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!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="VVrayven" data-source="post: 854891" data-attributes="member: 9950">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 <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=";)" />.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. <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=";)" /><hugs to all></blockquote>

Verification