How would you incorporate a tribe or nation of warrior women

>>43884710
If you're struggling to incorporate a warrior women culture in your setting without it being "magical realmy" just go fucking kill yourself.

>>43884710

Don't... Magical realm it?

Are you having difficulty not sexualizing it, or do you not know what the term magical realm implies?

I mean, you could try not giving them dicks, that might help but I'm no expert.

>>43884745
This, really.

Retarded /d/ posters are so fucking backwards, it's embarrassing to watch.

>>43884745

Calm it down in here. The man's just asking a question.

>>43884710
Just don't make a big deal out of it. Don't get all hot and bothered while describing them, don't make them one-note amazon-fetish pandering, and have them fight compenently rather than cinematically.

>>43884710
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazons

>>43884745
>>43884765
>>43884770
Eh, according to /tg/, everything is magical realm nowadays. Some confusion is understandable.

>>43884778
No.

>>43884778
he's made this exact thread several times before, and it has never been a legitimate question

File: monthly blues.jpg (104KB, 756x614px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 756x614px

Has it been a month already?

>>43884787
/tg/ has it's head up it's ass as far as hormones are concerned.

you must speak on a completely un-sexual topic to win on /tg/

>>43884787
According to /tg/, a bunch of /d/ fags are more than willing to do two things:

1. Assert that their blatant fetish shit isn't magical realm.
2. Take anything that wasn't magical realm and steer it straight over a cliff.

So, the secret is to treat them like idiots, call them out when they go too far, and to stop paying attention to them when they do naked cartwheels crying "PAY ATTENTION TO ME."

>>43884819
>and it has never been a legitimate question
Why not? Don't tell me it'd make an interesting setting, even if feminists and lewdposters alike are ruining the setting with their "MUH STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMYN WHO DON'T NEED NO MAN" and whizzards.

Inherrently there's nothing wrong with OPs question, and the question how a society where women are the disposable gender would function is both interesting and confronting for us, who live in a society where it's barely acknowledged just how disposable men are.

>>43884819
>>43884846
This.

>>43884855
>un-sexual topic

Doesn't exist

File: amazon_linguistics.jpg (203KB, 760x596px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 760x596px

>>43884710

"Everybody's somebody's fetish" - Samuel Delany

Everything is going to be someone's magical realm. The problem is not that it's someone's magical realm, it's that it's the DM's, and they're making other people an involuntary part of their masturbation fantasies.

As for the question itself, you can do it a few ways. You could have it flow from a difference in biology influencing culture. Make a change in how they work and come up with a semi plausible reason why it results in female warriors.

Or you can put it down to a patron diety/spirit/matriarch/Cirin who established female warriors and they've just kept on keeping on since then.

Finally there's the OGLAF approach.

>>43884912
>Why not?
any question that can be answered with "don't be a dip" doesn't need a hundred copy pasted threads

File: arminia.png (107KB, 256x676px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 256x676px

My setting features a matriarchal warlike nation based on western Europe. The ideal man in their culture is a craftsman or a scholar, while warfare and leadership are women's duties, though the last few decades have broken down the gender divide a lot.

Pictured: Reigning Princess of said country.

>>43884940
Freud pls go

>>43885018
I can never buy this sort of thing. Men are objectively and vastly superior warriors to women. Their soldiers would be worse than the soldiers of every other nation they fought. Why would they think it's a good idea? Craftsmen and scholars can work while pregnant but frontline infantry cannot. There's a reason it has never happened in reality. Tradition almost always gives way to pragmatism.

>>43884745
Females are not warriors, they are puny weaklings

>>43884710

I wouldn't.

>>43884710
Here's how we did it for Rogue Trader.

There was a genophage released during a cataclysmic civil war thousands of years ago that virtually wiped out all males on the planet that were not a part of a certain Hive, in an attempt to destroy the enemies ability to reproduce and win through attrition. However, the females of the other Hives (which had previously been fractured with internecine warfare) united against the rebellious and near-genocidal Hive, and eventually overpowered them despite suffering grueling losses with sheer numbers and willpower alone, as well as captured equipment they were still learning to use.

When Kronsny Hive (the Rebellious one) was finally subjugated, the males of the rebellious Hive were basically enslaved by the now overwhelmingly majority female population, which had (somewhat) come together to attempt to figure out a solution to not being able to reproduce. While importing males was decided upon, it would never be enough to fulfill their needs. So, they enslaved the males who had ruined the world for them, essentially "milked" the the most suitably fit and intelligent of the survivors for their sperm (all of whom possessed a genetic resistance to the genophage that would be discovered to be hereditary), and began a massive project to distribute enough of the different lineages to different groups so as to promote genetic variety and not bring out tons of recessive traits through accidental in-breeding. After roughly 50 years, the society had reorganized into a single planetary government that was based entirely on females, because at the time 95% of the population was female (many males weren't born with the genophage resistance, though some were).

This has continued as tradition for the last few thousand years, and there has never been enough males on the planet that are physically fit to breed (which is a highly sought after privilege for females) to risk allowing them to fight in battle.

>>43885018
>though the last few decades have broken down the gender divide a lot.
God damn masculinists ruining society!

>>43885152
I think the bigger issue is the fact that up until recently childbirth was incredibly dangerous, women were already pretty much fighting a war just to reproduce and took horrific losses from it constantly. Add fighting actual wars on top of that and you'd have hardly any women left.

>>43885152
Does the concept of "escapism" not appeal to you? Yes, women IRL are shit. Complete, utter shit. Unforgivable shit. The only place in the world where you can even find comparable shit is a DESIGNATED SHITTING STREET in India where nobody takes the poo to the loo.

Why do you think so much anime (perhaps the only popular form of media feminists aren't destroying from the inside) is full of strong and sexy women? Because it appeals to our desire to have what we will never get: strong and competent women who also happen to be attractive.

If it doesn't work in your shitty basement dice-based elf roleplay, figure out WHY it doesn't work and fix it. Hell, didn't this one poster come up with a completely different way for elf pregnancy and menstruation to work? That, combined with low gender dimorphism among elves, could easily make theirs a matriarchal society with warrior-women and male scholars. Even better if their patron deities are a female god of war and a male god of knowledge, and even their mode of fighting is a marriage between the two (eldritch knights).

tl;dr: Escapism more.

File: 662.jpg (48KB, 220x308px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 220x308px

>>43885018
>reigning princess
>Prince of Slumber

>>43884710

Don't give them any breaks. They fight differently from men and rely on archery a lot, but they're about as successful as any other variant military force.

That is, they're not good at everything, just better at speed and not so good at strength. They're excellent guerilla fighters and favor archery, but tend to get butchered in a straight-up confrontation.

>>43885244

Don't forget that women were basically tied down caring for children for years after each birth, due to (usually) needing to breast-feed, and thus be near their child at all times. Can't really go gallivanting off to war or whatever under those circumstances.

Well, individuals could, but it would be logistically difficult to arrange it on a societal level, especially when it was unnecessary since men were already around to do those things would the horrible downsides.

>>43885233
180 years as part of the same empire as a male-dominated kingdom will do that. They're up to about 40% men in parliament. Women still dominate the nobility, knighthood, military officers(enlisted are almost 50/50) and of course the Principality is ruled by a Reigning Princess. Still, nobody really minds; the people are more concerned with protecting the nation from the terrors of democracy and libertarianism than with getting men more representation.

>>43885269
That would be the artist's signature, my friend.

>>43885298
>That would be the artist's signature, my friend.
You don't fool me. I've seen enough dicks in my lifetime.

>>43885310
princeofslumber.tumblr.com
Warning: blog in question is extremely tumblr. You might want to just take my word for it.

File: Lizard2.jpg (515KB, 522x1100px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 522x1100px

>>43884710
You'd need something non-human for it to work 'realistically'. My favourite is lizard/avian/dinosaur-people; once they lay, they can leave their clutch in the hands of their nation's professionals to get right back out there into the fray, and in most renditions the females are depicted as more or less equal with the males, physically speaking.

>>43885282
>better at speed
Men are faster than women in pretty much every respect.

>not so good at strength
>archery
Didn't medieval warbows require an absurd amount of strength to use effectively?

>>43885152
Pregnancy will only put a woman out of commission for a few months, like a broken arm; it's breastfeeding that makes it difficult for a woman to deploy, since that's something you have to do every few hours for a long time.

A culture that relies heavily on wet nursing or has developed a substitute for human breast milk could go a long way toward making women equally available for military deployment. A sharp decrease in infant mortality and an increase in the ability of women to pursue and obtain careers outside the home would lead to falling pregnancy rates just like they did in modern history, further narrowing the gap.

The problem of physical strength and capacity is huge in pre-modern warfare, where many conflicts are resolved in hand-to-hand combat, but guns go a ways toward resolving that. It would not be hard to imagine an all-female cavalry unit carrying long guns, performing hit-and-run raids where the lighter weight of their soldiers permits their horses to run faster and longer, carry more ammunition and supplies.

Prior to the invention of guns, perhaps a unit of crossbow-women, with one woman carrying the pavise and the other firing from behind it.

And then there's magic.

File: Female Catachan.jpg (307KB, 909x1240px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 909x1240px

>>43885188

>>43885152


>>43885245
>Yes, women IRL are shit. Complete, utter shit. Unforgivable shit. The only place in the world where you can even find comparable shit is a DESIGNATED SHITTING STREET in India where nobody takes the poo to the loo.

And people wonder why women are extremely reluctant to take part in tabletop or roleplaying games and view people who participate in it poorly.

You fucks are legitimately sexist in the worst way. Yeah, women aren't as good at physical combat as men are - it's a proven fact, and one that I witnessed myself as an Army cadet when constantly testing and training with in my mixed-gender outfit. They're not as good at physical strength and endurance, and don't do as well with upper body tasks. But that doesn't mean they're absolute shit - a woman is still capable of learning combat tactics, she's still capable of shooting straight and analyzing a combat situation and implementing the necessary tactics to overcome the problems she might face. She can still pilot a plane, she can still drive a tank, she can still disarm explosives, she can do all of that shit. She just more likely than not can't do all the things that require a great deal of physical strength at the same level men can. Sure, that means that men should be on the front line more than women, and women shouldn't be doing high-intensity special forces operations, but it doesn't mean women aren't capable of performing basic combat tasks should it be required of them in an emergency.

A setting of warrior women can entirely exist, there just has to be a valid reason for why men are an extremely scarce commodity that cannot be wasted in battle.

>>43885369
>Didn't medieval warbows require an absurd amount of strength to use effectively?

Some, but it's largely overestimated. A decent bow for war can have a draw weight as low as 60-70lbs. 100+ pound bows were more rare and specialized, and few went above 120lbs. Just about any healthy adult, man or woman, could draw the bows on the lower end of that scale.

>>43885369
>Didn't medieval warbows require an absurd amount of strength to use effectively?
Yes, specifically upper body strength, which women tend to have a harder time building up than men. Sorry, Katniss.

>>43885369

Exactly. That's why they largely rely on shortbows and spears. Think ambush fighters against lightly-armored troops. They don't take to the field in larger numbers, because that would be a disastrous slaughter.

They are good, however, at mid-range archery. They can easily devastate an unprepared expedition that ventures into their territory. More, the place is difficult for a military campaign - Maybe it's punishingly hot, a jungle, a mountainous region that's uphill all the way, or otherwise something that makes conventional war impossible.

Honestly, I'd say that this is more of a defensive/scouting force than a force meant to be committed to en masse battle. They might also have a lot of magic from their local godling, which is of course the great equalizer.

Then again, "They stay in one spot and kill anyone" is probably a good descriptor for any tribe. I do see them getting slaughtered if a serious effort is mounted into the region.

I'm...trying to think about how warrior women would be superior to men, and all I can think of is "Because magic". But other than that, yeah, I can't think of anything else. Men have so many advantages it's unfair.

>>43885394
>Taking anonymous shitposting seriously
Anon...

>>43885394
>And people wonder why women are extremely reluctant to take part in tabletop or roleplaying games and view people who participate in it poorly.
Oh no, someone said something mean on a series of tubes ;___;

>A setting of warrior women can entirely exist, there just has to be a valid reason for why men are an extremely scarce commodity that cannot be wasted in battle.
Or, as you've just yourself described, a setting where the only enemies of civilization are a bunch of brown sandpeople with Soviet-era rifles that can easily be taken down by women using expensive toys with zero risk to life or limb. That is, as long as those sand people don't hurt her feefees by calling her a degenerate whore.

>>43885387
Specialized units maaaaaaaaaaaaybe, but the majority? That's nonsense, even with firearms. It still seems forced to me.

>>43885424

Really, my main problem with female warriors - In an even fight - is that their deaths are going to be ugly. We're used to men getting hurt, but where are you 'allowed' to hit a woman? Every time it comes down to a man versus a woman, the fight is really ugly, and the woman is going to be messed up.

Like, it's heroic if two guys are swinging axes at each other, and one guy goes down. It's less heroic if a man full-out punches a woman in the face with a mailed fist - Not to injure, not to slap her, but to KILL her - then buries his axe in her stomach. We're just wired to find that uncomfortable.

Also, let's be frank: Any women taken alive are likely going to be raped to death. Unless they're fighting a rigidly religious army, there's going to be a lot of sexual assault. Then again, any torture or atrocities committed on women are going to be eroticized in *some* way, so there's no getting away from that.

I'd really rather not bring too many women warriors into the campaign. In anime, girls don't get hit very often: Unless you're watching Freezing or something, which is a combination of ryona and bone-crunching combat. It's just deeply uncomfortable to watch, as a man.

>>43885412
Women are better at differentiating colors from what I've heard, which could make them slightly better as scouts or snipers for noticing people hiding, but that's a fairly niche role.

>>43885394
Nothing I said was even remotely sexist. Women can totally be dangerous warriors. I never said they couldn't. They just will never be as effective as a man. I take umbrage when settings decide to genderflip roles with absolutely no consideration for biology. Of course if men are a scarce resource then women warrior societies can exist, but only in that circumstance.

Fuck off with your knee jerk accusations.

>>43885459
This is a cultural thing. A society which considered women on the front lines normal wouldn't have the same "protect the women" reflex you have.

It's like asking how to make a non-magical realm Succubus or Monstergirl. Technically possible, but tricky. The trick is to not sexualize it. In the case of the !not Amazons, it's hard to pull off. You have a society with men in it that relies on women to do the fighting tends to ruin at least one person's suspension of disbelief. You have a society with no men, you run into the problem of how they reproduce. So you're either down to immortality or raping men, one of which is hard to believe, the other is full on magical realm.

Think about it in the context of the settings lore. Is it a world where magic is common enough to make up for any biological differences? Could their tribe have gotten godlike powers from a magical ritual or ancient pact? Things to consider.

The last, and probably most important thing is how you play it off. For an example, I'll use a grade A example of MR, Monstergirls. There's a huge difference between "Yeah no, this thing is a horrible creature who is going to rape you then kill you. and not necessarily in that order" and "qt3.14 monster girl just wants to find a man that will think of her as a person, as she rapes his brains out."

Likewise "Freakishly strong and morally bankrupt tribe of warriors that all happen to be women" is very different from "Group of sexy women who want to beat you down, then fuck you" which is also different from "Like *insert militaristic culture here* but with gender roles reversed".

tldr: Don't be a creep about it, and find a half-decent justification.

>>43885459
>Like, it's heroic if two guys are swinging axes at each other, and one guy goes down.
It's heroic because you've never actually seen it, you fucking faggot. There's nothing heroic with someone being hit in the jaw and then falling to his knees, spitting his teeth out and trying to cry (sometimes literally) his guts out between his mangled and bleeding gums. Literally the only reason why we've thought this was -and is- acceptable is because men are worth less than women in the eyes of about fucking everyone.

It's the same reason why we still allow genital mutilation of men but not women. I mean, they're just men. Who even fucking cares?

So take your "w-we're wired for that" bullshit and either follow it to its logical extreme (women become the property of men, under their protection but with very little autonomy) or shove it up your ass.

File: 1413315152116.jpg (93KB, 533x1221px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 533x1221px

>>43885152
Ladies and gentlemen, here we are at last, the topic that will always drive /tg/ up the wall - women in the military! Seriously, without fail, this shit ruins threads.

And with this thread, I can see why - completely reversing gender roles has to be either carefully explained in a variety of ways to make sure that it makes sense from multiple angles, or just handwaved. You're basically trying to rewrite how society has traditionally organized itself as far back as we can research, and that's fucking hard to do. I think even those on /tg/ who are the most salty about this subject would at least allow the odd female warrior, or have women arming themselves to act as militia in the homeland while the men are at war abroad - it's not like the fairer sex is completely incapable of such things, or that the men in the military have always been the best of the best.

But to explain an all-female military, or even a mostly female one...that would take work. Maybe the country's overall military strategy is based around guerrilla fighters or skirmishers, and as such their ideal soldiers would be relatively small and wouldn't require heavy weapons or armor, cutting out the average male? Or maybe they use magic so exclusively in warfare, which most men don't have time to learn due to physical labour needs, that women act as soldiers? Maybe there's a gladiatorial tournament stuff common in this culture, but men are discouraged from competing so that way people can still work, so women join the fights and end up just getting the most experience with fighting? I dunno.

>>43885532

See, you're completely right! That's exactly what I'm saying. That's why I'm saying that you're going to have to bend over backwards to think of a reason for female warriors, and even THEN the implications are going to be hideous.

We're thinking it's weird and uncomfortable, because the logical extreme you put forward is the natural order of things. Men protect women, and women survive under that protection.

If women aren't protected, then everything gets really ugly.

>>43885558

The main problem is that every time we approach the question (Unless the solution is magic, a lot of magic), the easier answer is always "...Or we could just use a guy, which would be simpler, more effective and more straightforward."

The best explanation I can think of is "The Goddess only grants magic to women, and makes small squads of women led by a Cleric of the priesthood superhuman." And even then, that's not something that holds up very well when you think about it.

>>43885587
The best explanation would be having the culture not be one made up of humans, but by some completely different species where sexual dimorphism instead favours the female for fighting. I mean anthropomorphic black widow spiders wouldn't send their males to the front would they?

>>43885282
>just better at speed and not so good at strength
speed is usually governed by having larger and stronger muscles

women are more flexible

>>43885558
What if there was a sort of two-pronged approach? Say that men are still better in a straight fight, but they see using weapons, armor, or using tactics other than berserking as unmanly.

Then, using that as a baseline, you have a coordinated army of woman show up without all those pesky concerns, who manage to take over with their 'dishonorable' tactics.

This progresses so that warfare is seen more as a womanly role, while men fighting is more of a spectacle for Gladiator rings or honor duels.

>>43885658
>Alright ladies, the Evil Empire of Soggy Knees has superior strength, speed and they hold the high ground. We must break through their defenses here or suffer defeat.
>Our ability to fold ourselves up into pretzels will be key to our victory.

>>43885675

But wouldn't that result in squads of women with men as basically the Death Company from 40K? Or with men as the squad champions, so to speak? Like, you'll have a squad of women in armor, led by a guy who looks like he's just oiled himself and is swinging around the most heavily magical weapon you can find.

>>43885697
unless it's sexual warfare, having more flexible joints isn't going to help them much

Granted, if the society they live in is decadent enough to allow civilians to pump themselves full of various drugs the gender gap can be closed, but that introduces a whole host of other problems.

Namely, being really fucking ugly. Don't go full roids, kids.

>>43885717
Possibly, unless men also consider anything more than bare-knuckles unmanly as well.

Still, it'd be a way to have women be the primary fighting force, even if you do have squads of naked men to run in and make suicidal charges. It'd still be the women doing all the 'boring' formation fighting and 'boring' tactical decisions.

Besides, saying that there would still be a place for men if you gave one a magic sword is basically a reverse of saying there would be a place for women if you gave them magical goddess powers. I think it sufficiently turns the tables.

>>43884710
A strong woman cannot give birth to strong children without strong seed, and your seed is weak. Your men are weak, and that means you are weak. You will learn what I mean when my brothers and sisters have finished raping you for the twentieth time.

>>43885658
I don't think there are any martial arts that depend on flexibility though, unless you count Yoga. Though I've heard it doesn't actually let you breath fire, so that's probably not going to help.

>>43885755
>Granted, if the society they live in is decadent enough to allow civilians to pump themselves full of various drugs the gender gap can be closed, but that introduces a whole host of other problems.

I don't see how that works, wouldn't the men just roid themselves up as much as the women and the gap would still exist just with both groups at a higher level overall?

>>43885755
>Call of Duty: Sexual Warfare
I could see it working. A mass of women disguise themselves as whores following the war train, slit the men's throats while they're distracted, then move on. Probably not much of a basis for 'woman warrior race' though.

>>43884710
It's all magical realm and lewds until the Amazons decide to give the fuck up on the PC Party and shank them anon.

>>43885813

I've always wondered how well the feminine wiles thing works. I mean, there's a lot that could go wrong with it - Even if the woman has a knife, I can't imagine that they get lucky every time. And I assume that the average man can smash a woman's brains out if he gets his hands on her.

I'm not saying it'd be a clean kill, or that the man would even survive. Just that it'd end bloodily.

>>43885831
It'd probably work really well the first time.

The first time.

>>43885587
You bring up a good point - especially when it's hard to make it exclusively female. Even if a guy might not work best for whatever reason, they'd be fine too in half the situations that are brought up.

That's why I personally just focus on ways to make women more or less equal to men in settings, or even excuse some culture where sometimes women are lauded veteran warriors, even if men do most of the fighting.

>>43885675
That could be interesting, because there is historical evidence for soldiers to act as beserkers or rush nearly or actually naked into battle. But why wouldn't the men eventually adopt the unmanly tactics as they become more prominent and more obviously worthwhile?

>>43885755
What if their method of fighting revolves more around dodging than taking a hit? Think Dark Eldar and add crazy exotic weapons.

>>43885230
1) this is magical realm as all shit. The use of the term "milked" should've tipped you off.
2) these people know too much genetics for 40k: science is a magical mistery for basically anyone who isn't from Mars.

>>43885866

How well can you dodge? When you have someone with a bag of punches and someone with a bag of dodges, the first guy is going to look stupid for a while - and the second guy is going to look stupid FOREVER.

More, the battlefield isn't a place for finesse. Knights wore armor so they could shrug off most attacks, because you don't die from the blow you see coming - You die when someone gets you from behind with a mace or an axe. Or when your sword is stuck in someone's face, and his buddy is running towards you screaming for blood.

>>43885755
>unless it's sexual warfare

Men and women engage in combat to decide which participant will gain the exquisite honor of being on top
The women resort to using their flexibility to their advantage and using joint locks
They abuse the vulnerability of their victims to verbally tease them and fondle their genitals
Such is life in an amazon society.

>>43885866
>What if their method of fighting revolves more around dodging than taking a hit?
So how well you can dodge a volley of arrows or a wall of pikes. Hell, one on one, the person focusing on dodging is going to get their shit beat in once the opponent gets a grip on them or lands a decent hit.

>>43885866
>What if their method of fighting revolves more around dodging than taking a hit?
"Dodging" is reaction time and speed. Neither of those are things women have any noticeable advantage in. And arguably they lose out in speed because of their lack of MASCLES.

I mean, you could go full anime or whatever, but at that point any sort of explanation is meaningless. A small newborn child is faster, stronger and more skilled than any gnarly old veteran in an anime.

>>43885831
I honestly wonder if male soldiers would be so stupid to be charmed by a female that easily. It certainly wouldn't work while the guys are on duty, right?

>>43885866

Because dodging worked really well for the Red Viper once the Mountain got him in a loving hug.

>>43885866
>But why wouldn't the men eventually adopt the unmanly tactics as they become more prominent and more obviously worthwhile?

Maybe there's some God of Berserking that remains rather popular? Or perhaps its just become such a cultural facet that it's the default. The women make up the majority of the army and all the leadership positions, so even a man that can get past all the social stigma is still just going to end up as a normal footman without much chance for recognition or advancement.

All the women he meets will assume he's to dull to understand tactics, and would probably just pester him about not being an oiled bare chest for them to look at.

>>43885910
in an occupied territory, maybe

but after one or two incidents they'd wise up or get ordered to shoot every prostitute

>>43884710
I usually have both orcs and elves matriarchal and rather militaristic in my settings, though in differing ways.
Mostly cause I like to play around with the idea that orcs and elves are very closely related but neither the races nor their gods want to even think about it (how they're related I usually don't flesh out other than that it's been almost completely erased from history to the point that even their gods may or may not know what's really going on) but they both have quite a few similarities.
On a whole it's not an overt thing, just statistically most elven archers/mages and orc warriors will be female, and given the whole rape and pillage thing, it's about as common for female orcs to rape defeated men as male orcs would rape defeated women

Both the race's ideal beauty skews towards an androgynous swimmers physique, leads to the whole "All elves look female thing and given that orcs tend to be much more muscular it leads them to look outside their race, leading both males and females to kidnap members of other races for mates during raids, or if they're prosperous enough, go looking for marriage opportunities outside their race.
Both races are pretty big on an individual and the larger society showing they're strong enough to dominate those beneath them, though orcs are more overt about physical/military domination and elves tend to more social/political displays of dominance over their lessers
Drow aren't too different from surface elves, other than being a LOT more willing to resort to murder as a first option
On the bit about women can't fight because preggers, pregnancy doesn't really slow either of the races down, elves have a sort of innate magic that can keep them going at about the same level of physical activity as when they're ill, injured, or in this case pregnant, orcs have the same, but they're also built strong enough it's not immediately apparent, other races often have similar things but for differing reasons

>>43885558

One other way you could do it is not have it be how society organizes itself; rather a small cult indipendant tribe or monastic order. Sort of like if the Magdeline laundries were run by female equivalents of the drill instructors from Quantico rather than Father Badtouch McRapey and Sister Punchy O'Repressedyke.

Or have them be the settings version of the Cossacks/Scots/Nepalese/Yemenis/Swiss or any other weird fringe group on the periphery of larger powers who keep their independence through mercenary work and generally being to much of a hassle to exterminate.

Hell, maybe have the group be founded by some absolute genius midwifes who figured out how to get deaths from childbirth and infant mortality down to near modern levels. As a woman in this society you train your entire childhood, are expected to produce your replacement kids in your late teens early twenties, spend as long as you can fighting, then, if you live, retire to teach, instruct, and command.

>>43885961
I like this idea. It would kind of make sense for a fringe and geographically isolated group of exceptional women to do this. I especially like the comparison to the Swiss, as a mountainous area would be both geographically isolated enough to allow such weird quirks to develop and impoverished enough to justify mercenary work being a popular way of earning money.

How do they reproduce though? Do their sons become househusbands? Do they intermarry with men from other cultures? Do they kidnap eligible husbands during their raids? Dare I enter this magical realm?

During one of the most tumultuous times in my setting (which set the basis for much of the 'current' lore for it), a large number of female slaves of varied races escaped from the elven race that kept them as slaves. As much of the population of the continent were fighting for their lives, no effort was made to follow them. A portion of them made it to relative safety, and went into hiding.

Before long, they were attacked by a "demon" from the forces that were invading the world. A group of heroes who were hunting the demon intervened, of which a handful were powerful women. The demon was defeated, but could not be killed, only bound. One of the female heroes stayed behind, and began training the escaped slaves in combat and survival. They swore an oath to keep the demon from being freed, and settled there.

As the years passed, the women found that there was residual energy leaking from the bound demon. They, and the forest they lived in, were being changed by the energy.

Now, more magic than mundane, they are a force to be reckoned with; however, they are somewhat isolationist and do not venture out of the forest as groups. Only individuals leave, and that is seldom.

The women are sterile; they can not give birth. Instead, when one dies, their body is interred in the grove where the demon is bound. After some period of time, a new one is "born" and comes out of the grove. They look similar to the one interred, but have no personal memories.

Each time this happens, that particular one appears more and more animal-like. The ones who have not died often look like pale humans/elves/etc. A few deaths results in simple changes; tails, horns, clawed hands. Many deaths cause them to become unsettling animal hybrids. Eventually, they look like ghostly versions of animals

Since they have no natural births, each individual is greatly valued. If one dies while out of the forest, all others near are compelled to return the body. They also "recruit" a scant few outsiders

File: 1430178694950.gif (474KB, 188x174px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 188x174px

>>43885900
>honor is given to the tribe of the victor because of their victory over the other tribe
>honor is not lost by the losing tribe, because the loser's strength shall be given to the son or daughter of the competitors, preventing them from losing face completely
>tribes are slowly drawn together through family ties, bringing peace and unity until part of a generation leaves/splits to another tribe because of intermarriage
>practice fights and friendly sparring matches on occasion bring about children from within the tribe alone
>those who are poor fighters are simply encouraged to practice more until they gain the approval of their peers, specifically their sparring partner

This is magical realm as shit but I love it.

>>43885996
>powerful women
>asexual reproduction
>morph into furries

Nope, no magical realm here.

>>43885989

I figured they'd have men around who would do pretty much everything that isn't fighting. The men would be strong in their own right and expected to fight if someone attacked the houshold while the women were away, but they wouldn't be trained to it. A woman might call a man who handles the house well a soldier or a trooper as a compliment; in the same way you get guys who will call their partners that.

As for breeding, arranged marriages while very young, knock out some kids in the late teens, hand the boys off to the men and the girls off to the old soldiers when they're old enough to be weaned, for instruction in fighting for the girls, and everything else for the men. No real magical realm needed (unless you want to imagine endless encounters between toned battle hardened cougars and men of varying ages, or the situational homosexuality that gender segregated upbringings tend to imply)

Many of the matriarchal societies I have in my games are often from either vastly different races than the humans (the central european feudal age stock standard castle lords who I use as the default kingdom) or they have to satisfy special circumstances in their location or culture.

For example of the former; My Ogres, Orcs, Almost all species of Goblins, Mountain Giants, Trolls, Dark Elves (this one is a no-brainer, it's basically tradition) and species of not!asia lizard people are matriarchal.

The primitives worship the birth process, seeing it as the greatest work achievable (these are the same ogres and mountain giants who only just discovered fire and spend too much time smashing shit to learn agriculture) and put females of their race up as chieftesses and shamans. Still rarely frontline combat, though with races as naturally strong and less prone to beauty, females find their fair share of fighting. Among these primitives, there is no professional army.

Orcs, Civilized Ogres (in the service of gnome gentry) and Goblins find themselves in a special situation thanks to sexual dimorphism and cultural exploration. The average orcish female is a foot taller and half a foot broader at the shoulder than the average orcish male. This has to do with the fact that her natural partner is a fucking orc. Mating is nearly as violent as front-line combat, just involving less bladed weapons. An orc woman who can fuck is an orc woman who can fight. Civilized Ogre males and females are able to explore the more softer side of their physiology, able to drink in the rich knowledge of their gnome handlers, who almost always have access to all the things that wealth grants them like, elvish art, dwarven crafts and halfling music. Armed with this knowledge, most female ogres choose to persue a study of economics and whatever one calls swordsmanship when one uses an eight foot long mace with a flanged head the size of a robust dwarf. Continued...

>>43886081
I'm not seeing any actual reason why the women would decide to be mercenaries and the men would stay at home though. It's really cool, but there seems to be a huge gap in the logic here.

>>43885499
I highly doubt any mammalian species isn't going to develop a "protect the women" reflex of their own. A mother is a lot more vital to a child's development, biologically speaking, than a father. So of course the males are going to want to protect the females, because the females could still potentially raise the next generation if the male dies.

>>43885459

You can use that. It's a phenomenon that men who fight other men will subconsciously miss if they humanize their enemy, right? Wouldn't being a woman amplify that?

>>43886130
If they started doing it and it became cultural and had no apparent downsides why would they stop?

>>43886153
Why would they decide to start doing it in the first place? Using women as soldiers instead of men has a ton of readily apparent downsides.

>>43886130

You can make up whatever just so story you like. Maybe the women were all that were left after some disaster. Maybe a group of women decided to go off into inna woods with their spears because they were afraid of a gaulout and start their own society. Maybe some milkmaid ate too many chemically interesting plants then had a hallucination that god was talking to her and god really wanted an army of murderbitches. Maybe they were twin girls Romana and Remina raised by a she wolf who decided to found their own city. Maybe some women had a vision of an eagle carrying a serpent that told them where to found the first village.

The real answer is, as almost always: "That's the way we've always done it". So much of culture boils down to that, so once you have a system that is more or less plausible, I find the origin doesn't matter except for flavor.

>>43886116
Most Ogres must also share the Orcish need for sexual sturdyness. An Ogre female has much in common with an Ogre male, sharing their strength and size, but with the obvious alterations needed to breastfeed, birth and carry infants.

An Ogre will often find themselves within the Gnome Republic's home guard. While not as often used as the Airship Elite or the supreme and unmatched (except by the Islander Elves) Gnomish Navy, the home guard are big enough to deter raiders and strong enough to hold against determined professional soldiers.

Goblins are a special sort. There is almost no difference between males and females, save for ear colour variation, length and maybe a difference of noses and eyes. When a Goblin Tribe fights, they all fight together. While not strictly matriarchal, a Goblin Tribe does not discriminate gender, so long as everyone is doing what they are told by the Boss.

Since Goblins are small, puny and prefer to fight with the advantage of both numbers and distance, it really doesn't matter if a female has the same strength as a male, because with Goblins, they are both equally puny in relative strength.

Giants are similar, though males are larger, yet rarer. Giants almost always end up in patriarchal harems as the male tries to populate his tribe and fighting strength as quickly as possible. Since giants cast out males in order to prevent competition between the father and his child over the child's mother/aunts/sisters, no tribe ever grows to be a significant fighting power beyond raiding and pillaging. Giants are like Lions, females do all the work, Males are just there to look imposing and menacing. The old ones get cast down by young ones.

Trolls are a rarity, as they almost never congregate in larger numbers than twenty or so, even then only for holy occasions. Most trolls either live alone or in a tight and few numbered family unit. Trolls mate for life and the larger female is often in charge. Continued...

>>43886081
>unless you want to imagine endless encounters between toned battle hardened cougars and men of varying ages
But that's wrong! The toned, muscular warrior women should, upon retirement, become docile, big breasted, ara ara~ MILFs who take over breastfeeding for the younger warriors and spoil the men they love with tender cuddles

Cougars shouldn't be muscular.

>>43886282

"There are many rooms in the mansion"

>>43886250
A society founded by women wouldn't get very far without any men. No country in the history of Earth has ever decided to have the men stay home while the women go to war. Why would this culture be any different?

>>43886282
>Cougars shouldn't be muscular.
MuscleMILFs

>>43884710
Make them like sea horses for start, the men carry the young that is why the woman must fight. Also makes the females sexually incompatible with most other races
This gives you a reason for the men to remain at home and the woman to fight, alternatively eggs or some other form of the woman are not needed to carry the young.
Use spiders as an example could also work, lay eggs and the woman are larger and stronger then the males.
Honestly just don't make it sexual and you should be fine.

>>43886295
....
>Realize it's a reference to the playboy mention
>AFTER googling it and ending up with John 14:2

>>43886321
But muscleMILFs aren't good for tender cuddling. You need an ample bossom and wide hips for that, as well as the elusive "MILF fat" that makes her stockier but somehow allows her to retain a perfect hourglass figure.

>>43885152
This.

Surprised how many delusional faggots there are in the thread, this is Tumblr level idiocy.

In a real world, women warriors would never naturally happen. Magic or some other equally ridiculous element would have to be a part of the premise for it to ever make sense.

Anything else is just leftist political delusions.

>>43886296

No culture has ever had a matriarchal psychotic spider bitch goddess, the number of elf bones in the fossil record is decidedly small, and there is an alarming paucity of dragons, magic powers, and the undead recorded in .the history books. Which is a long winded and pretentious way of saying "it's a fantasy".

Now, I'm not saying you have to accept it, just that at a certain point you either say "okay, this isn't the real world, but this concept is interesting enough as part of the backdrop to a story" or "I can't work with this"; either is okay! They are both perfectly valid reactions.

If the idea is always going to be deal-breaker for you, great. If not, how would you justify a group of warrior women?

>>43886261
Dark Elves are a traditional race of female priestesses, owing allegiance to a dark elvish goddess of sexuality and sensuality, the viciously jealous and deeply seductive scorned mistress of the elvish pantheon's head honcho. Male dark elves are critical of female leadership, since it has brought them illogical ruination and has spurred more than one rogue city of dark elves ruled by men to seek their fortunes in the labyrinthine caves of the underdark.

Dark elves, the followers of this scorned goddess, praise femininity in all things. Every woman must serve in either the temple, as a mother or in the elvish army. While males are not openly gelded or denounced, many DE females think the most intelligent thing that could ever come out of a man's mouth is his tongue. This sexist atmosphere has been met with mixed reactions from the males. Those old enough to remember when their skin was alabaster and pure are dismissive of their female betters, waiting for the time when this hundred thousand year old faze will pass on. The younger males are either ecstatic or openly rebellious.

Don't judge me for the Dark Elves, I added it in my setting to sate the feminist who comes to our group. She's an excellent roleplayer but believes far too much in the sci-fi feminist future books she enjoys. And she doesn't get too pissed about the fact that most Dark Elves wear almost nothing, and what they do wear is see-through, since their reason for doing so is to show that they are not a threat (and mostly only ever worn by diplomats and nobles entertaining guests). This coincides with the fact that their soldiers and watchmen are cloaked, hooded and armed to the teeth.

As for lizard people, it's hard enough for outsiders to tell which is which for them, since they're lizards and don't need the same defining traits as mammalian races. Like the goblins they too have equal opportunity in their military, but it's usually only the third and fourth daughter that joins. Continued

>>43886321
>>43886339
What if she was a soft muscle girl?

File: news_img_24236_0[1].jpg (139KB, 521x640px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 521x640px

>>43886339
>But muscleMILFs aren't good for tender cuddling. You need an ample bossom and wide hips for that, as well as the elusive "MILF fat" that makes her stockier but somehow allows her to retain a perfect hourglass figure.
Muscular form with a thick layer of fat over it, think

>>43886382
The examples of cultural or locational reasoning are wide-spread. The Dwarfs have a low female to male ratio, something like one in six, but the Dwarven Hold of Hu-Garn had only women left after all their men were lost in a treacherous war alongside the humans against other humans. They had to quickly fill vacant positions and refused outside help for fear of being absorbed into other Holds.

The High Elf floating mage-city/academy of Sotha'Sil (I know it's stealing from TES) is predominantly female. It might be the fact that nobody can actually tell the men from the women when they all wear long flowing mage robes, or it might be the ten thousand year old headmistress who's lover recently upset her, forcing her to lose faith in elvish males.

The Amazons of Yustria are Amazons. They're seven foot tall musclegirls with a taste for younger men than should be allowed on a blue board. I had no idea how to add them without sexualizing them, so I decided to go ahead and just sexualize them for the hell of it.

>>43886245
I mean, aside from using them as garrison soldiers while the men go raiding. That one isn't really a leap of logic.

File: 1444994135245.jpg (85KB, 980x952px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 980x952px

>>43885041
that's what your mother said, isn't it?

>>43886397
>>43886399
I shouldn't like this but I'm surprisingly okay with it.

>Strong yet soft muscleMILF who takes care of the children and trains the younger generations for combat
>Also takes care of one of the male prisoners of war
>A bit ashamed of some of her old scars
>Always laments that she's not as pretty as the younger girls
>The aforementioned POW tries to convince her that she's still beautiful despite her age
>One thing leads to another

MUH DICK and MUH HEART

>>43886447

You could also add a eusocial insectoid species. They have a very good built in justification for using female soldiers. 99% of their population are sterile females, so most of their everything is going to be female.

>>43886564
Did that in a sci-fi setting. Their entire cultural emphisis on duty and honour was upset by the fact that there's a whole galaxy of males out there, and they might be into fucking even a sterile female! Holy shit!

File: is this nigga serious.png (103KB, 208x214px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 208x214px

>>43884710

>How would you incorporate a tribe or nation of warrior women into your setting?

I wouldn't have them be human, I'd have them be patterned after some kind of animal where sexual dimorphism favors the females. Gnolls, spider-people, Anglerfish-people if it's underwater, etcetera. That way you completely bypass any of the spergy arguments like the ones found in these threads.

>>43884969
>Make a change in how they work and come up with a semi plausible reason why it results in female warriors.
Just go to nature, and make the females the larger and more aggressive half of the species.
As a side effect, when they interbreed with humans it results in two things. Halfbreed females are runty by their standards, but straight up amazonian by human standards. Halfbreed males are runty by human standards, but straight giga nigga freaks by the other species' standards.

>>43886617
>a unit of them winds up deployed to a combat zone alongside a unit of humans
>the humans are mostly males (combat arms will pretty much always be predominantly male, just due to the fact that kicking down doors, driving tanks, and pull string gun go boom all appeal to a traditionally masculine mindset of "FUCK YEAH, GET PAYED TO BLOW SHIT UP AND SHOOT GUNS WITH MY BUDDIES!")
>they start hooking up
>human high command starts panicking and sending in VAST quantities of contraceptives
>insectoid high command laughs at the humans when they find out, "Those are all sterile females. Oh, but we do want your men to stop fucking them. It's messing with the carefully cultivated slavish devotion to duty and sexual repression that we've trained into them from birth."

>>43886564
>>43886617
This sounds pretty magical realm desu

>>43884710
Once I read a very disappointing fantasy book, and one of the many disappointing elements was this nation of warrior women where the women composed the main military for out-of-borders operations (invasions et cetera) while the men protected the cities, raised the babies and so on. There is also this one occasion when it is implied the vast majority of the female population 'of age' leaves for a war.

Which is a retarded idea, since:
>Heavy losses on the female population means a far greater demographic damage on the long run than the same losses on the male population.
>A pregnant female will be increasingly impaired for at least five of the nine months before she gives birth. A man who has impregnated his wife could well leave for war the day after and whatever happens to him, he won't be burdened by pregnancy and he won't put in danger the baby.
>Women menstruate, men don't. In an army of women, at least 1/10th of the force will be bleeding at any given time, which (in absence of painkillers and other modern medications) hinders and endangers them either in a fight or in a march.

Now a real-life military campaign would take usually months or years, and in that settings there were no means of teleportation or other forms of transport to indicate their wars could be any shorter, so the aforementioned problems would be very relevant.

I have nothing against the idea of a matriarchal nation, a population of warrior female and warrior women in general. I fucking love valkyries, lady-knights and action women in general, expecially when they prove as strong or stronger than their male counterparts.
But when you talk about an entire military comprised of women, you have to consider these three problem I appointed and ask yourself if you have a reasonable explanation to justify them.

>>43886399
Catteleya has a ridiculously tiny head.

>>43886787

Nah. Magical realm is my eusocial species who's major export is sex slaves genetically engineered out of their own population.

They're basically doing what the British did selling opium to China, they don't make anything the rest of the galaxy wants, being weird ass eusocial bug monsters as they are. So they sell the chance to have absolute power over another sentient being, which they've noted people seem to value so highly that they'll actually work against the interests of their own species to achieve it. They're also hoping to do a bit of cultural sabotage by normalizing slavery and hoping that if they accept enslaving others they will ultimately wind up enslaving themselves.

>>43886791
Of all the many disproportioned things in that picture, you've picked the one anatomical piece that is actually quite correct (in relation to height and shoulder width, at least).
Yeah, her breasts are about thrice her head, but I don't think the head is at fault here.

>>43885230
How hard were you while writing this?

File: 1429490540056.gif (454KB, 300x185px) Image search: [Google]

454KB, 300x185px

I have a way you could go at this, but they would have to necessarily be insulated from the world at large--an island with only one water source and with wood unsuitable for long-range maritime vessel construction would work nicely.

Fact of the matter is, with vanilla humans, I don't think a matriarchal warrior society could believably coalesce; at least not without very specific conditions like these. We're just not wired that way; it would be less fit for competition than the surrounding tribes and be consumed. The single water source thing, or something similar, would be the lynchpin--there must be some life-critical resource which alters the tribe physiologically/psychologically, changing their makeup to be more suitable for your weird-ass scenario. It's important that they be insurmountably isolated from the world, as otherwise they might migrate or otherwise be conquered by a society of vanilla humans.

As for the physiological changes, well, making women more likely to give birth to multiple children would be a plus, to make up for the attrition from having your baby-factories in the line of fire, lest you invite population collapse. Extending the age bracket of fertility would help for the same reasons. Women would necessarily have to be stronger and more aggressive, and men made weaker and more submissive.

You would essentially be making another species. If you wanted to be extra magical realmy, they might be chemically dependent on the tainted resource which changes their physiology, adding another reason as to why they never fucked off and found a sane place to live.

>>43887113
...Or, uh, you could just make the Loroi, I guess. That works, too.

You know I'd probably just make it a society in which women are in the top positions. Man are soldiers and grunts but women are commanders. Higher authority and power rests on women but it otherwise looks like a normal society women work and become business women while mean are construction workers and plumbers. I'd show the stratification of it.

So basically a slightly more twisted feminists dream or idealistic depending on how good or bad you want it to be.

>>43886982
I'm no artist nor atonomist, but if I'm not mistaken an adult's body should be about five or six "heads" high, right? Because hers is about seven heads high.

>>43887145
>Ideaistic
>Men fight and die while women only order them around and stay safe

Only idealistic if youre a woman.

>>43886982
>>43887151
Her neck looks a bit too long, too.

>>43887151
Wrong.
Ideal proportions (according to classical Greek artists) would be seven or seven and a half heads .
Realistically it varies a lot. Short people don't have much smaller heads than tall people usually, so their proportions are different. Very tall people are often about 8 heads and short people (150 cm and under) may come down to 5.5, or even just 5, heads. I'm talking about 'normal' and well proportioned people of course.

Five or six heads is anime/manga standard for teenager characters (at least for your stereotypical unrealistic manga/anime)

>>43887256
Rather than the length of the neck I would appoint the absence of a reasonable trapezius

>>43887303
>anime/manga
That's why she looks weird, she's got a tiny head for an anime character.

>>43887303
>>43887319
Oh, that makes sense. So her being seven heads high is actually "accurate", but uncommon in anime. That's maybe why it looks so weird.

Aren't Drow supposed to be matriarchal since Lloth is female?

Literally just make the women ran society crueler, problem solved.

Showing signs of pain is frowned upon. When women have their periods they do there best to show no signs of discomfort, and use their pain as a sort of rage thing. Women on the frontline don't get pregnant (unless raped or something) cause any men they keep with them as fucktoys are eunuchs.

Completely flacid btw

>>43887337
Female Drow are also canonically larger and stronger than Males, one of the very issues discussed in this thread.

And therein lies the solution. If you want functioning amazons, make them not human. Because it doesn't work for our species.

>>43887319
>>43887323
Yeah, it's that. Also consider she has high heels, which makes everything even trickier.
I'm not saying she's realistically proportionated, of course. These udders aren't only unreasonable in size, they seem to be hanging from her collarbones if you look at the rim where she should have her manubrium.

>>43887355
they're barely bigger than males from what I've found, but I thought for sure that the females in Drow society were the head hanchos since they were usually the priestesses of Lloth, while males were usually keks.

>>43887398
Barely bigger yes. In charge also yes.

File: book of the long sun.jpg (360KB, 1105x1825px) Image search: [Google]

360KB, 1105x1825px

>>43884710
Handle it like Trivigaunte from the Book of the Long Sun

Just because I want to live there doesn't make it a magical realm

>>43887409
like 2 inches taller and 20 lbs more at most

>>43885558
>>43884710
>>43886788
>>43886620

Honestly, fantasy gives people every tool to make reverse societies, or super equal societies. Want warrior dominated warrior cultures? Boom, there's a species of humanoid where the women are physically larger, where pregancy is less of a hassle (like for most mammals), and where the males are weedier and run the households or whatever.

Simple as that.

Or just say that they're both equally strong, or that procreation involves jizzing and egging in a scummy pond and watching your little tadpoles grow while you don't really have to worry about it.

Hell, just having efficient healing magic so that women stop dying in childbirth will do wonders for equality even in grimderpy medieval settings because suddenly they're not a bad investment any more when it comes to inheriting title and possession.

The problem is that people mostly don't do this, they just completely handwave it and go "Well people are the same like in the real world but for no reason at all they're totally equal or amazons are everywhere, I don't have to explain shit, what are you, a misogynist?

>>43884969
I imagine the screaming one is on her period. Now give her a sword and point her to the enemy. Watch the bloody mess comence.

>>43887461
Interesting choice of words.

>>43885288
I'm imagining a military corp assigned as wet nurses.

>>43884710
While woman birth children the roles stand as they are.

Childbirth sucks, sorry.

As long as men are not women, women won't be men.

>>43885459
You mean that you wouldn't want an army made of soldiers ennemies don't want to injure ?

>>43884912
The difficulty would be in justifying why women are the disposable gender without going into /d/ territory either by means of m-preg or by having women give birth to shitloads of kids.
To my mind you would need a decidedly non-human society for it to make much sense.

For minimum /d/ I would suggest a society in which women typically experience menopause at a younger age than is common in our world, say around 35 or so, combined with a longer period of physical peak, perhaps from their 20s to their late fifties. This results in a period where women are able to fight but unable to contribute to population growth. If you also give the men of this society notably shorter lifespans, perhaps only to their mid forties you will end up with a society where the majority of highly ranked warriors are likely to be women resulting in a cultural bias towards the woman warrior 'Women are clearly better at fighting, all our generals are women.'

The above also ensures that most of your legendary warrior women are grannies, most people tend not to find that a turn-on.

>>43884710
Just make it magical realmy. Only XX individuals can manifest magical powers and the nation of warrior women just uses their magic to train muscle wizardry and their weak males who have to rely on physical power can't keep up with them. So the nation has to abduct capable men from bordering countries and snusnu them.

>>43886149

I'm not sure what you're saying there. Are you saying that if your enemy is a woman, you're less likely to fight "for real?" I dunno where that idea comes from. If you're in the military, you're going to fuck up the other guy regardless of if they have tits or not. A trained soldier isn't gonna go "b-b-beeewbs!" while bullets are flying. Or in any other situation.

File: patrick-hooks.jpg (73KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 400x300px

>>43884710
from the sounds of this thread this is bait but fuck it.
The way I'd do it it similar to the lion strategy
>Females are lithe, hunters
>more females than males
>these females have an advantage over human females in birth rates
>shorter pregnancy, longer fertility period, etc
>Males are often twice in size
>males fight each other for access to a harem
>as tech progressed being twice in size no longer as important
then you have two options
option 1
>males are now essentially gladitor slaves
>born into slavery will fight to the death for the right to breed
option 2
>smaller men have to be fed less
>women start keeping smaller men
>men stay at home
>still bigger than women but not hulking anymore

one thing to note if women are your army then you need a lot more of them than men. before survival is a race war and it is still a competition of species men are much more expendable.

alternately easy route
>women lay eggs

>>43887461
Watch her flail about in a weakened state full of unjustified impotent rage? Go watch berserk if you want to see a realistic fantasy female soldier on her period

>>43885387
with men as soldiers you don't have to break their arms to reproduce

>>43884745
Dammit, can we not have 1 thread where we don't tell OP to kill himself?

>>43884710
Don't equip them with dweomered lingerie as armour.
Don't give them an unquenchable thirst for raping men.
Treat them like any other warrior culture that isn't magical realm.

>>43887563
I'm very much a fan of caska, and I know what you mean. Still though, I've known some women who hit harder on their period than on their normal days. They're not always weakened. Just mostly depressed.

>>43884710
Simple. These women are feminazi, strongly hate every male on Earth, are very cold and never ever have sexuality mentioned in game.

File: Heisenberg Is Uncertain If You Are Serious.jpg (20KB, 400x593px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x593px

>>43887663
>any other warrior culture
>no unquenchable thirst for rape

>>43885387
I had hit the same problem when I was designing an Amazonian culture for a bronze age game. Basic childcare will always be a problem for Amazonian cultures unless you do one of two things. The first one is having dedicated women whose purpose is raising children. But this sort of undermines the concept of a Matriarchal society when you have a class of women whose entire job is childcare.

The solution I eventually hit upon might sound a bit magical realmish but was it allowed me to solve the problem. I just fucked around with the biology. I sorta made the men into shemales and gave them functioning breasts and made it there responsibility to take care of children.

>>43884745
This. If you've honestly got difficulty not injecting sexuality into everything you touch, you need to seek therapy.

>>43885394
>A setting of warrior women can entirely exist
Senpai there are good reasons why such a thing has not existed in the entirety of recorded human history.
It's stupid and served no point other than letting keks live out their emasculation fantasies.

File: ok.jpg (29KB, 375x305px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 375x305px

>>43884710
I wouldn't make it sexual.

Seriously, what's so difficult about this?

File: 1565498153.jpg (47KB, 630x473px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 630x473px

>>43888224
>muh reality in a fantasy game

File: 1433714774618-1.jpg (225KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1000x1000px

>>43885394
Okay, I'm biting.
>these three posts speak for tabletop gaming everywhere (even though one of them had nothing but biological reasons why it just straight up doesn't work for humanity)
>I speak for women everywhere
>You're all sexist
Tip top kek m8.
Collectivism is a literal shit.

>Women CAN do these things, but men are actually physically better at them
That is literally what one of the "sexist" posts said.

>but it doesn't mean women aren't capable of performing basic combat tasks should it be required of them in an emergency.
And that's why female PCs are allowed. That's why some fathers are sure to teach the women of their family how to swing, or indeed thrust, a blade.
It is not a reason women as a whole to give biology the big middle finger.

>A setting of warrior women can entirely exist, there just has to be a valid reason for why men are an extremely scarce commodity that cannot be wasted in battle.
>valid reason for why men are an extremely scarce commodity
Pfft. You'd like that, wouldn't you?

>>43884710
Make them non-mammalian. Females do majority of the fighting because of physical reasons (more Dex/Con/Str/Natural Armor bonus/just being taller or something), shit out some eggs when they feel the need, and leave them for male majority hunter-gatherers to feed and teach. Males tend to be the builders, scholars, diplomats and mages (bonus to Int/Wis/Cha). Their society is completely supported by their biology, as opposed to mammalian species, which tend to get burdened pretty hard with pregnancy, giving birth, and the early stages of development, to the point where it makes the world of sense for the female of the species to be the primary caretakers of that particular society.
Easy peasy. No massive societal upheavals that require a long history and explanation, no suspension of disbelief outside of "oh hey, there's lizard people", no sharp left turns to the magical realm.

>>43884710
Don't make it magical realmy. Not really that hard just have less kidnapping and raping men. A better question would be how would you incorporate a tribe or nation of warrior women and have it be unique and/or interesting.

Why do the women fight? Humans have a good reason to have the men fight, lower percentage body fat, greater muscle, taller, etc.

How does the society deal with pregnancy and a woman's inability to make an effective soldier while pregnant?

Do women breastfeed their babies? How do they do it when they go off to war?

For example a few justifications s
>Tribe lost a lot of men in war a thousand years ago, forced to coddle their few remaining males to survive as a tribe, even when the male population recovered it became the norm for women to fight in battle. Eventually they formed a religion centered on a goddess of war (like Athena) further justifying their continued role as soldiers and protectors.
>When a woman gets pregnant she is instead tasked with carrying out support roles, training young girls, helping repair weapons and armour, often still act as camp followers to help keep the army going by repairing gear.
>Women breastfeed their babies as normal, often when an army goes off to war the women with small children bring their entire families so that they can breastfeed their babies. The men, in addition to caring for the children also assist in cooking and making and repairing clothing for the soldiers. This results in armies having larger than normal baggage trains as entire families are dragged off to war.

Isn't quite the equal of a similarly capable force of male soldiers due to sexual dimorphism and the oversized baggage train but it could function. Alternatively you could have the men breastfeed babies to fix the latter problem and make them another species or something to deal with the sexual dimorphism.

>>43885558

In the same way I wouldn't present a communist utopia that dominates the world but instead a communist state in a world that doesn't understand it, so the good and bad sides can be compared and contrasted, I'd probably make a matriarchal state more along the lines of a Hatian style slave-rebellion-republic, which works well with the Amazon myth regarding Hercules.

>>43884710
- 4 S T R E N G T H
4

S

T

R

E

N

G

T

H

>>43884710
Women aren't warriors because they are mothers. In any society which relies on huge bodies of men (or, indeed, women) to do the fighting, you will see men do the fighting simply for that reason. And that's without getting into physical differences.

So the answer is simple: Set it in the future. Suddenly numbers take a backseat to technology, as do the physical differences. I mean, take Star Trek as an example. Women everywhere, because with homeworlds that have billions of people, you don't need to be too picky about protecting your breeding population when crewing starships that, at the most, contain a few thousand people.

If you want to go Fantasy, magic can take the same place.

>>43888800

Or, for grimdark, in the doomed sterile Children of Men future of humanity, there would be nothing to stop women armies and nations from being just as effective as male-dominated ones.

>>43888816
Or Y: The Last Man, where men don't exist anymore.

Israel as a bad guy made sense in that setting, given their universal conscription. Soooo... come to think of it, Israel is a good example of how to handle this sort of thing. A small country beset by numerically superior enemies, but with a massive technological advantage. Their soldiers don't serve for life, and their society is egalitarian, so it's possible to be both a soldier and a mother, because you're not marching halfway across the world. You're defending your home. There is no reason to not fight as a woman, because your barbaric enemies will kill you all the same, so it's better to give them a good fight than to cower behind oldfashioned gender roles. With the added advantage that the enemy is a ridiculously gendered society, where it is considered dishonourable to be killed by a woman, because they see women as subhuman.

But then someone would scream "MAGICAL REALM", I suppose...

>>43885152
Actually, this can be somewhat overcome if the nation is reasonably technologically advanced. The ladyknights may be using crossbows and siege engines that use gear ratios to make up for the strength difference (it's fantasy, that's the best explanation you get). Furthermore, I wouldn't find it unreasonable that the military realizes pregnancy is not a good thing for the middle of a war, and at the very least, vows of celibacy similar to that of a monk, priest, or paladin are taken. Even chastity belts wouldn't be too magical realm-y, but probably doesn't need to be mentioned unless the party presses about it.

Women who do get pregnant mid-war would be cycled off the battlefield slowly, spending the first few months in support roles before being sent home entirely. This is usually seen as shameful, and results in something akin to a court-martial, and may not even be possible if you do or don't consider chastity belts to be magical realm.

Hint: they aren't magical realm until the war is over and another baby boom happens.

>>43885152

If Englishmen (the halflings of IRL) can kill French knights with longbows and knives, so can an army of disgruntled women.

>>43888847
Because it's not like technology of ANY sort rolls back most of those advantages.

I mean, thicker skin? A pointy stick will solve that for you. This stuff isn't the landslide victory you imagine it to be, you fucking retard.

>>43885459
>We're just wired to find that uncomfortable.
I would be pretty uncomfortable watching a guy get an axe buried in his stomach as well.

File: female and male strength.jpg (103KB, 579x588px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 579x588px

Remove strength and fertility from the mix.

There's still a huge mental/social dynamic, but most people don't into empirical psychology so it's easy to handwave equality.

>>43888866
Could people please stop repeating this retarded argument? I've had quite enough of Angloboos.

The English have no special quality that won them Agincourt. The Flemish have a near-identical victory that is also attributed to a non-knightly weapon. And in both cases the battle was won for the same reason: French bumbling, and superior planning and training on part of the English and Flemish.

>>43885459

I'm not sure I buy this. I'm pretty sure the reason why slaver cultures throughout human history were ok torturing male slaves as an example but kept the female slaves was because of boners, not squeamishness. Plus a lot of ladies have been executed pretty horribly throughout human history.

Hell, didn't the Assyrians impale babies on spikes? We're all programmed biologically to not want to let babies come to harm, but that hasn't stopped us even back in the days of face to face warfare without modern technology.

File: France's_finest.jpg (265KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1280x1024px

>>43885558
I want to write a low fantasy Napoleonic-like setting where women serve on the general staff and dependant on each nation as some proportion of the officer corps.

It is very hard to find images of girls in Napoleonic uniforms that aren't just pin-up bait.

ez pz make them 20 feet tall and completely nude

>>43885394
dont bother. these morons are too sexist and stupid to understand the tone of their arguement is entirely condescending and that you are criticizing and drawing attention to it, not whining about it.

>>43888871
It's a shit argument used by dumb people. Men do awful shit to women all the time. There is no such biological wiring. At most, it's cultural.

Just look at that idiot's bullshit. Presenting his own faulty perception as FACT. Like, all women being raped to death. That's just this dude's sick fantasy, and that's it. Nothing in history supports that claim.

This is the face of "muh realism". Not very realistic at all, really.

>>43888896
>>its very hard to find images of girls that aren't just pin up bait
ftfy

File: 1416225495088.jpg (32KB, 475x700px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 475x700px

>>43888896

>>43888918
rape actually often resulted in death depending on the severity.

>>43888869
But then everyone complains that men could use the technology better, or something else gets in the way that technology can't cover.

Take 40k - the lasgun being the lasgun, anyone can use it. There's no kick or very little kick, and that makes using it a matter of learning how to point and shoot properly. That's it's point - you can quickly train regiments of guardsmen to use it, and you can hurriedly reinforce the local PDF with anyone from the old to the very young.

But if you argue that because of it women could make as good a soldiers as men in that setting, then people can bring things up like how much gear a woman can carry, or if they could carry another person around if they were wounded.

File: Prussian_Princess-viktoria-luise-von-preussen-husarenuniform-pferd-npg-4475.jpg (49KB, 325x488px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 325x488px

>>43888937
Ah yes, my waifu.

>>43888940
That's not even the fucking point, you autistic retard. Just take your "realism", and go.

>>43888683
>Collectivism is a literal shit.
DEGENERATES LEAVE REEEE

File: Officer_and_a_private_1812_40th.jpg (54KB, 524x835px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 524x835px

>>43888896
Judging by that picture you haven't found any at all.

File: Oww.jpg (356KB, 1120x1220px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1120x1220px

>>43888983
That was indeed the point of posting it.

How about "Fuck you, it's fantasy?" Do female soldiers really break your sense of disbelief to the point where you need threads about it?

>>43888896
I had an idea fairly similar to that, in some ways - I had thought of a country in a universe that relied heavily on conscription to fuel its needs for troops, most of those conscripts being the bottom of the barrel sort - street urchins, criminals, stuff like that. Guys who only aren't running away because they don't want to get caught themselves.

So the people who volunteer - usually women, who've actually gone out of their way to do some training beforehand - are very highly prized for their skill and actual ability to not run away the moment there's a chance. Eventually the veteran corps of this military would be almost entirely women.

Why not men? The lower and middle class can't really afford any real training or equipment, and conscription is generally looked down upon as a whole. And male nobles don't really want to join because they're busy with their own affairs, political skullduggery moving them forward more than military acclaim. So female nobles sometimes join the military, since they have the time, the money, and doing so gives them a large amount of independence and gives them more acclaim than being a lady would.

>>43886701
>>43884969
>>43884710
I made my woodelves mainly give birth to males, males were basically more drones, smaller and weaker while just as intelligent, they kinda know that they are expendable while the women were bigger than the avrage humn male, fewer and all had at least minor magic making them really effective warriors but simultaneously very important to the society since they can make babies, i also stole a bit of the asari thing for them making their life go in cycles where they go from fuck crazy to bloodthisty about every two years.

>>43888956
Well, yeah. But you could also argue that women would be logistically superior because they eat less, and you can stuff more of them on a troop transport.

It just becomes kind of meaningless, at that point. The problem with the argument that men evolved to fight is that it disregards the fact that we are not a stone age hunter-gatherer society. Yeah, men are more suited when you put a man and a woman next to each other. But when you get into settings, you need to take a lot of other shit into account. Technology, the nature of the conflict, the population, the culture, etc. etc. etc.

Point is, arguing that women will always be unsuited for combat is retarded, historically inaccurate, and probably born from some ridiculous superiority complex from a fat neckbeard who can't even run up the stairs, let alone across the battlefield.

>>43888956
Historically, strength isn't important for game-like "damage bonuses," it's a major advantage because it lets people carry more equipment, carry more equipment farther, tire slower, have fewer injuries, etc.

But none of that matters much if you use exoskeletons, or maybe genetic engineering. Or simply choose a form of war where carrying lots of heavy stuff isn't important, like hacking or magic.

>>43884778

This is a biweekly thread. And it's stupid every time.

>>43889021
And after taking all that into account - 2014 isn't stone age - US Marine's studies still show major disadvantages in mixed and female units vs all-male units. Women are worse at non-strength things, they shoot more poorly and cooperate more poorly, but there's also pure strength issues like climbing walls or dragging wounded people.

>>43888683
>Make them non-mammalian.

You don't need to do that to have females that are dominant/stronger than males. Spotted hyenas, naked mole rats, baleen whales etc. Extend to humanoids.

>>43888971
how the fuck does demonstrating that rape kills people hurt your arguement you stupid shit?

File: 1383943173977.png (188KB, 257x404px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 257x404px

Take eusocial insect systems and apply them to humans. Not very exciting but it works fine.

>>43884710
You wouldn't.

>>43889046
That's still a statistical thing - it's not that women can't or don't shoot as well and such, they're just less likely. And how poorly do they shoot compared to men? Is it negligible, or is it a serious problem? Can it be improved?

>>43889065
Because that wasn't the fucking point, and you basically add nothing to the discussion, tardo. It's like when someone asks you what kind of car you drive, and you say "a red one".

>>43884710
You made this exact same a week ago. Fuck off.

>>43884710
I had an all female mercenary unit of scouts and light skirmish troops, the were feared by other mostly because it was unnatrual for woman to fight and them being reight pastards making traps and poisoning wells and so on, bbut they were just one group and they recruted every woman that looked buff enough from every part of the world and they were the stonecoldest of killers with no adherence at all for any sort of human repect for their enemies, they were the best of the best fighting women from an entire continent that bade up a small merc band, thats how I made it, only the most extraordinary from an entire continent gathered together

>>43889046
>And after taking all that into account

But you didn't. You're basically repeating what I already said back at me. At no point did I deny any of this. What I DID say is that technology reduces a lot of those disadvantages to the point of them becoming meaningless.

And what I also said is that you need to take into account a lot of different factors. It's just not as simple as "hurdur men stronger, men better warriors". Women being not as strong as men doesn't mean they can't fight, and in a lot of cases it doesn't even have to mean they can fight less well.

But now I'm repeating myself because you're cherrypicking.

>>43889109
You're mad cuz he said something irrelevant? Calm down, kido.

>>43889099

God this is just going to be a battle of inches with you isn't it. First you're blowing off statistical evidence, then you're claiming anecdotes are what you're looking for, and you're going to "win" the argument that way.

Because if one or two women are tougher than a handful of men, that means women are every bit as tough and strong as men, right?

>>43889150
>implying you're not samefagging

>>43889109
>>your arguement is shit
>>why? because
>>men do awful shit to women all the time,
>gives an example of how this is true
>you throw a fucking shit fit over it.
you are retarded, shut up and go back to /b/

>>43889169
good to see you've calmed down a bit

>>43889183
>muh realism

>>43885018
>>43885152
I agree. I only buy it if they are semi-humans that birth through their asses and that have inverted sexual dimorphism.

>>43885018
It doesn't make sense really, unless you have totally scarcity of males in the realm of 1-10 or you have ubber females, it will be better to use males than females everytime because it would be easier to coup your loses. There's a big reason why women in war are so scarce, women are more useful as wombs than anything else.

>>43889198
>>pointless shit post.
okay now you're breaking the rules buddy.

>>43885499
Uh hell fucking no, do you think the larger and belligerent part of the species won't want to protect the smaller, social and childbearing part?

>>43889143

>Genetically engineering an adult
>Implying genetic engineering would be done on women rather than improving expendable men

>>43889050
Those would probably only work as fragmented tribes, and are fairly complex societies. And I'd say they're still burdened by pregnancy and child rearing, which tends to be the sole responsibility of the Alpha Female. With hyenas, the resident queen bitch don't take too kindly to cubs from another mother, from what I can recall from videos by that guy who is basically part of their pack. Can't recall his name, same guy does it with his lions too.
My idea was going for something that could operate on a larger scale with that burden removed, while keeping it simple enough that I could just keep ass-pulling ideas where, as Todd Howard would say, it just works.

We do have gnolls already, too, although I'd have to remind myself about how their society works. Although, I had no idea mole rats operated more like bees; sterile workers and a queen. Learn something new every day.

>>43889167
Dude, calm down, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying statistics and bullet points can't tell the whole story. You can't sweep over the whole issue in either direction.

>>43889099
yes it is a statistical thing, so having a few top of the line women warriors with the good men warriors makes sense maybe 2 female out of 10 would not feel to hard to believe, making the entire counties army out of women is just to biologically unsound an idea for humans for it to go well with me if you are playing a realistic game both in terms of sexual dismorphism and childbirth

as others have said make it elves or orcs or even fucking dwarves, maybe dwarven women are not slowed by childbirth, mayde swarven children grov superfast in the first few weeks and then it tkes time for the children to for conciosness so the baggage train is made out of children and, the armies are mixes sex and they bang eachother and make more bagage train and as the kids int he bagage become older thy become more sentient and boom the work as warriors, maybe this works better with orcs or goblins though, just make some shit up but if you make shit up remake everything to fit this,sexual dimorphism, pregnancy, periods, and shit cant work the same since those are the problems maybe the women cant be thin and sexy or maybe the males have to be friggin tiny little shits that cant fight worth shit

>>43888937
>>43888959
The funny thing is that you can see she's a titty monster.

>>43889206
It could be a race of giants, dragons or other such difficult to battle beings who wouldn't have many casualties.

It could also be a mostly female swarm species where casualties are meaningless or there's only 1 breeding female queen that has lots of babies all day and the only reason they don't have 2 breeding females is because they don't even have enough food to max out baby production on the 1.

>>43888980
Grubbing for @-rep?

>>43889207
Don't act like you haven't been shitposting, Anon.

Shit, my post was more on topic than the crap you have been saying. You're emblamatic for the "muh realism" crowd. You throw a shitfit whenever someone tells you your rape fantasies have no place in roleplaying.

So go to /d/, or something. I'm out.

Ant people, all men do is impregnate the one female among millions that actually gives birth. The rest of the species consist of warrior or worker women.

>>43889270

source?

>>43889266
Jesus Christ, learn what a full stop is.

>>43889290
Yup, it only works if you don't use human females. The only way it worked in real life was when they were plentiful and expendable because the army was part of a slaver nation (dahomey) or were part of the nobility and had to follow an strict way and behave like men (Iranian Steppe people).

>>43889294
>>a bunch of words shoved right in my mouth.
whatever you say mouth breather. you're like the guy who knows that the guy serving your food not exactly to your specifications has it out for you and wants to kill your entire family.

>>43889323
i am drunk nad very sorry

>>43889259

That's the point of statistical evidence and bullet points, they don't tell the full story but enough of it that anything after their inclusion are curiosities, something you should find interesting but not take as some sign the norm is anything but.

It's like people who proudly proclaim, and lobby, for the idea of gender binary to be expunged even though the assorted people that constitute the third gender are only .3% of the population, a number so small that it's ludicrous to say they're anything but an outlier.

I know you're probably arguing about women occasionally showing up in adventure parties, which I am fine with, but this argument we're having is very close to the kinds you'd find from people complaining about the lack of female representation in World War 2 movies, or stories set in medieval (fantasy or otherwise) settings.

>>43888956
Dude, you obviously have no idea how physically exhausting and intensive modern combat is. Technology alone doesn't make up for it.

>replying to this shitstorm
It's too late, it was always too late


Anyways, if you really feel the need to justify it (which honestly, you dont), look to religion. For example, the Cathar heresy in the Occitan during the Middle Ages. In it, women and men alike were allowed to fight/lead etc., the big thing for Cathars was total equality between everyone.

From there, it's not a huge leap to assume a religion in which men are kept in gentler positions and women are expected to do the heavy lifting. Ie, Drow.

Another aspect of religion in fantasy settings: clerics. If through religious faith alone, healing miracles can be consistently performed, childbirth/care becomes a non-issue, perhaps even safer than in modern times.

But seriously, it's your setting and your game. If you want female warriors, you don't have to justify it. If your players throw an autistic manfit over muh realism, they probably aren't the kind of people you'd want to play with anyways.

>>43889344
Normally gender differentiation pushes the reproductive and fighting castes apart; but what if you change the gender ratio?

A society with a 10:1 F:M ratio can still reproduce quickly, but is incentivized to keep the men protected.

>>43889451
I thought drow women were bigger than the men on avrage

>>43889257

All females in a spotted hyena pack reproduce and they have communal rearing, the higher ranking females will just have bigger and more aggressive offspring.

It's the grey wolves, which are more male-dominant, that have one breeding leader pair per pack.

>>43884782
Or just don't do it. Less drama.

>>43889451
>men are kept in gentler positions and women are expected to do the heavy lifting. Ie, Drow.
That was ass backwards.

>But seriously, it's your setting and your game. If you want female warriors, you don't have to justify it.
>Just handwave it, anyone who asks why is an autist
That's some lazy shit son.

>>43889460
Mostly because men were preffered as skinny feminine fuckbois.

>>43885282

This is a common misconception. Archery is often a more strength-intensive enterprise than swordplay. Crossbows would be the ranged weapon that ignored any strength difference, which might not exist in the fantasy world as it in no way reflects the mechanics most of those games run on.

Myself, I typically hand-wave it. All the fantasy games I play are so high-magic drawing the line at women being physically equal to men would be fucking retarded, so if there's an area that had a lot more women than men, the local militia would probably be mostly female.

The only ttg my group plays that aren't high fantasy is Shadowrun every now and then, where it's not an issue. Women can use upgrades and guns just as well as men.

File: 1445571754819.jpg (414KB, 1194x1200px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 1194x1200px

I mean instead of force-feeding some horrendous gender politics to everyone at the table or going for the sensible, nonhuman route that the gendertards disdain so much, I feel that there is a third route that isn't really touched on very much.

Basically you have to completely break through the magical realm with sheer force of so much /d/ bullshit all at once that it completely transcends being a fetish, and also transcends so much basic biology that it becomes body horror.

>"Put some clothes on?! You see this bikini, IT'S ALIVE. If I don't get blood all over my body at least once an hour IT SHRINKS EVEN MORE!"
>Horrible full moon super-estrus that turns them into the reavers from firefly.
>Have to have a steady supply of manslave dick in order to satiate the horrible monster that otherwise makes their tits grow so big it breaks their back.
>Completely desperate fighting, if she retreats her arms will swell up to muscle girl levels and bigger until she either wins a fight or her muscles become unsustainable and drain her life force just to exist.
>Vagina morphs into a cyclopean cavern if not properly eaten and drags you inside of it.
>"WHY DO WE ONLY GIVE BIRTH TO GIRLS WITH INCESTUOUS FEELINGS WHICH CONTINUES THIS HORRIBLE CURSE?"
>"DEAR GOD MY THONGMONSTER IS NOW SQUEEING MY TAILBONE UP INTO MY SPINE AND I CAN'T GET IT OFF PLEASE PUT ME OUT OF MY MISERY!"

>>43884710
Introduce monk style shenanigans (weaboo fightan magic, chi, ki, anima, life power, spirit power, whatever) that allows one to increase their natural physical capacity to superhuman levels through training, then expand every human's lifespan to númenórean levels.

Armies are now divided between the peasant levies/slightly professional armies and the elite forces comprised of practitioners (be them superstrong knights or superfast rangers or kamehameha mages).
Women can join the military after they end their (admitedly small) fertile age.
Men can join whenever.

>All this talk that the only way to have a female dominated society is if they led in combat

Why not make it so the men work, fight and die while women maintain a position of comfort and leisure with preference in political, legal and social matters?

>>43889620
So the real world? Boring.

File: 1402212692922.jpg (507KB, 659x950px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 659x950px

>>43889600
One of the facets of the question is that it's meant to be a mainly female army, not just an army that includes a lot of females.

I never had a nation of nothing but female warriors, I do have warriors that are women in small numbers as part of a nation's army. Usually fulfilling a very specialized role, often cavalry related.

>>43889633
Well this makes men and women essentially equal in potential, anon.
I'm sure you can see how it solves the problem, and don't need me to write it down for you.

In case you do:
If men and women are now more or less eqyal then you can field armies that use either or both, this allows you to have specific nations choosing which based on their cultural background AND allows for them to be on an equal playing field, without that whole "infinite stratos" tier bullshit.

Why not just go the simple route if you want to use humans, this is a group of people that gets a power boost from tech x or deity y compared to normal humans for X reason. DC amazons are one example, but things like the Brithini of Runequest fit the bill too.

>>43889632

You'd be surprised how fresh the real world is as a medieval setting, or how violently people react to it.

I guess it depends on how ridiculous you make the depiction, since you can run from Pacific Northwest hipster bubble-land to anal ravaged redpilled /pol/ political statement.

A moderate depiction would still be depressingly female-dominated, though.

>>43885394
>And people wonder why women are extremely reluctant to take part in tabletop or roleplaying games and view people who participate in it poorly.

If all it took to keep women away from stuff was for some dudes to grumble about it in the internet then women would never leave their homes.

>>43889460
I'd assume selective breeding, likely on religious grounds. Again, in world's where religion is quantifiable and has explicit benefits, things get a bit hard to compare to the real world.

>>43889520
>Drow
Wasn't a perfect example but I think the similarity was clear enough.

>>43889520
It's a fantasy tabletop game designed for fun. If you're seriously going to shit on someone who's putting in hours of work to run a game for you, because it's "unrealistic," you should probably take a long hard look at yourself.

Roleplaying is based on handwaving for the sake of fun. If realistic were so perfect, we wouldn't need roleplaying games.

>>43889538
the reason women are better at archery actually is because sword play requires reaction time and leverage. being a less effective archer is not a big deal since you can control for every other variable that make women less effective combatants. women archers do not have to worry about the enemy being taller than them when they fire, they don't have to worry about pushing through the ranks, they don't have to worry about split second reaction times. not to say that having these things wont make men better archers, but what it boils down to is that men are going to be able to bring more of their strengths more times in CQC than at range.

>>43889774
Being that the majority of the tabletop community interacts on the Internet, and much of its modern identity is formed on the Internet, that's not a very good comparison.

>>43889817
>Sword play
Polearms make more sense for women, not even just glaives either. Or weapons more weighted on the end.

File: 1433985685319-0.png (902KB, 1074x1000px) Image search: [Google]

902KB, 1074x1000px

>>43889775
There's a difference between "muh realism" and actually being coherent enough to not need a total suspension of disbelief.
And it's not even, as you put it, shitting on somebody's hard work. Because I could just ask in character questions about their society, and watch them squirm.

Don't get me wrong, I like muscled barbarian women as much as the next guy, but if you throw down a female-majority fighting force because reasons, I'm gonna have some questions. If they can't handle their setting being questioned, why are they DMing?

The only way you can have a society of warrior women that isn't on the verge of death is to either curse them so that they'll wander their lands as undead never be able to leave until they die in combat or you put some sort of resurrection magic in play, which prevents the huge population drops in face of defeat.

You see, if you kill 50% of women in a village, then the next generation is going to be 50% smaller.
If you kill 50% of the men, then you can keep the society growing.

Even with these factors in play, the female soldiers would be objectively inferior to their male counterparts if we went by real life statistics, so you'd need something to even the playing field to prevent them from being pushed back constantly.

That or they live in such shitty lands that nobody wants to invade them.

>>43889906
Time for amateur anthropologist hour

>>43889834
Majority of tabletop games are played with people you actually know. Your friends and your family.

The only reason why women shy away from it is because THEIR friends don't find such nerdy shit appealing.
Which is the exact same reason why certain men shy away from it as well.
In short, it's nerdy as fuck and only people who don't care about the opinions of others can actually enjoy it as a hobby.

>>43889892
I agree with you.

Would the answer "No one knows for sure, but it is said that the gods cursed the lands so that there are 4 women for every man." satisfy you?
Just curious.

>>43889926
The point still stands.

>>43889926
He's right that female deaths impact the population on a much larger scale than men's though.

>>43890132
What point, that men are the expendable gender? No one is doubting that point, realism is just boring as shit for a setting.

>>43890057
Thinking about it, it is a little bit of a handwave, but I can still work with it, seems legit. I'd most likely ask at that point "Which gods did this? Are they normally this much of a bunch of dicks? Why would they do that?"

File: 1445478251932.jpg (112KB, 1080x992px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1080x992px

>>43884710
Didn't we already have a thread like this not even a month ago?

>>43890190
Roll for knowledge history.

>>43890214
We have these every month.
The answer is always the same: you either need a different species or a supernatural factor that makes this less stupid, that or you handwave it with "well it's very unlikely but it happened"

>>43889906
you know, there isn't actually one reason why men tend to dominate, there are dozens of reasons, some of which we don't even know of,imho,your best bet would e to simply create some sort of amazon race based of hyenas or black widows

>>43889906
>>43884710
you know, there isn't actually one reason why men tend to dominate, there are dozens of reasons, some of which we don't even know of,imho,your best bet would e to simply create some sort of amazon race based of hyenas or black widows

>>43890268
>>43890246
That's so fucking lazy though

>>43884710
In general, women are relegated to the primary caregiver role because women have a much greater parental investment in the child: they spend nine months with this child in them and then go through the arduous process of childbirth. Also there's a hormonal attachment.

Men just put sperm in a vag.

So, you either have to change the way childbirth works to where a woman has less of an investment than men, possibly making men the ones who give childbirth. Otherwise, you have to give them some special powers (like they're vastly stronger than men, or they're the only ones who can pull off magic) that would make them the only real choice as soldiers.

Or, you can just throw logic out the window and have fun with your fantasy.

>>43890179
Doesn't need to realistic, but if you wanna put in a society that could not succesfully exist in real world into your setting, you're going to need to explain why can they survive when in real life they wouldn't.

Otherwise it's just a special snowflake culture that only exist due to "because I said so".

File: 1448269019831.jpg (21KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x360px

>>43884710
it would never happen because women did not evolve with the proper physical or psychological baselines to be effective warfighters. this is fact and cannot be refuted.

>>43890315

What in your opinion isn't lazy? A magical spell that makes women better warriors?

>>43890315
Not really, the fact that they're not human explains why their sexual dimorphism is different.

>>43889906
>You see, if you kill 50% of women in a village, then the next generation is going to be 50% smaller.
>If you kill 50% of the men, then you can keep the society growing.

Huh?

>kill 50% of the women
>women just have twice as many kids
>society keeps going

File: 16549681465.jpg (133KB, 550x500px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 550x500px

>>43890417
>muh realism.

>>43890315
It think it can be done well as long as you really think it through and dont just do, oh women are the fighters because hyenas, make an entire social structure and everything for them

do men hunt and women fight? or does the queen bich deside who gets to mate and keeps al the pretty fuckbois to heself unless you are part of her army? do they have religious beliefs that go that every woman needs to kill someone for every child they rear or they will have bad luck and they just fuck each other so much that they dont know that a man is actually needed to make a child, and continue building on that.
think on what kind of society that they would need in order to keep up their belief and survive

File: Internet PTSD_trigger meme « blueollie.jpg (16KB, 320x371px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x371px

>>43890337

>have fun with your fantasy

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEE

>>43890417
My fantasy setting doesn't have evolution.

>>43890395
>but if you wanna put in a society that could not succesfully exist in real world into your setting
I don't want to do any of that, why even have a fantasy setting if it is bond to the laws that govern a conception of reality?

>>43890434
Men can impregnate multiple women at no cost, women can only produce one babby per year, and that's before worrying about fertility dropping off as they age or risks of childbirth.

>>43890434
Men can inseminate multiple women, women can only be pregnant of one man at a time.
The maximum amount of children born per generation is defined by the amount of women.
And no, there are constraints to how many children each woman can have, and be sure that pre-modern populations were close to that limits, specially considering rampant child mortality.

File: 1440043460584.gif (3MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x281px

>>43890451
>science is mean! please leave so you don't further upset my feelings.
found the woman

>>43890482
I'd say most fantasy settings don't involve evolution (although I suppose some do) considering the mortal races are usually just put into existence by very real (within the reality of the game) deities.

File: 1382338765262.jpg (3KB, 109x120px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 109x120px

>>43890482
man that sucks. enjoy your barren rocks and water.

File: you are dumb.gif (2MB, 390x271px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 390x271px

>>43890507
Nigga you what? I know that men are inherently stronger than women. My point was that you're bringing your realism into a fantasy world with fucking magic.

Nigga, you dumb

>>43890541
>fantasy
>not having gods
gtfo

>>43890455
>>43890433
>>43890432
Its lazy because instead of trying to conceptualize a feasible reason for there being a number of warrior women, you're just going to handwave it all as "fantasy race" or "magic". It lacks any sense of creativity or originality.

>>43890497
It doesn't need to be bound to laws of reality, but it needs to be bound into it's own laws at the very least.

You need to be consistent with your worldbuilding. If you're not, then what are you going to do when your players spot discrepancies?

>>43890505
>women can only produce one babby a year
Good thing a generation is bigger than a single year, eh what?

>risks of childbirth
Which would be present even if 50% of the men died. Keep in mind, you're talking a fantasy setting with magic that can literally bring people back to life. Deaths by childbirth would be lower than they were in medieval times. If you need proof of this, the average life expectancy for a human in your typical D&D type game is usually several times greater than it would have been in the days of swords and kings and shitting in the woods and wenches and people going "hail and well met you fucking peasant piece of shit."

Regardless, a culture of 50 women shitting out 4 babies each will produce basically the same amount of babies as 100 women shitting out only 2 when you factor in infant mortality and childbirth related deaths.

>>43890591
It would only be a discrepancy if it was unusual in some way, if an army full of women isn't noteworthy to the inhabitants it would be a discrepancy.

>>43890506
100 women make two babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 200 babies made.

50 women make four babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 200 babies made.

>rampant child mortality
Magic throws that off, as evidenced by humans living way longer than they should.

>>43890651
Your conception of pre-modern lifespans are off. Most of the average lifespans take into account that childhood death was ludicrously more common than it is now. If you survived childhood, you had a lifespan comparable to what we have today

>>43890651
That's not how math works dumbass.
2x more women = 2x more potential births.

>>43890688
>Most of the average lifespans take into account that childhood death was ludicrously more common than it is now.

See:
>>43890651
>Magic throws that off, as evidenced by humans living way longer than they should.

You can't use how things worked historically because, historically, people weren't able to cast magical spells to bring people back from the dead.

>>43890586

OP asked for explicitly a tribe or nation of warrior women, not "a number" of warrior women. That has never existed in reality and has to be explained with magic or nanomachines or nonhumans.

>>43890701
Except read what I originally said:

>>43890434
>kill 50% of the women
>women just have twice as many kids
>society keeps going

Twice as many women doesn't necessarily mean they'll have twice as many kids. Meanwhile, if 50% of the women were to die, you'd be foolish not to think someone would notice and say "oh shit, the remaining women better double up on making babies or else we're fucked!"

>>43890651
Why do you assume they would be having less babies and then with less people they would have more?
Assume the most will always be optimum for an agrarian society you retarded mongrel, this isn't some strategy game where you set everything citizens do.

100 women make four babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 400 babies made.


50 women make four babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 200 babies made.

Now consider that magic isn't WIDESPREAD
or ACCESSIBLE (as in, most fantasy settings that people play in) and you'll have the usual infant mortality. At 250 per 1000 live births:
100 women have 300 viable kids, of which many will die during childhood and early adulthood.
100 women have 150 viable kids, of which many will die during childhood and early adulthood.

>>43890651
>100 women make two babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 200 babies made.
>50 women make four babies each over the span of their lifetimes: 200 babies made.
100 women make four babies each over span of their lives, 400 babies made.
To catch up, each of the 50 women would need to make 8 babies during their lifetimes.

How will the 50 women be able to keep up their warrior duties when they're taking 8 years off from military in order to pump out babies?

>>43890718
Even if we include magic, it doesn't mean that all members of society have access to magic. You can adjust it like you would adjust for the upper class having access to physicians and medicine.

>>43890753
>someone would notice and say "oh shit, the remaining women better double up on making babies or else we're fucked!"
Oh yeah that is why the new demographic shift totally isn't happening despite people handing out money and tax cuts for people to have kids.

Please fucking don't

>>43890737
>That has never existed in reality
Then don't use reality as a basis, but as another tool when designing a setting.

File: tumblr_static_3w1k0p6hogow80ow8gk00ccw8_640_v2.jpg (75KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 640x360px

>>43890753
read:
>>43890758

Anon, you're a huge faggot.

>>43890787

That's exactly why people are giving are magical/sci-fi explanations for it.

>>43890755
>Why do you assume they would be having less babies?

I don't. I assume, after a huge tragedy where 50% of the women are dead, the remaining women will get to work pumping out more babies. This is exactly the same as assuming that, after a huge tragedy where 50% of the men are dead, the remaining dead will get to work knocking up more women.

>>43890753
You also need to take into account the risks of pregnancy by the way.

And the fact that if the women are warriors then you'll be essentially defenseless while recovering.

>>43890586

well I find it hard to find a real good explanations for why human women would make up all or most armed forces so i would guess you need to make something up and I generally go with a new race.

if they are human you could say it is in their culture or religion but then you need to think of how their statistically weaker troops have fought off the other people of the world. what this might work in small tribes that never faced great wars with big armies of men and such.

i think as long as there is genuine thought behind a "race" or tribe they can be interesting and the most feasible reason for women being most of a nations warriors in a world with fantacy races is simply that they are not human

This doesn't make any sense. What you'd need to do to even approach a lick of rationality is that you have two classes of women. One class which is warrior women and they don't have kids. The other class which is working women and they have kids. The former is far smaller than the latter.

How do you idiots fall for this SAME THREAD every time?

>>43890833
It's not that men will work to knock up more women, you retard.

See that statistic on the amount of women and men having sex through online dating for an example. If the supply of men is depleted the few remaining will take the OPPORTUNITY to reproduce more and spread their genes.
Women don't have that luxury as pregnancy cares far greater costs for them, they also don't just double up on kids because it's not opportune for them on a personal level.

And see the demographic shift, people won't start making more kids because the population is dying (and be assured, the main "problem" is that middle and high class women don't want to have kids), jesus christ get your head out of your ass.

>>43890758
>How will the 50 women be able to keep up their warrior duties when they're taking 8 years off from military in order to pump out babies?

They don't? Men take up the slack for that generation. Which makes sense anyhow, since there's suddenly more of them.

Eight babies within one's lifetime also is not at all unreasonable.

>>43890833
protip: they would

i mean not as much as all that but people like to have sex and some people really like to have sex with different people and the more people that might become pregnant the more people you gonna get

>>43890879
You did too, you replied to it.

>>43890889
>50% of men die
>childrate drops as women go without having kids because all the men are married and taken
>society is fucked

>>43890908
>men take the slack
And then suddenly it's not matriarchal, and when the next generation comes men keep their new positions and so on.
Boom, no more women warriors.

>>43890908
That is assuming they weren't already having 8 children per lifetime.

>>43890931
>men are married and taken
Hahaha that never stopped anyone anon, it literally never stopped anyone.
Bachelors are also a thing, and a single bachelor can impregnate so fucking many women that it's not even funny. Can a single woman do the same? Be impregnated on the same scale? Just admit you're a fucking retard.
And polygyny is more common that polyandry if you haven't noticed.

>>43890931
i guess you dont know how much people still fucked other people they were not married to back in the days, i have gone through quite a lot of old documents where women send their children of to their relatives in order to become lumber rafters or something because the were not married yet if there are people they will get fucked on a statistical level and if they get fucked women are gonna get pregnant, the more women get fucked the more women get pregnant

>>43890998
In a society where women are the soldiers and ruling class, I'd think polyandry would be much more common than polgyny. Wouldn't you agree?

>>43891047
Nah. Women really just don't seem to be into that.

>>43890998
>And then suddenly it's not matriarchal
If 50% of the men died, women would be taking their places as soldiers. That doesn't mean it would always be that way. Works both ways if you ask me. It's conceivable that men pitch in to help during drastic times and return to the kitchen when things return to normal.

>>43891078
Men totally sleep around but women? Never!

>>43891111
Women sleep around, but they don't want multiple husbands.

>>43891129
>a woman wouldn't want to be surrounded by a bunch of dudes who has to do whatever she says
Man, you do not know women. My condolences to you.

>>43891047
Polygyny is more common because both sides get to reproduce (the man on a larger scale, but that is offset by his spread of resources among the wives).
Meanwhile polyandry is multiple men trying to share one womb. Resources are kind of a lesser worry too.

>>43891158
There have been many women throughout history who have had the position and the power to have multiple husbands. They never did, though they often had many lovers.

>>43890795
You're making the assumption that a nation with 50% of men dead won't have a ridiculously higher birthrate as well?

Okay, let's presume the 100 women make half the babies that the 50 surviving women warriors make.

Afterwards the 50 women warriors cannot fully dedicate themselves to babymaking because you actually need some warriors to protect your people.

Let's say you use 50% of the women to make babies while 50% are on fighting condition.
Now, you've got 25 women making babies at any given time, which means 4x longer time to replenish population than with the 100 women who concentrate on their normal lives.

4x longer time to replenish population = extended periods of weakness in which anybody with a full size army could come and crush you instantly.

>>43890998
Society wouldn't immediately shift you'd see a slow gradual change. It honestly would be more akin to a first wave feminist movement, but for men. Men would seek a way out of the "cult of domesticity" once they had been given a chance for a whole generation to take up more important roles in the society, and would fight to keep this position on some level. But then again that's bringing modern day sociology into a fantasy world where fucking magic exists so you know whatever.

>>43890908
Then you've got women who have been 8 years away from military to make babies and men who have 8 years of experience in the military.

Why in the everloving fuck would you ever return to using female warriors after seeing the damage it does to your society?

>>43891174
>the man to woman ratio is 2:1
Yeah, men would be willing to enter into a multiple dude marriage with a single woman, especially if it's under a matriarchy.

>one womb
You seem to be under the assumption that a woman can only give birth once in her lifetime or something, because two dudes married to the same woman could both have multiple biological children with just that woman.

>>43891220
Why would you go back to using male warriors after seeing the damage it does to your society?

>>43891177
1) female fertility is more limited than male, for 9 months they're busy making what's likely to be one baby
2) female fertile age is more limited than male, menopause is a thing
3) the combat ready women would more likely be of fertile age. So unless you want to send weak grannies to combat you're gonna have to choose.
4) they won't raise the birth rate on either event, men or women being dead
5) it's easier for men to spread their offspring among many women
6) if the number of women were to decrease significantly then the reproductive value of men would decrease further, which would be a very harmful thing, socially speaking


>>43891244
Oh my fucking god you're a moron.
You can never know if the child is yours unless you're a woman, that is one more reason for the enforced monogamy or polygyny. Yes modern people sometimes do that, as well as very few tribal groups, but it's not something common, the cost for the men is much greater.
>under a matriarchy
The thing is said matriarchy will fucking die because it's population will swing down wildly unless they put men in the military. And if they do that be sure that eventually the guys with spears won't like being bossed around.

>>43891091
No, they wouldn't.
It just means that they'll recruit kids and elderly to the army just like during WW1.

>>43891175
Powerful women living within the confines of patriarchal societies, sure. Wait, oops, that undermines your point. Sorry.

>>43891177
>>43890758

Its worth mentioning that the devastation to society from a lack of men is going to be nearly as harmful as a lack of child bearing women. That's under the best of circumstances, when women aren't pumping out babies.

I'd wager the society with 100 men and 50 women would recover faster than the 50 men and 100 women society. The labor of 50 men is not going to support a total of 100 women very easily, and is going to support 100+ babies and 100 women even less so.

This sort of scenario presupposes a comfy place with lots of easily available food and shelter. In anything other than that, you're gonna be better off with more men.

>>43891301
>You can never know if the child is yours
Except it's a world of magic and the woman who delivered the child cast the "who's your daddy" spell.

File: 1437506857583.jpg (553KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 1280x720px

>>43891091
Yeah that is totally why the nations that had large chunks of their male population destroyed turned matriarchal and fielded large armies of women.

>>43891311
If you're going to be a faggot and try to use the mythical and counter-factual matriarchy to illustrate how it should work in fantasy, go for it.

>>43891286
>Using female warriors = your nation's growth is stunted for generations to come.
>Using male warriors = send in the next wave, there's more where that came from.

There are no benefits for using a female only military.

>>43891338
Which is exactly why things would just go back to norm and women would return as soldiers. Thanks for arguing my point, friend.