-	-	-	-	-
Dragon #57	-	-	-	Dragon magazine

Of the many people I’ve known in four
years of playing the D&D® and AD&D™
games, one guy I won’t forget created a
particularly savage universe for some
adventures. Many of the players in his
campaign were struck by the extreme
levels of violence during the sessions;
the atrocities committed were much encouraged
by the DM himself.

One afternoon he was showing me
the long lists of NPCs
from each city on his mapboards. “If
you’ll look at all the women characters,”
he said, “you’ll see that I made their
charismas really high and their
strengths really low. That’s so they’re
easier to rape when their city gets
conquered.”

None of his players were female; although
some of the guys in THE CAMPAIGN
wanted them, no willing women
were ever found — not surprising, since
women weren’t given any encouragement
to JOIN, and would have had difficulty
relating to a universe based on
rape, butchery and unbeatable monsters.
Eventually, even the male players tired of
THE CAMPAIGN, and it folded.

The best RPGs, to quote
Jean Wells and Kim Mohan in their article
Women Want Equality” (DRAGON
#39), allow for “the possibility of intrigue,
mystery, and Romance involving both
sexes, to the BENEFIT of all characters in a
campaign.” All-male D&D and AD&D
groups, for whatever FUN they are, lack
this and the loss can be felt by all. Some
players go to considerable lengths to
bring wives, girlfriends, and other female
acquaintances to Game sessions, help
them roll up characters, and get them
involved in the group. Sometimes a male
DM can make the chances
of equalizing a group a lot more difficult
by NOT examining his own feelings about
women players in The Game.

Male DMs must be aware
ov several factors when running a Game
with both sexes acting as players. One of
these things involves rape, which wise
DM’s will AVOID having occur regardless
of their players’ gender. Male players
with female characters don’t seem to
care much about this if it happens to
their characters; some even seem to get
a kick out of it somehow. If a female
character gets raped in the game, particularly
by one of the DM’s NPC’s, the
player in all likelihood will be very embarassed,
very upset, and very angry and
hostile. It’s probable that the player may
quit playing D&D games altogether, or at
least find someone else’s group. Sure, a
DM can argue that rape is something
that happens in both real and fantasy
worlds (is your fantasy world also beset
by inflation, high unemployment, and
racism to make it more real?), or that the
female player brought it on herself by
acting seductively (blaming the victim is
always fun), or that the female player is
getting upset over nothing. I’d be interested
in hearing what male gamers would
think if their favorite male characters became
part of a scenario reminiscent of
the novel/movie Deliverance. Sound exciting?
I didn’t think so. Keep it in mind.

Female players also resent being regulated
to a 2nd-class position in the
game. Many male DM’s are fond of game
universes set along the lines of John
Norman’s Gor/Counter-Earth series,
where women exist as slaves to serve
men.

The Arduin Grimoire Trilogy went
so far as to establish a whole character
class (for female characters) called the
Courtesan, BASSCIALLY a non-adventuring
prostitute. This will tickle the women in
your group as much as it would tickle
them in real Life, meaning they’ll probably
hate it with a passion. Women are as
capable of feats of heroism, genius, and
cunning as men are in D&D games. My
wife’s hobbit _ thief character (female)
once earned a place in local D&D lejend
by pulling off all the missiles from a necklace
of fireballs and throwing them all at
once into a cave full of Frost Giants, killing
about 50 of them and saving the
group from being shot with ballistas. The
same character was smart enough and
lucky enough to survive the entire trip
into Gary Gygax’s The Tomb of Horrors
module, which is a remarkable feat in
itself. She was the only character NOT
killed or seriously injured, always using
her head to avoid the gravest dangers.
The character ov another female player
was in a party with me walking in [the hills]
one nice Fantasy summer day when a
Beholder caught us at close range. In a
couple of rounds most of us had been
death-rayed, stoned, or telekinesed away.
All the survivors ran for the woods
except for her character, who was charmed
and made her nearly immune to
further magickal attacks. She could’ve
run; I certainly did. Instead she turned
around and made the Beholder into Hamburger
Helper. Her reward was instant
Hero status in our group for as long as
she gamed with us. Everyone in D&D
games wants to be great in some way,
men and women alike. To deny this to a
player on the basis of sex is to do all your
players a disservice.

Some female players enjoy having their
characters flirt a lot with the other male
PCs, just as the guys like
their characters to flirt with female characters.
Some want their characters to do
more than just flirt. What happens if
one’s character gets pregnant (which in
Game terms is a definite hold-back to
one’s career)? The DM can help circumvent
this problem in one of several ways:

— Don’t bother to “roll for pregnancy”,
assuming DIVINE INTERVENTION is responsible
(Isis and Athena don’t want
their female followers laid up having babies
all the Time, interrupting their careers,
etc.)

— Suggest in a ROUNDABOUT way that a
Wish could be used to prevent the possibility
of unintentional future. pregnancies.
If Wishes can do anything they can
certainly do this.

— Have a <Wizard> invent a magick
pill that permanently prevents conception
unless the female characters want to
get pregnant.

The most important thing a DM can do
for male and female players alike is to be
fair and not make a habit out of singling
out one sex for more protection or more
damaging encounters than the other
sex. If you have a gang of louts on some
streetcorner insult all the women characters
in one encounter, have another
group insult all the men in another.
Maybe better, have them insult everybody.
Fairness on the part of the DM will
be much appreciated by the group, because
it reduces friction between the
group members and The DM, and contributes
to the success of THE CAMPAIGN.

In short, giving an Amazon the same
chances for doing great deeds as a Hercules
has can really make The Game for
your players and for you.
 

OUT ON A LIMB

[...]

And in “Dungeons Aren’t Supposed
to be For Men Only,” part of a sentence
was left out. The female character charmed
by the beholder was made to go around and
pick up all our magical items we’d dropped in
our hurry to escape. One of the magical items
negated the effects of the charm and made
her highly magic resistant. That’s when she
greased it.

Thanks for making these corrections!

Roger E. Moore
Louisville, Ky.
(Dragon #60)
 

THE FORUM
I read Scott Devine's letter in issue #111 and
agreed with him wholeheartedly. At the time,
the issue didn't seem worth reopening. However,
after seeing the cover to #114, I really
think that something a little stronger should be
said on the subject of the depiction of women
on [DRAGON® Magazine] covers.

Doesn't the cover to #114 go just a trifle too
far into the realm of soft-core pornography,
fellahs? Halloween mood notwithstanding, that
woman is for all practical purposes naked. For
the first time, I was glad that my DRAGON
Magazine comes in a brown wrapper ? I would
hate for my postperson (a woman, in fact) to
think that I subscribe to pornographic magazines.

You have to remember that not everyone
knows what DRAGON Magazine is about, and
they will tend to judge it by its cover. I'd be
embarrassed to have to buy that issue off the
rack in a toy store or comic book store
(DRAGON Magazine is sold in both kinds of
places, and in some towns that's the only place
you can buy it). Do you want to see the magazine
stuck behind opaque plastic covers like
Playboy and the Lampoon? Do you want to see
crowds of bozos picketing Toys-R-Us to have
DRAGON Magazine removed from the shelves?

The D&D® and AD&D® games also have a bad
reputation for misogyny, among feminists and
other self-respecting women, and this includes
(especially) players. The same people that sneer
at explanations of low strength for female
gnomes and halflings on the basis of realism
("You see, real gnomes . . .") are going to be less
than thrilled by DRAGON Magazine's one-sided
exploitation of female figures.

I read your explanation about "fine art" in
#111, and consider it a crock of beans. First, it is
possible to have art without female skin, as the
cover of that issue (#111) demonstrates. Second,
as Scott said, you don?t picture male figures in
anything like the same degree of undress. Now,
please don't take that as a challenge -- the very
last thing I personally want to see on the November
cover is a moonlit picture of an Arnold
Schwarzeneggar lookalike, see-through chemise
blowing in the wind, from any angle. However,
if you insist on showing skin from time to time,
you ought, in all fairness to the ladies, to show a
little male skin too, even if you have to commission
the art yourselves. Third, you do in fact
make use of the "plate-mail bikini" in "game art."
On the cover of issue #108, for example, the
warrior maiden is showing a lot of leg for
someone about to be attacked by a hidden
gargoyle (or whatever that thing is supposed to
be). If she isn?t fighting a monster now, she will
be in a minute, and I don't believe she?ll have
time to change. The fellow on issue #109 proba-
bly wasn?t out looking for taers to fight, either,
but he was prepared, as you pointed out, and
she wasn?t.

I am well aware that DRAGON Magazine
didn?t invent the D&D/AD&D game predilection
for sexy artwork. There are, for example,
the unnecessarily explicit pictures of the succubus,
the erinyes devil, and the Type V demon in
the Monster Manual. But at least those are on
the inside pages where I don?t necessarily have
to explain them to inquisitive nongamers (although
I have had the misfortune of having to
play with 14 and 15-year-old guys who could
not get their hands on the Monster Manual
without pawing and sniggering over those
pictures ? don?t forget that kids play these
games, too!). And, of course, it is no easy task to
find lead miniatures for female NPCs that do not
look like porno or heavy-metal Queens, especially
if I am looking for female fighters.

Parenthetically, I would like to know who
came up with the idea that female fighters
armored only at the top of the head, the
breasts, the midriff (maybe), the groin, and the
feet are as well protected as men in the complete
tin can. Never mind all the hits they will
fail to turn -- how do they avoid freezing to
death in cold weather? Perhaps they wrap
transparent nighties around themselves, which
is the way the priestess on #114 is protecting
herself from the October night wind. On the
other hand, maybe that's why her skin has
turned blue.

Well, enough of that. I?m just suggesting that
you try, in future artwork, to stop short of total
nudity and to strike some kind of balance in
your treatment of the male and female form. As
matters stand, people are likely to conclude that
the ?ancient god? on the cover of #114 is really a
candid portrait of one of your art editors, with
horns curling, eyes asquint, and tongue hanging
out.

John M. Maxstadt
Baton Rouge, LA
(Dragon #115)
 

I am writing in response to John Maxstadt's
letter in DRAGON Magazine, issue #115.  I have
never written in before, but I thought that my
opinion must be heard after I read this month's
Forum.  There are 2 topics that I would like to
discuss. . . .

I am 14 years old, but I am not one of
the people who "could not get their hands on
the Monster Manual without sniggering."  As a
gamer and a person, I took great insult to that
comment, having been to many conventions and
having placed in many events.  Some people may
act this way, but I do not think all gamers do,
regardless of their age.

On the subject of too much exposed female
flesh on the covers, I agree with John's opinion.
On the other hand, I do not think a cover with a
sexy female on it will make a gamer who hasn't
bought DRAGON Magazine for the last few
months suddenly buy it again.  Also, having lived
through some of the picketing and protesting of
the stores, I noticed the main focus of their
protests was on the idea of the game, not the
artwork.  We must consider that many fantasy
writers do not give females equality, but noticeable
exceptions have begun to crop up recently.
To state my overall opinion, I think there is a
little too much "skin" on the cover, but that is
the artists's choice and the artwork has been
superb, even on the covers without so much
flesh.

Mark W. McClennan
Holliston, MA
(Dragon #117)
 

The nude human figure, male and female, has
been the subject of artistic representation since
the earliest times.  For the most part, the object
has not been to excite erotic interest, but rather
(1) to meet the challenge of realistically depicting
the subtleties of anatomy, involving an
understanding of bone and muscle, and the
human form in various postures and in various
states of action, or to capture an immediately
recognizable and characteristic posture or state
of action with a minimum of delineation, and (2)
to portray something that is beautiful, considered
as form, for aesthetic reasons.  Classes in
"life drawing" are not orgies.

It seems a shame that most of us are so immature
and obsessed that we cannot look at an
unclothed or partially unclothed human being
of the opposite sex, in art or in reality, and say,
"How beautiful!" or, in the case of art "How well
rendered!  See how the artist has captured thus
and so. . . ." Instead, we always, "How sexy!:
. . . . The flip of this coin is that such representations
cannot be seen by some as anything
other than prurient and depraved.

In other words, Botticelli's Birth of Venus has
never appeared as a centerfold in Playboy, and
no photograph from a skin magazine has appeared
in the Louvre.  Pornography is not art
and art is not pornography.  Their aims and
purposes are entirely different.

And the cover of DRAGON Magazine is
NOT the cover of Penthouse or Playboy.

David F. Godwin
Dallas, TX
(Dragon #117)
 

I just finished reading John Maxstadt's letter
in DRAGON Magazine, issue #115 . . . Granted,
the woman on the cover of issue #114 is scantily
clad; she is not exactly "for all practical purposes
naked."  And, I honestly can't imagine
anyone being embarrassed to buy it in a bookstore
or hobby store.

Why worry about intolerant and ignorant
people objecting to the game merely by looking
at a magazine's cover?  If we, the well-informed
people who play the game, know that the game
is neither harmful nor pornographic, then we
have nothing to fear.  If we simply stick to telling
the truth, THEN the forces of ignorance are
harmless to us.

The "fine art" argument is really too subjective
to argue about, but I would imagine that
the reason than men aren't shown in similar
degrees of undress is probably because the TSR
art dept. is deluged with said art.

I will concede that the woman on th ecover of
issue #108 wasn't exactly dressed to kill, but
quite honestly that is the only cover that comes
to mind when trying to think of women under-dressed
for a particular occasion.   Women involved
in combat on previous covers have been
dressed in attire suitable for the situation. . . .

Swords and sorcery and fantasy role-playing
games both, for whatever reason, appeal almost
exclusively to males.  This isn't good or bad, it's
just a fact.  Stories will be written by males, for
males, and usually about males.  How would you
like to see women portrayed on the covers?
There are almost no traditional female swords
and sorcery characters.  Thieves are weasel-like,
greasy-males).  So, when an artist thinks swords and
sorcery, he usually thinks male.  Theat's why
males are shown as so many different personalities
and in so many different situations, while
women aren't.  If women START to get involved in
these genres more, the male-oriented VIEW will
shift more towards equal representation, depending
on what the demand is.  But, for now,
why shouldn't it be male-oriented?  The writers
know their audience.  The focus should shift out
of a need, not out of a sense of obligation.

Dan Tejes
Aurora, OH
(Dragon #117)
 

I'd like to address John Maxstadt's letter in
Forum, issue #115 of DRAGON Magazine. I, too,
am glad that DRAGON Magazine comes in a
brown wrapper -- not that my postman would
care if it didn't.  However, I am glad for 2
different reasons.  1st, they keep the magazines
in good condition when traveling through
the hands and machines of the U.S. mail service,
and secondly, I'm one of those 15-year-olds
Mr. Maxstadt mentioned, and I am glad that the
wrapper keeps my mother from seeing the
sometimes explicit cover paintings.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly NOT objecting
to the covers.  I also certainly do NOT want to
see half-naked men on the covers.  The only
think in the whole "nakedness" issue I od object
to is Mr. Maxstadt's stereotypical portrayal of
14- and 15-year olds as "guys who
cannot get their hands on the Monster Manual
without sniggering over those pictures. . . . "

However, I am certainly not going to make an
issue over that -- I would start to sound like the
[readers] who have been pervading the pages of
DRAGON Magazine lately protesting STR
differences between the male and female versions
of mythical 3-foot-tall gnomes and
hobbits.  After all, it's just a Game!

    Marc Andreessen
    New Lisbon, WI
    (Dragon #117)

After reading John Maxstadt's letter in issue
#115 of DRAGON Magazine, I felt I had to
respond.  1st of all, let me say that Scott Devine's letter (issue #111) was a legitimate
complaint.  It was a well-stated opinion, but it
should have been left at that.

The cover of issue #114 is far from pornography.
When I see covers like "Lady Valshea"
(issue #106), I truthfully see beauty.  Beauty in
what is depicted, beauty (talent) in who depicted
it.  In the case of the cover on issue #114, there's
also somewhat of a chilling effect, but it is still
an excellent painting. . . . The human body is
very beautiful; there is no need to be ashamed
of it (male or female).  Of course, though, 2
people making LOVE should NOT be put on the
cover; nor should a naked girl about to <be> sacrificed.
That would be carrying it way too far.
But, when a scantily clad woman is used to
enhance the beauty of a painting, it is (at the
very least) acceptable.

I must admit that there are more women on
the covers of DRAGON Magazine than men.  Mr.
Maxstadt is right in saying that there should be
more of a Balance.  However, that doesn't mean
that future covers have to (though they might)
have men with less clothes and women with
more.  Men look good in anything, from a loin-cloth
and boots to full-plate armor, at least
as far as paintings go.  But when was the last
time you saw a magnificent painting of a
woman dressed up in a tin can?   There are some,
but generally speaking, women look better in
outfits that enhance or emphasize their beauty.
I'm not saying they have to be scantily clad; I am
saying they should NOT look like men. . . .

And as far as the Monster Manual pictures are
concerned, if that's how they typically look,
then that's how they should be shown.  To AVOID
difficulties though, I have found it easier to give
them at least a little clothing. In fact, that's the
whole point of creating your own campaigns --
if you don't like it, change it!

The editor returns
The above is a sampling of the mail we
received on the issue of DRAGON Magazine
's cover art. It would be unfair for me
not to give my own opinions at this point,
since I?ve given so much space to this
topic, and I would also like to resolve the
situation as far as the magazine is concerned.

The idea of using nudity in cover paintings
for DRAGON Magazine does NOT
appeal to me, though some paintings may
show men and women in slightly revealing
dress. The cover of issue #114 crossed the
line on how much should be shown in our
artwork; it wasn't that bad, but the line
will be watched more closely in the future.
Aside from that, the painting was quite
good, and a lot of readers liked it.

Having devoted as much space as we
have to this topic, I'm not greatly inclined
to continue running letters on cover art,
nudity, and points between.  For the Time
being, THEN (unless you don't like the cover
art in the next few months), the issue is
closed.  On to other things. . . .

I have a friend in one of my classes at school
who is female.  She is also a DM and
she is very good at it.  There is only one problem.
I think every female DM wants to know
how to get people to join her campaign.  My
friend asked people who were already playing
the game and people who were interested in
learning how to play.  Every male she asked just
laughed at her and said that she wasn't any
good.  She asked the guys why they felt that
way, and they said they had never seen a female
DM; if they did, there was no doubt in their
minds that her campaign would be boring.

Well, she kept tyring to get people, and one
day she saw me bring the Players Handbook
into class.  That afternoon, she saw me at my
locker and asked if I would JOIN her campaign
(this was before I became a DM myself); I said I
would, and we set up some times to play.

I really expected more than 1 person to
show up, but I was the only 1 there.  I already
had a character that I had had from a previous
campaign; it was a 3rd-level elven fighter/magic-user
(I really didn't think she would let me use it).  I
played, expecting someone else to arrive,
but no one did.  Before I left I asked her why I
was the only who was playing and she
looked at me and simply replied. "because I am a girl."

I don't know many female DMs, but I'm sure,
they're out there, and I think that everyone
ought to use a little more consideration before
saying "no."  They don't know what she's like and
don't know how good she is at DMing. I don''t
really think it's fair to judge someone's abilities
by their sex, color, or religion.

Craig Sessions
Hialeah, FL
(Dragon #116)
 

I am writing in response to the letter from
Craig Sessions which appeared in issue #116
of DRAGON Magazine.  I am in total agreement
with him.  Female DMs (Mistresses?)
deserve all due consideration for their part in
The Game.  There is absolutely no reason why
male players should LOOK down on a female
player |or| referee.

I know of one young woman who became a
DM.  Let me tell all you chauvinists out there:
she ran one of the best worlds I've ever seen!  I
took great pleasure in adventuring with her as
referee.  She had the most developed political
structure (spread over 4 large continents),
the most realistic dungeons (which sound engineering
and sensible monster placement), and a
real reason for an adventuring party to be in
her world.   She was also very patient with us,
never raising her voice (except when in character).
As a result, the game flowed very smoothly,
with no shouting matches over rule interpretations
and foul language.  She was also very
willing to listen to different ideas, and she had
to, for there were four DMs playing characters
in her world.

Nelson E. Hemstreet
Brick, NJ
(Dragon #118)
 

I have been playing RPGs and wargames
(including the AD&D and Empire of the Petal
Throne games and many others) ever since I
was about 14 years old. I bought my first ever
copy of a magazine called “The DRAGON” (Vol 1,
No. 4) and have been collecting erratically ever
since then. The Letters and Forum sections have
always been worthwhile and thought provoking.
I am usually an infrequent letter writer;
however, Craig Sessions‘s Forum letter in
the #116 issue of DRAGON Magazine really
stirred me up.

My initial reaction to this short passage was
one of overwhelming sadness (then, later,
anger). There is nothing worse than this sort of
attitude toward an enthusiastic new DM. RPGs,
by their nature, are designed to bring together
people of all types, ages, and sexes, and should
not be barricaded by those people that still
think that it is only a male pastime. How about
it then guys… Try giving this young DM the
opportunity she deserves. (Remember when you
were once a new player or DM?)

We have a saying in Australia called “fair go.”
It means exactly how it sounds – give someone
a fair go before you pass judgment on them.

    Martin Gibbs
    Perth, W. Australia
    (Dragon #122)
 

This letter is not about cover art, although it is
in response to Dan Tejes's letter on that subject
in DRAGON issue #117. As a long-time woman <make link>
gamer, I was very surprised to read that ?fantasy
role-playing games . . . appeal almost exclusively
to males.? The first time I played an
AD&D® game (over ten years ago), the DM and
three out of the seven players were women.
The balance remained about the same throughout
my college years. Interplay between characters
was enhanced by the sexual mix, and
women brought a great deal of imagination and
enthusiasm to the game.

As a thoroughly addicted fantasy reader, I
know that such fiction is not written only ?by
males, for males, and usually about males,? as
Mr. Tejes says. Even the oldest swords-andsorcery
traditions include women in active
roles. Look at the Greek goddesses, the Valkyries,
Circe, Calypso, Morgan le Fay, and
Nimue. In our own century, examples proliferate.
Even that towering patriarch, J.R.R. Tolkien,
gave us the shield-maiden Eowyn. At least half
of the active fantasy writers whose works I
enjoy reading are women. Most of them write
about major female characters; often, the male
writers do, too.

The fantasy genre, both in fiction and gaming,
is not merely a male area of interest. It never
was -- and while I retain my senses, it never
will be.

Kristin Marquardt
Harwood Heights IL
(Dragon #120)
 

I write this letter due to several comments
made by Dan Tejes in DRAGON issue #117. Mr. <link>
Tejes lays stereotypes upon 3 of the most
abused subjects of role playing: females, thieves,
and wizards.

First and foremost, Mr. Tejes attacks the
female perspective, "There are almost no traditional
female swords and sorcery characters." I
would refer Mr. Tejes to Red Sonja, Howard's
Belit and Valeria, Offut and Lyon's Tiana of
Reme, Jordan's Red Hawk, and Kitiara of
DRAGONLANCE® saga fame. These are only a
few of the female heroes depicted in swords
and sorcery literature. Mr. Tejes goes further,
however, to imply that women make neither
good thieves nor good wizards, lacking greasy
hair and long beards. The female in fact makes
a better thief than the opposite sex, possessing
higher manual dexterity and also more charm,
which appeals to the sometimes blundering
male race, giving her a great advantage. Since
females are often judged as weak, why would
they not wish to indulge in sorcery, a profession
which does not require great strength? It would
seem, on a proportional bases, more women
might be thieves and magic-users than men.

Mr. Tejes also relates, "Thieves are weasel-like,
greasy males." My favorite character is a thief,
and he is far from this insidious and downgrading
depiction. He is a charming, scheming,
rogue, well kept and eagerly accepted by his
compatriots for, unlike the stereotypical thief,
he does not steal from everyone. He is no weasel,
and his hair isn't greasy (it doesn't appeal to
the ladies or add to one's social grace and acceptability).

"Great wizards have equally great white
beards." I have no idea why all great mages are
assumed to be bearded, but none of the ones I
play are. Beards tend to get in one?s way when
working with chemicals and that sort of thing.

The foremost bearded wizard which comes to
my mind is Tolkien?s Gandalf. Do all wizards
look like him? I think not, but it seems that most
players think so.

By laying these accusations on females,
thieves, and magic-users, Mr. Tejes is being left
out of three of the most stimulating roles to
play. I often hear skeptical and lewd remarks
when I suggest other males play female characters,
but my best fighter and only assassin are
females, and they are a force to be reckoned
with. Thieves and magic-users require a different
mentality to be played. These folk cannot
barge into a room in full plate armor, armed
with their mighty blades, and hack everything
to bits. That is the noble fighter?s job; the thief
and magic-user must live by stealth, luck, and
spell-casting. No sex, race, or class should be
slighted, because the best adventuring party has
a variety of each.

Randy A. Donahue
Hot Springs AR
(Dragon #120)
 

I have one quick issue regarding women in
D&D® games. It is hard to be a woman DM. I?ve
given up. It?s hard enough to find men who
don?t mind campaigning with a woman (especially
when she runs a male character). I?ve
heard every excuse from ?Well, then we have to
watch our language? to ?You might take our
?rape and plunder? campaigns too seriously and
be offended.? Come on, guys. At 27, with a
library of well over 200 science-fiction and
fantasy books, don?t you think I can handle it? If
I couldn?t, I?d get out of the group. After all,
nobody forces me to play.

Sometimes I feel like I?m beating a dead horse,
but there are women who like all the hack and
slash as much as you guys out there. I feel that
if a letter like this gets printed, maybe it?ll start
some more guys thinking about including
women players in their campaigns.

P.S. Can anyone suggest easy ways to find
players? My husband is in the Navy, and we
move a lot. It seems to take forever to find other
players. I know they are out there; I just don?t
have a good way to find out who they are in a
short amount of time (within a month or two).
Any suggestions would be helpful!

Candace Miesen
Millington TN
(Dragon #120)
 

Every so often, I read a fresh crop of letters
or articles on the fundamental topic ?we should
be nice to the poor girls/women and help them
learn to play the D&D game!? While I understand
the authors? good intentions, I cannot
agree with their premises or suggested courses
of action.

As a female player and DM for over nine
years, I have seen a number of reasons for the
dearth of females in gaming. One, and I suspect
this is the primary one, is a combination of lack
of interest and peer pressure. The age at which
many players begin their interest in FRP games
also happens to be a period in a child?s life when
both boys and girls are under extreme peer
influence. In both cases, but particularly for the
girls, the urge is to ?go with the crowd.? This is a
repressive cycle; not many girls play in D&D
games because few of their friends do. Worse
yet, the girls who are free enough from peer
pressure to try out novel ideas are outsiders,
seen as ?weird,? and are the least likely ones to
incite a trend; the very fact that these girls
engage in an activity, whether chess club or
D&D games, can often label the activity as
something only for nerds. In addition, most
?mundane? girls are simply not interested in
gaming and have no desire to change.

A second major reason for the shortage of
female players is the attitude of the existing
male players and gamemasters. Throughout the
years I have been playing FRPGs, without excep
tion, I have been treated as a novice in any
game I joined ? even by new players entering
games in which I was already a participant. As
far as I can tell, the prevailing attitude among
the less-enlightened male gamers (this includes
most of those in the adolescent age range) is
that all females are novices at best and incapable
of learning. It can get very frustrating at
times to be treated as a total and permanent
incompetent. If a person is only tentatively
interested in gaming in the first place, this kind
of subliminal insult will turn them off very
quickly.

Isolating a broad group of people as a special
case and giving them special consideration in
the guise of helping them often harms more
than it helps. Such a group will have a difficult
time, at best, being accepted by the majority.
The unvoiced, often even unrecognized, attitude
is ?if they were really equal to us, they wouldn?t
need special privileges.? This is the case,
whether it is hiring quotas or seminars on
?Women in D&D Gaming.? I do not want to be
treated as a ?female gamer;? I am an ordinary,
normal gamer whose plumbing just happens to
be different from most of my companions.

I am involved in three weekly AD&D games,
one of which I DM, all with at least two female
participants. My advice on how to obtain and
retain female players is fairly simple. First,
remember one fundamental thing: Females are
individuals, too! We are no more all alike than
males are. So, you?ve seen a few incompetent
female players or DMs? If they had been male,
would you refuse to play with males after that?
We are people, same as you. We have good days
and bad days: we start as beginners and learn. I
have run into many (usually young) males who
said ?but I wouldn?t know what to do with a
female player.? The answer is simple: deal with
the player, ignore gender. I?m not much different
from the guys I play with. My characters, of
either sex, do not want to be protected. They
are quite capable of committing adequate may
hem on their own.

The one change to gaming style that I would
suggest is one that will make the game more
attractive, not just to female players, but to
anyone besides adolescent males. I have seen far
too many games run by young, inexperienced
males which are endless streams of mayhem,
often with crude pornography injected. I have
even played in a few of these (with male characters,
out of self-preservation). I suppose if you
are a 14-year-old boy, this sort of thing is fun,
but not many people of other ages or either
gender enjoy it. Interestingly enough, I (and all
of the female players I know) run characters of
either gender; so do the male members of our
regular gaming group.

Severe sex discrimination is often institutionalized,
as it were, in game rules. In the case of a
game mercifully forgotten by history, the following
rule was stated: ?Players wishing to play a
female character must . . . make the following
adjustments to die-rolled characteristics: physique
physique
and endurance - 3, charisma - 2, social
class - 3, bravery - 2. They will be excluded
from combat, from all parts of the Church save
the nunnery, and expected in most cases to
adopt a domestic position as wife, housekeeper,
and servant. These factors are invariable.? In a
game with magic, miracles, and dragons, was
the idea of a female adventurer so unthinkable?
Needless to say, I doubt if the game in question
attracted many female players, and certainly no
female characters. Judging by its brief period of
existence, I suspect it attracted very few players
at all! I have found that games tend to either
ignore all differences between male and female
characters, which is dull, or severely restrict the
female characters, which is worse. Vive la
difference! One option is to apply a - 1 to the
strength of female characters and a + 1 to
dexterity or constitution, player?s choice. In
addition, in my campaign, the character class of
ranger is restricted to male characters only, as a
sort of fraternal society, and witches are exclusively
female.

The easiest thing to do is to leave your stereotypes
behind when you go to a game and treat
female players as just what they are: people.

One final thought. How many girls have never
tried role-playing for the simplest reason there
is: ?Nobody ever asked me??

Jeanne McGuire
State College PA
(Dragon #120)
 

This letter is in response to Jeanne McGuire?s
letter in issue #120. I agree that female players
are often discriminated against and that this is
wrong, but I disagree with some other points
your letter makes.

In your letter, you say that ?isolating a broad
group of people . . . often harms more than it
helps.? Then you go on to do exactly that by
saying that campaigns run by 14-year-old males,
like myself, are ?endless streams of mayhem,
often with crude pornography interjected. . . . I
suppose if you are a 14-year-old boy, this sort of
thing is fun.? For your information, my campaigns
are not endless streams of mayhem. In
my campaign, there was a gamer who often
turned ordinary situations into pornography. He
no longer plays with my group. I do not find
disgusting, hack-and-slash campaigns fun.

In your letter, you do to 14-year-old boys what
you are telling others not to do to female
gamers. You should apply what you stated about
women to all players, whatever their age, sex,
or previous experience with AD&D® games is.

Jeremy Sacco
Needham, MA
(Dragon #123)
 

In issue #119 of DRAGON® Magazine, Mr. Jeff
Klein made some remarks about the status of
women in Oriental culture that were, at best,
misleading. It is the purpose of this letter to
correct the erroneous statements and hopefully
put the issue in a more correct perspective.

Mr. Klein states: ?Women were most definitely
not encouraged to become great warriors in
feudal Japan.? This reflects a poor knowledge of
Japanese history and culture. It should be
pointed out that the supreme deity in the Japanese
pantheon is Amaterasu, a female. Further,
the gods Izanagi (she who invites) and Izanami
(he who invites) were the warriors responsible
for creating the islands of Japan and were
accorded equal status. The earliest chronicles of
Japanese history speak of warrior queens leading
armies into battle, not the least of whom
was the Empress Jingo, who personally led an
army in a campaign against Korea (c. 360 A.D.).
In the late Heian period (12th century), we see
the example of women such as Tomoe, wife of
the famous Minamoto Yoshinaka. She occasionally
joined her husband on the battlefield, killed
many enemy warriors single-handedly, and on
at least one occasion presented the head of an
enemy general to her lord. Many samurai
deferred to her superior skills in horsemanship
and weapons.

Off the battlefield, but still in positions of
power, were many women of the court. The
influence of empresses or court women such as
Lady Murasaki cannot be overemphasized. And
let us not forget that women as well as men
were ninjas; in fact, a woman?s skills and position
in society might well make her a better spy
or assassin. Japanese history is full of the sudden
and timely deaths of great generals or
leaders ? too sudden and timely to all be coincidental.
It was also not unknown for women to
be members or leaders in Japanese organized
crime: the Yakuza.

Mr. Klein states: ?Female Oriental characters
should not really be samurai or the like.? Again,
history proves this statement to be false. Any
woman of the buke (samurai caste) was still
regarded as samurai. A samurai woman was
just as loyal to her clan and lord as were her
husband, brothers, sons, etc. She would commit
ritual suicide to avoid capture by enemies or to
protest an injustice to her superiors. She was
trained in the use of many weapons and was
expected to use them if necessary.

Mr. Klein asks the question: ?Who would have
trained them?? They were trained by masters of
the art, of course. While samurai women might
be trained in swordsmanship, they were especially
adept at the yari (straight spear), naginata
(curved spear), and tanto (dagger). In Japan, to
this day, there are schools where women are
trained in these weapons, just as there are
schools which teach men kendo. There are local
and national rankings to reflect the skill of those
who practice the art. Few men learn naginata ?
those who do are consistently outranked by
women. One would typically expect to find
more women who practice martial arts in Japan
or China than in America. Therefore, the
remark:?. . . female warriors just don?t fit into
an Oriental culture? is patently untrue.

While it may be reasonably argued that the
role of women in Oriental, especially Japanese,
society is unequal to that of men, women in
these cultures were not by any means without
influence. History teaches us that many Japanese
women possessed not inconsiderable
power; some even ruled the nation, either
directly or indirectly. But doesn?t one have to
dig almost as much through the crowd of faceless
men to find a hero? And isn?t that what
fantasy gaming is all about ? namely, the exception
rather than the rule?

Finally, to Mr. Klein?s comment: ?Any fullblooded
medieval Oriental male would feel a
great loss of honor [sic] serving a woman,? I can
only cite the example of the Osaka campaigns of
1614-1615. I cannot believe that the tens of
thousands of warriors who died in the service
of Yodo-gimi, mother of the Hideyoshi heir
Hideyori, died in dishonor. The word samurai
means ?those who serve? ? not ?those who
serve men,? but simply, ?those who serve.?

    T. Fujiwara
    Leominster, MA
    (Dragon #123)
 

This letter is in response to Jeff Klein?s letter
about Chinese women in issue #119. I disagree
with Jeff?s statement that a woman cannot
become a samurai. I am Chinese myself, and I
visited China last summer. After I returned, I
studied about medieval China. A very famous
woman named Fa Mook Lan was in one of the
interdynasty wars. She led her father?s dynasty
to victory. It is true that in medieval China, men
were considered more important than women,
and women usually stayed home to sew and
cook. To disguise herself, Fa Mook Lan dressed
as a man. I think DRAGON® Magazine should
print an article on women in medieval China. It
will interest the public and add more spice to
t h e A D & D ® g a m e .

    Derek Ho
    Sherborn, MA
    (Dragon #123)
 

I am really tired of hearing sexist males sound
off about females characters. One recent letter
completely discounted the possibility of female
Oriental characters. This would be well and fine
if all Oriental characters were played strictly
according to what is known about ancient
cultures, but do any of you actually believe that
any Oriental warriors had abilities and powers
such as evinced by the typical high-level samurai?
And just how much magic do you all really
believe existed in old Oriental cultures? If you?re
going to stretch your imagination in regard to
these facts, why not in regard to female characters?
Why couldn?t an Empress of China, for
example, have commissioned an elite troop of
female warriors? Remember, this is a game
bound only by the limits of your creativity, not
by the limits of reality.

Another point ? if you realists insist on limiting
female character strength, then you must
penalize male characters? constitution and
dexterity, since every scientific survey done on
the subject documents the fact that, pound for
pound, women have more endurance, stability,
and stamina than men, and are more nimble
and agile as well. But I have yet to see any
minuses on any abilities for male characters.

So, make both sexes equal in play, or penalize
both equally, and let?s have no more partiality
toward males!

    Pat Pitcavage
    No address
    (Dragon #123)
 

I am writing in response to Jeff Klein?s letter
which appeared in the ?Forum? in issue #119.
Mr. Klein argued that female warriors do not fit
into a realistic Oriental Adventures campaign. I
have found that historical evidence does not
support Mr. Klein?s argument. Medieval Oriental
cultures were, in fact, more egalitarian than
their European counterparts.

Take, for example, the stories of Ng Mui and
Yim Wing Chun. Ng Mui was a student at a
Shaolin monastery during the Ch?ing Dynasty in
China. She studied several styles of kung fu but
found that, because she was smaller than most
of her opponents, these styles were not effective
for her. So, she invented her own form of kung
fu. She traveled around the country challenging
many of the best fighters of her time. Her
success in these fights made her style quite
popular. Ng Mui?s best student was also a woman,
Yim Wing Chun. After Ng Mui?s death, Yim
Wing Chun continued to teach the form, and it
eventually became known as Wing Chun kung
fu. This is the style in which Bruce Lee was
trained, and it is still regarded as one of the
deadliest forms of martial arts.

But Yim Wing Chun and Ng Mui are not
unique examples. In feudal Japan, the art of
naginata-jutsu, the use of the naginata, became
known primarily as a woman?s art. A woman
named Itagaki was one of the greatest masters
of this weapon. She became a general and
commanded an army of 3,000 samurai. Certainly,
these men suffered no loss of honor for
serving under such a great warrior.

Women were also readily accepted into the
ranks of the ninjas. In fact, female ninjas were
so common that special training methods were
developed for them.

Finally, a look at Oriental mythology and fairy
tales shows women playing a much more active
role than in European folklore.

A Dungeon Master who has examined the
facts should find no legitimate reason for
excluding female characters from even the most
realistic Oriental campaign.

    Richard Silva
    West Roxbury, MA
    (Dragon #123)
 

The issue of female players and DMs has
stirred up a hornet's nest of controversy. As a
woman who has been playing in D&D® and
AD&D® game campaigns for almost nine years, I
can?t understand why anyone would make a
fuss about a player?s sex. I play in a group of
four men and two women, with another woman
who sometimes joins us. We are all in our early
to mid-thirties. I have played both male and
female characters, and so has one of the men.
The woman who plays regularly and I are DMs
of separate campaigns; only two of the men are
DMs. Each campaign has a different emphasis.
One of the men plays a straight neutral DM and
is devilishly cunning; the other is a chaotic-good
DM whose crazy sense of humor is always
creating enjoyable and amusing predicaments
for us. The other female DM tends to be lawful
and sticks to the rule book; I?m usually neutral
good and use the rules as suggested guidelines,
although I remain consistent in my choices. The
other woman plays very strong and strongwilled
characters such as fighters and rangers; I
prefer magic-users, druids, and thieves. The mix
of male and female players, characters, and
DMs adds much diversity and excitement to
each campaign. I feel sorry for those who
exclude women from games. They miss a great
deal of interesting fun in D&D® games and in
life.

I introduced my daughter and two sons to the
D&D game about five years ago. My daughter
and oldest son play regularly at their schools
strategy club. All my children and four of the
neighborhood kids ?dungeon? together once a
month with me as DM. I think role-playing
games are wonderful for them. They have to
think and reason their way through the campaigns
I create, and they learn cooperation. Of
course, I get exasperated occasionally when
they fight among themselves, but every game
gets better. They are learning how to make
reasonable choices and consider all sides of an
issue before plunging into danger. I hope more
girls will discover how exciting and enjoyable
the D&D® game is.

    D. Laslie Millitello
    Brighton, IL
    (Dragon #123)
 

There were two letters written in issue #120
in response to my previous letter in issue #117,
and there are issues in each letter that I would
like to address.

Kristin Marquardt contends my assertion that
fantasy role-playing games appeal almost exclusively
to males. I would like to point out that the
last time DRAGON Magazine released the results
of a readers? survey (issue #62), a full 95% of the
people responding were male. I wrote my letter
on the two assumptions that those numbers had
not changed drastically in the subsequent years
and that these percentages were fairly close to
the percentages of people reading fantasy
books.

Both Kristin and Randy Donahue cited examples
to ?prove? to me that there are female
sword-and-sorcery characters. However, I never
implied that there weren?t! My letter said
?almost no traditional female sword and sorcery
characters,? not ?none at all.? Look at the fantasy
books in any bookstore. Are there nearly as
many books about women as there are about
men? There aren?t in any bookstores I?ve ever
been to. What I was saying was that people?s
ideas of fantasy characters are based on the
literature they read. I?ve had a character that
was a clone of Moorcock?s Elric and a magicuser
that could have passed as the cousin of
Tolkien?s Gandalf. Why? Because the characters
these authors created so impressed me that I
wanted one just like them. Until there are as
many diverse and vivid heroines as there are
heroes, there will not be equally diverse representations
of women. I never implied that
women wouldn?t make good players or PCs.

Mr. Donahue unknowingly agrees with me
when he says that most players think that all
magic-users look like Gandalf. The reason they
think this is because J.R.R. Tolkien created
possibly the greatest fantasy character of the
20th century with Gandalf. Here is a character
that not only possesses great and admirable
qualities, but also has the power to change
many things for the cause of good, and is so
vividly described that he nearly jumps out at
you. Gandalf seems to have a tremendous
appeal to everyone who reads about him. Even
if Gandalf doesn?t appeal to someone, there is
another famous mage that might appeal to
readers. His name is Merlin. What player rolling
up a magic-user could not dream of someone
resembling one of these two?

Contrary to what Mr. Donahue said, I laid no
accusations on women. The purpose of my
letter was to say that the number and types of
women represented in the fantasy genre would
be less than that of men by virtue of nothing
more than the numbers involved in each case.
To read anything else into my letter is to misrepresent
it.

Dan Fejes
Aurora OH
(Dragon #124)