Adult: GUCK Development Forum again

[Bastoche]

Bastone:See the above quote both do not directly involve the sex act.

I don't think I missed much on this thread and I can assure you that VVrayven, DbS, Gez, etc the most involved persons on this GUCK project do not intend to detail anything that comes before sex. I'll try to find the posts...

*searching the thread*

Ah!

quote from Sorn:

"As far as dating/picking someone up goes, stick with opposed Bluff/Sense Motive rolls. A few new modifiers might not be a bad idea... let's keep that in mind when it comes time to go over the rest of the skills."

quote from DbS:

"With regards the recommendation for seduction, courtship and love, the GUCK may address some of the issues: a mechanic dedicated purely to seduction (such as that presented in Ch3 of the DbS conversion) would probably be featured, but open to modifiers as the Gamesmaster sees fit (roleplay will definately be required). Courtship, love and such are best left purely in the grounds of roleplaying, as they are tied in with the nature of the character and are far more than a one-off event. Players who feel too uncomfortable doing so should probably avoid such matters."

Then VVrayven said she agreed with this and we pretty much dropped the issue.

GUCK is intended to give a sidebar-like mechanic for quick resolving sex rules (named "soft focus") and the main set of rules (named "hard-focus") gives a detailed enough 3E-like set of rules for sexual intercourse encounter. Seduction may be included as a sidebar (personnaly I think it's a lost of time) and love, etc will not be covered. It's up to each group of player to decide about this. / personnaly think there should not be a mechanic for this. It should be entirely roleplay resolved. If some rolls are needed, I think charisma checks, bluff and/or diplomacy checks covers anything there could ever need to be covered on this matter. Contrary to sex intercourse.

 

[Sorn]

Welcome back DbS. Was starting to worry about you.

Anyway, let's get to your stuff:

Fashion: I was thinking more of loose suggestions for modifiers, not a concrete list that would cover all eventualities. More of a "Wearing last year's courtier's outfit at the Queen's Ball will probably net you a -2 to -4 penalty." Given that, we should be fine with a few short sentences.

Spells: I am still convinced that if we limit a majority of our spells to sensual PrC's, we will loose quite a bit of our audience. Going with descriptors ([Sensual], [Arousal], etc.) is the way to go in my eyes. Instead of giving our PrC's better access to those spells, they should get bonuses to cast them (i.e. increased DC or increased effects). If we really want to limit spells, the only way that would feel 3e to me would be to make them domain spells, but not general cleric spells.

Btw, I just took another quick look at EA: Nymphology, but everything in there I could find were spells that were part of the core-class spell-lists. Maybe I am reading you wrong, but where in there does it say that sex related spells should be part of a different school or should have limited access?

Pregnancy:This looks great.

The 9 stages system is fine, but we should change the gestation period a little bit. Longer-lived and larger races would probably have a longer gestation periods than smaller/short-lived races. When we say that "most common humanoids" have a 9 month gestation, we are sending the wrong message, considering that out of the PHB races, only humans and half-elves will have anything close to that. Elves have been noted to have an 18 month gestation in "Moon Elves" by Natural20Press. Halflings and Gnomes, being smaller should be around 5-7 months. Dwarves with their birth-friendly hips and longer lifespan should probably fall somewhere between humans and elves. High-fertility races like orcs and goblins will have shorter gestation periods as well.

Now for the exhaustion checks. I don't think this is such a good idea, especially when applied to commoners (which seems to be one of our big check and balance system). Imagine Lucy the peasant, with a Str, Con and Dex of 10. She rolled lousy for her checks, and her saves are VERY low. At the end of the pregnancy, she has effective stats of 1. The Con drain affecting her hit points alone might kill her. God beware if she has a stat at 9, which means she could simply die from exhaustion (not labor mind you, just having the belly). Also, if we use any sort of Con modifiers for labor and delivery, we will assure that most of the mothers will simply die during childbirth. Granted, a pregnancy will change your life around, but it shouldn't be lethal just by itself.

As an alternate system, how about this: If you fail your check, you receive an armor check penalty equal to the stage you are in? A -9 in the late stages to the same skills affected by ACP sounds about right to me. Of course it would stack with any existing ACP the character might have, plus your armor might not fit anymore.

To simplify the things, starting at Stage 3, the check DC is 10+Stage. Early on, I don't think there would be much of a hindrance, so we could skip the first two stages.

 

[SinbadBleu]

I don't think I missed much on this thread and I can assure you that VVrayven, DbS, Gez, etc the most involved persons on this GUCK project do not intend to detail anything that comes before sex. I'll try to find the posts...

*searching the thread*

Ah!

quote from Sorn:

"As far as dating/picking someone up goes, stick with opposed Bluff/Sense Motive rolls. A few new modifiers might not be a bad idea... let's keep that in mind when it comes time to go over the rest of the skills."

quote from DbS:

"With regards the recommendation for seduction, courtship and love, the GUCK may address some of the issues: a mechanic dedicated purely to seduction (such as that presented in Ch3 of the DbS conversion) would probably be featured, but open to modifiers as the Gamesmaster sees fit (roleplay will definately be required). Courtship, love and such are best left purely in the grounds of roleplaying, as they are tied in with the nature of the character and are far more than a one-off event. Players who feel too uncomfortable doing so should probably avoid such matters."

Then VVrayven said she agreed with this and we pretty much dropped the issue.

GUCK is intended to give a sidebar-like mechanic for quick resolving sex rules (named "soft focus") and the main set of rules (named "hard-focus") gives a detailed enough 3E-like set of rules for sexual intercourse encounter. Seduction may be included as a sidebar (personnaly I think it's a lost of time) and love, etc will not be covered. It's up to each group of player to decide about this. / personnaly think there should not be a mechanic for this. It should be entirely roleplay resolved. If some rolls are needed, I think charisma checks, bluff and/or diplomacy checks covers anything there could ever need to be covered on this matter. Contrary to sex intercourse.

Hmmm it appears to me that the overstatement that a vote was held on this was to say the least overstated.

I have read the above threads no voting was held. At best it could be described a off the cuff consenus.

On RolePlay versus RollPlay we disagree, each from different POV. This not the most correct forum for the rhetoric on Role versus Roll.

I for one don't think of it as loss of time. I would greatly like to discuss the seduction and its affects on CUCK.

After the most powerfull and largest sexual organ is the brain!!!

Seduction

Ok bluff for those quickie ie another notch in gun so to speak encounters.

Diplomacy for the more serious seduction attempts for a more permanent nature.

 

[Bastoche]

Well if you want to create the GSK (Guide of Seduction Knowledge), be my guest. I suggest you start another thread for this since here we are rather discussing mechanics about sex intercourse. And it could be very confusing for everybody. The main goal here is to get a 3E-like in feel, realistic and complete "sex" guide. If the core of the GUCK creators feels like they should be working onseduction mechanics and that they want to do it now then...

We disagree about roll vs role and I'm pretty sure the most involved folks on GUCK agrees with me...

In anyway, the current thread is about basic sex mechanics. Seduction maybe will be included in a side bar so it's not a top priority.

I personnaly think that seduction is more than already fully covered by the standard skill selection from the PHB that is sense motive, bluff, diplomacy and charisma checks. It involves everything there needs to be. The only thing that could be discussed is how to use these skills for the specific seduction role. I think it was discussed in a splat book (sword'n'fist ?) Furthermore, there should never be as much details on seduction than on hard-focus intercourse rules. So seduction rolls should be as simple or simpler than soft focus rules. That isn't much IMO.

 

[SinbadBleu]

Well if you want to create the GSK (Guide of Seduction Knowledge), be my guest. I suggest you start another thread for this since here we are rather discussing mechanics about sex intercourse. And it could be very confusing for everybody. The main goal here is to get a 3E-like in feel, realistic and complete "sex" guide. If the core of the GUCK creators feels like they should be working onseduction mechanics and that they want to do it now then...

We disagree about roll vs role and I'm pretty sure the most involved folks on GUCK agrees with me...

In anyway, the current thread is about basic sex mechanics. Seduction maybe will be included in a side bar so it's not a top priority.

I personnaly think that seduction is more than already fully covered by the standard skill selection from the PHB that is sense motive, bluff, diplomacy and charisma checks. It involves everything there needs to be. The only thing that could be discussed is how to use these skills for the specific seduction role. I think it was discussed in a splat book (sword'n'fist ?) Furthermore, there should never be as much details on seduction than on hard-focus intercourse rules. So seduction rolls should be as simple or simpler than soft focus rules. That isn't much IMO.

Well actually a more correct topic would be "What Was Banned From the GUCK Forum"

We also disagree on seductioh also. Not surprizing though.

You might also check out the tables for getting in and out of clothing has nothing directly to do with sex mechanics ie intercourse. Yes it has an effecton the largest sexual organ though it done properly.

Since you tote it so please list the core persons.....and what they have contributed......beyond the original works.

Your statements are at odds with each other...."feel, realistic and complete "sex" guide" Then you want everything left out for roleplaying. Make up your mind please, it confusing the non core ones.

This topic on this forum has the second highest views and the top three posts over the last few months. Now you should ask yourself what is everyone coming back here for views???? They are not all of the core beings, it is the non core beings surfing for new ideas etc that they can "borrow" for use in their games. Let us give them ideas they can borrow without stamping it with our POV's, or restricting by same.

Satire Mode Engaged
Yes the core group entirely in sync with you.....
Satire Mode Disengaged

 

[kolvar]

Just have a few seconds to spare and want to write, that this rather annoys me, that, even with satire mode and everything, people are arguing, what should be in or not.
So far, this is the development thread for the basic rules and we did the whole thing twice upside down (and that is the reason, why we do it a third time).
The suggestion, to do another thread, is ok, but will probably lead to nothing, as far as the past has shown.
My suggestion: collect everything, that does not belong to the topic at hand in a file, put it on the site and when we come to it, we have everything at hand. On a case by case basis, a topic can be discussed immediatly.
(but probalby, this is all meaningless and I am making something out of nothing, because I can barely look through my eyes and have rather annoying cold. In this case, just forget that I posted).

 

[Psyckosama]

Hmmm by the mainsteam D20 players we are already perverts for even thinking of gathering together such ideas and rules.

We each have our own POV(Point of View) because of that each of has different needs on the rules being gathered together.

As for a small number of perverts it would amaze you as to how many copies of the Rules of Carnal Knowledge in all versions that have been downloaded, since the days of TSR rule.

That because the old rules set was a damn funny read, and fun to snicker at!

My POV on what the GUCK should become is more then just a set of rules for having sex. There are some major areas that are skimed over in most books, seduction, courtship, and reproduction. I feel it is 120% within the flavor of the GUCK to handle these issues to some degree.

* Psyckosama’s rules on pregnancy: I have reservations as to having a monthly system for working things out, and a few things don’t quite add up (eg common human in their Prime has over a one in six chance of getting pregnant after having sex once in a month. In real-life statistics, you’re looking at a third of this. Furthermore, it gives flat bonuses for ‘magic’, whereas 3e recommends no ‘passive bonuses’ – fertility magic should be as listed in the spell description. However, I really, really like the recent suggestion on critical ranges for multiple children – very much in flavour.

The reason I posted my system is because it is simple.

The problems you noted, they can be fixed. The current modifiers are semi-temporary. It needs polish. For example the "fertility magic" entry I gave is really just a momentary place holder. The discriptors I gave could easly be removed and incorporated into a standard spell.

Personally I just don't like the idea of rolling everytime they have sex. It slows down the *ahem* action and doesn't account for the fact that it can logically be guessed that players that do it useing the GUCK rules (like a married couple) would also do it "off screen" like when they are inbetween addventures, when the DM glazes over the long voyage to where ever, or other times.

Before anyone mentions that you should not consider the PCs sexuially active unless it's RPed out, I just want to mention that atleast I feel that the periods of time that are covered by the adventures are exceptional moments in the characters life, not the norm. I'll give an example of my opinion.

Bill the Fighter might spend lots of time trudging through god-forsaken pits for fame, forture, and to impressed his lover, Linda the Mage, but not all that time. They probelly spend more time traveling to the dungeon or relaxing in their keep/country villa/ townhouse/ect then they actually do during the crawl. And while they may enjoy the ocasional bout of kinky dungeon luvin' chances are most of their intimate activity will be during those long road trips or at home.

I know the above is a simplification but I think you can get the basic idea.

PREGNANCY

Pregnancy is broken down into nine stages. Amongst the common humanoids, each of these stages represents a month of pregnancy. At the beginning of each stage, the mother must test once each against Weakness, Awkwardness and Exhaustion. Failure represents the loss of a point of Strength, Dexterity or Constitution, respectively – this loss cannot be removed until after the pregnancy, when it recovers at the usual rate. The DC for these checks, and for spotting that the childbearer is pregnant, are given in the table below:

Stage/Check DC/Spot DC
1/10/75
2/12/50
3/14/35
4/16/25
5/18/20
6/20/15
7/22/10
8/24/5
9/26/0

Should the mother roll a natural 1 on her Weakness, Awkwardness or Exhaustion checks during the first stage, the embryo will not implant and pregnancy will be negated. Thereafter, it will only be when two Weakness, Awkwardness or Exhaustion checks have rolled 1’s in the same stage that the child will die.

There are some very rough rules to mull over. Get back to me with your thoughts and feelings – this is merely the product of an idly spent hour.

Oh, and regarding SinBadBleu’s last comment, I feel it is a hopeless, daunting and ungratifying task to try to cater to everyone’s tastes – many would disagree with the existence of the guide altogether.

Hmmm... It has potential but needs work. I agree with Sorn on most of his points and would like to add the idea that which stat is reduced is random and only one is reduced per cycle. Pregnant woman should also be encumbered as the weight of the baby should count toward their carry weight.

his armor check penelty on the otherhand is too great IMHO. I think it should be repersented by the decrease in dex, a penalty to worn (nonmagical) armor, and maybe a modifier that it is easier to critical against a pregnant woman.

 

[Gez]

Since I've been dubbed by Bastoche "one of the most involved persons on this GUCK project", I feel compelled to sneak out of hiding for something more constructive that giving a link to rapist treants.

While the guide won't adress how to mechanically fall in love (romantism deserve to be romantic, after all, and if dice rolling is fun, it's not romantic), we could adress some effects of love.

Like, for example, a +2 circumstance bonus to innuendo and sense motive (lovers only need their eyes to talk), and even to bluff and intimidate (you pay more attention) the loving one. A +2 moral bonus when you are helped by your loved one (who use the aid another action), and likewise a +2 moral bonus to the aid another roll.

Also, I thought of that faery-talesque feat. Don't have a good name for it now.

Love stronger than all [General]
Like the Charming Prince curing Snowwhite of the apple's poison with a kiss, or that other Charming Prince awaking the Sleeping Beauty with another curse-breaking curse, or even like Isis resurrecting her divine husband with an even more potent "kiss" (well, that involved her lips and tongue so it's a sort of kiss anyway), your love is so strong that it can overcame curse, poison, disease and even death.
Prerequisite: Loving one person deeply and truly, Charisma 15+.
Benefit: Once a month, you are able to use cure poison, remove curse, remove disease, or resurrection as a spell-like ability while kissing (or another erotic activity) the loved person. You pay the experience point cost associated with the spell, if any. Also, when resurrecting a loved one through this feat, you may choose to lose a level yourself to avoid that loss to the loved one.

 

[Bastoche]

This thread has a long history. I ask everybody to go at the beginning of this thread and read it over again.

The main aim of the GUCK is to support an erotic fantasy game style. A game setting where sex encounters comes first and other types of encounters are second.

For all those of you only interested in quick sex rules and pregnancy, there will be the "soft-focus" set of rules especially for that purpose.

The rules GUCK is about is rules for sex encounters as a main feature of a campaign. The so-called "hard-focus" rules. All the prior discussion gravitated around that very purpose keeping in mind that most people will rather be interested in soft-focus.

SinbadBleu, I don't know what the hell you're trying to prove here but please read this whole thread over and you'll understand. There's no point in going through juvenile arguing over seduction and love etc. We're here to give rules suggestion to further improve the GUCK rule set. To further improve this set of rules, it is imperative that everybody understands what we are trying to acheive here and in order to do so, read the thread over. I'll try to gather up the things "done" in a following post.

 

[Sorn]

Ok, instead of arguing around forever: what kind of rules would the proponents of seduction rules like to see? Maybe this will move the discussion into a productive direction again.

If the mechanics are sound, I have no problem with it being in the book.

So, are you guys thinking a new skill? Personally, I am strongly against that, as seduction is already covered in Bluff, Sense Motive, Diplomacy, or just straight Cha checks, as Bastoche said. Adding new skills is always a pain, so anything that can be resolved with existing skills would certainly be appreciated.

Guidelines on applicable modifiers? That shouldn't be a problem.

So, any proposals are certainly welcome, and I am sure if there's a workable system, we can devote a page to it. After all, we do not have any size constraints or have to meet specifications for a printing company or anything.

Love: apart from the mechanical effects of love which Gez already outlined, I don't think we need much more than that. Anything else regarding love can not be put into game terms (at least if you ask me).

Pregnancy: We currently have a proposal for a monthly system, and a per-sex-act system. Both have their pros and cons. Personally, I am leaning more towards the per-encounter roll. However, I do see the benefit of the monthly system for an adventuring couple (or any other couple for that matter) who might have some fun during off-time and hence might produce offspring.

So, how about this: We already have hard-focus and soft-focus rules. Monthly rolls for pregnancy would fall into soft-focus, while the per-act roll is hard-focus. Some campaigns might even use both. Specific encounters can get their hard-focus treatment, while for general travel or downtime, the monthly roll is used.

Both systems should be very compatible, to keep the number of different modifiers for the same thing down. After all, people will have to keep track of this stuff. The less confusing, the better.

Now, some general thoughts:

We have been working on this book for quite a while now. From the original team, not too many people are left. I might be wrong, but I think that Kolvar and me are the only active people left from the early days. A high turnover rate for a non-profit RPG product is to be expected, but it certainly doesn't help with getting things done.

Right now we have some very dedicated people coming up with some excellent material, something which shows me that we are finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel (what kind of tunnel is up to your imagination). Let's focus on getting the must-haves ironed out. Then we can go over additional material.

For right now, the way I see it, the order of priorities should be:

-Finalize Core Mechanics (should be just about done)
-Fetish/Kink/Fret rules
-Pregnancy
-Feats
-Spells
-PrC's
-Equipment (both magical and mundane)
-Monsters

After that, we have room for all kinds of things, be it a prostitute generator, organizations (harems, brothels, virgin warrior nuns, etc), or whatever else you can think of.

Now, if anybody really wants to see a certain rule that is not on the list for the book, come up with some mechanics and post it. Demanding stuff and arguing about it isn't going to get us anywhere, so let's be constructive.