D&D 5E celebrating pride and lgbtq+ players 2021

[bulletmeat]

Gender-neutral Medieval titles.

• Apprentice, Journeyer (not Journeyman), Master (not Mistress)
• Sovereign or Monarch or Highness (not King or Queen or Emperor or Empress)
• Czar
• Noble or Honorable (not Lord/Lady, Duke/Dutchess)
• Fine folk (not "ladies and gentlemen")
• Priest (not priestess), Pope (not popess)
• Sorcerer (not sorceress)
• Enchanter (not enchantress)
• Witch (not warlock)
• Ancestor or Parent (not father or mother)
• Descendant or Child or Offspring (not son or daughter)

Also, if one uses the title lord (High Lord, Lord-Barron) I think it would work fine for most identifications. I can even easily see Ash-ley holding a shotgun, looking down at her person, and saying 'Hail to the King baby.'

Back in the 2e days I had a female wizard who was open to whatever gender she wanted to be with, though arcane power was her ultimate goal. She used my physical sexuality to get information from a guy (by choice) once as well as give a soul to a succubus that she ended up partnering with and ruling a small pocket universe on the Planes. She was known as Lord-Mage by then.

 

[billd91]

Yeah, it would be, but I'm deeply cynical about corporate pride efforts. I'll honestly be shocked if there ISN'T some sort of D&D logo in pride colors in the offering.

Honestly, I'd like people to get over that. Corporations are always going to do things that make them profit and look good, but in this case, they are calculating that endorsing/catering to a set of minority identities is the wave they want to be on despite the inevitable conservative/evangelical backlash. They're actually choosing the right side of the cultural conflict in public marketing and that's not small potatoes.
Don't forget that less than 20 years ago, states were banning same-sex marriages with broad public support. The country has, in many ways, turned on a freakin' dime on that issue, but it's still vulnerable - particularly in the highest courts. Big corporations probably aren't making the decision lightly.

 

[Gradine]

One thing I'm curious about is how does titles work for trans characters. Like in the real world They/Their for example works for day to day life, but in a D&D setting what do you call them if they become Baron/Baroness, Duke/Dutchess, King/Queen, Czar/Czarina, Emperor/Empress, Priest/Priestess, Sorcerer/Sorceress, is their terminology for gendered titles and other unorthodox pronouns for Trans characters in D&D?

In real life this is unlikely to come up unless you buy land in Scotland, in D&D it's a solid possibility.

First off, I think you're more thinking of non-binary/gender non-comforming than all trans folx, many of whom use the typical gendered pronouns for their correct gender (a trans woman would typically go by she/her, for example).

As for titles/professions, it would really depend on the individual. Some I think would be fine with using the "default" (read: typically masculine) titles, some would use feminine title; others would go out of their way to define their titles as gender non-comforming as well. You might have a Monarch, a Celebrant, an Incantatrix, etc. A typical but by no means universal practice is to add an "x" at the end to donate gender neutrality, i.e; Duchex, Czarex, etc. You might also see the "x" or "z" placed at the beginning of the title: Xemperor, Xorceress, etc.

The idea is not to have a fully defined "third list" to pull titles from; it's to have the character refer to themselves in the way that is most true to themselves.

 

[Yaarel]

Also, if one uses the title lord (High Lord, Lord-Barron) I think it would work fine for most identifications. I can even easily see Ash-ley holding a shotgun, looking down at her person, and saying 'Hail to the King baby.'

Back in the 2e days I had a female wizard who was open to whatever gender she wanted to be with, though arcane power was her ultimate goal. She used my physical sexuality to get information from a guy (by choice) once as well as give a soul to a succubus that she ended up partnering with and ruling a small pocket universe on the Planes. She was known as Lord-Mage by then.

I do think "lord" can work. Dr Who refers to "time lords" and gets away with it.

(Likewise, D&D uses the term "Warlock" and gets away with it.)

Still, when addressing someone, Noble or "my Noble", is probably clearer.

 

[Faolyn]

Keep the focus on the fact they are people while we are trying to find a way to typify, pigeonhole and stereotype them? How about we just have "people"?

Because not all people are exactly the same.

Also, as I and others have mentioned, it's important to show and normalize queer people, not just treat them as "other."

And their sexual preference or gender identity is completely irrelevant to this. You can depict a romantic couple without announcing they are "homosexual people" or "transgender people" or any other type of people. There is no logical reason to even bring this into the discussion unless you want to stereotype them.

Imagine the following plot: The PCs come across an old lady whose husband was kidnapped by ogres. Will the PCs help her?

Is this announcing that the NPCs in question are heterosexual?

Now the following: The PCs come across an old lady whose wife was kidnapped by ogres. Will the PCs help her?

Is this announcing that the NPCs are homosexual?

I have played hundreds of men and women characters in FR settings. Probably about 30% male, 70% female. How/why is it these characters are all assumed to be "cis gendered, heterosexual people/elves/halflings/half-orcs" etc? I have never said nor implied such.

So wait, you think it's possible to play a person of a different sex than you and not resort to stereotypes, but it's impossible to play a person of a different sexuality than you without resorting to stereotypes? How does that work?

 

[Faolyn]

One thing I'm curious about is how does titles work for trans characters. Like in the real world They/Their for example works for day to day life, but in a D&D setting what do you call them if they become Baron/Baroness, Duke/Dutchess, King/Queen, Czar/Czarina, Emperor/Empress, Priest/Priestess, Sorcerer/Sorceress, is their terminology for gendered titles and other unorthodox pronouns for Trans characters in D&D?

In real life this is unlikely to come up unless you buy land in Scotland, in D&D it's a solid possibility.

Ages ago, I found this blog post I found helpful: Gender Neutral/Queer Titles

 

[Steampunkette]

Ages ago, I found this blog post I found helpful: Gender Neutral/Queer Titles

This is actually super important in a way I'm not sure people truly grasp: There have -always- been gender-neutral ways to refer to pretty much everyone at every tier of society. (Except in Latin, which did it's best to gender every single noun and pronoun)

Your Majesty is how one addresses a King or Queen, certainly. But there's a difference for the Majesty's kids:

Your Highness: Any child of Royalty who is not next in line to the throne.
Your Royal Highness: Any child of Royalty who is the Heir to the throne.

Heir, itself, is a gender-neutral term.

Why do we have this kind of specialized neutral term..? Why not have specific terms for Princess who is Heir to the throne? And the answer is:

Because it's just easier. By having a singular term applied to a child of any gender (Like the world "Child") you can refer to any individual who fits that category with the term. So why do we have the term Princess?

Because Latin was awful at literally everything and French is right behind.

Priisemokaps was a proto-italian word for "First Chief" or essentially the most important chief. What we'd think of today as basically a King. Over time, as Latin evolved it became Prī̆nceps (Pronounced Prin-Cheps with a soft i sound like in the word it). It's also why "Prī̆nceps Infernorum" is in the song Personet Hodie even though people think of the referenced character as a king rather than a prince.

But you need another word for First Girl Chief because while Latin has no Articles and 400 different words for "Death" they always -had- to slap a gender on every bleeding noun they could. So some jerknugget said "Prī̆ncipissa!" and everyone cheered. (Meanwhile Heres remained shockingly gender-neutral and developed into Heir in secret)

But then came Germans. Isn't it always the Germans in etymology? And they introduced -their- terms for King and Queen and suddenly the world is in an uproar! The French had only recently "Fixed" Prī̆ncipissa by changing it to Princesse and making Prī̆nceps into Prince. What to do with these lovely words that would otherwise be consumed by the linguistic dominance of German?

Easy. Drop it down a tier.

And that's why we even HAVE words for Prince and Princess.

Etymology is grand, yeah?

 

[imagineGod]

My personal short rant: I am seeing bias in certain things, and feeling frustrated at how differential rules are being applied.

This is actually super important in a way I'm not sure people truly grasp: There have -always- been gender-neutral ways to refer to pretty much everyone at every tier of society. (Except in Latin, which did it's best to gender every single noun and pronoun)

Your Majesty is how one addresses a King or Queen, certainly. But there's a difference for the Majesty's kids:

Your Highness: Any child of Royalty who is not next in line to the throne.
Your Royal Highness: Any child of Royalty who is the Heir to the throne.

Heir, itself, is a gender-neutral term.

Why do we have this kind of specialized neutral term..? Why not have specific terms for Princess who is Heir to the throne? And the answer is:

Because it's just easier. By having a singular term applied to a child of any gender (Like the world "Child") you can refer to any individual who fits that category with the term. So why do we have the term Princess?

Because Latin was awful at literally everything and French is right behind.

Priisemokaps was a proto-italian word for "First Chief" or essentially the most important chief. What we'd think of today as basically a King. Over time, as Latin evolved it became Prī̆nceps (Pronounced Prin-Cheps with a soft i sound like in the word it). It's also why "Prī̆nceps Infernorum" is in the song Personet Hodie even though people think of the referenced character as a king rather than a prince.

But you need another word for First Girl Chief because while Latin has no Articles and 400 different words for "Death" they always -had- to slap a gender on every bleeding noun they could. So some jerknugget said "Prī̆ncipissa!" and everyone cheered. (Meanwhile Heres remained shockingly gender-neutral and developed into Heir in secret)

But then came Germans. Isn't it always the Germans in etymology? And they introduced -their- terms for King and Queen and suddenly the world is in an uproar! The French had only recently "Fixed" Prī̆ncipissa by changing it to Princesse and making Prī̆nceps into Prince. What to do with these lovely words that would otherwise be consumed by the linguistic dominance of German?

Easy. Drop it down a tier.

And that's why we even HAVE words for Prince and Princess.

Etymology is grand, yeah?

Most nouns in French have genders including tables and chairs. Also in Spanish, Italian, Russian, a significant number of major European languages, making English the outlier.

 

[Umbran]

Big corporations probably aren't making the decision lightly.

Consider also that the executive boards of these corporations are still likely dominated by older white guys... and they still are making this pivot. That tells you something about the economics of the situation.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Priest and Sorcerer are currently used by default instead of Priestess and Sorceress for both male and female titles. In theory such can be used similarly by all others, except for Queen, because Queen has a strong history of powerful women rulers in their own right behind it.

Some female leaders actually preferred the title King to Queen interestingly.