Pull me one out of there that states women were fighting in combat, the ones i did see from a quick skim had a citation needed. The rest were all women leading in battle, which is no the same as fighting, as we talked about with Joan of arc.
And things like this seriously count as a women “Warrior”.
451: Saint Genevieve is credited with averting Attila from Paris by rallying the people in prayer.[3]
And what does China have to do with the medieval period?
"1335: The Scots defeat a company led by the Count of Namur. Amongst the Count’s casualties was a female lancer who had killed her opponent, Richard Shaw, at the same moment that he had killed her. Her gender was only discovered when the bodies were being stripped of their armor at the end of the engagement. “The chronicler Bower seems to have been at least as impressed by the rarity of two mounted soldiers simultaneously transfixing one another with their lances as with the fact that one of them was a woman”
as I just said.
Congrats, after hours of arguing you found me one example over a 1000 year period. Not sure why one of you could not have done it earlier.
I’ll definitely have to look more into this account, when i have time, but i’ll give it the benefit of the doubt since it doesn’t have a citation needed.
Now that we have that, I would like your citiation that burying a woman with her husbands arms and armor and without the typical household implements was common among vikings.
There were female knights and warriors during that time - not sure about in that region - but you and others here seem to be making huge assumptions about history without actually knowing history
Can you give an example of a female knight?
Obviously a female soldier would be Jean D’Arc, but she’s not a knight, and I do think she’s the only woman who was actually on the battlefield.
See, an intelligent person would perhaps say why a female character would be a good idea for this game. To premise it around necessarily being a ‘warrior’ makes the idea an immediate writeoff, the ‘down with henry’ just makes you sound silly. There are many good reasons to create a female character story arc, and you have failed to present a single one.
I Wonder If there were complains about a Missing “Geraldine of Rivia”?
but plenty of Muslim and “none European” SS soldiers…
That’s one more example than we have of a blacksmiths son becoming a full blown knight with equipment that could match that of the holy roman emperor, taking on entire cities in hand to hand combat. Let’s not pretend for a second that historical accuracy is a reason to not have a playable female character in this game. That argument destroys itself its so weak. The only real reason to not have a female story arc is because of limited developer resources combined with player demand for other DLC content. Lot’s of thinly disguised misogyny on this forum.
No it’s simply because you are Playing one exactly role, that’s the Story and Concert of the whole Game! I Don’t See any Problem with that, i mean i’m Not complaing that the Pony-Simulator 2K17 only allowed you to Play Girls and that there are also Boys Riding Horses - yes that’s true, But that’s Just Not the Game!
Nope you are wrong. This is not elder scrolls, it’s a medieval simulator. Free thinking women were burned at the stake in this age. Look up the malleus malificarum, not entirely sure if that’s the correct spelling of it.
I understand, but the game as we have it is not a finished game. The devs know they have a lot of content left to add.
I have a history degree, not that I need one to know that your comment is nonsense. Please don’t talk about things that you know nothing about.
No we don’t need female protagonist.
It is about historical accuracy, with some fantasy in there. It would be extremely innacurate to have a female lead in the game though. It would be more likely for a blacksmiths son to become a squire, than a women to in those days.
From the US civil war there are plenty of examples of females serving as soldiers.
And there are also some from earlier wars.
It very likely happened true out history…
But what is the same with all of them?
They dressed as men, used male names and tried in every way to be seen by people around them as a man.
If they managed to do this successfully and not get discovered, then naturally we would not know about it.
But that also mean that they are totally irrelevant to this game.
If everyone treat the main character as a male, there is no difference… and the whole idea of playing as a female is lost.
Off the top od my head look up order of the hatchet I know they were refereed to as knights and given a bunch of legal protections as a recognized order
OK you can say whatever you want on the internet Mr. History degree. I do know what I’m talking about, I love history and always have and it’s a fact that free thinking women were hunted and killed by the church to keep them under men, which was wrong yes, but a big part of the game is being historically accurate to the times.
But i Don’t think that Just giving Henry Boobs and a Vagaga and Engage in some romance with Peschek (or Theresa, how should i know, i’m Not the one To judge) should have priority to add.
There’s so much content Most Players would Love to have, but a female character isn’t one of it (especially since you got no Chainmail-Bikini which is the reason for Most Men to Play a Woman).
I really doubt they will Release a completely different Main Quest that fits a Woman(even though i would Like that) and i think Most Players agree, that better AI, bugfixing, optimication, content Like polearms and crossbows and so on should have priority.
