• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

bitparity

Αὐτοκράτωρ τῶν Ῥωμαίων
59 Badges
Nov 12, 2008
242
1
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Magicka
  • March of the Eagles
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • Rome Gold
  • Semper Fi
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Deus Vult
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis 4: Emperor
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Prison Architect
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
I mean as it stands now, all being gay does is reduce your fertility and your opinion. But just as a hetero king frequently goes and saucies himself with a pretty young thing at court, I think events should fire regarding other homosexual characters, whether they be courtiers or other nobles.

Like what if you become the lover of another noble, then that should also be the equivalent of marriage in an alliance, BUT, if it is found out, you would get an instant revolt on your hands, as its one thing to be a quiet "confirmed bachelor" its another thing to endanger your realm by living in sin.

Thus if you're not gay your spymaster would have incentive to be sent out to form a spy network whenever "unusual" alliances are discovered that aren't marriage related, and likewise if you're a gay lord, you have to always keep your spymaster at home fending off other spies trying to find this secret out. And maybe make the penalty for being blackmailed as gay far worse, like cause for excommunication and invasion.

This creating a roleplayed penalty and bonus for being gay. Because lets be honest here, being outed as gay back in medieval times should be regarded as a destructive event.
 
I agree, but Paradox had to tread a kind of fine line here. Not everyone in the world has the best attitudes toward homosexuality. In a game where you're supposed to identify with your character, they may not want to force everyone into that role.
 
I agree, but Paradox had to tread a kind of fine line here. Not everyone in the world has the best attitudes toward homosexuality. In a game where you're supposed to identify with your character, they may not want to force everyone into that role.

Well, anyobody who actually think that should not be allowed to play the game at all.
I agree that it would be funny if your character sneaked away with another homosexual during a feast or something..:p
 
I agree, but Paradox had to tread a kind of fine line here. Not everyone in the world has the best attitudes toward homosexuality. In a game where you're supposed to identify with your character, they may not want to force everyone into that role.

We already had one person on the forum warned for calling his king's kid a homosexual bastard...
 
But was his kid a homosexual bastard?

People shouldn't feel offended if it isn't directed towards them -.-

Without dragging this into a huge debate; should women not be offended when sleazeball men make misogynistic comments about another woman? Should black people not be offended when some white guy calls another black guy a racial slur? Hell, I'm a white male and both those things offend me. What's different about homosexuals and people making homophobic comments?

Anyway, back on topic;

It'd be nice if there were. I have a homosexual heir coming up (with like 6 sons and no daughters, after three generations of one son + many daughters), and I was kind of hoping for some amusing, quirky events around it. So it's disappointing that a pretty prime subject for events doesn't have any. Considering the prevalence of homosexual-related content in the mainstream right now, I'd be surprised if they were simply afraid people would complain.
 
We already had one person on the forum warned for calling his king's kid a homosexual bastard...
To be fair, his character did have both the homusexual trait and the bastard trait. On topic though: I think the primary changes to be applied first should be to make the trait more uncommon, and make a way to cure yourself of the trait, before a long romance "event quest-line" is added aswell. ;)
 
Wait, what? You think homosexuality is something that can and should be cured? And what makes you say it should be uncommon? The fact that we know of few only tells you that they learned how to hide or live with it suppressed inside of them. Even today, apparently staight people spring fourth after multiple kids, having tried their whole lives to just ignore their natural urges.
 
+1 to this thread. If your ruler is homosexual and there is a homosexual courtier, you should be allowed the same adultery events as a hetero ruler. Lets not kid ourselves that this didn't happen. Probably the most famous homosexual relationship between ruler and courtier was Alexander the Great and his buddy/general Hephastion.
 
I agree that there should be more events, and I think it's worth discussing on here as long as people remain civil.

Also, if you set up a spy network you get that event about a noble/courtier being homosexual, but none of the options do anything. Am I missing something, or are they dead-end options?
 
I predict a positive future for this thread...

I dunno. I've read some quite interesting threads on here on medieval homosexuality.

Do we actually have much evidence of regular homosexual scandals (among contemporaries, not later commentators)? I've picked up the impression (and will happily take correction) that it wasn't seen as the sort of identity defining thing that we do today - that it was a sin in the eyes of God and the zealous, but then so were many common sexual proclivities. Would a noble who was rumoured or known to have engaged in homosexuality actually be disgraced in the way we are used to from more recent European history?
 
I sort of thought that the homosexual traits relations penalty was still rather small because the character was "still in the closet" so to speak. There would be suspicions and other characters might find his behavior a bit odd. But if your characters leanings became widely known it would lead to much larger consequences, so an event chain for that might be appropriate. Thats my take at least.
 
IWould a noble who was rumoured or known to have engaged in homosexuality actually be disgraced in the way we are used to from more recent European history?
I'd guess that when a catholic leader's homosexuality becomes public, the Pope would be quite upset, and would most likely excommunicate that person, which would then have alot of trouble on his hands. As for "lowborn", they would probably be given the death penalty were they discovered. I'd like to hear an expert about that though. Now that I think about it though, a well developed event questline tree where you struggle to keep your secret hidden, and are faced with moral dilemmas would be quite interesting. +1 to OP.
 
+1 to this thread. If your ruler is homosexual and there is a homosexual courtier, you should be allowed the same adultery events as a hetero ruler. Lets not kid ourselves that this didn't happen. Probably the most famous homosexual relationship between ruler and courtier was Alexander the Great and his buddy/general Hephastion.

Yeah but homosexuality wasn't frowned upon in Ancient Greece. The ancient greeks actually invented recreational gay sex.

I dunno. I've read some quite interesting threads on here on medieval homosexuality.

Do we actually have much evidence of regular homosexual scandals (among contemporaries, not later commentators)? I've picked up the impression (and will happily take correction) that it wasn't seen as the sort of identity defining thing that we do today - that it was a sin in the eyes of God and the zealous, but then so were many common sexual proclivities. Would a noble who was rumoured or known to have engaged in homosexuality actually be disgraced in the way we are used to from more recent European history?

Gay men were burned along with witches, back in the day. But the gay men would be thrown in with the bundles (faggots) of sticks below as they were seen as less human than the witches. Hence the derogatory use of 'faggot' today towards gay men. So yeah it seemed to be taken fairly seriously back then.
 
Yeah but homosexuality wasn't frowned upon in Ancient Greece.
That statement is highly debatable, but I will not open this can of worms.

In the time period where CK takes place homosexuality was not accepted.
The punishment was death.
If Paradox does include more "social" events for gay characters they would also have to include a lot of events that would have the characters killed if/once discovered.
I don't think we want that.
 
Gay men were burned along with witches, back in the day. But the gay men would be thrown in with the bundles (faggots) of sticks below as they were seen as less human than the witches. Hence the derogatory use of 'faggot' today towards gay men. So yeah it seemed to be taken fairly seriously back then.

I'm pretty sure that is an urban legend. Checking the etymology of the term faggot, as meaning homosexual, the origin seems to be early twentieth century America.

The reason I'm curious about this is that I've seen people arguing previously that a lot of our conceptions of medieval attitudes to homosexuality are seriously anachronistic, and I've never really seen convincing arguments against it. Not that it was not regarded as a sin, or was not on occasion brutally punished, but more the idea that people can be defined as gay or straight or bi; that homosexuality was a practice that some people would engage in because they were naturally predisposed towards it, while the large majority would have no interest in it.

Just doing a bit of random internet reading, and it seems that "sodomy" was a fairly general word during the period, and referred to a range of sexual practices which could be either male-male or male-female, which didn't result in conception.

I'd be interested to know if there were any cases of high nobles suffering serious secular or religious censure, especially if we can be sure it wasn't a case where the real motives weren't political.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.