Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Gaming through denial
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6387145" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>First, I don't think the discussion of Japanese sexual tropes is one we really want to have since it would certainly derail the thread.</p><p></p><p>Secondly, in my game at least, an advantage like "being universally loved by both sexes" would not be one you could claim merely by stating that of the character and declaring it in background. No player is allowed to declare tangible mechanical advantages on the basis of the character's flavor or written background. Anything you want to have as a starting that is a tangible advantage must be reflected on the character sheet. If you wanted to be so beautiful that you were universally loved by both sexes, you'd for example take the Attractive and Androgynous traits, a reasonably high charisma and probably some ranks in Diplomacy and/or Bluff. You could then declare your character was so stunningly beautiful that everyone of either sex was fascinated by them, because the mechanical effect would match the flavor you were claiming. You could claim that about yourself precisely because (and to the extent that) it would be true in game that propositions based on that claim would produce the positive fortune outcome.</p><p></p><p>You are allowed to claim any sort of flavor you want that doesn't imply any direct benefit. For example, you are allowed to claim that you are the king's son, provided you write your background in such a way that you gain no specific benefit from the relationship - for example you are a disowned, disgraced, bastard, who has been barred from court and is neither widely recognized nor widely admired. If you want tangible benefits from this relationship, you must pay for the them with the appropriate traits and feats - noble rank, wealthy, patron, etc.</p><p></p><p>In general, most DMs without background traits in their game would simply just refuse to approve any background that gave the character considerable advantage above and beyond what could be justified from their character sheet.</p><p></p><p>I've seen this sort of behavior from a player before. It sucks for everyone, because its blatant spot light stealing and the sort of players that engage in it basically want to play solo with an audience and treat the GM as being a device for self-gratification and self-validation. Any GM that doesn't concede to their demands in every situation is deemed wrong, and so play must stop until they get their way. You end up spending more time arguing about the game than playing it, and if you don't argue, then you must accept that one player in the group has the power of "Win Button" which he may use at any time to get anything wishes.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There are plenty of reasons to challenge the disguise. For one thing, the rules on disguise state that you need 1d3x10 minutes to prepare one, and imply that a disguise is in fact a disguise - that is something you apply that obscures your appearance. Disrobing is implicitly equivalent to removing the disguise, particularly in the case of disguising ones gender. For another, if you allow this sort of thing to stand, then you are basically punishing anyone who spent points on being able to disguise themselves. The tacit lesson you are stating at your table is, "Although the rules I've given you to use state that there is a disguise skill that applies in these situations, you are and would be a fool to spend any resources on the ability to disguise oneself because in play I'm going to ignore that in favor of going with what I feel like, up to and including favoritism on my part in how I apply the rules." </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While this argument might well apply to an aberration like a beholder or mind flayer, if for now other reason that such races probably don't care about humanoid gender, the same argument seems silly to apply in relation to races with basically human body plans and similar gender norms, such as the fey. Indeed, if anything, fey that might willing engage in sexual activity with humanoids such as satyrs or dryads - as "small gods" of fertility - might well have an easier time determining gender than members of the character's own race.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And yet, in general in those cases, the individual in question has gone to great lengths to produce a believable disguise and has great practice in doing so and behaving and speaking like a female and probably spending more even than the usual 1d3 x 10 minutes to produce it. If the PC in question had high ranks in disguise or sufficient charisma, then their ability to create disguises which survived sustained observation might be believable.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>However, the player in question is not submitting to even this most basic concession to the rules. He is declaring by fiat that his disguise is impenetrable regardless of his ranks in disguise (or rather lack thereof) and regardless of the insight and perception abilities of the witness. He's even claiming by fiat that his disguise is impenetrable even in cases where a disguise has not be applied!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6387145, member: 4937"] First, I don't think the discussion of Japanese sexual tropes is one we really want to have since it would certainly derail the thread. Secondly, in my game at least, an advantage like "being universally loved by both sexes" would not be one you could claim merely by stating that of the character and declaring it in background. No player is allowed to declare tangible mechanical advantages on the basis of the character's flavor or written background. Anything you want to have as a starting that is a tangible advantage must be reflected on the character sheet. If you wanted to be so beautiful that you were universally loved by both sexes, you'd for example take the Attractive and Androgynous traits, a reasonably high charisma and probably some ranks in Diplomacy and/or Bluff. You could then declare your character was so stunningly beautiful that everyone of either sex was fascinated by them, because the mechanical effect would match the flavor you were claiming. You could claim that about yourself precisely because (and to the extent that) it would be true in game that propositions based on that claim would produce the positive fortune outcome. You are allowed to claim any sort of flavor you want that doesn't imply any direct benefit. For example, you are allowed to claim that you are the king's son, provided you write your background in such a way that you gain no specific benefit from the relationship - for example you are a disowned, disgraced, bastard, who has been barred from court and is neither widely recognized nor widely admired. If you want tangible benefits from this relationship, you must pay for the them with the appropriate traits and feats - noble rank, wealthy, patron, etc. In general, most DMs without background traits in their game would simply just refuse to approve any background that gave the character considerable advantage above and beyond what could be justified from their character sheet. I've seen this sort of behavior from a player before. It sucks for everyone, because its blatant spot light stealing and the sort of players that engage in it basically want to play solo with an audience and treat the GM as being a device for self-gratification and self-validation. Any GM that doesn't concede to their demands in every situation is deemed wrong, and so play must stop until they get their way. You end up spending more time arguing about the game than playing it, and if you don't argue, then you must accept that one player in the group has the power of "Win Button" which he may use at any time to get anything wishes. There are plenty of reasons to challenge the disguise. For one thing, the rules on disguise state that you need 1d3x10 minutes to prepare one, and imply that a disguise is in fact a disguise - that is something you apply that obscures your appearance. Disrobing is implicitly equivalent to removing the disguise, particularly in the case of disguising ones gender. For another, if you allow this sort of thing to stand, then you are basically punishing anyone who spent points on being able to disguise themselves. The tacit lesson you are stating at your table is, "Although the rules I've given you to use state that there is a disguise skill that applies in these situations, you are and would be a fool to spend any resources on the ability to disguise oneself because in play I'm going to ignore that in favor of going with what I feel like, up to and including favoritism on my part in how I apply the rules." While this argument might well apply to an aberration like a beholder or mind flayer, if for now other reason that such races probably don't care about humanoid gender, the same argument seems silly to apply in relation to races with basically human body plans and similar gender norms, such as the fey. Indeed, if anything, fey that might willing engage in sexual activity with humanoids such as satyrs or dryads - as "small gods" of fertility - might well have an easier time determining gender than members of the character's own race. And yet, in general in those cases, the individual in question has gone to great lengths to produce a believable disguise and has great practice in doing so and behaving and speaking like a female and probably spending more even than the usual 1d3 x 10 minutes to produce it. If the PC in question had high ranks in disguise or sufficient charisma, then their ability to create disguises which survived sustained observation might be believable. However, the player in question is not submitting to even this most basic concession to the rules. He is declaring by fiat that his disguise is impenetrable regardless of his ranks in disguise (or rather lack thereof) and regardless of the insight and perception abilities of the witness. He's even claiming by fiat that his disguise is impenetrable even in cases where a disguise has not be applied! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Gaming through denial
Top