarcastic. Perhaps the inclusion of :rolleyes: would have made this clear.

It was in response to this:

Hopefully we're all intelligent enough to distinguish the difference between Drow and Africans. And we should be able to distinguish between reality and all stereotypes. But that doesn't mean that we can't discuss it.

BTW - I feel somewhat vindicated by both Tal and Equestors (last) post. Whether or not the Drow were intended to portray Africans (I don't believe that they were), it can easily be interpreted as a negative racial stereotype.

Then who are they meant to portray? I agree that they don't even closely resemble Africans physically (and that's the only way I think the two could be compared, ie dark=black=brown, which is crazy) So I am at a loss as to who the drow are supposed to be a negative racial sterotype of. Maybe spiders are being discriminated against?

(No offense was meant by that last statement by the way, I'm just having fun.... and I do think spiders are too oft un-necessarily portrayed as evil, ;) ).

Spider lover! :mad:

Don't get me wrong, it's just that in D&D all the other animals are True Neutral, so why not spiders?

It's consistency that's important, it's the principle of the thing; spidrs are no more evil than snakes, bunnies or platupi.

Perhaps it is a result of living in America, the home of the brave, the land of the PC.

Come on, Manus! Didn't you see Arachnaphobia? We all know what spiders are like. They run around on the floor, biting and killing babies, spreading disease. They're ruthless poisonous predators and have to be stopped. They spread terror! In fact, spiders are terrorists.

You support terrorism. You should be ashamed.

.
.
.
.
.
*tosses grain of salt at Manus, hoping it doesn't hit him in the eye - that would sting*

BTW - I feel somewhat vindicated by both Tal and Equestors (last) post. Whether or not the Drow were intended to portray Africans (I don't believe that they were), it can easily be interpreted as a negative racial stereotype.Agreed. That is because the discrimination wailing has gone too far. It no longer serves countering actual discrimination, but it makes people look out to get offended. Some paranoid types read bits few times over, just in case they should feel offended by something and could miss it. Or just looking out for damages :rolleyes:

Secondly, (and this is important for the roleplaying freaks, and especially in P&P) female players will naturally want to play female characters. There is no reason their characters should be penalized or perceived as unusual just because they're women. Note that in d20 Modern P&P, there is no statistical difference between the genders.Several reservations:

1. That someone wants something, doesn't mean it's right for him to get it.

2. There's nothing unfair in the truth. Truth is of things that be, fair/unfair is of actions born from choice. Following your logic, you should send a cease and desist note to God ;)

If Elves existed in the real world, I think it'd be unfair to give them racial penalties/bonuses, since Elven players would want to play Elven characters, and it would be unfair in a game if Elves were naturally good Rogues* but crappy Barbarians**.1. Again, the stress in on truth. As elves are fictional, this here truth turns into an abstract concept, but realism is still valid and logic still applies.

2. There already are players who would rather play elves without the CON hit, dwarves without the CHA hit etc.

3. News: in real world not everyone is an intellectual, a sportsman, an artist or a leader figure as he pleases. Some people are not meant for astrophysics, some shouldn't really speak
in public, some had better not try doing two things at one time. Want an elf with high CON? Sure, you can get him a 16 (17 in 2E), which is already skyhigh.

4. If by fair you mean equally-powerful-no-matter-what, there should be no bonuses or penalties whatsoever.

5. Just a general impression, but what you say looks like removing the black/white/Asian from arrest warrants ;)

First, you're taking real-life girls, not FR/Greyhawk girls.What is the magic that makes FR/Greyhawk girls need less body mass than man do for the same strength and toughness? To me it seems Political Correctness domain spells ;)

Or perhaps FR & Greyhawk humans are different and women are exactly as tall and heavy as men are?

Hmmm... what's next? Perhaps we should make all characters have the same size, height, hair colour. Or maybe just 10 all across the board for all characters? Hmmm... well, and some people want to play good characters but they don't really feel like helping people out, saving the world etc and they don't see why they shouldn't use poison or vampiric weapons. Why not let them play as they want and make it part of the rules?

In short: Everyone already can play whatever and however he wishes, so long as he finds a willing DM and perhaps other players.

And a remainder: There are no gender adjustments present in D&D apart from drow favoured class. I don't insist they be included - they could, but I don't bother all that much. I only say that meeting a certain quota of kickass female warriors is silly and hypocritical. Still, there are people who would deceive themselves for the sake of being PC.

Ultimately: in the name of playing-what-everyone-likes, why don't we make all skills class skills and allow free multiclassing of specialty priests, paladins and monks? Damn, I always wanted a paladin/bard, too. What about a barbarian/monk? I'm sure some people would appreciate it ;) Perhaps we just remove the rules and pay Wizards for the logo :D

Edit: Psss... I wonder when they will come up with a certain given percentage of homosexuals in D&D settings and games.

Women do not have as much upper-body strength as men. They DO have higher pain tolerance, better immunity, recover more quickly from injury and illness, and live longer. So if you want a game to be realistc for some reason, the men should have higher "strength" and the women higher "constitution". Women also have better manual dexterity.

Saying that complaining about discrimination is "whining" is... interesting. How much personal discrimination have you experienced? Try putting yourself in the place of a woman playing, say, BGDA. The only woman in that game is pure eye candy; she runs around in fishnet stockings with a leotard up her butt. That's hardly realistic, and it's sexist.

I think you will find that disease recovery and longevity is more based on the higher female propensity to live healthier lifestyles than physical constitution.

As to pain tolerance, I am not sure. Seems to me a willpower rather than coinstitution- and the main basis is childbirth, which is unable to be compared to any male biologocal system. You may be correct, I may have heard something like this, but in any case this is indeed a nervous system difference, pain tolerance does not equate to damage tolerance.

Constitution is about hit points, not nerves. Inflict injuries with swords against a male and female and I'm sure the average female would recieve more damage as a percentage of her total, or even more absolutely due to less muscle mass.

In any case, we have allready discussed agility which the average female holds in excess of the average man. I am not sure if you are saying dexterity is the same thing, but I use the terms differently. Both measure different aspects of speed, and agility is speed and flexibility, while dexterity is speed and co-ordination (and co-ordination includes lightness of touch so to speak).

In my experience men usually have better co-ordination (to-hit so to speak) than women, so it is fair to rate this higher I think. So the fact that it is equal for both is allready in favour of women.

No-one here is saying that discrimination is whining, we are saying that ususally it is not discrimination at all (which I guess would make it whining so you may be correct there, I may have mis-interpreted you).

Also, if all the women in the game were like you described, then it may be interpreted as discrimination - I would not say this however, as it is still only one type of woman you are encountering, and it would be expected that people in similar situations are similar- not like creating a PC which can be anything, and therefore should be a good representative of an average person, or a game-world which encompasses many different types of situations and should represent them equally- but with just one girl that girl could be anything based on her character, you can't equate one person to an all-encompassing general statement, that's like me saying that becase there are prostitutes, that all women are whores, which I am sure you would immediately disagree with, as would I.

Also, many women do choose to dress like that themselves, are you calling them sexist? How has this been discrimination against you personally? A particular story-line is just that, a story, when all the characters are individual personas (unlike an RTS where there are many spawns of a similar occupation, and none has an individual persona unless uniquely designed) then you cannot fault one of those characters flaws as being representtitve of a portrayal of all people of a similar race or sex. That's nonsense, and no harm has come to you becuase of it. Discrimination is when you are harmed due to race or sex or similar. Reading a book or playing a game which has a single character you do not like is not discrimination, it is not liking the character, that is all. Perhaps you are yourself biased against the type of women who you have encountered in these games.

This maybe way off topic... but anyway

i have been studying genetics recently. What i came across is uncomfortable to say the least. At this moment, as behavioral genetics uncovered more linkage between genetic makeup and personalities, i am losing more free will of my own.

To these behavioral genetics researchers, all are pre-determined. Through studies of seperated identical twins, it seems that environmental effects have little to do with your ability (not funny at all). Raised in different environments, identical twins still showed similiar personalities later. Your IQ score is not determined by what kind of education you went through, it is a series of genes marked as IGF2R. You are that intelligent the moment your parents sperm and egg met each other. Seperated identical twins raised in different environment shared similiar IQ score.

Think about it, we breed horses and dogs. We call the information of breeding as knowledge. If both the parents of a horse once won a big race title, tell me you wouldn't spend big money to buy this gifted horse? How about dogs? Why retriever are called so? Why shepherd are called so? Because they are natuarally good at so. They had been bred to be good at so. The same knowledge is crime, sinful and immoral if we use it on human. Why?

Passed down by mother, Xq28 is a series of genes that determine males' sexual orientation. 75% homosexual shared the one version of Xq28; 75% heterosexual shared the other version.

D4DR codes for Dopamine receptors. The longer the D4DR, the lower responsiveness of you Dopamine receptors, the more advantureous you are.

The sad fact is, we cannot readily decide who we are. Your genes own you and tell you what to do, how to react, what to decide. These in turn determine what you are.

We can go around and say all are created equal, trying our best to believe it is true. But it is not, actually. Our genes not only determine our physical appearance (black, yellow and white), it also determine our ability and personality. It is wrong to say Chinese are good at math but for behavirol genetics scientists, this is a possibility.

Sorry to tell you that with the advancement in behavirol genetics, stereotyping is justified.

The only woman in that game is pure eye candy; she runs around in fishnet stockings with a leotard up her butt. That's hardly realistic, and it's sexist.Indeed. So it makes me laugh how quotas are being met and at the same time all those female fighters together wear less metal than one male armour takes :shake: :grin: Not to mention they behave like does in breeding time. Speak... let them better not speak, pretty please :rolleyes:

Other issues:

Women pain tolerance being exceptional and higher than that of men: I have no idea where you get it
from. It seems a, so called, compensatory myth. Longevity has nothing to do with constitution increase. See elves. Illness recovery faster? Doesn't seem correct to me, but I'm no expert here.

@teekc:

Think about it, we breed horses and dogs. We call the information of breeding as knowledge. If both the parents of a horse once won a big race title, tell me you wouldn't spend big money to buy this gifted horse? How about dogs? Why retriever are called so? Why shepherd are called so? Because they are natuarally good at so. They had been bred to be good at so. The same knowledge is crime, sinful and immoral if we use it on human. Why?Because for some people it's easier to call truth discrimination and get rid of it. Some people will still use the genetic excuse for their shortcommings, though.

Hmmm... so, it seems that feudalism has some scientific base :shake:

Anyway, intelligence seems hereditary even from life experience. Not only the overall potential, but also the type of intelligence you possess. For instance: on both sides there's no mathematician, physican, chemist or similar in my family. The closest thing you get is a medical practitioner, or some sort of lawyer/economist/general manager. Nonetheless, everyone's got considerable power with IQ tests, brainteasers, etc - in fact even maths, although it feels they're not made for it. It's just not something they like. Nonetheless again, they tend to end up in such jobs that day-to-day maths follows them closely (banks rule here), they can't get rid of it. Which wasn't a great surprise, I ended up another visual mathematician type for whom formal maths means sea sickness and black despair, and a humane arts guy with a strange fascination in PCs and coding plus a total lack of patience for illogical, vastly demented humanists (the immense depth of Poet X's message to humanity, reflecting how so universal a truth in this how so outsanding a piece of art as this very poem is bweeeh, someone give me a plastic bag). You don't really get that from just a certain configuration of educational facilities and other development, do you?

I could see wisdom and charisma largely hereditary too, but what about physical attributes? Predispositions, sure. Or such things as coordination, balance, locomotive sickness or lack of it. But then, much depends on working out, practice, lifestyle, illnesses etc.

Another question: Could you elaborate a bit more on how dopamine relates to adventurousness? I see some basic relation: from what I know, dopamine is, let's say, a cognate of amphetamine that is released when it comes to a relationship, after a succesful seduction, and later in or after the romance stage, but before people get overly used to each other. It enhances mental and intellectual powers, provides some additional willpower and resolve, improves memory etc etc. Therefore, a lower responsiveness of dopamine receptors would necessitate more input for the same output. Therefore, the person would be more adventurous. Sort of in constant search for various excitement. Am I right?


Ah, and we weren't created equal. To one God gave one talent, to another five, to yet another ten ;)

First of all the idea that Drow are based on black people is just ridiculous.


Here's a quote from the forgotten realms campaign setting: Descended from the original dark-skinned subrace called the Illythiiri, the Drow were cursed into their present appearance by the good elven deities for following the goddes Lolth down the path to evil and corruption.


They were basically made black to forever remind them that it is their own fault that they were driven into the Underdark.


I also think that males should be a bit stronger than females.
typical male heroes should have 14-15 str, females should have 13-14 in my opinion.

18 is just unrealistic for a PC that has lived in a library fortress for all his life(Baldur's Gate) Wulfgar has got 18 str, he is a giant barbarian living in perhaps the harshest region on Toril, AND he worked in the dwarven mines for 5 years.

Hmmm... what's next? Perhaps we should make all characters have the same size, height, hair colour. Or maybe just 10 all across the board for all characters? Hmmm... well, and some people want to play good characters but they don't really feel like helping people out, saving the world etc and they don't see why they shouldn't use poison or vampiric weapons. Why not let them play as they want and make it part of the rules?
GREAT JOB CHEV!!!

I agree completly with this just giv all the races and sexes the same stat totals and then everyone has the freedom to role/powerplay how they see fit to their hearts content, and the devs of the game don't hae to worry about been sued for been sexist.

Well done! :thumb: