Anyone else a little bothered at there apparently only being one queer iconic that's a dude?

[Chocolate Milkshake]

I didn't really notice until I saw the banner in the pride announcement, but it seems a little strange that there's just one one male iconic to be not cis and/or straight out of nine. In fact, I didn't even know Quinn is gay/bi/ace/trans/something else until I saw the banner. I'm assuming it's just an oversight or something, but like, some more queer male iconics would be nice.

[Kobold Catgirl]

This isn't to say it's not a problem, but my lowkey impression has always been that "gaming" and "novels" are sort of two sides of the queer/trans rep coin--novels tend to have pretty weak transfem representation (because a lot of transmasc eggs get into writing as a relatively socially acceptable form of afab introversion), while tabletops and videogames tend to have much stronger transfem representation for the opposite reason. That's just a theory, though, and one that becomes less and less accurate every year. It's not totally relevant here, either. I just think it's interesting.

It's important to place the iconics in context with the fact that we essentially have 1.5 sets of iconics, since a lot of iconics didn't make the transition to PF2 or didn't exist in PF1. A lot of them were posted in large waves and didn't get a lot of personal attention. Judging by how long it took for Quinn's unofficial gayness to become official, it seems to more be a matter of "there hasn't been a chance to commission fiction and art for every iconic yet".

See, I'm pretty sure Seltyiel is queer. I'm not sure where I'm getting that from, but I swear I heard it somewhere. If I'm right, there may just not have been an opportunity to display it more prominently yet.

[Kelseus]

Also Mios is masc presenting non-binary. While they may take issue with being referred to as a dude or male, I think they still meet the criteria you are referencing.

[Feros]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

...

See, I'm pretty sure Seltyiel is queer. I'm not sure where I'm getting that from, but I swear I heard it somewhere. If I'm right, there may just not have been an opportunity to display it more prominently yet.

Pretty sure it was THIS post by Wes, KC. Third quote, from Bulmahn.

Really used the Wayback Machine there! :)

[Dancing Wind]

There's a similar post from a couple years ago.

Quote:

I noticed that their are a lot more prominent queer female characters then male ones,

James Jacobs replied here

May 19, 2022

James Jacobs wrote:

Yes. Getting more queer representation is important to me.

I've been including positive male queer characters from the start. Check out the gazetteer for Sandpoint in the first adventure for Pathfinder, Burnt Offerings. On the iconic front, the investigator, Quinn, is gay. There's a significant gay couple among the allied NPCs in Wrath of the Righteous. Gozreh is, of course, gender fluid. I have long seen Cayden Caliean as pansexual, although I don't know that we've said as much in print. I believe Seltyiel was intended to be pansexual, although like Quinn, we haven't explored those stories with him yet (maybe in the comics?)

The primary reason that Desna and Sarenrae are presented as queer is because they're exports from my homebrew, and they've been queer there for several decades, so those stories are brought forward into Pathifnder.

There'll be more positive queer male characters as well, but I've been working to build a diverse set of characters in the books I write and develop for a long time; it's important to me, since I'm a queer male myself (whether or not I'd be called a "positive" one is, I guess, not up to me, but I try to be and hope I am).

Note that PART of the issue you're seeing is that for most of Pathfinder's history, the vast bulk of our character work has been tackled in the format of adventures, and adventures skew toward presenting villainous NPCs rather than "positive role" NPCs, simply because of the nature of such a product.

[keftiu]

Kelseus wrote:

Also Mios is masc presenting non-binary. While they may take issue with being referred to as a dude or male, I think they still meet the criteria you are referencing.

Pointing to a they/them non-binary character when someone asks for queer men is not helpful or respectful, IMO. It would be just as weird if you called one a queer woman just because they have boobs - something that happens constantly IRL, where many NB people just get seen as their assigned birth genders.

[TriOmegaZero]

I think it is fair to ask for more male representation, even if we do have a sizable roster already. There’s room for all of Golarions diversity to be shown.

[Val'bryn2]

You do know the question of if Valeros is het, bi, gay, or asexual is entirely dependant on who plays him at any given time, right? Same for all iconics.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Non-explicit representation doesn't really mean anything in a conversation about public representation.

Also, I know people tend to be kind of bad at checking their tone on the messageboard, but "you do know" is kind of a condescending way to open your message and seems likely to put people in a defensive mindset when replying.

[Val'bryn2]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Non-explicit representation doesn't really mean anything in a conversation about public representation.

Also, I know people tend to be kind of bad at checking their tone on the messageboard, but "you do know" is kind of a condescending way to open your message and seems likely to put people in a defensive mindset when replying.

Pathfinder is a role-playing game. Even disregarding that the default assumption is that all characters are (at least potentially) bisexual, telling people you HAVE to play this particular iconic character as gay, trans, bi, or whatever is every bit as problematic as telling them they have to play them as straight.

Is MY Quinn less valid than yours because I seduce the barmaid instead of the barman? This is why the iconics are poor choices for representation, they are EVERYONE'S characters

[TheCowardlyLion]

Also some of the Iconics DO have a stated sexuality rather than all being player viewpoint sexual, such as Quinn and Kyra and Merisiel.

So it’d be closer to say bi until stated otherwise, which i believe was always Paizo’s stance.

[TheCowardlyLion]

Val'bryn2 wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Non-explicit representation doesn't really mean anything in a conversation about public representation.

Also, I know people tend to be kind of bad at checking their tone on the messageboard, but "you do know" is kind of a condescending way to open your message and seems likely to put people in a defensive mindset when replying.

Pathfinder is a role-playing game. Even disregarding that the default assumption is that all characters are (at least potentially) bisexual, telling people you HAVE to play this particular iconic character as gay, trans, bi, or whatever is every bit as problematic as telling them they have to play them as straight.

Is MY Quinn less valid than yours because I seduce the barmaid instead of the barman? This is why the iconics are poor choices for representation, they are EVERYONE'S characters

No, theyre art to show off the class.

Yes you can play Quinn as straight if you choose to.

Doesn’t make it not problematic, and it doesnt make other people bad for being uncomfortable with it.

[TheCowardlyLion]

They’re premades if you don’t have a character of your own.

To which i then have to ask, why are you playing Quinn if you don’t wanna play Quinn? Make your own investigator to seduce barmaids.

[Val'bryn2]

TheCowardlyLion wrote:

They’re premades if you don’t have a character of your own.

To which i then have to ask, why are you playing Quinn if you don’t wanna play Quinn? Make your own investigator to seduce barmaids.

Often because I am joining a game that's looking for an extra player, and rather than spend 20-30 minutes throwing one together, making them wait and holding up the game, I pick an iconic for a character role that needs filling. It's called courtesy. If I am joining a group with advance notice, yeah, I often build my own character.

Also, there had been some Society adventures published that either required or strictly encouraged the play of iconic.

I'm sorry, are you trying to set limits for when pregens are acceptable to be played?

[TheCowardlyLion]

Yeah, straightwashing makes people uncomfortable. You playing Quinn doesn’t make Quinn your’s, he’s still Quinn, till you go about editing him and we hap a ship of Theseus situation.

What you’re asking for is what the Iconics are, not have ever been.

They’ve always had backstories and personalities. They’re not a blank set of stats to do whatever with.

[Val'bryn2]

There were three that I seem to remember as options, but it has been a while. Pathfinder died out in my area during Covid, and hasn't really recovered.

[Kobold Catgirl]

This is such a weird and embarrassing direction for this thread to go.

Play characters however you want. The iconics exist for two reasons: as pregenerated statblocks, and as examples of how characters interact in the world. The investigator iconic is a statblock for a human investigator, with no sexuality, no motivations, and, really, no name. Quinn is a gay detective who solves crimes and misses obvious romantic hints. Just because you only engage with the character as a generic statblock doesn't mean everyone else does, too.

I'm gonna say it: Making a big deal about playing Quinn as straight on a thread about gay representation is a super weird move. It gives the impression you were hoping to start something, and you immediately replying to criticism with "so much for inclusion" like a prepared comeback doesn't really help that impression.

This is all a dumb time-wasting non sequitur. We're talking about gay representation, and how of the iconics--which are, remember, examples of how characters might behave in the world--gay men may or not be underrepresented among them. You have expressed that you don't think representation among the iconics is valuable because you personally don't engage with them as unique characters. That's genuinely fine. You've made your case. We all disagree with you, so let's move on.

EDIT: Oh, you also seem to be expressing your headcanon that every iconic is bisexual. I think Paizo has said something to that effect--like, "feel free to ship characters whatever way you like, everyone's bi unless stated otherwise"--but simply allowing fans to interpret things however they like isn't representation. Like, definitively, that's not what the word means, because representation is about explicit visibility.

You kind of just seem to be bouncing between whichever argument protects you here. Does representation matter for iconics (thus making "they're all bi" a coherent argument) or doesn't it?

[TriOmegaZero]

Val'bryn2 wrote:

Reminding everyone that, per Paizo's policy, every single one of the characters they are complaining aren't queer enough are, canonically, bisexual?

James specifically doesn't appreciate people using answers from his AMA thread as weapons in discussions, you know.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Alright, I think we can be done here. This is a bad-faith argument and a waste of my time, so I'm out.

Back on topic: I think it'd be really nice to see Seltyiel's rumored queerness made canon. Gay masc gamers deserve their toxic Satanic femboy representation.

[Cori Marie]

If Valeros had a stated sexuality, absolutely it would make me uncomfortable for someone to decide to play him some other way. He doesn't, so your strawman goes out the window. Quinn does.