Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group

Uhlwolf · Novice Joined: 18 Jan 2012 Posts: 22

In reviewing the hindrances I was surprised that they did not include "female" given the forced gender roles and strictures on women in the Victorian Era.

Is it simply a standard alteration that Savage Worlds uses for its various lines that these worlds have gender equality?

jpk · Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:39 pm Post subject:

The choice is largely up to you.

In practice, most groups play games with a modern sense of gender roles, no matter what the rules might state.

If that's not the case in a group's Victorian-era game, female isn't so much of a Hindrance as it is a difference. Formal society that places strictures on a female also allows for certain benefits, most notably that they likely won't be attacked until all the men are put down and she continues to fight. Less formal society that ignores such niceties would also be less likely to expect stricter gender roles.

And, generally, Victorian-era games are assumed to be played with somewhat romanticized idea of the era, not the grittiest of reality of the era. I've yet to see a chapter on body lice or cholera in any Victorian RPG, after all.
_________________
Joel Kinstle
Pinnacle Entertainment, www.peginc.com

sjmiller

Uhlwolf · Novice Joined: 18 Jan 2012 Posts: 22

SavageGamerGirl · Heroic Joined: 24 Oct 2010 Posts: 1273

Women have another slight advantage in a Victorian setting, also.

They get to wear armor, and it's not only socially acceptable, it's required.

The woven cloths, thick laces, and wooden and whalebone stays of a typical Victorian corset should be considered every bit as good as Savage Worlds' leather armor, covering the torso only. It would be improper for a Victorian lady to go about without her corset, and it has the benefit of perhaps being able to turn aside a blade or bullet.

Now, it also wouldn't be too far out of line to penalize Climbing, Fighting, Swimming, and Agility Trait rolls by -1 due to restricted movement from the corset's rigidity. That might be a little too harsh, though.
_________________
'But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: 'we're all mad here.'
The Order of the Dice... OF DOOM!

Jordan Peacock · Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject:

Vinzent · Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:29 pm Post subject:

How was female a hindrance? Sure men got all the jobs and the vote but when the ship is going down, men have to stay on board until the very end. I'd say it evens out.
_________________
My Savage Worlds Blog
Get off the Human reservation. Read The Starrunner by C.B. Jones

Lord Inar

steelbrok · Veteran Joined: 07 Aug 2005 Posts: 795 Location: UK

The Dread Polack · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:15 am Post subject:

I played a pulp one-shot once (Hero System), where gender inequality was mostly roleplayed in the background. Honestly, playing a bigot, even a well-meaning bigot isn't fun.

In a pre-civil war campaign, you could create an Edge that gives you black slave that you can order around. It would be setting appropriate, but nobody I know would take it.

One amusing disadvantage the woman in our pulp one-shot had was that she was rendered physically helpless if a man grabbed her by the wrist. We all had a chuckle. The player played it out. It was used once for dramatic effect, and that was it. Pretty sure we wouldn't have gone with that for a long-term campaign.

SavageGamerGirl · Heroic Joined: 24 Oct 2010 Posts: 1273

To be completely realistic about it, the main disadvantages of being female in that era, or any era previous to the current one really, were social and economic. Those aren't always easy to get across in an RPG.

Your job prospects were extremely limited, so you couldn't support yourself if you had to. You NEEDED a husband if you didn't want to starve, or a father who didn't mind supporting you. Not being married past a certain age was it's own social stigma. If you went too far beyond the expected age to be married chances were that you never would be. You weren't allowed to vote (at least until 1920), so you couldn't even petition your representatives for change. Even if your husband was fabulously wealthy, everything owned was HIS. Not a scrap was actually yours. You couldn't own property, and certainly not any part of his estate. That honor went to his male heir. If he died and you had no son, oops, too bad, you just went from fabulously wealthy to hoping to high heaven that your husband's brother or whatever close male relative would inherit his estate wouldn't mind keeping you on, or that you get remarried (after an appropriately long period of mourning) before someone else swoops in to take your husband's wealth and property.

None of the above would ever likely come up in an RPG, so trying to build a Hindrance around it is pointless.

I agree that if you wanted to at least touch on the social ramifications of being female in the Victorian era, then Outsider is probably the way to go, applied if the female character ever steps out of her place in society.

But I wouldn't even do that, actually. In RPGs, we are creating a romanticized version of a bygone era, not a historical recreation. If we were completely true to history, playing in a past era would probably not be much fun for anyone at all, regardless of race or gender.
_________________
'But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: 'we're all mad here.'
The Order of the Dice... OF DOOM!

Lord Inar · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:12 pm Post subject:

newForumNewName · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:39 pm Post subject:

Lord Inar · Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:13 am Post subject:

...and it is great fun to boot!

Early on we got crocked by several undead and had to spend a month convalescing, but that was the perfect opportunity for our characters to get to know each other better. So of course it worked out well in the end.
_________________
Lord Inar
Sherwood and Gaslight
Rocky Mountain Savages
SharkBytes

BPIJonathan