Simply Gabriele's page

Crystal Frasier wrote:

Simply Gabriele wrote:

As a woman, I feel the need to point out that even if I can benchpress a horse and bind five devils to do the same with my powers, I am still the one carrying a child, giving birth to it and needing/wanting recuperation (albeit magically aided, most likely).

Competence is not the only reason why a woman might choose not to do something, or be not able to. You might be a marvelous ranger, a great shot with deadly aim. But you're seven months pregnant, you do not wish to go into war or explore that devil infested cave because your child might be exposed to the evil energies.
Sure, this doesn't mean that ALL cultures incorporate this in some limiting fashion. But simply because women have the exact same ability to perform.. It doesn't erase gender roles off the board, it gives more leeway and variety of approach.

Luckily, people with uteri don't have to spend all their time being seven months pregnant, and many women only choose to do it once or twice, or even not at all. A single dad raising a toddler would likewise probably take some time off adventuring to make sure his kid wasn't exposed to demon energy or ghoul fever.

And again, this have nothing to do with trans men and representation.

I thought we were talking about the average hum-drum population of a kingdom, the ones that generally carve out how gender roles and cultural norms develop, not the miniscule percentage of people who decide to become murderhobos.

And from what I learned in Anthropology, people living in economies that thrive on having an extra pair of hands on the farm typically produce a LOT of hands, which translates into having large families. I mean seriously, just take a look at Africa, they have large families because children are *cheap*, and start paying off the moment they can look after the goats.

They also have large families because, when you get old, who is going to look after you? Much of Africa lacks the type of highly developed social...

That is also my view. More over, I don't believe that this necessarily leads to oppressive gender paradigm, when it comes either to women, transgenders or queer people of any inclination. A "high virility = good" society could just as well be matriarchal (oppressively so or not), painting women as the lifegivers, and men as secondary when it comes to it.

Even in a system that does actually espouse what we consider the old conservative beliefs of women needing to stay put, in a setting like Golarion, that could have a widely different meaning. For example, a village of traditionalist Erastil worshipers could have a booming church based on highly skilled women as healers and priests, tending the farms, the sick and the needy while fully embracing the gender norm of devoting themselves to family and community.

And Crystal, I brought this up because the perception of gender and what it means to be a specific gender in a specific society was being discussed, especially in regards of physical capability meaning perfect equality in all regards. I do believe that the views of the community or the family would be of great importance while discussing how a trans person could feel and move in it. I do agree that a PC or any adventurer almost by definition is at least somewhat outside the norm, but we all carry a part of our roots and upbringing, whether to embrace or to rebel against it as we move in life.

Mr. Bubbles wrote:

Zhangar wrote:

Magic's a hell of an equalizer.

Golarion's a world where some 5'0" twerp that weighs 100 pounds soaking wet could kill Godzilla King Mogaru with her bare hands.

"Traditional gender roles" (a.k.a., I'm naturally bigger and stronger than you, so do what I say or get hurt) goes out the window when either gender's fully capable of suplexing ogres.

And that's just the pure martials. "Traditional gender roles" gets thrown out the window even harder the moment stuff like smite and ki and domain powers and spells get involved.

I'd expect Amiri's tribe to NOT go "you're a woman, you must do ____," I'd expect them to go "you're built like a brick s@~~ house, how about you do ____."

The general vibe on Golarion is that a society that actively discriminates against its members, for whatever reason, often has something deeply wrong with it.

Magic is indeed a great equalizer, but the problem with magic is both genders are equally represented as having magical inclinations, and magic in Golarion isn't as common as magic in, say, Eberron.

Again, see being able to kill Godzilla with your bare hands.

Physics in the Pathfinder universe don't work quite the way they do here.

In the Pathfinder universe, men and women are equally adept at both magic and physical combat. There's no physical (or magical) advantages from gender.

Another way to put it - in the Golarion universe, women are just a strong as men, and men are just as agile as women.

As a woman, I feel the need to point out that even if I can benchpress a horse and bind five devils to do the same with my powers, I am still the one carrying a child, giving birth to it and needing/wanting recuperation (albeit magically aided, most likely).

Competence is not the only reason why a woman might choose not to do something, or be not able to. You might be a marvelous ranger, a great shot with deadly aim. But you're seven months pregnant, you do not wish to go into war or explore that devil infested cave because your child might be exposed to the evil energies.
Sure, this doesn't mean that ALL cultures incorporate this in some limiting fashion. But simply because women have the exact same ability to perform.. It doesn't erase gender roles off the board, it gives more leeway and variety of approach.

Isn't this exactly the issue? Unless it is an actual part of the story (for example, some noble demanding his son to marry a woman and produce an heir, but the son is a homoromantic asexual, and the story explains the crux of the issue in one way or another) or the author explicitly explains it later, we have no idea what the gender, sexuality, or kibbles and bits of iconics or NPCs are.

The DMs or players are free to speculate and adjust as they desire. After all, are all characters who do not 'partake' in tavern wenches asexual? No. Neither are characters whose stories do not involve romantic pursuits aromantic. Their personalities, preferences, circumstances, whatever might have such concerns pushed aside. In most cases we do not know any characters' private lives and thoughts, their self identities or attachments.

Nonetheless, I do not believe the topic itself should be avoided like holy/unholy water. But it must be addressed in a way that doesn't reek of tokenism or lazy writing. Would you really make someone being nonbinary/asexual/genderfluid a plot point? How would that happen? It's one thing if the town sheriff goes "My name is Jitt-- No, I prefer 'they'." and continue on their talk about the zombie menace. A whole another thing if you becomes a sort of hamfisted comedic scene: quest giver socialite shows up in a three piece pantsuit and a tophat, introduces themselves as Joseph, a man's man, then two days later it's Josie in silken scarves and pincurls, thanking PCs for speedily assisting a lady. Are you ready to explain this outside the game or will you go along when players get suspicious that this is some sort of disguise or something more nefarious? This is a world of possessions and cursed items and mind affecting tricks. Would the players not even be allowed to question something like this in game, since it's a sensitive topic?

A general rule, but if you're only an a&$~+#! to women, it might well go overlooked in an all male group.

Or even overlooked when women do try to participate. It's fairly common for some types of sexist behavior to be unnoticed or excused by other men. If it's not too blatant, at least.

And now you're being "benevolently" sexist. We women are not gentle beings just so much more susceptible to someone being rude or childish. And what I've personally encountered is just the opposite - people being hypersensitive because a woman is at the table. Oh, no, that evil sorceress cannot try to make the naive brute back stab the party by batting her high cha eyelashes at him! No, that might somehow make me uncomfortable. Or worse yet, if there's a disagreement at the table over anything at all, there are suggestions I should be pandered to, cause isn't it great to have a female player? We wouldn't want to turn her away by resolving the problem or a rule interpretation in the usual manner.

Now if you have a player or players, or, gods forbid, the gm, who specifically picks on a player because she is a woman or because the character is female, that's horrible. But not more horrible than another player being singled out for some other arbitrary characteristic. We can only hope to spot these people in public events and deal with them accordingly.

I agree with the consensus that that it is always good to strive to keep the prejudiced, mean spirited or plain rude players at bay, but this is simply for the general health of the community and for the sake of gameplay. This might help with the female percentage or it might not, but that's quite irrelevant, it needs to be done anyway.

Gabriele, I do no believe in special rules. However, I think that GMs and players can be respectful of others and welcoming. This has worked well in my local PFS group, I believe. We have several women gamers in our group.

This is a general rule. If you're an a*&#$*@ at the table, you'll only have a mess or similarly unbearable people playing along, regardless of their physical characteristics or gender.

Absolutely nothing. Nothing turns me away from a hobby faster than feeling pandered to or put on a pedestal, which is an almost inevitable result of campaigning to get women into this or that. Women do not need special rules or marketing. Yes, in the past the stereotype of an rpg was sweaty barbarian beefcakes saving weak damsels in flimsy silken skirts. But it has not been the case for a while, and marketing has been inclusive in showing all genders and races participating on equal grounds.

In my opinion, only time will shift any remaining opinions that table top rpgs are a 'no girls allowed' type of scene. The other geeky activities you mention are more transient, quick to gain and lose hype and customers. Tabletop is more stable, moving along slowly. No wonder the general opinions about it are slower to change.

I'm going to be the Debbie Downer here.

I do think that sex and short term dalliances are completely allowed for paladins, as long as they are LG - respectful, honest, consensual and so on. That's not what ticks me off about scenario like this one and the 'my god sent me an angel to make an aasimar with, what honor' idea... Why would the mortal do it?

In most of these cases, just like this time, the character is a paladin, someone who is devoted to duty, doing the right thing, going out of their way to help others. Why does someone like that agree to have a child that they won't be able/allowed to take care of? To love, to see them grow, to have a relationship with... Wouldn't a paladin want to fulfill his or her parental duty to the best of their abilities, instead of being a glorified breeding stock for divines? Wouldn't it weigh down on their heart that there's a child of theirs somewhere and they will probably never see them?

@Simply Gabriele: just wanted to share that I do not play a lot of good characters but instead I play almost exclusively neutral of some kind. And my favorite deity is Asmodeous so I get what your saying about the bad boys... I just don't want to always play in to the normal fantasies of being the bad boy who can kill everyone he cant trick. And by the way You made a GREAT post and went in depth on the matter, much appreciated.

Well, I guess that's where our main disagreement lies: Unless the character in mind is a cleric or otherwise part of the deity's church, I think they can strongly gravitate to only one key point of the deity, pretty much disregarding the rest. Which, in the case of evil gods, doesn't necessarily have to be the slaughter of all that look at them the wrong way. And thus you can have rule mad nerds that do everything by the book without being evil, you can have Dispater worshiping gallant knights that are no necessarily slaughter happy, since a nice duel to submission or first blood can suffice... Maybe someone who worships Charon because they see death not as some evil that cuts your life and joy short, but as a necessary end of all lives that gives meaning to existence in the first place.

Evil gods don't have to have only 'bad' people worshiping, after all. Religion can be heavily regional, as per Cheliax. The evilness of it can be intentionally downplayed by the clergy, again, as Cheliax shows. Or Andoran, if you will, where evil churches are permitted to operate in public and focus heavily on other aspects of the faiths to draw people into their congregations. Then there are racial gods. A CN or even CG gnoll can pay serious homage to Lamashtu as his creator, having heard many stories about her giving life, being a mother of many, about her overcoming challenges and achieving godhood. Maybe that gnoll feels Lamashtu blesses him on his travels or grants him powers, whether she does so or not (say a barbarian who thinks Lamashtu fills him with power to defeat his enemies or a ranger who thinks Mother of Beasts blesses him with successful hunt to feed her gnoll children).

22, female, disagree with you wholeheartedly.

For one, you seem quick to dismiss evil (male) deities for little reason. I can only assume you play mostly good characters, otherwise they are fair game and, in my opinion, not particularly lacking in character, no matter how much I love Lamashtu. You can always appreciate the unbending cold law of Asmodeus in all the flavors you can come up with. Or Dispater, he has plenty of development to work with - his marriages and unconventional (for an archdevil) relationships with women to begin with and his son Ragathiel, him being Asmodeus' favorite, the First King title, his industrious, if evil, civilization building... If Asmodeus brings up the image of an evil lawyer or judge, Dispater is the ideal malevolent aristocrat - all manners, propriety and cold-hearted decisiveness. And that, to me, is as interesting, if not more, than a 'cheer-leading' goddess of love and beauty.

Leaving archdevils alone, Zon Kuthon has plenty to offer, besides S&M. He's a tragic tortured being, twisted into evil. But that aside he has his deal with Abadar, his residence being in the shadow plane, his relationship with his sister. Those can all bleed into his clergy or Kuthon-loving societies. One of my all time favorite character concepts is a devout Kuthite artist who paints eerie pictures in blood and gore; and this is entirely within Zon Kuthon's purview - pain, sadism, death, destruction of living and breathing beauty to make a mockery. It could even be spitting in Shelyn's direction, mocking her beliefs in the most gruesome of ways. And let's not forget that despite the fact that mad leather clad cultists who go mad with sadistic rage come off as chaotic at first sight... Zon Kuthon is lawful, which is an interesting spin and can come out in your Kuthite characters (a better Christian Grey, anyone? After all, that character could use polish.)

Leaving evil behind... Why not Cayden? A good portion of your stereotypical adventurers are exactly the kind-hearted drunken oafs that Cayden would have among his flock. Wenches, mead, glorious adventures and saving the day, full package. He's easy to work into more standard worship too - celebrations to mark brewery events like first grape crop or opening of the first bath of year's beer, opening of inns (they can even have a shrine at the bar). He's a god of t!&* and wine and, more likely than not, little accidental next generation adventurers that happen when you mix the two. His ascension is both amusing and interesting, which could even prompt many an adventurer to emulate his favored deity to try to reach some piece of divinity for themselves, and there's always the fact that he's also a god that values freedom above all.

And what about Aroden? You can't possibly claim he's underdeveloped or unrelatable. From him being the last Azlanti to his fight for humanity and his death, he's fleshed out as well as the rest of your gods and goddesses. He's 'real', as you like to use that term, he comes off as someone who tries to do his best to protect what he loves, which happens to be the human race and culture.

TLDR: I disagree that flavorful devout characters need to stick to female deities as male gods have plenty of angles and domain interpretations to work with, just like the goddesses.

P.S. Noticed your edit. Being a god of booze and sex is not inherently sexist or "icky" for women, even straight women, since otherwise bar wenches are once again appealing. We are just as capable of "lowbrow" humor or appreciating a beer (or ten) with some side of cheesecake. Unless your players are particularly sensitive to the subject, which is not necessarily limited to your female players, he shouldn't be a problem.

It might be just my opinion, but you shouldn't fear "justifying" actions of evil PCs. Of course, I don't mean arguing vehemently that painting the orphanage red with blood was a Good action. What I am saying is that most Evil characters have completely valid reasons for what they do.

You don't have to avoid characters that are misguided, for example, an LE character can have a warped sense of respect and honor where he or she responds to slights violently, and even takes pride in it. Have your PC have a deeply rooted belief, like might makes right, take it a step further and you're on your path to evil. As long as you have internal consistency for some semblance of sanity, deeply held beliefs that are evil by definition or in practice are completely valid and interesting, and not just a mark of low mental stats. After all, Asmodeus is cunning, experienced and incredibly intelligent and made no less Evil by any of those qualities.

Of course, like any of your good characters, they can be agenda-driven. And not just "Well, I worship Asmodeus, therefore I want to help out his cause", but more defined, practical goals, say, some wizard or alchemist who started in the neutral alignments but quickly slipped south by taking bloody shortcuts to gain power, knowledge or to finish their research which by itself might be completely neutral or even benevolent(Crazy doctor who thinks nothing of experimenting on defenseless or "undesirables" to find out how to overcome some debilitating sickness, anyone?). Good parties are often set against characters who are neck deep in evil not by default but because they got blinded by their goals - protecting their family or themselves, retaking some lost lore or land, winning a war.. It can be whatever suits your particular class or or taste, see if you find any inspiration in your favorite pathfinder villains.

Naturally, they CAN be raised surrounded by selfishness, backstabbing or apathy. It's pretty common for people to create characters who come from horrid backgrounds of war torn countries where people have started to turn on one another, but most of the time PCs like that take the higher ground and fight the evil that haunts their memories. However not everyone is like that, some people are too marred by their experiences to re-evaluate their worldviews. You can have someone who thinks stealing some guy's last supper is perfectly valid, cause if he cannot defend it, he doesn't deserve it. After all, this person would expect no better treatment if they were the weaker party in the situation, everyone's out for themselves, right? Added to that, a lot of races have racial prejudices that can easily push someone towards capital E Evil. So if you have a particular race or nationality you want your character to be, dig for nuggets of questionable beliefs or events in that culture and expand upon them.

If you're leaning more ...Impulsive and chaotic, raw emotions are the easiest way. Grief is a terrible, overwhelming emotion that can do horrid things to people's minds and push them to do even more terrible things to others. Have mental scarring from any kind of abuse you feel comfortable putting in your character's sheet and head. For example, pain of abandonment, be it friends, family, romantic love. Show confusion, lack of direction, someone who lives for the moment because they are not able to force themselves to think of the future, to imagine it without pain and sadness. To maintain functionality, you can have your character keep it bottled until something sets it off - threat of being betrayed again, death of companions, maybe even some Evil actions like children being mistreated or a particular type of evil being that has caused the trauma to begin with. This tends to take some serious consideration, so you might want to try to imagine what exactly happened to harrow the character so and what was the immediate follow up, especially internally, within the character's mind. Were they failed by their community or their law? Did they feel left behind by their god, their prayers unanswered? Are they seeking revenge or are they just lashing out?

Either way, I hope my endless rant gave you some vague idea of how you want your character to be. Having a character whose evils are not just something they stab at with their +1 longsword is great fun and can bring a whole new set of roleplay possibilities.