| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am a woman and a GM who handles about 60-75% of the GM'ing duties for our group which includes my husband (on here as Wiggz), two other men and another woman as well as one occasional male drop-in. All of us are in our 30's. All of us are heterosexual except for the other female who is openly bi-sexual and currently involved with another woman. The males in the group would be considered progressive (though the progressive part usually requires an act of will whereas the male part often comes all too naturally). I'm giving this brief demographical background in the hopes that no one will read what I'm writing as judgement on any lifestyle, on any choice or any group whatsoever - if a person can write a good backstory and can do their part to avoid a TPK, they are welcome at my table period.
But come on.
In Jade Regent we were introduced to 'relationship rules' the application of which made it clear that all of the major NPC's which would be with the party throughout could be considered bi-sexual. That's fine, let's not exclude gamers of any preference from participation.
In Skull and Shackles our bi-sexual member (newly joined and in her first major campaign ever) was over-joyed to discover that she could play her character 'that way' and it became a pretty awesome part of our overall storyline, with she allying with and becoming clandestine lovers with Tessa Fairwind while her crew put out that she was a maiden who would only ever be tamed by the man who could out-sail her - something that would obviously never happen.
In Reign of Winter we encountered a lesbian couple early on which again was fine - its good in my opinion to encounter such realities of life in the game for versimilitude at the very least, provided that their lifestyle doesn't become the focus of or a distraction from the rest of the adventure, which in this case clearly didn't happen. In fact, we began this AP with only three players - our two female players (including me) and my husband. The party group was made up of he, running a Barbarian and the GM, the other girl and I each running one of three sisters who made up a witch's coven and each of whom claimed the Barbarian as husband and protector.
Clearly alternative lifestyles are embraced and even actively explored in our games... but early on in Wrath of the Righteous, I'm getting a little concerned that Paizo might be trying a little TOO hard to shoe-horn in a socially progressive message. In the first book alone we encounter not just a lesbian couple, but one that features a transgendered member as well. Okay, as I said, versimilitude. In book 2, two of the three main NPC's that will join the party are a gay couple... which, looking at the way its probably going to end up for our group, means that 4 of the 5 NPC's accompanying the group are all going to be gay/lesbian/transgendered - its like a gay pride parade in the middle of the Worldwound (and an interracial one at that), and its starting to feel really forced and really gratuitous, to the point that I know it'll be a distraction to what looks like to be a superbly written story.
Now I get the irony in play, that gay and lesbian couples are often ostracized by the more conservative religious groups in our country and that here, in a campaign that features the strongest religious presence of any AP, gays and lesbians feature prominently as heroes in the fight against ACTUAL evil... but moving forward, I just wanted to caution the outstanding staff at Paizo from working too hard to 'prove' that they're progressive and inclusive, lest the end result be the exact opposite of the one intended. I've found that hitting people over the head with something all too often ends up just giving them a headache and all drowning them in something does is leave them grasping for something, anything, that isn't water.
At any rate, I just wanted to give you a fan's perspective. Great AP so far and as gorgeously illustrated as any we've had. Thank you.
I found it an interesting addition as well. But to be honest? A GM could easily rule that the gay couple are just really good friends instead... and way back in Runelords we had a gay couple, one of whom was a paladin. They were background characters, but still they were there. So Paizo has long had homosexual characters in their APs, even before there was a Pathfinder game. These latest four NPCs probably wouldn't even raise eyebrows if the NPCs in the campaign weren't more important to the game.
I found it an interesting addition as well. But to be honest? A GM could easily rule that the gay couple are just really good friends instead... and way back in Runelords we had a gay couple, one of whom was a paladin. They were background characters, but still they were there. So Paizo has long had homosexual characters in their APs, even before there was a Pathfinder game. These latest four NPCs probably wouldn't even raise eyebrows if the NPCs in the campaign weren't more important to the game.
Oh, obviously I can hand-wave the relationship to be anything I want it to be and I probably will... something more akin to the Frodo-Sam dynamic that mimiced the closeness between British officers and their men. The eye-raising part to me was that it was going to work out that 4 of 5 major NPC's in my particular game (80%) were being set up as gay/lesbian/transgendered.
I'm a huge fan of Paizo and their work, just don't want them to start missing the forest for the trees when it comes to a progressive mindset/agenda.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My long and rambling thoughts on the subject
I really don't think it's a big deal. If you don't like it, just change Anevia's backstory slightly.
I don't like that people are considering it to be Paizo ramming some sort of agenda down people's throats. There are transgender gamers out there - should they never have an NPC who has a similar identity without it being considered part of some agenda?
About 1 in 10 people in the real world is gay, transgender, questioning, or has a similar nonconventional sexual identity. I doubt that Paizo's products even approach that number thus far. As far as I know, Anevia is the first transgender NPC introduced in the line. I don't think that's excessive at all.
Second actually. That I know of. The first was in the previous AP in Reign of Winter. Admittedly that relationship was on the rocks and the trans-girl in question wanted to escape an unfair imprisonment, but it's still there. I must admit I'm more curious as to the specifics of gender-switching in the game. How expensive are these potions? Is it a polymorph effect and can it be dispelled? Is it more akin to the belts of femininity/masculinity?
(Amusingly enough, I'd crafted a different poison table in 1st/2nd edition AD&D which included a poison of sex change... with the drawback of if it was negated before the poison ran its course, the person could end up without a gender. But I'm an evil GM so...)
My long and rambling thoughts on the subject
I really don't think it's a big deal. If you don't like it, just change Anevia's backstory slightly.
I don't like that people are considering it to be Paizo ramming some sort of agenda down people's throats. There are transgender gamers out there - should they never have an NPC who has a similar identity without it being considered part of some agenda?
About 1 in 10 people in the real world is gay, transgender, questioning, or has a similar nonconventional sexual identity. I doubt that Paizo's products even approach that number thus far. As far as I know, Anevia is the first transgender NPC introduced in the line. I don't think that's excessive at all.
The point I made in my post was that when that couple was introduced it hardly raised an eyebrow for me at all... its when the second gay couple was introduced as main NPC's (and those are the only two prominent relationships thus far, no?), THAT'S when it started to feel both forced and little excessive.
Nah. We'll know there's an agenda when our gruff millionaire playboy ends up shacking up with the blind elf-wizard... ^_^
And having said it, I just know someone will start shipping those two.
Second actually.
Third, if you count the trans Gray Maiden in the backmatter of Shattered Star. Fourth, if you count the halfling barbarian in NPC Codex. That's four male-to-female and zero female-to-male, unless I've missed one. What's up with that ratio? :P
The point I made in my post was that when that couple was introduced it hardly raised an eyebrow for me at all... its when the second gay couple was introduced as main NPC's (and those are the only two prominent relationships thus far, no?), THAT'S when it started to feel both forced and little excessive.
I guess I'm still not quite in agreement. Maybe my mind will change as the adventure path unfolds, but it doesn't necessarily strike me as a bad thing to turn social norms on their head once in a while. And having a second gay couple in there once in a while helps to avoid the perception that there's a token couple just tossed in there to meet some arbitrary quota.
As I said, Joana, as I know of. I never read Shattered Star (or most of the APs). And I didn't recall the halfling in the NPC codex. (By the way, the webcomic "Venus Envy" included both a female-to-male pre-transition trasgendered character and the main character, a male-to-female pre-transition.)
Well, you're actually correct that she's the second trans NPC who takes part in an AP (afaik). The Gray Maiden isn't part of the adventure, and the NPC Codex barbarian isn't even technically in Golarion. :)
I'd just like to see a trans man in the mix. Trans women get a lot more press atm, but the numbers are roughly equal in the real world.
|
I'm kinda mixed on the issue -- no pun intended (...well, maybe a little bit intended).
On one hand, after gaming for over three decades and only just now seeing it in print, it's really refreshing... We come to the point in gaming where we've seen every kind of NPC, BBEG and encounter possible and it's nice to see something different.
And as far as Paizo being "progressive" or whatever by including LGBT NPCs (and PCs), I'm just not with (those of) you on that. At all. I can't agree that an entertainment publisher in society today can be called progressive for including LGBT characters. Christ, half the TV shows, movies, cartoons, books, songs, etc., out there do this and it sure as hell isn't new
On the other hand I strongly agree with the OP's choice of word in her concern, "gratuitous." (my bold) It seems to me that including some of these NPCs has no other justification except to include an LGBT element or four. And, as heretical as it is for me to posit, that's just bad game design.
Paizo is the best -- best ever -- but creative torpor has been settling in slowly the last few years and is starting to show it's ugly head. The last handful of APs have become more and more banal in their design and Paizo needs fresh blood and a big design shake-up for adventures.
Ultimately, I don't believe at all that Paizo's overuse -- and gratuitous use -- of LGBT elements is because they're trying to flaunt their "progressiveness" (it's NOT progressive anymore, thank god!); rather, it's a combination of A) slightly poor design resulting from a slow creative torpor with B) the element of "Oooh, a new and refreshing element to design -- including LGBT; we should run it into the ground in overuse cuz we can't think of anything else new to do." Like a new toy the child has to play with too much.
My 2 cp.
(and the truth)
Except for one thing: sometimes people just fall in love. Especially in war situations. If you're in a society where same-sex unions aren't frowned upon (except by certain uptight individuals like the Scarnettis) then if you're in a war-environment... love will happen. I'd not be at all surprised to find out the Paladin army your group leads has several shield-partnerings, both straight and homosexual (and even bisexual individuals who don't care what gender the person they're with - they just are into that person).
I see the relationship between the latter two NPCs to be a war-driven relationship, with some dependence issues as well. The only thing that brings it to the fore is the prominent position these two play in the second part of the AP.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Worldwound is such a bleak place if any where on Golarion could use a Pride Parade it's there.
besides every adventure is by a different author, so its not like James, Rob and Adam are sitting there throwing darts at a NPC list on the wall going "gay" straight" transgender" "gay" "straight" "has a thing for goats". i say just lighten up, change what you want, and let the professionals do their job. if you don't like it change it or dont buy it at all!
or are you just worried the NPCs are going to steal your PCs Gay Thunder (which really should be a band name:)
and for the record i'm 100% heterosexual and happily married, and i fully support gay marriage.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
well, I strongly disagree with the OP, I must say. My reasoning:
1) I don't find the "transgender-lesbian" relationship any more noteworthy than any other case of homosexual relationship from Paizo. I honestly don't agree with people who are rattled by this.
2) If ever there was an AP that should have highlighted inclusiveness, that AP should be WotR. It's an AP about good Vs. evil, and as far as I'm concerned, accepting people as they are is a shining example of good. So the good NPCs should be open minded, and a good way to telegraph that is to show them as having no issue with some of today's major subjects of debate, which is inclusiveness for LGBT people.
So I think the call to Paizo to reduce the use of LGBT NPCs is seriously misguided and, to some folk it can come across as offensive (I realize the OP is not being offensive on purpose but some people are still going to read her words in a way other than she intended).
Rather, I'd call Paizo to balance the numbers a bit. I can't remember the last time we had a functional, healthy heterosexual relationship between two major NPCs. LGBT people exist and should be acknowledged, but so do non-LGBTs. Generally, I think we need more couple in our games.
Rather, I'd call Paizo to balance the numbers a bit. I can't remember the last time we had a functional, healthy heterosexual relationship between two major NPCs. LGBT people exist and should be acknowledged, but so do non-LGBTs. Generally, I think we need more couple in our games.
It's at least implied that the relationship between Shiela & Caynaveran Heidmarch is healthy & happy in Shattered Star. Granted, there isn't much focus on it, but there is almost as much information available to focus on their relationship as is available to focus on the two homosexual pairings in WotR. Personally, my big gripe is they finally make up a hot 1/2 Orc I would so totally hit on, & then they up and make her married already!
|
|
Rather, I'd call Paizo to balance the numbers a bit. I can't remember the last time we had a functional, healthy heterosexual relationship between two major NPCs. LGBT people exist and should be acknowledged, but so do non-LGBTs. Generally, I think we need more couple in our games.It's at least implied that the relationship between Shiela & Caynaveran Heidmarch is healthy & happy in Shattered Star. Granted, there isn't much focus on it, but there is almost as much information available to focus on their relationship as is available to focus on the two homosexual pairings in WotR.
True, I suppose, though I'll take my own forgetting of them as evidence that the relationship was such a small part of that AP's plot that it was... well... forgettable. Besides, I did use the word "major" on purpose in my definition. It's easy to include non-major NPCs that belong to a category because there could be a lot of them. Major NPCs take the spotlight, so there are a few. Mr. Heidmarch was never actually in any book of Shattered Star...
I really don't see what the problem is. Suggesting that 'its like a gay pride parade in the middle of the Worldwound (and an interracial one at that)' because it's got 4 whole gay people in it is frankly offensive.
Kenabres has a population of 12,000. Even if the LGBT population is as low as 5%, that's still 600 people. Not counting visitors.
True, I suppose, though I'll take my own forgetting of them as evidence that the relationship was such a small part of that AP's plot that it was... well... forgettable. Besides, I did use the word "major" on purpose in my definition. It's easy to include non-major NPCs that belong to a category because there could be a lot of them. Major NPCs take the spotlight, so there are a few. Mr. Heidmarch was never actually in any book of Shattered Star...
Actually, he was. One of the sub-missions on the inner cover is a request by him to document specific locations within the Crow. As you said however, it is easily overlooked if the GM doesn't decide to make something of it.
|
My main complaint is neither their gender nor their sexual orientation, but the fact that they have so many details of their backstory dedicated to those aspects, and yet neither their behavior nor their role in the adventure is in any way related to it. I had to do some serious modifying to their roles in order to have my players take them seriously. As characters they are bland and cartoonish (specially for such a gritty adventure). Comparatively, my players LOVED the Jadrenka and Marislova part of the Maiden Mother crone adventure (RoW). I had to increase their role in the game as the players tried to fix their relationship (it was quite sweet).
The funny thing is that as their backgrounds were revealed, the players kept expecting interesting plot hooks or roleplaying cues to come out of them. Something like;
Me: "Irabeth is a righteous paladin, and a half orc at that...."
Players: uhhhhh
Me: "and her parents love each other very much and live happy over there"
Players: ...
Me: "Irabeth paid for Anevia´s sex change spell by selling a family heirloom that depicted her god"
Players: oh oh oh
Me: "and her family, Iomedae and the other witch burning paladins are cool with it"
Players: ...
If you are going to have such significant defining characteristics on a character, have such details play a role on the story for pits sake. And IT IS IRRELEVANT that those characteristics are related to sexuality or gender. I just want them to be relevant.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
LGBTQ characters don't need to be justified, they don't have to be a minority of characters.
I know when something has been done a certain way since forever it seems strange to have something done a different way.
For some people the majority of the significant people in their life are LGBTQ.
To call that bad game design is just, I don't even know a polite word for it. Suffice to say, nothing is inherently broken about LGBTQ characters.
The PC's friends in this AP are going to be LGBTQ characters, it has no game effect, but for a teenager struggling to find acceptance, seeing fictional characters who they can identify with is absolutely life changing.
Um... Frerezar, why would the group need to know anything about Anevia's sex-change? I doubt it's something she talks about. We know about it because it helps provide background information on her but I'm not sure why she'd tell anyone else, especially the party members who are relative strangers. (For that matter, while the rich snob might know of the sex change, I'm not sure how many of the Eagle Guard know. He knew because he was rich and had connections and put things together. They're just the organization that Irabeth works with.)
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a general rule. If I read someone's complaint about LGBT themes in adventures, replace all instances of LBGT with race, and it makes me feel uncomfortable, then I'm probably not in agreement. Doing that to the OP, I'm not in agreement.
I'll say what I always say. If they keep adding NPCs of all types, LBGT, race, gender... whatever, then soon enough, they won't feel unique anymore and it won't feel like shoehorning anymore. Because it'll be the norm and I'm honestly okay with Pathfinder saying that anyone can be a hero, no matter your race, gender, or sexuality.
I have a general rule. If I read someone's complaint about LGBT themes in adventures, replace all instances of LBGT with race, and it makes me feel uncomfortable, then I'm probably not in agreement. Doing that to the OP, I'm not in agreement.
I'll say what I always say. If they keep adding NPCs of all types, LBGT, race, gender... whatever, then soon enough, they won't feel unique anymore and it won't feel like shoehorning anymore. Because it'll be the norm and I'm honestly okay with Pathfinder saying that anyone can be a hero, no matter your race, gender, or sexuality.
Well said!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, in a game where a gnome ninja, a half orc wizard, a dwarf bard, a tiefling fighter, and a kitsune paladin can come together and fistfight demons in a literal Hell on Earth (Abyss if you want to be pedantic ;) ), I find that getting hung up on an LGBT character in the game to make little sense.
Honestly, in a game where a gnome ninja, a half orc wizard, a dwarf bard, a tiefling fighter, and a kitsune paladin can come together and fistfight demons in a literal Hell on Earth (Abyss if you want to be pedantic ;) ), I find that getting hung up on an LGBT character in the game to make little sense.
There seems to be a lot of deliberate misinterpretation of my point... my point isn't a problem with LGBT characters, and that's pretty clearly stated a number of times, even using specific examples. My point is the distraction created by using a gratuitous number of them. Let's use your 'race' analogy - if all of a sudden the majority of NPC's were all gnomes, wouldn't you say 'wait a minute, this doesn't make any sense... what's up with all the gnomes?'. You wouldn't ask the question because you're a gnome-hating racist, you'd ask it because demographically speaking it simply doesn't make sense within the story.
Moreover, let's acknowledge that LGBT characters aren't remotely the same as non-human races for the purposes of these adventures. Nobody is including gnomes specifically to make sure the gnomish among us are properly represented or so that a confused or outcast teen-aged gnome might feel a sense of inclusion and acceptance.
As I said, ZERO problem with LGBT characters in Pathfinder adventures, especially considering that we have had and even now have players who fit that category... I simply felt the need to overpopulate the key NPC's with LGBT characters might have the effect of pushing an agenda to the point of making people deaf to it, or worse reactionary against it. I think Irabeth and her mate's story is interesting and provides some fascinating depth to the characters, even if it is just backstory with little if any direct impact on the here and now... but the additional inclusion of a second gay couple already in just the second book for no other reason than just to shoe-horn it in, the likelihood that out of 5 main NPC's in my game 4 of them would be LGBT stretches believability to the point of distraction from the story. Their sexual orientation in no way affects any aspect of the game, the characters' motivations, anything at all the way it does with Irabeth and as such the inclusion of that aspect of them takes on a very gratuitous feel.
If you were to make Irabeth and Anevia a hetero-sexual couple, it would unravel the entire character concept and rewrite much of the game history... it would undermine their motivations and utterly diminish them as characters which would be wrong in my opinion as a responsible storyteller. If you were to make the gay couple in the second book (sorry but the names escape me) into a hetero-sexual couple it would change absolutely nothing about their backstory or the adventure itself. Hence the feeling of gratuitousness.
My opinion as expressed is in no way (and quite obviously so) an attack on LGBT players or the inclusion of LGBT characters in the game... its a concern that as so often happens, the pressure to be SO inclusive that you start getting exclusive can quickly undermine the legitimacy of any well-intended agenda.
And for the record, one of my biggest pet peeves is the over-use of exotic races anyway. These travelling menageries that many parties tend to be these days drive me nuts... and I say that with a likely party of a Human, a Halfling, a Tiefling and two Aasimars. When exotic races are used in our campaigns, its always with a very specific purpose and story concept... ditto when alternative lifestyle characters are included as mentioned above.
|
|
Um... Frerezar, why would the group need to know anything about Anevia's sex-change? I doubt it's something she talks about. We know about it because it helps provide background information on her but I'm not sure why she'd tell anyone else, especially the party members who are relative strangers. (For that matter, while the rich snob might know of the sex change, I'm not sure how many of the Eagle Guard know. He knew because he was rich and had connections and put things together. They're just the organization that Irabeth works with.)
Because not only is space of the adventure dedicated o this fact, but it it comes up when the players find the sword Irabeth sold (at the Gray Garrison). If a paladin sells her sword (symbol of her deity), which happens to be a family heirloom, the player´s curiosity (and suspicion) is going to be aroused. So Irabeth would either have to lie, tell them to go away, or just tell them. regardless, it is something that with the story as written it will come up. Of course I can alter it, but that is not the point.
Also, this is NOT about LGBT (term which i hate by the way as it throws a lot of people into the same bandwagon), it is about character details which are in the story and yet have no point in the overall narrative of said story. I would have as much of an issue if Anevia happened to be secretly a Kitsune (important and interesting fact) and yet it NEVER came up in the story (not even as a possible mystery to solve).
Also worth saying, I am not talking out of a random bias, but because we just finished the first book (starting Sword of Valor this Friday) and the players are kind of disappointed with the two main NPCs so far (at least that damn noble/merchant is easy to hate). This is particularly frustrating as I was expecting another Jadrenka/Marislova kind of thing.
To be honest? I'd think that knowing she owns a house, the players would assume she sold her family sword so she could have a place to call her own while living with her wife. But then, I'm not a player, so... ^^;;
Considering that the fight for the rights of LGBT people is one that is actually going on right now today I think the inclusion of LGBT people in adventure paths is a great thing.
Is Paizo forcing them in to promote an agenda?
God I hope so. I hope the good people at Paizo are in support of basic human rights and support basic human decency and would seek to promote that in their products (from everything I have seen they do support that). I applaud their inclusion and the brave step of supporting our LGBT brothers and sisters in their products.
Though I can understand peoples concern with any forced elements into a narrative, I think the importance of the topic out weighs any story concerns (especially in this day and age). Paizo is very good about how they include the subject and the presence of LGBT characters enhances the complexity of their world and stories.
For those that are concerned with having anything forced into their narrative they can just remove the LGBT characters that they don't want present. So it can have zero impact on your game play while still having the very important role of making LGBT gamers feel included. I think it is a win win.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, in a game where a gnome ninja, a half orc wizard, a dwarf bard, a tiefling fighter, and a kitsune paladin can come together and fistfight demons in a literal Hell on Earth (Abyss if you want to be pedantic ;) ), I find that getting hung up on an LGBT character in the game to make little sense.There seems to be a lot of deliberate misinterpretation of my point... my point isn't a problem with LGBT characters, and that's pretty clearly stated a number of times, even using specific examples. My point is the distraction created by using a gratuitous number of them. Let's use your 'race' analogy - if all of a sudden the majority of NPC's were all gnomes, wouldn't you say 'wait a minute, this doesn't make any sense... what's up with all the gnomes?'. You wouldn't ask the question because you're a gnome-hating racist, you'd ask it because demographically speaking it simply doesn't make sense within the story.
Moreover, let's acknowledge that LGBT characters aren't remotely the same as non-human races for the purposes of these adventures. Nobody is including gnomes specifically to make sure the gnomish among us are properly represented or so that a confused or outcast teen-aged gnome might feel a sense of inclusion and acceptance.
As I said, ZERO problem with LGBT characters in Pathfinder adventures, especially considering that we have had and even now have players who fit that category... I simply felt the need to overpopulate the key NPC's with LGBT characters might have the effect of pushing an agenda to the point of making people deaf to it, or worse reactionary against it. I think Irabeth and her mate's story is interesting and provides some fascinating depth to the characters, even if it is just backstory with little if any direct impact on the here and now... but the additional inclusion of a second gay couple already in just the second book for no other reason than just to shoe-horn it in, the likelihood that out of 5 main NPC's in my game 4 of them would be LGBT...
In the inner front cover of each of the Wrath of the Righteous, there's a list of allied NPCs that can help the PCs during their adventure. Out of there, 4 are LGBT in one way or another. Now, of course, they ARE couples - so if we used your "gnome" example, we'd have two couples of gnomes (and of course, if one part of a couple is a gnome, the other one most likely is as well).
Honestly? I don't think you would have created a concerned thread in this forums if there were two couples of gnomes helping the PCs out. Or if 4 out of 10 allies were wizards. Or if 4 out of 10 lawful neutral.
I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just saying that you most probably ARE giving more attention to the LGBT aspect than you would have to another such happenstance. For example, I don't recall hearing anything from you about how in Carrion Crown, nearly all of the important NPCs are male (about 90% I think).
And there's a reason, honestly. LGBT folk are not usually the center of our attention and given their relatively low numbers, it's easy to live through big parts of your life without encountering many. Which means that it took some time until Paizo began to notice and acknowledge their existence, and it might take you some time, too. I suggest that you take some time to seriously think (and I mean that - serious thoughts. The kind where you go to sleep thinking about it, wake up the day after troubled, and then consult someone you trust on the matter) if you are not making a bigger deal out of things because they force you to make contact with something you find unusual.
I believe you will find that's the case. If LGBT people are 5-10% of the population, the odds of seeing 4 in a group of 10 are about 1/800 (see calculation in spoiler). In other words unlikely to say the least, but not much more than, say, scoring a double 20 on a d20 in a row... and we've all seen that happen, right?
taking 5% as the chance of a person being LGBT, we need 4 "hits" - each with a chance of 5%, so a total of (1/20)^4. However, any 4 of the ten will do, not only a specific foursome. So to handle that we multiply the previous number by the number of different groups of 4 people you can pick out of 10 - that's 10!/(4!*6!), for a total of 210. The multiplication of the two number yields the result. Using a less conservative number, say 10%, will give a much better chance - 1/50, a full 2%.
|
|
This is NOT about the likelihood of an individual being either gay lesbian or anything else, but about how such a characteristic is relevant to an individual character in a story. If you include a set of details about one or more characters I expect them to be relevant to their personality, plot points, role, hooks, etc. Those details in this story serve no purpose and, as such, I did not need to know them (in the same way i do not need to know if Irabeth was ever sexually abused or if Gwern smoked pot).
Now, if you had those details interesting and engaging as part of the way the characters interact with players, then go for it.
...Honestly, in a game where a gnome ninja, a half orc wizard, a dwarf bard, a tiefling fighter, and a kitsune paladin can come together and fistfight demons in a literal Hell on Earth (Abyss if you want to be pedantic ;) ), I find that getting hung up on an LGBT character in the game to make little sense.There seems to be a lot of deliberate misinterpretation of my point... my point isn't a problem with LGBT characters, and that's pretty clearly stated a number of times, even using specific examples. My point is the distraction created by using a gratuitous number of them. Let's use your 'race' analogy - if all of a sudden the majority of NPC's were all gnomes, wouldn't you say 'wait a minute, this doesn't make any sense... what's up with all the gnomes?'. You wouldn't ask the question because you're a gnome-hating racist, you'd ask it because demographically speaking it simply doesn't make sense within the story.
Moreover, let's acknowledge that LGBT characters aren't remotely the same as non-human races for the purposes of these adventures. Nobody is including gnomes specifically to make sure the gnomish among us are properly represented or so that a confused or outcast teen-aged gnome might feel a sense of inclusion and acceptance.
As I said, ZERO problem with LGBT characters in Pathfinder adventures, especially considering that we have had and even now have players who fit that category... I simply felt the need to overpopulate the key NPC's with LGBT characters might have the effect of pushing an agenda to the point of making people deaf to it, or worse reactionary against it. I think Irabeth and her mate's story is interesting and provides some fascinating depth to the characters, even if it is just backstory with little if any direct impact on the here and now... but the additional inclusion of a second gay couple already in just the second book for no other reason than just to shoe-horn it in, the likelihood that out of 5 main NPC's in
And what are the odds of seeing 4 mythic characters together at the same time?
I found it curious myself. The problem is the second couple felt "added on" as the first couple were lesbian, so two gay men were added to balance it out. That said, if this were a straight couple I could hear someone grousing "great, we get our first hetero couple, and the guy's a drug addict while the girl's desperately trying to keep his secret." (And if Paizo had chosen to have the Rogue/Low Crusader be a woman, then "why are they picking on women by having the one straight woman be a drug addict!")
Or to put it another way, no matter what Paizo does, someone will raise an eyebrow and comment. Story Archer was just brave enough to risk internet censure by voicing her concerns that the second couple felt added on.
That said... I kind of wonder if the character backgrounds for these NPCs was crafted using the Ultimate Campaign charts! :)
|
|
Funny thing is that I find the "new" couple to be far more interesting because their particular flaws and quirks actually come into play daring he adventure (while avnevia and irabeth just look like someone yelling "hey look, a transgender - lesbian couple can be good and happy too"). I would have gone a bit further with the new guys by implying that given their secret relationship keeping both secrets would be even harder on their relationship (the addiction being the other one).
|
|
This is NOT about the likelihood of an individual being either gay lesbian or anything else, but about how such a characteristic is relevant to an individual character in a story. If you include a set of details about one or more characters I expect them to be relevant to their personality, plot points, role, hooks, etc. Those details in this story serve no purpose and, as such, I did not need to know them (in the same way i do not need to know if Irabeth was ever sexually abused or if Gwern smoked pot).
Now, if you had those details interesting and engaging as part of the way the characters interact with players, then go for it.
My post was a reply to Story Archer, not to you, so it addressed the issue that Story Archer raised. I realize you were talking about something a bit different.
I don't agree with your point either, by the way. I stated earlier in this thread that in my opinion, if there ever was an AP in which unusual characters should have an unusually easy time being accepted, it's Wrath of the Righteous. In this AP, unlike in many others, the distinction between GOOD people and EVIL people is not only clear cut, it's also part of the plot and the theme of the entire story. Because acceptance of your fellow human beings (/demi-human beings) is considered to be "Good" in our own world, then in a game made for us, showing people as accepting is a GREAT way to show they are good.
The PCs, the crusaders they work with, and the NPC allies are GOOD. therefore, they are more willing than most people to accept minorities. So yeah, Irabeth is the daughter of a good orc. Rare as hack, but appropriate for the story. The crazed, "witch hunting" inquisitors and paladins accept the idea of homosexuality and transgender people because nothing in the faith of any good god in Golarion opposes it. It's not like in our history where the monotheistic faiths believed homosexuality to be a vile crime worthy of punishment from a divine source. There's no reason whatsoever for the knights to NOT accept LGBT people.
The male homosexuals from "Sword of Valor" are also good people and are also accepted by their community, EXACTLY like the couple from the first book. Only difference is that Annevia did a better job of shrugging her problematic past off than Aron managed. Their problems are completely unrelated to their sexuality. However, I will grant that they are more interesting to me, as characters, than Annevia and Irabeth.
Hope this clarifies things up :)
|
|
This is NOT about the likelihood of an individual being either gay lesbian or anything else, but about how such a characteristic is relevant to an individual character in a story. If you include a set of details about one or more characters I expect them to be relevant to their personality, plot points, role, hooks, etc. Those details in this story serve no purpose and, as such, I did not need to know them (in the same way i do not need to know if Irabeth was ever sexually abused or if Gwern smoked pot).
Now, if you had those details interesting and engaging as part of the way the characters interact with players, then go for it.
My post was a reply to Story Archer, not to you, so it addressed the issue that Story Archer raised. I realize you were talking about something a bit different.
I don't agree with your point either, by the way. I stated earlier in this thread that in my opinion, if there ever was an AP in which unusual characters should have an unusually easy time being accepted, it's Wrath of the Righteous. In this AP, unlike in many others, the distinction between GOOD people and EVIL people is not only clear cut, it's also part of the plot and the theme of the entire story. Because acceptance of your fellow human beings (/demi-human beings) is considered to be "Good" in our own world, then in a game made for us, showing people as accepting is a GREAT way to show they are good.
The PCs, the crusaders they work with, and the NPC allies are GOOD. therefore, they are more willing than most people to accept minorities. So yeah, Irabeth is the daughter of a good orc. Rare as hack, but appropriate for the story. The crazed, "witch hunting" inquisitors and paladins accept the idea of homosexuality and transgender people because nothing in the faith of any good god in Golarion opposes it. It's not like in our history where the monotheistic faiths believed homosexuality to be a vile crime worthy of punishment from a divine source. There's no reason whatsoever for...
I only mentioned those possible interesting complications as example of what could be done with the information that was given on the characters (which just happens to be related to their sexuality),and that used up valuable adventure space that I paid for I might add. Because even if what you say is true, it would still mean that there was NO point at all for such characteristics to be added. In the same way that if anevia was a tian woman who, as a child, came all the way from minkai escaping from thieving human traffickers, if nothing of thhat backgorund was in ANY way related to the story, a PC cnversation, a personality trait, a relationship hook etc it would also be useless (even thou in the real world seeing someone of asian descent and who was victim of trafficking is nothing strange)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly? I don't think you would have created a concerned thread in this forums if there were two couples of gnomes helping the PCs out. Or if 4 out of 10 allies were wizards. Or if 4 out of 10 lawful neutral.
I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just saying that you most probably ARE giving more attention to the LGBT aspect than you would have to another such happenstance. For example, I don't recall hearing anything from you about how in Carrion Crown, nearly all of the important NPCs are male (about 90% I think).
And there's a reason, honestly. LGBT folk are not usually the center of our attention and given their relatively low numbers, it's easy to live through big parts of your life without encountering many. Which means that it took some time until Paizo began to notice and acknowledge their existence, and it might take you some time, too. I suggest that you take some time to seriously think (and I mean that - serious thoughts. The kind where you go to sleep thinking about it, wake up the day after troubled, and then consult someone you trust on the matter) if you are not making a bigger deal out of things because they force you to make contact with something you find unusual.
I keep trying to make this point and it keeps getting ovcerlooked by some, to the point if I wonder whether it's deliberate:
I have no problem with LGBT. Nor do I suffer from a lack of exposure to them. My best friend outside of my marriage is a much-loved gay black man (to quote one of his favorite movies Chasing Amy, "a minority of a minority in a minority and notoriously the most 'swishy' of the bunch"). We have a player who is actively and openly bi-sexual and we have had a lesbian member in the past. I not only don't think its unusual, its part of my daily life.
I think your presumption may very well be the case in some situations... but presuming the only reason that I might have a question about over-inclusion of one group or another is solely due to my limited experience or personal prejudices is exactly the kind of thinking you want to discourage rather than fall back on yourself. A person can have a problem with Obama's political views without being a racist. A person can find the inclusion of an unusually high number of LGTB individuals in an AP odd or otherwise motivated without being homophobic or ignorant. I can promise that I won't presume LGBT individuals all think and feel the same way about things - so I would like to invite you to avoid the presumption that non-LGBT individuals do the same.
The addition of a second LGBT couple seemed odd and forced to me within the context of the story. Oftentimes when such things are forced they can create either a backlash or an antipathy towards the subject which is worthy of cautioning against. I felt it was worthy of mentioning since I did not see that others had, so I mentioned it.
I come from a school of gaming where RPG's are an artistic form akin to storytelling, and by virtue of their being interactive, can be a real tool for personal introspection or growth in addition to simply being entertaining. As such, whenever I designed my own adventures or campaigns I was always sure to tailor encounters, especially RP encounters, to the specific players I had on hand. If there was a time when it would have been good for the group in my opinion to include a member of an alternative life-style or a person suffering from drug addiction or mental disorders or anything else outside of the 'norm', I would have. Likewise, if I felt a pre-existing adventure or campaign lacked such necessary or appropriate qualities, I would of course customize them for inclusion. Pre-packaged adventures like this particular AP are notoriously short on space, so if a salient detail about an individual (or couple) is included, I like to think its done so because its germaine to the story, not a gratuitous add-on designed to push an agenda. Just as a GM is perfectly capable of making those two a hetero-sexual pair of friends instead of a gay couple, so too could a GM have made the pair of friends a homo-sexual couple if presented in reverse... the difference is that the GM probably would have had an actual in-story reason for doing so.
And for the record, I don't own and haven't yet read Carrion Crown, but it IS on the list. Think about it like this - I own Jade Regent, Skull n Shackles, Shattered Star and Reign of Winter, all of which feature some inclusion of LGBT... and this is the first time you have heard from me on the subject at all.
I keep trying to make this point and it keeps getting ovcerlooked by some, to the point if I wonder whether it's deliberate:I have no problem with LGBT. Nor do I suffer from a lack of exposure to them. My best friend outside of my marriage is a much-loved gay black man (to quote one of his favorite movies Chasing Amy, "a minority of a minority in a minority and notoriously the most 'swishy' of the bunch"). We have a player who is actively and openly bi-sexual and we have had a lesbian member in the past. I not only don't think its unusual, its part of my daily life.
I think your presumption may very well be the case in some situations... but presuming the only reason that I might have a question about over-inclusion of one group or another is solely due to my limited experience or...
Can you please explain how having 2 non-heterosexual couples is somehow unusually high? It's 2 couples. You don't get much lower than the number 2.
And I don't think you having a gay best friend really forgives your comments that having four gay people in an adventure is like having a "gay pride parade".
She's saying she lives in that environment everyday and has no problems with that environment. Thus if people are jumping at her choice of words and implying she has problems with homosexuality then they are mistaken in their accusations. In short, she just presented character background information much like the pertinent NPCs in this campaign have had pertinent background information provided. ;)
Actually, it just dawned on me that Reign of Winter also had two lesbian couples that play a prominent role, with one having transitioned from male to female (and that latter relationship somewhat unhealthy due to excessive jealousy brought on by an evil person manipulating events along with a failure to communicate effectively). Silly of me to have forgotten that! ^^;;
Going off on a tangent (as is my wont), I also have to wonder about our reformed Succubus and how she will be represented and showcased when she arrives in the next chapter. After all, succubi are known for their seductiveness and sexuality. Will she be actively repressing that aspect of herself? Or is she just downplaying it out of a need to step beyond her nature? (And just what is the nature of a succubus? Is their sensuality and seductiveness inherently evil, or do they just use these elements in the pursuit of their evil?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Warning! I’m going to cast wall of text!
If I might jump in, I wonder if we might get at the heart of the matter if we rephrase things a bit. For example, my circle is composed primarily of casual gamers. We ignore hooks and NPC secrets with abandon, and none of us is hugely motivated to come up with them ourselves. So, the more of them we can drop into our campaigns from any number of sources, the more likely we are to bite at one of them, and from then on the GM can start working their magic. For our group, it wouldn’t make much sense to make too many NPC secrets in an adventure we buy important to the plot, but it would make a good deal to have them there for reuse. After all, if it really is a compelling hook or what not, then it shouldn’t be that hard to imagine how it might impact play once it’s been discovered, right? In what might otherwise be a more free-form part of using a published adventure, saying “If X fact gets out, Y does this and Z happens,” starts encroaching on the body of the adventure itself, unless that’s meant to be a part of it, and ultimately I’m not sure that’s what I want from even most NPC quirks or secrets.
On a related note, I’m unmoved by the demographic or proportional representation issues, perhaps because, again, I’m a casual gamer and have a lot of material I haven’t used yet, and a lot of it facilitates certain assumptions. I don’t think many people would worry about what it might mean if most of the NPCs their group interacts with are straight, cis, and, for giggles (that is, I don’t think LGBT people are any more or less likely to fall into this category), mono-amorous, and human. I’m pretty sure the default assumption in most of my gaming material is just that. It probably does me a favour to have material that forces me to think about what might happen if, hey, everyone the PCs know, apart from themselves, perhaps, is a dwarf, or happily married, or LGBT, or any or all of the preceding.
On the other hand, since I game casually, I’m more open to the “kitchen sink” or “Mos Eisley cantina” campaign, so something like, “You know, I never noticed before, but everyone we know around here seems to be a gnome!” wouldn’t really bother me. Part of me wonders whether that would have to happen sometime even in a human-dominated world like Golarion. Sure, there are more of them around than anyone else, but even in a mainly human region, given how easily humans splinter into cliques and so on, why wouldn’t one pass through a halfling village or an elf ghetto every once in a while?
Lastly, one thing that I do find myself wondering uneasily about is this. As much as the designers try to include LGBT characters in a setting without real-world history, how easily might things like the consequences of real-world gender assumptions creep in regardless? That is, how much does it make sense for Golarion folks to think about what’s “womanly” or “manly”? Do four LGBT NPCs constitute a misplaced pride parade in a setting where, by and large, that part of who they are isn’t a big deal? I can’t help thinking the two might be related. Might LGBT people in Golarion still come together because they are associated with gender-variant behaviour in some sense? It’s the little things, like most female characters being more or less conventionally feminine according to our additional conventions of what women in fantasy games look like, or that Seoni’s the (feminine, coded-instinctive?) sorcerer and Ezren’s the (masculine, coded-rational?) wizard, while Feiya suits the whole witches in covens and have access to triple-aspect magic thing a bit too neatly for my tastes. Could it be that a chance accumulation of LGBT characters highlights the potential, and potentially inadvertent, assumptions involved? I’m not playing WotR yet, so I can’t speak to how likely this grouping of NPCs is, but if, as someone pointed out before, they are only 4 out of 10 possible allies in the campaign’s starting area, and one’s open to such a grouping just happening eventually somewhere, I wonder why it might seem more problematic. Just some thoughts, sorry to ramble on so.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly? I don't think you would have created a concerned thread in this forums if there were two couples of gnomes helping the PCs out. Or if 4 out of 10 allies were wizards. Or if 4 out of 10 lawful neutral.
I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just saying that you most probably ARE giving more attention to the LGBT aspect than you would have to another such happenstance. For example, I don't recall hearing anything from you about how in Carrion Crown, nearly all of the important NPCs are male (about 90% I think).
And there's a reason, honestly. LGBT folk are not usually the center of our attention and given their relatively low numbers, it's easy to live through big parts of your life without encountering many. Which means that it took some time until Paizo began to notice and acknowledge their existence, and it might take you some time, too. I suggest that you take some time to seriously think (and I mean that - serious thoughts. The kind where you go to sleep thinking about it, wake up the day after troubled, and then consult someone you trust on the matter) if you are not making a bigger deal out of things because they force you to make contact with something you find unusual.
I keep trying to make this point and it keeps getting ovcerlooked by some, to the point if I wonder whether it's deliberate:
I have no problem with LGBT. Nor do I suffer from a lack of exposure to them. My best friend outside of my marriage is a much-loved gay black man (to quote one of his favorite movies Chasing Amy, "a minority of a minority in a minority and notoriously the most 'swishy' of the bunch"). We have a player who is actively and openly bi-sexual and we have had a lesbian member in the past. I not only don't think its unusual, its part of my daily life.
I think your presumption may very well be the case in some situations... but presuming the only reason that I might have a question about over-inclusion of one group or another is solely due to my limited experience or...
Well, we are at an impasse, Story Archer, because I simply don't believe you. You are SAYING you have no problem or lack of experience with LGBT, and yet two couples raised your bells, and you must agree that at least here in the boards, the majority seems to not be worried about it. So I believe you should ask yourself what is the difference between you and the other group.
I get that you have a couple of friends who are LGBT. I get that you won't judge anyone by their sexuality. As I attempted to get across before, I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm saying that you are in a position in life where 4 LGBT people out of 10 caught much more of your attention than the many other details in these and other adventures by Paizo. And really, there's nothing all that special about having two gay couples around. And it's really not like they are taking all that much of the precious space that you as a customer payed for. Between both pairs, the amount of text that actually dealt with their unusual sexuality is rather negligible. If memory serves me right, than in the case of the male couple the issue is never even addressed in the adventure - it is mentioned that Aron and the Shelyn priest (name slipped) are lovers, but nowhere is there a line of text dedicated to notify you that they are both males. So if one of them would have been a female, that wouldn't have freed any extra space.
I mean, try and notice what you are getting worked up about - MAYBE a couple of paragraphs of text which you don't use are nothing. Have you ever started a thread about how there was this monster you didn't like in the bestiary, and it wasted an entire page for you? because if there ever was such a monster, it wasted way more space than the entirety of the text Paizo put through all of it's APs ever that was dedicated to describing the LGBT aspects of NPCs.
And the "gratuitous add-on designed to push an agenda" is TWO COUPLES. It's really not all that much of a crazy coincidence. It's not something that's common, at all, in the Paizo adventures, and there just happens to have been a small spike. I don't see the problem. For your information, more than 4 of my ten best friends turned out over the years to be gay - I met most of them during high school, when they were not yet sure of their sexuality, and just over time one after the other came out of the closet.So I am a living example of how not-impossible the coincidence in the adventure is. I even calculated the odds a couple posts up.
To sum up - What I tried to tell you last post I'm trying to tell you know. The way you think and the things you say indicate to me that you do have an issue that you are unaware of with LGBT - you simply haven't met enough to get used to their presence. You were so unused to it that the presence of a second couple sent you thinking into paths that don't even make sense (like the complaint about the wasted space, which frankly just isn't grounded in reality). So I'll ask you again for the same thing I did last time - take a step back and review the situation. Think about it. Don't immediately shoot an answer back. Really question your assumptions for a moment, and see if maybe your strong reaction came not because of anything gratuitous from Paizo's part but from somewhere else.
I know I went through that when a high number of my friends turned out to be either homosexual or bisexual - I had no problem with the concept at all, but seeing so many people around me as examples of homosexuals when before I rarely if ever encountered homosexuals made me pause and think. I suggest you do the same.
|
|
It is worth saying that as a customer I woud not complaint about something I beieve a designer just did not do properly according to my standarts (such as a monster i did not like); however, if a particular element one pays for was made less valuable because of a social agenda (a deliberate action instead of a mystake) then an issue arises, because it means the same course of action will be repeated again and again.
Now, this could be an issue of parallel design: these chapters have two different authors, and if both wanted to include this element, no designer is going to write them and say, "Sorry, Neil, we have to change the characters you wrote because Amber already used up the gayness quota for this AP."
This is a possibility that honestly never occurred to me, but it would make perfect sense.
Frerezar: it sounds like you're saying that the AP is less valuable to you because it's got gay all over it.
LOL - of course that's not what he's saying.
|
|
Frerezar: it sounds like you're saying that the AP is less valuable to you because it's got gay all over it.
I sure hope that's not what you're saying, because that's kinda sad. Personally, it's more valuable to me because it's more inclusive, and if a deliberate decision was made to be more inclusive and that decision is going to be made again, I will support it with my money and my words.
To put it another way: gaming has no inherent social responsibility. However, while it will have exactly no impact if a straight teenager sees a heterosexual relationship represented in a module, the same is not true of a gay teenager. When I was sixteen, seeing Sosiel (a character who was a lot more like me than any giant masculine knight in armor) in a caring relationship with Aron would have rocked my world, and made it a little easier to get through my days. If the writers choose to keep a kid like me in mind, I can't ever see how that could be a bad thing. I mean, in this context it's not as though a straight kid picking up dice is going to say, "this male NPC is attracted to women, maybe I'm not so weird, after all." That kid never has to wonder about it, in the first place. Not for that.
If you're looking at that kid and saying, "you are less important than my false sense of verisimilitude," ... then I can't continue that sentence without breaking the first rule of the messageboards, y'know?
Yhe value has been diminished (as in I enjoy it less, believe it is of lesser quality, etc) because it has NPCs whose backgroudn details, which occupy printed space, are non interactive: details that do not come up in their personalities, subplots, hooks, ordeals, etc.
Funny thing is that the last game we finished was RoW, and it included a gender ambiguous rakshasa blooded tiefling (who fell for an also ambiguously gendered alien), a sex neutral ifrit oracle or fire, and a bi temporaly displaced fetchling. We as a group, and me as an individual have no issue at all with more or less anything; however, I do have an issue with pointless NPC background just for the sake of incusivenes.
Well, we are at an impasse, Story Archer, because I simply don't believe you.
So it is in fact being deliberately over-looked. Fair enough. You choose not believe me which is absolutely your right. I on the other hand choose to believe that you are either trying very hard to find some way to be offended or are trying very hard to judge someone you have no knowledge of under the veneer of sounding enlightened. Perhaps both. I don't imagine either of us is overly worried about what the other thinks of us so long as we are able to express our views.
An impasse it is, then, though I would humbly point out that I have had a lot more exposure to LGBT in my life than you have had to me in yours, which might perhaps explain the disconnect.
Creative Director
|
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now, this could be an issue of parallel design: these chapters have two different authors, and if both wanted to include this element, no designer is going to write them and say, "Sorry, Neil, we have to change the characters you wrote because Amber already used up the gayness quota for this AP."This is a possibility that honestly never occurred to me, but it would make perfect sense.
It's not parallel design. Part of a devloper's job is to prevent parallel design.
It's all by specific design, in other words. All of the significant NPCs in this adventure path were part of the outline I created for the adventure path for the authors to develop.
I do not think that NPC background material is ever irrelevant to the game—anything we put in for an NPC that's got as significant a role in the adventure as these do is directly supporting the adventure by giving the GM more information to use to roleplay the character as intended. If you want to change something about an NPC to make the NPC more appropriate for your group, by all means do so.
But the inclusion of LGBT characters in this AP in positive roles is completely and absolutely the point. I understand if that doesn't sit well with some folks, and in those cases they should absolutely change the characters to be more appropriate for their games. But I absolutely do not apologize for including these characters in the adventure path.