After playing Total War, Something I think is cool about this game...

[Toldavf]

a fantasy game (with magic...)

Exactly! Some suspension of disbelief is necessary for any fantasy setting, the world is amazing, the races are excellent and well fleshed out, history and lore is deep, gritty and consistent (mostly). People should enjoy it for what it is instead of trying to see some non existent political agenda behind the fluff.

[Fallenkezef]

It's an interesting point. As technology made it easier for women to be truly equal to men in islamic/christian influenced societies, those same societies became MORE repressive if women.

Yet in pre-christian, primitive socities women had more respect, hell all across the social spectrum.
While the history channel's interpretation of Ivarr the Boneless is as about as accurate as Disney's Robin Hood, the fact remains he was a cripple who commanded a substantial part of the Great Heathen Army and later settled Dublin.

Try being a cripple in Europe between the 13th and 19th centuries

[HissiCNesS]

I don't understand all the hassle? This is a fantasy universe (with magic...) and if the creators want gender-equality in regards of power and whatsoever, so be it. As long as the core vibe of it stays the same (gritty, bloody, madness) and weapons and armor look badass who gives a damn if the protagonist has a puss€y or a d¡ck or both or something completely different between the legs or tentacles or you know you get the point.

And dispite what and how human history was and has evolved, why not strive for equality among humans (and non-human animals). Men and women should do whatever the fukk they wanna do as long as it is ethically and morally acceptable and not harmful to their fellow earthlings.

http://www.nationearth.com/

[Fallenkezef]

I don't understand all the hassle? This is a fantasy universe (with magic...) and if the creators want gender-equality in regards of power and whatsoever, so be it. As long as the core vibe of it stays the same (gritty, bloody, madness) and weapons and armor look badass who gives a damn if the protagonist has a puss€y or a d¡ck or both or something completely different between the legs or tentacles or you know you get the point.

And dispite what and how human history was and has evolved, why not strive for equality among humans (and non-human animals). Men and women should do whatever the fukk they wanna do as long as it is ethically and morally acceptable and not harmful to their fellow earthlings.

http://www.nationearth.com/

Tentacles, fun for all the fanily! Special christmas deal from Slaanesh inc, buy three tentacles get one free! Not enough orifices? That will not be a problem.....

One of the few things GW does well is gender equality.

Also I love how this game does realistic female armour! Female knights, WP's and High Elves are practical and don't look like shiny hookers.

[Toldavf]

I don't understand all the hassle? This is a fantasy universe (with magic...) and if the creators want gender-equality in regards of power and whatsoever, so be it. As long as the core vibe of it stays the same (gritty, bloody, madness) and weapons and armor look badass who gives a damn if the protagonist has a puss€y or a d¡ck or both or something completely different between the legs or tentacles or you know you get the point.

And dispite what and how human history was and has evolved, why not strive for equality among humans (and non-human animals). Men and women should do whatever the fukk they wanna do as long as it is ethically and morally acceptable and not harmful to their fellow earthlings.

http://www.nationearth.com/

Tentacles, fun for all the fanily! Special christmas deal from Slaanesh inc, buy three tentacles get one free! Not enough orifices? That will not be a problem.....

One of the few things GW does well is gender equality.

Also I love how this game does realistic female armour! Female knights, WP's and High Elves are practical and don't look like shiny hookers.

I mean boob pate is a bit unrealistic, but its defenatly allot better than bikinimail

[GodlessCrom]

That is how things work in neckbeard fictionland, no doubt.

Listen mate. I come from the part of the world where there was no electricity up to mid 20th century. My family got electricity in their house in 1983. Scythes were still being used, up until the 80's. We got nuclear families in the 50's. We still know from which tribes we come from, and our organized crime groups are based on tribal origins. Marrying a girl by abducting her was a common practice up until the 60's, when the state had to aggressively intervene. Automatic weapons were widely available after the WWII, so people were dying like flies, trying to abduct or defend girls.

My ancestors, from my grandfather and beyond, fought for the land with their neighbors. God knows how many people died in those family wars. Me and my grandfather are the only men in the last seven generations of my lineage, that didn't kill a person in an armed conflict. Grandad only did prison for aggravated assault though. Again, because of the land. My father's family house was burned down down twice in the last 150 years. My direct ancestor was impaled on a stake, just 150 years ago. We wiped out the family of a guy that was responsible. Drowned them in a river, collectively.

And that was my daddy's side of the family. There literally are folk songs about my mother's tribe's raiding endeavors, where they would raid villages and steal cattle. And it's not like 10 centuries ago. I'm talking about 100 years ago.


So no, you cant lecture me how backwards, patriarchal $hitholes of the world work.

What part of the world is this? Sounds like a pretty metal place to live. Or maybe just West Virginia (family is from west virginia, dont ban pls)

Also, just because something is some way in the 20th century doesnt mean it was that way all the time. Contrary to the way history is portrayed, history does not progress along a linear path from point A to point B. Things like cultural values and social mores can change quite drastically over the course of a century, let alone several centuries.

That being said, its safe to say that in the majority of human cultures across human history, men have been responsible for the vast majority of violence (and also the primary victims of it.) Almost all fantasy nowadays is far more egalitarian than the medieval history it draws on. Thats alright IMO. As long as its consistent within the world, it doesnt hurt suspension of disbelief.

[verterdegete]

counterargument

Ok, to be more clear. I will answer your first post.




You need to understand that people can't just start farming. In order to farm you need to have good climate and good quality of soil. If you live in some rocky/mountainous region, a desert, a steppe - you can't farm in a sufficient way to survive. So you live primarily of animal husbandry, because there is at least some sort of grass there. But the grass doesn't last forever. Since you don't know how to cultivate the land, it eventually grows barren. So you are constantly on the move for greener pastures. That's why the barbaric people usually live in a (semi) nomadic way.

Just to show an example, here are a few screenshots of the place where my family originates from. It's the Dinaric Alps, in Europe.

Spoiler:

So much for farming, amirite?

(I Don't live there. My father moved to a big city. I visit it often though.)



To go back on subject. You can't grow anything, except to scrap something to make bread from. You grow animals, but the pastures are weak. The cattle is small. It doesn't give a lot of meat or milk. You're hungry. Climate is harsh. Dangerous fauna. It's a hard life, and a constant struggle for survival. And you can't move out of there, because you'll enter a territory of some big civilization that will wipe you out.

So what do you do to survive? You fight for more land, and you steal. You steal from your neighbors. You steal from other tribes. And finally, you organize raiding parties into some rich civilization's territory. It is a life of violence, out of which a warrior culture is born. A culture of epic songs, manhood competitions, strict upbringing of boys. All to make a strong, rough man that can defend what belongs to him, a take what belongs to others. That's how you got Vikings, Mongols, Cossacks, Bedouins, Huns, Tatars, Ottomans etc. etc. etc. And finally, that's how you got them:

Spoiler:

Now, why women don't figure in? It's simple. Women are physically weaker than men. And it's not just that they lack the strength for warfare. They lack the strength for major aspects of primitive agriculture/animal husbandry. You asked me what makes a man using a rifle, more superior than woman using a rifle. A man can walk longer, run faster, carry more weight, perform heavy physical jobs related to military, like digging trenches and building pontoon bridges etc. It's not just lying down and shooting. Now, barbaric women were indeed very sturdy. But still not enough to engage themselves in warfare. Besides, somebody has to stay at home, take care of the children, make clothes, prepare food reserves for the winter etc.



And when it comes to the old school raiding, it was a very risky and difficult endeavor. Especially, if you're going into a territory of some big civilization, that has a huge, professional, well trained and better equipped army. So you have to play dirty. You attack weakly defended targets, at night, while the defending army is busy at some other place etc. etc. And then - you run as hell back to your place. All of that over often ridiculous distances, and over harsh geographic conditions. A commando type of mission, in which not even any man could join in. Only the bravest and the strongest. And those men are the basis of something that will later turn into formal nobility, once that society transforms from barbarism into a civilization.

No phuck ups. No PC. Only bare utilitarianism. Otherwise you're dead.



I'm becoming excessively boring with this. I'll refrain my self from writing on this topic. At least for some time.

[bwdaWAR]

Spoiler:

Ok, to be more clear. I will answer your first post.




You need to understand that people can't just farm. In order to farm you need to have good climate and good quality of soil. If you live in some rocky/mountainous region, a desert, a steppe - you can't farm in a sufficient way to survive. So you live primarily of animal husbandry, because there is at least some sort of grass there. But the grass doesn't last forever. Since you don't know how to cultivate the land, it eventually grows barren. So you are constantly on the move for greener pastures. That's why the barbaric people usually live in a (semi) nomadic way.

Just to show an example, here are a few screenshots of the place where my family originates from. It's the Dinaric Alps, in Europe.







So much for farming, amirite?

(I Don't live there. My father moved to a big city. I visit it often though.)



To go back on subject. You can't grow anything, except to scrap something to make bread from. You grow animals, but the pastures are weak. The cattle is small. It doesn't give a lot of meat or milk. You're hungry. Climate is harsh. Dangerous fauna. It's a hard life, and a constant struggle for survival. And you can't move out of there, because you'll enter a territory of some big civilization that will wipe you out.

So what do you do to survive? You fight for more land, and you steal. You steal from your neighbors. You steal from other tribes. And finally, you organize raiding parties into some rich civilization's territory. It is a life of violence, out of which a warrior culture is born. A culture of epic songs, manhood competitions, strict upbringing of boys. All to make a strong, rough man that can defend what belongs to him, a take what belongs to others. That's how you got Vikings, Mongols, Cossacks, Bedouins, Huns, Tatars, Ottomans etc. etc. etc. And finally, that's how you got them:




Now, why women don't figure in? It's simple. Women are physically weaker than men. And it's not just that they lack the strength for warfare. They lack the strength for major aspects of primitive agriculture/animal husbandry. You asked me what makes a man using a rifle, more superior than woman using a rifle. A man can walk longer, run faster, carry more weight, perform heavy physical jobs related to military, like digging trenches and building pontoon bridges etc. It's not just lying down and shooting. Now, barbaric women were indeed very sturdy. But still not enough to engage themselves in warfare. Besides, somebody has to stay at home, take care of the children, make clothes, prepare food reserves for the winter etc.



And when it comes to the old school raiding, it was a very risky and difficult endeavor. Especially, if you're going into a territory of some big civilization, that has a huge, professional, well trained and better equipped army. So you have to play dirty. You attack weakly defended targets, at night, while the defending army is busy at some other place etc. etc. And then - you run as hell back to your place. All of that over often ridiculous distances, and over harsh geographic conditions. A commando type of mission, in which not even any man could join in. Only the bravest and the strongest. And those men are the basis of something that will later turn into formal nobility, once that society transforms from barbarism into a civilization.

No phuck ups. No PC. Only bare utilitarianism. Otherwise you're dead.



I'm becoming excessively boring with this. I'll refrain my self from writing on this topic. At least for some time.

Let's go over these points. First of all, farming requires neither good soil nor good climate. It has been done in a wide variety of environments, as it happens to be different crops can be grown in different places. Barley used to be very popular in Europe, for example. The yield will not be as good but it will still be better and more reliable than the hunter-gatherer alternative or even animal husbandry.
Which brings us to the next point: you are mistaking "barbarian" for "nomad". No, they are not the same thing, and no, most "barbarians" were not "nomads", and yes, most of them farmed. Vikings for example, did. Some of the groups you described there only achieved any notoriety due to their expansionism, which comes from a complex historical background and has nothing to do with the lifestyle people had. Just a few counter-examples, ancient Rome started as a settled animal husbandry group, but during their actual expansions (as opposed to the back-and-forth wars they reputedly had with their neighbours at that early stage), they were farmers. The mongols would be completely unknown if it wasn't for the expansion under Genghis Khan that had more to do with the mastermind behind it than the conditions the people performing it lived under, noticeable that their empire collapsed very soon after his death, comparable to the sudden expansion under Alexander the Great; and the ancient Greeks of Macedonia are not exactly renowned to be a nomadic warrior society, either. The Ottoman turks transformed from the tribal society to a close mirror of the Byzantine Empire that first hired them as mercenaries, then was gradually conquered them, by the time they expanded into Europe. But similar expansions due to complex social/economic reasons happened all the time, you can take the Crusades as another well known example. And remember that the famous vikings did not raid, they conquered; as did the mongols, or any other group whenever they could (shown by the fact that both held onto the lands they captured if it was possible). So ultimately, are they, nomadic or not, different from the other cultures in this regard? No, not really. They did the exact same thing all other groups did: when they were powerful, they conquered nearby lands, either holding onto them by installing their own people as rulers, or extracting a bribe from them if they can't, or just taking what they can and damaging them to weaken them. You can see these elements in any conqueror cultures, regardless of at what point of history they were. The rest is purely romanticism, with other words, BS.

But back to the original point. I don't know what background you're actually from, but after reading over these points...

They lack the strength for major aspects of primitive agriculture/animal husbandry.

A man can walk longer, run faster, carry more weight, perform heavy physical jobs related to military, like digging trenches and building pontoon bridges etc. It's not just lying down and shooting. Now, barbaric women were indeed very sturdy. But still not enough to engage themselves in warfare.

Perhaps you are unaware that women in not-so-modern rural environments do these things all the time, as part of their everyday life? Work in agriculture without much, or any, machinery, tend to animal herds, and yes, carry weights, perform physically demanding tasks such as digging (usually part as the aforementioned agricultural work) etc. These are all things that women in a rural environment do as part of their everyday lives. And yes, they are quite demanding. But muscle size and body size aren't everything, and, surprise, they aren't that very closely related to how long one can perform heavy physical labor. Am I saying women are equal to men in these aspects? No, not really. But you are quite clearly stating that women even CAN'T do these, which is, once again, BS. Your average soldier, modern times or before, was neither a bodybuilder nor a "strong man". They were average people from all backgrounds. In that role, endurance was more important, and believe me, women in rural environment most certainly build endurance for hard physical labor. So yes, I know it's not just firing that rifle (even though in the clan vendetta system you described in your previous post, it is literally just that, there's no organised warfare involved). But women in a hard physical labor environment show that they can actually do such things by doing it, constantly.
It had more to do, as I described before, with this:

Besides, somebody has to stay at home, take care of the children, make clothes, prepare food reserves for the winter etc.

Except that that was what most of the men did as well. Speaking of vikings specifically, feel free to look up the concept of "thrall". (And in case you think that was exclusively from raids, let me point out that the Roman Empire, which is not depicted as that "noble savage warrior culture" you spoke of, relied on slaves after its initial expansions to a great degree as well.)

It is a life of violence, out of which a warrior culture is born. A culture of epic songs, manhood competitions, strict upbringing of boys. All to make a strong, rough man that can defend what belongs to him, a take what belongs to others.

So... the machismo aspect of these posts, what exactly is the point of them? Because together with what seems to be statements claiming that women are physicall not so much "less capable" as outright "incapable", and the usual complaining about "PC", it sounds like yet another incarnation of rather typical sexism that considers women simply inferior.

[venrik]

Women are stronger than men. For sure, its the guys who run round killing and whatever, but the women rule. They are the ones that hold the social group together, often with an iron fist. Men are just boys, who go out and play, women are the ones who knit it all back together when boys games ruin everything. Respect the women, they are the ones who repair all the crap men make. They are mother, they are life. They are more important than you will ever be.

[GodlessCrom]

This thread has just had an amazing variety of interesting opinions lol