Adult: GUCK Development Forum again

[Sorn]

Thanks VVrayven... missed that one. But it's fixed now.

Looking at the Status Conditions, this looks pretty much done to me. Should we move the status of that section to "Finished"? I don't see anything that would impact the status conditions, unless we do a major revamp of the core mechanics.

I have some ideas for some of the minor areas (Sexual Alignment, Diseases, Equipment, Prostitution), so I'll hopefully have some writeups for those sections soon. Since they aren't really dependant on the core mechanics, there shouldn't be a need for too many revisions.

 

[Asher]

Back from number-crunching with some additional thoughts on the Arousal DC values table.

After some testing, I've been persuaded to convert back to the original system of doubling one value to get the next higher one. Those core DC values are sound and have the added benefit of being memorizable. The only areas that needed to be fixed were the extreme top and bottom of the scale.

Basically, it should be unusual for an Aroused or Peaked character to become unaroused while Prowess checks continue to be made against him or her. Because the system of resolving an encounter round by round involves so many individual checks, however, even failure on a result of 1 can be a significant statistic: a 5% chance of the character becoming unaroused with each roll of the die. That's too high a figure for male characters (barring impotence, which should be handled with a modifier anyway), and seems like a plausible figure for female characters. Thus the "low end" of the table should probably read:

Current\Target None Aroused Peaked
None <13/<16 13/16 26/32
Aroused <1/<2 1/2 14/18
Peaked <1/<1 1/1 2/2

As for the high end of the table (ie, achieving and sustaining climax), the problem in my view was that the values produced far more multi-orgasmic males than females -- a real oddity. Rather than extending the table, however, I suggest that we simply modify the existing rule for females. Currently, to calculate the DC value for additional rounds spent Climaxed or Ecstatic, you use the values for a Peaked character and double them. I propose that we double the Peaked values for male characters, but multiply by 1.5 for female characters. This produces DCs of 32/30 for additional rounds Climaxed, and 64/60 for additional rounds in Ecstasy.

Another proposal: I find the Fort save versus arousal to be nearly useless in most cases. Rather than setting the Fort save DC at the value of the partner's Prowess check, I suggest that the Fort save DC be 10 + the number by which the partner's Prowess check exceeds the required DC to raise the character's Arousal. For example, an Aroused male character whose partner makes a Prowess check at 19 (exceeding the DC of 14 by five points) would have to make his Fort save at DC 15 rather than DC 19. With the current system, it seems unrealistically difficult to resist arousal checks, and this alternate system offsets that problem.

Yet another proposal: Should the +8 modifier to DC for a post-climax male really last out the full 10 minutes even if his partner successfully arouses him again before that time expires? If it continues to last the entire time, that character is sitting pretty, nearly impervious to Prowess checks made by ordinary mortals for several minutes after becoming Aroused again. I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to apply the +8 DC modifier only until the character becomes successfully Aroused again, and then revert to normal modifiers for Fatigue/Exhaustion?

Still yet another proposal: Currently, we state that the Aroused and Peaked conditions last for five minutes (one minute in inappropriate situations). Does this mean that a character who approaches the brink of orgasm and then stops all sexual activity will still be on the verge of coming nearly five minutes later??? Why don't we set a more reasonable duration, such as one minute or even less?

More updates as they occur to me...

 

[Sorn]

I posted a writeup for prostitution on the site. I did some online research yesterday, plus I bought a book called Sex in History, which I am reading right now. Any insight from that might change the writeup.

It's not quite done yet, but any suggestions are certainly appreciated.

If anyone has any writeups for any of the other chapters that aren't affected by the core mechanics, feel free to email them to me and I'll post them on the site. This gives everyone the chance to read them at their leisure and we can discuss them here once we get to that point in the development phase.

 

[SinbadBleu]

Sorn: Here is web page titled Hooker Heroes that has some info you may find useful.

Hooker Heroes
http://wondersmith.com/heroes/index.htm

At different times Courtesans came from below the Noble class, will research some to prove my point. I do agree about the Charisma minimum.

 

[VVrayven]

Alright boys, <puts on her lead writer glasses>

I hate to do it but we do have to harp on some of the "established" core mechanics. I'm been running some tests with my new java machine and things just don't make sense. Asher has a lot of good points.

1) About resistance rolls. Resistence does next to nill for males. To be cheesy, it is mostly futile. Once a person has 5 ranks in Prowess, that fort save means just about nothing. This isn't just a case of defense being outstripped by offensive. It does help at really basic sex, like commoner 1 vs commoner 1, but this guide isn't about that. And for females? With a base Fort Save DC 20 to resist a minimal orgasm?! Nope, she's never going to hit that, and if she is leveled enough to do so, she is probably facing an opponent or lover that will require her to get a DC 30 or 40 Fort save. Resisting doesn't do much under our current rules.

Asher has made some suggestions:

His Idea: Fort Save DC equal to 10 + Exceed value of the prowess check. Not a bad idea, but kind of time consuming. I like the concept and it keeps power of resisting equal to the power of prowess (roughly).

My Idea 1: Subtract the Fort Save from the prowess check. More math yes. It also makes resisting actually do something. Perhaps this is a little extreme.

My Idea 2: Allow a Fort Save against a static DC by condition, for instance, a DC 15 to resist peak, a DC 25 to resist orgasm, or something like that. The problem here is that a really good lover cannot influence the chart.

We need a good and fast way to handle this in which resisting pleasure is not just a throw away roll with almost no chance to succeed (or zero chance to succeed once your hit prowess rolls of 20+).

2) About loosing arousal. This is still a problem, even with the new chart. Men loose arousal about 10% of all sexual encounters in our current system. Women "go dry and loose arousal" a lot more often as well. I think that once you are physically aroused it shouldn't be brought down except by expiration of time limit or by orgasm. I say the charts should be capped so that any roll resides to aroused. Discussion?

3) About men and multiple orgasms. This is a problem. However, I'm much more inclineded towards looking at this as an extended orgasm rather than multiple ones, just use the same procedure but change flavor text. I would like to hear some more input on dropping the female DCs to 1.5 instead of 2 for concurrent orgasm rounds.

4) About the -8 for 10 minutes. Asher is absolutely right. Under the current system, all this does is allow the man 40% to get erect and there after have a far greater chance of loosing his erection again. This just isn't the way it works. If she gets him up again, he stays up. If we do my suggestion of capping the charts, however, so that men can't loose arousal... Then this rule works out, it just becomes 40% harder to arouse him initially and then it is more difficult to make him climax if you do get him going (which is in my experience exactly was DOES happen .

5) Length of status conditions. I agree that Peaked should only last 10 rounds or one minute. Comments?

That's it. I'm going to play with some numbers in my java scripter and see what happens. I'll have results soon, boys.

<hugs to all>

 

[Death By Surfeit]

Revised Prowess Check Rules

Wotcher,

Sorry for my sporadic input - my internet access is a little eccentric at the moment. I suppose I have dropped by at an opportune time, however, as VVrayven has kindly summarised all the issues - I'll do my best to resolve as many as I can.

1) The opposition of the two is very difficult to balance. I'll condone VVrayven's second method, with the addition that we can get around the difficulty of static DC / increasing levels by opening up CA maneouvres that boost the DC for resisting pleasure. This would be an acceptable compromise in my opinion.

2) I concur with VVrayven: maintain the original Arousal DCs, but do not allow a drop of more than one Arousal level at once – a Peaked character cannot instantaneously lose all Arousal. Post-Climax is an exception to this rule.

3) I was of a similar mindset. Regarding VVrayven & Asher’s comments, I would normally advocate a lower DC for successive rounds, but I was concerned that a particularily good partner could keep their bedmate in continuous Ecstasy or Climax until they pass out. At epic level, perhaps this is allowable, but in the meantime some limits had to be placed.

In the meantime, however, I’ve concocted a superior version. Basically, the DC increases according to a chart as the character is kept in Climax or Ecstasy – the first failed DC indicates post-Climax fatigue and Arousal drop. Gratification rules could be linked to this, possibly.

4) The chart cap addresses this problem to a reasonable degree, although I am reluctant to naysay against losing Arousal altogether as a strict rule. I would advocate imposing a –8 until Arousal is gained, then dropping it to normal fatigue mods.

5) Status condition length – I’ll second, err, third that motion.

All in all quite a few modifications. I thought I’d recompile the Prowess DC Table together with an Extended Climax Table (see above) for the benefit of whoever feels like recompiling the Prowess Check v1.4 – see below.

Table X-XX: Arousal DCs
Current Arousal - None - Aroused - Peaked - Climaxed - Ecstatic
None -/- 13/16 26/32 52/64 104/128
Aroused -/- 3/4 14/18 28/36 56/72
Peaked -/- -/- 4/5 16/20 32/40

Table X-XX2: Extended Climax DCs
Round – Climax DC//Grat – Ecstasy DC//Grat
1st 16/20**//1 32/40**//2
2nd 24/25//2 48/50//4
3rd 32/30//3 64/60//6
4th 40/35//4 80/70//8
5th 48/40//5 96/80//10*

*Repeat numerical pattern ad infinitum. Numbers on left are male DCs, on right female DCs.
**Typical values for arising from Peaked.
Gratification values are cumulative – take those from each round of Climax or Ecstasy.

There. Everything’s not yet balanced and very much open to feedback, so by all means post whatever you wish to say.

Before I go, thanks to all of you for posting your comments (sorry I couldn’t address you in turn), especially to Sorn for getting the site back up and running. This may just be me, but the downloads section could do with some clarification of which download contains what – separating the different guides and the peripheral stuff would also help.

Cheers all,

DbS

 

[Asher]

His Idea: Fort Save DC equal to 10 + Exceed value of the prowess check. Not a bad idea, but kind of time consuming. I like the concept and it keeps power of resisting equal to the power of prowess (roughly).

My Idea 1: Subtract the Fort Save from the prowess check. More math yes. It also makes resisting actually do something. Perhaps this is a little extreme.

My Idea 2: Allow a Fort Save against a static DC by condition, for instance, a DC 15 to resist peak, a DC 25 to resist orgasm, or something like that. The problem here is that a really good lover cannot influence the chart.

The method I proposed seems more cumbersome than it actually turned out to be when I tried it. Calculating the Exceed value and adding 10 was a pretty quick mental math operation. However, it does produce the odd effect of making Fort saves to resist climax easier than Fort saves to resist Arousal or Peaked status. I like both of your alternate proposals and would endorse whichever of them you find works better as you continue to test the system.

I think that once you are physically aroused it shouldn't be brought down except by expiration of time limit or by orgasm. I say the charts should be capped so that any roll resides to aroused. Discussion?

Yep, sounds like a good idea to me.

I'm much more inclined towards looking at this as an extended orgasm rather than multiple ones, just use the same procedure but change flavor text.

Yes, I appreciate the distinction between a longer orgasm and multiple ones, and changing the flavor text is probably the right way to handle it.

About the -8 for 10 minutes ... This just isn't the way it works. If she gets him up again, he stays up. If we do my suggestion of capping the charts, however, so that men can't loose arousal... Then this rule works out, it just becomes 40% harder to arouse him initially and then it is more difficult to make him climax if you do get him going (which is in my experience exactly what DOES happen .

Here I'll have to take your word for it. So are you saying that Fatigue/Exhaustion modifiers should affect the DC to *increase* arousal, but not to sustain the current level? If so, then that makes sense to me.

Once again, VVrayven, thanks for your incisive critique and especially for your work in testing these proposed systems!

 

[Asher]

Re: Revised Prowess Check Rules

I concur with VVrayven: maintain the original Arousal DCs, but do not allow a drop of more than one Arousal level at once – a Peaked character cannot instantaneously lose all Arousal. Post-Climax is an exception to this rule.

That is indeed an improvement, but it still strikes me as a real oddity that an Aroused character engaged in intercourse could suddenly revert to Unaroused status, short of some unusual occurrence. Even with your revised DC table, the DC to maintain Arousal is still 3/4, so we'll continue to see that phenomenon quite often -- unless I'm misinterpreting something, as I've been known to do before.

I’ve concocted a superior version. Basically, the DC increases according to a chart as the character is kept in Climax or Ecstasy – the first failed DC indicates post-Climax fatigue and Arousal drop. Gratification rules could be linked to this, possibly.

I like the look of those DC increments, DbS. I'll be interested to see how they test out.

Nice to see you back around here, too.

 

[VVrayven]

Heya guys.

Thanks for the feeback Asher and DbS. I'm going to get working on 1.4 now. It should be posted before my bedtime (yeah, whenever that is! )

As for the integration of new ideas:

I love the new climax chart. I like the idea that we no longer diffieniat between a previous round spend in climax or ectasy, that solves a lot of problems. I'll be using it, minor tweak to the java script.

I'm going to test two versions of the DC table. One with arousal loss capped at one per round, and one with the arousal loss as impossible and then we'll talk about it. (and make version 1.45 I'm sure).

Status condition length with now be implemented though it will have little if any effect.

NOTE TO SORN: Change the length of Peaked Status to one minute please.

As for fixed DC resisting... Okay. I'm going to go with this and we'll play with them from there.

Condition Resisting DC
Arousal 5
Peaked 10
Climax 15
Esctasy 25

Not sure how these will pan out. For instance, I think a basic male needs at least a 25% chance to hold off climax and a 50% to hold of peak. I'll try the numbers at 5 higher too (after all we are building the guide for PCs).

That's it for now.

 

[VVrayven]

<yawn> Okay! I've done it. My Javascript runs very very well now. <rubs eyes> Anyway, here is a breif run down of the AI.

The Male resists becoming peaked or climaxing. The Female pleasures herself during intercourse until she has had ONE climax, and then helps the male. The program runs until the male has had one climax, or the female passes out. I'll run some more detailed ones with multiple male climaxes (which the program can do ) after we decide on a DC table.

The program makes use of the new gratification table (which by the way completly removes the exceed number, thank God!) I also have adopted the following Resist static DCs:

Resist Arousal: DC 10
Resist Peaked: DC 15
Resist Climax: DC 20
Resist Esctasy: DC 25

These are good numbers. I'll defend it if needed, but trust me, these work for most low level, and mid level encounters. High level should be balanced by carnal arts as well.

I'm just going to print the program results straight. These show averages over 10 million sexual encounter runs. These runs use zero rank commoners as test subjects.

Using DbS's numbers:

Table X-XX: Arousal DCs
Current Arousal - None - Aroused - Peaked - Climaxed - Ecstatic
None -/- 13/16 26/32 52/64 104/128
Aroused -/- 3/4 14/18 28/36 56/72
Peaked -/- -/- 4/5 16/20 32/40

We get the following:
Average Total Time: 44.032278
Average Foreplay Time: 28.105424
Average Intercourse Time: 15.926854
Female Climax Percentage: 53.849199999999996%
Male Climax Percentage: 100.0%
Average Female Orgasms 0.848426
Average Male Orgasms 1.0
Average Female Arousal Loss 8.158269
Average Male Arousal Loss 7.032318
Average Female Gratification 0.848426
Average Male Gratification 1.0
Average Female Fatigue Status 0.538492
Average Male Fatigue Status 1.0

As you can see, these numbers are promising, except for a few small problems...

1) Average intercourse time is about 1.5 minutes with foreplay being 2.8 minutes. Livable but not too good.

2) Females climax about 53% of the time, not bad for zero rankers working with Hard Focus.

3) Females usually go from Aroused to None an average of EIGHT times during and encounter and Males loose their erection an average of seven times a sexual session. This cannot be tolerated.

Now, there are a few fixes to these problems. The first idea is to cut the arousal loss from the table. Hence this DC table:

Table X-XX: Arousal DCs
Current Arousal - None - Aroused - Peaked - Climaxed - Ecstatic
None -/- 13/16 26/32 52/64 104/128
Aroused -/- -/- 14/18 28/36 56/72
Peaked -/- -/- 4/5 16/20 32/40

Produces the following results:

Average Total Time: 19.056723
Average Foreplay Time: 3.130066
Average Intercourse Time: 15.926657
Female Climax Percentage: 66.1671%
Male Climax Percentage: 100.0%
Average Female Orgasms 0.661671
Average Male Orgasms 1.0
Average Female Arousal Loss 0.618565
Average Male Arousal Loss 0.0
Average Female Gratification 0.661671
Average Male Gratification 1.0
Average Female Fatigue Status 0.661671
Average Male Fatigue Status 1.0

These numbers aren't too bad. I'll let everyone mull them over because I'm really really sleeping and need backrub... <sigh> Anyway, one other idea is to allow the man a Fort Save DC 5 to avoid the drop from Aroused to None and keep the same table DbS uses. This will produce:

Average Total Time: 36.167861
Average Foreplay Time: 20.189997
Average Intercourse Time: 15.977864
Female Climax Percentage: 53.9939%
Male Climax Percentage: 100.0%
Average Female Orgasms 0.602328
Average Male Orgasms 1.0
Average Female Arousal Loss 8.195099
Average Male Arousal Loss 1.412101
Average Female Gratification 0.602328
Average Male Gratification 1.0
Average Female Fatigue Status 0.539939
Average Male Fatigue Status 1.0

These aren't too bad either, of course we still have the loose of 1.4 erections on average for a standard virile young man... I'll hear disucssion now (in the morning rather). Hope you guys like the java thingy. <yawn> I'm being carried to bed now so g'night all and happy debating! <hugz> zzzzz....