Hey, OP. I think you raise very good, and respectful, questions. There is certainly nothing wrong with them. I also sympathize as a fellow overthinker.

However, be it stealth or identity sliders... I have one firm stance. That is, features should be targeted at the people enjoying them.

I don't think that's either you or me. Larian should poll the people interested for best results. Having a questline about gender identity, flat chests for body models (because binding) could be good. Lots of options theoretically available.

I also have another point: voice training. If in doubt, how would you conclude someone's gender?

I assume trans Tav has simply taken steps to either pass or be ambigeous enough that people clock them by voice. Of course, that is an in universe explanation, not what the player /has/ to do. However, that's good enough for me.

Sex scenes and genital preferences... In real life, these are relevant questions. In a game, where nothing is real, I'm quite satisfied with simply NPCs having none. The execution of sex scenes is another matter, but that brings me back to "just ask trans people".

Nonbinary people do not appear to have been included in this game. I wouldn't roleplay as myself anyway, but I'm also already quite glad they're trying/at all/ on this subject. I don't know If it's feasible to adjust for enbies this late into development. There's so many flavours. Nonbinary isn't just a third gender. No matter what Larian chooses, it will skip over people.

Unlike trans people, there's really no in universe explanation. I'd rather have no enby Tav over a poorly done last minute fix... but that's just me. I don't know If D&D has a race with no sexual dimorphism. But, If there was, that would be a good baby step in the right direction. Get the concept Into people's minds. Maybe it would be more enjoyable for people who aren't LGBT+, too.

In the current political climate of gaming, I think that's something we could both ask for and have a result that wouldn't look like "pandering". Unfortunately, to many, anything that appeals to a minority is "pandering". So, you have to be clever about it.

Edit: What I also found important on the topic, thinking about it, is to note that not every game needs to have every option.

In Bg3, there is good reason to have more options than usual. In other games or smaller projects, not so much. In the end, we should accept how much a developer thinks is relevant in the frame of their RPG. Consequently, I also think there's not so much a "trend" in gaming as developers being able to be more open on what they want to work on. They also have queer people on their teams. It's rarely straight people pandering to the LGBT as us making content for ourselves. Self expression in work, not just consumption.

I think that freedom is wonderful. We can also reframe the conversation.

The existence of trans people is well established. So, I believe even an extremist who believes it a mental illness would have to aknowledge that in D&D, you can well play mentally ill characters. Nobody has to change their view points, though they can experiment with a character's mind If they so wish. Scrubbing the existence of trans people out of a game with rape and slavery in it seems like going too far. Look, nobody is playing this with the expectation to never be made uncomfortable, ever.

If anything, If we want to help these people curate their game more, I would advocate for limiting who you're hit on by. Paradoxically, that would also be rather "woke". Sex repulsed people exist. Throw everyone a bone equally and all that.

Considering how clumsy the game is in separating platonic from romantic feelings, being able to turn each romance off box by box can really just improve gameplay.

Last edited by Silver/; 02/01/23 11:47 PM. Reason: Addition