Meet the Iconics: Navasi

So what does everyone think about the new announced god, Weydan, god of discovery and equality?

It's true, Navasi wasn't explicitly confirmed gay anywhere I saw - I guess we can read into Navasi's story what we want. The story seemed to me to read a little bit like a fairy tale, and a romance popped out to me from Amanda's words. Although I'm mostly heterosexual myself, I've been involved in my local Pride club long enough to know how much characters like this can affect people who daily have to put up with prejudice and mistrust from people all around them, especially here in more religious-centric parts of Texas (Don't get me wrong, we've got a lot of awesome people down here too - but seriously; I've actually witnessed a kid getting pelted with rocks for having lesbian parents. Not. Cool. Bro.). Seriously, even if gay characters are redundant - and I strongly disagree with the implications of this observation, personally - sometimes these things make a difference, to be told again and again that you aren't alone, that there are people who respect you and want to see you succeed, and cherish this aspect of your identity other people have tried to make you hate. Characters like Navasi have made a world of difference in my friends' lives, and they've made a world of difference in mine. So, for my part, I'm really grateful Paizo's worked so hard to promote visions of diverse and respectful families of characters. It kind of represents my own dreams I'm fighting for.

I relate to characters more when they have distinct and concrete identities. Make them feel like a real person. My two cents for what they're worth.

So what does everyone think about the new announced god, Weydan, god of discovery and equality?

I desire this product/service and wish to subscribe to hir newsletter.

Archmage Variel wrote:

So what does everyone think about the new announced god, Weydan, god of discovery and equality?

I desire this product/service and wish to subscribe to hir newsletter.

I'm calling it now. Desna's news feed is just a string of inspirational memes.

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

What I'm about to point out, shouldn't be seen as either an indorsement or an condemnation of a particular view point, but more as a commentary on how something, like this backstory, that actually can appeal to both view points.
When I read the backstory, there isn't anything in it, that overtly speaks to the sexuality of Navasi. It clearly states that she considered herself inseparable from this woman (the original navasi), but what does that mean? are we talking lesbians?, platonic love? good friends? it actually doesn't explicitly say what the relationship was between the two, which in my opinion is good thing. Because it leaves room for every player to project, some of what they would like to see on to character, so that every player of every background can feel some part of them being represented in the setting.
Said in another way, she is a person that's enough of a blank slate that people can mirror some of themselves, their backgrounds and relationships in her, while not being so much a blank slate that she seems unfinished or disjointed.

Edit: Well Amanda H. K. said what I was trying to say, just more coherently.

Like Pathfinder, Starfinder is a place where people of all backgrounds and perspectives exist and thrive, and I strive as a writer to create stories in which all readers can see parts of themselves reflected in our heroes' backgrounds.

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

I imagined sort of a chaotic, lead by example, pirate captain type.

Mark Seifter wrote:

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

I imagined sort of a chaotic, lead by example, pirate captain type.

*nods*

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

I think she probably views having to give orders in itself as something of a failure on her part - if she'd hired the right people, they'd already be doing what needed doing without her having to say anything. Inasmuch as she does have to tell people what to do, I really can't see her as a martinet; "first among equals" seems like it would fit her precisely.

What I'm about to point out, shouldn't be seen as either an indorsement or an condemnation of a particular view point, but more as a commentary on how something, like this backstory, that actually can appeal to both view points.

When I read the backstory, there isn't anything in it, that overtly speaks to the sexuality of Navasi. It clearly states that she considered herself inseparable from this woman (the original navasi), but what does that mean? are we talking lesbians?, platonic love? good friends? it actually doesn't explicitly say what the relationship was between the two, which in my opinion is good thing. Because it leaves room for every player to project, some of what they would like to see on to character, so that every player of every background can feel some part of them being represented in the setting.
Said in another way, she is a person that's enough of a blank slate that people can mirror some of themselves, their backgrounds and relationships in her, while not being so much a blank slate that she seems unfinished or disjointed.

This! this is apparently what I am struggling to say!

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

Very much in the Peter Quill/Star Lord style of being a bit of a goof, trusting her team to do what they do best or just adapting well when they do whatever they were going to do anyway.

But, again, it's important to explicitly say it some times. Minorities can project themselves onto anyone but to feel at home, comfortable, accepted, requires some explicitness. And maybe that means some people don't like that Iconic. That's fine too. Not everyone is going to love every Iconic character's backstory. But representation is important and it would be great if we respected that ideal for people who almost never get to see it in their hobbies and might be afraid to come out at their tables amongst their best friends. That was me in high school and college, so I know this all too well.

And that's really all I'm going to say on this. Take it as you will.

Mark Seifter wrote:

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

I think she probably views having to give orders in itself as something of a failure on her part - if she'd hired the right people, they'd already be doing what needed doing without her having to say anything. Inasmuch as she does have to tell people what to do, I really can't see her as a martinet; "first among equals" seems like it would fit her precisely.

I think that's right. That's another really clever thing I hadn't thought of when I first read the blog but that Amanda sneaked in there: People are going to be looking for guidance/ a role model on how to have one of the PCs be the captain without being bossy or controlling the other PCs choices, and Amanda has provided a great example of just that with the captain iconic (the natural place for new players to look for that example).

Greetings.

Navasi mentioned something about Vesk and a job?

Looking even more forwards to this System becoming a reality...

To say it again, because apparently we have to have this conversation every time we present a character who is queer....

In fiction, people can and do project themselves into unfamiliar roles all the time. But minorities are asked to do it for nearly all mainstream portrayals rather than simply getting to see themselves reflected in a heroic context like straight white guys get to see constantly. We're told to make do with allusions and implications and suggestion, but rarely presented with the overt. We are always asked to identify in a way that is quiet and hidden and in the shadows and doesn't make waves. We are told our identities, which many of us fight hard because of and even die for, aren't as important as yet another mainstream portrayal.

So yes, specificity is incredibly important in regards to minority representation. And if makes for a more dynamic world if characters are forced to hide major character traits from the reader.

Look guys I never ever intended to offend. I wanted to know why and some of you have taken the time to explain that. I get it now. I honestly don't care what your religion skin color or anything else is. I am not great at expressing myself, I think we've proved that tonight. To those offended I AM TRUELY SORRY. It was not my intent. My honest feeling is that if someone were dilibeartely offering up a minority character just to appeal to me it would be more offensive, I would assume I can make that character I want to play without having to have that explained to me. Again if offense was taken it was not intended.

I consider the bar set quite high... which actually makes me kinda nervous. ;)

Same here!

Look guys I never ever intended to offend. I wanted to know why and some of you have taken the time to explain that. I get it now. I honestly don't care what your religion skin color or anything else is. I am not great at expressing myself, I think we've proved that tonight. To those offended I AM TRUELY SORRY. It was not my intent. My honest feeling is that if someone were dilibeartely offering up a minority character just to appeal to me it would be more offensive, I would assume I can make that character I want to play without having to have that explained to me. Again if offense was taken it was not intended.

I don't think anyone was offended, and it seemed to me you had an honest question. Honestly, were I to be working for Paizo, I think I'd be proud of moments like these. What is roleplaying if not to spark deep questions with simple games and dialogue? I'd probably agree with you on the matter of forced inclusion - making a character just to be gay comes across a little bit superficial. The genuine quality of Navasi's character speaks anything but quota-fulfilling to me; in fact, we both agreed we had to read into Navasi's story to interpret such an identity. Personally, I think Navasi reads very much as a real person, the full package, not a token - and that's the strongest statement you can make. Indeed, I'm pleased Navasi's character has already sparked up constructive dialogues like these! I think you did a good thing asking questions and seeking out perspective. Top form, you! (might want to make a different thread for it next time, though)

So - anyone have any thoughts on Weydan being a Lashunta goddess? Because that's what I'm putting my creds on.

tries to sound out Weydan, and it keeps sounding 'Whedon' to him. Does FreeholdDM know?

Is orientation important to play?

It is if it is directly tied to a character's motivations, as is the case for Navasi. If she had a "friend" that she just sort of left at Absalom Station when she was deciding what would define her as a person, then maybe the fact that she had a "friend" wasn't vital to who she is. But in this case, she took the name, the appearance, and the worldview of her "friend." Because this other character had a huge impact on Navasi (the iconic), (the original) Navasi is totally relevant to the iconic and her personality. If she had been "friends" with a dude, I am 100% positive no one would question whether that relationship was vital to her as a character.

Let people choose.

How wonderful the world would be if we could just choose to ignore people who were different than us. Or if people could just choose not to be who they are because it might cramp someone else's style.

You're free to "choose" whatever you want for characters in your game, but Navasi's backstory is canon now, so there's not much of a choice left for anyone to make. Take it or leave it.

Look guys I never ever intended to offend. I wanted to know why and some of you have taken the time to explain that. I get it now. I honestly don't care what your religion skin color or anything else is. I am not great at expressing myself, I think we've proved that tonight. To those offended I AM TRUELY SORRY. It was not my intent. My honest feeling is that if someone were dilibeartely offering up a minority character just to appeal to me it would be more offensive, I would assume I can make that character I want to play without having to have that explained to me. Again if offense was taken it was not intended.

Consider this: The representation you don't feel is very important is also incredibly common for you. there's no dearth of straight protagonists in any western media. No shortage of cisgender protagonists. Plenty of men. Tons of white people. All being the protagonist. That representation is so considered to be the "default" that things that don't have those are usually considered niche. Luke Cage is a "black" show. Batgirl is a "girls" comic.

A lot of us don't ever see ourselves reflected as protagonists, so much so that we'll jump on any vagueness and pretend it's representation just so we don't feel left out. I've frequently said that as a child, all through high school, and into college, literally the only overt representation I saw of myself was a pink dinosaur. When some media comes along that openly and happily paints a minority trait on a protagonist and you're not accustomed to seeing yourself openly and happily represented, it feels amazing and validating and loving. It's the emotional equivalent of this.

So yes, representation is hugely important.

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

Look guys I never ever intended to offend. I wanted to know why and some of you have taken the time to explain that. I get it now. I honestly don't care what your religion skin color or anything else is. I am not great at expressing myself, I think we've proved that tonight. To those offended I AM TRUELY SORRY. It was not my intent. My honest feeling is that if someone were dilibeartely offering up a minority character just to appeal to me it would be more offensive, I would assume I can make that character I want to play without having to have that explained to me. Again if offense was taken it was not intended.

I don't think anyone was offended, and it seemed to me you had an honest question. Honestly, were I to work for Paizo, I think I'd be proud of moments like these. What is roleplaying if not to spark deep questions with simple games and dialogue? I'd probably agree with you on the matter of forced inclusion - making a character just to be gay comes across a little bit superficial. The fluidity and genuine quality of Navasi's character speaks of more natural inclusion to me; in fact, we both agreed we had to read into Navasi's story to interpret such an identity! Indeed, I'm pleased Navasi's character has already sparked up constructive dialogues like these! I think you did a good thing asking questions and seeking out perspective. Top form, you!

So - anyone have any thoughts on Weydan being a Lashunta goddess? Because that's what I'm putting my creds on.

I'd be surprised if any god in Starfinder identified with patronage of a single race. Did the gap only effect knowledge of golarion or overall knowledge, because if space travel was happening by the time the gap occurred, it may be hard to trace a deity's original history of worship.

Opsylum wrote:

So - anyone have any thoughts on Weydan being a Lashunta goddess? Because that's what I'm putting my creds on.

I'd be surprised if any god in Starfinder identified with patronage of a single race. Did the gap only effect knowledge of golarion or overall knowledge, because if space travel was happening by the time the gap occurred, it may be hard to trace a deity's original history of worship.

True. I should have clarified with native Lashunta goddess. And yeah, I think the gap was implied to affect everyone, including other worlds. I kind of figure, the way the gap was explained, acolytes of Weydan would probably still remember they worshipped Weydan, and if the religion was practiced most prominently on Castrovel, it could be inferred Weydan's religion originated from there. Actually I kind of figured the worship of a native god would be one of the more common things to hold a culture together that had lost much of its history and identity - not to say that Weydan would belong to any specific culture.

Another way of looking at it:

Presuming you can breathe normally, oxygen doesn't seem that important to you on a day-to-day basis. I mean, you know it's good, but it's not something you ever have to think about. And if, say, a restaurant advertised "We have oxygen tubes," that would seem like a weird-ass marketing gimmick.

But to me, as an asthmatic, oxygen is sometimes very hard to come by, and there are times I can't get it without taking extra measures or going out of my way. Now I might look at that restaurant, offering oxygen so I can enjoy a meal without worrying about my breathing, and think "hot damn!" And my family and friends, who've seen me have an asthma attack, might look at that and say "wow, that's pretty thoughtful," and so while oxygen tubes aren't personally aimed at them, they recognize that the restaurant is trying to make some space for asthmatics in a way you never see.

The restaurant isn't necessarily offering oxygen tubes because they think it's the next great marketing gimmick. They might never really use them. Maybe the owner is just asthmatic too, and offering something they always needed to others. But having a place where oxygen isn't a challenge to get, for people who sometimes can't breath, feels huge.

It's all in how common something is to you.

What interests me about the Gap, since it has been brought up, is that it hit *all of Reality*, from what I've seen printed on it.

So not just the Golarion system, but the Vesk System, and *every other system, every other Plane, everything*.

This is the sort of epic power level that should terrify even powerful deities...

EDIT: Back to the topic of the thread, though...

Navasi, condolences on the loss, and hopefully in some future time/space/plane the two of you may reunite as befits the beliefs and/or cultural expectations of both you and your partner.

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay. Let people choose.

That's how I read it.

ive got it. All I can do is apologize. I swear to you I'm not intentionally a jerk I just didn't get it. I don't read all these pages so I was not aware we'd been over this ground. Your point is well taken. I'm sorry.

Thank you for apologizing <3

ive got it. All I can do is apologize. I swear to you I'm not intentionally a jerk I just didn't get it. I don't read all these pages so I was not aware we'd been over this ground. Your point is well taken. I'm sorry.

You learned something today! And hopefully, because you asked, some other people did, too. I hope you take the responses you've garnered in the best possible light and agree to agree that Navasi is pretty awesome.

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay. Let people choose.

That's how I read it.

Okay, but ask yourself why you feel the need choose a world without minorities.

Thank you for apologizing <3

I sometimes think I should just keep my mouth shut. Tonight is one of those nights. This hobby is what keeps me sane and I hate knowing that I embarrassed myself tonight in front of my peers.

EltonJ wrote:

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay. Let people choose.

That's how I read it.

Okay, but ask yourself why you feel the need choose a world without minorities.

I didn't choose to see a world without minority's, I have a friend I'd like to think I'd do just about anything for, and we're straight. i didn't see heroic sacrifice as been about sexual orientations. I love my friends and I'd do anything for them,

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay.

That's how I read it.

I didn't clue in either. Maybe it could have been made more obvious, like a brief kiss or something?

Edit: No issue beyond clarity for me.

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

ive got it. All I can do is apologize. I swear to you I'm not intentionally a jerk I just didn't get it. I don't read all these pages so I was not aware we'd been over this ground. Your point is well taken. I'm sorry.

You learned something today! And hopefully, because you asked, some other people did, too. I hope you take the responses you've garnered in the best possible light and agree to agree that Navasi is pretty awesome.

Oh I've preordered the entire line I'm hooked.

I'm not using any of the Iconics, though. My first character is going to be a human technomancer.

EltonJ wrote:

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay. Let people choose.

That's how I read it.

I didn't clue in either. Maybe it could have been made more obvious, like a brief kiss or something?

But, if you kiss a deity, does your face melt like seeing the arc of the covenant?

Alright I also don't get <3 what does that mean?

Alright I also don't get <3 what does that mean?

That would be a heart.

Oh jeez.... Technology and I are not buddies isee it now I read it as less than three. Which made zero sense.

So, I am 100 percent for diversity. I do have an issue with saying somehow people should feel guilty due to representation in comics. Since you mentioned Luke Cage he was created by Archie Goodwin, George Tuska, and John Romita White Guys as you put it. Now you could say, and I would agree that the gaming industry for quite some time has been dominated by White Guys. As diversity grows I would hope and encourage more diverse characters in Comics and games. I would also encourage more diversity in game development. The first thing I look for in a game is good system rather than was the author a man or women or what race they are. Or what sexual orientation they are.

Dave2

I would like to once again thank Paizo for their continue efforts to provide a world where people like me can exist. I first learned about Shardra and became little bit more than an "obsessed fan," then I learned about many of the other amazing Iconics and characters various adventure paths, or how the dateable npcs in jade Reagent are bisexual. Then of course there are the deities like Arshea.

And now you continue to do so in Starfinder with Navasi, Iseph, and hopfully more in the future.
You create a fantasy world where people like me cane exist but where we can be heros. Thank you

Lemartes wrote:

EltonJ wrote:

Mine all mine...don't touch wrote:

I had read the above as the two women being friends without having to read in gay. Let people choose.

That's how I read it.

I didn't clue in either. Maybe it could have been made more obvious, like a brief kiss or something?

But, if you kiss a deity, does your face melt like seeing the arc of the covenant?

Ah now I didn't think of that. If it's a deity.

I think as the Iconic character, Navasi's background is fantastic! Yes, it follows a somewhat cliche story, but again she is the iconic PC so I feel that it fits perfectly. Also, in this day and age of information overload, it is VERY difficult to have a truly "unique" story for anything.

In regards to the story, I really like how she took on her deceased friend/lover/whatever's identity. In my opinion that is a very subtle way of bringing to light Navasi's thoughts of self-identity. She is willing to basically cast aside her very identity not simply to just avoid being captured, but to honor this person that held such an important place in her heart.

I liked the setting details nested in the write up more than the character herself, as others have said she is a mix up of common background elements and it works but it isnt gripping without something a lot more detailed to flesh out her uniqueness. But it works extremely well as far as setting the tone for Starfinder and is a great flavor write up. I would probably read a novel about her though, something to give her enough space to really develop. And as much as i like the setting details and the character picture, i am still bothered by her right hand, maybe the angle or something but it always looks way to small... I also wonder now if that holstered pistol of hers is from the previous Navasi since its so unique compared to the other weapons we've seen. Perhaps a divinely powered weapon?

I also wonder now if that holstered pistol of hers is from the previous Navasi since its so unique compared to the other weapons we've seen. Perhaps a divinely powered weapon?

"This here is a GOD Gun. Don't make me draw it." ???

So hey, what does everyone think Navasi's leadership style would be as a captain? The last paragraph makes me think she's more of a nicer leader rather than a demanding or intimidating one, focusing on Diplomacy rather than Intimidate, and her principles might cause her to think of herself less as "the boss" than as the facilitator who brought together a particular specialist crew, so more like a first among equals. What do you think?

Well... she is said to be a very successful captain so i would disagree with you on her leadership qualities? Off duty or outside of the bridge she might be diplomatic and think of herself as just an equal among the crew, as a captain specifically though i imagine she demands immediate obedience to her orders. If she says reroute power to the engines even if that drains the shields than it better happen, the Sixth Finger Assualt Boarding Craft sure wouldnt mind you delaying a few minutes to explain why you need to sacrifice shields for speed but then she wouldnt be a captain, or own a ship, for very long. Captains need to have clear chains of command and everyone in the crew should know to obey because under fire is not the time to stand up and debate amongst equals about something the good idea fairy just dropped off in your lap.

Star Trek does a bad job of that i think and spreads the idea around that there is all the time in the world to explain the how and why of things in an emergency, for once i think Star Wars did it better; from Imperial Officers firing off orders and not bothering to make sure they will be followed to Admiral Raddus coming up with a really hair brained idea and no one questioning him, that is how captaining is done. ;)

Does anyone else think it's a little weird that Navasi kinda stole the identity of her dead lover? When the real Navasi died, she copied her hair, personality, name, and one eye.

I know everyone comes to grieve in their own way, but is that what's going on, or is this assumption of identity normal on Absalom Station?

If it isn't normal, would "Navasi" begin to acquire a collection of fallen companions traits? Sort of totemic-like? If so, will she be calling on her different "personalities" for different situations, like if she needs to be in charge and charismatic, then she's Navasi. If she needs to be in the gunner's seat during ship combat (and something unfortunate has happened to Obozaya) then she's sees herself as a vesk with knowledge of heavy weapons.