Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 02:03:20 PM
During the 2e-era, I think it was highly suggestive. I just ran with it. My players thought it was cool how I handled it, I kept it discrete because POWER - ruling without producing heirs is/was and issue in monarchies etc. In fact that was at one point one of the sub-plots of our long-standing campaign, some of the PC's having become powerful enough to be in her orbit finding someone to potentially fulfil her monarchial duties with. In the end she ended up adopting an infant the PC's rescued...

So yeah, *I* made her gay overtly. Again, it's implied, and I simply contextualized. And I think that's how it should be. This is why Thirsty Sword Lesbians exists as it does - its not trying to look like what the Realms of 1e/2e era is trying to present.

I don't think it's even implied. More the possibility was left often, without any real emphasis on it.

With hindsight, particularly with what we've learned about Ed Greenwood's campaigns, what festhalls really are, and so; I think it's blindingly obvious that it was both very deliberate and intended from the start, and not a retrofit. But based just on the FRA, you had to make the leap yourself. They weren't really helping you. This wasn't a sly wink, it was an elision.

Which I'm fine with. Author-insert sexuality can be as creepy as creepy gamers make sexual jokes at the table. A game aimed at a mass market audience shouldn't assume that level of intimacy with the readers, or between gamers; that's something for each group to decide. That doesn't mean you have to hide homosexuality or similar relationships, but it does mean it should be treated like other forms of sexuality. And in D&D, explicit heterosexual relationships are rare to the point of almost being nonexistent, outside of chaste references to marriage. The few exceptions are usually things like lusty pirates or misbehaving princesses, where it's one of the most prominent parts of their character. And Vaerna and Yanseldara aren't that type. The main difference between 30 years ago and today is it's more acceptable to throw in a few marriages where the couple may not be a man and a woman (I'm phrasing it that way because whether an NPC was male or female wasn't always stated).

Yeah - I took it that way.

I agree, either way it's fine. It's not intruding on the assumptions of the setting and it's left to the GM's and players to go wherever they want with it.

I don't want "modernisms" in my fantasy Realms settings that are informed by things not appropriate to the pastiches that the Realms pulls from. And if you're going to try and pull that off, do it with the understanding that it has to be good.

I don't *really* know what "Representation" means coming from the Left, because all their examples since this term have become a "thing" in the entertainment world already existed - it's called Tokenism.

There were excellent examples of representation already extant in pop-culture, it's pathetic that rank and file consumers side with the very corporations that have convinced them their Tokenism has some value, vs. creators in the past that tried to deftly navigate those waters when it was far more difficult and challenging to produce something good that was accepted and consumed. Now if you don't accept it - you're a monster. The nuance of these standards is lost, and the use of first principles completely missing.

Quote from: Pat on October 04, 2021, 10:38:58 AM

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
Again - since D&D has always been traditionally pretty tepid on sex in their game - even as early as 2nd Edition they had gay characters (the rulers of Elversult, which coincidentally is where some of my longest campaigns were situated. Yanseldara and Lady Hawklyn were prominent NPC's in my own campaign for *decades*).

Did they ever explicitly say Vaerna and Yanseldara were gay, in 2e? I only have Forgotten Realms Adventures, which left room for that interpretation, but it required quite a bit of extrapolation to get there. Checking, the most suggestive part is a statement that Vaerna is "Yanseldara's deeply trusted companion, strong right arm, and former adventuring comrade", and that they live together in the "Ladytowers". So really nothing. Gay? Not gay? Up to you. Which is par for the course, when it comes to all forms of sexuality in early D&D.

To be fair there was only so far you could go in the early 90s. We'd just spent a decade defending our hobby's existence, and had to skirt certain lines. This was before gay characters were common on TV, and before the word itself stopped being a slur. D&D was really pushing the envelope, as much as it could I think.

I learned more about what women suffer, what it's like to be a minority, and what it's like to have power and privilege in Faerun and Krynn than I ever did the real world. I knew what they meant by Ladytowers. Do you have any idea how much giggling happened across geeky basements at that single word?

Huh huh. Huh huh huh. Ladies. In a tower.

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
...
Again - since D&D has always been traditionally pretty tepid on sex in their game ...

It always has, and still is in their best interest to be so.

Tolerance is not Acceptance.

When you only have the former, yet act as if you have the latter, and start to shove it in peoples faces...

You get This:

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
...
SJW's are playing with fire. Representation is earned not demanded. No one owes anyone a spot on the stage - you want representation: go make the thing worthy of people's attention and money. ...

Because This:

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 10:03:24 AM
Don't be a parasite on established cultures at their own expense. <--- this is something SJW's don't understand. BEING an SJW can only happen because of the cultural structures that they are trying to tear down. Once those things are gone, the whole SJW concept will, itself, get destroyed by the SJW's themselves, if not from the backlash they will create.
...

I know a lot of people hope that if the SJWs are beat, that things will go back to a nice middle of the road normal.

But historically that is just not how these things tend to work out.

I think that for purposes of enjoying running water, flushing toilets, and a working electrical grid: Some people will have to make some hard choices about who they're going to have to side with to beat the SJWs.

As someone that has lived without running water, an electrical grid, and comes from a culture whose cuisine most American's would call "offal" and "trash" - I'll be perfectly fine.

My newfound neighbors, that grew up on participation trophies, easy-mode gaming, and fast-food and not working, will learn the true meaning of competition.

Ideological cannibals are not the same thing as actual cannibals.

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 09:11:08 PM
As someone that has lived without running water, an electrical grid, and comes from a culture whose cuisine most American's would call "offal" and "trash" - I'll be perfectly fine.

My newfound neighbors, that grew up on participation trophies, easy-mode gaming, and fast-food and not working, will learn the true meaning of competition.

Ideological cannibals are not the same thing as actual cannibals.

By being fine won't you also be a target? One of the hallmarks of every socialist / communist regime is the continual scapgoating of the next group. If you have money or resources they'll just take it. Obviously you didn't earn it because ________________.

The SJWs will run down your privilege dance card, and if they find nothing they'll just use the White Supremicist label. Doesn't matter what you actually look like, do, or have said.

If resources become an issue, as increasingly seems like it will very soon, then they'll use whatever flimsy logic necessary to take from the haves. Those who had the foresight to prepare will be prime targets.

@jaeger points out that a lot of disparate groups are going to need to band together to prevent this from happening. I already see that coalition growing. The threat is real. Ruining our hobbies is one thing, but we're crossing a whole other scary corner, and I'm pleased to see more people around me waking up to that fact. I choose to take a hopeful view.

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 03:11:42 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 04, 2021, 02:33:40 PM
I fundamentally disagree that WotC is coercing people by including any sort of content in their modules - whether that's gay NPCs or anything else. Whatever they want to print in their modules is just fucking words on a page. No one is being coerced by the printing of fictional game content.

So you're making my point - it's "shut up and keep buying products, or you're a Nazi". Or don't buy them at all. It's absolutely coercion to anyone that is a consumer of D&D products that doesn't agree with this stuff. And if you're going to engage publicly about our content, expect to be shunned.

OK, so from what I'm understand here -- you're saying that it's not the content of the module that's coercion, but you think that shunning is coercion? That makes a little more sense to me, but I still wouldn't call it coercion.

From my view, being shunned by group X isn't taking anything away from me. Over my life, I've been used to not being invited to the popular crowd. They don't owe me anything, and I don't owe them anything. If they don't want me, I'd prefer to play with other people anyway. My tastes have rarely been very mainstream in terms of RPGs, so I often had to stretch to find people to play with - and that's fine.

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 03:11:42 PM
Edit: Remember - people were ALREADY playing D&D long before WotC went woke and took over. When they started doing this shit in D&D people have been speaking up against it - we're here RIGHT now because of it. And look, we're multiple pages into this thread and not a single good example of why WotC brand of "Diversity" or "Representation" has been presented as being GOOD for the hobby.

I'm still waiting. When I ask for "is it good?" it's deafeningly silent. So which is it? And why?

I've already answered before about this. I consider the question to be bullshit because there's no clear definition of "diversity" - it's a buzzword that can mean whatever positive or negative meaning the person considers it.

I consider WotC's products in general to be good for the hobby because some people enjoy playing them. I likewise consider OSR products good for the hobby, because some people enjoy playing them. This includes SJWs enjoying playing the latest Ravenloft book, and it includes people here enjoying Lion & Dragon.

Quote from: The OSR Is A Scam on September 17, 2021, 08:23:28 AM
"Diversity And Representation In The Hobby" is meaningless, let me make my case -
https://youtu.be/JvPeGvKC5do

The username is too retarded to make clicking on that link worth the effort.

Fucknut either doesn't know what the OSR is or what a scam is.

Quote from: Banjo Destructo on September 17, 2021, 09:06:36 AMI honestly think real diversity in friend groups is a good thing, liberal bubbles need more real conservative friends, and vice versa.

Fuck that. We need segregation (and secession).

Leave the left to their Woketopia. Life's too short to tolerate their presence.

And gaming tables are for relaxation and fun. Unless you're dealing with a convention table of strangers, why fuck up a home game by including people who want you eradicated?

EDIT: and that goes both ways.

Quote from: tenbones on October 04, 2021, 09:11:08 PM
As someone that has lived without running water, an electrical grid, and comes from a culture whose cuisine most American's would call "offal" and "trash" - I'll be perfectly fine.

My newfound neighbors, that grew up on participation trophies, easy-mode gaming, and fast-food and not working, will learn the true meaning of competition.
...

If your newfound neighbors could not bring themselves to ally with someone they otherwise largely agree with on Big  issues because you were not 100% in lock-step on ideology: Then they deserve the isolation they've brought upon themselves.

Quote from: ChrisFox on October 05, 2021, 01:25:04 AM
..
@jaeger points out that a lot of disparate groups are going to need to band together to prevent this from happening. I already see that coalition growing. The threat is real. Ruining our hobbies is one thing, but we're crossing a whole other scary corner, and I'm pleased to see more people around me waking up to that fact. I choose to take a hopeful view.

Exactly. Alienating potential natural allies over issues that are dwarfed by the SJW threat is stupid.

SJWs don't care if you're religious, and the other guy is an atheist. If you both don't like SJWs; they are very happy to march both of you both off to the gulags. They are very equal-opportunity that way.

Like the artist formerly known as Condor DM - now Mr. The OSR is a scam.  He obviously has no love for the SJWs, but he has gone out of his way, and doubled down on alienating a group of people who would otherwise consider him an ally, over some stupid hot take video.

He's an idiot.

Don't be an idiot. Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

There will be plenty of time to fall-out over arguments about Enlightenment philosophy vs. Christian morality, or Atheistic determinism: After we are done toasting each with the hollowed out skulls of our mutual SJW enemies, whilst sitting atop their charred funeral pyre.

One of the biggest problems with all of this talk about "diversity" is that it comes from an elite and SJWs who are- and this is the pathetic part- basing what they think diversity is on themselves in the particular portion of the temporal-probability area they live in.

In other words, they seem to assume that everything centers around America in the 1960's (since we're usually talking about Baby Boomers being behind this). This is what made those arguments about whether or not ancient Egyptians were actually black so pathetic: 1) they were not, they were a sort of unique blend if their own illustrations are any indication and 2) if you went back in time and tried to lay any of the current dogma about races on them they would have absolutely no idea what you were talking about- the entire mindset and definitions of these things were different.

So the very ones preaching diversity and multiculturalism are in fact looking through it all through their own lenses. Assuming it MUST be what THEY think it is. This is why, years ago, white leftists were defending gangsta rap as part of "black culture:" because in their minds that was what black people were all about.

It must be on display somehow. A homosexual who dresses normally and while being attracted to men isn't into actual sex (as many people aren't) isn't going to cut it with leftists as a character because he does not fit their definition of what a homosexual is like- if he doesn't display it so you wouldn't even know it- he just acts like a regular guy because that's the way he is- then something is wrong, he isn't "gay enough."

RPGPundit gets it all wrong when he wonders when companies are going to wake up and realize if you go woke you go broke, because he's assuming money is the issue, that the Baby Boomers running (ruining) things are misguided into believing going totally SJW will make money- the entire idea is to ruin, destroy, undermine, brainwash. WE ARE PAST THE POINT WHERE IT'S ABOUT MAKING MONEY. Now it's about pushing a destructive agenda. Setting off a bomb in an airplane will bring down the airplane, but of course it will also destroy the bomb- but who cares about the bomb as long as it does its job?

If black people want to play AD&D what is stopping them and what has ever stopped them? Nothing. Want to play a B.A. Baracus in a fantasy setting, cooking up something to bring down the red dragon? Who ever stopped you? Nobody. You could play almost anything, most DMs would allow you to play a Phanaton or whatever as long as it didn't unbalance the game, so why not black, asian, or whatever humans?

So why the "demand" for "diversity" now, now that with the Internet people from all over the planet can literally play any kind of game they want? This was NOT the case back in my day, but now that it is the demands are so much more shrill?

In my game you can be human, elf, half-orc, dwarf, red panda, dragon (Ayundellian dragons are not as overpowered as AD&D dragons), lesser dragon, draconfolk, deerfolk, whatever. Want to be a black human from the "Sunlands?" Why not? There are rules and limitations pertaining to characters (differences based on sex, species, race (e.g. elves are more agile than humans and have infravision), but they are logical ones. 

No, it's not about "diversity." That is here and has been all along. It's all about ruining everything. You see, the thing about these games was the idea of good vs. evil, and especially in the 1977 monster manual you could see good creatures were actually superior to evil ones (e.g. gold dragons vs. red dragons). Without that concept, a society withers and dies. And that is what that elite wants.

Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on October 05, 2021, 04:42:20 PM
The entire idea is to ruin, destroy, undermine, brainwash. WE ARE PAST THE POINT WHERE IT'S ABOUT MAKING MONEY. Now it's about pushing a destructive agenda. Setting off a bomb in an airplane will bring down the airplane, but of course it will also destroy the bomb- but who cares about the bomb as long as it does its job?

This paragraph is chillingly accurate, and took me a long time to admit. It isn't about money. It's about bringing down the system. That is becoming increasingly obvious. If it isn't subservient, then it needs to be destroyed.

The vast majority of SJW gamers I've met...don't play the game. They don't buy the books. They certainly don't read the books. I realize there are exceptions, but in general their knowledge is confined to whatever live-play they happen to watch / listen to. Critical Role being the most common example.

The very instant gaming is ruined they will look to whatever refuge / game / hobby has been created and move in on that. There really is only one answer. You found Zion, the last city, and you bar the gates.

What concerns me is how fast it seems to be sweeping all media.

Quote from: ChrisFox on October 06, 2021, 01:28:15 AM

Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on October 05, 2021, 04:42:20 PM
The entire idea is to ruin, destroy, undermine, brainwash. WE ARE PAST THE POINT WHERE IT'S ABOUT MAKING MONEY. Now it's about pushing a destructive agenda. Setting off a bomb in an airplane will bring down the airplane, but of course it will also destroy the bomb- but who cares about the bomb as long as it does its job?

This paragraph is chillingly accurate, and took me a long time to admit. It isn't about money. It's about bringing down the system. That is becoming increasingly obvious. If it isn't subservient, then it needs to be destroyed.

The vast majority of SJW gamers I've met...don't play the game. They don't buy the books. They certainly don't read the books. I realize there are exceptions, but in general their knowledge is confined to whatever live-play they happen to watch / listen to. Critical Role being the most common example.

The very instant gaming is ruined they will look to whatever refuge / game / hobby has been created and move in on that. There really is only one answer. You found Zion, the last city, and you bar the gates.

What concerns me is how fast it seems to be sweeping all media.

What puzzles me -- and mind you, I don't think you're completely wrong -- is how many OTHER people who seem willing to join in on this even in the face of financial ruin.

It's literally signing up for the Poisoned Cocktail. Doesn't ANYONE look at the sales figures and say, 'Hey guys, why are our numbers down?'

We think of companies as logical things, but I'll use Blizzard as an example since they've been in news a lot lately, and the SJWs are now dismantling their game piece by piece with no resistance, driving away many of the few remaining players.

Back when Blizzard founded it was a bunch of geeks at Blizzard North, and a bunch at Blizzard south. Two groups of geeks, one working on Diablo, the other on Warcraft, then Starcraft. These were small companies. Startups.

I've worked at a lot of startups, and you make miracles. You create amazing software, and hardware, and change the market. In the case of games you get out books quickly and easily. The hardcover in my profile is 400 pages, made by 2 people, and some freelance artists.

Once a company finds success they have to start adding departments:

1- Human Resources
2- Diversity, Inclusion, & Equity
3- Compliance
4- Marketing
5- Customer Service

Etc, etc, etc. The company grows and grows. Now you have real employees, with rights. They can't be worked through breaks. They can't stay late on salary to finish that feature.

Before people lived at the job. Employees were there 16+ hours a day, and so relationships formed. Friendships, and romantic relationships. But, the bigger the company becomes, the more bad apples are introduced. Now there's sexual harassment. Bullies.

The bigger a company gets the more entropy impacts it. The people at the top making the decisions are not longer sitting one cubicle over from the guy building the software or writing the book. Now there's 12 layers between Hasbro execs and the people on the ground.

They hear someone say that SJW is the way to go. They hear that's what the kids want. And so they green light a change without really understand their market. We've seen this in nearly every industry. It rises as indie, and falls as corporate.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion departments didn't even exist when I worked software. Now they are larger than HR, and neither of those two entire departments does anything to make the product better. How many other departments is that true for?

"So what you're saying is..."(tm)

White Supremacist men (which oddly includes anyone male or female of any ethnic background that doesn't agree with the Left) are *not* holding down minorities that agree with Leftist narrative boxes they've been stuffed into?

I find that very difficult to believe.

/slurps THEY'S double soy-latte decaf ristretto Frappuccino with semen seasoning