| Author |
 Topic  |
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
 Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 19:10:04
|
Well, the tone of the discussion didn't change until one of your earlier posts Aldrick. Everyone else was being respectful. And the post you made about 'diplomacy' just proves my point all the more. But I'm glad to see things have become more civil in the last hour or so. Anyway, as I said earlier, DnD will survive (and I never meant to imply that it wouldn't), I just think they could actually reach a broader audience in the end with a different tact (also explained earlier).
Of course, my opinion regarding political correctness is just that...an opinion (I never said they had some political agenda with their blurb...only that the increasing PC may be problematic). And they have lost a few customers over this (as I've also already pointed out with a personal info). It may very well have a more positive effect in the end...but I prefer as close to 100% effectiveness as possible. I'm thinking that if this increases sales by say 20% that it COULD have been 25% (just an example there) with a more subtle approach.
Don't know if I'm making any sense and no longer care. I'm off to spend time with the family.
Cheers. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
 |
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 19:21:59
|
wotc knows what they are doing..... what a load of manure.
if they knew what they were doing than they would have not done 4e.....
and political correctness is another word to say lie and grin about it,,,,,, well on somethings anyway that will not be discussed here as Sage in all his moderatorness will delete posts and or lock threads.
as was said, that line about Corellon has been in there for some time. that also said it was a line not needed as that part of each person's character is not something that will always be played( if at all) as it would fall under the mature section.....( which even in paizo's rule stated that was something to be discussed at the table iirc)
anyway, moving on..... this thread is going to nowhere fast. Say hello to Courage the cowardly dog when you get there |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 21:47:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Plus, as someone who started D&D during the late 1e/early 2e days, it's a relief seeing how far the game and society in general have come in a couple of decades. Can you imagine what it would have been like if this had shown up in, say, the original Unearthed Arcana?
Something along the lines of:
"D&D is the devils game, a very queer devil. All those young boys spending all that time indoors, together, alone, unsupervised. To say nothing of the horrific things they do to the girls. Their 'Dungeon Master', or DM as the lingo tries to hide it, initiates them in their masochistic Satanic rituals with pacts sealed with blood and fluids where the innocent souls are sworn to eternal servitude to Baphomet the s/he-goat demon. Fear for our youth. Save our children. Only Hell awaits for those who play the game of D&D, in truth short for Devils & Demons."
/sarcasm (in case that escaped anyone).
Not so wise man once say, <"The devil is in ALL of you!">  |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 21:49:34
|
The inclusiveness discussed in the brief passage in the Basic rules is not often easy or necessary to portray in an image or an NPC textual description (it's not relevant most of the time to an adventure). Even if it were, it would be too easy to get loss in the shuffle and volume of information, much as the Corellon mention went unnoticed by some for the decades since publication. Examples can only go so far if the intended widening of perspectives on the issue is not a "policy".
Putting the short blurb in the Basic rules makes it an edition-wide, indeed a game-wide, notion as opposed to an exception that would be forgotten within the pages of an out-of-print book. It's true, stating such is different than actual and accurate implementation, but that's something people will have to hold Wizards to as the edition moves forward. For now, having this in the Basic rules is the right place if it's to be anything at all. |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 01:11:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Who is to say that a cleric can't cure a condition like that, assuming the condition has at it's root a biological cause (for example, homosexuality, or body-brain gender mismatch in some transsexuals)?
?
Wait .. are you really suggesting that in D&D homosexuality should be cure-able like a disease ... ?
Please tell me i've misunderstood ...
What is there to misunderstand? This is a fantasy setting. There are clerics. If homosexuality or gender dysmorphia is biological at its root, then a cleric/magic could fix it.
The fact is that real life sexuality and identity is not the same as fantasy identity and sexuality. In throwing out a few words to placate LGBT people WOTC hasn't considered the in-game implications of the words.
Here we have an instance of 'real life' considerations intruding on fantasy (essentially escapism). It is a slippery slope and will require all kinds of shout outs in the future to whatever identity group is out there.
If WOTC wants to do identity and sexuality in a fantasy context I would support that. |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:25:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Who is to say that a cleric can't cure a condition like that, assuming the condition has at it's root a biological cause (for example, homosexuality, or body-brain gender mismatch in some transsexuals)?
?
Wait .. are you really suggesting that in D&D homosexuality should be cure-able like a disease ... ?
Please tell me i've misunderstood ...
What is there to misunderstand? This is a fantasy setting. There are clerics. If homosexuality or gender dysmorphia is biological at its root, then a cleric/magic could fix it.
I think, redking, that your use of terms like "fix" and "cure" is being interpreted to imply that you believe that homosexuality or being transgendered or intersex is a disorder or disease that needs to be remedied, rather than simply being a state of existence. Your statements could very easily be read to mean that these are problems, and that those problems could be remedied with the correct healing spell. |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:30:37
|
getting a bit to close to RW politics here.
who cares
Sage... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:46:01
|
| This topic, by its very nature, does brush up against real-world politics a lot more than we generally allow... That said, I think if we stick to the topic, and avoid discussing the root causes behind individual differences, we should be alright. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:46:43
|
I think we're all mature enough to at least try to skirt that particular mindfield for the most part.
This has been an informative discussion, and I'd like to see it continue that way. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:56:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Garen Thal
quote:
What is there to misunderstand? This is a fantasy setting. There are clerics. If homosexuality or gender dysmorphia is biological at its root, then a cleric/magic could fix it.
I think, redking, that your use of terms like "fix" and "cure" is being interpreted to imply that you believe that homosexuality or being transgendered or intersex is a disorder or disease that needs to be remedied, rather than simply being a state of existence. Your statements could very easily be read to mean that these are problems, and that those problems could be remedied with the correct healing spell.
We are speaking of a fantasy game, are we not? Or are we speaking of real life now?
In game it is highly likely that homosexuality and gender dysmorphia would be considered a disorder. The precise reason that it would be considered a disorder is precisely due to the fact that, in game, these kinds of things could be cured or fixed (or choose whatever terminology doesn't offend you).
The greater part of gay and transsexual acceptance is due to the fact that it is widely thought that homosexuality or transsexuality cannot be remedied, and thus must be accepted. If there was a remedy to it acceptance would be at a much lower level in the real world.
No one knows what the cause of homosexuality is at this point. What causes homosexuality is not by any means settled science, which is why there is so much conjecture about the matter.
The majority of the gay community seems to advocate the 'gay gene' theory. In this theory a 'gay gene' is either present in some bloodlines, or dormant in all bloodlines and somehow activated, causing a homosexual orientation. Another theory is a pathogen affecting a baby in utero causes homosexuality, and thus with the advancement of science homosexuality is preventable (this is known as the 'germ theory', and is hated by organized homosexual groups. Gays want to be thought to be born gay, but they don't want to be born gay THAT way). Finally there is the theory that gender is entirely socially constructed. Decades ago this theory had some support, but is these days definitely a minority position today.
The point here is that real life is intruding into the fantasy world. If WOTC wants to bring it with a real description of fantasy identity and sexuality, I say bring it. |
|
|
|
JohnnyGrognard
Acolyte
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:25:06
|
Wow this topic is really worked up.
Frankly, I liked the paragraph. Generally, I like my fantasy role playing games having as little "real world" themes as possible. I usually leave it up to the dungeon master if he or she wants to introduce any such political, sexual, or religious points into their game. I always want the focus to be on the game and not social issues. (Unless the DM states, "Hey, I want to try something different as opposed to just monster slaying and treasure gathering".)
With that being said, we are constantly moving forward as a society and the audience of role playing games has grown to immense proportions. It is a great time for gaming because we've seen a new and strong edition of D&D, a wonderful OSR that has been readily acknowledged, and an inclusion of grognards and young players, who are finally coming together and agreeing on systems.
Now within this whole boom of gaming, that audience who is now part of the gaming world all have varied lives and backgrounds. What is the harm in WOTC putting in a little blurb to say "Hey! All are welcome!" It is politely letting us know the gaming world has changed without beating us on the head.
Granted, in reality, we shouldn't need this blurb. At the table, conventions, shops, what have you, we should be welcoming to all walks of gamers anyway, but I see it as a friendly little reminder. I honestly liked it. :) |
Door, Room, Monster, Treasure! |
Edited by - JohnnyGrognard on 07 Jul 2014 04:26:07 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:29:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
In game it is highly likely that homosexuality and gender dysmorphia would be considered a disorder.
In the Realms?
No. Not likely at all.
In other people's games? That depends a great deal on the DM and players.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
The precise reason that it would be considered a disorder is precisely due to the fact that, in game, these kinds of things could be cured or fixed (or choose whatever terminology doesn't offend you).
The existence of a cure presupposes something is already considered a disorder.
Your conclusion does not follow. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:47:24
|
The realms is hetero-normitive. Kings arrange marriages of princes to princesses, not other princes. Are you contending then that a marriage of Kong Azoun to Lord Nasher would not raise any eyebrows in the realms?
Most likely such a match would cause rebellion in both realms.
The real non-sequitur here is that political considerations in 2014 in the real world should be of importance in a fantasy setting. |
Edited by - redking on 07 Jul 2014 04:55:08 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 05:17:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
The realms is hetero-normitive.
No, it isn't.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Are you contending then that a marriage of Kong Azoun to Lord Nasher would not raise any eyebrows in the realms?
The expectations to carry on a line in a place like Cormyr have zero bearing on the wider Realms.
Likewise, the fact that the Realms is not hetero-normative (that is, it does not assume that heterosexuality is the only sexual orientation, or only norm) has no bearing on the particulars of Cormyr's need to keep the Obarskyr line going in order for them to retain power and not lose it to the elves. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 05:25:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by redking
The realms is hetero-normitive.
No, it isn't.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Are you contending then that a marriage of Kong Azoun to Lord Nasher would not raise any eyebrows in the realms?
The expectations to carry on a line in a place like Cormyr have zero bearing on the wider Realms.
Likewise, the fact that the Realms is not hetero-normative (that is, it does not assume that heterosexuality is the only sexual orientation, or only norm) has no bearing on the particulars of Cormyr's need to keep the Obarskyr line going in order for them to retain power and not lose it to the elves.
So the Obarskyrs won't use magical means to remedy the homosexuality of an heir? Or are the Obarskyrs real world 2014 transplants into the realms that are content to see a homosexual son in an unhappy heterosexual marriage?
I don't think you are really understanding what 'normative' means. What is normative for the nobility is going to be normative for the peasantry.
You are trying to shoe horn the real world into the realms, and it doesn't make a lick of sense. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 05:51:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by redking
So the Obarskyrs won't use magical means to remedy the homosexuality of an heir?
I'm no expert about Cormyr, but I know a few things.
As to your question: no, by and large I don't think they would use magical means to change the sexual orientation of an heir to the throne, either out of practical need or because they thought something was "wrong" with the heir.
Depending on which king was sitting on the throne and which Mage Royal was attending that king, I'd wager magical coercion might be used on the heir. Likewise an effort would be made to find a suitable bride (assuming the heir is male) who understood the sexual proclivities of the heir and was sympathetic to his nature, while being entirely loyal to Cormyr.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
Or are the Obarskyrs real world 2014 transplants into the realms that are content to see a homosexual son in an unhappy heterosexual marriage?
As to the first part, and regarding Obarskyrs in general: in all cases no.
As to the last part of your question: it depends on the nature and demeanor of the particular Obarskyr. Given that humans in the Cormyr are not, to my knowledge, hostile to homosexuality, there's a good chance the heir would find and understanding mate.
That he's a bold stag who's rumored to only rut with other bold stags may not be an issue.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
I don't think you are really understanding what 'normative' means. What is normative for the nobility is going to be normative for the peasantry.
By all means pleas share with me your definition of hetero-normative, so that we can both be on the same page.
As to your second sentence: you're assuming this to be the case, but it doesn't hold for the Realms or for Cormyr, to my knowledge.
quote:
Originally posted by redking
You are trying to shoe horn the real world into the realms, and it doesn't make a lick of sense.
By all means, read more about the Realms. I'd start with the "Ask Ed" archives.
You'll be surprised, I think, at what you find.
Happy reading!  |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 07 Jul 2014 05:56:19 |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 06:06:22
|
I won't attempt a quote by quote reply.
Hetero-normative simply means that heterosexuality is considered the 'norm' and mainstream society works around those expectations. For example, when I said that Kings in the realms match princes with princesses, and not princes with princes, you chose to limit the example to a breeding imperative. That was not my intention at all, and you have (probably unintentionally) made a strawman argument out of what I was saying.
In a non hetero-normative society, a second son prince (or whatever) could be married off to another second son prince to seal an alliance between states, such as happens with princes and princesses in hetero-normative societies. If you can give me any instances of the like happening in the realms, then I will be willing to accept your assertion that the realms is not hetero-normative. Instances of tolerance towards homosexual or transsexual individuals does not indicate that a society is not hetero-normative. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 06:46:58
|
Thank you for the definition. It's similar to others I found online, but I think it's safe to say that in the Realms heterosexuality is not widely promoted as being "normal" such that homosexuality is considered abnormal or wrong, or is otherwise something to be tolerated.
The reason I spoke to breeding imperative (as you put it) is because in your example you chose Cormyr. The ability of Cormyr to remain a human kingdom (and to not revert to elven control) is contingent on the Obarskry bloodline surviving. This naturally means breeding.
But it's clear to me now you meant to speak to the wider Realms when you gave your example.
So, your position seems to be that in the wider Realms there can be no alliances forged between states (I'd wager you mean everything from individual city states to entire nations) involving heirs where that alliance is not sealed with a heterosexual union.
Because of this, you assert that all nobility (or basically all people in power) are heterosexual, and so all the "peasantry"* must be hetero because that's what their betters do.
Thus, you say, it follows that the Realms are hetero-normative.
I can imagine a scenario where two city states with homosexual heirs that are of the same gender find common cause, marry off the heirs and then all sorts of interesting machinations take place regarding children.**
I can also imagine the topic of sexuality of heirs being everything from a non-issue to a major headache for the heads of various noble houses living throughout the Realms, but I can't imagine this being something that keeps deals from being made and power joining with power.
Regardless, what goes for the needs of kings, queens, heirs and political alliances vis-a-vis sexuality does not automatically set the social mores and norms for the wider Realms.
Your position is too black and white, and thus too limited in scope.
The Realms, to my knowledge, does not care or worry overmuch about homosexuality. I'm sure their are exceptions and I'm happy to be proven wrong. It wouldn't be the first time it's happened. 
* "Peasantry" is a loaded term. In Suzail, Cormyr, for example, the nobles might well look down on everyone as though they were peasants, but in fact they'd be raising their noses at a long list of upper, middle and lower classes that includes courtiers, super-wealthy merchants, burghers (shopkeepers, landlords, investors, crafters, etc.), journeymen, trusties, fairhands, true commoners (maids, independent house servants, shop assistants and so on) and day laborers, dockhands, hardhands, lowlives and graspers. Keep in mind that Suzail is fairly representative in terms of what "paid living" jobs are in the wider Realms.
** This might make a great question to post in the most recent Ask Ed thread. I'm curious now to learn if any sort of major national alliance have been forged where the marrying off or joining of heirs occurred where both heirs were of the same gender, whether human, elven or dwarven. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 07 Jul 2014 07:00:38 |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 06:57:49
|
This is instructive, a reply from Ed.
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/8384/sexuality-in-the-realms-answer-from-ed-greenwood
"As to sexual attitudes in the Realms, there is indeed local prejudice against individuals who have “different” or “unusual” sexuality—bigotry and a dislike of change and “what’s not usual” is everywhere and is (unfortunately) part of being human.
Specific religions often invoke temporary abstinence as punishments for transgressions against the creed of the faith, but other matters sexual are usually ignored in doctrine, rather than policed by doctrine (consecration or baptism of willing, old-enough-to-choose offspring being an important exception; this is urged and promoted by almost all Faerûnian faiths).
Yet in a polytheistic setting in which everyone “believes in” and worships (in some fashion, even if it’s only “Here’s a prayer, now please don’t bother me today”) ALL of the gods, clergy avoid endorsing discrimination against someone because of sex. Which doesn’t mean they won’t severely speak to someone they think does something inappropriate, like trying to fornicate with grieving individuals at a funeral, or anyone forcing their attentions on someone except a recipient receiving such attentions as part of a ritual to Loviatar or Sharess or Sune or Shiallia the recipient has agreed beforehand to take part in, and knows what this will mean [[in other words, self-chosen submission is acceptable, but being on the receiving end of forced and unwanted sex is not]].
Shiallia wants all creatures to reproduce and multiply, which means fertile females should engage in sex with partners of their choice, regardless of their marital state (and all devout worshippers of the goddess should help in the feeding and rearing of said offspring); it does NOT mean those fertile females have to accept the advances of every passing creature.
In general, “anything goes” in the wilderness, the settled status quo is most valued (and adhered to) in small villages and towns, and as places get larger and have more contact with the wider Realms (market towns, being on caravan routes), the more tolerant and varied sexuality can be found and is tolerated/ignored. Bisexual characters exist in the Realms and always have done, as have “out” homosexual characters, May/December partnerships, polygamy, and just about everything else.
Yet matters sexual are seldom the “big deal” in the Realms that it is in any real-world area dominated by one faith, where clerics of that faith presume to tell others “how to behave.” The polytheistic nature of the Realms is one reason for this, and another is the D&D® game itself, that with its array of sentient races, presents what some would call “bestiality” or other terms for “coupling with other races” as a fait accompli (otherwise, there would be no “half-elves” or “half-orcs”)."
This goes back to my original posting on this thread. That "stuff like homosexuality and gender dysmorphia would be the least of potential controversial lifestyles".
I still assert that this is only an issue in D&D now because gay marriage and the transgender movement is such a big issue in the real world. Because of this I find it intrusive into my 'fantasy world'. If WOTC wants to deal with sexuality and identity, then I prefer that they do it within the context of the realms and fantasy sexuality and identity, rather than as a shout out to real life political considerations. Why speak of only speak of sexuality between man and man when they have not undertaken to speak of sexuality between man and illithid? At least then it would logically fit into the realms. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 07:06:32
|
| Glad you took the time to look around. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 07:21:33
|
This whole issue brings up another can of worms.
Do 'homophobes' (a very problematic word but I can't think of another) have any particular alignment tendency? Is homophobia an evil act? Does homosexuality have an alignment tendency? Transgender feels somewhat chaotic aligned to me.
Are there any homophobic deities? Is Talos the God of storms and homophobia, while Corellon is the God of elves and homosexuality?
The possibilities seem endless. You can replay TV and newspaper stories in the realms. |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 10:25:45
|
I don't think that Dungeons and Dragons has progressed to the point where we could see a god taking homosexuality as a portfolio. For now, I'd see Sune and Sharess as the gods of *all* love and lust.
Even Paizo doesn't have a gay god - they have a few divine beings who represent sexuality but they do not differentiate. They also differ in alignments: Neutral Good, Lawful Good, Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Neutral - off the top of my head. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 15:20:08
|
Red King's posts are… problematical, but he does bring up an interesting point: if you change "fix sexual orientation" to "change sexual orientation," is there magic in the Realms that would do that?
And the answer is likely yes.
Of course, this is complicated by the fact that human sexuality is a spectrum, not black and white. The same would likely be true for other PC races. What would it mean to cast, say, "Invert Sexual Orientation" on someone who was "mostly heterosexual, but also attracted to these few of my same gender?" Or on one of my favorite fictional characters, who was attracted to "soldiers."
I'd imagine most of this magic would have originated with the elves, who would use it both to honor Corellon and to explore and keep fresh sexuality over a centuries-long lifespan. Most of the spells would likely be temporary, with durations lasting from a night up to a few years (these are elves we're talking about, after all). But over time the spells would have also migrated into the human community, and were likely also re-developed into priestly versions for Sharess and Sune.
Though if there are places in the Realms that are intensely homophobic, there might well be an underground of mages who would cast a permanent version on people for a fee. And in those areas, it might well be considered "fixing," as in, "please change this so I don't get burned at the stake."
Personally, I've always thought Mulhorand might be such a land, what with it being so intensely conservative and old-fashioned. It could make for an interesting role-play-heavy campaign, sort of a Realms version of the X-men "cure" plotline seen in the comics and The Last Stand movie. Some would jump at the choice, some would reject it utterly, and then what happens if and when the Mulhorandi government and priesthoods learn about it? It'd be a bit of a different campaign, but could be a lot of fun. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1621 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 16:52:10
|
I've seen enough LGBT people made very happy about this, so to thier smiles and feelings of acceptance and respect by this passage make it worth it to me.
And as for anyone driven out by that paragraph, another excellent reason to have it! Don't let the door hit thier asses on the way out. |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
873 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 17:15:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Red King's posts are… problematical, but he does bring up an interesting point: if you change "fix sexual orientation" to "change sexual orientation," is there magic in the Realms that would do that?
And the answer is likely yes.
Exactly.
I'm strongly against any interpretation that treats sexual orientation like a stab wound, mummy rot or raving drooling madness. The latters can be cured and "fixed" by magic, in the former case there's nothing to cure or "fix".
Now, if we talk about magical coercion than anything goes, but it's clear that any change wrought in this manner overrides the personal freedom of the recipient and it's not a "fix", it's an imposition from outside. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 17:38:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
I don't think that Dungeons and Dragons has progressed to the point where we could see a god taking homosexuality as a portfolio. For now, I'd see Sune and Sharess as the gods of *all* love and lust.
Even Paizo doesn't have a gay god - they have a few divine beings who represent sexuality but they do not differentiate. They also differ in alignments: Neutral Good, Lawful Good, Chaotic Evil and Chaotic Neutral - off the top of my head.
I don't see a need for a god of homosexuality. Sexuality, in general, should encompass all flavors of sexuality. And it's usually the act of sex itself that is strongly venerated, not the sexual preference. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 18:32:20
|
Don't get me wrong; I don't think that homosexual or transgender characters can't exist, I think that the character concept should be a good one if they are introduced.
For example, I would love it if there was a great gay villain. Unfortunately all the gay characters we see in the MSM are saccharine sweet and not representative of a diverse set of world views. I would be more interested for example in tolerant Banites (that don't care about homosexuality as it isn't relevant to the tenets of Bane) opposed to the homophobia of a fertility god (that opposes homosexuality for practical reasons). I bet we won't see gay or trans villains, and until we do this whole 'inclusiveness' thing is a fraud and just shout out and nothing else.
Depending in the society homosexuality could be taboo, or merely a peccadillo. The problematic issue arises when reactions of NPCs are expected to be 100% tolerant and politically correct.
I do not think there is one person here that would accept guilt or blame for calling a female 'she' when that female happens to consider herself a 'he'. Also, that person may ask you to adopt a certain terminology but whether you do or not is up to your own conscience. Any force or pressure applied to alter your own beliefs is nothing but thought control.
If a player in my campaign wants to play a gay or transsexual character then they had better have an excellent character concept, otherwise the request will be denied. Why? Because we are playing together as a group, and if a 'gay' character is just a vehicle for modern political issues then it undermines the whole role-playing experience. This goes doubly so for the 'transsexual' character. If the intention is for the 'transsexual' character to be front and center to the detriment of 'cisgender' characters then it is unacceptable.
Has anyone here seen 'The Crying Game'? I found the scene in that quite realistic when the man finds out that his 'girlfriend' happens to be a man himself.
A peasant that can't read is unlikely to be tolerant. Most likely most parents in the realms will seek a remedy for homosexuality should their children be homosexual. Most people in the 'real world' would seek a cure too. Does anyone remember 'deaf culture'? This was actually a thing, and there was even deaf acceptance like there is gay acceptance today. However a cure was found for most forms of deafness and deaf culture is no more (the end of deaf culture was even called a 'holocaust' by some people). In the fantasy setting of the realms homosexuality has a remedy, and that makes it highly likely that there is no 'gay culture' in the realms. It is quite possible that gay culture in the real would will be eliminated just like deaf culture was, as long as the cause of homosexuality is discovered.
If anyone wants to talk about FANTASY SEXUALITY in the realms, I would love to do that. I hope we can do that.
By the way I am glad that we have a safe place to talk here. I checked out the thread on RPG.net and noticed that quite a few people got banned for dissenting opinion rather than trolling. I think that forums should be able to ban people for any reason, but they should be straight forward about the reason for it. If dissenting opinion on a particular issue is not allowed, for example, they should just say so rather than pretending that dissension is allowed when in fact it is not allowed.
If someone has seen my positing history here, you will see that it is mainly a contribution to the realmslore of Deepspawn, as genetics is of interest to me. I am not concerned about this issue in particular, and stumbled upon it by accident.
If readers here had read my posts on this thread, I noted that the cause of homosexuality is unknown (anyone that tells you with certainty is lying or ignorant). It may be genetic. Or it may be a pathogen or parasite that causes homosexuality. Either way it can be remedied in a fantasy world with clerics and magic. The only way it cannot be remedied is if homosexuality is a choice, and thus homosexuality in the 'real world' and in the 'fantasy world' is at odds.
The only way for homosexuality to be 'equal' to heterosexuality in the realms is for it to be reality equal. That means the distribution of relationships should be roughly 50/50 between heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships. If however homosexuality is a distinct minority of relationships then the society is hetero-normative. In that case even if homosexuality is tolerated, it doesn't mean that it meets widespread approval or even any approval at all.
|
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 18:40:36
|
In no particular order I'll respond to some of what has been said.
1. I think Redking's 'normative' was meant to mean 'most prevalent' rather than a measurement of normal/abnormal. If you take it in that light I think some of what he said makes a little more sense. Redking please correct me if I'm wrong about my assumption of your meaning.
2. Jeremy is spot-on on all the lore regarding Cormyr. Additionally, I think if he poses his question to Ed we will likely find that some alliances indeed have been cemented with same-gender partnerships (and other types, such as transgenders). I only say this because that answer just seems very 'Ed' to me (he's always maintained that the Realms was rather accepting of most sexual preferances IN MOST CASES).
3. Someone proved my point above about being 'glad' that some folks would leave the game over this. And that's just sad (and not 'inclusive' at all). But to each their own I guess, you can't please everyone.
4. Wooley is correct, I think, regarding deities in the Realms being more focused on the act of sex and/or love as opposed to specifically homosexuality et. al. Though now that it was mentioned, I rather like the idea of a demipower with the portfolio of bi/gay/trans etc. love.
5. Hoondatha's comments are spot on methinks. Mulhorand likely would 'officially' denounce such practices, but then I think it would lead to certain problems within their church heirarchies...and that also has a RW extrapolation (and PLEASE don't take THAT the wrong way, I mean no disrespect to anyone's religious beliefs).
6. Redking: I also find the term 'homophobe' distasteful (and this coming from a non-hetero). But the rest of that post doesn't quite make sense to me. Are you implying that sexual behavior should have a pre-disposed alignment? If that is so I think you would be mistaken...both for Ed's idea of the Realms and in the real world. People don't fit into neat little boxes with labels on them (well most don't I think). We TRY to fit people into nice little boxes with labels on them (and I mean this quite literally, our brains are typiclally hard-wired that way). But folks just don't fit molds like we want them to. And Ed's Realms people certainly don't, regarless of the RW.
7. Finally, I've SOMEWHAT changed my mind on how Wizbro handled this situation. I think the statement overall is going to bring in more sales than it loses. As in the blurb may (as an example) lose 4% of sales (from one 'group') yet gain 10% in sales from others...for a net gain of 6%. I still maintain that they could have gone a different route and kept most of that '4%' though. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
Edited by - The Arcanamach on 07 Jul 2014 18:42:01 |
|
|
|
redking
Learned Scribe
131 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 18:55:58
|
The Arcanamach - indeed, and all very well, but STILL no dealing of identity and sexuality, IN THE REALMS!
My opinion, already stated several times, is that homosexuality or gender dysmorphia is likely a much smaller issue than love between man and troll, or orc and illithid, or gnome and aboleth. What about man and simulacrum?
If WOTC wants to do this, then do it properly. If on the otherhand WOTC just wants a shout out to LGBT people, I think it is a waste of space. Where is the shout out to transracial people? What is transracial, you say? People that are of a particular (human) race but consider themselves to be a member of another race. Is WOTC ignoring these people, and denying their existence? Not very inclusive, is it?
I want a discussion of fantasy sexuality and identity. I already know a lot about the real world. I don't need game designers to tell me anything about the subject of real world sexuality. Game designers, please tell me something new. Tell me about sexuality in the realms, not sexuality in the realms as a proxy for real world hot issues. |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:09:06
|
RK: Except the Basic Rules aren't the 5e Realms campaign setting. They're… the Basic Rules. The rules for the game in general. They're pulling examples from various campaign settings, many of which haven't been in print for a long time, but only to provide examples of concrete rules (ie: using Bruenor as an example of character building).
They can't delve into the lore of the Realms. Any lore, whether that's sexuality and gender in Cormyr or the factions in (or even existence of) Mulmaster. It's beyond the scope of the document.
All they're trying to say is that D&D is for everyone, and that includes both players and characters who don't happen to be cis or heterosexual. Maybe we'll find out some specifics of how that inclusiveness works in practice in the Realms when the campaign setting comes out, but until it comes out complaining that they aren't showing what inclusiveness looks like in the Realms is rather silly. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
I think WOTC entered the modern age
Topic Locked
