and also thanks to Urban who seems to be everywhere and know everything, I don’t know what I would do without you
2 Likes
Society yes but God knows you can make an interesting game about the women that break the cloth. The ones that normally do it become powerful through the church they become Mother Superiors had the nunneries with large tracts of land taking them de facto Lords. And there was quite a few but not many women of knowledge and the letter there are rare did scholar classes but they were some famous female scholars in the Middle normally they were sent back to the church some of them had famous love affairs, others famous Mystics of normal stock and background that was touched by Divine Heavenly inspiration and acting in the image of compassion. There are the famous Mystic Pilgrim that wrote about her experience English at that. And of course their are the Cathrine of Siena, and her secular counterpart Eleanor of Aquitaine, but they are all exceptions to the rule, not inlcuding the de facto Lord that were nuns. Oh that’s that would have this would have change the tone of the game. I think he wanted to make the lease special of main characters showing that circumstances and events can make someone greater and story in the everywhere in real life. Our protagonist could have an exceptional skill of arm but nothing about them superhuman or Larger than Life in the end of the day there are man, and the circumstances of their surrounding that makes them famous legendary even.
Please do some research before you make wildly inaccurate and gender-essentialist claims like this.
3 Likes
Funny, you mention the religious part. In this game, the author deliberately made “God” into a woman. If anything, then the religious leaders, if nothing else, should be women. A female God would most likely be served by females; one of the reasons the Abrahamic faiths didn’t have female priests is the whole logic that “man was made in God’s image” meaning man is closer to God (a female being made from man’s rib, makes her one step removed).
Civil war still would have broken out; there was different possible heirs to the throne.
And the author could still have kept the heavily regimented roles if they wanted, but there still would be a place for women.
Joan of Arc is an obvious example. Sikelgaita del Salerno also springs to mind; she commanded troops in her own right.
Isabel of Conches rode into battle armed like a knight.
Jeanne Hachette, a peasant woman, stopped the capture of Beauvais by Charles the Bold.
Joanna of Flanders, Duchess of Brittany, was known to be a skilled military leader besides just taking up arms.
Onorata Rodiani was a condottiere at a point in her life, though it is true she did go disguised.
Isabella of Castile (Yes, the one with Columbus) did oversee military administration, and there are records of her donning armor to rally her troops, especially during a siege.
However, if nothing else, a female noble could have broken out of the role if nothing else, and stayed true to ‘authenticity’ and still fought, and led troops into battle…
So I still stand by my assertion that the author could have provide a female role if he wanted too, and the fact he didn’t is a bit of a shame.
The highest position off the church is the Holy Farther and only a man can attain the position.
And even their prophet (Joshua) was a man.
The war broke out because there were no male heir to the throne. So if Augustine could inherit without her claim being questioned, there would be no war.
But how? Women aren’t sent to squire and can’t inherit lands in this setting. The set wants to emulate the old England society, that is why it is genderlocked.
If it didn’t tried to emulate the real world, I would agree with you that the genderlock would be without cause.
1 Like
Then the author should have just gone whole hog and kept “God” as a man anyways. If anything, the change to God as a female makes it less authentic than the other parts.
It would have been fine for the line of succession to be male only; that still wouldn’t preclude allowing a female MC to be in game.
[quote]But how? Women aren’t sent to squire and can’t inherit lands in this setting. The set wants to emulate the old England society, that is why it is genderlocked.
If it didn’t tried to emulate the real world, I would agree with you that the genderlock would be without cause.
[/quote]
Then the author shouldn’t have had a female heir as a contender to the throne; by your own logic she shouldn’t be there.
And for that matter, the author could have constructed a scenario where a female would attain knighthood, but the one she served under would have known…and for whatever reason (maybe a debt, etc.) kept the secret.
I mean, hell, you have the MC keeping a bastard secret under a possible page/squire thing. There is no reason this couldn’t have applied to a female MC for part of their backstory
But that is the beauty of Augustine’s arch. She is a competent monarch, but she can only ascend to the throne trough war, even if her father was the late King. She is a exception of the file, like many women who became the defacto rulers of their lands.
And that is what I was taking, it is possible to have a female MC but the story would be very different from the male MC, and I think Goshman wanted to tell a history of a normal knight, and while they can accomplish a lot, will not be a special case like a female MC would be.
And keeping Stephen is dangerous, if you tell the King about him, hewill execute you and take your lands from your family.
3 Likes
I liked that arch However, when someone starts making the authenticity argument, then she shouldn’t be there, if one starts applying the game’s world logic and wants to remain consistent.
.[quote=“Urban, post:869, topic:7187”]
And that is what I was taking, it is possible to have a female MC but the story would be very different from the male MC, and I think Goshman wanted to tell a history of a normal knight, and while they can accomplish a lot, will not be a special case like a female MC would be.[/quote]
Except the knight is not normal; even if events worked in their favor, they would show they aren’t ‘normal’ by their deeds and actions.
Not denying this. However, once again, if one is going the authenticity route, then Stephen wouldn’t be a contender either.
Name an English King who was a royal bastard? William the Great? Well, he was from Normandy, so I wouldn’t really include that. And he certainly wasn’t disguised as a lowly knight.
Edward the Martyr? Well he was a legitimate child, just not acknowledged as the heir.
Sorry for my comment. I’ve retracted it due to not being backed by research. Sorry again.
1 Like
Augustine does make sense, she is essentially taking the throne via force and bringing a foreign tradition of strong women via her warrior mother. If it was a gender equal setting she would be the heir, but in this setting the throne goes to the next male dynasty member, in this case either the bastard son or the cousin or whatever. Both have terrible claims, bastardy does not a king make, especially when it’s someone who wasn’t raised in the Kings court and could possibly be made up. A cousin is so far removed he may as well be making up his blood connection, and then the Kings daughter. They all are considered on the same level of not a proper heir. Augustine essentially takes the throne by force, and that’s what gains her respect, not to mention she executes those who speak out against her.
2 Likes
You think it’s inconsistent look at Athens the city and name for the goddess of wisdom and the legend was she’s there strange adopted mother but they’re still we’re terribly chauvinistic by today’s standards. Women did find some ways to break the Norms but not all of them are well recorded. Look up the game for any woman that want to wheel power they had to have a ruthlessness in this world. Well think of real life examples of median wages I think of Irene who helped lose some of Rome’s legitimacy and practically killed her own son for the throne. Then there’s poor Zoe you stumbled into it far too much. What is interesting reflection you can even play a wife of Lord and since many of them or out in court or battle guess who managed the estate. There’s a lot of things that could have been done but I understand why he wanted to focus a narrative because they would’ve been very different games I would have loved to play them Regardless.
But that is exactly why there is a war, many nobles don’t accept her because she is a woman and by the Norwall laws she shouldn’t be a heir.
Several nobles who support her, only do that because they think she is weak and can be made a puppet to them.
That is her arc, a woman that can’t have what should be hers, because of the bigotry of the society.[quote=“Lys, post:870, topic:7187”]
Except the knight is not normal; even if events worked in their favor, they would show they aren’t ‘normal’ by their deeds and actions.
[/quote]
While the MC might not be normal, the MC’s actions are eclipsed by more important people of his time. He is forgotten by history in several endings, and the ones were he of remembered is because of what he did for more important people (putting Stephen on the throne out looking the Valmagne King).
The story emulates England society, it is not meant to be an 100% accurate history story of England.
2 Likes
Yes, but women could still be priestesses of Athena. In Lords of Aswicdale, making it a male only led church is more inauthentic than if the author didn’t change the deity.
True. However, when so many people make the argument for authenticity, and so many parts aren’t authentic…well, then gender-locking the MC as ‘authenticity’ doesn’t hold up for me.
And one could argue the same thing could apply to a female MC. Yes, maybe she was famous in her day, but the events of later descendants (or the monarch she put on the throne) make it pale…or else records were lost, etc.
I’m sorry, this is just the case where the arguments people bring up for the gender-locking don’t work for me. This is going to be a case where I respectfully disagree…
As such, my intention is not to fight, and will leave things at that. And if nothing else, this is also a good example where people can debate/disagree, but it didn’t break out in a fight. 
2 Likes
Arguments are good and people should be scared of them as long as they are respectful.
Now let’s get back to the Brass Tax here. You’re arguing from the good talking to the conclusion that the gender Locke is not justifiable in this setting when the goddess they worship is indeed a goddess, showing an inconsistency for the chauvinism in the setting. Where in real life they had a backing by philosophers and Famous theologians for there chauvinistic.
AFI I want you to pass the chauvinism with some of these guys some of them are the most brilliant of people. Remind me of a conversation I had with my Professor for formal logic who specialize in ethics and adored Aristotle. I gotta stay here response was interesting but that’s for another conversation. 
Now if I can make an argument for the case is that they may have a goddess but they probably came from the already chauvinistic society and a warrior Society of that at least the ones that accepted this religion or spread it. Mind you he doesn’t go into the history of the church which is going to be seeing the sequel and it could be explained at least why there’s only male priests with the female goddess.
Historical perspective the Medieval ages and even the early Dark Ages had endless inconsistency is considering the religion itself is founded by a pacifist who loves the meek in the pool down shotted women and discarded men etc. Would stand in straight Paradox to the ruling class of the day which were the Knights the warrior Kings and the male Priestly class both with all of their decadence. Which is huge inconsistency in real life. If you want another real life example look at how Goddess are worship in Hinduism and look at the incredible chauvinistic perspective of the society overall.
I am saying if he’s going for that real life flare and inconsistency like that would be sure to real life then we think.
The second point you made of us being able to become a forgotten Queen or queenmaker etc. The main character is normal he’s just incredibly lucky to be at the right place at the right time. You see that with several historical characters they could have been killed or ended up in obscurity if it wasn’t for fate.
@Goshman maybe if not too much to ask if you could weigh in with some more. We could put this argument to bed.
@Lys my good woman I don’t know how much further we can go with us since we both person in our arguments. And I feel like if we do go further ever going to go into circles.
I never said the author couldn’t have a chauvinistic society. However, people keep trotting out authenticity as an argument. However when some many elements are actually not authentic…then allowing a female MC isn’t undoable either.
And once again, how would this stop a female MC?
People are arguing a female MC would be too famous…I would actually posit if one was to go check, there would be plenty of women who were movers and shakers in their time, but forgotten to history just as their male counterparts. The main reason the ones I listed appear is that they did engage in arenas which were typically seen as man’s domain. But not every woman who did so becomes famous as well. Not every woman who was a pirate, or served in the Civil War (in disguise) exactly became famous either.
[quote=“Rogar, post:876, topic:7187”]
@Goshman maybe if not too much to ask if you could weigh in with some more. We could put this argument to bed.[/quote]
The author doesn’t have to weigh in; he already did when he wrote the game. I’m just saying I believe the author could have made it work if he wanted to. I’m certain I could have…and before someone says “Why don’t you something like that?”…I probably will, but I have projects lined up for the next 2 years so it will be some time.
That is what I said at the end of my post, and why I’m not going to say much more on the subject.
1 Like
But there are female priestess, that is why in the sequel the MC can be a woman 
.
No problem, people have different perspective. We were having a healthy discussion, so no harm done.
1 Like
You can where is this my friend I would love to see the proof of it.
Angelica of Fiore in the Crusades is likely the one being referred to. Not strictly speaking a priestess since she’s an Exarch of the Holy Father. Very different job descriptions.
I don’t want to crash into your lovely debate. It’s been fascinating to watch unfold.
5 Likes
I mean I’m fine with the game being gender locked I personally love to see the game with the real world influences specially when it comes to things of the earth today and shown as in real life how they can be played with bend or go against the grain. Example if I was going to make a game about an order that Harrell from perspective of one of the concubines and a cut through nature of that environment and then turn the power that I actually can be lead through it. I’m going to make a gender locked as a woman I’m gonna do my research and damn well I’m gonna make it fun.
1 Like
Yet, looking at those exceptional women, throughout the actual historical record, you would see they became both defacto and de jure rulers - from being Queen in England as Emma of Normandy did (which is the closest to this story’s in both details and generalities) or if it were Irene if the Eastern Roman Empire - so your own argument is defeating your position on the game, at least according to actual history.
3 Likes