Should females be represented differently than males in RPGs?

[J1M]

Can someone explain why people care so much more about representing sexual dimorphism when it comes to STR, but are so casual about INT and WIS?

Because women can reach the same high IQ, memory, reasoning, and learning ability as men. It's just that they fall more into the average rather than the extremes. Here's a good graphic showing the difference.



Women are the red line and men are the blue line.

Source

Wisdom represents enlightenment, judgment, guile, willpower, common sense, and intuition. Women are pretty much equal in this department.

If you have anything to the contrary feel free to present it.

Note I'm using AD&D 2E's definitions for the attributes.

You've elaborated my question, but haven't answered it. 140 IQ is what, 14 INT? If we are talking about characters starting with 18 or 20, they aren't even on the graph.

Given those distributions, why don't people suggest an INT cap for female characters instead of an INT bonus? Or higher point buy costs instead of always being concerned about STR?

[MadPreacher]

You've elaborated my question, but haven't answered it.

I did answer it. Women are equal to men when it comes to Intelligence and Wisdom. It's at the extremes where they differ. Thus, sexual dimorphism plays no role in those stats.

140 IQ is what, 14 INT?

This ability gives only a general indication of a character’s mental acuity. A semi-intelligent character (Int 3 or 4) can speak (with difficulty) and is apt to react instinctively and impulsively. He is not hopeless as a player character (PC), but playing such a character cor-rectly is not easy. A character with low Intelligence (Int 5–7) could also be called dull-witted or slow. A very intelligent person (Int 11 or 12) picks up new ideas quickly and learns easily. A highly intelligent character (Int 13 or 14) is one who can solve most problems without even trying very hard. One with exceptional intelligence (Int 15 or 16) is noticeably above the norm. A genius character is brilliant (Int 17 or 18). A character beyond genius is potentially more clever and more brilliant than can possibly be imagined.

It doesn't say how many IQ points 1 point of Int means. If we go by the max IQ being 140 then that would be Int 18.

Given those distributions, why don't people suggest an INT cap for female characters instead of an INT bonus?

Why would women have a cap on Intelligence when they can reach the same 140 IQ as men? It's just rarer that they do as most women fall in the average. Since player characters by definition are heroes they are not average in the slightest.

Or higher point buy costs instead of always being concerned about STR?

If you can find me one woman that can lift as much as the men's world record holder for a bench press of 1,350 pounds I'll change my Strength cap. Go now and find that unicorn of a woman.

Women can't lift as much as men. News at 11.

[J1M]

140 IQ as the cap.

This board has multiple people with IQs higher than that.

It wasn't what I was expecting, but at least you answered my question.

[MadPreacher]

140 IQ as the cap.

This board has multiple people with IQs higher than that.

It wasn't what I was expecting, but at least you answered my question.

It all depends upon the classification system you use. Some only go up to 130 while others go up to 170. Choose your flavor and go from there. Also, I qualified my statement with "IF" the cap is 140 then it would be 18. It's hilarious how you ignore the qualifier to the statement.

[aeternalis]

140 IQ as the cap.

This board has multiple people with IQs higher than that.

It wasn't what I was expecting, but at least you answered my question.

I don't actually know my own IQ, so I can't speak to the middle part, but I agree 140 is a poor cap. If you simply mapped the probability of rolling an 18 (1/216) on 3d6, then maybe so (since 145 is about 1/1000 or 3 stdev; that might actually be 148, I forget) but... the top end of human intelligence seems to lie beyond that, even if you don't believe Chris Langan's IQ scores or whatever.

The points about women having a lower standard deviation than men seem true enough (evolutionarily speaking), but I also believe there are some more subtle differences between intelligences that are difficult to capture. (Nor am I sold on IQ = Intelligence at all in general. It's a decent enough proxy, but IRL seems more complicated, and different conceptions of "giftedness" probably play into this.)

It all depends upon the classification system you use. Some only go up to 130 while others go up to 170. Choose your flavor and go from there. Also, I qualified my statement with "IF" the cap is 140 then it would be 18. It's hilarious how you ignore the qualifier to the statement.

I thought Stanford-Binet was fairly standard but maybe I'm wrong.

My kid is getting IQ testing soon so I might have more opinions after that.

[Gastrick]

You can see in the 1870 war against France for how effective Prussian Germany was under good leadership.

[citation needed]

The US didn't have a government run education system in the majority of the states until the 1870s. Prior to that what was called public schools back then were in reality private schools as the government was not involved at all in the running of them.

To help unify the nation after the Revolutionary War, textbooks were written to standardize spelling and pronunciation and to instill patriotism and religious beliefs in students. At the same time, these textbooks included negative stereotypes of Native Americans and certain immigrant groups. The children going to school continued primarily to be those from wealthy families. By the mid-1800s, a call for free, compulsory education had begun, and compulsory education became widespread by the end of the century. This was an important development, as children from all social classes could now receive a free, formal education. Compulsory education was intended to further national unity and to teach immigrants “American” values. It also arose because of industrialization, as an industrial economy demanded reading, writing, and math skills much more than an agricultural economy had.

Source

Upon becoming the secretary of education of Massachusetts in 1837, Horace Mann (1796–1859) worked to create a statewide system of professional teachers, based on the Prussian model of "common schools." Prussia was attempting to develop a system of education by which all students were entitled to the same content in their public classes. Mann initially focused on elementary education and on training teachers. The common-school movement quickly gained strength across the North. Connecticut adopted a similar system in 1849, and Massachusetts passed a compulsory attendance law in 1852.[78][79] Mann's crusading style attracted wide middle-class support. Historian Ellwood P. Cubberley asserts:

No one did more than he to establish in the minds of the American people the conception that education should be universal, non-sectarian, free, and that its aims should be social efficiency, civic virtue, and character, rather than mere learning or the advancement of sectarian ends.[80]

Source

This doesn't answer my question of how you know these private schools weren't strict, with heavy discipline, and that they didn't have the "collectivist conformity" of shared uniforms and normal hairstyles.

For inventions (first car)

Invented by the French in 1769 and used steam power.

Made a small error, first practical car. This guy here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Benz

There's also the guy who invented the diesel engine, the Father of Electric Engineering, the guy who created airships, etc.

literature (Goethe)

Compare that to Mark Twain and Edgar Allen Poe.

Yes, he's a much better author and playwright than either of them.

music (beethoven, wagner)

Of which the US created Jazz, Blues, Bluegrass, Country, and Rock 'n Roll. Of which most of the movers and shakers that created these genres were homeschooled or went to a public school before they were destroyed by the US Department of Education that was created by Jimmy Carter. You had a point somewhere right?

Those genres all suck, and even with Rock which I like, it's for being exciting rather than being beautiful-to-listen-to like with those classical composers. Also that most of those were created after Prussia was no longer around.

Germany was either equal or greater than the U.S.

Oh dick measuring contest I see. The US is a superpower and Germany is getting welfare from US taxpayers while hiding behind US troops. When your country can spend as much of your GDP on your own defense let me know.

Strange to bring up modern times, I think we both know these are very different countries than they once were.

The real reason behind all of these things is genetics, that people back then had superior blood to those today and were capable of much more. Like the 19th century study of reaction times, they have steadily decreased over time, which strongly correlates with intelligence, and shows that people have been steadily getting dumber for over 120 years. While intelligence is necessary for great things, it isn't sufficient, where strong discipline and endurance for long efforts is also needed.

Genetics has no bearing on what you are taught. That was my point. I could careless of the shit you shoveled here since it's not at issue.

Not that this matters to me, but literacy has actually gone up over time. The obvious explanation being that education wasn't always universal, and a significant portion of the population didn't go to any schools:

You lack a source for your chart and it begins after most states had adopted mandatory government education.



There's my proof that your collectivist education has failed. I want you to refute that.

I did earlier by showing how well "collectivist education" worked in Prussia. The video agrees with my simpler explanation for why people are getting dumber at 3:02

[Gastrick]

German culture is significantly older than American culture. For the relatively short amount of time the US has existed, it has created an exceptional amount of great music and art.

We also have the largest number of Nobel laurates. The US has 403 while Germany has a measly 114.

Source

Although I dislike defending modern Germany, the US has 4 times the population, and the Nobel Prize was started in 1901, so it makes sense that America would have 3.5 times the nobel laureates.

[MadPreacher]

I thought Stanford-Binet was fairly standard but maybe I'm wrong.

You have Wechsler (128+), Stanford-Binet (140+), Woodcock-Johnson (131+), and K-ABC (130+).

Wechsler always was 128+, but the current is 130+.

Stanford-Binet varied from 140+ to the earlier 1937 160-169 range. Current max is 132+.

When comparing the written rules of AD&D 2E for Intelligence you have to remember what IQ tests were available at the time. You have Wechsler 1981 (130+), K-ABC 1983 (130+), and Stanford-Binef 1986 (132+). So when AD&D 2E talked about 140 IQ they are referring to a score that is in excess of the then current caps for the three IQ tests.

Source

This doesn't answer my question of how you know these private schools weren't strict, with heavy discipline, and that they didn't have the "collectivist conformity" of shared uniforms and normal hairstyles.

Nice moving of the goal posts. How I know is historical documentation. There weren't government paid for schools. How schooling was done was through parents hiring a teacher(s) to run a local school (most people lived in communities of several hundred people at the time. The parents split the cost for running the school, paying the teacher, and in many cases if the teacher didn't have a home they would be roomed with a family as part of their payment.

Made a small error, first practical car.

A steam powered car was practical. What you mean to say is the first internal combustion engine.

Father of Electric Engineering

I'm reading the history of electrical engineering and Carl isn't listed.

the guy who created airships

First airship was created by Brazilian Bartolomeu de Gusmão in 1709. The first powered airship was done by Henri Giffard and flew in 1852. He was French.

For all your claims about a superior indoctrination you have yet to show that here. Every claim you made as being done by a German was actually done by someone else. Did Germans contribute to science? Yes. Did they create things? Yes.

Those genres all suck, and even with Rock which I like, it's for being exciting rather than being beautiful-to-listen-to like with those classical composers. Also that most of those were created after Prussia was no longer around.

I don't care what you like or don't like. It's not germane to the discussion at hand.

I did earlier by showing how well "collectivist education" worked in Prussia.

Yet it produced generations of morons that lacked critical thinking and let their government create 2 world wars. Strange thing to be proud of.

Although I dislike defending modern Germany, the US has 4 times the population, and the Nobel Prize was started in 1901, so it makes sense that America would have 3.5 times the nobel laureates.

So you admit that Americans are smarter and have created far more inventions that have benefited the world than Germany. It's good to know that the US is leading the pack in geniuses and inventions.

Tell me again how your collectivist indoctrination is paying off. I could use a good laugh since every measurement shows Germany to be woefully behind most other European nations by a small margin and the US by leaps and bounds.

[Gastrick]

I'm getting rather tired of this argument, it has also swerved quite far off of my original position.

Father of Electric Engineering

I'm reading the history of electrical engineering and Carl isn't listed.

the guy who created airships

First airship was created by Bartolomeu de Gusmão in 1709. The first powered airship was done by Henri Giffard and flew in 1852. He was French.

https://www.nutsvolts.com/magazine/arti ... ngineering
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_von_Zeppelin

I did earlier by showing how well "collectivist education" worked in Prussia.

Yet it produced generations of morons that lacked critical thinking and let their government create 2 world wars.

Although I dislike defending modern Germany, the US has 4 times the population, and the Nobel Prize was started in 1901, so it makes sense that America would have 3.5 times the nobel laureates.

So you admit that Americans are smarter and have created far more inventions that have benefited the world than Germany. It's good to know that the US is leading the pack in geniuses and inventions.

[MadPreacher]

I'm getting rather tired of this argument, it has also swerved quite far off of my original position.

Yes, you have yet to produce a single example about how your inferior government indoctrination system actually works better than the individualistic one used by the US until the past 50 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_von_Zeppelin

That's a type of airship. He didn't invent all airships as you originally claimed.

the guy who created airships

You had a point about your superior collectivist indoctrination yet you've committed numerous factual errors that anyone with a search engine can show you for the idiot that you are.

Don't get me wrong dude. I really like you and your posts. It's just so easy to turn your ignorant talking points against you with actual historical facts.

[Gastrick]

Yes, you have yet to produce a single example about how your inferior government indoctrination system actually works better than the individualistic one used by the US until the past 50 years.

The original discussion was about government-run Japanese school policy A vs. government-run Japanese school policy B. I don't see it as a goal or possible to make great geniuses and great artists through different types of schooling.

Don't get me wrong dude. I really like you and your posts.

That's nice to hear

[MadPreacher]

The original discussion was about government-run Japanese school policy A vs. government-run Japanese school policy B.

Was it?

A "looser, more Western, individualistic policy" for students is a bad thing, the opposite is far superior.

You made the claim that the "looser, more Western, individualistic policy" for students is a bad thing. You brought up the west and by extension the US. That's why I commented. You then proceed to tell verifiable historical untruths to prop up the failed education system of your home country.

I don't see it as a goal or possible to make great geniuses and great artists through different types of schooling.

In life there are a variety of metrics used to determine success of a certain thing. We can use the Nobel prizes as an unbiased measure of current and past education policies for the entire world. The US has 403 Nobel prizes, Germany has 114, and Japan has a measly 29. Which education system is better by this metric? It's overwhelmingly the US individualistic policy of before 1980 and the creation of the US Department of Education.

So what is your actual point in your original comment? US is bad and Japan/Germany are good for their education system?

[WhiteShark]

Which generation are you referring to here? (zoomer, younger millenial, older millenial, younger Gen X, older Gen X)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yutori_education
The Japanese version of page says it lasted from 1980 to 2010, so young Gen X through young Millenials, approximately.

Edit: Just read that in 2002 they started teaching π as 3 and reduced overall classtime by 30%.

[WhiteShark]

We can use the Nobel prizes as an unbiased measure of current and past education policies for the entire world.

I firmly believe in American exceptionalism but claiming Nobel prizes are unbiased is absurd, unless you think that Obama deserved his """Peace""" prize.

[Segata]

Jews are over-represented among Nobel winners.

[MadPreacher]

I firmly believe in American exceptionalism but claiming Nobel prizes are unbiased is absurd, unless you think that Obama deserved his """Peace""" prize.

When you pull out the "Peace" Prize the US still has 382 prizes for literature, physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, and economics. When you remove the economics winners the US now has 311 prizes.

I'm sure you had a point in your dismissal of US accomplishments in actual science right?

[WhiteShark]

I'm sure you had a point in your dismissal of US accomplishments in actual science right?

Do you enjoy misrepresenting what other people say? When did I dismiss the US accomplishments in actual science? May I remind you, this is what I said in the very post to which you're responding:

I firmly believe in American exceptionalism but claiming Nobel prizes are unbiased is absurd, unless you think that Obama deserved his """Peace""" prize.

This is off-topic anyway, so I'm not going to respond any further in this argument.

[MadPreacher]

Do you enjoy misrepresenting what other people say? When did I dismiss the US accomplishments in actual science?

Let me cite your post where you did exactly that under the guise of being "unbiased". You misrepresented yourself and I just pointed it out by citing all the prizes given in the other four science categories.

I firmly believe in American exceptionalism but claiming Nobel prizes are unbiased is absurd, unless you think that Obama deserved his """Peace""" prize.

I rest my case.

This is off-topic anyway, so I'm not going to respond any further in this argument.

I accept your loss with graciousness. Other people should look up to you for inspiration on how to handle losing an argument.

[Theodora]

Yes women should be represented differently, in terms of intellect and emotional capability, all of which women are superior at when compared to men. Also virgin men should be weak, look no further than individuals like madpreacher, just a pathetic virgin...

[aeternalis]

Yes women should be represented differently, in terms of intellect and emotional capability, all of which women are superior at when compared to men. Also virgin men should be weak, look no further than individuals like madpreacher, just a pathetic virgin...

If you're going to make a fake Theo account you could at least try a little harder to mimic the writing style.

[KnightoftheWind]

Yes women should be represented differently, in terms of intellect and emotional capability, all of which women are superior at when compared to men. Also virgin men should be weak, look no further than individuals like madpreacher, just a pathetic virgin...

Women, intellect, and emotional capability should not be written in the same sentence. Women lack both of those things, and more.

[Fulcanelli]

I like rolling for stats over point buy, and giving male and female characters bonuses and maluses on stats similar to D&D racial bonus/penalties.
This way not every individual is born equal, and there are cases of exceptional females who can excel as warriors.
I like how gender was treated in Mount & Blade Warband, and how gender as well as race and stats heavily affected how the world treated your character in Arcanum, Fallout etc.
Games like POE2 where the military is made up of 61% yass qween girlbosses take the fun out of doing female runs, essentially boiling it down to a cosmetic choice.