Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adult: GUCK Development Forum again
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="Sorn" data-source="post: 733323" data-attributes="member: 3097"><p>Exactly my sentiments. However, since all non-fluff segments are open content, I'd suggest once we get to editing our spells, we check for duplicates and compare. Nothing I hate more than countless d20 spells by different publishers that do the same thing. My wife is working on an Excel spell list of all the books we own (which is a lot), and there are quite a few examples of duplicate spells, where there shouldn't be. How many different versions of a given cleric domain do we really need? So, instead of duplicating, we could reuse some of the material presented elsewhere. I am not saying the whole spell list from EA:Nymphology, but where applicable. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My prime concern is the fact that most games will not have a sexual focus. It might be a part of it, maybe even a big part. However, if presented with the option of spending a lot of feats on sexual stuff or getting Power Attack and Cleave, most people will probably pick regular feats that are either beneficial to their survival or give general bonuses (like the various forms of Skill Focus). </p><p></p><p>The first draft with just Sex Tricks based on ranks in Sexual Prowess was supporting this view, since skill points are a lot easier to come by, and you get a lot of those few ranks in Sexual Prowess. Maybe only a handful of ranks down the road when you gained a few levels. </p><p></p><p>Having advanced versions (i.e. Carnal Arts) available is even cooler, but as said, feats are hard to come by, so if it can be handled with general feats that people already have, would be better in my opinion. </p><p></p><p>Your latest draft relies on only one feat, and a minimum rank of 3. That's pretty good, and I can live with that. It ensures that even low-level NPC's can pick up a carnal art, and we don't have to deal with 20th level prostitutes. I am still a little worried that people will shy away from taking a feat, but as long as the standard sex tricks are still available, that shouldn't be an issue. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Just a quick question on those two... does that mean that you get to use the Carnal Art in combat? Rub a little here and there as you grapple someone? I noticed similar ones in the other arts, but those two stuck out the most. </p><p></p><p>If so, there would definitely be an increased value of getting the Carnal Arts feat, since it would be beneficial outside of your normal sex situation. </p><p></p><p>Again, that's my only worry... we design an elaborate Carnal Arts system and nobody uses it because they don't want to "waste" a feat for it and just make due with standard Prowess checks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sorn, post: 733323, member: 3097"] Exactly my sentiments. However, since all non-fluff segments are open content, I'd suggest once we get to editing our spells, we check for duplicates and compare. Nothing I hate more than countless d20 spells by different publishers that do the same thing. My wife is working on an Excel spell list of all the books we own (which is a lot), and there are quite a few examples of duplicate spells, where there shouldn't be. How many different versions of a given cleric domain do we really need? So, instead of duplicating, we could reuse some of the material presented elsewhere. I am not saying the whole spell list from EA:Nymphology, but where applicable. My prime concern is the fact that most games will not have a sexual focus. It might be a part of it, maybe even a big part. However, if presented with the option of spending a lot of feats on sexual stuff or getting Power Attack and Cleave, most people will probably pick regular feats that are either beneficial to their survival or give general bonuses (like the various forms of Skill Focus). The first draft with just Sex Tricks based on ranks in Sexual Prowess was supporting this view, since skill points are a lot easier to come by, and you get a lot of those few ranks in Sexual Prowess. Maybe only a handful of ranks down the road when you gained a few levels. Having advanced versions (i.e. Carnal Arts) available is even cooler, but as said, feats are hard to come by, so if it can be handled with general feats that people already have, would be better in my opinion. Your latest draft relies on only one feat, and a minimum rank of 3. That's pretty good, and I can live with that. It ensures that even low-level NPC's can pick up a carnal art, and we don't have to deal with 20th level prostitutes. I am still a little worried that people will shy away from taking a feat, but as long as the standard sex tricks are still available, that shouldn't be an issue. Just a quick question on those two... does that mean that you get to use the Carnal Art in combat? Rub a little here and there as you grapple someone? I noticed similar ones in the other arts, but those two stuck out the most. If so, there would definitely be an increased value of getting the Carnal Arts feat, since it would be beneficial outside of your normal sex situation. Again, that's my only worry... we design an elaborate Carnal Arts system and nobody uses it because they don't want to "waste" a feat for it and just make due with standard Prowess checks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Adult: GUCK Development Forum again
Top