Do people actually use the iconics in their games? I thought they were just around for the fiction stuff and as sample PCs.
That's pretty much their function, which is why people being bothered by their sexual orientation in fluff which is generally not even liable to show up in the core - at least not very often - is confusing and vexing to me. Seriously, I'm pretty sure the only reason we know Kyra is gay is because of the comics.
It's not exactly being shoved in anyone's face, and when people object like this, it comes off as their being irritated at the fact that it's present at all, in anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
using Valeros as a pregen in PFS was one of the greatest moments in my Pathfinder playing time
I do not think the other players were used to hearing him say 'bro' so much or volunteering 'to crush some burritos with a cold cerveza or three'
but to be on-topic warriorpoet I do not think it is the location of the sexual orientation, in this case in the fluff
it is the very existence of the sexual orientation
the people who are mad about it either have a problem with that specific orientation or they simply do not want it foisted into the hobby where they are pathfinding their dungeons and their dragons
you are probably not going to get a different reaction by announcing whether or not it is canon, core, fluff, homebrew, alternate universe or the all-powerful Word of a Voltron that is made out of the combined powers of sean, james and jason
okay so voltron might be missing some body parts since there are only like three names there but still you get the point
EDIT: and dangit did you rewrite your last post to include that last line or did I just miss it the first time because it says basically just what I said only in a way that is more concise and actually makes sense
|
Do people actually use the iconics in their games? I thought they were just around for the fiction stuff and as sample PCs.
In public Pathfinder Society games, we get newbies showing up without a PC all the time, so we hand them level 1 iconics as pregens. Kyra is the most popular, because no group will ever say no to having an extra healer. But then, people are focused on mechanical stuff and don't worry about fluff. Most people don't even read the short paragraph of background story at the bottom of the pregen character sheet.
Playing weekly, and seeing these pregens used all the time, I don't think I've ever heard anyone mention the fact that Kyra is a lesbian. The only reason I know is from this thread.
Just to be clear - I'm not opposed to including a gay iconic - my position is a preference for no sexual references.
If there's a reference to a man and his wife -- that's a reference to sexual orientation (straight). Objecting to the same level of reference to a man and his husband is bigotry. If you don't have an objection to that, then you're worried about something that doesn't occur in the APs or modules. The only references to homosexual relationships in the APs and modules are along the lines of, "CHaracter X(female) is in a relationship with Character Y(female)," or "X(female) has been living with Y(Male) for years but is becoming attracted to Z (female), who feels the same way but hasn't made it known because she's Y's bodyguard." How much you go into such things is entirely up to you.
I think almost everyone, including those most in favor of more LGTBs would object to anything explicit in official material.>_>
<_<
I can literally hear the perviness of your brain activating.
Congrats, you've raised emoting text to a whole new level of communication.
I'm still voting for the Mikaze cult.
I'm still voting for the Mikaze cult.I think almost everyone, including those most in favor of more LGTBs would object to anything explicit in official material.>_>
<_<
I can literally hear the perviness of your brain activating.
Congrats, you've raised emoting text to a whole new level of communication.
All praise to the horned happy one!
... Amen
|
I don't see the diversity of the iconics as political correctness. I think it's more about having a little something for everybody. Most fantasy stories hinge on the ability to relate to the characters. This is just another way people can relate to certain iconics.
And why does it have to be one or the other? Why cant it be a bit of both? Its great that its diversity, but its also PC because its by the numbers- one gay male, one gay female, one transgender, one bisexual. All depends on how you look at it. You don't think so, I'm more of the yeah PC by the numbers, but its nice that there is diversity.
Ultimately, like some, I DONT CARE. The iconics aren't interesting or uninteresting because they are gay, straight, bi or transgender. They're interesting to me for other reasons. History, build, background, that's what I look for in characters. And if their a good character? Awesome. And if their a good character that's gay or straight? Awesome still.
Ptolus had some gay NPC's in it, and they were interesting. Not because they were gay, but because they were good characters with interesting backgrounds and stuff, who were also gay.
All praise to the horned happy one!I'm still voting for the Mikaze cult.I think almost everyone, including those most in favor of more LGTBs would object to anything explicit in official material.>_>
<_<
I can literally hear the perviness of your brain activating.
Congrats, you've raised emoting text to a whole new level of communication.
to be honest the sexuality of the iconics never even crossed my mind til i just saw this thread, still dont know who is what and i don't care, let them live how they want i always say.
Just to be clear - I'm not opposed to including a gay iconic - my position is a preference for no sexual references.
A sexual reference can be as innocuous as "Bob is married to the local seamstress, Jane." That sentence gives you a basic idea of the relationship between the two, including the fact that both of them are attracted to the opposite gender. The Paizo folk haven't written anything explicit about any homosexual relationships.
I'd wager that you do want sexual references, since a world in which the authors aren't allowed to tell you who is married to whom would really feel like it had some awkward gaps (not to mention throwing a wrench into tons of adventure plot elements). But for some reason you're objecting to innocuous references to homosexuality, while at the same time offering no objection to innocuous references to heterosexuality. It's a puzzling stance, and I've asked you a few times now to explain how you reconcile it without revealing bigotry as an underlying motivation.
I'm happy that the materiel was silent on the matter - I can add what fits my campaign world.
AGAIN, by that logic the campaign setting (and adventure, and novel, and chronicle, etc.) authors should leave out as many details as humanly possible, because you like it when the material is silent on characterization. Because if they don't mention anything about vocal timbre, skin color, gender, sexual orientation, hair length, eye color, personality quirks, or preferred shampoo scent, it gives you more flexibility to fit your campaign world (as if you are powerless to change those things as a DM).
So an explanation is needed, here, and you continually refuse to provide one.
The rest of your post is pretty much what I predicted - your ability to twist words to conform to your suspicions.
I haven't twisted anything. If I wanted to twist what you said, I'd already be calling you a bigot. But I'm not, because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving you the opportunity to explain the things you've said here. You have continually refused to take that opportunity, which isn't doing you any favors. So I'll offer it to you again: prove me wrong. Explain why you object to relatively innocent - subtle, even! - references to homosexuality, while at the same time offering essentially no objection to references - including overt ones - to heterosexuality, without revealing bigotry as one of the underlying reasons for your position.
That's my challenge. You should be fully capable of meeting it.
I know a simple refutal of your assersions wont satisfy you, but it's quite clear nothing will.
I've explained exactly what will satisfy me. All you have to provide is a coherent explanation.
My real motive? When I see people saying - "By the way, we've suddenly decided that each of our iconics is going to represent a minority group" - my instinct is that it's PC driven.
But your own words have shown us that there's clearly more going on that just that. Even a cursory knowledge of the iconics would be enough to confirm that their sexuality has received very little attention, and that your accusations of their being generic characterizations of LGBT people is completely baseless. And I'm assuming that you wouldn't have come barreling into a thread like this unless you were at least superficially familiar with the iconics.
I simply don't have any deep-seated ulterior motive for my original post. Your attempts to attribute anything sinister in my posts reflects more about your character than mine.
Then it should be trivially easy for you to explain yourself as outlined above. You're making this more difficult than it needs to be.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well the problem is that after Hook Mountain Massacre was released there was a massive outcry (including, IIRC, the aforementioned phone calls) and ever since Paizo got tamer with their publications. Sure there are some elements here and there, but nothing ever again got close to the walls to balls gross-out gore level of Grauls.
I'm not arguing that gore for gore's sake is something that should appear in every AP, but the occasional shock and awe to remind the players why monsters are monsters and why evil is Evil, that's something I'd love to see more.
Very true, evil needs to mean something for good to
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that a character (iconic or otherwise) even exists suggests the existence that somewhere, a male and a female of their respective race had the sex. (or of entirely different species, in the case of half-orc or half-elven characters, with all the bestiality / miscegenation-terror that implies) Every single NPC is, indirectly, a reference to sexuality, and weigh in around 100% in favor of some sort of heterosexual intercourse being the source of their existence.
A game world with zero references, however oblique or indirect, to sexuality, would be a dusty ghost world, with no living creatures in it.
Instead, the game world is crawling with adults (whose parents must have had sex at some point), children (whose parents must have had sex relatively recently) and married couples (who may or may not be having sex, depending on the state of their marriage...). If one in several dozen of those NPCs is in a same-sex relationship, then big whoop.
In a fantasy world, where druid companions may well be able to spend their ability increases in Intelligence and become sentient people and not just dumb animals, I'd save my pearl-clutching for the day we read that Lini and Droogami's relationship is a bit more 'companionable' than 'Companion' would strictly suggest.
...had the sex.
This is how I refer to it from now on.
"He wouldn've been born, but his parents had the sex."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...had the sex.
This is how I refer to it from now on.
"He wouldn've been born, but his parents had the sex."
"Then it's safe to assume that at some stage you and your wife have had sexual intercourse?"
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Something else that needs to be mentioned is that any references regarding sexuality in Pathfinder material tend towards fitting in naturally and organically in the context that they might turn up. It avoids the prudish deadworld that Set mentioned and a fanservice-dominated EVERYBODY'S DOING EVERYBODY deal.
Not that there's anything wrong with fanservice of course. It's only when it's the only game in town that grates.[/don'tknowhowmanytimesthislinehasbeenrepeated]
That's one thing I love about Paizo's approach to homosexual characters. They simply are, and they stand on their own feet before their sexuality comes into the equation.
Hell, if you look at the one known intersexed character known so far, you'll find that her anatomy is actually one of the least surprising things about her.
Golarion is a setting where anyone can feel at home in, and it doesn't make a big deal about it. No matter who you are or how you identify, you can fit into that world. And Shayliss Vinder would still totally do you.
...had the sex.
This is how I refer to it from now on.
"He wouldn've been born, but his parents had the sex."
And not merely a sex either!
All praise to the horned happy one!I'm still voting for the Mikaze cult.I think almost everyone, including those most in favor of more LGTBs would object to anything explicit in official material.>_>
<_<
I can literally hear the perviness of your brain activating.
Congrats, you've raised emoting text to a whole new level of communication.
I'll accept any heartwarming pictures of Imrijka X Valeros rated from G to X.
The dad, is that a young Hugh Laurie?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll accept any heartwarming pictures of Imrijka X Valeros rated from G to X.
I can try...
So, uh, here we go?
_^^_,,,
[**](**)
----====
. /[[ ]] \ / :::: \
. | .][. | | \ :: / |
* {||} ** {||} *
.. {||} {||}
.. <--> <-->
... see, Imrijka is on the right (it's clear because of the hat), and Valeros is on the left (you can tell because he has no hat).
Does this satisfy, great one?
(My meager skills aside.)
I hear them half-orc ladies get really wild when tusking season hits.
MY MIND
I'll take that as a "yes". :D
I...what... but... no...even...don't...wow...
:D
EDIT: Oh, hey, you know, I realize I dyslexicated again. Sorry. ... see, Imrijka is on the left (it's clear because of the hat), and Valeros is on the right (you can tell because he has no hat).
Okay, whew. Glad we got that sorted out!
EDIT 2: Like, seriously, after three decades, I should be able to tell my right from my left. Bother it all, Dyslexiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Just out of curiosity, is there a Mediterranean iconic?
Who is the dyslexiac iconnic?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
:D
EDIT: Oh, hey, you know, I realize I dyslexicated again. Sorry. ... see, Imrijka is on the left (it's clear because of the hat), and Valeros is on the right (you can tell because he has no hat).
Okay, whew. Glad we got that sorted out!
EDIT 2: Like, seriously, after three decades, I should be able to tell my right from my left. Bother it all, Dyslexiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Raise your hands and spread your fingers. The one hand where thumb and index finger form capital letter "L" is the left one.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Raise your hands and spread your fingers. The one hand where thumb and index finger form capital letter "L" is the left one.:D
EDIT: Oh, hey, you know, I realize I dyslexicated again. Sorry. ... see, Imrijka is on the left (it's clear because of the hat), and Valeros is on the right (you can tell because he has no hat).
Okay, whew. Glad we got that sorted out!
EDIT 2: Like, seriously, after three decades, I should be able to tell my right from my left. Bother it all, Dyslexiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Wait, your left or my left?
SIDENOTE: I actually do get disappointed when images of Link on Zelda merchandise gets mirror-flipped so that he's no longer left-handed.
But which way around is a captitol L, and is it meant to be an L from your own perspective or that of a person looking at you? I always found that kind of method harder to remember than the answer it was meant to remind me of.
Th like the whole "big elefants can always understand small elephants" rhyme. Way, way harder to remember then the spelling of because.
Typos left in . I usually correct as many I as I can find and then edit my posts about twice.
|
|
A game world with zero references, however oblique or indirect, to sexuality, would be a dusty ghost world, with no living creatures in it.
That's so much horse manure that its not even funny. Did you ever play red box D&D? first edition? Second?
Sex- gay, straight, whatever, wasn't bothered with. I highly doubt that anyone would say greyhawk was a barren wasteland with no living creatures in it. Or forgotten realms or other places, old school modules like Tome of horrors or Temple of elemental evil and Homlet.
It just wasn't important to a good adventure or story or character.
|
|
Sure you can build an interesting world while keeping away any elements that could get prude parents or religious fanatics at arm's length and the maturity rating "kids of all ages", but you can do so much more if you drop your fears of 80s D&D-is-Satan craze coming back and you shoot for something more like PG-13.
A game world with zero references, however oblique or indirect, to sexuality, would be a dusty ghost world, with no living creatures in it.
That's so much horse manure that its not even funny. Did you ever play red box D&D? first edition? Second?
Sex- gay, straight, whatever, wasn't bothered with. I highly doubt that anyone would say greyhawk was a barren wasteland with no living creatures in it. Or forgotten realms or other places, old school modules like Tome of horrors or Temple of elemental evil and Homlet.
It just wasn't important to a good adventure or story or character.
Yeah, the problem here is we're working on two different meanings of "sexual reference", due to confusion up-thread.
Set was talking about text that confirmed or implied a sexuality, which includes the existence of children, marriage and any people described as "attractive".
You are talking only about text relating in some way to the act of having sex.
AD&D was inspired by stories which included both kinds of reference, and as soon as you expand beyond the bare bones of each system and describe anything other than death traps and fighting, the first sort is all but inevitable.
But which way around is a captitol L, and is it meant to be an L from your own perspective or that of a person looking at you? I always found that kind of method harder to remember than the answer it was meant to remind me of.
Th like the whole "big elefants can always understand small elephants" rhyme. Way, way harder to remember then the spelling of because.Typos left in . I usually correct as many I as I can find and then edit my posts about twice.
Wait, your left or my left?
This is part of the problem. Whose left? (I was actually thinking from the characters' perspectives... a habit I've gotten used to when talking to my son of late and mentally correcting myself to do so all the time.)
The other part is remembering which way "L" faces (similar problems with small 'b's, and 'd's and the like. While I know which way is which, and have gone through all the therapy and stuff, it still turns me around. But, though I may joke about it, I'm pretty cool with it, and I don't make those mistakes most of the time anymore.
But it does sneak up on me when I forget to triple check.
SIDENOTE: I actually do get disappointed when images of Link on Zelda merchandise gets mirror-flipped so that he's no longer left-handed.
Link is pretty awesome that way.
I think that's probably being unintentionally implied in some cases, but yeah I'm sure many people think of it that way. I anybody who came in here thinking that is learning something.
I meant to say I HOPE anybody who came in thinking that is learning something.
I don't think it seems weird at all, just dangerously ignorant and deeply unpleasant.
The fact that a character (iconic or otherwise) even exists suggests the existence that somewhere, a male and a female of their respective race had the sex. (or of entirely different species, in the case of half-orc or half-elven characters, with all the bestiality / miscegenation-terror that implies) Every single NPC is, indirectly, a reference to sexuality, and weigh in around 100% in favor of some sort of heterosexual intercourse being the source of their existence.
A game world with zero references, however oblique or indirect, to sexuality, would be a dusty ghost world, with no living creatures in it.
Instead, the game world is crawling with adults (whose parents must have had sex at some point), children (whose parents must have had sex relatively recently) and married couples (who may or may not be having sex, depending on the state of their marriage...). If one in several dozen of those NPCs is in a same-sex relationship, then big whoop.
In a fantasy world, where druid companions may well be able to spend their ability increases in Intelligence and become sentient people and not just dumb animals, I'd save my pearl-clutching for the day we read that Lini and Droogami's relationship is a bit more 'companionable' than 'Companion' would strictly suggest.
Not that it matters but in my campaigns it's slightly lower than 100%...
Is asexual reproduction still sexual?
I think that's a zen question right there.
Nah. Just in a world of magic, shapeshifting, and spells...
At least one of my PCs has two mothers. One's a blacksmith, the other's a pirate.
|
|
Did you read the rest of the post? Or just that sentence?
The part about parents? Or children? Or married couples?
Even the occasional romance as motivation?
Didn't 1E have a table of names for prostitutes?None of those had "zero references, however oblique or indirect, to sexuality".
Oh I read it. I just disagreed utterlywith it. Did you? Because once you or others said zero reference would be a ghost world, none of that happened long ago when I played, nor was anyone worried about sexual orintation for a great adventure, town or world.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is asexual reproduction still sexual?
I think that's a zen question right there.
Well... Technically, it is not sexual reproduction, as you need a transference of gametes (whatever the gene-carrying modus might be: ova, spermatozoa , spores, pollen, virus, etc.) between two (or more...) individuals capable of inter-breeding for that to be so.
As for asexual reproduction, that's effectively cloning, right?
Of course, whether or not one finds that... stimulating (and, hence, potentially sexual) will depend on the individual (although other factors could play a part...).
So I guess the answer would be: It all depends on the very moment at which one is and is meant to be... or something...
_____________________________________________
TLDR - If it does it for you, awesome!
:p
Carry on.
-- C.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who is the dyslexiac iconnic?
Vlaeros.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Asexual reproduction has been around since the beginning of D&D.
Ghouls, wraiths, vampires, etc. all reproduced asexually, although you may well have felt that your character was getting bleeped in the process.
Various oozes and pudding reproduced when you stuck your sword into them, which was probably not intended to sound as phallic as the way I just phrased it.
Green slime was yet another thing that asexually reproduced itself at your expense.
And, reproduction or no reproduction, sexuality and sexual imagery wasn't absent from the game, with those free-range succubus boobies flopping about. (In addition to lamia boobies and Marilith boobies and Bast boobies and Aphrodite boobies and gosh, that picture of Hermes in Deities & Demigods may require brain-bleach to recover from...)
The Monster Manual and Deities & Demigods may not have been as much of a 'poor man's playboy' as National Geographic, back in the day, but they were hardly free of sexualized imagery.
30 odd years ago, with the introduction of alu-fiends and cambions (including that bad boy Iuz, who was kind of a big deal in Greyhawk), not only were NPCs having the sex, they were *having sex with demons.*
And while Mordenkainen may not have gotten any, I'm pretty sure that Elminster got enough for him and the rest of the Circle of Eight combined, ifyouknowwhatImean, nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
Of course, whether or not one finds that... stimulating (and, hence, potentially sexual) will depend on the individual (although other factors could play a part...).-- C.
Complete derail, but one of the things I loved about the GURPS Goblins venue was that, technically, their reproduction was both asexual, in that there was no actual transfer of genetic material; and sexual, in that the only way to get a female Goblin pregnant was to get her sexually exited...
Which could be accomplished by reading a particularly spicy letter or scene in a novel.
Who is the dyslexiac iconnic?Vlaeros.
Dude, you win!