Gender Rebalancing in Monster Names / Descriptions / Speech / Messages
issueid=4002 11-17-2015 09:39 PM
Junior Member
Number of reported issues by Kelibath: 25
Gender Rebalancing in Monster Names / Descriptions / Speech / Messages
Add a 'male' descriptor for the counterpart to 'female' monsters or otherwise address the current gender descriptors in the text to improve parity and avoid further alienation of female gamers

This RFE is a request if at all possible to alter the current strange and uncomfortable imbalance between gendered monsters; specifically, female variants being encountered far less often, and the strange disparity between 'male' monsters having no referenced gender and 'female' monsters of the same kind being described foremostly by their gender.

I'm a massive long-term fan of ADOM and came to the entire genre of roguelikes through it. I'm also female. As a female ADOM fan, this issue actually impacts on me quite seriously and continues even now to make me feel marginalised as a player. I love the fact that the main character can be of either binary gender, and the overwhelming detail that has gone into the game in every respect, and having 'female creatures' is definitely a step up from simply assuming that all of the standard monsters in the game are male by default. Nevertheless it's really quite glaring when a 'female' variant of a known monster suddenly shows up. When the game was first being conceived this probably seemed like a progressive step forwards as female monsters were finally being consciously included, but what it actually serves to do is to normalise every monster without the 'female' descriptor as male and therefore make female monsters seem strangely unusual. When I started playing this game it was postcardware and I wasn't as aware of the wider repercussions from this sort of representation - so I just enjoyed something but felt I had absolutely no place to criticise it for one stylistic choice I wasn't happy with. I've been thinking it would be great to change it for going on twelve years, though, and have finally got the courage up to submit a report to that effect. Now that ADOM is a priced commodity which being released to Steam and a public audience, I see this as a much more pressing issue. There'll be a vast new player base encountering 'female orcs' and 'orcs' for the first time; many of whom might be offended, and some of whom might well post about the issue on social media. I do appreciate that not everyone will be affected by this problem to the same extent (some more, some less, after all, I'm certainly still supporting the game!) but it's something that -does- get noticed, -does- affect at least some players and -may well- garner negative attention.

I would like to see a finished version of ADOM where there is no default gender assumption for either the player or any randomly generated standard monster that they encounter.


My suggestions for how improve on this issue follow:

First, remove the 'female' descriptor from monsters with a 'standard' and 'female' alternate. Generated creatures should instead be assigned a gender on first generation according to a global or per-species algorithm which alters their name (when appropriate), art (if possible), description and the pronouns used (he/she/they/it) in their attack messages and 'l'ook description.
Secondly, I suggest adding this to all applicable/humanoid creatures, not solely the types that already have a 'female' variant, excepting where these are prohibited from one or the other gender by canon or game mechanics.
Ensure the pronouns within descriptions for all monsters currently without gender variation are listed as 'it' or 'they' instead.
I'd also like to up the encounter frequency percentages, now that differing names are not required, to something more like 50% chance per gender (distributed differently by species as required).
Standardise gendered monster names that won't work without the 'female' prefix - notably Swordsman, Lizardman. Suggestions include using swordsman/swordswoman/swordfighter to match their pronouns and lizardfolk/lizardkin/lizardlings.
Maybe add some variant gender names in the same way to current elite forms of the normal monsters, as well - Ogre Queen, Werewolf Queen, Minotaur Queen - whatever works for canon.
NPCs that are generated as 'named' should probably generate their gender first, and then draw from a list of appropriate names afterwards - shopkeepers and artifact guardians, etc.
Some few sections of dialogue also still need to be parsed to avoid accidental use of the wrong pronouns for the PC.



These changes are the easiest way I can think of to introduce the necessary alterations and more reasonably balance the Drakalor Chain. This would present the continued impression of a diverse and balanced world in ADOM without any gender being singled out as more exotic to the player by default, and some suggestions would also allow for the incorporation of non-binary gender to be represented in the game.

My original suggestion was that for every monster with a 'female' alternate, add the 'male' descriptor to their 'standard' opposite. In this manner 'male orcs' and 'female orcs' would show up without any major coding changes being requisite - I have now discarded this in favour of the more streamlined option of removing prefixes entirely. It was originally included because it seemed like the fastest fix. There are also other aspects that would also add to the rebalancing of this issue that might make good suggestions for further gender balance and to link with the above. For example, incorporating female shopkeepers (if not already done) by using names randomised from a list which includes those suitable for both genders (maybe change the HMV shopkeep to female by default), increasing number/balance of set female NPCs, implementing gender parity in Terinyo and Dwarftown by having the graphics for 'farmer' and 'goodwoman' randomly select per foo from the two tiles available (and therefore change the second monster name to 'villager' or similar) and replacing 'female dwarf' with 'dwarves' with RNG'd appearance.. We could even add a third 'other' option to the current character select screen for gender (incorporating a +1 to say, Toughness, and a third gender quest). But I see these more as hopeful future developments after the main, essential suggestions above have been implemented.

Either way, though, this is an issue which has my sincerest attention, and one I honestly think is a necessary change to be made before the game is completed.
Issue Details
Issue Number 4002
Issue Type Feature
Project ADOM (Ancient Domains Of Mystery)
Category All
Status Suggested
Priority 3
Suggested Version ADOM r61 (v2.0.0)
Implemented Version (none)
Milestone (none)
Votes for this feature 26
Votes against this feature 16
Assigned Users (none)
Tags (none)




11-20-2015 04:11 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by auricbond
Fun fact: the term 'bug' was coined by a female programmer who found an insect in the punch-cards they used back then. Oops, I mean just a programmer. A programmer (f).

Actually that may be a myth...
No, it was a moth :p

11-20-2015 04:16 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by Kelibath
"the term 'bug' was coined by a programmer when she found an insect"
Well done on missing the joke despite quoting it.

Quote Originally Posted by anon123
No, it was a moth :p
History has sadly forgotten its name. And gender.

11-20-2015 04:18 PM
Ancient Member
I think removing female as a descriptor, but still assigning sex and saying you hit him/her is a great idea on all sorts of levels (hey, it reduces name length and how much space is taken up in the message buffer!). It's a subtle change that keeps a lot of flavor and makes sense.

On a different note: wow, auricbond. I won't quote everything you've said but:
Quote Originally Posted by auricbond
I think that that--what you just said-- is also in your mind. Also to repeat myself: intent is paramount. Who cares what's endemic if you have the power to rise above it. If you're a powerful female, you'll rise to a position of power. Sexism will have no power to sway you if you aren't sexist yourself; if you don't allow it to exert psychological pressure on you and discourage you when a male OR female invokes that as their best argument for why you should step down. Feeble!
......
Is that anyone's fault? You seem to think that it is the prejudices and stereotypes that held women back from assuming their fair share of the power and recognition, but I think you might have chicken and egg mixed up. Say what you like about her, but noone questioned Thatcher because she had a vagina and a womb, just as an example. If you step up and prove your worth, and you don't live somewhere like Iran, you can be a part of whatever small percent of women are bearers of respect and authority. The go-getters of those positions don't whine about how prejudices held them back, they just smack any opposition around the chops with the truth that they are not going to assume the role you assumed they would.
That's a really backwards attitude, demonstrably wrong, and actually really sexist! These kinds of statements don't make the ADOM community look good or encourage people to step up and post this kind of (perfectly good) RFE.

11-20-2015 04:42 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by SirTheta
I think removing female as a descriptor, but still assigning sex and saying you hit him/her is a great idea on all sorts of levels (hey, it reduces name length and how much space is taken up in the message buffer!). It's a subtle change that keeps a lot of flavor and makes sense.

On a different note: wow, auricbond. I won't quote everything you've said but:
That's a really backwards attitude, demonstrably wrong, and actually really sexist! These kinds of statements don't make the ADOM community look good or encourage people to step up and post this kind of (perfectly good) RFE.
Without further elaboration, I neither agree or understand, nor do I know what you mean by the word 'sexist' (it doesn't mean "forbidden language", for the record). By the definition I use, I'm the least sexist person on the planet and the paragraphs you quoted were respectful toward women. The idea of me being sexist is laughable, and I think my statements reflect well on the ADOM community. I don't think you really understood, or cared to understand, the message I was trying to get across.

11-20-2015 05:04 PM
Junior Member
Quote Originally Posted by auricbond
Well done on missing the joke despite quoting it.
I got the joke, and wasn't quoting the joke, but showing obliquely how my original RFE suggestions would then apply to the joke. Dry wit.

On that note, guys, let's stop feeding the troll posts. I really appreciate the support and the demonstration that my responses and understanding of these issues weren't in the minority. But at the same time, I had been hoping the thread had moved on past that section. I'd love some more varied opinions and suggestions rather than lots of people feeling uncomfortable to post replies to thirty pages' worth of social theory.

11-20-2015 05:19 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by Kelibath
I got the joke, and wasn't quoting the joke, but showing obliquely how my original RFE suggestions would then apply to the joke. Dry wit.
That did elude me; I'm sorry (I still don't get the funny part even now that you've told me).

On that note, guys, let's stop feeding the troll posts. I really appreciate the support and the demonstration that my responses and understanding of these issues weren't in the minority. But at the same time, I had been hoping the thread had moved on past that section. I'd love some more varied opinions and suggestions rather than lots of people feeling uncomfortable to post replies to thirty pages' worth of social theory.
Insinuating that anyone is a troll isn't likely to make people comfortable and welcome either. Let's not be skeptical of peoples intentions unless it is truly without room for misinterpretation.

*EDIT since she won't let this go, I'll concede Kelibath's wishes to take this somewhere private (unless other people chime in and say 'no, no, no, carry on...'). Otherwise she might keep making me out to be a trouble-maker and an unfocused moderator might leap to the assumption that that's what I am as well and deal with me accordingly.

11-20-2015 07:10 PM
Ancient Member
Everyone, please do not start this sort of discussion in RFE comments. It does no one any good, and certainly doesn't help with Thomas deciding on features. There is a vote yes/no feature. No one here has voted no to this feature, and yet there's 3 pages of long long debate? This is a really terrible way to behave!

If this sort of debate continues I'll have to lock the thread.

auricbond, please consider this a formal warning - your aggressive style of responding to every point in this thread is unwarranted and non-constructive.

11-20-2015 07:18 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by Grey
Everyone, please do not start this sort of discussion in RFE comments. It does no one any good, and certainly doesn't help with Thomas deciding on features. There is a vote yes/no feature. No one here has voted no to this feature, and yet there's 3 pages of long long debate? This is a really terrible way to behave!

If this sort of debate continues I'll have to lock the thread.

auricbond, please consider this a formal warning - your aggressive style of responding to every point in this thread is unwarranted and non-constructive.
Fair enough. And as a formal request, can you tell me then if all informal talk is forbidden in the RFE section? I thought it was acceptable since topics have wandered and talked about all sorts of (tangentially related, if not directly on-topic) things in the past with noone stepping in and saying no. I also meant no aggression, and not sure which post came off as aggressive.

11-20-2015 07:23 PM
Junior Member
Quote Originally Posted by Grey
Everyone, please do not start this sort of discussion in RFE comments. It does no one any good, and certainly doesn't help with Thomas deciding on features. There is a vote yes/no feature. No one here has voted no to this feature, and yet there's 3 pages of long long debate? This is a really terrible way to behave!
If this sort of debate continues I'll have to lock the thread.
auricbond, please consider this a formal warning - your aggressive style of responding to every point in this thread is unwarranted and non-constructive.
In fairness to everyone the majority of the debate on this thread has been supportive (including most of auricbond's first comment) and at least 70% of this thread is legitimate feature discussion - which is incredible!
I'm really amazed by how many well-thought-out and positive responses this has garnered so far, and so glad the majority of opinion at least is behind it.
I was also at fault for having originally answered in the manner that I did. It was a shortsighted attempt at inclusivity and I shouldn't have assumed certain concepts were not being understood.
I'd prefer not to see the thread simply locked as it's generated a lot of positive commentary so far, some of which has made it into edits to the RFE already. I'd like it to continue receiving commendation -and- critique as long as they're respectful.
(I'll also try not to jump in and answer so often myself - I just figured people would like to see I was taking their feedback.)

11-20-2015 07:37 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by auricbond
Fair enough. And as a formal request, can you tell me then if all informal talk is forbidden in the RFE section? I thought it was acceptable since topics have wandered and talked about all sorts of (tangentially related, if not directly on-topic) things in the past with noone stepping in and saying no. I also meant no aggression, and not sure which post came off as aggressive.
It's not forbidden, but I don't think it's very useful. I'm stepping in here because I'm worried this could get out of control. Discussion is ping ponging without any resolution, and it's mostly lots of "I think" rather than any useful facts.

Remember that Thomas reads RFEs to consider changes to the game. He doesn't have time to consider long-winded discussion. The forums are a better place for this sort of thing (with the right tone). Often something is best discussed amongst the community on the boards and then a concise and widely agreed RFE made.

11-20-2015 08:47 PM
ixi ixi is offline
Junior Member
Quote Originally Posted by Kelibath
So, out of interest - why "female claw bug" in particular? Is this a stealth Aliens reference? :)
A bit of spoiled history for new players :)
Claw bugs are genderless and the only one female claw bug is probably a someone's reward, joke and/or really unusual and fun thing. It deserved to be an exception ;)

11-21-2015 12:58 AM
Junior Member
Quote Originally Posted by ixi
A bit of spoiled history for new players :)
Claw bugs are genderless and the only one female claw bug is probably a someone's reward, joke and/or really unusual and fun thing. It deserved to be an exception ;)
I can't see anything like that being a problem (and I expect that it will survive implementation anyway, then, as the Creator wrote it in deliberately in the first place for a pledge reward).

11-21-2015 10:45 AM
Ancient Member
The female claw bug was created by a user as their boss from the crowdfunding rewards.

Of course the word female should be preserved there, as it's what sets it apart - there are many claw bugs in Ancardia but apparently only one female claw bug, which is that one.

11-21-2015 02:08 PM
Junior Member
While we're at it, maybe something could be done about the gender balance concerning unique NPCs. (Maybe it should be another RFE, I don't know). This was actually pointed out 12 years ago on rec.games.roguelike.adom, link. Here's a list of uniques taken from the thread:


***

And the image of female NPCs that do exist is somewhat flat. Caverns of Chaos have only one unique female NPC (Banshee), and it's implied she's mad because she lost her husband. Of the other characters, tiny girl is a damsel in distress, the water dragon is mostly defined through her motherhood, and the whole Ice Queen & Yggaz dynamic, with or without the *bitch* mentioned, could be interpreted as reinforcing negative stereotypes of female status and frigidity. Sure, the game reflects the popular image of medieval societies, but I don't think the game would suffer if Tywat Pare or Hotzenplotz or whoever was female.

11-21-2015 02:35 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by Feorg
And the image of female NPCs that do exist is somewhat flat. Caverns of Chaos have only one unique female NPC (Banshee), and it's implied she's mad because she lost her husband. Of the other characters, tiny girl is a damsel in distress, the water dragon is mostly defined through her motherhood, and the whole Ice Queen & Yggaz dynamic, with or without the *bitch* mentioned, could be interpreted as reinforcing negative stereotypes of female status and frigidity. Sure, the game reflects the popular image of medieval societies, but I don't think the game would suffer if Tywat Pare or Hotzenplotz or whoever was female.
Well, some of unique NPCs are modeled on characters or archetypes from some other fiction, so we can't change them. Some can easily be changed: like Guth'Alak as a woman -- to extend druid balance; although there are already lawful good female Yrriur and chaotic evil Riurry) or Master Summoner.

Realistically, changing shopkeepers' gender can affect the guaranteed ones (some name change would be in order though). I can easily see Munxip as a woman (now that's a weird thing to say).

Ice Queen & Yggaz dynamic could really use a change. Drunken loser bitching about his ex-wife I can understand, but the Ice Queen sadly wondering whether her husband is ok is pretty weak stuff.

11-21-2015 04:55 PM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by Feorg
They forgot Yrruir, yet not her evil counterpart? Oops. (*EDIT they thought she was male) Still, that's an illuminating list--although I had it in the back of my head that it was a game dominated by male characters without having to see it. I just thought 'eh, a lot of societies are like that'. Games aren't obligated to be progressive or to choose idealism over true-to-lifeness--but nor do I mind it being done the idealistic way either.

11-21-2015 05:23 PM
Junior Member
Ln, I tend I agree - while her reaction paints the Ice Queen as a much better person than Yggaz, it might be an idea for her to be disappointed that his actions ended up tearing them apart and maybe pitying him rather than just obsessing over him.

Quote Originally Posted by Feorg
While we're at it, maybe something could be done about the gender balance concerning unique NPCs. (Maybe it should be another RFE, I don't know). This was actually pointed out 12 years ago on rec.games.roguelike.adom, link. Here's a list of uniques taken from the thread:


***

And the image of female NPCs that do exist is somewhat flat. Caverns of Chaos have only one unique female NPC (Banshee), and it's implied she's mad because she lost her husband. Of the other characters, tiny girl is a damsel in distress, the water dragon is mostly defined through her motherhood, and the whole Ice Queen & Yggaz dynamic, with or without the *bitch* mentioned, could be interpreted as reinforcing negative stereotypes of female status and frigidity. Sure, the game reflects the popular image of medieval societies, but I don't think the game would suffer if Tywat Pare or Hotzenplotz or whoever was female.
I've kind of nodded to this in my RFE by mentioning the possibility of female shopkeeper NPCs and rebalancing areas like Terinyo to have a better mix of unnamed NPC types.
I figured that going farther would require a seperate RFE just as you say and I thought it would be better to address one thing at a time - necessary changes to avoid alienation and then positive changes to promote inclusion later.
That said, though, perhaps I was wrong. I've seen hundreds of bug reports and RFEs submitted in tandem by other commenters and I can't see any reason not to do both at once!

Your idea is brilliant and well-researched (excepting one unicorn, apparently, though at least that one avoids the gender stereotyping that you mention). My expectation is that people will want to see their familiar and beloved NPCs remain the same, but, one or two changes at the very least really should be acceptable. It may also turn out that players at large would prefer to see more female NPCs and would be happy with alterations to some of their favourites. The easiest ones to change IMO will be the NPCs where their gender doesn't significantly affect name, gameplay or tileset - some of the wyrms and dragons, ratlings like Skriek, shopkeepers like Leggot, some Arena combatants and so on. I'd also argue for more unique female NPCs to be added that buck the trend of girlish archetypes.

I'd love to see this written up as another RFE or forum thread and don't think that it would be a duplicate. This is a big enough issue to request several different changes and having multiple players suggest the same type of thing only lends it strength.

11-21-2015 11:35 PM
ixi ixi is offline
Junior Member
Quote Originally Posted by Feorg
Thanks you for that list, it shows NPC gender problem in general. It do worth an RFE, the only thing left - which NPCs could be changed without breaking the plot. What if almost every NPC during game generation could have a chance to be female? Seeing female sheriff, crime lady, cat lady, old amazon warrior or assassin princess from time to time could be nice.
Would anyone create an RFE? If no one would in a couple of days (or weeks, depends on work...) I'll create one for sure.

--- --- ---

Any feedback from 3 persons who downvoted?

11-22-2015 02:00 AM
Junior Member
Is it really necessary to mention the gender anywhere in the game, though? Surely a structure like "You hit the goblin. It dies/runs away/panics" would be more neutral, in the long run. I do understand that it would leave open questions, like ghost/quickling kings and queens, but wouldn't replacing king/queen with something like "royalty" work? It would pose a problem with some classic character like Terinyo's "tiny girl", because "tiny person" might sound like a PC term for a dwarf, though. But I think this RFE is important, and by weighing the best suggestions mentioned here the game will eventually become better.

11-22-2015 02:48 AM
Ancient Member
Quote Originally Posted by mrfz
Is it really necessary to mention the gender anywhere in the game, though? Surely a structure like "You hit the goblin. It dies/runs away/panics" would be more neutral, in the long run. I do understand that it would leave open questions, like ghost/quickling kings and queens, but wouldn't replacing king/queen with something like "royalty" work? It would pose a problem with some classic character like Terinyo's "tiny girl", because "tiny person" might sound like a PC term for a dwarf, though. But I think this RFE is important, and by weighing the best suggestions mentioned here the game will eventually become better.

Why is avoiding mentioning gender important? That is not the RFE.

+ Reply