I can’t stay quiet about this any longer. An issue has sprung up that has truly outraged the Arkham community on all sides – the issue of representation of characters’ sexual orientation within the lore of the game. Most sane people would agree that a person’s sexual orientation shouldn’t really matter much to who they are. FFG, though, saw fit to fly in the face of progress and go a totally different track with their game, making a big deal out of something that shouldn’t matter at all. Most of this criticism has of course, centered around one character, one character’s whose sexual orientation has been shoved down everyone’s throats from the moment he was announced.
That character, of course, is Mark Harrigan.
From the moment one first encounters Mark, one may think this is a character who’s going to keep his private life PRIVATE. Unfortunately, that is not what happens. Right out the gate, the player’s eyes are accosted by the first line on his card. “You begin the game with Sophie (In Loving Memory) in play.” Apparently, the developers of this game saw fit to include the very female name of Mark’s different-gendered lover right on the front of his card. It’s as if the developers of this card game – a card game people play for FUN, not to be PREACHED AT – are trying to say this character’s sex life is the most important thing about him.
At this point, you may say, “Well, who cares if he’s straight? Just play the game and don’t think about it.” The only problem is, if you are playing Mark, you have to think about him being straight ALL. THE. TIME. This is because Mark’s 100% female lover is literally a signature asset. Talk about representation GONE WILD! One can only wonder what FFG was thinking with this one, taking a character’s heterosexuality and making a signature asset out of it!
Not only is it a signature asset, it also flips to become a signature weakness. In fact, playing around Sophie as an asset and as a weakness is core to how Mark works mechanically. The crazy developers were not content to leave Mark’s sexual orientation just be a piece of the lore in the game. They had to shove it into the way he plays as a character too! It’s like the developers are saying his heterosexuality is a core part of who he is! YIKES.
I, like many others, wish we could live in a world where one’s sexual orientation is not treated like it’s such a big deal. Unfortunately, it’s hard to imagine such a world on the way with characters like Mark Harrigan slowing down progress by shoving heterosexuality in the face of people who, frankly, just want to play board games.
Characters like Calvin Wright are fine, though. No problem there.
Rite of Seeking 
What a dumb post.
Since when is it wrong to make character heterosexual? Maybe author has the problem and he must see everyone as hetero or homo sexual at the same time. This is game about 1920, and that character is a war veteran. Read some books about war time and maybe you will manage to understand how many people left their loved ones home, lost them and kept their memory as a reason to live and keep doing whatever they are doing.
Haven`t seen this much nonsense from a post for a long time.
LikeLike
… man, I really wish I could tell if Gob was really this dumb or if they were just RP’ing along with the article.
LikeLike
Wow, you’re dense, Gob. You need to take a class in literature or something, because this is very, very clearly satire. It is satirizing the inclination many have for posting the complaint that FFG is shoving homosexuality down our throats. This is brilliant, and I’m really sorry to inform you that you’re not the brightest bulb in the room.
LikeLike
How can people read satire and not get it?
LikeLike
Are you familiar with the term “Satire”? “Lampoon”? “Sarcasm”, even?
LikeLike
I’m pretty certain the entire article is satire. Y’know, a joke poking fun at how people blow people’s sexual orientation way out of proportion. Only nonsense I see here is you treating it so seriously.
LikeLike
Brilliant satire. Jonathan Swift would be proud.
LikeLike
I get what you’re trying to do, but it really doesn’t work. When people complain about gay characters being shoved down our throats, it’s because it’s often both their sole defining characteristic and it adds nothing to the story. Mark’s heterosexuality is neither: he is an ex-soldier first and foremost, and his wife’s death is crucial to his being a Guardian.
LikeLike
Are you kidding me? What if sophie is a sister? Can someone not love a sister? And just because she COULD be a lover, that doesnt make him straight. He could be bi or pan or you know gay with one exception. You dont know if sophie is 100% female. That is such a transphobic thing to say. This article is bull and pointing it out means youre paying waaaay to much on his sexual orientation than the game. Who cares if he is straight. Get over yourself.
LikeLike
@Gob
You should also read Jonathan Swift’s ‘A Modest Proposal’.
LikeLike
I think this article is making a big deal out of nothing. In the time of the game homosexuality wasn’t that acceptable. So, it was normal for gay men to marry their friends (the most notable case is Alan Turing the father of computers). If you have to give sexual orientation to an investigator, you could very well make it match the socially-common way. Just like you’re trying to give sexuality to other investigators that don’t imply it, you could try and give a closeted sexuality to this one..
Role play is literally playing a role, you don’t need to try and passively attack a whole brand because they didn’t put your preferred assumption in one of their characters.
LikeLike
Making sexual orientation a center of the design is actually most prominent in case of Pete (and Duke)…
LikeLike
Risqué, but fun.
LikeLike
Just because Sophie is dressed feminine doesn’t mean they identify as female.
LikeLike