What's even the point of having male characters when a female version will always be more interesting?

PF wuz not mentioned ya troll

u should leave and never come back
get it? because /u/ is a bad board and you should feel bad for dragging this shit here. 5% lesbians, 5% guys, and 90% guys pretending to be lesbians is pretty much the recipe for the smuggest and saltiest shithole this side of /b/.

Wrong. Female dwarves are always awful.

>Sorry, what was the point of this thread?
OP wanted to fap but he can only get off to images used as thread starters on Veeky Forums.

It's a common problem.

Talking like an ork to hide your butthurt is ineffective on me. Where else is there a substantive difference between a witch and wizard barring their sex? If you're going to make the case that a witch is a female WARLOCK rather than a female Wizard, that's somewhat iffy as it can be used for both as well as a descriptive title for a Sorceress.

So yeah, basically just kill yourself.

OP missed something. Straight girls are unneeded too.

Girls can love girls. Girls should love girls.

Men cannot love. Men should be used for work and little else.

Why is /y/ so much more sane than /u/ when by rights they should both be the same thing with different sets of tackle?

See replies to

>Girls can love girls.

how do you post here Rotifera

And now we've entered Full Retard Zone.
>That Guy: The Thread: Episode IX: The Revenge: The Reckoning: The Return Versus Godzilla Meets the Bad News Bears and the Three Stooges in New York Electric Boogaloo: Based on a True Story.

>dwarves are always awful.

More accurate.

>Guest Starring The Avengers and The Ghostbusters

The characterization matter more
A female character can be awful, a male character to, if you focus solely on an "subtle" twist of reversed gender for the sole purpose of it, it's not better than the original stereotype, it s even worse

Nice non-response.

However, at its base, assuming an equal level or lack of awfulness, a female character will always be better. This is just a fact.

you are too reasonable to post in babby's second bait thread

Male whore > whore.
Male princess > princess.
Male gentle healer > gentle healer.
Male housewife > housewife.

Your move, lawman.

>I don't enjoy That Guy shilling his bait thread and /u/ fetish on Veeky Forums
>Therefore I must be /pol/
Just get off of your computer while you still have some shred of dignity or sanity.

Actually, witch is a gender-neutral term, as is wizard. Historically the definitions of wizard, witch, sorcerer, etc are fairly similar and often are used interchangeably, although "witch" typically was used with negative connotation . But if I were to say, the difference would be that whereas a wizard practices learned scholarly magic, and in most modern fantasy will cast direct magic ie shooting lightning out of your fingers; a witch practices more esoteric, ritualistic folk magic, often entirely indirect and featuring alchemy.

Most of which say "female wizard" or "female warlock", or something about hats.

Because wizards never wear hats, right?

girls are great
but rpgs (etc) still need males, in case:
someone needs to open a jar
think logically
supply a shoulder to help you stop crying
etc...
until we have maid-bots, girls are still important

Unless the guy who keeps playing female characters has been playing only female characters for nearly a decade and has basically made it so that any playing of the opposite gender or any stuff like that is looked down upon if not outright banned.

girls are great
but rpgs (etc) still need males, in case:
someone needs to open a jar
think logically
supply a shoulder to help you stop crying
etc...
until we have maid-bots, girls are still important

See

...

>The only difference in most good systems is ingrained, unhealthy fluff assumptions, namely that wizards train at an academy and witches live out in the middle of nowhere.

So basically unless you're telling people how to play their characters, I'm right, and they really are the same thing except that witch can arguably cover a few more classes.

Also, if witches can't be scholarly, explain this.

>Girls can love girls. Girls should love girls.
>Men cannot love. Men should be used for work and little else.
Sure, I have no problems with it.

Leave the actual work and advancement to men.
Leave science, art, technology, culture to men.
Leave men the things like grand architecture and complex mechanisms, the things like weapons of mass destructions and things like instant communication device, like trade and colonization and things like discussions and inventions.

You silly girls can enjoy your love all you want.
After all, men are already in love with their work and hobbies.
>*tippening intensifies*

Because lesbians have become boring.

>ignoring non-stupid replies
,

Aren't female meleeists and archers kind of unrealistic anyway because of the upper body strength required? And because of how their brains work, wouldn't they be worse at Intelligence-based magic? Thinking logically, a female character is almost always the first step of special snowflakehood.

To play it safe.

Female versions may be moar interersting, moar sympathetic, and moar awesome to today's tumblr crowd, but they're also moar risky and harder to play "correctly."

>Also, if witches can't be scholarly, explain this.
It's almost like I was giving my interpretation of what the difference between wizards and witches could be, and that other people have different interpretations, also that's a picture of an anime.

How does he have so much influence on your group that he's both playing AND determining what's looked down on or banned? Your group must be a bunch of cucks. Oh, wait, never mind. It's because all sensible people know that female characters are superior, and men should be marginalized as much as possible into the few character roles (Bandits, innkeepers, etc) that call for lumpy, ugly bags of meat. There is a reason why the vagina is empowering and the penis is gross.

Because where males THINK with their dicks, females ACT with their vaginas.

Ever heard of a great female nerd alchemist? Solely devoted to her alchemy? Not engaging in silly romance? Me neither.

I don't understand your logic
If the sex is the only difference, what makes it better?

See Unless you're making a case that witches are really druids. It's not as if "old magic" ever stopped millenia-old liches from being, usually, members of the Wizard class.

TL:DR your interpretation is shit and even JK Rowling has witches as female wizards. The only mainstream counter to this is Pathfinder, which you're pretending you don't play.

Good lord you're pathetic.

What's wrong with your spelling? Also, fuck tumblr.

Furthermore, you're wrong, play a female character with a male personality and she's "SO ORIGINAL! LE EPIC TOMBOY!" It's not harder at all.

okay

Well, I have little to no idea how to write sensuality with Male charachters. So my male charachters tend to be prominent as platforms for jokes and playing with achytypes. SCIENCE wizard, Lost soldier, grumpy old man who happens to be a dragon.

Then why did you get buttflustered over someone else's interpretation?

A witch is a female wizard, sorcerer, warlock, or occasionally druid if you go full NATURE MAGIC, that's it.

>It's an "OP is obvious bait but the beta neckbeards bite anyways" episode again.

...

You do realize that these are only interesting because they subvert an established trope, right?

If girly adventurers were the norm, they'd be boring and this thread would be about how much more interesting male characters are.

But anonymous, don't you know you can't write stupid women?
Portraying a woman negatively is the same as portraying ALL women negatively! If one girl is crazy in your story, then you're saying all women have psychological problems and only men can be sane!
Galbrush paradox.

Not him, but presumably the fact that it's harder for a female to adventure and women are just better than men in general. It's 2016, it's a woman's world now, you're just living in it. We'll soon have our first female president, Europe is ruled by a woman, and the patriarchal sections of the globe are shrinking and growing more irrelevant. Just accept it.

Please, user. Not this shit again.
I don't want to spend the rest of the night trying to get across why Marie Curie is shit, for the same reason I don't want to explain why Jeanne d'Arc is shit.
There were way more influential women in science than her.

Thanks for admitting you're wrong.

Who is Micolash? Why does he wear the birdcage?

>mainstream
The mainstream has a tendency to erode away the subtleties of a thing. That's how you get witches that are just female wizards that ride brooms and have black cats as pets instead of witches that run the gamut from helpful medicine women to child-eating pagans.

>A witch is a female
Witch is a gender neutral term

>electing someone so old
Nobody's afraid of senile madness?
>tfw country that rules the world has to choose from 3 piles of shit to rule them

>Jeanne d'Arc is shit
Found the Anglo

But really user, do tell.

It's a long held Veeky Forums pastime to squeeze vaguely-interesting discussion out of troll threads.

Begone filthy, dumb, English scum.

Because a lot of TTRPG players are men, and a lot of men have trouble roleplaying women.

That's not a real thing. It's a flimsy excuse based on misinformation made in an attempt to sidestep criticism.

>the fact that it's harder for a female to adventure and women are just better than men in general.

Yeah I think of that aspect when reading this thread and it's perfectly fine for a characterization , but if the female character only revolve around that , it's pitiful and not exceptional in any way.
>Just accept it.

I have nothing to reject, I have no problem with female character being an "man" archetype, it's just that the op thesis doesnt make any sense to me

No its because he's ruined the concept of a female character through shamless fapbait and general creepy autistic behavior. He's also driven "but she's interesting cuz she's a girl and I'm guy, isn't that so neat?" Concpet into the fucking dirt.I recall the phrase "progressive" being thrown around quite often as well. Thankfully we hit the last straw and booted his ass.

I hate you for reminding me that this is a real thing and is also why Dragoncunt can never be portrayed negatively in GoT and even that omnibitch Cersei Lannister has to be portrayed sympathetically.

>That's not a real thing
Are you kidding me? Did you not see the X-Men: Apocalypse backlash over the fact that the main villain injured Mystique?
Men can't even hurt women in modern media without feminist venom.

Because there's no purityfagging on /y/, as it is limited to porn image dumps and the discussion thereof. It embraces depravity much easier and doesn't act high and mighty about the material it discusses. It also does it's best to contain that kind of stuff and curates the red nature of the board very well as opposed to its distaff counterpart.

>What's even the point of having male characters when a female version will always be more cringeworthy?

FTFY

The exception that proves the rule?

Don't forget that Brienne will never lose a fight, ever.

Exactly, they're better by default by subverting the norm. Unless roleplaying still exists so far in the future that female characters and the female perspective IS the default

You like Kyouko and you know it.

it's just a reaction image I got from here, who's Kyouko?

I would watch that movie.

It really hasn't been for a very, very long time, but I appreciate the fact that you've read the Malleus Maleficarum.

Didn't The Hound kick the shit out of her that one time, or am I misremembering?

The lesbian life partner of the girl in the reaction image.

Stop replying to yourself cuck.

We get it. You enjoy /u/. You like playing female characters so you can have some yuri romance in your games.

That's fine, just don't go Magical Realm with it.

But just because that's your preferred form of RP doesn't mean it's the best or only valid option. Other people like other stuff. Deal with it.

The Hound sufficiently distracted her from taking custody of Arya, but ultimately she was the one to beat his face in and kick him off a cliff.

Long story short, her entire existence was just one huge fuck-up.
Remember those stories about the Russian Empire fleet where the dumbasses were fighting themselves? Or the story how Americans attacked the Japanese islands, only to find out that the Japs have left long ago and Americans were killing their own men?

Those stories seem outright TAME compared to Jeanne's history of campaigning. I'm seriously not in the mood to recite the utter dumbness of what exactly happened in Jeanne's military campaigns, but compared to the above stories, Jeanne's story is a fucking comedy of errors.
She was an incompetent peasant, and if you know the details of her assault on, for example, Bastille de la Saint Loup, the whole story becomes fucking absurd.

I ain't samefagging senpai

>Russian Empire fleet where the dumbasses were fighting themselves?
wat
when?

I'm sorry user, but I'm not actually that well read

Sometime when you are in the mood you should come over to /fgog/ on Veeky Forums and tell some of those stories.

...

Just play traps

>russo-japanese war
Ah, that fucking clusterfuck with dumb beta king

Do tell the details user, I can't seem to find anything particularly embarrassing anywhere. The only thing I can get about de Saint Loup is that she was carried off the field weeping after being hit by an arrow. Can't really blame her given that she was seventeen years old at the time and completely inexperienced, it was literally her first battle.

But that's like saying Napoleon was a complete fuck-up because he threw absolutely everything away when he invaded Russia, and then continued to fuck up almost every single time after that. If you can give me more, I'll listen to your point rather than think you're just shitting on her because she's a woman.

>witch
predominantly female in modern usage, magic user possibly with elements of satanism or corruption, bonus points for familiars
>wizard
studies magic, or the de facto term for magic users
>sorcerer
does not study magic, or the de facto term for magic users, also elements of evil. Sorceresses are evil at least 2/3 of the time.
>mage
the de facto term for magic user, probably more direct applications of magic
>warlock
male witch or an alternative term for a demon pact sorcerer, probably the most likely to be evil, or at least have an evil power source

I did not see that. Probably because it wasn't that big.

Female lead characters are almost invariably portrayed as more flawed that female peripheral characters. Compare Leslie Knope, Abbi Abrams/Ilana Wexler, Allie McBeal, Rebecca Bunch, the cast of Happy Endings or Community vs. the wives or love interests in male-lead sitcoms, what's-her-face from The Lorax movie.

Female characters are portrayed as "flawless" because male writers/showrunners often misunderstand what a strong female character is, thinking it means "doesn't have flaws" rather than "well-developed" or "having an impact on the plot other than being a prize".

Mage is a lot more popular than Wizard as the generic term.

Stop letting your boner control your brain you subhuman vermin.

That's why I said both can be the de facto term, mage is probably the most technically correct in works related to or inspired by D&D (modern rpgs) but Tolkien used Wizard to describe Gandalf and he's a favored soul or something.

It's a TV show that's decided to use "Witch" as a gender-oriented term for "magic user". The rest of us say that girls can be Wizards.

Pretty sure all Wizards in Tolkien are like Gandalf.

So just use all-female settings if that's what interests you.
Others actually find males relatable and interesting.