If the player character isn’t required to have a sexual relationship with either of them, it can count as an asexual option. Even if the player character chooses to have sex with them at some point of the story it can still count as an asexual relationship. Not experiencing sexual attraction doesn’t ‘forbid’ taking sexual actions.
I don’t think it can be an aromatic option because of the required emotional intimacy, unless it can be purely platonic/not romantic form of emotional intimacy.
Yep, I get it. And thanks to @AletheiaKnights for confirming it for me.
Yes, that makes sense. And works well with what I was saying about letting the MC make the choice to define relationships with the NPCs instead of overall. And it especially works with another possible RO I’ve got in mind that can either be an f-buddy (for the aro MCs who like casual sex) or a legitimate RO–he will ask after a certain point (this is weird relationship so it’s not right after the first sexual encounter) if the MC wants more than casual sex, but needs to know sooner rather than later.
I get you. It’s jarring for some non-ace MCs as well. I think my biggest problem, in general, with romance in these games is that, until recently, it was never really romance. The MC doesn’t get to know the LI at all–it’s just they’re either banging or they’re “in love” without ever really being around each other. And it’s too shallow for my tastes.
I think this is the part that confuses me the most when it comes to writing it. If the MC gets into a relationship with these two, should there be options offered to the MC to partake in a sexual encounter? Or for the MC to approach them? Or one of them (the whole idea of this is that, even for those who are only attracted to males or only to females can be with one of them sexually and be intimate friends with the other).
I’m not certain about this, really. I mean, say you play a female MC and she’s attracted to females only, but feels that connection to the male as well. She doesn’t have to have sex with him because that’s not how these two roll, but she does have to be very close to him, enough so that she can accept hugs, a peck on the top of the head, etc. Nothing too intrusive or even that would be considered a sexual touch, but still indications that the two are very close, closer than what most people would consider “just good friends.”
I guess my issue is, what is the clear delineation between platonic emotional intimacy and romantic emotional intimacy for people who aren’t having sex with each other? I have my own definition of it, but I’m coming at it from a hetero allo romantic (is that the correct term??) POV rather than an ace or aro POV, so I’m guessing it may not mesh with your definition.
Making it an option? Definitely. But saying ‘no’ to it should also be a valid choice. Like, being able to have a fulfilling relationship with your characters even without involving sex between (one of) them and the player character.
And, like, being able to define if it’s a ‘never’ kind of no, or a ‘not in this specific instance’ kind of no. Having to say no multiple times while knowing the answer is always going to be no is kinda annoying.
There isn’t really one. It’s more a personal interpretation.
That’s a really difficult one. It’s annoying when a character you’re not interested in keeps throwing themselves at you, but by the same token, if you don’t enthusiastically embrace them being really forward it cuts off completely in some games. I’m not 100% sure how to fix that for the characters that are very forward in their approaches. I personally don’t like games that come right out and say “so who do you want” to set a variable, rather use other triggers as sometimes people don’t want any of them yet/ever/haven’t decided/are interested in getting to know more than one person before deciding.
The games that do annoy me a bit, are the ones that cut content if you don’t romance a character (or at least not enough for the game’s stats). One game I can think of for example basically cuts off and ends early and you don’t get a satifying conclusion if you haven’t “adequately” romanced one of the characters. That could easily have been improved by allowing the person to go to the event by themselves, or with one of the other characters as a friend. That way you don’t “fail” a game or miss out on content if you don’t want to date the available NPCs.
I think where it often becomes problematic, is that there frequently seems to be a single “relationship” stat with the goal of ones pegged as potential RO’s of being their gf/bf as the ultimate goal. It’s quite disconcerting when you meet a character and think for whatever reason “can’t see me dating them, but they’d be fun to go off on some adventures with”, they make a pass (or skip right to the point in some games!), you turn down the offer, and all of a sudden you’re being treated like you hate them because your relationship stat (which is a combo of romance and friendship status) has dived. I think this has wider implications for everyone’s enjoyment of games, not strictly people who identify as either Ace or Aromantic.
This can be fixed where authors want to and it’s appropriate to the storyline (I mean if you’re reading a game where the premise is to hook up with people, then sure), by writing in a solid “other” relationship (friend, colleague, comrade etc) with the potential to romance them as an alternative controlled by a separate stat. That way hopefully you don’t get cut out of story sections, or can only love/hate NPC’s as you go along.
I’d also love for ace NPC’s to be better represented. There’s this thing that seems to happen in the media in general that I kind of tend to call the “Sheldon” effect. Basically they’re robots or emotionally maladjusted individuals who’s spectrum ranges from ice queen to quirky loner and need to be fixed. Just write them as normal characters, with normal response, with the exception that they’ll turn down certain types of advances from the MC (or if the MC from the NPC doing so) and it doesn’t necessarily mean they hate you 
Hear, hear!
In general, I would say that if you ever portray a character as needing to be fixed (as distinct from needing to be helped, or needing to learn or grow or make specific changes to achieve their goals), you’re doing it wrong.
(Also, quirky loner ice queens rule, if I do say so myself. )
As an ace, I’d honestly love to see more characters like Todd Chavez from BoJack Horseman. He was a lovable goofball who was not primarily defined by his asexuality. Actually, it was a part of him he (and we as the viewers) were able to discover pretty late into the game and that I found really comforting and lovely.
Some thoughts re: asexual representation (sorry if this isn’t helpful at all and I’m just rambling on like a fool)
The automatic conflation of being ace with being aro truly irked me in some games. If you give me a choice to play an ace character but don’t specify that it automatically also includes aromanticism, I will feel cheated. Let me choose for myself if my asexual MC is aromantic or alloromantic. Or, if your game only offers allosexual/alloromantic and asexual/aromantic routes, please clearly advertise those as such.
If you want to allow ace headcanons without specifically including an ace option in your game, please try to avoid instant physical attraction in the narrative upon first meeting a romanceable NPC. It is absoluty fine if the MC likes their glasses or their haircut or even comments on their toned figure, but it this appreciation shouldn’t be described in an overly sexualized manner (e.g. focusing on particular body parts) that invokes similarities to dogs drooling at the sight of a nice, big piece of steak.
Don’t deny asexual characters sexual content on principle. This might seem counter-intuitive at first, but let me emphasize as someone who always plays sex-repulsed ace MCs (= no sex, ever), there are asexual people out there who choose to have sex and they are no less asexual for it.
So, if you offer the choice to be asexual in your game and it doesn’t involve any sex (which is perfectly fine, by the way!), please be upfront about the extent of which an asexual MC gets to live and express their asexuality in your game, for example by directly tying a statement like “I am not attracted to people in this manner and therefore choose to abstain from sexual intercourse” (better worded, of course) to the asexuality option.
To me, this would signal the available “mode” of asexuality of your game without necessarily and unhelpfully implying that asexuality as a spectrum absolutely, ~never ever~ does involve any actual sex.
Conversely, if you want to offer sexual content for an ace MC, be aware that it can be a tricky, even triggering subject for some of your readers. Always make it a choice and/or maybe even negotiable at certain steps/acts of intimacy. (I realize this might be overly complicated to code, so take it as a suggestion, not an absolute must-have!)
Please try to avoid stereotypes. Not all aces are socially awkward nerds or child-like, innocent, pure virgins. Some are and that’s really great and absolutely valid, but you rarely see extroverted, foul-mouthed aces in fiction who know more about sex than your average allosexual because they thoroughly researched it before they concluded for themselves that it’s simply not for them. Also, being ace doesn’t exclude you from being kinky (yes, there’s such a thing as non-sexual kink!). Ace people are not a monolith, so maybe try to subvert at least some clichés. Or just one. That’s a cool start as well!
Something I will personally never tire of (but others might): Asexual characters and puns! Love it. All the awards! Give me an ace achievement with a ridiculous title and I might even want to marry you. Give me five of them and I definitely will marry you (depending on the dad-humor levels of your puns).
If you’re allosexual and you want to include an experience/route that specifically involves aspects of asexuality in your game (kudos for that!), you should definitely consider getting feedback specifically from the ace player base available. Do your research. Empathy alone won’t save the day because asexuality isn’t just being “a little quirky about sex”.
Assuming you’re dealing with a real-world inspired, modern setting, being/growing up asexual might mean the following for an asexual MC:
Feeling estranged due to the constant bombardement of very confusing societal messages that make absolutely no sense to them and their lived experience (e.g. some asexuals growing up believing that sex is just something like an elaborate inside joke everybody talks about, but no one actually does).
Feeling deviant, even if they’re attracted to the “acceptable” opposite sex because the form their attraction takes is not considered ~valid enough (especially in asexual boys and men).
Developing unhealthy coping mechanisms to deal with a world that is clearly not suited for them and their needs.
Finding your “real” identity a lot later in life than your peers because the concept of asexuality was never an option to begin with.
Not sure if I’m making any sense anymore (it’s very late here!), so I better head off to bed. 
This. Everything in this post. This is what everyone trying to write asexual characters needs to take to heart. This is what I’ve spent the last 24 hours trying to say, only much, much better.
First, I really appreciate your explanation. I do have a question or two, though…
Do you mean that even offering that content is triggering? Or do you mean specifically how it’s presented? Given the first quoted block, I’m assuming you mean how it’s presented, but want to make sure you don’t mean that it’s automatically a lose-lose situation for a writer, because not offering it is bad but offering it is also bad.
For MCs, this should be a given no matter what their preferences, but I know it is not always the case. I’ve played more than one game where my MC was forced to be a flustered mess at points that made no sense to me, especially for MCs who are pretty open about sex and attraction. I hate it when the narrative forces emotions on my MCs, and hate it even more when their responses to being hit on are decided by the author with no input from the stats.
I did not know this. And am now curious exactly how such kinks play out.
If it’s not a real-world inspired setting, is it okay to ignore the negative feelings you listed? I just don’t see beings that live extraordinarily long lives being concerned with what other people do in the bedroom (or public, if that’s their thing). Different fantasy cultures will obviously have different opinions, but I just want to make sure it’s not something that will automatically set someone off to play an ace or aro or somewhere on that spectrum and it not be something that causes anyone to blink, much less causes a disconnect with those around them.
Someone did an unofficial poll on kink website FetLife, in a group that had both asexuals and allosexuals. The question was, if you had to choose, would you rather be able to do BDSM but never have sex, or have sex but never do BDSM? Almost without exception, the asexuals said the former, and the allosexuals said the latter.
When considering kink and asexuality, it’s important to remember that asexuals are people who don’t experience primary sexual attraction, not people who never have sex. Of course, there are some who never have sex, but there are also some who do, for any number of reasons.
It’s also important to remember that kink isn’t just about weird sex practices. If it’s hard to imagine kink without sex, just ask any dominatrix who works openly in a place where prostitution is illegal how she passes the time with her clients. There are a lot of things that are erotic without being necessarily sexual: impact play, humiliation, certain clothing items, even high Victorian formal protocol.
Many people who don’t experience sexual attraction are still drawn to certain activities or practices that fall under the heading of kink, such as stimulation play, certain kinds of roleplay, or power exchange. Some may indulge in these activities without sexual contact, or they may be interested in sex in the context of kink in a way they never could be in a vanilla context. For example, an asexual submissive may find it emotionally gratifying to please their dominant partner sexually, even if sex isn’t something they crave for its own sake.
I don’t know if anyone still remembers Guenevere, but in my opinion the author handled this point very well.
I do! I think it was especially interesting to see representation of how an asexual character (or one who doesn’t want to have sex for other reasons) might function in an arranged marriage where things like heirs are expected. Not something any other game I’ve played even comes close to touching.
Luckily Arthur is a good person and can accept it if sex is totally off the table.
I might drop my own strange ace experience here, for the reference that people like me also exist, and characters like that might exist.
I’m not sure i know a correct term for what i am though… sex-favorable asexual maybe? (blurred mild nsfw)
I don’t have sexual desires and don’t really feel arousal.
I like looking at people’s naked bodies, but it’s just from an aesthetic/emotional point of view.
I love to have sex with (to) people i deeply care for, because their physical reactions, and emotions, and vulnerability, and trust give me so much emotionally, it’s absolutely worth it. It’s amazing to have someone so vulnerable in your arms and want to make them feel good and safe.
All that amazingness happens just in my brain, while my body feels pretty much stone-cold and indifferent.
My partner initiates when they want. I never initiate.
I’m always on giving side, never on receiving, never will be.
I don’t feel awkward or shy about any of my partners’ body parts, but i do about all of mine.
I’d rather not be touched sexually, even by my own partner, and would be really uncomfortable about it. Thankfully, they enjoy it how it is. Telling this because this sort of character might need a specific sort of MC… someone who is okay with keeping their hands to themselves 
Hmmm, that said, i’m afraid an ace like that might be tricky to write, because for those who aren’t like that, it might feel like “you call the character ace and then sleep with them”, idc. But if you somehow manage to write it so that it is obvious that sex isn’t needed for their body, but is nice for their emotions, it might work.
For personality reference, i’m kind and very caring person, i can be really goofy, i love puns and dad jokes and to be softly rude to my partner (like “put on a hat, you dumb idiot, it’s freezing outside”) and i don’t feel awkward talking about sex though i tend not to be overly descriptive. I won’t flirt with anyone, even my partner, but i do enjoy being flirted with if it’s the person i like (or really hate it if it’s the person i don’t care about and will pretend to be oblivious)
One of the biggest pitfalls, as I catch up on the thread, is trying to write a character that tries to be everything on the spectrum.
If I write a character based on @Christian.Valentine, they would be different than if I wrote a character based on where I am on the spectrum.
A writer, instead of trying to write a character that is “everything to everyone” might have better success writing their character as a unique individual.
That might be well known concept that is obvious… but in terms of orientation, romance, and sexuality, it gets more complicated.
I also feel, peeling off of what @Eiwynn said. A huge pitfall is also not being able to please everyone.
It is clear and known that everyone has their own experiences and definitions of sexuality, and people who are ace or aro may experience it differently from one another. As a writer, how do you write characters that are accessible to everyone and accommodate the diverse range of sexualities and romantic preferences without overly writing about it.
I honestly don’t know if it’s possible to accurately capture the minutia of the different experiences people in the ace/aro or even other sexuality categories as it is often so wide and so personal to the person. What I believe writers can and should do is portray the general experience, but either offer options or open-endedness that allows each reader to make canon their own interpretations.
Also huge thanks to @Christian.Valentine for sharing on their experiences 
I suspect that writing “everything to everyone” comes with the problem when the author doesn’t feel their character’s personality yet, but vaguely desires to please certain groups of people without belonging to that group and understanding the concept (that said, we might not fully understand how it works for others on the same spectrum).
This might not necessarily be a bad thing per se, it’s good when the author wants their game to be inclusive, but i would probably recommend the author who wants but struggles to write an individual ace person to actually find an ace person who is comfortable speaking openly about their experience, ask them questions and use them as a reference for how it might work.
Getting feedback is essential, but it sometimes is harder than it seems at first blush. The most efficient and effective way to approach this in this community is to ask for it explicitly. @HarrisPS has shown us how to do this:
There are other ways as well, such as opening a poll on the subject in your WiP thread.
In general terms: this is also known as finding sensitivity readers. The trouble is that most people do not necessarily have the mental “spoons” to answer questions or teach about (or validate) themselves.
If you are reading demos/games and providing feedback, it might help an author to know if you are available to them. This does not mean that you must do so. If you do end up helping someone, be sure you are upfront and clear in establishing your boundaries… establishing such a reader-author relationship is a very rewarding experience, but it can be very hard to keep up over time.
Lastly, remember: the author has the final say – so even if your feedback is 100% correct and the author should listen to you… if they decide not to, you should respect that their writing is theirs; for better or worse.
I’ve struggled with this since I have several playtesters on the ace/aro/gray/demi spectrum and all of them want slightly different things. After lengthy discussions (good playtesters who can verbalize what they feel are the best thing ever) I settled for using a variable I call hrny (yes, I know). It simply controls how comfortable the mc is with feeling/appreciating/experiencing purely physical attraction. It’s something that can be turned on during the game through choices where the player expressively chooses to have those reactions. It doesn’t lock anybody out of anything, but it changes descriptions and experiences.
In addition, there are options to talk about/decide that the physical things are not for you once romances have gone far enough that might be an issue. This is also not forever, it can be for the moment, and might be subject to change in the future if the player feels the situation has changed.
There are also fade to black options, for players who want their character to do things, but don’t feel comfortable reading about it.
It’s a complicated web, I can’t make everybody happy, but this seems to work alright.
The simple sexual orientation thing I had in Rebirth just didn’t work in the long run.
Oh, i agree with that, asking the community is a good idea! My first thought was asking a specific person because, idk, after sharing my stuff, my mind just skipped to the hypothetical situation when i am being asked? But i agree that having as many opinions of people who are comfortable to share as possible is a better approach, and i most probably would’ve thought about that if i had a need to write a character whose concept i might not fully understand.
(which i don’t, because while i dream about writing my own novel and have a plot and a few characters decently outlined, i’m not a native english speaker and very self-conscious about it, my writing can be grammatically incorrect or stiff, so i would need a serious beta reading, and idk how to even find people for something that huge)
Plus, while i would enjoy characters with very specific quirks, sometimes it’s good when a character is more… well, mild in that area? To be relatable to by more people from the spectrum, to be easier understandable by people from outside the spectrum. I hope it didn’t come across wrong, i didn’t mean characters would be bland or stereotypical, no. But probably the reference of the majority of the community would be better on many occasions (especially since i have a strong opinion that character’s sexuality/gender should be just a little part of them but not their main trait or struggle)