Sexuality in your games.

[Aikuchi]

This is true… I think I am going to have to seriously reevaluate the way the whole multiple wives concept works. I was hoping to give women more power in a marriage than this, but now I am leaning toward having all the power reside with the first wife and having subsequent wives subservient to her. This would allow the nobility to take more than one wife, without fear of the first female losing power.

Its mostly tradition that dictates that men of affluence or considerable power and ranking take multiple wives (leaning to heavy patriachal society - in governing), but the domain of home, hearth and other more essential, mundane matters are the province of women. -traditionally-, with a 'reason' that men care little or are ill equipped for such matters.

The first wive gains 'helpers' as well as ranking for each wive after her. To keep some power in the family, each elder wife would love to get pick of the next wife, choosing a "marriageable servant" or sorts. There is also the bringing of more children into a home. and sometimes 1st wives have an extended right to claim the younger wives children as her own heris (if she is unwilling ir unable to produce heirs). There is very little altruistic (?) or generous benefits to being in a family with several wives. Like most relationships for multiple partners (undisclosed) - its a power play for dominance. Familial politics plays a greater role with one clan/family to the next depending on size of faily (including exended wives and networks). Each wife after the 1st gains less and less power, demored to a more servantlike state.
Unless they die in succession, which is why poisons are so much preferable (giggles).

But what do I know - I dont have muiltiple wives.
I only live in a society that practices such.

 

[DarkKestral]

Another thing to think about is that, in political games, the IMPLICATION of who is sleeping with who is more important than the act, in many ways, so don't necessarily worry about whether or not indvidual characters are likely to have homosexual or bisexual tendencies and relationships, rather focus instead on what the fallout is when things tend to implicate NPCs and PCs in disapproved-of relationships of various types be they sexual or not. The duke favoring the vassal may not be homosexual, and the vassal may be his bastard son that he likes because the vassal's not really a boot-licker, like his actual heirs. However, he may appear homosexual, because no one seems to find him in relationships with women. (Perhaps he's the sort that doesn't "kiss and tell") While sexuality itself is all well-and-good as a concept to introduce, societal class relationships are often more important. A culture that is incredibly accepting of homosexuality and tends to romanticize homosexual relationships while marginalizing heterosexual ones (the Greeks are a good example of this, actually) may still find such a relationship wrong because the vassal is of a lower social class than the acceptable minimum for the duke to have any sort of apparent relationship with, sexual or not. A culture that isn't accepting of homosexuality may find it wrong because the vassal is a bastard child of the duke. In neither case was the specifics of the sexuality of the duke necessarily the important factor. So, in practice, sexuality can also be hand-waved if you use some deftness and skill in 'cutting away' at the right moments. If it's open, the PDA can be described as "hand-holding and hugging are common signs of affection, regardless of gender. Public kissing, however, is rare, and viewed as shameful." Note, at no time, did I mention any actual sexuality, but at the same time, you've already got a good idea of how this culture approaches affection. If you need to go further, than you can, but I would argue that in most cases it's not needed. Sex CAN stay in the bedroom, believe it or not.

However, class views of marriage and of sexual propriety are a bit more important than straight sexuality. (yes, it was a bit of a pun.. this topic's a bit heavy and could use some humor) Historically, there have been three basic versions of the intentions of marriage: A) Marriage should be romance B) Marriage should provide for procreation C) Marriage should help create power blocs. Social class also had a split: Lower class, middle class, and upper class.

Lower social classes historically have favored a combo of A and B rationales. Middle classes, most often the A and C combo. The upper classes, the B and C combo of rationales. While there have been variants, these have been traditional. The "middle class" has largely existed only since the late 1700's or so, and as a result, in most societies, the sexual habits of the rich often diverge from the rest of society quite a bit. Variously, the rich have romanticized homosexuality while commoners often practiced mostly heterosexuality, and the rich have also romanticized heterosexuality when commoners didn't care, were bisexual, or were homosexual in general tendencies not associated with procreation. Additionally, bastardy and incest have been common at times among the rich when they weren't among the general masses and vice versa. Assume, then, that rather than homosexuality/heterosexuality being the big division of how people define their sex lives, they define it by social class.

Thus, rather than put any possible 'X is odd" onus on sexuality, assume some element of society will always think what they view as the worst possible crime against the social order is happening when they see comparatively odd behavior that might be sex-linked. If you don't intimate directly someone's orientation, you can also gauge the reactions of players without needing to bust them over the heads with the idea that there might be GLBT characters in the game ahead of time. Of course, that STILL might backfire, depending on the social views of players, but if they're that strongly against sex outside of marriage, it's probably a reasonable assumption in the overall American culture at this time that they'll also be against the presence of GLBT characters in-game. Of course, your milage may vary...

 

[Kristivas]

My main problem would be having one of three types of players, the "eww gross" player, the offended player, or the player that stalks the lesbian to try and catch her "in the act". The first player wouldn't make it into my group in the first place, the latter player would be penalized (I'd consider such action as OOC), and the second type of player can hopefully be reasoned with.

Why would you penalize the player of the character who stalks the lesbian to try and catch her? In a world of fighters and barbarians and whatnot, I think this would be a great roleplaying tool. If you're going to push the fact that there are so many gay/bi relationships in your world, I wouldn't fault someone for having their character go on a lesbian-hunt. With it being so common, I can't imagine testosterone-charged warrior (or voyueristing[sp] rogue) types NOT wanting to seek out such.. things..


I didn't read through everyone's replies, but here's the only experience one of my groups ever had with the subject during play.

We let someone DM who had yet to do so, and the game started out fine. Then, it turned out we needed to get the left half of an ancient shield from an eccentric noble, who's great grandfather had taken it from the field of a battle many years ago, after it was split by a demon lord.

Pretty interesting plot, we were really getting into the game. Our character reached the noble's castle and met with him. It turns out, he had a little 'thing' for the paladin (highest charisma, also a he). This nobleman professed his love for the paladin, and declared he would give the half of the shield to our group if one of two conditions were met. One, was that he would have his way with the paladin for a night. The other was a duel to the death. It was then impressed upon the group how much of a kick-ass warrior this nobleman was.

The real problem was this: the paladin's player had a serious dislike for the homosexual lifestyle. He wasn't outright hateful towards them or anything, he was just one of those guys "you can do your own thing, but keep it far away from me". So, you can probably guess how it turned out.

He accepted the duel and was losing. Throughout the battle, the nobleman kept blowing kisses and whatnot. As soon as our paladin fell (he refused to give up and was determined to kill the guy.. I think it sparked something internally, but then again I'm no psychologist) the rest of the party rushed the dueling area, promptly killed the guy, managed to save the paladin before he hit negative 10, and ended up escaping the castle with the left half of the shield (after having to kill 20 or so guards).

But, by now, the paladin's player was really really mad. He almost beat the hell out of the DM. The game ended right there, and it was quite awhile before we played again.


Now, you might think to yourself, "So? Those guys just aren't mature enough for that kind of gaming and my group is." and you'd probably be right. Still, up to that point, we'd been able to handle just about every other kind of scenario you can imagine. It just kinda blew me away at how fast things degenerated.

 

[ARandomGod]

I am not concerned about how they feel about the issue personally. I am concerned about it being a distraction. I am not one who is interested in having PC's fall in love and have various romances, yet if one did choose to play a bi-sexual or gay character... would it be a distraction to others?

I suppose it would depend on the players. The overall maturity level and potential homophobia.

I am interested in hearing about the experiences of others in the community. Have you DMed or played in any games in which there were gay / bi-sexual NPC's or PC's? If so, did it distract the group or cause unnecessary problems?

Yes, I have, it's never caused overt problems for games I've GM'd or games I've been in where that subject has been in the game. Indeed, I'd find it rather odd in a well developed world if there wasn't at least some bi or gay population. Whether you'd ever encounter that at a PC is a different story, but it should be there somewhere.

 

[freebfrost]

I am not concerned about how they feel about the issue personally. I am concerned about it being a distraction. I am not one who is interested in having PC's fall in love and have various romances, yet if one did choose to play a bi-sexual or gay character... would it be a distraction to others?

If that kind of interaction is not a focus of your game, why does it matter? So, if sexuality isn't have a part in your game, it shouldn't matter.

Do you RP bad cases of gas or constipation in your game? If not, do you want to consider adding that level of reality to the game? If so, why?

It's the same deal with sexuality.

I am interested in hearing about the experiences of others in the community. Have you DMed or played in any games in which there were gay / bi-sexual NPC's or PC's? If so, did it distract the group or cause unnecessary problems?

Yes, I've DMed such, but the game did have a focus on these things, so it was a normal part of the gameplay. And no, it didn't cause any distractions. My group is (mostly) mature - other than the occasional good-natured jibe (which would happen with straight characters too), it was unremarkable.

 

[freebfrost]

He wasn't outright hateful towards them or anything, he was just one of those guys "you can do your own thing, but keep it far away from me".

But, by now, the paladin's player was really really mad. He almost beat the hell out of the DM. The game ended right there, and it was quite awhile before we played again.

Not "outright hateful" you say? Are you sure about that evaluation?

Because that doesn't sound like someone who is cool with homosexual themes. For example, I'm personally cool with the "do your own thing" as far as religious beliefs, but if my DM cornered me into a Christian/Buddhist/Hindu (pick one or add your favorite) in game, I don't think I'd be jumping him with bad intentions after the game ended... :\

 

[Kristivas]

Not "outright hateful" you say? Are you sure about that evaluation?

Because that doesn't sound like someone who is cool with homosexual themes. For example, I'm personally cool with the "do your own thing" as far as religious beliefs, but if my DM cornered me into a Christian/Buddhist/Hindu (pick one or add your favorite) in game, I don't think I'd be jumping him with bad intentions after the game ended... :\

Well, not 'outright hateful' that I'd ever seen. I guess he was angry the DM forced his character into a situation he was uncomfortable/offended with. I honestly couldn't say. Before I got a computer and the internet, during my teenage years (when the game happened), I also thought homosexuality was "bad" and "gross" and whatnot. It took me meeting actual gay people to learn otherwise.

Then again, I did live in West Virginia.

 

[freebfrost]

Well, not 'outright hateful' that I'd ever seen. I guess he was angry the DM forced his character into a situation he was uncomfortable/offended with. I honestly couldn't say. Before I got a computer and the internet, during my teenage years (when the game happened), I also thought homosexuality was "bad" and "gross" and whatnot. It took me meeting actual gay people to learn otherwise.

Then again, I did live in West Virginia.

Having been born there and stuck across the Ohio River from it for much of life, I sympathize...

I understand the anger in being railroaded, but that's a bit extreme. I think there was much more going on there other than the old "DM forcing the player to do XYZ" thing. Again, I've been railroaded before and can't recall one time I tried to beat up the DM for it.

 

[Aaron L]

Ive never given it much thought, but Id include gay characters in the world. To do oterwise would be like having no redheads or lefthanded people or something. Homosexuality exists as a part of humanity and to exclude it would be odd. Now as to weather elves or dwarves would have homosexuals is also something to think about, but since they are still biological sapient beings (and humanoids to boot) I imagine it occurs among them as well.

But in a lot of situations it isnt going to be an issue. Ive had a pretty good friend for almost 2 years now that I recently learned was gay. It just never came up. So it may just never arise in conversation or adventuring with side NPCs.

As for a PC, whatever the player wants is fine.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Before I got a computer and the internet, during my teenage years (when the game happened), I also thought homosexuality was "bad" and "gross" and whatnot. It took me meeting actual gay people to learn otherwise.

Then again, I did live in West Virginia.

Let me just offer you my respect for being open-minded enough to change long-held opinions, and being strong enough to admit that you once held opinions that you no longer support.