No Alphabets 7.1 — Baldur's Gate 3

[rusty_shackleford]

She looks like someone who'd be blown away if I sneezed in her direction. She doesn't look muscular or strong. With her build, she'd be more suited to the role of a rogue than a warrior.

She's not even a mammal as far as I know, how many muscular frogs have you seen?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Always was? Who has a problem with Bae'zel?

Yes, they're not even demihuman(which I think is too close to human for it to count), but some lizard race that lays eggs.

Another example is Drow, which were specifically created to turn human sexual dimorphism on its head.

She looks like someone who'd be blown away if I sneezed in her direction. She doesn't look muscular or strong. With her build, she'd be more suited to the role of a rogue than a warrior.

You assume that that stature is the same as the stature of a human though.

Did you just assume her stature?

8e3~2.jpg

[jebacdrkac]

Laezel should have had Karalach's body, while the reddit woman would look better with ghoul's. She shouldn't be a warrior in the first place; a rogue/assassin background suits her better rather than a big StRoNg woman who supposedly survived a decade on the frontlines

[rusty_shackleford]

Laezel should have had Karalach's body, while the reddit woman would look better with ghoul's. She shouldn't be a warrior in the first place; a rogue/assassin background suits her better rather than a big StRoNg woman who supposedly survived a decade on the frontlines

reddit woman was a deconstruction of Red Sonja.
She's even red, haha, GET IT???

They beat you over the head with that ****.

[logincrash]

Let me add this as a plus that having armor as a medieval/fantasy style fighter means that your "moveset" is very limited.
We all know the Crusader Knights from history, and they were the most well equipped and armored fighters around that time. It is no secret that in such armor you cannot move as freely. Therefore, having less armor for a female (or just simply agile) type warrior is the best counterpart.

The "Wearing armor means you cannot move around freely" is literally a hollyjew meme. You can run, move and even do rolls wearing full armor.

I was going to post the same exact video.
It also should be said that the people in this video are modern men and not full time knights who regularly wore plate armor since adolescence. And the dude at 0:30 literally does a cartwheel in full armor.
But what can you expect from a coomer with an AI slop avatar.

[Jordy]

I don't think covering up CERTAIN characters specifically for immersion, is the same as censorship.

Who would turn up to a political event dressed like they're on a night out? Especially in that setting.

Sure a player character barbarian woman might, but not "noble / rich" aristocrat NPCs.

Let me add this as a plus that having armor as a medieval/fantasy style fighter means that your "moveset" is very limited.
We all know the Crusader Knights from history, and they were the most well equipped and armored fighters around that time. It is no secret that in such armor you cannot move as freely. Therefore, having less armor for a female (or just simply agile) type warrior is the best counterpart.
The best example is the Night Elves from Warcraft. Remember how they were introduced in Warcraft 3? That's why the females were usually the fighters, and the males are druids/caster type.

Sadly, the modern 'muricans think that a female showing some skin means sexualizing. Which is utterly stupid. I bet these people never went outside during summer season, and witnessed actual real women, because they barely have any clothing on. I guess we should scream on them too:
"Stop sexualizing yourself!"

What a clown world we live in...

The "Wearing armor means you cannot move around freely" is literally a hollyjew meme. You can run, move and even do rolls wearing full armor.

Posting this just because it's kino.

[Acrux]

Let me add this as a plus that having armor as a medieval/fantasy style fighter means that your "moveset" is very limited.
We all know the Crusader Knights from history, and they were the most well equipped and armored fighters around that time. It is no secret that in such armor you cannot move as freely. Therefore, having less armor for a female (or just simply agile) type warrior is the best counterpart.
The best example is the Night Elves from Warcraft. Remember how they were introduced in Warcraft 3? That's why the females were usually the fighters, and the males are druids/caster type.

Sadly, the modern 'muricans think that a female showing some skin means sexualizing. Which is utterly stupid. I bet these people never went outside during summer season, and witnessed actual real women, because they barely have any clothing on. I guess we should scream on them too:
"Stop sexualizing yourself!"

What a clown world we live in...

having female fighters is ******

It's fine for me in fiction and fantasy, if they are not Mary Sue plot armor types.
Like Eowin or Arwen, they were just fine. (Yeah I know, Eowin wasn't really a warrior..)

Arwen wasn't a warrior at all. She sat at home and knitted knitted Aragorn's standard.

[Acrux]

Like Eowin or Arwen, they were just fine. (Yeah I know, Eowin wasn't really a warrior..)

Arwen wasn't human, she's 3/4ths elf, which means a lot in tolkien's world

also she's a direct descendant of Bëor, and probably closer to something like 15/16th elf tbh

Not to mention a bit of Maiar.

[Magick]

I don't think covering up CERTAIN characters specifically for immersion, is the same as censorship.

Who would turn up to a political event dressed like they're on a night out? Especially in that setting.

Sure a player character barbarian woman might, but not "noble / rich" aristocrat NPCs.

Let me add this as a plus that having armor as a medieval/fantasy style fighter means that your "moveset" is very limited.
We all know the Crusader Knights from history, and they were the most well equipped and armored fighters around that time. It is no secret that in such armor you cannot move as freely. Therefore, having less armor for a female (or just simply agile) type warrior is the best counterpart.
The best example is the Night Elves from Warcraft. Remember how they were introduced in Warcraft 3? That's why the females were usually the fighters, and the males are druids/caster type.

Sadly, the modern 'muricans think that a female showing some skin means sexualizing. Which is utterly stupid. I bet these people never went outside during summer season, and witnessed actual real women, because they barely have any clothing on. I guess we should scream on them too:
"Stop sexualizing yourself!"

What a clown world we live in...

You're saying (mostly) the right thing, but for the wrong reasons.
Medieval armour restricts breathability, temperature control, sound and vision. It does not (heavily) restrict mobility.
The joints (waist, arms, legs) were all flexible and in later periods had besagews and rondels to protect those areas that were thinner / weaker / not covered by plate armour.

Women shouldn't wear heavy armour because they don't have the body frame nor muscle or stamina for it.

[Tangerine]

but also the historical Soviet army had women snipers who were surprisingly good at it.

I believe the stories about Soviet femoid snipers even less than bear and eagle cages.

[Zpyder]

[/quote]
Another example is Drow, which were specifically created to turn human sexual dimorphism on its head. Them being evil is well, you can maybe guess how Gygax viewed a female dominated society
[/quote]

And even this is gone away. First of all, that never made much sense when they had the males be the soldiers, the primary physical fighting force. In a society where the 'strong' survive, you don't put your weakest people as your military physical fighting force. Not if you want to win. Of course, strength is not limited to being defined as only physical strength. And the Drow add credence to this idea by defining strength as that which survives is strong. There are a number of ways to survive. But in the case of melee soldiers physical strength and physical abilities in general are important features, and males typically have an edge here, even among elves. Perhaps not as pronounced as in humans, but still there.

Now, they are not described as the females being bigger and/or stronger than males. In fact, males are slightly heavier in the newest editions. Now, there are spells that augment physical abilities and that can do more than natural abilities anyway, and Lolth can give her priestesses that spell as needed, so the females can use this for campaign flavor. But I personally like it where the females ruling is not by physical might, but by divine means, and societal pressure. Drow are not a brute race, like orcs, and this makes more sense, and gives more intrigue with better plots. I find it much more interesting with engaging power dynamics, and more fun that way personally.

But anyway, this goes back to what you were saying about the role females play, in this case, even when they are in power. Pulling strings behind the scenes or behind front lines. Great for story and strategy. But females should not be so prevalent if at all as front line fighters in a setting wherein most humanoids the males are physically naturally better suited for that role.

[rusty_shackleford]

but also the historical Soviet army had women snipers who were surprisingly good at it.

I believe the stories about Soviet femoid snipers even less than bear and eagle cages.

"Do you think they'd just… fabricate things like that? About such a major war? And nobody would call them out on it?"


There has been more media made about the tuskegee airmen than probably nearly any other part of WW2 besides the hall of costs, and if it's not #2, it's certainly close.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_ ... ar_culture

How did they perform in reality?

(The guy who wrote this —- Daniel L. Haulman — is considered to be the leading historical authority on the tuskegee airmen FWIW)

[Tangerine]

"Implication" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in making them seem competent.

[PixiGreen]

Doing another PT. Ser Aylin is magnificent! With your mod, the game is pure bliss!

[Lancaster]

but also the historical Soviet army had women snipers who were surprisingly good at it.

I believe the stories about Soviet femoid snipers even less than bear and eagle cages.

"Do you think they'd just… fabricate things like that? About such a major war? And nobody would call them out on it?"


There has been more media made about the tuskegee airmen than probably nearly any other part of WW2 besides the hall of costs, and if it's not #2, it's certainly close.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_ ... ar_culture

How did they perform in reality?

(The guy who wrote this —- Daniel L. Haulman — is considered to be the leading historical authority on the tuskegee airmen FWIW)

Thanks for watching these movies for me so I don't have to.

[TKVNC]

I don't think covering up CERTAIN characters specifically for immersion, is the same as censorship.

Who would turn up to a political event dressed like they're on a night out? Especially in that setting.

Sure a player character barbarian woman might, but not "noble / rich" aristocrat NPCs.

Let me add this as a plus that having armor as a medieval/fantasy style fighter means that your "moveset" is very limited.
We all know the Crusader Knights from history, and they were the most well equipped and armored fighters around that time. It is no secret that in such armor you cannot move as freely. Therefore, having less armor for a female (or just simply agile) type warrior is the best counterpart.
The best example is the Night Elves from Warcraft. Remember how they were introduced in Warcraft 3? That's why the females were usually the fighters, and the males are druids/caster type.

Sadly, the modern 'muricans think that a female showing some skin means sexualizing. Which is utterly stupid. I bet these people never went outside during summer season, and witnessed actual real women, because they barely have any clothing on. I guess we should scream on them too:
"Stop sexualizing yourself!"

What a clown world we live in...

You're saying (mostly) the right thing, but for the wrong reasons.
Medieval armour restricts breathability, temperature control, sound and vision. It does not (heavily) restrict mobility.
The joints (waist, arms, legs) were all flexible and in later periods had besagews and rondels to protect those areas that were thinner / weaker / not covered by plate armour.

Women shouldn't wear heavy armour because they don't have the body frame nor muscle or stamina for it.

Well, armour only really restricts breathability, and vision when you're wearing a visor (and or bevor - or in that case, just a bevor). Late Sallet helmets had bevors that could be pushed down or removed - and most helmets had visors that could be lifted - and this would often be done once actual combat had begun - visors and bevors were mostly for closing the gap, or a cavalry charge.

Even the famous great helm was worn over a bascinet, and would be taken off, and slung over the shoulders once you'd either closed the gap between you, and your opponent, or had finished your cavalry action.

Sound and heat though, those are entirely acceptable, and entirely true.

Women were simply no good as fighters, and in almost all instances, never were. Shield maidens were not real, and neither existed almost any other example of 'mythical women fighter' trope.War is a bloody business, and is carried out by men, as they have the muscle mass, and build for violence.

[gerey]

"Do you think they'd just… fabricate things like that? About such a major war? And nobody would call them out on it?"

If they're willing to fabricate so much about the victors, just imagine what they've fabricated about the losers.

[red36]

Hey, apologies if this is obvious to veterans but is there a way to non-'mainstream' mods easily? I'm using the bg3 mod manager and want to run a campaign for solo play with one set of mods and another with no mods with friends. However when i go to invite them to the multiplayer campaign even though the mods are disabled both inside the game as well as within the mod manager) they say they don't have the same mod settings. Should I just wait until we have finished the multiplayer campaign or is there a work around. I had to delete all the mod files and folders in order for them to connect again.

[loregamer]

Hey, apologies if this is obvious to veterans but is there a way to non-'mainstream' mods easily? I'm using the bg3 mod manager and want to run a campaign for solo play with one set of mods and another with no mods with friends. However when i go to invite them to the multiplayer campaign even though the mods are disabled both inside the game as well as within the mod manager) they say they don't have the same mod settings. Should I just wait until we have finished the multiplayer campaign or is there a work around. I had to delete all the mod files and folders in order for them to connect again.

You can try moving all the pak files out of your mod folder when you're playing with them, and then move them back when you're playing solo.

Do you have loose files installed to your game as well? That can mess things up

[red36]

Hey, apologies if this is obvious to veterans but is there a way to non-'mainstream' mods easily? I'm using the bg3 mod manager and want to run a campaign for solo play with one set of mods and another with no mods with friends. However when i go to invite them to the multiplayer campaign even though the mods are disabled both inside the game as well as within the mod manager) they say they don't have the same mod settings. Should I just wait until we have finished the multiplayer campaign or is there a work around. I had to delete all the mod files and folders in order for them to connect again.

You can try moving all the pak files out of your mod folder when you're playing with them, and then move them back when you're playing solo.

Do you have loose files installed to your game as well? That can mess things up

No loose files! Just stuff from this website as far as I can tell.
I'll feel dumb but happy if it's that simple. When I deleted files it seemed like there was some kind of mod list config file that would also have to be managed? Is it just a matter of whatever pak files are in that folder is what the game can see? Thanks for the help!

[orinEsque]

Hey, apologies if this is obvious to veterans but is there a way to non-'mainstream' mods easily? I'm using the bg3 mod manager and want to run a campaign for solo play with one set of mods and another with no mods with friends. However when i go to invite them to the multiplayer campaign even though the mods are disabled both inside the game as well as within the mod manager) they say they don't have the same mod settings. Should I just wait until we have finished the multiplayer campaign or is there a work around. I had to delete all the mod files and folders in order for them to connect again.

You can try moving all the pak files out of your mod folder when you're playing with them, and then move them back when you're playing solo.

Do you have loose files installed to your game as well? That can mess things up

No loose files! Just stuff from this website as far as I can tell.
I'll feel dumb but happy if it's that simple. When I deleted files it seemed like there was some kind of mod list config file that would also have to be managed? Is it just a matter of whatever pak files are in that folder is what the game can see? Thanks for the help!

yes, just move the pak files files out of the mod folder and make sure to go into bg3 mod manager to export your modless load order

[Kain]

Can you guess why?
https://ibb.co/SJgX3cc

[Delacroix]

Forgotten Realms suuuucks, dude. World of Greyhawk is where it's at. https://greyhawkonline.com/greyhawkwiki/Greyhawk

Now there's an oldie. Greyhawk was so short lived. I had the map and everything then they suddenly dropped it. I wonder what the story was behind that.

[Delacroix]

You're saying (mostly) the right thing, but for the wrong reasons.
Medieval armour restricts breathability, temperature control, sound and vision. It does not (heavily) restrict mobility.
The joints (waist, arms, legs) were all flexible and in later periods had besagews and rondels to protect those areas that were thinner / weaker / not covered by plate armour.

Women shouldn't wear heavy armour because they don't have the body frame nor muscle or stamina for it.

One can find videos online of people in armor doing cartwheels. The idea that you lose mobility in armor is a myth. Medieval armor is very articulated. I happen to have a suit. I will say, however, I can't put the second arm piece on once I have the first on. So maybe a slight loss of total mobility, also mine isn't made by the best medieval smiths.

[Acrux]

Forgotten Realms suuuucks, dude. World of Greyhawk is where it's at. https://greyhawkonline.com/greyhawkwiki/Greyhawk

Now there's an oldie. Greyhawk was so short lived. I had the map and everything then they suddenly dropped it. I wonder what the story was behind that.

Short answer: Dragonlance.

Longer answer: since it was Gary's setting, and he was starting to do other things - like try to drum up support for a D&D movie and the cartoon - he wasn't creating as much for Greyhawk. This was also around when they stole TSR from him. There were still a few more Greyhawk modules made, including the infamous Castle Greyhawk that was a big FU to Gygax.

I've heard there's a small section on Greyhawk/Oerth are in the new 2024 DMG.

[Kain]

One can find videos online of people in armor doing cartwheels. The idea that you lose mobility in armor is a myth. Medieval armor is very articulated. I happen to have a suit. I will say, however, I can't put the second arm piece on once I have the first on. So maybe a slight loss of total mobility, also mine isn't made by the best medieval smiths.

Knights back in the day needed squires and servants to help put on and off their full plate armor. It's hard to do so by yourself.

[logincrash]

One can find videos online of people in armor doing cartwheels. The idea that you lose mobility in armor is a myth. Medieval armor is very articulated. I happen to have a suit. I will say, however, I can't put the second arm piece on once I have the first on. So maybe a slight loss of total mobility, also mine isn't made by the best medieval smiths.

Knights back in the day needed squires and servants to help put on and off their full plate armor. It's hard to do so by yourself.

Yeah, no ****. But having difficulty buckling a hundred straps on your back doesn't mean that you lose mobility on the battlefield.

[Kain]

Yeah, no ****. But having difficulty buckling a hundred straps on your back doesn't mean that you lose mobility on the battlefield.

Perhaps not. But I hear somewhere that medieval full plate is so heavy that if a knight fell off his horse, he won't be able to get up. Carrying up to 110 pounds with your whole body is a massive stamina drain and greatly affects your mobility. That's why they put knights on horses and not run around the battlefield on foot like a ordinary soldier. And full plate is expensive, only sons of noble houses can afford it. So there is more in the life of a knight than just wearing his heavy load and swinging his sword. They are not battle monks. Also this:https://www.livescience.com/15128-armor ... nergy.html

[logincrash]

Yeah, no ****. But having difficulty buckling a hundred straps on your back doesn't mean that you lose mobility on the battlefield.

Perhaps not. But I hear somewhere that medieval full plate is so heavy that if a knight fell off his horse, he won't be able to get up. Carrying up to 110 pounds with your whole body is a massive stamina drain and greatly affects your mobility. That's why they put knights on horses and not run around the battlefield on foot like a ordinary soldier. And full plate is expensive, only sons of noble houses can afford it. So there is more in the life of a knight than just wearing his heavy load and swinging his sword. They are not battle monks. Also this:https://www.livescience.com/15128-armor ... nergy.html

All of this is ********.
There are videos in this very thread of people in full armor doing flips and getting up from prone in seconds.
Nice phrasing on the "up to 110 pounds." A typical suit of full plate weighs about 55 pounds. That is less than a standard combat load for a US army soldier (about 80 pounds).
Knights were a warrior class. Their prestige and privileges come from the fact that their job is to fight in wars. If there are no wars, they train (tournaments and ****).
Also this "study" you linked is about a literal LARPer walking on a treadmill in his replica suit of armor. He's not a "son of a noble house" who trained for war since childhood and could afford a battle-ready suit of full plate with proper weight distribution.
Are you gonna tell me that swords weren't sharp and were just used to bash open full plate armor next?

[Oyster Sauce]

I suspect moving in armor is actually difficult because I've only ever seen the one twenty year old video of a guy showing his best takes while resting between shots and still struggling to move get posted as evidence that it isn't