Quote from: Pat;1041525The absence of explicit homosexual pairings in old school modules is definitely a thing, but the presence of heterosexual pairings is also light. It's not really the focus of D&D, after all.

Again, I agree it's not the focus - but it's not totally absent, either. There are examples in other modules as well. Here are some quotes from Against the Giants, for example.

QuoteChief Nosnra & wife: H.P. 65, 41 (he fights as a frost giant, she as a male hill giant)

QuoteThis large common room has various sizes of cots, tables, chairs, stools, and the like. It is cluttered with old clothing and junk. In it are 6 giantess maids (non-combatants) and a "handsome" giant warrior (H.P.: 43) who will immediately do battle in order to show off for his admirers.

Quote8. Prison Cavern

Several torches light the place dimly. A storm giantess who is comely to those of her ilk (and is strong and fights as if she were a male) is chained on the north wall with huge manacles at the wrists and ankles. A fur rug in the middle of the place bears a table and two chairs. Upon the table are heaps of food on golden platters (six, each worth 500 gp), in silver bowls (three, each worth 100 gp), and two huge flagons of ivory set with six gems (100 gp each) set to tantalize her into submitting to the Jarl's will and becoming his leman. This durance vile makes her a friend to any who rescue her, although evil characters will cause this aid to be of brief duration.

Quote23.Kennel Keeper's Quarters
Here dwells the Keeper and his wife. These fire giants will rush to the aid of their charges if they hear a commotion outside. Each has a sword and club.

QuoteTwo cloud giants, a noble and his lady from the Sulhaut Mountains, have come to hear King Snurre tell why his warfare will profit them, and make them powerful.

Even without a detailed town, there are references to romance, spouses, and/or sexuality. It's a pretty normal part of life, after all. So I don't think it's at all strange that it should appear. By parallel, chairs also aren't a focus of D&D, but they appear regularly in modules.

To my mind, gay characters should be much the same. It shouldn't be a big deal to just have a gay character or two mentioned in a module.

Quote from: jhkim;1041656Even without a detailed town, there are references to romance, spouses, and/or sexuality. It's a pretty normal part of life, after all. So I don't think it's at all strange that it should appear. By parallel, chairs also aren't a focus of D&D, but they appear regularly in modules.

To my mind, gay characters should be much the same. It shouldn't be a big deal to just have a gay character or two mentioned in a module.

It's just as bad as having explicitly heterosexual characters. Some occasional minor references are inevitable because sexuality and pair-bonding is a big part of being human, not to mention being a big part of being not human (in all those fantasy settings where not humans act almost completely indistinguishably from humans). But keep it small at worst, and excise it when possible, because it's one of those things that works better in a DM's hands not a designer's.

Quote from: jhkim;1041656Again, I agree it's not the focus - but it's not totally absent, either. There are examples in other modules as well. Here are some quotes from Against the Giants, for example.

Even without a detailed town, there are references to romance, spouses, and/or sexuality. It's a pretty normal part of life, after all. So I don't think it's at all strange that it should appear. By parallel, chairs also aren't a focus of D&D, but they appear regularly in modules.

To my mind, gay characters should be much the same. It shouldn't be a big deal to just have a gay character or two mentioned in a module.

Who's to say the Storm Giantess isn't turning the Frost Giant Jarl down because she bats for the other team?  Did Gary say she was cis-hetero?  Who is erasing based on unrealized privilege, Gary or you?
 
Just because there's a King and Queen doesn't mean they're heterosexual, or even if they are, that they even live in the same castles.  Make a couple of heirs and they never have to see each other again except at official functions.

In Module X, we see the Innkeeper, Wife and 2 kids who help at the inn.  We don't know whether they are vanilla missionary every night, or that the Wife likes to be choked, the Innkeeper likes watching the Blacksmith bang his wife and their kids are pulling a Lannister.  One or both of the adults could be LGBT and still in the closet.  What does that tell us?  That we don't know anything about the sexuality of the NPCs and people are more openly gay in larger cities and less so in rural towns?  Big fucking secret.

Based on the percentage occurance of LGBTQ in the human earth population, Paizo by themselves has over-represented, based on module NPCs who we have any mention of their sexual orientation.

Generally speaking, I agree with you.  It isn't really a big deal if they make someone LGBTQ in a module, but to be honest, not often does someone make LGBTQ NPCs in a module without the module being about the LGBTQ relationship in some way.  Sometimes Paizo has some minor NPCs where it's just mentioned and that's it.

But, if it's not a big deal to have an NPC be LGBTQ, then it's also not a big deal to not have an NPC be LGBTQ, especially when the number of NPCs in the module are so small.

You give lots of examples of "hetero" NPCs we really know nothing about other than that they are married, and I give you The Baronial Physician of Middenheim, Herr Doktor Luigi Pavarotti, of Power Behind the Throne fame for WFRP1.  A man of great appetites in all things, Dr. Pavarotti is apparently pan-sexual as he will have relations with any of the races of the Old World, male, female or other.  Even more surprisingly for Warhammer... (spoiler for the module)

Spoiler

Pavarotti isn't part of any Slaaneshi Cult and has no Dark Secrets.  He's actually one of the most decent characters in that module.  He's just a Libertine.

So, if we're talking about NPCs whose gender and sexual preferences are explicitly stated, the LGBTQ's are ahead of the game, because Cis-Hetero's never get any shout outs unless they're Cultists or Serial Killers.

Or to sum it up..
Player - How come none of the Mayors of the towns along the Wild Coast are LGBTQ?
Me - Have you asked them?  Did you expect them to wear a sign?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1041673Who's to say the Storm Giantess isn't turning the Frost Giant Jarl down because she bats for the other team?  Did Gary say she was cis-hetero?  Who is erasing based on unrealized privilege, Gary or you?
 
Just because there's a King and Queen doesn't mean they're heterosexual, or even if they are, that they even live in the same castles.  Make a couple of heirs and they never have to see each other again except at official functions.

The storm giant entry doesn't say anything about the sexuality of the storm giant, but it does indicate about the sexuality of the frost giant jarl.  It's true about a king and queen - but conversely, just because there are two queens doesn't mean that they're homosexual. Maybe they just have a very close platonic relationship that they share. Likewise if a male farmer has a husband at home.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1041673Based on the percentage occurance of LGBTQ in the human earth population, Paizo by themselves has over-represented, based on module NPCs who we have any mention of their sexual orientation.

Generally speaking, I agree with you.  It isn't really a big deal if they make someone LGBTQ in a module, but to be honest, not often does someone make LGBTQ NPCs in a module without the module being about the LGBTQ relationship in some way.  Sometimes Paizo has some minor NPCs where it's just mentioned and that's it.

But, if it's not a big deal to have an NPC be LGBTQ, then it's also not a big deal to not have an NPC be LGBTQ, especially when the number of NPCs in the module are so small.

The numbers of NPCs in an individual module are small - and thus I agree it is no big deal if a single module has no LGBTQ NPCs. On the other hand, the total number of NPCs across hundreds of published modules is large. If there aren't any among hundreds of old-school modules, it's notable.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1041673Just because there's a King and Queen doesn't mean they're heterosexual, or even if they are, that they even live in the same castles.  Make a couple of heirs and they never have to see each other again except at official functions.

The movie The Lion in Winter revolved around such a marriage. For those who maybe haven't seen it, great flick BTW.

Quote from: jhkim;1041736If there aren't any among hundreds of old-school modules, it's notable.

Is it really?

Abortion is a common element of society, both past and present, but its mention is lacking in RPGs. But its inclusion would be a hot button divisive issue, even if handled in the most even handed and serious method. And that's just an example from a dozen hot button topics not yet in RPGs.

Unfortunately, its impossible to bring homosexuality into a product without its presentation being viewed through the political lens. If a module stated, "X% of NPCs are LGBT, please roll or choose as they are encountered in your game.", that would be political because of all the political and culture war pissing matches over what X% of the human population are LGBT.

Of course, there's also the question about the largest minority population being ignored: the disabled.

And then we have the arguments over presentation.

And of course, we run into Tenbones' question. Which minority gets priority and what is the hierarchy for representation?

As I stated repeatedly in the other thread, I've had players play LGBT PCs and I've had LGBT NPCs in those games, and I've had LGBT players who have no interest in sexuality of any kind in their RPGs for a variety of reasons. And as the vast majority of my RPG play has no sexuality as core elements, I couldn't care less where your PC does with your pants junk.

As for publishers, I don't know the right answer. Everything has become so political that both inclusion and exclusion are viewed as political pandering and virtue signalling.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1041673Or to sum it up..
Player - How come none of the Mayors of the towns along the Wild Coast are LGBTQ?
Me - Have you asked them?  Did you expect them to wear a sign?

I don't know the Wild Coast, but if we're talking TSR modules for D&D, there have been spells to detect that since 1974, and depending on their discretion there may be lots of other NPCs who know and even more who want to find out. And it's kind of crucial information for certain purposes (do you send Mata Hari or her brother to get information? It is quite funny to roll orientation for an NPC when the players attempt seduction and they end up having sent the wrong character).

Modules tend to present a fair amount of irrelevant information about NPCs, because it makes the game world seem more real and the NPCs more memorable, and clever players may find a use for it, and it may disguise something important. I'm not interested in sexual preferences of NPCs to demonstrate inclusiveness or to meet a quota, but I'm not banning it from my game because someone might be too much of a snowflake to handle it.

(In fairness, when I played "Breath of the Yellow Rose", I cringed a little when it seemed to be heading toward eating disorders among wealthy young people in Mulmaster, but hot button issue that might have been handled badly was averted when the Ranger missed her Medicine check, and we just cracked some cultists heads without thinking too hard about it. So I can see an argument that certain issues will make some players uncomfortable. If you're one of those, just show the X card and there will be no problems at all!)

How, pray tell, does one "Detect LBGTQ" in OD&D with the existing spell list?

* popcorn *

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1041784How, pray tell, does one "Detect LBGTQ" in OD&D with the existing spell list?

ESP, Commune. A little more directly and intrusively, Charm Person, Geas or Quest would probably work. Spying with Wizard Eye might work if you got lucky on the timing; Contact Higher Plane* and Invisible Stalker (for longer term spying) might work, albeit with some risk. Slipping the hired help some gold to gossip would probably be the most effective way, but using magic is more fun.

I am not loath to answer your questions, but why have me do any more of your imagining for you?

*By 1974 turning gay for weeks was probably no longer a possible effect of that spell.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1041764Is it really?

It is. If you have hundreds of old school modules, and probably hundreds of brief, off-hand references to heterosexual relationships, even the most conservative estimate for the prevalence of homosexuality would suggest there should be a few same sex pairings. The lack of any isn't major, but it is notable.

Though you're correct that it seems blown out of proportion these days.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1041784How, pray tell, does one "Detect LBGTQ" in OD&D with the existing spell list?

* popcorn *

Heraldry. If the Pointer or Dexter fields have a rainbow, Viola! Your in gay town. Have fun (or don't as you are so inclined...)!

Quote from: Pat;1041801It is. If you have hundreds of old school modules, and probably hundreds of brief, off-hand references to heterosexual relationships, even the most conservative estimate for the prevalence of homosexuality would suggest there should be a few same sex pairings. The lack of any isn't major, but it is notable.

Though you're correct that it seems blown out of proportion these days.

The source material literature seems to have very few homosexual characters, even as villains in swords and sorcery. Conan and certainly Lord of the Rings. Even in Lankhmar.

Quote from: S'mon;1041853The source material literature seems to have very few homosexual characters, even as villains in swords and sorcery. Conan and certainly Lord of the Rings. Even in Lankhmar.

We probably all know why there were no mentions, but cultural mores have shifted.

Quote from: Pat;1041867We probably all know why there were no mentions, but cultural mores have shifted.

Yes, but I think fantasy settings used to only weakly reflect the mores of the times they were created. The idea that eg Golarion should closely reflect the mores of modern Seattle seems very recent, 6-8 years.

Quote from: S'mon;1041873Yes, but I think fantasy settings used to only weakly reflect the mores of the times they were created. The idea that eg Golarion should closely reflect the mores of modern Seattle seems very recent, 6-8 years.

That's just a particularly strident version. I'd say D&D has reflected the mores of its time since at least the 1980s. People from the modern world, poorly disguised with a thin veneer of RenFaire trappings, and no attempt to smooth over the resultant logical inconsistencies. Which makes sense, because once D&D expanded beyond the historical simulation crowd, it was easier to play "you and me, but with swords and spells" than to try to get into a very alien mindset.