SP - Player, NPCs & Troops Yo were the black women at?

[Stratigo]

In Warband there were 5 female companions and 11 male ones.

In Bannerlord i'm running around with my personal harem, there are so many female ones.

bannerlord's companions are procedurally generated currently.

He's actually quite right there. I hate it when everytime this conversation pops up, people throw up exceptions and try to explain it as a norm. It was a taboo back in the day and that's why we know pretty much every female "warrior" by name. I don't care about that 75% bannerlord companions are female, but i care about history.

Chill out dude. None of your soldiers can be women. A handful of nobles are female, and you can have companions that are, but they make the distinct minority. No one's pushing the evil SJWs into your game, no one has to cry out the horrors of progressiveness for daring to put ladies in armor. I mean, people will because but one lady is too much. But you really shouldn't.

 

[Kripaz]

we have said nothing about majority army, where in Bannerlord is the majority army female, ffs look a your troop roster, not a single female to be seen, but YOUR NAMED COMPANION! who might be a smith, trader, engineer or fighther or something else, can be female, in an army of a 100 thats makes it 1% female, my armies are nearing 200 with 3 female companions, 2 of them healers, are you now saying women were not healers? or are you saying healers did not travel with armies?

Wait are we talking about real life troop trees or bannerlord ones?.

 

[Timmortal]

This. And there's a good reason behind it.

I the north we had female figthers, the scytians and or steppe and nomad people had them aswell, in those types of society it helped if everyone could hunt and fight. In the norther part of europe women were considered far more equal and could hold property and get divorsed, that was until christianity came and started changing that, calling women unclean and inferior.

 

[Amari]

This sure went down quick.

 

[Mr Similan]

we have said nothing about majority army, where in Bannerlord is the majority army female, ffs look a your troop roster, not a single female to be seen, but YOUR NAMED COMPANION! who might be a smith, trader, engineer or fighther or something else, can be female, in an army of a 100 thats makes it 1% female, my armies are nearing 200 with 3 female companions, 2 of them healers, are you now saying women were not healers? or are you saying healers did not travel with armies?

You stated that the reason there were so many females was because the were over half the pop. I responded by saying that females were forbidden to join the army before the 1st WW. You told me I'm wrong. I havent said anything about companions, but Ill let you know that camp followers are not an army so your healer example isnt vaild either way.

 

[Kripaz]

Chill out dude. None of your soldiers can be women. A handful of nobles are female, and you can have companions that are, but they make the distinct minority. No one's pushing the evil SJWs into your game, no one has to cry out the horrors of progressiveness for daring to put ladies in armor. I mean, people will because but one lady is too much. But you really shouldn't.

Like i said, i don't care if the cut off every **** in bannerlord, i care about truthful history telling.

 

[YellowSolEk]

This entire argument is dumb, the world needs to be consistent with realism, but players should have a choice, because it's a sandbox.

 

[Timmortal]

You stated that the reason there were so many females was because the were over half the pop. I responded by saying that females were forbidden to join the army before the 1st WW. You told me I'm wrong. I havent said anything about companions, but Ill let you know that camp followers are not an army so your healer example isnt vaild either way.

i said there are women in bannerlord because half the population is female, you whine that there are too many females in the game. is said, point to a single troop in the roster thats female and pointed out that the companions are meant to be healers and the like. also camp followers were very much a part of the army, though a part apart from the main force, Theres been very few armies without camp followers.

 

[Kripaz]

I the north we had female figthers, the scytians and or steppe and nomad people had them aswell, in those types of society it helped if everyone could hunt and fight. In the norther part of europe women were considered far more equal and could hold property and get divorsed, that was until christianity came and started changing that, calling women unclean and inferior.

There's no solid proof that "we" had female warriors in the north. Only proof we have are from anglo-saxon chronicles when norse men came with their famielies to plunder England. They were there to settle. Let's be honest, "vikings" are a meme at this point.

 

[Mr Similan]

Didnt say anything about there being to many women ingame. 2nd camp followers dont constitue as an army so, as I said before, it's irrelevant to the topic of female warriors/soldiers.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

He's actually quite right there. I hate it when everytime this conversation pops up, people throw up exceptions and try to explain it as a norm. It was a taboo back in the day and that's why we know pretty much every female "warrior" by name. I don't care about that 75% bannerlord companions are female, but i care about history.

You chose to ignore when I said "exceptional" and also ignored my comment on "Actually, that many of the companions are women fits well their role as "we're the rejects, the pirates, the bandits, the disinherited... you come from the gutter, and so do they, men and women alike, defying social conventions."

It's there, in the fringe, where you'd find most of the women doing things "they were not supposed to". Be this fighting, being witches, or whatever else.

You're also wrong on another account: we don't know pretty much every female warrior by name. We know of the famous ones, but the bias in the sources just doesn't allow us to know. We don't know how many women were acting outside of the norm (as well as men acting outisde of the norm, people acting outside of the norm), but from the little examples we have, we can imagine (not be sure, but imagine) that it may not have been uncommon, just rarely recorded.

I also don't think "taboo" is the word you have to use in this case. When a woman fought in the Middle Ages, and was recorded, it was not scratched from record. It was commented with astonishment, used as example of defiance or determination, or painted in whatever light the chronicler needed it to be painted. But not erased. Not taboo, just uncommon.

 

[Kripaz]

Didnt say anything about there being to many women ingame. 2nd camp followers dont constitue as an army so, as I said before, it's irrelevant to the topic of female warriors/soldiers.

Yea, this conversation really got off the rail.

 

[Stratigo]

There's no solid proof that "we" had female warriors in the north. Only proof we have are from anglo-saxon chronicles when norse men came with their famielies to plunder England. They were there to settle. Let's be honest, "vikings" are a meme at this point.

There's no solid proof for, well, a lot of things in history that we believe in uncomplicatidly. Were there some lady fighters? Sure, there's evidence to suggest it textually and archaeologically. Was it common? No. Not amount societies of the pre modern world. But I just forsee the hill that will be died upon here and I see where this thread will go ultimately and I want to reiterate to some folks that, no, taleworlds hasn't been ambushed in an alleyway by feminists and forced to put women in their game.

 

[Timmortal]

You chose to ignore when I said "exceptional" and also ignored my comment on "Actually, that many of the companions are women fits well their role as "we're the rejects, the pirates, the bandits, the disinherited... you come from the gutter, and so do they, men and women alike, defying social conventions."

It's there, in the fringe, where you'd find most of the women doing things "they were not supposed to". Be this fighting, being witches, or whatever else.

You're also wrong on another account: we don't know pretty much every female warrior by name. We know of the famous ones, but the bias in the sources just doesn't allow us to know. We don't know how many women were acting outside of the norm (as well as men acting outisde of the norm, people acting outside of the norm), but from the little examples we have, we can imagine (not be sure, but imagine) that it may not have been uncommon, just rarely recorded.

I also don't think "taboo" is the word you have to use in this case. When a woman fought in the Middle Ages, and was recorded, it was not scratched from record. It was commented with astonishment, used as example of defiance or determination, or painted in whatever light the chronicler needed it to be painted. But not erased. Not taboo, just uncommon.

+1

 

[Timmortal]

Didnt say anything about there being to many women ingame. 2nd camp followers dont constitue as an army so, as I said before, it's irrelevant to the topic of female warriors/soldiers.

you are arguing in bad faith then, cause my comment was to a comment about there being to many female companions, to which i said half the people in the world are women, to which you said, women were forbidden in the army. So either you are a troll or forgot what the conversation was about.

 

[Mr Similan]

you are arguing in bad faith then, cause my comment was to a comment about there being to many female companions, to which i said half the people in the world are women, to which you said, women were forbidden in the army. So either you are a troll or forgot what the conversation was about.

No your argument is bad and shouldnt be used. Let me show you why: As you stated more than half(51%) of the population is female. Yet the caresector is predominantly female with certain proffesions having a 90% female work base. Stating the population of females in general doesnt say anything about what sector they will occupy. Thus it's a bad argument and should not be used again

 

[Fietta]

Do I have to remind you all that this is a fantasy game? Unless you believe Calradia existed. In a fantasy game, females can be whatever they want to be regardless of period. Back to the OP, I agree there should probably be more darker skin females.

 

[MBeagleguy]

Just open an history book please. History proved you wrong.

How dare you tell someone to read a book! joking

Anyway I don't even know why there's such an outcry on the number of females in the game. It's a game that can only capture but so much of the history.

 

[Shrugging Khan]

Women and men being presented as effectively equivalent in a medieval setting is very unrealistic and, IMO, worse world-building than in Warband. But it's also easily remedied for the player: Just don't hire female companions.

 

[Timmortal]

No your argument is bad and shouldnt be used. Let me show you why: As you stated more than half(51%) of the population is female. Yet the caresector is predominantly female with certain proffesions having a 90% female work base. Stating the population of females in general doesnt say anything about what sector they will occupy. Thus it's a bad argument and should not be used again

lol putting modern sociatal structures into a argument about ancient societies, were there many hospitals hospitals and daycare institutions in ancient times? also almost all teachers used to be male. they Arent now. so are you saying they could not have been then either, thats just a stupid arguemnt im done here.