-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
no female commanders or add female commanders as an optional.
- Thread starter moonelord
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
When you create a fictional world, taking inspiration from historical settings, you dont need to adapt everything. Why not create a fictional world that is better than the real one?
If you prefer not having female commanders that is your opinion, I was just saying that you can not justify it with historical immersion when the game is fictional. If they wanted more immersion they would just make it take place in a historical setting.
Personally I think it could be interesting if the attitude for female commanders varied between the factions
If you prefer not having female commanders that is your opinion, I was just saying that you can not justify it with historical immersion when the game is fictional. If they wanted more immersion they would just make it take place in a historical setting.
Personally I think it could be interesting if the attitude for female commanders varied between the factions
What is the harm of not having the option? This is how the game world is intended to be. Hope for mods if you wish. But talking about this being immersion breaking is ridiculous
The harm is that it would add development time changing something that does not need to change.moonelord said:
The game needs to be updated to fit a modern audience hence female commanders. I like it. It is good. Whether that is historically accurate or not, I personally do not care.
Ford Perfect said:
Yeah you may not agree with me but it destroys my immersion personally.hope for mod tho.
LeChat said:
it was very exceptional. it was very rare that you cannot even see.
Exitialis said:
It cannot be as hard as takes time much to implement such an option.
Rules said:
But it happens.moonelord said:LeChat said:
it was very exceptional. it was very rare that you cannot even see.
And for "historical" : the history is that is in Calradia, not in our world. And there can be female commanders in Calradia. Not usual, but there can.
moonelord said:
For how much it takes inspiration from history, it's not history. We don't know much of the cultures and customs of the different factions and kingdoms, we expect that it maybe a bit different than actual historical cultures, maybe it's not common but not impossible in Calradia to have female commandersafter all it all depends on the cultures, and these are made up. If you can believe all the things that "makes" this world, a fictional continent, with fictional factions, history, armors and whatnot, I think it's easy to believe in this too.
I agree and have argued in the past that historical accuracy is a moot point in any fantasy world, however much historically inspired. The creators always choose which parts of history to emulate and which not.
Buuut, since people are going to keep making that argument...
Female political leaders waging war and commanding troops is well attested in medieval sources. Compared to the question of female combatants, there is no question that noble women led armies. Since political and military leadership were intertwined, women who came to power sometimes had to defend it. Famous examples include Matilda of Canossa, Caterina di Sforza, Ethelflaed the Lady of Mercia, Adelaide-Blanche of Anjou and Ermengarde of Italy.
If the inclusion of politically and militarily active noblewomen breaks your historical immersion, your knowledge of history is lacking.
Buuut, since people are going to keep making that argument...
Female political leaders waging war and commanding troops is well attested in medieval sources. Compared to the question of female combatants, there is no question that noble women led armies. Since political and military leadership were intertwined, women who came to power sometimes had to defend it. Famous examples include Matilda of Canossa, Caterina di Sforza, Ethelflaed the Lady of Mercia, Adelaide-Blanche of Anjou and Ermengarde of Italy.
If the inclusion of politically and militarily active noblewomen breaks your historical immersion, your knowledge of history is lacking.
moonelord said:
Do you have info about female commanders been added in to the game? From what I have seen so far, Bannerlord will have same or similar restrictions that Warband had on females. All AI lords I saw so far were male.
rbk414 said:
It is historical inspired game. Therefore historical immersion is a valid request.
Oxtocoatl said:
MB is not fantasy world. It's fictional but not fantasy. It's not even low fantasy world like say Battlebrothers.
Oxtocoatl said:
That depends on what kind of inclusion. Inclusion other then extreme exception would be immersion breaking yes. For women aces to political and military offices was severely restricted. As a rule, woman could attain them only in the absence of a legitimate male heir or on his behalf, if he was too young. And then not everywhere. And in cases where it was possible, it was pretty much restricted to highest office of the state, that is ruler of the country. I don't recall any woman holding lower titles.
You ask for no female commanders because the game is inspired by history but female warriors/lords can be historical. In history there was women warriors/lords, there was a woman lord Seljuq https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melike_Mama_Hatun, there was female warriors in the Sarmatians (that seem to have inspired the amazon myth), and they finally found women warriors/Lords viking graves (i remenber the debates here with many people saying it was a myth etc...). There was also Baudica the celtic queen of a Brittany tribe. On another side it was almost impossible to become warriors/commanders for females at the time of knights in europe or in Byzantine empire. If Bannerlord is inspired by history i think its mainly for this allow players to play a female character. Like other said here it could be fun if there was cultural differences in factions about females becoming warrior/commanders. In history we can see that some cultures had a different approach on this. Historically women commanders is not so crazy as you think but if you play in a faction that is inspired by western knights or byzantine empire i understand it could be shocking.
Totally agree with this, during hundred years wars there was widows of some dead lord that managed their holdings before their son was in age to become Lord.
If you want to be historical you could allow female commanders in viking, steppe warriors, barbarians, celtic inspired factions, and more rarely in special cases in other factions.
Totally agree with this, during hundred years wars there was widows of some dead lord that managed their holdings before their son was in age to become Lord.
If you want to be historical you could allow female commanders in viking, steppe warriors, barbarians, celtic inspired factions, and more rarely in special cases in other factions.
If the previous title is anything to go by, even faction leaders will roam the map with their retinue and engage in combat. One of the imperial sub-factions is led by a woman, ergo there is almost certainly at least one female commander in the game. There is also the guaranteed option for player characters to be female commanders, which makes two. What's another handful on top of that? Arguments that it breaks immersion are precipitated on the notion that the presence of women in commanding roles is not only unexpected but is so objectionable that it detracts from one's enjoyment of the game. In a game full of anachronisms, why is this particular nail the one in desperate need of a hammering?hruza said:
Ettenrocal said:
It's not "people", it's actual historians who dispute that. There is no evidence that that woman was a warrior, let alone lord. It's an assumption. Moreover there is question about "her" sex to begin with, as "she" might not be "she". Or to be more precise, bones might not belong to the grave it was claimed.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/09/have-we-finally-found-hard-evidence-for-viking-warrior-women/
Also you seems to assume that women that became ruler, must have automatically be a warriors. Those are two unrelated things. Women rulers rarely, if at all lead troops. And there is also difference between leading troops and actually fighting. People often bring Janne d'Arc as an example. Yet there is no single evidence that she actually fought herself in combat.
Btw, Amazons are a mythical characters and evidence that Sarmatians had women soldiers is as speculative as that of a viking women soldiers. There is no convincing prof of either. What there is however is a modern political agenda that tries to push certain ideologies by among other things rewriting history through popular culture like computer games or films.
I was speaking of people here on Talewords forum, they were not historians for what i know. I was just saying that female warriors and or commanders or rulers is not so historically inacurate. If you wait for me to write a wikipedia article on each things i'm saying, sorry but i have no time for this. yeah some women were only rulers and yeah some where only warriors but you don't know either who they were and probably somes were the two.
- Status
