So I just got this game, and I've been playing it a lot over the last few days. I'll save the praise for when I've seen more of the game (and have played it enough to spot its flaws and get sick of it), but I'm having a lot of fun so far. However, there's something I don't get that's been bugging me.

When I started a new game, I was immediately advised that playing a female character would make the game more difficult, for all the reasons one might expect from a backwards medieval society. "OK," I thought, "that sounds interesting. Let's do that." So I made myself a female commoner and headed for Swadia.

After getting myself established, I fought for Swadia as a mercenary for a few months, then I asked to be made a vassal. The king told me he didn't want his precious holdings managed by female hands, which I accepted. I was a little confused, then, when literally the very next game day, he granted me ladyship of a village. Shortly after that, I overran and conquered a city, which he also granted to me.

I was actually a little disappointed. I didn't think it would be that easy (of course, defending my new holdings when Swadia was at war with the entire continent was not easy, and I've since lost them both).

I don't think I was particularly adored by the court. I had maybe ~200 renown and single-digit reputation with most of the lords, including the king. So, my question is, what gives? Is playing a female not as hard as it's made out to be, or is the AI just that flaky? Are there factors involved that I'm not considering?

If I didn't know better, I would say that the court saw my new vassalage as a convenient way to offload a poverty-stricken backwater bordering enemy territory (Peshmi), and further only gave me Narra knowing that they could leave it to fall (I couldn't convince any nearby lords to help me defend it) and use it as an example of why women shouldn't be granted land. I don't think the AI is actually that intricate, but it's fun to let my imagination write the story. :p

I didn't know they made it harder for female characters, I just thought they made your stats a little bit different. I've been playing M&B for years but I've only ever played males. You might want to ask in the forums http://forum.taleworlds.com

I hope you enjoy the game. In spite of a few flaws its a game full of character and will keep you entertained for hours.

Propably only difficulty I noticed while playing women are hardships of finding husband instead of "easy" gain of free property from my wife.

Yeah, the difficulties in sex and parentage lie in how much you have to trudge and socialize with other lords in order to get ahead. Warrior women aren't seen in a positive light and a male noble will have an easier time than a female commoner, but that doesn't make playing the game as such impossibly hard. Also, if you conquer a town or city (you started the siege) and you win, the king is likely to give it to you, although that also depends on how many other lands you have, how many lands the other lords have and how much the king and other lords like you.

Ohhh, I see. So when he told me he would not grant me a fief, he meant, like, not right this second?

Well, I think (someone correct me if I'm wrong) male characters get a fief right upon joining the kingdom, aye, female ones don't.

It's hilarious that he granted you one right after though! :P Not sure if that's normal. I had to wait a while for mine (But I did join up with a kingdom rather quickly).

I play a male commoner and got a fief the moment I joined up with Swadia. I got a second one after some time and some fighting... but the bastard gave me a town that's waaaaaay on the other side of the map! I can't reach it in time before it's burnt to the ground!

I still can't conquer castles on my own though. I played an archer/swordsman in M&B and this time in Warband I decided to go lance/two handed axeman and I'm kinda regretting it. I loved shooting down people on sieges, but I die kinda quickly when I'm in the mix of the melee troop.

Yeah, they should really label the games that "actively promote equal opportunities" or, even better, enforce that type of policy in the virtual worlds. That would probably provifde some support to Microsoft's vision of the future of PC gaming ....

Just being cynical.