Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="VVrayven" data-source="post: 648250" data-attributes="member: 9950">I can relate and understand completly. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Point 1) I'm in agreement with Masturbation rules. I think there should be a way to try to partners at once. At this point... I'm thinking all rolls should be penalized by a single modifier (say -4 to -8 range for 2 partners?)This brings up another point. The whole "sex system" is abstracted much the same way that combat is, right? We can't assume intercourse (or any other act for that matter) WILL be used in any given "round" of sex. The DCs on the chart assume the act of "taking 20" with normal people. This results with about 6-8 minutes of sex (which in my experience with an 'average' guy can be about right). But the consequence of the abstraction is that it becomes really difficult assinging modifiers to specific acts...Point 2) I agree with your idea. I think a Fortitude (as opposed to will) is the appropriate way to go. Combined with the "Unwilling" status condition, I think it works even better. Perhaps a feat can allow you to use your Will save?Point 3) Again. I like your solution. With regard to syngery bonuses... Mmmm... Perhaps you offer a +2 bonus for every relatvant "kink" that the two share. You'd have to define the acts being done in the round though. This is where the abstraction hurts us... But, then again, we want to keep everything simple. I think these should stack, but I also think a penalty should be used for unsure partners.Very well. I do agree. I think perhaps the "mental" status conditions should be able to be evoked with a feat maybe? As such, how about the following Chart?--------------Target-->---Ars-------Peak-----Clxm---------EsctyCurrentNone---------------------13/16----26/32----52/64------104/128Ars-------------------------7/9------14/18----28/36--------56/72Peak-----------------------4/5------8/10-----15/20--------30/40Clxm--------------------------------------------30/25--------40/35Escty-------------------------------------------30/25--------50/45What do you think?I agree. I was just throwing the idea up for discussion. I agree with your suggestions for the chart and think that they are all good ideas. I agree. So let's crack that Core Mechanic! I'm for the 'Hard Focus' take and for the variable ability score use. We need a good setup to allow for a bunch of modifiers and a way to deal with the abstraction problem. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As I get them. You will hear them. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification