New Montaron Romance!!!

[Lava Del'Vortel]

By being a Zhentarim I wanted to say that he would have different priorities than "having sex right here, right now", not that they are homophobic. I was too tired to write what I meant.

Aaaand I never said that it has to do something with morality. Yeah, it's taste. It's what you find temptating. Interesting. Appealing.

...and since both me and Rhaella mentioned a prostitute, it may be quite an idea for the encounter!

[Rhaella]

Oh, sorry.  I was agreeing with you on it being a matter of taste rather than one of morality.  That part wasn't directed at you.

[TDouglas]

I'm not sure sexual orientation qualifies as being a matter of taste ... makes it sound like they woke up one morning and decided to be gay.  It's simply a question of how the brain is wired, with 10% going to one extreme or the other and the rest being somewhere inbetween.

That said, you get power dynamics in any relationship (gay or straight, sexual or platonic).  I direct your attention to the old phrase "who wears the pants in the family", which dealt with that situation and was directed exclusively (for the time period) at heterosexual couples.

I got to thinking about the problem last night tho, and realized Smiling Imp may have more on his plate than he realizes.  There are no indications (that I can tell) that Montaron is homophobic (nothing in BG1 to that effect), but he is pretty constantly referred to as psyhopathic throughout.  He definately doesn't like travelling with good / neutral aligned characters (I seem to recall him attacking such NPCs without provocation), and even the wording in his (BG1) bio supports the assertion.  I'm certainly no expert, but I seem to recall that psychopathic individuals do not feel love (or empathize with others to any great degree), although they are extremely good manipulators.  If memory serves, they're pretty much loners.  None of which bodes well for a romance

Given Montys tendency towards violence (and, as per Murneth, apparent predisposition towards torture), I'm guessing the prostitute path might well end up with him being a "Jack the Ripper" type ... it would certainly be in keeping with his BG1 presentation.  I still don't perceive the NPC as being homophobic, tho if psychopathic he would certainly not hesitate to use sex to control charname if he thought he could.

My posts have been trying to lead towards a relationship path with the NPC (not necessarily a sexual one), with some interesting problems for charname with it's unfolding.  You'd run into these problems regardless of the nature of said relationship tho.  Trying to "flesh out" the character (with the bare bones information presented in BG1) is going to lead in some interesting directions.

Honestly Smiling Imp, for your first romance you may be better off choosing someone more ... stable? 

[Lava Del'Vortel]

Yeah, sure! I'm glad you joined the discussion as you know more about Zhentarims than we do

Oh, and about the prostitute thing: it would be a funny experience. Like meeting a courtesan saying something like "You're back Monty? You're one of my best clients, you know?" and the talk with charname about it

[Rhaella]

I'm not sure sexual orientation qualifies as being a matter of taste ... makes it sound like they woke up one morning and decided to be gay.  It's simply a question of how the brain is wired, with 10% going to one extreme or the other and the rest being somewhere inbetween.

That said, you get power dynamics in any relationship (gay or straight, sexual or platonic).  I direct your attention to the old phrase "who wears the pants in the family", which dealt with that situation and was directed exclusively (for the time period) at heterosexual couples.

Well, I'm not sure anyone wakes up one morning and decides that today they're going to like pizza or broccoli or whatever else.  I'm just using it as a synonym for 'preference.'  As for only 10% being entirely one way or the other... that may be true, but a lot of people are still close enough to make no substantial difference. When it comes to writing romances, I wouldn't be willing to make a bisexual NPC unless they were in the 40-60% range.  Unless the NPC is pretty close to that true bisexual mark, you're setting yourself up for a hell of a lot of extra work to make it believable.

And yeah, there are power dynamics anywhere, but chauvinistic men tend to pretend otherwise. I'm not sure if Montaron is sexist, though. If he is, it's certainly not to the same degree as Edwin, Eldoth, or even Korgan.

Honestly Smiling Imp, for your first romance you may be better off choosing someone more ... stable? 

Agreed. Hell, if you still wanted something ugly, Eldoth might be a better bet.

[TDouglas]

quote/ Yeah, sure! Cheesy I'm glad you joined the discussion as you know more about Zhentarims than we do Wink /quote

Ohhhh kaaay, I wasn't aware we were discussing the Zhents, but have it your way

As for how Monty is going to be perceived, that will vary by individual ... there's no "one true way" to experience things (especially something as ambiguous as an ill-defined NPC ) so any interpretation Smiling Imp chooses is fine.

As for the whole bisexual thing ... jeesh, how often does one have to state (and restate, and state again) that the post has nothing in particular to do with sex?  Much less sexual preference.  My point with Monty being psychopathic is that there are those who use sex as a tool and nothing more ... this is from real life, not just a mod.  How many times (in the real world) have you seen someone (male or female) use sex for the sole purpose of screwing up someone elses life for instance?  As I've said before, you don't have to be gay, straight, bi or a mushroom to indulge in any form of sexual activity ... the reasons for it are often complex and related more to the environment (and genetics) than preference (i.e. prisoners).

I'm wondering if the real problem here is trying to force "evil" characters to conform to "good" standards?  Perhaps Monty is "just misunderstood"?  Get real ... I fail to see why it's so impossible to simply let evil BE evil without all the morality plays.  Who really cares about sex (or orientation) in the first place ... a psychopath would not hesitate to do whatever was needful to accomplish his objectives -- period.  For all I care Monty could be a serial turnip rapist.  The point is to develop the NPC in an interesting way, allowing him to actually BE evil (instead of some watered down goody-goody).  For a romance (or even just a friendship) Monty is not going to be concerned about your feelings, your life dreams or any of the rest of that sappy crap.  He's evil, not good or neutral.  Your morality does not concern him in any way, means, shape or form (unless it starts interfering with his goals, in which case your life is probably forfeit).

[Lava Del'Vortel]

Actually I think the best thing would be writing a romance / NPC of your own, as most people associate your mod with bringing back old NPC rather than romances or huge friendships and I think that part won't get as much attention as it should.

...as for everything you wrote till now, why not you help with "Xzar and Monty" by contribution?

Ohhhh kaaay, I wasn't aware we were discussing the Zhents, but have it your way

Monty is a Zhentarim and social groups (any: mercenaries, chantries, family, friends) construct identity. That's a fact.

Dough, it is a matter of prefferences and they are shaped for a long long time and it also has SOMETHING to do with identity. Choosing to use sex as a tool is also a kind of prefference, not a matter of alignment, morality, mood or anything like that.
As for prisoners - not every single prisoner have sex while being imprisoned, right? That's an issue of prefference too, as it has a lot to do with both choice and an idea of satisfying own need. Some would masturbate, some would have sex with other men and some maybe wouldn't satisfy the urge, what may be equal to torturing him-/herself.

Facts you present are really generalizing, like stating prisoners satisfy themselves through sex with other imprisoned men. Yeah, it's a common knowledge, but what about the dimension of the phenomenon? And how many of those who have homosexual contact in prison actually wants it?

Getting satisfaction by crude sex has nothing to do with evilness, but with choices which are determined by many many many factors, and one of the most significant factor is the matter of prefference (a choice to satisfy it that way, or in a different way).

I agree Monty wouldn't care for your feeling, but he would care for himself, reputation, gold, winning what he wants to win. But it doesn't mean he would use any way, because even playing hardball isn't like that, as it includes all possible ways we consider and see.

[TDouglas]

My point would be that this character (if you go with the psychopath interpretation favored by BG1) would be the kind to use any form of "relationship" as a tool.  Monty is portrayed as a dangerous individual throughout BG1 ... the idea of him being a BG2 "Jack the Ripper" is perfectly consistent with his BG1 persona.  Maybe it would be a new twist on the skinner murders in the docks ... Monty could critique the tanner on his methods, and maybe open a path for the party to work WITH him rather than the good path of turning him in.  As I said, let evil BE evil.

As for prisoners, you're still thinking of sex as ONLY physical gratification ... you're forgetting that a healthy percentage of "prison sex" is actually "prison rape" ... it doesn't have anything to do with orientation at all, it's a form of power tripping.  Unfortunately, that's exactly the kind of behavior a psychopath would indulge in (regardless of his sexual preference).  Just saying ...

[Smiling Imp]

Lots of good dialog happening. Just a few things that ran through my mind.

I agree with the consensus, Monty would mostly frequent prostitutes and I like the idea of some of the harlots in the game knowing him and him having to explain that to <CHARNAME>.  I also like the 'Jack the Ripper' idea and even helping the tanner.

As far a Montaron and homosexuality, I remember reading a thread about the sexuality of certain BG characters and a lot of people seemed to agree that he and Xzar were in the closet. It seemed feasible at the time, but the more I thought, the more I began to believe that Montaron would not want any kind of emotional attachment, whether he was forthcoming about it or not. Sex for him would be about self-gratification, power and domination. Thus I could possibly see Montaron giving the business to a male <CHARNAME>, to let him know who is the boss. I also see him as a manipulator that will use people to get what he wants from them. As far as the other aspects of the friendship path besides sex, I will have to think about it, although any suggestions in this regard would be appreciated.

Yes.. Montaron may not be the ideal candidate for a romance, but at least then you guys won't be disappointed if  it stinks.  

[Lava Del'Vortel]

I'm getting slightly tired of it. You've got your own vision of what I'm writing, Dough. Like here:
I said:

And how many of those who have homosexual contact in prison actually want it?

While you say:

you're forgetting that a healthy percentage of "prison sex" is actually "prison rape"

So... uhm... I think you're just taking some bits of what I'm writing, you don't look at questions I ask etc. Seriously...

Everything's up to Imp and I don't think he needs a debate about sex in prison here.

[TDouglas]

Montaron may not be the ideal candidate for a romance, but at least then you guys won't be disappointed if it stinks.

You're being WAY too hard on yourself there ... you've been doing an excellent job so far   This IS going to be a bitch to write tho

I can easily see Uncle Monty trying to critique the tanner on his skinning techniques tho ... handled carefully, that could even be darkly hilarious .  Hmmm, ya know, you could even grant an improvement to the armor of human flesh you ultimately end up with.  Assuming the party decides to aid the tanner (and his boyz) there's no real reason you couldn't wind up with higher quality flesh than the tanner would have acquired ... it would probably take some extra components (besides Adalons blood), so could even work in an extra quest for it.  It would really just depend on what you want to do

Montys involvement would flow naturally from the psychopath angle ... many such individuals use human flesh to reupholster their furniture (and make some nice area rugs & throw pillows & such).  It's a pity the BG series doesn't use non-weapon proficiencies ... it's be a hoot if poor Monty could harvest the materials, but was constantly stabbing himself in the finger with the sewing needle

I really can't imagine Monty getting into a gay relationship, but then it's hard to imagine him in ANY romantic relationship ... from his BG1 descriptions, I'd say he's just not that kind of guy.  As you said, he would use romantic feelings someone else may develop to direct said persons actions.  Probably, in this case, he'd use charnames attempts at a relationship to drag him/her into the flesh harvesting trade (especially if there's good money involved).  Since Monty (in BG1 at least) tends to attack good/neutral party members, the relationship path (of any type) would only work if charname is evil ... although attempting to corrupt good or neutral characters would have its charms as well   It's one more thing you'd have to consider prior to writing (I warned you this is going to be a bitch to write ).

[BR4ZIL]

And you think Tsuki is a romantic romance? It's not. And no matter what you say, no matter what are the facts of the past, present or predicions about future; no matter in what culture or what are the other contexts (like alignment) are, there are men who won't accept male-male sex. Same goes for women. And I believe that Montaron is someone like that. He's not someone driven by urges, as he is more a merciles methodist (however, I'm not sure if he's that merciles after all). And he's a Zhentarim. I always fight for monorities, like homosexual players, but it doesn't mean that we have to make EVERY character bisexual. I think that Montaron would rather make fun of PC is he appeared to be a homosexual. That would be rather something apropriate. Offering some male-male sex (doesn't really matter if that's stuppose to be 'friends with benefits' relationship - I don't actually believe Monty would need that kind of benefits, anyway as he would rather hire a hooker than have sex with anyone who's near) just to stress how evil he is would be a rather out-of-character fixation.  

I gotta agree with Lava here, Montaron doesnt seems the guy that would do such thing. A "friends with benefits relationship" is something that might put Monty in a vulnerable position (said person would get to know his habits & such) and with him being a very careful person, it would seem very out of character for him to do that, i definitly see him getting a prostitue, someone that will be inconsequential to him later & with no need to worry.

If anything ,Xzar is a more likely candidate to have sex with a male PC (and he might not even know what he is doing  ).

[TDouglas]

Yeah, I suspect Xzar could have sex with one of Montys discarded turnips and not be aware of it

Again, however, this isn't really a question about orientation (or sex itself) ... it's about the type of relationship he'd be willing to enter into.  I agree he's going to keep his distance, but he'd do that with anyone (male, female or vegatable ).  I just see him trying to use any advantage he can get (even to include sex), regardless of his "orientation".

[BR4ZIL]

Yeah, I suspect Xzar could have sex with one of Montys discarded turnips and not be aware of it

Again, however, this isn't really a question about orientation (or sex itself) ... it's about the type of relationship he'd be willing to enter into.  I agree he's going to keep his distance, but he'd do that with anyone (male, female or vegatable ).  I just see him trying to use any advantage he can get (even to include sex), regardless of his "orientation".

Even then, IMO, Montaron wouldnt want to enter this kind of relationship (friends with benefits) with someone he has to be constantly with (the PC), that just seems imprudent of him. I know a Neutral Evil person has the "mercenary" atitude, but that doesnt mean he doesnt think on the consequences & the risk of doing such thing.

For example, Montaron wouldnt do it because he would either think said person would intrude in his personal space or maybe that person would inconsequentially fall in love with him (maybe he thinks he is that awesome  ) and he wouldnt want the trouble.

Montaron can be gay,bisexual or straight for all i care, but he wouldnt do anything with close company he has to keep, i see him being VERY wary & distant of the rest of the party.

[TDouglas]

  he wouldnt do anything with close company he has to keep, i see him being VERY wary & distant of the rest of the party 

And that's the issue exactly ... trying to figure out how Monty would respond to any form of relationship (including a "platonic" friendship).  The interesting question (and what Smiling Imp is shooting for) is if it would be possible to actually "get to know" the character ... to get into a relationship path (regardless of it's type).  And, if so, then what happens next