>-4 Strength Okay, done. What buffs do they get? And what

>>52069140
+4 charisma or +2 dexterity +2 charisma

Males have no bonuses/penalties.

Or you could just do away with the concept all together.

>>52069140

Males take a hit to wis. -4 to be precise, but get bonuses to strength and con. There is a reason our car insurance is more expensive and studies show that men are more likely to die in all stages of life than women.

>>52069140
>muh equality

>>52069140
>Male
+2 Str, +1 Con
-2 Wis, -1 Cha
Roll Int 3d6
>Female
+2 Wis, +1 Cha
-2 Str, -1 Con
Roll Int 5d6 take middle 3

>>52069254

Mostly right, but women are no more intelligent than men and vice versa. More wise sure, but not more intelligent.

>>52069269
Their intelligence tends to be more average, hence the middle 3 of 5. Men have more geniuses but also more retards, while women are more consistently in the middle.

>>52069281
then why wouldn't you roll 1d20 over 3d6?

>>52069217

Because men work more dangerous jobs.

Wisdom is equal between the sexes

>>52069140
Male bonus
>+5 to initiative roles
Men have been by and large the innovators, accomplishers, and succeeders of the species, as such they are quick to spring into action

Female bonus
>advantage on negotiation roles
Women are well aware that they are never expected to take responsibility for anything, let alone possess the skill or gumption to be able to accomplish anything, and are adept at getting others to heed to their needs.

I'd that what you want, Anon? Just take it and your (you)s, and give me some as well.

>>52069281
>>52069305
4d4? 20d2?

>>52069281
Less aggressive and risk-taking by default, which is why almost all major discoveries or explorations are done by men. It comes with being physically weaker and more reproductively vital. Not many women are inclined to go bushwacking through an unknown tropical jungle or poke crocodiles with a stick, for good or ill.

File: Shield Grog.jpg (58KB, 736x1089px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 736x1089px

>>52069269
>>52069281
Also, if you wanted it to be more of a balanced autism than a purely realistic autism, you should probably bring all the +-2s down to +-1s, since otherwise being female would be equal to being a midget, and male with half-orc, in terms of stat adjustment.

Either way, shit thread. I suggest posting musclegirls, but I lack any.

>>52069306

Relevant information. In hunter gatherer societies women generally do the gathering. This is a safe and relatively easy activity which can provide consistent calories. Often there is enough forage that men could gather as well, but they don't. Men almost always choose to hunt, a risky activity that often fails to provide food. It's not because they need thw meat, they could live off of the forage, in fact they do when they fail to catch anything, they do it for the prestige. You can't tell me that passing up easy food and risking going hungry because your in a dick measuring contest with the guy in the next cave over isn't low wis.

File: don't start it.jpg (47KB, 625x416px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 625x416px

>>52069140

>>52069328
Here's a free (You).

>>52069393

Too late. It's happening. Flee while you are still sane.

>>52069140
Which species are we talking about here?

File: Found in all fields.jpg (106KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 800x600px

>>52069305
>>52069330
Using only d6s in chargen makes it simpler, especially with modifier rolling schemes, so if you default to 4d6 drop 1, you would roll female Int with 6d6 drop lowest 2 and highest 1. Compare to the numerical hoops you would have to jump through otherwise.

>>52069334
Also, tend to have slightly better social intelligence and (IIRC) color perception. All of which is part of the really weird blob that is "Wisdom"

>>52069375
Low wis and low int.

I can understand using your free time to hunt. Nothing wrong with a hobby that pays off. But wasting time on sport when there's work to be done is just short sighted and lazy.

>>52069187
fpbp

woman ARE more social than men.

So do halfling men get -6 to str, with halfling woman getting a -10?

>>52069442

Thing is, that one animal will feed you your woman and your friends. It makes you popular, and that plays an important part in group politics. It's not stupid per see, it's just not optimal. And these people are hardly starving, or even scraping to get by. Tribal hunter gatherers actually have more free time than citizens of first world countries in most cases. It doesn't take long to forage their caloric needs.

>>52069375
Again, less risk-taking, but if all we ever did was what would fill our bellies humans would still be hunter-gatherers today. Women take the safe and easy path, but it doesn't do anything more than maintain the status quo. Little ambition.

>>52069140
So, the average human woman is as strong as an Atomie, a CR 1 fey two size categories smaller than her? She is closer to the strength of a housecat than a baseline str 10 individual. That seems a BIT extreme.

>>52069574
You seemed to have missed this part:
>I can understand using your free time to hunt. Nothing wrong with a hobby that pays off. But wasting time on sport when there's work to be done is just short sighted and lazy.

As a side note, from someone who regularly hunts for sport, you're grossly overestimating how "popular" a good kill makes you. Especially when it's a treat and not a need. My carpentry projects make me more popular than any single buck on my wall.

Now, gossiping, cooking, weaving, bearing/raising of children. All of these things strengthen social bonds far more than any hunt ever could. With the acceptation of say herd runs/mass slaughter.

>>52069705
>Women take the safe and easy path
What fake history is getting force fed down your throat?

Could you at least have the manners to swallow it instead of puking it all over everyone else?

>>52069851

You live in a fucking first world country you dipshit. That kill means a hell of a lot more when it's the only meat your group has had in a while and you share it around. This is fucking anthropology. I'm not talking out my ass, people have researched this.

You've taken crazy pills brother.

-33% strength/toughness/whatever.
Very large social/charisma bonuses in a variety of situations.

Then depending on local culture you could have various other social benefits in exchange for drawbacks.

>>52069914
Where do you live anon? What degrees do you have? What scholarly research are you basing your views on? Do you know anything about premodern societies that you didn't learn from /tg/?

>>52069914
You're talking out of ass buddy. If you're going to shit, go do it somewhere else.

>>52069851
>hunting for sport
>acception
>fake history

-2 int

>>52069940
>inb4 anon links to a study that was completed in the 40's

>>52069940

Midwest. College graduate. Anthropology minor. I can give you the names of the relevant ethnographies and studies if you want to educate yourself. Or you can keep your delusions and your sense of self importance. Your choice.

>>52069955
pics or you're lying

>>52069955
I'd actually relish the opportunity to learn more from this board. Care to share your studies and maybe critical responses to them?

>>52069217
Women have a tendency not to report such things.

Their accidents are more common and easily avoidable things.

Men's accidents are deadlier but less common and usually pointless.

She's going to sideswipe your parked shit in a parking lot because muh phone. He's going to wrap himself around a tree at a hundred plus because she's a show off.

File: 20170307_224152.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

>>52069962

If your willing to keep an open mind rather than just screech at me in ignorance I suggest you read pic related. Published in 04, no ancient research from the 40s here. It was one of my textbooks, and I kept it because it was quite well done. It's a fairly comprehensive ethnography on the Mukogodo and Maasai, and the author is in good standing in the community. Of the two the Mukogodo are the hunter gatherers, so you should probably focus on those sections.

>>52069970

Well what do you want to know? Different family structures? How people feed themselves? Politics in different types of societies? What?

>>52070027
>Lee Cronk
>Collaborated on a fraudulent paper on the relationship between body symmetry, dancing, and sexual selection.

Not what I want to see from an author. But I'll give it a shot.

>>52069140
It was -4 to *max* strength, if you rolled under a 15 your strength wasn't effected.
If you rolled a 15 your strength was (essentially) unaffected, 15 Str and 14 Str had identical bonuses.

But yes, 10-in-216 female characters had marginally worse chances to force open stuck doors.
4-in-216 even missed out on noteworthy attack bonus!

>>52070027

>it took them 8 years after publication of the paper—and five after we submitted a retraction and 4 and a half years after we published PROOF of fraud (later borne out by Rutgers’ investigation) for them finally to “retract” a paper now cited 136 times

>part of the long delays is that the journal really sees no upside to admitting fraud and then one of the co-authors Lee Cronk unaccountably defended the fraudster William Brown to the bitter end

>here is what happened at the bitter end; this was Nature’s suggested wording:
“Since publication of the Letter, it has come to our attention that
certain aspects of data handling and treatment make the conclusions of the report unsound.”

> Brown and Cronk’s data set have 65 fraudulent entries which are internally inconsistent, that is, contradicted as impossible by the rest of their
data set

Good standing may be a bit of a stretch applied to Cronk, no?

>>52070027
"Some caveats though. Cronk is muddled in his discussion of the adaptive nature of female-biased childhood sex ratio and genetics underlying behavioral traits.
1. Adaptive nature of female-biased sex ratio (pg 124). Cronk is correct that the female-biased sex ratio is not an individual feature, but one of the group. The more accurate question is whether the female-biased CARE is adaptive. The group selection argument is a red-herring (although group-selection should not be dismissed offhand in the way Cronk dismisses it - see work of David Sloan Wilson).
Now, is female-biased CARE adaptive? Cronk has been building up to this case for most of the book, and then reaches the wrong conclusion. Just because a cost-benefit analysis (conscious or not) is put into giving less care to boys, and all else being equal parents would prefer to have their boys live as well, says virtually nothing about if the trait is an adaptation or not. Most all evolved traits represent trade-offs and maximizing fitness. Just because in this case little boys are suffering and dying does not mean this feature is not adaptive. Female-biased care is unlikely to be adaptive for the boy who is receiving less care (although it might be due to kin-selection). Cronk makes a strong case that it is adaptive for the parents..even if he dismisses his own case for dubious reasons.

(tbc)

>>52069914
This guy is right. Even without his credentials he's clearly correct. Huge difference between bringing home meat in the stone age and bringing it home now, when you can just go to the supermarket and get a good cut for five bucks. If you guys don't understand this you're retarded.

>>52070153
cont.

"2. Genetics of daughter favoritism (pg 125). Cronk is very likely correct that genetic differences do not underlie the daughter favoritism, but that instead this is a facultative trait. Given the rapid emergence of this trait and the interbreeding of Mukogodo with other groups that do not favor daughters, genetic differences are very unlikely to be important. However, his wholesale dismissal of a role for genes is folly. Genetically, Mukogodo are CERTAINLY different from you and me (despite Cronk's contention to the contrary). Yes, ~99.9% of genetic material is similar across all humans. However, with ~6 billion base pairs in a genome, ~0.1% represents a lot of potential differences. With genes often being scores of thousands of basepairs long, the potential for functional genetic polymorphisms is great. A mutation at a single base pair is capable of causing fatal diseases. Genetic polymorphisms have been associated with pair-bonding behaviors and feelings about having children. Additionally, tentative evidence of differential fitness based upon genetic polymorphisms associated with behavior have been found.

While Cronk writes a strong book that I will consider assigning to undergraduates in future courses, it is disappointing to see him make the fallacious statements outlined above."

(end)

>>52070159
>you get all the calories and nutrients you need with just gathering
>hunted meat is incredibly valuable and not a leisurely activity

pick one.

>>52069851
>What fake history is getting force fed down your throat?

Name a single time a nation's women decided, en-mas, to physically fight a war on their own behalf instead trying to shame men into it. Name a single nation with a long tradition of near or exclusively-female leadership that has ever achieved anything noteworthy militarily, politically, or scientifically. Name a single military or expeditionary force organized, supplied, and crewed exclusively by women across all of time.

Because swap women for men and I can name all of those things easily.

>>52069140
No penalties should apply. A halfling is the size of a 5' year old child and only takes 0 to -2.

>>52070118
It was never anything, why do you guys spread utterly bizarre lies? I don't get it.

>>52070173
What did I say about swallowing? If you can't do that, at least excuse yourself like a gentleman.

>>52070136

I won't deny that getting tarred with that brush didnt help his reputation, but he wasn't the one who falsified the results. Brown did. Cronk took a hit sure, but his work with the Mukogodo and Maasai is still considered quite good.

The book itself has some contested material in it, but if you just want to understand the division of labor and substinance patterns in hunter gatherer societies, which was the relevant issue at hand, it has good material.

>>52069140
>what buffs do they get

kek
You really think "-4 strength" exists because of realism? Or balance?

>>52070196
>B-But men and women are exactly the same th-thing

Kek, you literally have nothing but your propaganda spew. You have no facts, ergo you cannot display any. Sad!

>>52070227
>Sad!
Go back to your twitter feed rusky.

>>52070196
>B-But mean and women are exactly the s-same

Kek, you literally have no facts. All you have is your propaganda spew. Sad!

>>52070219
A simple arm wrestling contest between, say, 100 men and women of similar age and physical condition can easily prove it is,

>>52070234
Go back to the synagogue, Shlomo.

>>52070237
>>52070249
>Double posting

So does the Kremlin pay you per (you) or by the post?

>>52070237
>>52070227
freaky

>>52070258
>Oy vey, you posted twice goyim. This makes a = not a.

Kek.

File: max strength.jpg (97KB, 858x924px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 858x924px

>>52070118
>>52070195
You're both wrong, for however little it's worth.

On a far more interesting line of discussion,
>>52070195
You know that D&D existed before WotC purchased the intellectual property
for it and slapped it on to their half-baked Fallout tie-in RPG, right?

>>52070172
it tastes good. It was a luxury good. Surely your shrunken brain can understand this?

>>52070273
So by the post then. Well hopefully they'll put you on salary soon comrade.

>>52070281
So we agree that hunting for meat is a luxury and not a requirement then. Took you long enough.

Ah hell this is a shit show. Who wants to talk about W.E.I.R.D. nations?

>>52070287
Nah, they're way too jewy to pay anything.

>>52070227
He's right though. Men have always shouldered the vast majority of risk, often by choice.
You can't just ignore this by saying "fake history" over and over again.

>>52070299
I don't think you're attacking the right person here... It doesn't seem like you have any idea what's going on

>>52070312
Tell me about WEIRD nations anon.

Also, do we ever expect anything else from these threads?

Especially when everyone on /tg/ has a PhD in everything and is also a starving Nigerian prince.

>>52070329
meant for
>>52070196

>>52070329
He didn't though. He said that woman as a whole never take any risk. This is wrong.

Then he moved the goal post again. Can't really have a conversation with the guy at this point.

>>52070205
Anon this may be out of character for this board but I'm glad you're here. You seem like a reasonable, discerning person who's willing to engage on the merits and can cite scholarly sources. I've been coming here for years and your kind is unfortunately rare here.

Thanks.

>>52070324
>Russians
>Jewy

What world do you live in?

>>52070333

WEIRD is an acronym used by anthropologists. It stands for western educated industrialized rich and democratic. Put quite simply, from an anthropological point of view we are odd ducks. Quite literally"weird". We developed pretty differently compared to most cultures. Of course we view our culture as normal, even though it isn't.

Thus is related to why some people don't trust the results of psychology studies, because most of them are done with a test pool of college students within a narrow age range inside wealthy nations, which is not really terribly representative of humanity as a whole.

>>52070355
Name one time when they have en-mas then, dipshit. It's quite simple. A war of women, an exploration ship full of women, a matriarchal country embracing risk-taking... just one.

Except you can't.

>>52070406
>I will continue to ignore the woman who fought and died in various theaters during the 20th century because these woman don't fit my narrow definition of what a woman is.

>>52070400
Go on.

>>52070406
Most historians and experts from related fields would tell you that a true matriarchal society has never existed on this planet. There may be varying degrees of prominence for women in patriarchal societies but none which place the role of women above men.

Unless you have an example of a matriarchal society?

>>52070373

Thanks, I'm really nothing special. I just remembered a few things from an old anthropology course I thought might be relevant and figured I'd throw my two cents in. I'd really rather not get caught up in the usual arguement, even though I do have an opinion. It's rather pointless since both sides are deeply entrenched in their own points of view. It's just the same old back and forth.

>>52070427
maybe if they had stayed home instead of going to the movies all the time they'd still be alive

>>52070433

Would you consider monogamy to be the norm for human beings?

>>52070427
Once again, when did they do so on their own impetus, en-mas?

>>52070436
Why not? I thought women did not posses -4 str? Surely by sheer chance if nothing else some cabal of women, somewhere, should have stumbled into power, no? Or overthrown their wicked patriarchal oppressors as a revolutionary army?

Gee, I wonder why not of that ever happened.

>>52070436
Most historians/social scientists don't even agree on what a "true matriarchal society" would be. Is it a society structured for the "benefit" of woman or is it a society centered around woman as an authority.

>>52070459
As a polyamorous American my bias requires I answer "no"

I honestly don't know.

Yawn.

How often does this thread get made, again?

>>52070479
Three times a day. Four if anon is desperate for cock.

>>52070469
Most agree it would be a society with women as authorities and enjoying a higher social status than men. Admittedly a hard thing to quantify but there's a reason social sciences are called "soft sciences"

>>52070479
There's at least one every couple weeks.

Not surprising really, its at least 300 guaranteed replies.

>>52070500
>"soft science"
God I hate this term.

I can appreciate applying the scientific method and critical thinking. But that term just annoys the shit out of me.

>>52070501
85ish and counting anon.

File: Dune_Fish_Speaker_Concept.jpg (156KB, 800x1058px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 800x1058px

>>52069140
>What buffs do they get?
Wait for a man to put them in charge, make them the dominant militant group and have them worship said man.

>>52069269
Women are less wise and less intelligent. Are you a fucking feminist or something? Read the fucking bell Curve.

>>52069851
>DURR U FAKE LOL I HAVE NO ARGUMENT
Why not just not post at all, since you clearly don't know anything about what's being discussed.

>>52070519
>>52070531
Slow morning lads?

>>52070427
>WAAAAA WHAT ARE STATISTICS
Feminist proven. Fuck off.

>>52070537
>still no argument, no refutation, and no proof of his own claims
Fuck off back to tumblr.

>>52069187
>Or you could just do away with the concept all together.
this tbqh

>>52070469

The answer is no. not really. Cultures that advocate Monogomy are less numerous than cultures that practice alternatives (although this has changed with the spread of western ideology to some extent), and societies that do have a cultural bias towards monogamous relations tend to practice what is known as "serial monogamy," meaning that while they may only be with one partner at a time they don't stay with them very long.

Did you know that in Tibet there was a practice where brothers would share the same wife? One woman would marry an entire family of male siblings. This of course is the odd man out. Polygamy with one man and multiple wives is a dominant model. Although how it is practiced varies. For instance in New Guinea among the Trobrianders only the chief may have more than one wife. Which is actually an important part of their political and social structure because it keeps him wealthy and powerful relative to the rest of the village.

There is a matriarchal group in China who practice what is called "walking marriages" which is for all intents and purpose free love.

Sexual relations are weird. And fascinating. I was surprised how much of the discipline revolves around sex. sometimes it feels like half of it comes back to sex.

Forgive the tangent.

>>52070542
Yep, slow morning.

>>52070438
This board will never change but posts like yours are the reason I keep coming back despite the obvious trolls. I've always had a soft spot for anthropological/historical/archaeological research being incorporated into my games and anytime someone brings that to this board it's a net benefit.

>>52070554
Still sad.

>>52070553
Go on. Tangents are fine.

Drowns out the retards.

>And what debuffs/buffs do males get?
-6 or -7 to CHA.
Might as well go the whole 9 yards. Try getting your way as a man, then getting your way as a woman. Even a horrendously ugly woman will be a stronger roll for things like sympathy or lying.

>>52070575
Honest question, what do they pay you per post?

>>52070554
Cry some more, dyke.

100 replies gents

Doing Gods work

>>52070626
Honestly, you can say that the sexes are equal because it's a fantasy game. That solves the problem.

>>52070577

Hmmm lets see. I'm gonna talk about the Trobrianders, cause they're interesting. Shame that most of these cultures are disappearing really.

For one thing men and women have different currency. Entirely different currency. Back in the day the currency of men was Yams and shell necklaces. Still is to some extent, though modern goods and moneys are becoming increasingly important.

Women make their own currency out of banana leaves and skirts. They strip leaves and make dried bundles, which are then traded around and sold between women. For instance a woman can tell her husband "I need some banana leaves" and he'll anty up some trade goods so she can buy them.

"Why does she need banana leaves?" you may ask. Well she might need them because someone died. See when a member of a womans family died as part of the funeral she is expected to give out all of her leaves and skirts to the mourners and people who helped with the funeral to show appreciation. The more you give out the more wealthy and powerful you are, so in the event of a funeral a woman and her family may need to work quite hard to get enough banana leaves to distribute so they don't offend anyone.

>>52070615
6 million shekels.

>>52070634
Nah, that'll just trigger the retards looking for an excuse to shit post.

>>52070639
Okay now that is damned fascinating. Making a note to read more on Trobrianders later.

Are woman allowed to use male/western like currency in any capacity or do they need their husbands to act as a proxy?

>>52070639
>too stupid to comprehend that sex causes pregnancy
Yeah, you can chalk them up under the same species as abbos: homo habilus (aka: not Homo sapiens).

>>52070666

To give you an example I'm a woman, and I need banana leaf bundles. I tell my husband to buy me some tabacco, and then I go and sell that for bundles.Women do not deal in Yams. But they do own Yams that are given to them. It's complicated. Anyway, its not so much that they aren't allowed, it's just not their thing. They have their bundles, which they can use to purchase what they want from other women.

Increasingly with the younger generations you do see use of western currency among both sexes, especially since a lot of the young people are getting jobs.

>>52070721
Awesome anon. Thanks for sharing.

>>52070714

That is far from the weirdest belief about sex I've heard of.

>>52070743
Don't respond, you'll only encourage them.

>>52070756

You wanna hear about some weird shit? I warn you, these motherfuckers are really far off from our cultural norms. Uncomfortably so, and I can't remember the exact names so I'm afraid it will be difficult for you to do further research should you be so inclined. Interested?

>>52070774
Lay it on me man.

>nu-/tg/ desperately seeking a negative to being male

there is none, this is why feminists call us privileged, because we are.

Men are outright superior to women and you just need to accept that. If we arnt then your male privilege theory falls apart.

File: tg_gets_a_lesson_in_reproduction.png (655KB, 1912x2832px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 1912x2832px

52070833
Stop shitposting! We are trying to learn something! /tg/ is for enlightenment, story-telling, and inducing erections, not baiting!

>>52070774
Go on.

>>52070807

Alright, little googling with the relevant information got me the name. So let me tell you about the coming of age ritual for the Etoro people of Papau New Guinea.

They believe that everyone is born with a vessel. This vessel is empty. In order to fill his vessel and become a man boys in this society preform ritual fellatio on an older male in order to consume the sperm and thereby fill their vessel. This is not considered by them to be sexual.Bullshit

Women are considered unclean. To lay with a women is potentially polluting, and drains your vessel of life essence . Gotta be careful about that.

In fact it's pretty common for women to dress up like male warrior boys so their husbands can stand to touch them for the purpose of procreation .Did I mention that traditionally masculinity was tied in with warfare in this culture and these men were all initiates in warrior lodges, which was tied in to the homosexuality?

So yeah, ritualized homosexual pedophilia as a cornerstone of their traditional culture. That is one practice I am not at all sad is dying out.

>>52070879
How Greek/Persian/Pashtun/Arab of them.

>>52070902

Don't forget the Japs. It's not uncommon. In fact there are studies that suggest a connection between homosexuality and warrior cultures, but I'm not well versed on that subject so I won't go into it. I just remember learning that in my first anthropology course long ago when the professor was still getting a kick out of shocking us with 'improper' behavior.

>>52070879
That doesn't really sound all that divergent from the bullshit pedophiles made up during history

>>52070927

Eh it isn't, but it still got a great reaction out of my class at the time. So many shocked and offended little undergraduates. I figured it might be good for a laugh here, but I suppose I forgot where I am. This is 4chan. We don't have any delicate little flowers here do we? Just autistic ones.

>>52070944
How rude of you.

>>52070944
I mean, we also are the degenerates.

>>52070957

I include myself in that statement. And really, can you watch the regular screaming fests over the same old arguments and not agree that our community has some problems?

>>52070919
And this is why dwarven women wear (fake) beards and real axes and chainmail.

File: 20170308_003625.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

>>52070666

This is a pretty decent book for that.

>>52070968

Biggest reaction from normies would be hooting and howling, and blaming western countries somehow

Biggest reaction from here might be someone breaking the silence with
>sounds kinda hot

>>52070994

>Dwarven women emulate men because all the Dwarves are raging homos.

Deepest lore.

File: 1343792105973.jpg (357KB, 810x1410px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 810x1410px

>>52070879
>>52070902
>>52070919
>>52070927
>>52070944
>wah this culture is different from my white, first world, democratic one so that means its BAD

you all should be fucking ashamed of yourself.
there is nothing wrong with that kind of relationship between a man and a boy

>>52071033

From an anthropological point of view it's not bad. And professionally I am required not to pass judgment, but I can damn well have whatever personal opinion I want, and I don't much care for the sexual exploitation of children. Just a personal preference. I don't consider their culture to be inferior, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

>Giving women con penalties
>When it's men who get sick the easiest on average
>Also women are documented as lasting significantly longer under torture

Also cheap bait thread, 5/10 made me reply

>>52071061
explain how its sexual exploitation, children can only be "traumatized" by sexual acts if society deems it as a traumatizing act, in a society wheres not it is not harmful, its basically the same as circumcision.

And from a objective point of view cutting of a part of a boys penis with out his consent is far worse than blowing the village elder.

>>52069140
No modifiers or negatives for either males or females if we are talking about a setting that is not wholly grounded in reality.

If it is based in reality, think about who your character is and hinder yourself were needed to reflect their life. Such as deciding whether or not you will be an average person, a shitty one, or an exceptional one.

A game trying to impose what it thinks about the biological differences that exist will only lead to bullshit.

>>52069254
Alt:
>Male
+1 STR +1 CON +1 INT
-1 CHA -1 WIS -1 DEX
>Female
+1 CHA +1 WIS +1 DEX
-1 STR -1 CON -1 INT

>>52071033
>there is nothing wrong with that kind of relationship between a man and a boy
Bait

>>52069187
>+2 dex
>implying

>>52071119
explain how its bad, other then the possibility of transmitting STDs.

Because if you go that route we can agree about how its better for all humans to be completely isolated from each other as to not risk spreading disease at all.

>>52071123
Ever try braiding or sewing? Your man hands lack dexterity.

>>52071113

You have a point. If I was perfectly objective I would be able to distance myself from it. I am not perfectly objective however, and though I try to be I still see things through the lenses of my cultural upbringing, which is perfectly normal.

>>52071146


Not to say that my culture is normal, just that cultural bias is.

>>52071106
men get sick easier because we work harder jobs and thus make are bodies more susceptible to sickness, it has nothing to do with women having a higher tolerance to disease, because they dont.

>lasting longer under torture.

only because the torturers are men and thus go easy on the women, submitting them to less extreme torting

>>52071061
>I don't consider their culture to be inferior

I do.

>>52071033
Why the fuck would I be ashamed of not being a worthless, primitive pedophile?

>>52071146
>>52071150
acceptable and understandable response. You are a good human being.

>>52071171
why dont you fuck off back to /pol/ where you can circlejerk your white pride with like minded fellows?

>>52071187
>Oy vey, literal pedophiles who've accomplished nothing in thousands of years are just like you, goyim.

Back to tumblr with you.

>>52071134
It doesn't matter what culture you're in, if sexual acts are tied to culture and ritual, and you cannot effectively refuse to participate, that denial of agency can result in mental trauma. Just because they decide to perpetuate the system in their adulthood (to continue being a part of society) doesn't mean that no one ever wanted to say no.

>>52071206
they're certainty living a more fulfilling life than the loser who sits all day in his own room brewing in hatred for other races and taking credit for others accomplishments as his own because they just happen to share a skin color

>>52071232
>Le basement nazi meme

Kek. This one argues like a woman ("pedophilia is ok because muh feelz") but I can't decide if its some 300 pound dyke or just a pube-bearded nu male. Anyone have any idea?

>>52071232
you may need a new bulb for that projector

>>52070258
Can you go be a fag on a different board?

>>52071219
we can say that about anything though, the american housing industry for example.

>when you turn 18 you need to move out, go into dept to buy your own house, and spend the rest of your life paying it off, only to force your children to do the same, refuse to participate and you become a failure in societies eyes

that is just as traumatizing and a denial of agency, and I would argue it to be far more harmful to the humans in the society it is subject to

>>52071289
>Buying a house is more harmful than literal mandatory pedophilia
>This is what leftists actually believe

>>52069140
>What buffs do they get?
+4 Charisma.

>And what debuffs/buffs do males get?
Being seen as disposable by society.

>>52071033
Bait, but kys anyways.

>>52071158
>men get sick easier because we work harder
No you goddamn moron. This is across the board. Boys are more susceptible to being sick from birth.

>>52071158
Also shit women get pulled through in torture is not remotely "less extreme", women usually get subjected to worse. Shit like hungry rats in cunts. Shit that would break you just thinking about it being done to your dick, /robot/

>>52071321
>Being seen as disposable by society.
Quick reminder that in any situation where a woman might die in childbirth happened, which was about a quarter of all births, the doctor's priority was always the baby.

Meanwhile, men being in any sort of military was a) statistically rare until the world wars and b) what political power flew from in any country with any sort of major military tradition.

>but miners
Children of both sexes were miners. If you read about actual industrial factory conditions instead of fedorashit on reddit and /r9k/ you might have a degree of knowledge rather than just bitter pissing and moaning about women not giving you the time of day.

File: 14453526565790[1].jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

>>52071454
>Quick reminder that in any situation where a woman might die in childbirth happened, which was about a quarter of all births, the doctor's priority was always the baby.
No fucking shit man.

>Meanwhile, men being in any sort of military
Because that's literally the only context in which male disposability applies, doesn't it?

>was a) statistically rare until the world wars
Yeah, it was statistically rare until entire generations of men were called upon to die so it isn't important at all.

>what political power flew from in any country with any sort of major military tradition.
Which matters to the men at the bottom how exactly?

>Le funny hat strawman
>Le bitter
>Le no female attention
Alright m8

>>52071430
because boys also engage in more active and harder play, and thus receive more cuts and injuries, and thus more exposure to bacteria and viruses.

While girls play with dolls and put on make-up

Once again it has nothing to due with women having some magical resistance to disease, but rather that they sit inside all day safe and sound, reducing the chances of getting sick

>>52071437
wow its almost like putting a rat into a cunt is easier than stuffing a rat into someones dick

clearly women are built to be masters at resisting torture

>>52071454

>Quick reminder that in any situation where a woman might die in childbirth happened, which was about a quarter of all births

pfffhahahaha!
Stopped reading right there.

>>52069140
Men get a penalty on disease resistance, as well as a penalty on impulse control.

>>52069306
Driving a car like a cunt is a job now?

>>52071486
>because boys also engage in more active and harder play,
This is actually generally bullshit.

>>52071508
>but but but r/mensrights taught me this was so

>>52071657
This, and call it a day.

Maybe give women a bonus on carousing, maybe not.

File: MRA doesn't work.jpg (342KB, 1000x664px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1000x664px

>>52071678
>Mens rights
Well-intentioned idiots who function on the utterly stupid assumption that women are willing to cooperate for the betterment of men.

>>52071454
>Quick reminder that in any situation where a woman might die in childbirth happened, which was about a quarter of all births, the doctor's priority was always the baby.
I don't know about the validity of your claim, but I do know that most mothers would want it that way. It's instinct.
>Meanwhile, men being in any sort of military was a) statistically rare until the world wars
This is just you being an ignoramus. Even if we ignore the fact that your poopooing the world wars, it's abjectly wrong.
http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/faq/?referrer=https://www.google.com/
Of the 22 million people in the north, 2 million were sent to fucking fight and die against their own countrymen and lay waste to their own country. Even if every fucking person in the north were a fighting age male, that'd still be a 1/11 chance. That's not a statistical rarity.
>Children of both sexes were miners.
Pretty sure they just broke coal outside/in the mouths of the mines. They weren't minor miners. They were a cheap way to do low strain jobs that still took a ton of time.
Hiring a minor coal miner would be ridiculously impractical.
This is just talking about industrialization though. I'm sure some African shithole's got some little bastards digging for diamonds. The good news is that they're likely too busy fucking the little girls to use them for that.

>>52071665

>loggers
>longshoremen
>carpenters of all kinds
>trash collectors
>farmers
>steel workers
>truck drivers
>utility line workers
>combat jobs in the military
>cops
>firefighters

these are some of the most dangerous jobs that are still performed mostly by men
and they are mostly performed by men for a fucking reason

>>52071692
women don't even cooperate for the betterment of women

they cooperate for the personal betterment of themselves, first, always, and only

>>52069140
Just fucking do away with the boons/banes entirely and be done with it

Or alternatively men get -4 to DEX

Females should have all the stats 20% less then males... except from charisma may, that should be left equal.

>>52069140
Male disadvantages:
Called shot to the dick / balls deals more damage.
Dick might get stuck on stuff.
Lack of proper milk production.

>>52071888
> Men
> less dexterous then females

You what mate? =) thats why all the surgeons and clockmakers and engineers are females, right... oh, wait a second! They are not! And all the great tinkers ever were males...

File: 1488773586041.jpg (160KB, 800x550px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 800x550px

>>52069140
Honestly if I try and make gender differences into character creation I usually just add bonuses rather than give detriments, people are happier that way.

>Men, small bonus to STR or CON, +2 in d20
>Women, small bonus to DEX or CHA, +2 in d20

File: 2014-10-03-blogbellcurve.png (11KB, 800x428px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 800x428px

>>52071914
Men tend to have a flatter distribution on the normal distribution than Women

There are more male geniuses than female geniuses, but there are also more male morons than female morons.

Basically the Y chromosome is the wildcard mutation that gets to express itself with a potentially good or shitty trait where females get mostly average.

The reason for this is that the uterus is a shitty method of spreading genetics, its almost guaranteed to reproduce, but it can only produce a child every 9-10 months even if the woman owning it rules the entire world, where a man with a penis if he dominated the world due to superior genes could pump out upwards 100 kids every few months if he timed it right.

That and western culture encourages men to "prove themselves worthy" by succeeding, and basically tells women to look pretty to attract a successful mate

Then you have Islamic culture which pretty much wastes all their female potential as just plain breeders no matter their ability, then eastern culture which is still very much the same in most countries but has begun aping western culture.

SO
For a /tg/ relevant post, Women tend to be biologically more flexible due to less dense muscle fibers allowing them to stretch more.

>>52071940
awesome, thanks for info anon

>>52071940
>The reason for this is that the uterus is a shitty method of spreading genetics, its almost guaranteed to reproduce, but it can only produce a child every 9-10 months even if the woman owning it rules the entire world, where a man with a penis if he dominated the world due to superior genes could pump out upwards 100 kids every few months if he timed it right.
https://psmag.com/8-000-years-ago-17-women-reproduced-for-every-one-man-6d41445ae73d#.ujo7atks9

Basically if you are a man and your genetics suck, you won't be spreading them, but if your genetics are awesome, then you will spread them everywhere a la Ghengis Khan

The vast majority of human males throughout history died without reproducing, around 40% had children, whereas 80% of women reproduced.

>>52071898
that only applies to attractive women.

ugly females are far less charismatic than ugly males.

honestly cha being tied to attractiveness is dumb in the first place

women should just have advantage on cha checks on men who want to fuck them, apart from that they should still have lower cha.

>>52072001
>MFW I'm writing a system and this is a perk
Basically male or female characters can take the perk "Stunning" and get speech/barter bonuses to people that want to bang them.
DMs choice to who wants to bang them, but its usually just people of the opposite sex, usually.

>>52071848
And men don't?

>>52072018
every man that ever died in a war certainly wasn't doing it for his own benefit

>>52072026
>Get paid
>Prove your manliness
>Manly soldier dudes get ALL the women
>Look at this awesome dude in this propoganda poster! Hes so cool! And that could be you!

Sorry dude, the "greatest generation" really wasn't that special, most of them never even saw the enemy

>>52072018
Women that band together to protect other women's rights are empowered
Men that band together to protect men's rights are losers

didn't you get the memo

>>52069140
>-4 STR, -2 INT, -2 CON, +2 DEX, +2 CHA

fite me

>>52070873
Why do I keep giggling at "Uteri do not fossilize well"?

>>52071033
If we have to put up with what their culture does, they have to put up with what our culture does.

In this case, that means we imprison men who diddle little boys and take all their possessions. Hope it was worth it.

File: kabuto.png (55KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 250x250px

>>52072026
>>52072045
Let us not forget conscription, social-based selfishness (in other words, protecting YOUR people because YOU like them) and, of course, the power of good ol propaganda.

>>52072054
Not entirely sure we're talking about the same thing. I was just speaking against the notion that women are inherently selfish... unlike men. Somehow.

>>52072118
Is it bad that my first thought was it fossilizing into a Kabuto?

>>52072143
I agree with this sentiment. If culture is subjective, then no culture is better than another. In which case we are just as free to promote our cultural values as they are.

>>52072071
+2 DEX for stuff that requires tiny woman hands? Fair.

+2 DEX when dodging a fireball? No.

>>52070196
Hes right though, women have been proven to be no less intelligent then men, so why is it all the top ranking individuals in everything are men? Why are men still in charge? Why are/do men make all the technological and scientific breakthroughs? Either they have less ambition/ drive (since its easier for them to live a life piggybacking off others success, among other things) or they have not been afforded equal opportunities (which while true in the past hasn't stopped them lately)

I believe it was also proven in a study that men are better suited for leadership roles, men with males bosses felt more comfortable, and women felt significantly less stressed with a male boss than female

>>52072253
Can you prove that this is the result of biology and not cultural inertia running from the past when the genders were more segregated?

I don't want to come across as I'm jumping on the crazy SJW "EVERYTHING IS CULTURAL" bandwagon, but I just want to point out that there is no solid proof that this is due to biology either.

Put simply, it could be biological, it could be cultural. We just don't know.

>>52072280
While technically no, it is shown men are more likely risk takers and more aggressive, where as women tend to be more social (albeit bitchy) and homely

Which suits the genders biological purpose

>>52072071
+0 everything.
Fight me.

>>52072289
I am not disagreeing with you in that it does seem to be inuitive design on nature's part. However, that does not mean that it is actually true.

It's an educated guess, but a guess nonetheless. So believing it to be the absolute truth is not the way to go about it. Which is probably why mental traits being modified by gender should probably not be touched upon.

>>52069217
>There is a reason our car insurance is more expensive
You have no idea how shitty I was with the insurance companies when they gave that as the reason why I paid higher premiums than my sister.

On the other hand, my sister also got into multiple accidents while I remain free as a bird. Horrible situation awareness.

>>52069140
>Wymn
-4 str cap
+2 cha cap
+2 dex cap
>Men
+2 con cap
+2 str cap
-4 dex cap

>>52069140
>>52069187
Also +2 to fort saves against disease
Males recieve a -2

>>52069254
Correct.

File: 1488774805891.png (266KB, 283x427px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 283x427px

>>52069140
Why must you always post this? You know what happens. You know what shitposting you bring here.
Just fuck you, fuck /pol/, fuck the whiny fucks arguing with them, fuck this thread, fuck me.

>>52072521
>fuck me
I see your game. You're not gonna bamboozle me.

File: 1486052928894.png (190KB, 262x488px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 262x488px

>>52072531
It was worth a try, sugar.

My Exalted stat block:

>-1 Strength
>-1 Endurance
Women are weak.
>+1 Dex
Women are dexterous.
>+2 Manipulation
Women are manipulative.
>-1 Presence
...But they aren't really that charismatic.
>-1 Intelligence
>-1 Wit
Women aren't that intelligent on average.
>-3 Willpower
Women can't control themselves.

I found that pretty close to reality.

>>52069254
How do you defend a fucking 4 point WIS gap between males and females? Wisdom governs perception and willpower, so what gives?

>>52069914
Made this comment before I could

>>52070172>>52070172
That's a false dichotomy, while hunting and forraging could reliably provide food for people, when meat was obtained it was far more calorically and nutritionally dense and therefore valued highly as an excellent supplement to standard food sources.

>>52070615
About tree-fiddy.

>tfw this thread wears fedoras

File: pretty stylish.jpg (125KB, 803x1024px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 803x1024px

>>52072860
What can I say? They're pretty stylish hats.
Shame they're associated with neckbeards.

>>52069140
If we're using men as the base-line, women get -1 strength and +1 dexterity. With a neutral baseline, women get +1 dexterity and men get +1 strength.

With a given level of ability (like we're dealing with two evenly-matched warriors), a woman is going to be weaker but more agile than the man. That is to say: women have a higher dexterity to strength ratio than men do.

>>52069187
>+4 charisma or +2 dexterity +2 charisma
You understand that charisma is primarily a leadership ability, right? A +4 charisma would mean that the vast majority of leaders and generals and such would be women.

>>52072506

wut

File: 1488291898547.jpg (156KB, 1224x814px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1224x814px

>>52069140
I mean if you guys want to keep enforcing this meme.
>females must apply a -4 in a physical stat but inturn gain a +4 in a mental stat. Males dont get this bonus nor penalty.

Or

>neither character sex are affected by penalties nor bonuses because a player character is inherently different from non-playable character as the PCs is the hero of the setting.

>>52072946
Nah you see the reason /pol/ocks keep posting this is they're desperate to prove they're superior to woman in every facet.

And the (you)s

All the sweet and spicy (you)s

>>52073012
Please understand that while (you)s are nourishing, sarcastic (you)s provide lack taste and certain essential nutrients, and are also a bit chewy.

Thank you

>>52072946
>>females must apply a -4 in a physical stat but inturn gain a +4 in a mental stat. Males dont get this bonus nor penalty.
+4 CHA sounds fair and realistic.

>>52072866
Trilbys are associated with neckbeards, anon, not fedoras.

>>52072897

Women have better immune systems than men on average.

Think of it as an evolutionary utility. The women are usually left behind in groups with the old and the young, the place most likely for diseases to incubate and spread. One of the biggest threats to that group is disease, if the men are doing their job properly and keeping away physical threats.

>>52073027
/pol/ucks are pretty desperate though. It's sad.

File: Black man's fedora.jpg (166KB, 1000x868px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1000x868px

>>52073092
Seems that people can't tell the difference then. I personally wear these occasionally when I don't feel like combing my hair(like when I'm in a rush).

>>52073171
That's a flat cap, not a trilby or a fedora.

>>52072881

I'd actually swap out the dex for wis, personally. Testosterone deadens the senses. This makes you not suffer as much from running all day running to catch that deer, but it also fucks with your perception.

The whole 'the woman cares about the paint colors and the man can't tell the difference' joke? That's based in real fact, because the men literally can't tell the difference when to the woman the colors are as different as blue and green are.

Only attribute bonus with any grounds in reality I can justify giving to women over men is con, and even that is stretching it.

>>52069187
At that point why isn't it just men have +2 strength and -2 charisma, while women have -2 Strength and +2 charisma

The difference is still 4, but this way it doesn't feel like men are the base character with no penalties and bonuses, while women are some kind of alternate subrace or template to be applied.

>>52069140
They can give birth to live young.
Also it's properly -6 Strength.

>>52073960
Oh, are you an expert in biology?

File: aa4.png (94KB, 1302x1301px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1302x1301px

>>52069140

>>52074201

Why would I have to be an expert in biology to provide my opinion on what I find an acceptable counterpoint to a tabletop game meme?

>>52069140
none
fuck you tumblr

>Male:
default
>Female
-4 STR -2 INT +2 CHA can roll to seduce a total stranger with no penalty.

>>52069140
We caluclated this out using AD&D strength standards, and the fact is, according to the math, there is a one point difference between male and female strength scores in real life.

so it's -1 str for women.

It has also been proven quite easily that women can vconvince people - especially men - that they are in fact all that, and that men will do amazing stupid stuff on behalf of a female. So women get +1 cha.

That is the sum total of the actual; score differences as studied and avowed by /tg/ itself, with multiple people working on the project.

>>52074320
Mainly this part:
>any grounds in reality

>>52073143
This, they have quicker convalescence to diseases.

>>52074382
Seems legit, but I still have to ask you for a citation.

>>52069140
M +1 Str
F +1 Con

Fuck you and your negative stats

>>52074400

The whole point of -4 str is that it's trying to mimic reality, where women are physically weaker than men. If I am to provide some sort of identical bonus to women, I'm gonna have to use the same reasoning, hence it needs to be grounded in reality as well. Charisma, wisdom and intelligence are out the window right off the bat, most leaders and geniuses in history were men. What we have left is con and dex and there's no evidence to suggest one sex is more dexterous than the other. Con bonus is the only thing I can justify women having since they do tend to get sick less and live longer.

File: Bruce-Lee-2-promo[1].jpg (99KB, 1090x614px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1090x614px

Males
> +2 STR or CON, -2 WIS or CHA
> Add two of (stereotypical skills] to their starting proficiencies.

Females
> +2 DEX or CHA, -2 STR or WIS
> Add two of [stereotypical skills] to their stating proficiencies.

(for humans anyway)

Give the skills 2 free ranks, or whatever, depending on the system/edition, as an alternative.
The lists should cover everything from crafts to combat to past-times, so that the fighters aren't all men and the women aren't all gardeners, or whatever, there are just various (if romanticized) social standards in place that would put a person in a disposition to pick those skills up over time; transitively. Hypothetically these lists would all be different for each race too, based on the race's values and more common trades.

Keep in mind this is the same game where most editions think the average human can support ~100+lbs without being encumbered. -4 is dumb, not because it's inaccurate, but it's perhaps a little much. Puts females in a position where they'd have to dedicate basically all of their attribute advancements to catch up to a male counter part. It's worth noting that, in the end, this is at most a 10% difference in probability for any STR-based action; modifiers shifting every two and all, so were D&D a better game, where one's skills and experience were better represented than through abstract catch-all modifiers and (for the most part) non-encounter-related skill ranks, then even with -4 STR a woman could just add a couple of extra points to their favored weapons/skills and be right back on equal terms.

I also think people too often over-estimate the relation between size and strength, as well as how much force is required to do significant damage to a person. Bruce Lee benched ~160, was 5'7", and weighted like 135lbs.

>>52069140
>What buffs do they get? And what debuffs/buffs do males get?

None.
I hope you're not under the impression that the sexes are in some way "balanced."

>>52069140
4 free skillpoint in Profession(Dish Washer).

>>52071141
>braiding
yes
>sewing
yes

Women are more flexible than men because they're shorter on average, but not more dexterous. Especially dex in roleplaying games means stuff like dodging, quick movements etc. A male would be more fit for the typical thief, assassin or ranger character.

File: 5555555555.jpg (184KB, 574x573px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 574x573px

>>52070173
>implying those men wanted to be in war
>implying war is a good response to anything

File: 52337950_p0.png (106KB, 524x1000px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 524x1000px

>>52069140
if we're talking real talk here
women get this
-2 str (women are weaker)
+2 to enemy crit confirmation (their flesh is softer)
+1 wisdom (they have better senses and better resistance to mental trauma)
+1 charisma (they are naturally more beautiful and personable but..)
-2 to the following
Diplomacy (their vocal pitch makes it hard for them to be taken seriously as a leader figure)
Intimidate (they are not as indimidating)
Minus 1 to the following
Initiative (their reaction time is meaningfully worse than men
engineering (their spacial imaginging and reasoning skills are wore off)
dungeoneering.
+2 to the following
Perception (they can see better in color and details, even if men react to sight faster)
Sense Motive (they have a better sense of accurate discernment for others expressions and moods)
Profession midwife (they have some innate motherhood qualities.)
None of this shit is cultural, I've excised as much of that as possible.

Being a girl blows mechanically, but It's worth it to play on hard mode, fuck scrubs.

>>52069140
Women have -4 Str, men have -4 Con

File: talk_shit_get_fit.jpg (184KB, 1024x1448px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1024x1448px

Should it be an option to be able to make up some of the debuff via training or something?

Say women could cover the strength debuff and potentially go past it?

Pic vaguely related.

>>52071848
thats what makes us people you moron.

>>52074825
>I can justify women having since they do tend to get sick less and live longer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3A2M2drZ-M

>>52073143
oh right, I forgot about this
>>52077255
add a fort save here.

>>52069140

Realistically, +2 DEX and +2 CHR.

>>52074825
see >>52077255

>>52074366
best post

>>52069140
The only game that ever did this "right" was Arcanum.
And it was still shit
And it was vidya

>>52069269
>women are no more intelligent than men

>>52070519
>women are less wise and less intelligent

School and university graduation rates kinda suggest otherwise

>>52070277
That chart actually seems quite reasonable to me.
I suppose it shouldn't be a surprise to see everyone has blown it out of proprotions.

>>52077255
>better resistance to mental trauma
Could you justify this? Not even disagreeing, just curious as to why you would think so.

Personally, I've been wanting to stat males and females differently in my rpg for a long time, and one of the things I've considered giving females for balance is +1 Coherence (sanity/focus), but I've been unable to find enough scientific backing to feel comfortable doing so. Far as I can tell, women are more prone to depression, anxiety, and fear issues, while men are more prone to anger, self-hatred, and dissociation. But neither is particularly more stable overall.

>>52073194
Men have better senses in most areas. Men are adapted to be better hunters and trackers, and visual acuity and sense of smell and hearing are important.

Color perception is one of the few places where this is not the case and that's because the genes that govern it are on the X chromosome. Because women have two X chromosomes they are much more likely to get functioning color vision out of at least one of them.

>>52079561
That's got more to do with societal biases and the way we treat boys vs. girls for education. Through a variety of societies, the whole thing winds up a wash - In china where girls are encouraged not to go to school and boys are taught to excel they wind up with extremely good rates, but around here where schooling is treated as a joke for boys that's not as important as 'real' education on the job they do worse.

>>52069217
You sure thats not a courage bonus my dude.

File: 1238745039210325235.jpg (470KB, 1250x982px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 1250x982px

>>52072881

Correction: Charisma is the ability to get someone to do what you want directly, of which leadership is a subset. A low Int. Wis. character with 18 charisma makes a terrible leader, but can collect a band of idiots willing to die for her cause readily.

If you want to codify such differences into the game, they should be applied as differences in the point CAPS, not on every character. The point of character generation is that you're making one that's different from the average person.

>>52069217
Males have a higher average amount of time spent driving and in that time, a statistically lower risk of accidents

>>52070756
>i can't stand facts that hurt my feelings
Fuck off back to plebs.

File: 1472740736671.jpg (29KB, 340x395px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 340x395px

>>52084531
cant promise you much. the evidence is lite but there. mostly because it's not exactly moral to collect more of it. people basically did sensory deprivation and brainwashing experiments trying to get the subjects to break and go back on their beliefs. women take longer efforts for less yeild on this, so I gave us higher wisdom to account for wisdom damage, but not enough to account for an additional score. women also are less likely to to earn themselves a darwin award for doing something stupid. in this case the arguement is not so much that we are "Wiser" than men in the monk sense but in the caution and mental fortitude sense.

and yeah I would agree on your assessment of stability. this is purely a stat because the abstraction of the game allows for these scores to be attacked directly. if it wasn't the case, I wouldn't be giving us the bonus.
>Men have better senses in most areas. Men are adapted to be better hunters and trackers, and visual acuity and sense of smell and hearing are important.
they really don't. they have better predator senses yes. but they don't have the better senses when it comes to what we define as human; color vision and detail, touch. this isn't really a surprise, for us, eating the wrong thing gets you killed, for you, getting gored by a moose does.

>>52082569
I really should have posted that side by side with the Strength Bonuses table.
There's almost no benefits below 18 strength, and "3d6 in order" was expected.

>>52077297
In what possible capacity would women have higher constitution than men?

>>52086004
the arguement doesn't make sense to me for that much con (nor str penalty) but I keep hearing stuff about disease the most.

>>52086004
Immune system, so disease and maybe poison resistance. D&D stats don't map well to human sexual dymorphism since you have the immune system and being able to take a blow to the head on the same stat. You could just leave the stat itself alone and give men 1HP/level vs +2 saves vs poison and disease, I guess.

See also: dexterity governing what is effectively reaction time and flexibility.

>>52085955

>the evidence is lite but there

No it isn't.

>but they don't have the better senses when it comes to what we define as human; color vision and detail, touch.

The only better sensual acuity women have is slightly higher color perception. They are worse at spacial perception

File: trufax.png (90KB, 601x640px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 601x640px

>>52087086
dogmatic and aggressive.

like basically all misogynists, you've taken your intimate aversion to your sadly unaffectionate mother and overgeneralised to infer the inferiority of all women.

File: 1439961190468.jpg (107KB, 736x1144px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 736x1144px

>>52074030

Because First post is Wrongest post; women have -4 str, men have -2 str - subtracted from a maximum of 20.

iirc Women also had -2 to WIS while men had -4.

And this is obviously only for humans - this is from early editions when there weren't female dwarves, elves or half-orcs, only "male human", "female human", "elf", "dwarf", "halfling", and "half-orc".

>>52069140
None.

In all seriousness though DnD doesn't have a wide enough variance of capabilities to accurately represent the differences of sexual dimorphism in humans. Sure women are slightly weaker than men on average but it isn't -4, since that would make the average woman as weak as a small child, at worst it is -2.

Ultimately however if DnD did represent sexual dimorphism they should do it for all races, taking into account the builds of races. eg.
>Male half orcs get +2 strength +1 constitution
>Female half orcs get +1 strength +2 constitution

>>52069140
>What buffs do they get?

None. Some options are just objectively inferior. Sexually compatible enemies would be sometimes fighting to capture, and that is all.

>>52069217
>Males take a hit to wis.

Pfffhahaha. Women are obviously and vastly less capable of basic risk management, as evidenced by the fact that as soon as they were given the decisive say in matters of marriage, the number of single moms skyrocketed.

>There is a reason our car insurance is more expensive

Gee, I wonder why privileged citizens get privileges.

>studies show that men are more likely to die in all stages of life than women.

That's because men always have an expectation to perform placed on them, leading to both taking more dangerous job and higher levels of stress.

>>52069140
There used to be a time when people knew how to hide and ignore a thread.

>>52069375
>they do it for the prestige. You can't tell me that passing up easy food and risking going hungry because your in a dick measuring contest with the guy in the next cave over isn't low wis.
And why do they want that prestige of being the guy who brought home the big game?
THE WOMEN, you fucking retard.
Sexual attraction goes both ways. Men are attracted to pretty women. Women are attracted to exceptional men.
Guess which one involves more needless risk of death?

>>52069429
Nah. Druids dont sit around discussing colors. Thats charisma, havent you aeen how much women talk about this dress veing gold and black or blue and black

>>52069140
Anon are you deducting -4 constitution and -4 wisdom during their period?%

>>52072521
>fuck me.
You're not fooling anybody. You shall stay a virgin and become a wizard and you're gonna like it

>>52071670
You were a pussy boy then

>>52071437
Time to make things up on tg and getbmad about what i lied about

File: yj9XSML.png (2MB, 1440x2000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x2000px

>>52087086
you sure seem upset,
http://www.worldcat.org/title/total-isolation-science-of-sensory-deprivation/oclc/712802137
like I said, this shit isn't exactly plentiful, but if you want to cry that it doesn't exist you would be objectively wrong.
>The only better sensual acuity women have is slightly higher color perception. They are worse at spacial perception
no we aren't. we're bad at processing space in our minds, the process is useful but has very little to do with being able to see and measure an actual space you have available. Testing for this focuses around having you rotate a 3d dimensional object in your mind, and verify that it is the same object on a different image. they don't drop men and women into a fucking room and ask them how big it is.

And having more color vision is more detail, and you forgot touch. same nerves, smaller hand. this isn't rocket science and it's far from a land slide in our favor.

this is a D&D score so the +1 to wisdom provides no actual benefit other than to stave off damage and drain longer. I'm not going to go into the rabit hole on weather or not we are actually wiser. Wisdom is relative to goal and niche. for example, it is wise for men to take more risks because the group can afford their risks if they fail, and more women take less risks becuase they are more vital, you could say the men are less wise because many of them fail and that results in issues they have to deal with or you could say that they are all taking an acceptable risk that helps the species more than the individual, in which case it is wise. At this point it should be obvious why arguing for or against being wise in men and women using statistics like these is a crap shoot.

>>52071914
worth mentioning that the superior trait in males that makes them more likely than us to be tinkerers and work in fields involving engineering, clock making, and other instances where you build things, is spacial reasoning, not dexterity.

>>52087518
>Pfffhahaha. Women are obviously and vastly less capable of basic risk management, as evidenced by the fact that as soon as they were given the decisive say in matters of marriage, the number of single moms skyrocketed.
no shit, that's called freedom. you seem upset that we are allowed to do what men do. I don't expect you to laud any women for doing something stupid like that but it's not exactly an indication of risk management. particularly when before with men fully in charge the reason why single mothers rarely existed was because the men told you who you where marrying, and you stayed with them and accepted it. Superior marriage stability by the shotgun. I'd rather not go back to the days of marriage dowrys thankyou

>>52090006
I haven't posted in this thread before but he didn't seem upset, you do.

Sensory deprivation testing on only six individuals and women having somewhat better results in the end, doesn't equate being more resistant to torture of any kind, or even having any greater kind of mental resistance (which would be INT not WIS anyway). Essentially, your "evidence" is meaningless.

Brighter colors in our vision is not more detail, that's a false equivalence. Women on average have keener hearing than men, as men have keener sight. Biologists think that this is because women needed better hearing to rear their children, and men needed keener sight to kill things, being that we were largely hunters in our earliest societies. Neither sex has keener touch than the other. I'd love to know where you got that information, because it's flat out fucking wrong.

Probably the only intelligent thing you did, in your post was not going down the which sex is wiser rabbit hole. Wisdom; means to have experience, knowledge and good judgement. Those are not things a person is born with they LEARN them. The reason why men are associated with wisdom is because for them to survive to old age or even just long enough to pass on their genes, they had to have it, women did not, they made men protect them.
>>52090048
>no shit, that's called freedom. you seem upset that we are allowed to do what men do.
Men never raised children on their own, if they could help it, ever, they raised them with women or not at all. It shows poor risk management because to become a mother you have to be either stupid and take unneccessary risks or be doing it deliberately with a partner you ideally love and are going to raise the child with. You severely overestimate the control of fathers in pre-modern times, most let their daughters choose their mates only the wealthy, nobles, and royalty took choice away completely and sometimes even they were allowed to choose.

Teenagers should get -8 Wis -8 Int

>>52090768
Only in a modern setting, teenagers in ages past were far more mature by necessity,

>>52085557
>A low Int. Wis. character with 18 charisma makes a terrible leader, but can collect a band of idiots willing to die for her cause readily.

Sounds like my ex.

>>52087442
Literally the *only* limitation on strength by gender has a entry for each gender of each race: >>52070277

>>52088599
I lost my right for wizardhood quite a lot of time ago, anon.
By becoming a warlock.

>>52072253
>>52072280
speaking of biology, there is quite a number of women who did and are doing significant research, such as :
the two women who discovered the Crispr-Cas9 system, Emmanuelle Charpentier, and Jennifer Doudna
Barbara McClintock who discovered transposon elements in the DNA
Rosalind Franklin who took the first pic of the double-stranded DNA molecules (which got stolen by the guys who will recieved later the nobel prize for the discovery of the helical structure of the DNA)
and so on ...

File: 1484889097521.jpg (62KB, 374x767px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 374x767px

>this whole thread

why does dexterity never govern what the word dexterity means?, honest question. A card dealer has more dexterity than a cheer leader even if she can do handsprings. If a fat guy can catch a fastball every time but a runner cant who is more dexterous and what is agility?

>>52095017
That's simply a symptom of the very limited DND stats which don't separate dexterity and agility, and instead use one despite the fact that they are radically different things.

A gymnast and a classically trained pianist have extremely different abilities and it would be nice to see that represented in a game. It's part of the reason why I started playing games besides DND and their kin.

Dammit, why is this thread still alive?

>>52095087
what games would you recommend friendo?

>>52095107
You realize you just invited and almost guaranteed for someone to remake this thread a few hours after this one dies.

File: 1428321784637.gif (2MB, 480x292px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x292px

>>52090768
Or by looking at this thread and ones like it men should get -8 Wis -8 Int.

>>52095349
>"muh sogyny"

>>52069140
Males get a 25% chance to lose suspension of disbelief. Not all that bad in combat but they make terrible DMs, writers, or people in general.

>>52069140
-4 strength is unrealistic. If you actually want to meme about gender, it should be an ability score cap.

>>52069140
Well, if you actually want to take Biology of both sexs into account, Males would have higher strengt, women would have high dex since they develope fine motor skills faster then males.

>>52069254
Watch a man give a speech then a woman, then tell me who has more charisma, hint, what gender leaders have been demeocaraticly elected more.

>>52069140
Bait: the thread

>>52079561
School performance is much more about diligence than intelligence.

>>52096270
It certainly has nothing to do with cultural imprinting!

Even if you're a misogynistic faggot, the whole -4 argument doesn't make sense.

Are you seriously telling me that, by nature, a six foot tall woman is statistically weaker than a two foot tall male gnome?

File: 24q7mk1ooecx.png (646KB, 1050x1050px) Image search: [Google]

646KB, 1050x1050px

>>52096346
The strongest women are weaker than the average man.

>>52096346
Are you retarded? We already went over this in the thread.
>>52070277

File: 1430593801228.jpg (111KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 400x300px

>>52096051

>>52096270
To be fair, oration is a skill that takes time and practice to develop.

That said, men will get to their point quickly and not waste everyone's time.

>>52096486
That's why I said gnome male, not human male you troglodyte.
>tg reading comprehension

>>52096346
>a six foot tall woman is statistically weaker than a two foot tall male gnome?

No, they actually both have equal potential. See >>52070277

File: AE1.gif (588KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

588KB, 500x375px

>>52069140
Female humans:

Females have higher pain tolerance and live longer. +2 con.

Females are more graceful and flexible. +2 Dex.

Females have weaker upper bodies. -2 Str.

Females are taught to be quiet. -2 intimidate. Does not apply if raised outside human civilization.

Females have a lower center of gravity. +2 balance and +2 against trip.

Male humans:

Males are oblivious. -2 Wis

Males have stronger upper bodies. +2 Str.

Males are taller. +5 ft movement speed.

Males are taught to lead. +2 Diplomacy and intimidate. Does not apply if raised outside human civilization.

>>52079561
>university graduation rates
Mot women graduate from college with completely useless degrees, graduation rates mean nothing.

>>52092561
Do you get to summon succubi?

>>52101754
Only once.

File: 119wjdw.jpg (41KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 569x428px

>>52069140
How about +2 cha and -2 Str for ladies and +2 str and -2 cha for dudes?

>>52071141
sewing and braiding are learned skills that are not inherently restricted to women. Especially since braiding goes beyond just hair and sewing can go from patching up a tear to sewing a wound closed