No Homosexuality in my Campaign?

[Aristotle]

Touchy subject, but I'll give it a shot...

How do you incorporate homosexuality in your campaign world? Don't try to. I'm not saying not to include the ocasional gay character or whatever, but stop trying to find a way to hilight it. If you try to hilight the gay culture as a separate culture from 'normal people' or as a racial tendency, you run the risk of doing so in bad taste and offending potential players who might have otherwised enjoyed playing with you.

Fantasy is not history, but fantasy settings typically have a look and feel similar to one or more real world historic eras. So if you want to 'include' homosexuality, just look to the era that most resembled an area in your campaign world and see how that culture handled the issue. Homosexuality has existed for a long time, and the level of acceptance/tolerance it has had throughout history has been all over the spectrum from conservative societies that considered it an offensive and unnatural act to hedonistic societies that considered it a healthy aspect of human sexuality. It doesn't matter who is 'right'. Just adopt the stance that feels best for the setting, or the area within the setting, that you are working on.

Homosexuality shouldn't need any more justification for existence in a campaign setting than heterosexuality. Sexual preference will rarely play a role in the global scale of things, and isn't really even directly important on a personal scale save for a few circumstances.

How openly gay an individual character acts will be determined by the player/GM's interpretation of that character with consideration for the stance the society of the character comes from has on the issue. In any event, it should have little or no impact on the world at large.

 

[Turanil]

From my perspective, you danced around the fact to being offensive. But this is probably just a matter of comprehending comments different ways.

I got the same impression.

 

[Oryan77]

Another thing to think about is that if you do throw in homosexuality in your game, it's possible that it could cause problems in roleplaying situations and upset your game.

The reason I say that is because you mentioned that all of your players are heterosexual. Of course I don't know what kind of guys they are, but from what I've seen in D&D, males treat social issues in game very childish a lot of the time. Sort of like how guys act when playing female PC's, they think they have to flirt with everything around them. You may take the gay issue seriously, but when the players are introduced to it, they might make a joke out of it. They might react in a way that makes your game less serious than you wanted it to be. They might think that you introduced a gay NPC couple just to add humor to the session and play along with it.

I'd be curious to know how you would be roleplaying these NPC's also. The way you roleplay them will be a BIG factor on how serious your players take it. It just seems like another form of "boys roleplying girls" is about to happen. Sure, a community of NPC's might be gay, but what kind of impact is that going to have on your game if your PC's are all straight? It's possible that those NPC's sexuality may never even come up in a session...they'd be just like any other warrior around. So I don't see the point in implementing this really.

 

[Empyreus]

Vraille says: "The Dragons know, after all they were the gods greatest creations. The Elves know, after all they were created to serve the Dragons. The Minotaurs know (not the MM ones, a home-brewed PC Race). As their god survived the divine war and is the last orginal diety left. Most learned scholars know. They've studied the ancient texts & know the truth."

Okay, so now I'm wondering...did the gods sit all of their creations down and say, "Hey guys, this is why we created you and the world and all the people in it." I'm guessing they didn't. So, while they might be more clued in to things in general, they probably didn't see the gods' world-building blueprints. And even if they did sit them all down and have a big pow wow about it, would any of those original creatures still be alive? And even if some of them are, would they run around and blather it to everybody else or keep it a secret? I mean, the big question that has plagued humanity in the real world has always been "why are we here?" If everybody already knows this, then why are you playing in this world?

For example: In my campaign, I've rewritten the creation myth at least ten times, and for the most part I like all ten versions. I've decided that different cultural groups draw on these different drafts, which gives each culture its own unique background and history...which means the players never know which creation myth is Right. To be honest, I haven't even decided which is the "Right" one myself. If the players ever push the game to a point where I have to decide and let them find out the Truth, that's the end of that campaign. No bigger puzzle to solve than that one right there.

And another thing, you say most learned scholars know the Truth, because they've read the ancient texts. SCARY! I'm guessing that these scholars and their ilk have been passing these down for countless generations, right? I'm sure personal preferences as well as political and social pressures have likely influenced the interpretation of these texts as the eons have gone by. Lord knows that's happened (and is still happening) in the real world!

The more I read this the more I have to question, like half the other people posting, why this is such an issue for you. I mean, you might as well have Big Gay Al's Big Gay Dragon Ride and let your players stumble upon it...hitting the players over the head with the introduction of homosexuality any other way is gonna seem that ridiculous, anyway. It shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Trainz]

Of course I don't know what kind of guys they are, but from what I've seen in D&D, males treat social issues in game very childish a lot of the time. Sort of like how guys act when playing female PC's, they think they have to flirt with everything around them. You may take the gay issue seriously, but when the players are introduced to it, they might make a joke out of it.

That is a very good point.

To return to my example, my previous bisexual character was quite manly and heroic. I was actually the leader of our group (it just happened that way). I didn't play him like a flaming caricature. That would have been an offense to homosexuals in general, and to my fellow players in particular.

Hetero or Homo, you have to be playing with mature players in order to consider sexuality in RPG's. I don't mind if it DOES happen that a female character is played like a whore (these types do exist), but if it is done ad nauseam and childishly, well that's wrong.

 

[Treebore]

If you never specifically stated that homo sexuality is NOT in your game then there is no need to "introduce" the concept. Just do what people do in real life, realize that somewhere behind the scenes/off screen there are homosexual people.

If you have a player who wants to play a gay character, let them. Just tell them that they will have to quit playing it if you determine it is to disruptive to the rest of the group. I've had only two or three people ever play a gay character in my games and they/we had fun with it. As a potentially interesting side note, the gay players I have had in my groups never expressed an interest in playing a gay character. Don't know why, I never asked, or remember the answer if I did.

 

[Malic]

Your examples cover VERY few factors in the overall scheme of how straight/gay couples functions in society.

Exactly! That's the point! And you know why? It's because we are not trying to compare them. We are not having a discussion about the merits or otherwise of homosexuality - in fact we are avoiding that like anything, to keep the thread open.

FWIW, I don't think everything needs to be designed in specially, with free will involved, but if you want to, the Greek example could be useful.

 

[Darkness]

Sure, a community of NPC's might be gay, but what kind of impact is that going to have on your game if your PC's are all straight? It's possible that those NPC's sexuality may never even come up in a session...they'd be just like any other warrior around. So I don't see the point in implementing this really.

Yeah, if it doesn't come up, it's just background color. Of course, many GMs like having detailed cultures and NPCs... *shrug*

There are many situations when it could come up, though. For example:

For example, a noble's enemies might kidnap his/her same-sex lover. Maybe the PCs are then asked to rescue that person.

Swearing revenge for the death of your lover is also common in fantasy. This lover can very well be of the same gender. Considering how much a typical D&D group fights, somebody just might swear revenge against the PCs.

And so on. The possibilities are many.

 

[JackGiantkiller]

To answer what I perceive as the original question:

If (as in much of history) your combat forces are predominantly male, then look to certain actual periods and practices as instructive. In both ancient Greece and Rome, homosexual relationships formed in the military as a matter of course. The men did in fact marry and produce offspring, but they loked to members of their own sex for long term sexual and romantic relationships. In military units this sometimes led to permanent official pairings as sheild brothers, which were sometimes considered more effective than heterosexual troops because each member of the pair would fight more fiercely in defense of their loved one. IIRC, there were entire units composed of such teams in both Greece and Persia at one time, called Sacred Bands. In addition, certain extremely famous heroes had lovers who accompanied them on the battlefield: Achilles and Patroclus, Hercules and the fellow who was washed off the ship forcing him to dive after in the Argonauts.

So, from a certain point of view, at least according to certain real world cultures, homosexuality was perfectly suitable for races born and bred to be warriors.

(Please do not interpret this as being either in favor of, or against, any set or subset of sexual practices in real life.)

 

[barsoomcore]

From what I've seen in D&D, males treat social issues in game very childish a lot of the time. Sort of like how guys act when playing female PC's, they think they have to flirt with everything around them.

It's true, people should play the sorts of games they think are fun.

I definitely do NOT see what you see -- what you're describing sounds more like TEENAGE behaviour than MALE behaviour. The people I play with don't have those kinds of problems. And as a DM (and a DM of somewhat female-centric campaigns), I'm playing female characters all the time, and as far as I know I do reasonably okay job of it. No worse than I do of the male characters I play, at any rate.

And I know guys who have played female PCs, and have done so myself, and it was as fun as playing a male character. It wasn't all stupid and immature. Or if it was, we had fun anyways.

But if your players don't like playing certain kinds of games, you shouldn't be surprised if they, um, don't like playing those kinds of games. Nothing says you have to run games they like, of course.