D&D 5E 5e's new gender policy - is it attracting new players?

[SuperZero]

I only mentioned the hair to emphasis that not all gay guys are shaved metrosexuals. If you take a walk in Castro (San Francisco), you'll see some extremely manly looking dudes holding hands.

So you didn't at all read the post you were quoting, then.
That's about the opposite of what I said. A lot of characters can exist without ever having their orientation mentioned or implied. It is absolutely false that it never happens. They don't have to be straight every time it is mentioned.

By love I meant romantic love, not professional. If I remember correctly, in ancient Greece, a master and his apprentice were often romantically involved and it was considered normal. It's an example of society where homosexuality isn’t a taboo.

Better idea of a setting where homosexuality isn't taboo: Don't make homophobia a major setting element. All I have to do is not include something. That's it.
Homosexuality isn't an alien thing. Just... don't exclude.

Even if you don't have players that fit any of these or other titles...

And don't think you don't just because you don't know about it. For some strange reason they don't always want to tell everyone.

 

[Dire Bare]

I feel like transgender identity is a modern thing, and not really a good fit for the kind of fantasy games that people tend to associate with D&D.

This has already been addressed in the thread, but . . . . Sooooooo wrong . . . .

Gay, bisexual, and various transgender orientations have been in existence as long (if not longer) than homo sapiens has existed as a species. And many different cultures, both past and present, have acknowledged this, sometimes even in positive ways!

The idea that transgender is a "new thing" is laughable. To be so open and accepting about folks being trans is relatively new in modern American culture, but that's something different.

 

[Dire Bare]

So, is D&D, by being much more open than they have been in the past, beginning to draw in from a more diverse group of players in the LGBTQ community?

In my anecdotal experience (what other experience could I have?) I think the D&D hobby has long been rooted in the white male hetero assumptions of the fantasy literature that spawned it. However, at the same time, the D&D hobby has long been a refuge for "freaks & geeks" of all stripes, and has been a relatively safe haven for many gay, lesbian, and trans folks over the years . . . . well, depending on play group.

The statement on gender inclusivity in the PHB has made many folks already involved in the D&D hobby feel more accepted, and that's good enough for me right there. It also has drawn folks to the hobby who were "fantasy-curious" and now see the D&D hobby as more modern, mainstream, and friendly, both hetero and non. And, IMO, it's also a shot across the bow for intolerant folks who happily discriminate against those with different orientations than what they are comfortable with. D&D is now "officially" inclusive and tolerant and wants everyone to feel safe to join in on the fun!

Has the statement brought in new gamers by the truckload? Probably not, and that's okay too. The gender inclusivity statement made me smile, made my friends smile, and has broadened the appeal of my favorite game. Win-win all around.

 

[Dire Bare]

Wife is a female partner. If Mr. X's wife is a dude then the proper term is husband. The phrasing should have been "Mr X's spouse is a dude".

Well, actually . . . . sure, the dictionary definition and traditional cultural understanding of the term "wife" refers to a female. But folks in the gay community have long chosen to use the term to refer to their spouses. Not all do of course, but many do so. I've had several gay couple friends where neither identified as female, but one was more feminine than the other and was referred to as the "wife", and the more "butch" partner as the "husband". I've seen lesbian couples do this too, from the opposite direction.

 

[Dire Bare]

So people who disagree with you ("Argue that such things are unnecessary") are a "problem" in your book? IE dissent is labelled as a problem?

Oh come on. It's not that folks disagree that's the problem. It's a problem when they stubbornly insist that there IS NO problem, and actively resist efforts towards equality and inclusivity.

 

[MechaPilot]

These postmodern delusions of "equality" have no place in DnD either. There is no "equality" in DnD. FFS we have classes and levels. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence should be able to figure out that a 1st level character is NOT "equal" to a 5th level character. You want equality? Then YOU go fight the dragon! Take your 1st Level, low-Strength havin' butt to the cave and you fight the dragon. Your strength is not equal to mine. Your hit points are not equal to mine. The dragon will kill you because you're weak. All of that kumbaya bull crap needs to die in a fireball because it has no place in DnD.

There is a great deal of equality in D&D. All characters require the same amounts of XP to level. There are no stat adjustments for gender. There are no race or gender requirements for classes. The default according to more than one edition is that males and females have equal status (though individual societies may have less egalitarian cultures if described as such). 5e has all classes receiving the same proficiency bonus with skills and weapons at the same levels.

Your example of equality meaning that a high level character and a low level character is flawed because it fails to account for the effort put in by the high level character. However, that doesn't mean there is inequality. The low level character could become high-level by putting in that same amount of effort (i.e. earning that same amount of XP).

When you play DnD you find the threat and you kill it. Then you take all of their property and you're a hero. That's DnD!

Except for when you don't and it's still D&D.

Your explanation of what D&D is completely leaves out any non-combat resolution. It is no less D&D if you simply steal and destroy the McGuffin the Lich needs to magically slaughter and reanimate an entire city. It is no less D&D to convince the commander of an enemy legion to turn against his evil lord, or to come to the rescue of a town being pillaged by another of that lord's legions.

The only thing worse than a pedophile is a Social Justice Warrior who makes every perversion their moral imperative. And that's precisely what this thread is about. It's about taking something that is a fringe element of any society and pushing it into the forefront of a game that isn't about social issues and soup kitchens.

I see Social Justice Warrior bandied about on the internet, and it's always sad and funny to me. The last I knew, justice and the pursuit thereof were good things. It's interesting how a term that by the casual definitions of each element could easily be applied to Ghandi, MLK, and Susan B. Anthony has been twisted into a pejorative.

Being LGBT is not a perversion. LGBT persons may not have the numbers that straight, non-trangendered people have, but that makes them no less deserving of respecting their basic human dignity than straight, non-transgendered people. It's also with noting that things can be "fringe" because the non-acceptance of them pushes them to the fringes of society. This is true not just of bad things, but also of good things, because a society's values can cause them to shove aside other values like liberty and privacy.

Oh, and "worse than a pedophile?" Really? Just by weighing the effects of both on the lives that have been touched by them disproves that premise.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

I will say I have never fit in with most people. I have my own still unresolved issues, but I wish back when I opened up my first book back in the late 90's it had something like that in it... I think the inclusiveness is perfect.

 

[discosoc]

This has already been addressed in the thread, but . . . . Sooooooo wrong . . . .

Gay, bisexual, and various transgender orientations have been in existence as long (if not longer) than homo sapiens has existed as a species. And many different cultures, both past and present, have acknowledged this, sometimes even in positive ways!

The idea that transgender is a "new thing" is laughable. To be so open and accepting about folks being trans is relatively new in modern American culture, but that's something different.

My point is, D&D has never really been meant to take on social issues like transgender identity. That's not to say it can't support players who want to make that an important part of their game (either through the story being told or the players behind the characters), but I don't think trying to bake sexual orientation and identity into the core rules is the right thing to advocate.

That's a setting issue, and one where gender roles will probably be very different between them. For example, playing a game set in the Wheel of Time setting would have quite different gender norms and expectations compared to A Song of Ice and Fire. I think a lot of people here are confusing D&D which is a rules framework that requires a setting, with other RPG games that combine the two (such as Vampire: The Masquerade). People are even comparing Pathfinder to 5e as an example of how a company can be LGBT-friendly without actually acknowledging that the core Pathfinder rules really aren't that different. All the stuff LGBT stuff they talk about is located in the APs and other supplements; not the rules.

 

[Lanliss]

I fear this thread would go on just as long as it already has if it was talking about acceptance of LGBT in a setting book, instead of a paragraph of the PHB. I do not think that can be considered a solution.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The guy who wrote the rules for 5e is a happily married gay man. And a genuine stand up guy too who I have a lot of respect for. But I'm supposed to believe that this happily married gay man is part of the problem for objecting to have specifically called out GLBT NPCs in the books? That's what's being argued by some here, that if you don't worry about it, then you're objecting to it. And if you're not specifically making an effort to call attention to it and include it, then you're part of the problem. I'm pretty sure that's the opposite of how I would describe Jeremy.

Come on now. The whole point behind NPCs is to only give you enough info as it fits in the plot, and it's the DM's job to flesh out anything else. Is Leosin or Talis (from HotDQ) gay? Straight? They are whatever you want them to be. That's the whole point of playing a game with your imagination. But for 99% of gamers, sexuality never comes up or is an issue, so why devote man hours and page count to something that is easily resolved at the table by the DM and has no bearing on the adventure itself? I don't recall the sexuality or gender identification of anyone in the adventure paths.

And I suggest people read this interview on the subject by JC and MM