Adult: GUCK Development Forum again

[Vaxalon]

No, you misunderstand.

Maybe not every year. Every other year.

It takes an average of 20 months for ANY woman to get pregnant.

Take all of the penalties, slam them all together. Con 3, nursing, 45 years old, it all doesn't matter.

After an average of 20 months, she's pregnant.

 

[asra]

Prowess checks are a full round action and thus all of them are resolved for a single target at the end of the round (they may each be rolled on initiative count, but their effect does not take place until the end of the entire round). Each prowess check is rolled off the target's current state of arousal and physical condition. The highest successful arousal increase is used as the base roll. If another participant succeeds the DC neccessary to raise the target's arousal, the base roll recieves a +2 synergy bonus. If a participant simply hits the current arosual state DC there is no modifier. If the participant only can hit an arousal DC lower than the current state, then the base roll suffers a -2 circumstance penalty.

Maybe I'm missing something, but under the suggested rules, what good are Multiple Partners?

If we look at the gratifaction DCs, they are usually more then 10 DCs apart for each state. If to raise the Prowess roll, participants have to achive arousal increase, then the effects of multiple situmulation are apparently nearly neglable, especially regarding that under the hard core rules requires a additional 5 success to add 1 to the gratifaction table.

In the example, having both A & B succeed didn't seem to make much of a difference.

BTW, is there a maximal number for multiple partners?

 

[Xeriar]

No, you misunderstand.

Maybe not every year. Every other year.

It takes an average of 20 months for ANY woman to get pregnant.

Take all of the penalties, slam them all together. Con 3, nursing, 45 years old, it all doesn't matter.

After an average of 20 months, she's pregnant.

In early colonial times the marriage was considered unsuccessful if the wife was not pumping out a child a year.

 

[Psyckosama]

No, you misunderstand.

Maybe not every year. Every other year.

It takes an average of 20 months for ANY woman to get pregnant.

Take all of the penalties, slam them all together. Con 3, nursing, 45 years old, it all doesn't matter.

After an average of 20 months, she's pregnant.

Maybe I didn't make it clear... you still have to make the confermation roll.

Lets add the modifiers...

Normal roll needed (no counting critical sucess)... 15+3(con)+2(nursing)+1(age)=21... she need a critical... lets apply it to the confermation test... DC10 (didn't mention this) + 6... she needs to roll above a 16 this time. okay... now what do we have...

1/20 x 4/20 = 2/400 or 1/100

So she has a 1 in 100 chance of getting pregnant with the stats you gave. Will that woman have a baby with what you gave?

No bloody likely.

Now, lets try a normal woman, no birthcontrol who doesn't WANT a baby but is not adverse to the idea... Lets say she's age 25 with 10 con

She has no con bonus and a + 1 for her age. She has to roll over a 14, and after that, over a 9... lets see...

6/20 x 11/20... a solid 17% chance.

Now, lets try you normal PC level character... lets say a level 5 half-elf mage with 12 con.

+1 for her con.

now say she's in the optimal age of fertility giving her a +1

as a half elf she's between human and elf making her a member of a low fertility race giving her a -2

now lets reasonably she's been knee deep in dungeon muck for the last week (not exactly an enviroment where you git jiggy with it) a -1 for only 2 weeks of activity.

Now, finally, as a responcible woman who is not dumbass enough to rish pregancy with her profression, she uses magical contraception 5/2 + 1 = 3.5... lets boot that up to a 4 by rounding.

first roll = 15 - 1 - 1 + 2 + 2 + 4.... 21... only on a crit.

Now with the second roll we remove the situational modifiers, as it repersents not if she concieved but it the conception takes (IE: she's not just "late")

Second rold (if we get said crit) 10 - 2 + 2 = DC10... Her health and youthfulness cancle out her racial infertility.

So, 1/20 x 10/20 = or about 3% chance of pregency... contraception works, but it's not totally idiot proof. There is still a chance even if your careful.

One more... lets say a lady paladin, slightly past her prime who has found her soulmate and is ready to retire...

No old yet, but pst her prime... +0

A fighting class, so a high con is likely, lets say a 16... +3

She wants a child and they're trying. +2

She really wants a baby so she has a level 12 cleric friend cast a fertility spell on her... +7

1st 15 - 12 = DC3

2nd 10 -3 = DC7

17/20 x 13/20 = a massive 55%

 

[VVrayven]

Okay. I see you're point. I disagree with it, but maybe a footnote is in order. Some clothing is heavy but reletively simple to put on, like geavy robes, but still simple to remove. I think a sample list is in order...

I said I agreed and changed it silly, I'll make a sample list though, the general idea is to allow any clothing to fit into one of the four types, Heavy cloaks doesn't automatically mean the garment is heavy, in fact, one big heavy robe is probably LIGHT.

I really have no been contributing much because I honestly doubt that I'll ever be using the detailed sex act rules (we generally wing it or roll a couple of dice to get a generalized outcome... no fine detail)

More power to ya, just trying to cover all angles.

Maybe I'm missing something, but under the suggested rules, what good are Multiple Partners?

::smiles:: In real life, what good are mutliple partners? Just teasing, but my point is that while some people do get off a lot faster with mutliple people, the stimulation benefit isn't that great. (if they have a kink for it that's another +2 to +4 though). +2 syngery on an even arousal (we are changing that, if you hit their current condition, you get the +2), is pretty signifigant. Remember, the system is balanced around common folk, not epic heroes. +2 might not mean much if you have a +24, but if you are a normal jow with a +4, your chances with a helping hand from a partner increased the chance to peak her from 15% to 25%. If you have a threesome and she helps herself too that's a 35% chance. It isn't good for the gratification, but it is good for success.

I see no reason to put a cap on the number of possible partners, after all, they WILL RUN OUT of prof to use. A girl could be penetrated only one (her giving oral can't help her out, and recieving sodomy doesn't give pleasure at the moment by the rules). One other person could use Caress on her breats, she could masturbate herself, that's three. After that you start running out of options...

In the example, having both A & B succeed didn't seem to make much of a difference.

Ah. True, in the example they don't. However, if the guy is concerned with helping her with her orgasm, two people are FAR better than one. IF one person is rolling against a DC 20 and they each have a +3, they have a 90% to fail the roll. However, the odds of BOTH of them failing are only 81%. If they had a third partner, the chance of failing becomes 72%. So by the odds, having more people obviously helps, but it doesn't neccessarily add an outstanding bonus. And it shouldn't. This is just they way multiple checks CAN be made, more isn't ALWAYS better.

Hope that helps, Asra. Sorry if I was unclear, but it's late for me and I'm really sleepy. Bedtime. <yawn and waves>

 

[Gez]

Any ideas?... and we definatly need rules FOR being pregnant, and maybe some rules and equipment for how to handle children and dependents.

Well, if you hadn't seen it, here's the last thing I typed in the other thread:

As I said in the other thread, we should avoid using % when a modifier may apply. % are mainly for random treasures or random encounters (which I don't use heavily, I prefer to choose as a DM), random chance of getting wings if half-celestial or half-fiend (which, again, I don't really like, since that should rather be decided by the DM -- and the player if it's a PC), for fiends summoning some of their ilk (which, in my opinion, is a bad idea and a leftover from 2e, but there was another thread about that), and for stabilization roll (idem).

So, let say we rename this second table to something like "Successfull pregnancy modifiers". At the base, that would be a Fortitude saving throw, at let say DC 15. Then we add these modifiers to the DC:

Baby Race:
Dwarf: +1
Elf: +4
Gnome: +1
Half-Elf: +2
Half-Orc: -1
Halfling: +2
Human: +0
----------------
Orc: -2
Goblin: -2
Hobgoblin: -4

Per extra baby: +2*
* Twins: +2, triplets +4, etc. If the save is failed just because of this extra baby modifier, this means that part of the babies survive, and part are miscarried.

So, a woman waiting half-elves twins would get a Fortitude save DC 15+2+2 = 19. If she roll a total of 19 or more, congratulation to her. If she roll a total of 17 or 18, she'll only birth one child. If she roll a total of 16 or below, the two babies are stillborn.

Let's take now a orc woman pregnant of a triplets of half-orcs. Her DC will be 15-1+4=18. A result of 18 or more means 3 babies, 16 or 17 means 2, 14 or 15 means only one, 13 or less means none.


My numbers have been estimated quite simply, you have a scale of DC. Medium breeders (humans) are at 0. Slow breeders are at +2. Fast breeders are -2. If frail (racial Con penalty), you go up one degree of difficulty higher, (i.e., elves go from +2 to +4). If stout (racial Con bonus), you go down one degree (dwarf, gnome, hobgoblin are example of that). Cross-breeds use the DC adjustment closest to their parental average, rounded up if need be.


+4
+2
+1
0
-1
-2
-4

Also, with this table, it is easier for an elven woman to birth a half-elf child than a full elven one.


This certainly may benefit from some fine-tuning.

 

[Sorn]

Clothing
Excellent work, VVrayven.

Soft/Hard-Focus
Ok, I must have gotten turned around somewhere. Must be all that work, but for some reason I thought that soft-focus was the order of the day, with hard-focus being the sidebar.

In any case, a lot of the current spells are still applicable to either focus. Even a spell that adjusts the target to 'Aroused' or 'Peaked' will work in a soft focus environment, albeit with different applications. As an example, picture a Bard bringing an audience member to the brink of an orgasm with what she thinks is a simple song. (I guess that sheds some light on all those Boy Bands). I agree that the environment changes somewhat from the bedroom to those other applications, but it's still workable.

The status conditions we have set up will work irregardless of whether you play hard focus, soft focus, or no focus at all. Ok, so they wouldn't really affect a Prowess check in Soft Focus, but a character can still be aroused, or horny, or peaked.

Once we get to spells, we can go through and decide what kind of bonuses certain spells should give in a soft-focus situation. Bear in mind that even a hard-focus game might opt to do a few soft-focus rolls for quick encounters that don't advance the story, so we should have a working solution for that.

Pregnancy:
The mechanics look good. However, I am not sure I like the idea of a monthly roll. In my current game, the two women in the party are very sexually active, with multiple partners each. With the monthly roll, even the DM wouldn't know who the father was. I'd rather see a system where pregnancy is resolved on an encounter basis (should the male climax). This of course could lead to the necessity to implement menstruation rules. I think both women in my group would lynch the DM that introduces such rules.

Anyone else have an opinion on this?

 

[Psyckosama]

Pregnancy:
The mechanics look good. However, I am not sure I like the idea of a monthly roll. In my current game, the two women in the party are very sexually active, with multiple partners each. With the monthly roll, even the DM wouldn't know who the father was. I'd rather see a system where pregnancy is resolved on an encounter basis (should the male climax).

IMHO an encouter to encounter basis is just too much book keeping... I like monthly because its less work.

As for who the father is, make up a random table and roll it out, choose out of a hat, or just do the fun part and make it the most inconvienient option

This of course could lead to the necessity to implement menstruation rules. I think both women in my group would lynch the DM that introduces such rules.

... If I was forced to makeup menstruation rules, I'd lynch myself. They'd just too be complex and hard to keep track of... of course they also add some sadistic fun potential...

If you're willing to keep track you can always introduce a fun little think from the anime Slayers... female magic users lose the ability to focus their magical ability during "that time of the month".

 

[Sorn]

Psyckosama:

I see your point. One of the pros of monthly pregnancy resolution would be the uncertainty factor.

Now, how do we handle twins, triplets, etc. with this system? Have a flat chance for each race? Have a baby die for each race (e.g. Elf "litters" are 1d10-7 babies, minimum of 1 on a confirmed pregnancy) Beating the DC by X?

Personally, I'd go with the baby die. Allows us to come up with decent averages.

The flat chance would lead to d100 rolls, which I personally don't like in the d20 system.

Beating the DC is a can of worms. Imagine someone trying really hard to conceive a baby. All the couple wants is a single child, but to be sure, they use every method known to man to conveive and end up with a monstrous birth of 9 children.

Gez's system seems to be going in the direction of increased DC's for twins, etc. However, I don't think anyone is trying to get twins or triplets. It just happens, so I am not too keen on that approach.

Once it is confirmed that it's twins, additional modifiers to labour and delivery of course apply for multiple births.

 

[Gez]

Gez's system seems to be going in the direction of increased DC's for twins, etc. However, I don't think anyone is trying to get twins or triplets. It just happens, so I am not too keen on that approach.

Just roll. And look at the result.