Tyranny Pre-Release Thread

[Roguey]

Since women are smaller but have the same potential stats, something is compensating. if not magic then what?

Character models are an abstraction.

 

[Rev]

It's not badly written, but I find it annoying that he keeps writing about armies and soldiers and everyone is a woman. It would be fine to have strong women in fantasy but at least make them sorceresses, witches, assassins that use their wit and charme to kill targets, but soldiers and fighters rely on their strenght and phisicality and women are just inferior to men in those regards.

It's a fantasy not-Earth where people get awesome over-the-top physical abilities.

It's fantasy but the average woman is still weaker than the average man, so it's dumb to feature so many female warriors. And they're probably doing it just to appease feminists and SJWs by providing "strong women". Not a dealbreaker to me, but straight retarded nonetheless.
There can be powerful female characters, but their power should rely on something other than strenght and fighting ability. For example, in The Witcher many of the more powerful characters are women but their power rely (usually) on magic (or otherwise their noble birth and social position), not on their combat skill, so it makes sense.

 

[Roguey]

the average woman is still weaker than the average man,

In Tyranny-land?

And they're probably doing it just to appease feminists and SJWs by providing "strong women".

Perhaps it's just a fetish for physically strong women, something I can get behind.

For example, in The Witcher many of the more powerful characters are women but their power rely (usually) on magic (or otherwise their noble birth and social position), not on their combat skill, so it makes sense.

Witcher-land is not Tyranny-land. People don't go around jumping in the air shooting dozens of arrows at once in Witcher-land.

 

[Excidium II]

Since women are smaller but have the same potential stats, something is compensating. if not magic then what?

Character models are an abstraction.

So in the fiction they have the same physical characteristics? If not magic then what could prompt that?

People don't go around jumping in the air shooting dozens of arrows at once in Witcher-land.

Does everyone actually go around doing that in tyranny, even common soldiers?

 

[Infinitron]

Notice how all the most powerful people mentioned in the story are men (including the wizened old sceptic at the end who is the closest to being a self-aware "good guy"), while the women are all highly competent but ultimately subservient middle managers.

Hey, it's almost like real life after all.

 

[Excidium II]

Sounds p. mysoginistic.

 

[Rev]

the average woman is still weaker than the average man,

In Tyranny-land?

Are you really trying to argue that since it's a fantasy the physical traits of men and women are reversed? It wouldn't make any sense, and I don't know of any fantasy where the average woman is physically stronger than the average man.
In fact, pretty much the point of having humans in fantasy is to have a race whom the player/reader/viewer can easily relate to. Therefore you don't make taller or more muscular women just as you don't make men giving birth to children.

And they're probably doing it just to appease feminists and SJWs by providing "strong women".

Perhaps it's just a fetish for physically strong women, something I can get behind.

Yeah, maybe it's just Paul Kirsch's fetish, who knows. But this, the other short story and the "errand girl" thing seem to point in my direction.

For example, in The Witcher many of the more powerful characters are women but their power rely (usually) on magic (or otherwise their noble birth and social position), not on their combat skill, so it makes sense.

Witcher-land is not Tyranny-land. People don't go around jumping in the air shooting dozens of arrows at once in Witcher-land.

There is plenty of other magical shit in Witcher-land, though. Maybe even more so than in Tiranny, since Geralt's adventures are full of elves, dwarves, dragons, hobbits, griffins and pretty much any other fantasy species.

Notice how all the most powerful people mentioned in the story are men (including the wizened old sceptic at the end who comes closest to being a self-aware "good guy"), while the women are all highly competent but ultimately subservient middle managers.

Yes, Kyros is a man and Tunon, who seems to be the most powerful Archon, is so as well. But my gripe is not against having even very powerful women, it's just that having so many women soldiers in some military organization is dumb. Most women are simply weaker than men in melee. Also, an evil overlord should care only about the end result, which is to conquer the land (and therefore having the best possible fighters in his armies), not about giving equal rights and opportunities where it makes no sense.

 

[Zed]

Notice how all the most powerful people mentioned in the story are men (including the wizened old sceptic at the end who is the closest to being a self-aware "good guy"), while the women are all highly competent but ultimately subservient middle managers.

Hey, it's almost like real life after all.

women are woars

 

[Excidium II]

And they're probably doing it just to appease feminists and SJWs by providing "strong women".

Perhaps it's just a fetish for physically strong women, something I can get behind.

Yeah, maybe it's just Paul Kirsch's fetish, who knows. But this, the other short story and the "errand girl" thing seem to point in my direction.

That's a weird fetish for strong womyn that still look like twigs.

 

[Zed]

women are woars

whore

 

[Zed]

whore

women are whores

 

[Excidium II]

Being female should be a flaw you pick on chargen. All female party = hard mode.

 

[Roguey]

Are you really trying to argue that since it's a fantasy the physical traits of men and women are reversed? It wouldn't make any sense, and I don't know of any fantasy where the average woman is physically stronger than the average man.

They're not-quite-human. You can make women who match or exceed many men in strength in D&D, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Jagged Alliance 2, Arcanum, Vampire the Masquerade, Divinity, Shadowrun, Wasteland, Underrail...

By the by, since you mentioned the Witcher, I'll have you know in the latest expansion pack you run into an undefeated bare-fist fighting champion who happens to be a masked woman. TBH I thought that stretched credibility. But there's your Witcher for you.

 

[Rev]

Are you really trying to argue that since it's a fantasy the physical traits of men and women are reversed? It wouldn't make any sense, and I don't know of any fantasy where the average woman is physically stronger than the average man.

They're not-quite-human. You can make women who match or exceed many men in strength in D&D, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Jagged Alliance 2, Arcanum, Vampire the Masquerade, Divinity, Shadowrun, Wasteland, Underrail...

By the by, since you mentioned the Witcher, I'll have you know in the latest expansion pack you run into an undefeated bare-fist fighting champion who happens to be a masked woman. TBH I thought that stretched credibility. But there's your Witcher for you.

Just to be straight, I'm not saying that there's no way a woman can possibly beat a man in a fight. A woman that spend some time training in sports or in martial arts will be able to defeat common guys, but she would be no match against an equally trained man, because he has a great physical advantage to begin with. For example, Serena Williams is the best female tennis player of the last decade, yet she would have no chance not only against Djokovic but also against anyone in the male top 50 ATP ranking.

The fact that you can build women with 18/00 strenght in AD&D, or equally strong girls in other games doesn't mean anything. It's just because devs don't want to waste their time increasing complexity by adding gender bonuses or penalties, which would also probably result in the complaints of many players who want to play female warriors because their build would be sub-optimal.
As to TW3, I've yet to play that quest, but there was also an undefeated Skellige woman warrior who promised to marry anyone who could beat her in a fight in the base game. She spent all her life training and so she was good in combat, she's not an average gal and it's not common for women to be good at fighting in the game, so it doesn't stretch credibility too much in my book. Having armies filled with women is another matter.

 

[Excidium II]

The fact that you can build women with 18/00 strenght in AD&D

It used to be you couldn't.

 

[Excidium II]

Are you really trying to argue that since it's a fantasy the physical traits of men and women are reversed? It wouldn't make any sense, and I don't know of any fantasy where the average woman is physically stronger than the average man.

They're not-quite-human. You can make women who match or exceed many men in strength in D&D, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Jagged Alliance 2, Arcanum, Vampire the Masquerade, Divinity, Shadowrun, Wasteland, Underrail...

That's not a problem. It's just dumpb is when the potential physical capabilities are the same.

 

[Rev]

The fact that you can build women with 18/00 strenght in AD&D

It used to be you couldn't.

Yeah? I was thinking about BG and IWD, my bad if it was different in the tabletop version. Anyhow, just change that example with a 10 strenght rating in Fallout or AoD, or a 18 or higher in KotOR/NWN/PoE, etc.

 

[Space Insect]

It used to be you couldn't.

Actually, no. I just flipped through my 1st edition AD&D rulebooks and there was absolutely nothing about gender. It even used pronouns for both genders the entire time.

 

[Excidium II]

It used to be you couldn't.

Actually, no. I just flipped through my 1st edition AD&D rulebooks and there was absolutely nothing about gender. It even used pronouns for both genders the entire time.

Page 15 of PHB.

Granted it's just for some non-humans. I could swear there was a difference for humans too. Aren't female humans capped at 16 STR in goldbox games?

 

[santino27]

It used to be you couldn't.

Actually, no. I just flipped through my 1st edition AD&D rulebooks and there was absolutely nothing about gender. It even used pronouns for both genders the entire time.

Page 15 of PHB.

Granted it's just for some non-humans. I could swear there was a difference for humans too. Aren't female humans capped at 16 STR in goldbox games?

The passage in question (not copying the chart):

The Slash (/) separates the minimums and maximums possible for males, shown first, and females, shown after the slash, thus: males/females, minimum and maximum as applicable. A male dwarf needs a minimum strength of 8, as does a female of that race; a male dwarf can have a maximum strength of 18, but a female dwarf can have a maximum strength of 17; this reads as 8/8, 18/17.

In the gold box games, I vaguely remember it being capped at 18/50 for women (fighters).

 

[Excidium II]

In the gold box games, I vaguely remember it being capped at 18/50 for women (fighters).

That's correct. Fem elves that are capped at 16.

 

[Space Insect]

Page 15 of PHB.

Granted it's just for some non-humans. I could swear there was a difference for humans too. Aren't female humans capped at 16 STR in goldbox games?

Oh, wow. I am completely blind. My apologies then. It is surprising that apparently human females don't have the ability score adjustment as well.

 

[Excidium II]

We know why

 

[Roguey]

As to TW3, I've yet to play that quest, but there was also an undefeated Skellige woman warrior who promised to marry anyone who could beat her in a fight in the base game.

Potato Red Sonja.

 

[Merlkir]

The female boxer is not the top champion, rather one of the three you need to fight in order to fight the champion: