Should Palladium include GBLT characters in future books?

[The Galactus Kid]

Yes. I have no problem with this.

[Greyaxe]

I voted No, not because of any issues with the gay or lesbian communities but because:


1. It is unnecessary to state an individuals sexuality in an RPG. if you would like to introduce Gay and Lesbian characters into your game simply assign NPC's or characters an additional stat and be done with it. You could include nightclubs communities and other facets of the gay community if you like.
2. It generates an unnecessary churn in an already scarce market.
3. What makes a gay character different from any other character generated? Are you looking to perpetuate stereotypes of what "Gay" is or do you just want to be inclusive, I feel gaming is inclusive enough already because you can do absolutely anything.

[The Beast]

I voted No, not because of any issues with the gay or lesbian communities but because:


1. It is unnecessary to state an individuals sexuality in an RPG. if you would like to introduce Gay and Lesbian characters into your game simply assign NPC's or characters an additional stat and be done with it. You could include nightclubs communities and other facets of the gay community if you like.
2. It generates an unnecessary churn in an already scarce market.
3. What makes a gay character different from any other character generated? Are you looking to perpetuate stereotypes of what "Gay" is or do you just want to be inclusive, I feel gaming is inclusive enough already because you can do absolutely anything.

Agreed.

[FatherMorpheus]

I voted No, not because of any issues with the gay or lesbian communities but because:


1. It is unnecessary to state an individuals sexuality in an RPG.

But this has already been done in Palladium's books. For example, in Western Empire we are told of so-and-so's "wife" or "husband" and it's always a male/female relationship.

2. It generates an unnecessary churn in an already scarce market.

Valid point.

3. What makes a gay character different from any other character generated?

Nothing really, but the nature of relationships listed in ALL of Palladium's books are heterosexual.

Actually, on this last one, several of the species actually reproduce asexually. So if you zoom out a little bit, GBLT is represented via Blind Warrior Woman (asexual), Splugorth, non-gender, and even sexually transmitted disease to reproduce like vampires.

On a little more serious note, I don't know if I would trust Palladium to handle this topic well. It isn't easy for some of the best writers to get right. Let alone an RPG company who is known for bad editing and copy.

[Chronicle]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"



That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.


I can understand PFRPG mentions because a lot of family mergers go on in settings like that. (and even rifts i guess)

[Steve Dubya]

1. It is unnecessary to state an individuals sexuality in an RPG. if you would like to introduce Gay and Lesbian characters into your game simply assign NPC's or characters an additional stat and be done with it. You could include nightclubs communities and other facets of the gay community if you like.

The PB stat should probably also get jettisoned for that reason as well. It literally defines the attractiveness of a given organism.

[The Galactus Kid]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"

That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.

Agreed. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

I think that this is how it should be handled as well.

[Jorel]

ummm...not quite there but....yellow dancer...

[The Galactus Kid]

ummm...not quite there but....yellow dancer...

As close as 1980's mainstream childrens programming would allow. Judges will allow it.

[SkyeFyre]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"



That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.


I can understand PFRPG mentions because a lot of family mergers go on in settings like that. (and even rifts i guess)

I would have to agree with this. I've got no problem with LGBT, but I find in a lot of cases of media they tend to draw attention to themselves with "Hey look! We're 'LGBT'! See! Look at us! We're totally different!", when they should be treated the same way as your straight up, plain, heterosexuals. You wouldn't go out of your way to be like "Joe is a heterosexual male who likes girls. He's REALLY, REALLY straight", and I feel the same goes for LGBT. Make a passing comment, treat it casually, and that's that.

So in short: I'd only be fine with it if it were handled properly, and I'm not sure it'd be handled properly so I voted no. You can change that to a yes if the spirit of the poll is if I'm supportive of the idea despite execution.

[Tiree]

I say no. Some of the older books written back in the 80's and 90's may mention husband and wife. Some of the newer ones may too. It's not needed, it's all about the GM and what they are comfortable with. I had a GM who ran some of the villains out of Villains Unlimited as a gay group. They may not have been written that way, but that is how he saw them.

Put the power into the GM's hand, don't take it away.

And games like Rifts - it's post apocalyptic. Who cares what sex, orientation, or even race you are... You are Human or D-Bee... that's all that matters. They traded one set of groups for another. You still have the angst over my group is better than yours... it's just placed in a different way.

[Scott Gibbons]

Absolutely not. Right now RPG's in general, and Palladium Books specifically, are under the radar on this issue. Let's not expose them to the crazies on either side of the issue. The last thing PB needs right now are protests or wild denunciations by people who'd otherwise have no interest in the company or its games.

[Jorel]

Yes. There is an element of inclusiveness to consider.

Rifts did something amazing and relatively revolutionary at the time of its release by making one of its key protagonists, Erin Tarn, a woman, and a somewhat elderly and not stereotypically attractive woman at that. While there is a bit of a macho vibe to Rifts on occasion, the presence of Erin Tarn tells women gamers that this game is just as much for them as it is for the boys, which is a very important message for a hobby that has been dominated by the "boys only club" in the past.

The next step then, is a LGBTQ character, presented in a manner similar to Erin Tarn, a protagonist who symbolically tells prospective players, "This game is for you, too."

this times 1000%. No one is going to protest PB over this except hate filled bigots. And I don't think PB really wants that demographic anyway.

[Hendrik]

My first thought was that sexual orientation should be a non-issue in games, the more so because the people on Rifts earth (a) really have other problems and (b) things far less normal have become the norm of daily life.

I agree with Involved Observer that at least overplaying this for a game makes a political statement that I just do not think belongs in a game. I do not want to see any political flags raised in a game, even if the cause is a cause I agree with. Less because Palladium may stir a beehive with that, but because I do not think it an appropriate forum. Palladium has always rightly avoided political and religious issues so far.

Political action needs to be taken in the political forum, education needs to take place in schools etc, not through gaming companies, but foremost at home. I teach my children tolerance and a wide acceptance of how people choose to live. Whatever sexual persuasion any of them will endorse for herself, I want them to be happy, never closeted, and give and demand respect for her neighbour, especially her partner.

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"

That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.

Agreed. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

I think that this is how it should be handled as well.

I very much agree with this.

[Jorel]

I think the person in the OP is just suggesting that PB include a few NPCs that may not be clearly static hetero couples or even a transgender person as an NPC without stating which sex they prefer to be with. It would be representative of the world we live in today and that makes sense.

[Jorel]

Also I think it would be on the freelancers to submit something like that in a manuscript and not for Kevin to just throw it in to make up for lack of those kinds of NPCs.

[Josh Hilden]

I will say that as a bisexual man I am overjoyed when LGBT characters are written as real people. Captain Jack Harkness is probably my favorite example of this. So yeah if I read an rpg with LBGT characters in the text or using homophobia as a plot point for conflict it would make me very happy.

[Jorel]

Exactly. Can't say I'm a fan of Captain Jack, but you know the wife is. We need more characters where that is a part of who they are, not a feature they are selling. Those who fear PB getting harassed for being accepting of those kinds of things are actually the ones who are a part of the problem. All anyone wants is acceptance and you are suggesting PB should act like they don't exist.

[Jorel]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"

That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.

Agreed. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

I think that this is how it should be handled as well.

Do I sense a gay couple owning a Robot mechanics shop in Sovietski? That would be a world of difference from the Russia we know today...

[Daniel Stoker]

I don't see why there should be any issue having the mention that Hank has a husband or that Mary and her girlfriend etc could be thrown in a character description. As to the idea of having gay characters would bring attention on the hobby... as Rallan's pointed out in the past, this is a game "where terminal drug addicts are really really cool, where demon prostitutes murder their clients during sex, where breasts are hella visibile in some of the illustrations, where a lot of the art is either fetishtastic (Ramon Perez sure did like putting everyone in fishnets and shiny black leather ) or graphically violent, and where Siembieda himself has bent over backwards to try and explain why a genocidal evil empire are actually kinda alright guys who are just misunderstood." I think we can have a gay character here and there without a lot of issues.


Daniel Stoker

[The Galactus Kid]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"

That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.

Agreed. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

I think that this is how it should be handled as well.

Do I sense a gay couple owning a Robot mechanics shop in Sovietski? That would be a world of difference from the Russia we know today...

There are subtle undertones between two major female players. Nothing concrete and called out, but speculation is there.

[gaby]

I think it Should be Up to the Players to make ther Character Gay or Not.
Palladium should Not Impose Gay Npcs.Players should be the only Ones that have the Right to make Characters who are Gay.

[Josh Hilden]

I think it Should be Up to the Players to make ther Character Gay or Not.
Palladium should Not Impose Gay Npcs.Players should be the only Ones that have the Right to make Characters who are Gay.

So if the author, who creates the NPC's in a book, makes some of them LBGT that's imposing on the players? So if I write two straight characters who are married as part of their back story is that imposing on the players?

[The Galactus Kid]

I think it Should be Up to the Players to make ther Character Gay or Not.
Palladium should Not Impose Gay Npcs.Players should be the only Ones that have the Right to make Characters who are Gay.

NPCs are elements of the story world. As a writer I can present the word as I think it shoul be presented and if a GM or player doesn't like it they can change it.

[The Galactus Kid]

I think it Should be Up to the Players to make ther Character Gay or Not.
Palladium should Not Impose Gay Npcs.Players should be the only Ones that have the Right to make Characters who are Gay.

So if the author, who creates the NPC's in a book, makes some of them LBGT that's imposing on the players? So if I write two straight characters who are married as part of their back story is that imposing on the players?

My point exactly.

[Hendrik]

I think the person in the OP is just suggesting that PB include a few NPCs that may not be clearly static hetero couples or even a transgender person as an NPC without stating which sex they prefer to be with. It would be representative of the world we live in today and that makes sense.

The OP was open as to how LGBT could/should be introduced.

I agree 100% with what you say, Jorel, which is why I agreed before with Chronicle, Nightfactory and Galactus Kid.

I don't see why there should be any issue having the mention that Hank has a husband or that Mary and her girlfriend etc could be thrown in a character description. As to the idea of having gay characters would bring attention on the hobby... as Rallan's pointed out in the past, this is a game "where terminal drug addicts are really really cool, where demon prostitutes murder their clients during sex, where breasts are hella visibile in some of the illustrations, where a lot of the art is either fetishtastic (Ramon Perez sure did like putting everyone in fishnets and shiny black leather ) or graphically violent, and where Siembieda himself has bent over backwards to try and explain why a genocidal evil empire are actually kinda alright guys who are just misunderstood." I think we can have a gay character here and there without a lot of issues.

Agreed & kinda of a really good point, Daniel.

Those who fear PB getting harassed for being accepting of those kinds of things are actually the ones who are a part of the problem.

I don't think so, and do not think I am part of this particular problem. I just pointed out that Palladum has a history of avoiding political and religious issues and think that prudent.

Anyway, I would not mind at all if LGBT characters would be a normal part of the SF & fantasy worlds we are talking about (as they should be in real life). Heavens, Haldeman's Hugo/Nebula winning "Forever War" has this as one of the major topics.

I just would not want to see it overstated or politicised in a game.

[Jorel]

i don't have an issue with it.
Mention it in passing and don't write an article about it.

Such and such npc "Robert and his husband run a business at the end of town"

That should be all you need. no fluff, no history it is a clear statement without making it a big deal.

Agreed. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

I think that this is how it should be handled as well.

Do I sense a gay couple owning a Robot mechanics shop in Sovietski? That would be a world of difference from the Russia we know today...

There are subtle undertones between two major female players. Nothing concrete and called out, but speculation is there.

the reverse of the same suggestion of Bob and his husband. I like it.

[Jorel]

I never said overstated or politicized. I don't think it should even be a defining feature. Like Jessy the gay. He should be Jessy the carpenter that just happens to also like to hang out with a dozen guys and no ladies...and the occasional whore.

[Josh Hilden]

My sexuality does not define me but it is important, just like with everyone else I've ever met in my entire life.

[Jorel]

pretty much my point. And thanks for speaking up Josh. it helps give people perspective.

[ffranceschi]

My vote is YES.

[Jorel]

Sad to say I am not surprised that the PB community seams to also be a bit behind in the times. that almost half would say no is a big tell to me about the type of people that are into PB.

[Jorel]

guess I don't play much video games, but anywhere close to 50% is too high for logic. Must be other forces at work there.

[Jorel]

I don't see why there should be any issue having the mention that Hank has a husband or that Mary and her girlfriend etc could be thrown in a character description. As to the idea of having gay characters would bring attention on the hobby... as Rallan's pointed out in the past, this is a game "where terminal drug addicts are really really cool, where demon prostitutes murder their clients during sex, where breasts are hella visibile in some of the illustrations, where a lot of the art is either fetishtastic (Ramon Perez sure did like putting everyone in fishnets and shiny black leather ) or graphically violent, and where Siembieda himself has bent over backwards to try and explain why a genocidal evil empire are actually kinda alright guys who are just misunderstood." I think we can have a gay character here and there without a lot of issues.


Daniel Stoker

and this is the perfect reason why it shouldn't even be an issue.

[The Galactus Kid]

I don't see why there should be any issue having the mention that Hank has a husband or that Mary and her girlfriend etc could be thrown in a character description. As to the idea of having gay characters would bring attention on the hobby... as Rallan's pointed out in the past, this is a game "where terminal drug addicts are really really cool, where demon prostitutes murder their clients during sex, where breasts are hella visibile in some of the illustrations, where a lot of the art is either fetishtastic (Ramon Perez sure did like putting everyone in fishnets and shiny black leather ) or graphically violent, and where Siembieda himself has bent over backwards to try and explain why a genocidal evil empire are actually kinda alright guys who are just misunderstood." I think we can have a gay character here and there without a lot of issues.


Daniel Stoker

and this is the perfect reason why it shouldn't even be an issue.

Exactly.

[Giant2005]

Sad to say I am not surprised that the PB community seams to also be a bit behind in the times. that almost half would say no is a big tell to me about the type of people that are into PB.

Behind the times? Part of the problem? Why put such connotations on other people's ideals?
I voted no to the poll, not because I am "behind the times" or "part of the problem" (as you stated earlier) but because I simply do not care. The gay community are just people like you and I and aren't deserving nor probably wanting of special attention - they want equality. Trying to campaign that some special characters be put in the game just to pander to them is not only demeaning but prejudice. Let the writers write what they want to write. Let the publisher publish what it wants to publish. Trying to impose your beliefs and your perceptions on others is what is wrong and considering the internet is populated by numerous articles about how political correctness is the new prejudice that are almost 10 years old now, I think it is pretty "behind the times" too.

[Daniel Stoker]

Well a based on the wording of the poll a no vote is that you don't think they should have GLBT characters in future books, not caring isn't the same as no, and no one is asking for 'special' characters the questions is that should some future characters be GLBT.


Daniel Stoker

[Jorel]

Well a based on the wording of the poll a no vote is that you don't think they should have GLBT characters in future books, not caring isn't the same as no, and no one is asking for 'special' characters the questions is that should some future characters be GLBT.


Daniel Stoker

that was how I read the poll. We are talking about being inclusive here. A no vote would be for not including. Possibly for excluding.

[Giant2005]

Well a based on the wording of the poll a no vote is that you don't think they should have GLBT characters in future books, not caring isn't the same as no, and no one is asking for 'special' characters the questions is that should some future characters be GLBT.


Daniel Stoker

But the very fact that the question was asked forces me to say no. If it just came up in a book naturally? Great. But making a poll and trying to make some big deal about it? Hell no. That just promotes special treatment for the sake of special treatment - that isn't equality.

[Josh Hilden]

The poll starts a discussion, what's wrong with that?

[Daniel Stoker]

But the very fact that the question was asked forces me to say no. If it just came up in a book naturally? Great. But making a poll and trying to make some big deal about it? Hell no. That just promotes special treatment for the sake of special treatment - that isn't equality.

Why does it force you to say no? Making a poll isn’t making a big deal about it, it’s polling what the people here in the forums think about Palladium having GLBT characters in a future book, and how is wanting to see them included in books special treatment?


Daniel Stoker

[Jorel]

allowing unequal treatment to go on unmentioned is a terrible answer. Best to shine light on stuff like that and talk about it. Hiding it is not the answer.

[Jorel]

I actually think there is everything right with having this poll. I don't have any close LGBT friends or really even know that many, but I am all for them being seen and heard and read about in all facets of the media. Same with every person no matter their race (D-Bee), creed, color of skin, nationality, sex/sexual orientation. None of that matters, or is it really any of the publics business what people do with themselves. If they display it publicly that is dofferent. It is not for society to say whether it should be there in private. Obviously within reason...and there are usually laws to uphold those standards and the laws are becoming more just in a lot of places as we evolve as a culture. If they can have pictures of bestiality on armor in the fantasy books we can have a reference to non hetero relationships. They don't have to be detailed. The fact they exist is enough.

[Pepsi Jedi]

I've no problem with it. Like many above I don't think Palladium should make a huge deal about it. Why? Because it's not a huge deal. People are people. Write them as they are. If one happens to be gay. Then they're gay. No huge deal. If they're bi. They're bi. I just finished writing up an alien for HU that has 4 genders in their species. No huge deal.

I do share some concern that Palladium might..... go weird with it. It's not really talked about these days but a few of us remember the "Sexual deviants" Tables in one of the older games. It's been decades. I'm not going to rail at them or anything, but those tables were pulled for a reason. That reason was.. bad.

So I do share some concern about 'trusting' Palladium with the topic in general. It's decades later so.. things may have changed. .... Maybe not.


As for the poll. This surprises some of you guys? Sure.. it's 2014 but homophobia is not gone. It's just hidden a bit more now. LGBT is more culturally accepted these days. More and more states are recognizing gay marriage and all, but there's still folks out there stuck in beliefs from previous time periods. Most are not 'overt' bigots. Most (Like the ones in this poll) are content to keep their views and opinions mostly to themselves. They vote 'no' with out coming out and saying why. Why? Because they don't want to be seen as bigots. That's not to say that everyone that voted no, are bigots. Some just don't trust the company to handle the topic.

Still, it's not surprising that there's still some, even many people that are opposed to it. *Shakes head* It's sad. People are people though and some people suck.

So.. In conclusion. I voted "Yes". I think that the LGBT should be handled same as anyone else in a book. Don't make a huge deal about it. Just write them as people(beings). Don't try and be 'new and trendy'. Or whatever. Just be chill about it.

[Giant2005]

allowing unequal treatment to go on unmentioned is a terrible answer. Best to shine light on stuff like that and talk about it. Hiding it is not the answer.

The problem is that without the discussion, it could have been a great step forward for the LGBT community (if such a thing actually went in print). With the discussion, it becomes tainted by the stigma of Political Correctness and although I have faith in the writers for Palladium enough to believe they would put it in for the right reasons, the possibility remains that they could be contributing to the cause of Political Correctness than the cause of the LGBT community. That possibility would cheapen the achievement.
Equal Rights and Political Correctness are two very different things - the former is a right that should never need questioned, the latter is one of the the biggest obstacles to be overcome before equality can really be achieved.

[Josh Hilden]

I agree about stigma bit the facts are that without people shouting and making scene we would not have progressed as far as we have.

To be clear with the exception of the old deviancy tables I've never thought of Palladium as homophobic or anti LGBT.

[Jorel]

Me neither, but that is a far cry from actually representing it by having normal NPC relationships reflect our modern society.

[Pepsi Jedi]

To be clear with the exception of the old deviancy tables I've never thought of Palladium as homophobic or anti LGBT.

With the exception of those things, beings in Palladium games seem to reproduce off screen and never to be mentioned. At the very most you might see hints about Prostitutes now and then (and about 20 times in black market) Other than that sex is seldom if ever touched upon at all. About the only time you see it addressed is the Palladium "No half breeds" Rule.

[Jorel]

But they do mention the relationships of hetero couples and that is more what this is about...I think. Not the actual sex, but the fact there are plenty of couples out there and even poly groups that exist in reality, so why are only the vanilla hereto kind the ones being labeled as in a relationship?

[Jorel]

Well stated and I fully agree.