Uncle

I don't know that you can honestly say that the art draws in more than it's turned away. If that were the case, I'd expect Malifaux to be a lot more popular.

Absolutely! I figure that at the point where a kid is "mature" enough to play a wargame, they are "mature" enough to deal with anything that game entails. If I am playing against a kid and he makes any inappropriate comments, I will be quick to correct him or give him a glare. But the real issue is that, potentially, scantily-clad models are driving away potential customers from this game, and that makes me sad.

I think it says more about the artist when they sculpt/paint a strong, commanding female and then give them a neckline so low I can see their navel.

I'd really rather not get into a religious debate here, particularly about the... Well, particularities of the Apocrypha. Suffice it to say that yes, I am well aware of the inspiration behind Lilith, but inspiration does not mean direct copy. The use of "Kindly Ones" actually threw me a bit, since that epithet has been used for several beings over the course of human history. And yes, the Maiden, the Mother, and the... Other One are an obvious inspiration for the original three Neverborn Masters, but until we see them doing some snipping of threads, it's just inspiration. I actually do not know much about Sumerian mythology aside from what little bit I gleaned from Snow Crash. It's admittedly a weak spot in my studies. However, I'm sure there's inspiration. I'm just not a big fan of bondage demons in my games. Nothing in Malifaux is offensive to me, really. I find some of it in questionable taste, and would understand others finding it offensive. As I've tried to state repeatedly, I simply do not find the game "feminist."

Lady J would be a lot more practical if she wasn't wearing a corset. Those things really do not allow one to breathe or bend easily.

In my neck of the woods, the three most popular Crews seem to be Seamus, the Dreamer, and Colette. But we're far from a large group.

I am prepared to argue in terms of Lady J, Perdita, Bete Noir, the Ikiryo, Myranda, and Rasputina, as far as clothing goes. All of them are revealing more flesh, although a fair bit less leg, or are wearing heavily cheesecakey, fetishized clothing. Hence, "one of." I will point out here that Lilith is Malifaux is not the first female, who was rejected by Adam for having an opinion. Nor should we start using real-world religious beliefs in a game that is, as far as I can tell, trying very hard to avoid mentioning religion.

The difference there is that if a woman chooses to express "feminity" (which I suppose here means dressing like something from Boris Vallejo), it is her choice. When a man does something like that to a fantasy woman, it is his choice. Control is the big issue there. Frankly, the SoB are very heavily fetishized with the power armored corsets and thigh boots, not to mention the Penetentia (or whatever they're called). Plus, the whole power armored boobs thing. But still, the standard Sister is heavily clothed. It just strikes me as odd that some of the most "fully clothed" female models for Malifaux are Cassie and the Performers. How does that make sense?

I'm curious as to when I accused Wyrd of doing so. At no time was I intending to imply that Wyrd described Malifaux as "feminist friendly," but rather that at least one individual on this thread had done so. It really isn't. It's a fun game, though.

In their free time, they are able to dress as they please, of course, but I was referring specifically to the "work" comment made earlier. Pools and beaches also have dress codes, to a certain extent. Or at least, they did when I was a lifeguard 10-15 years ago. Someone wearing a Wicked Weasel, for example, would be turned away with the explanation that this was a family pool/beach, although that never happened in the 8+ years I spent working as such. It seems people instinctively knew how to dress for such situations. To an extent, yes. But where do we draw the line as far as what is "too far?"

Walking down the street downtown in the fourth (fifth? I forget) largest city in the second largest country in the world, I oddly enough do not see any women dressed like any of the mentioned names. However, I do see several female executives of large corporations who make more in a month than I do in a year. Typically, they are wearing a slightly more feminine version of the typical suit, or a blouse and skirt. These women are definitely empowered and successful, but for some reason, they're dressed professionally. Odd, innit?

Firstly, I was not the person who told the guy in question not to bring his gang anymore, or to repaint them before they were brought back. Secondly, I also wasn't the guy who painted his Redemptionists in white robes with Confederate flags.

If your coworkers are dressing like Taelor, Vicky, Rasputina, Colette, etc., then I seriously question where you work. Perhaps. That said, it is the truth--if you're going to gore up your models or play with a bunch of hyper-sexualized miniatures, I'd rather not have you included in a group. You could be the nicest guy in the world, but that still applies. I've actually been in a playgroup where a young man was told "No, you can't use those models--bring something else if you want to play here." The guy was plenty nice, he just chose an unfortunate color scheme for his Redemptionists.

I'm very happy for your wife. Different people have different opinions. Some women believe that being "strong" does not mean dressing up like a male fantasy. Yes, I should be able to open a Playboy at my desk at work and not feel ashamed at all. I should be able to leer at women to my satisfaction without anyone reacting at all--after all, breasts are natural and there's no reason that I shouldn't be allowed to look at my leisure, right? Different people have different comfort zones. Trying to mock people for that really isn't going to work. I am not comfortable playing with underdressed female miniatures in the presence of small children or those who would be otherwise offended by them. Go figure.

Actually, I rather agree there as well; however, the topic of the thread is "Women in Malifaux," not "Carnage in Malifaux." People who go to either extreme of sexuality or gore (or both together, yikes) don't really strike me as the sort I'd like to have in my playgroup.

Oh man, I'm almost sorry to do this... Here's a thread about it on RPGNet: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=553278

Yes, it's a massive disconnect in our values these days, but it is what it is. Personally, I could care less, but when Mommy brings little Jimmy to the game store and sees a bunch of grown men pushing around tiny half-naked girls, things get awkward. Plus, we're playing a war game here. Expecting there to be no violence would be like playing an h-game and expecting everyone to be prudishly covered and behaving modestly. I don't think it's unreasonable to hope that a game's models wouldn't get one viewed as a creep. And Nathan, honestly, the Belles are one of the most covered-up models in the game and have frankly gorgeous period dressed on. It's not surprising that they have draw power.

Oddly enough, I really like Malifaux, and I play Colette (and, to be fair, only Colette, although Kirai is growing on me as well, along with the Dreamer). I merely think that trying to pass it off as a feminist-friendly game is a little silly.

I would ask, particularly, why Wyrd thought it was necessary to include BDSM-themed miniatures in Malifaux, or how that was considered particularly appropriate for the time period and setting, as it were. Ultimately, I would prefer not to own models that would potentially awkward conversations with parents/grandparents/significant others/random bystanders/Mommy bringing little Jimmy into the game store. This is the same reason why I am not a fan of the Diaz Daemonettes or any other "revealing" miniature--game stores are not 18+ and I would prefer not having to hide my models when the folks come to visit.

Page 154, Rising Powers: "Not only are these women trained in stagecraft, but also the most ancient of dances - seduction. [break] Colette's performers are no mere prostitutes, however. They are trained Arcanist operatives, using their wiles to infiltrate and gather information which they pass back to Colette's contacts..." Page 83, Rising Powers: "The girls stormed off to busy themselves with tasks backstage. 'You can forget about that special dance tonight, Joss.'" Evidently "making their own way" requires one to dress like a male fantasy. Indeed, a lot of these models came from the Great Beforetime, but it's not as though Nekima and the Lelitu are so much better, you know? Exactly the same thing that happened with my wife, who will semi-happily play a game of WHFB with me. She flipped through the Malifaux books and lost all interest in playing. Tasteless miniatures do not excuse ones in bad taste.

In Rising Powers, the story detailing the conflict between Hamelin the Plagued and Colette has the latter in a men's work shirt and trousers, which is a far more practical outfit for combat and sewer crawling than her performer's clothing. Of course, that model wouldn't sell as much. Likewise, Taelor is supposed to be an extremely strong woman, but her model is of a supermodel with bad stripper-boobs covered by the sort of tops which require quite a bit of artful scissors use to create. Lady Justice and Lilith fight in corsets and thigh boots, neither of which would allow someone to be active. And so on. I know I'm being overly critical here, but Wyrd has made no huge strides towards "female equality" with Malifaux. About the best thing you can say is that there's a lot of cheesecake, as opposed to just one or two examples. You also don't see anyone trying to say that the X-Men are taking strides towards equality of the genders by incorporating the Thongmaster... Erm, Psylocke. Or calling it "one of the most feminist comics on the market." [Edit: responding to Mergoth.]

It comes across as female-friendly until you actually look at things. At the point, we start to see a lot of Vallejo-ish ideals crop up. I find it somewhat ironic that the burlesque performers of Colette and crew are actually some of the most conservatively dressed female in the game. Lady Justice, Perdita, Vicky, Colette, Lilith, Taelor,the Lelitu, Nekima (judging by the concept art), and the Nurses could all use less cheesecake models--they're all beautiful minis, but they come across as more than a little objectifying. Looking at the background, we see shades of Frank Miller. Not everything is "whoreswhoreswhoreswhorsewhores," but there's certainly an undercurrent. You have undead prostitutes, living burlesque dancers (who are, it is hinted, also prostitutes, but this is hardly surprising), and at least one Master who is a former prostitute--Colette is arguable here, since it's not flat-out stated. Furthermore, females are regularly described as beautiful, whereas the males get far fewer such descriptions. In fact, the only real time where we get females who are not depicted and/or described as alluring, they are deliberate subversions in the form of old ladies--Abuela Ortega and Zoraida. Even Rasputina is a little over-the-top in the "soviet cheesecake" style. Admittedly, the Silent Ones are an exception, but it's one of the few. Is Malifaux female-friendly? Perhaps in comparison, but it has a long ways to go before it could be considered non-objectifying towards women.

See, the odd thing there, for me, is that none of that manages to strike me as complicated at all. In fact, that was pretty much the first thing I realized upon going through her cards, and there's really no "interaction" there, either. About the closest thing to "complicated interaction" I can even see regarding the Showgirls that doesn't involve dodgy rules (Celebrity, Fixable) would be the Performer's Poisoned Gift, if only because one has to plan very carefully in order to succeed at paralyzing an opponent. Sure, it's doable, but it's far from guaranteed. Oh, and also the Mannequin's Companion ability, but I'd chalk that up to dodgy rules as well (no offense Wyrd). So I guess that doesn't really count as such.

Completely agree there. I've yet to have a game in which Cassie is either alive or there's anything she could possibly do, primarily due to tabling the opponent--Gremlins don't last long, I've noticed. However, there's only six models (eight it you really want to argue) that you should be taking as a Colette player, so learning their rules isn't difficult. I'm sure some people would be okay with it. However, I have no real intention on expanding my Malifaux collection beyond what it currently is, assuming no new Showgirls come out. And sure, it'd be a useful experience, but it's not one I'm willing to devote my very limited game time to. It would not have been insulting at all, as I would have simply refused to do so. Had that been an issue with your group, then yes, it would have been insulting. I suppose the reverse could be asked: if said player responded to your group with "No thanks, I'd rather play with the crew I'm interested in," would that have been an issue?

Off the top of my head, that would be Cassandra, and it would allow her (if still alive) to activate at the end of the game, but before calculating VPs and the like. Do I win anything? Let's be honest here, guys: here's what you're going to take in a Colette crew: Colette Cassie Coryphee Coryphee Duet Showgirl Mannequin (maybe) Gunsmith (maybe) Johan That's eight models, some of whom overlap quite a bit (the Coryphees primarily). Now, I'm not certain why having eight separate statlines is considered "complicated" or how someone would get all addlepated by the horrific complexity therein--heck, read the cards, people! If someone told me "oh here, learn with this simple crew," I would, again, find another game to play. Maybe I'm just overly specific in my interests, but I am not playing Malifaux for the Arcanists, or the background, or anything else. I am playing because I really dig on the Showgirls. And yes, I meant the Performers. I tend to get those two nouns mixed up in my head.