an attempt to discuss the actual *content* of the BoEF
- Thread starter woodelf
- Start date
Vocenoctum
First Post
ArthurQ said:
The real reason's Paladins' are immune to disease?
Wombat
First Post
Well, all the quotes make my decision even easier.
I see absolutely nothing here that I would want and/or need in my game. Unnecessary rules, feats, and spells for any style of game I can even imagine playing, but I can see where others might find them interesting. I mean, hey, I still don't understand playing Vampire: The Masquerade either -- I tend to see vampires are leeches with legs rather than anything sexy and inviting, but I can also see where people get those notions, even when I don't agree with them.
Thanks for the quotes, though, because now I know for certain.
That's why I tend to like reviews...
I see absolutely nothing here that I would want and/or need in my game. Unnecessary rules, feats, and spells for any style of game I can even imagine playing, but I can see where others might find them interesting. I mean, hey, I still don't understand playing Vampire: The Masquerade either -- I tend to see vampires are leeches with legs rather than anything sexy and inviting, but I can also see where people get those notions, even when I don't agree with them.
Thanks for the quotes, though, because now I know for certain.
That's why I tend to like reviews...
d4
First Post
i don't think it goes that far.Teflon Billy said:
it reminds me of a couple of GURPS advantages: Pitiable and Sanctity. with Pitiable, people generally react more favorably to you because you seem to be someone who needs looking out for. with Sanctity, you have some quality so that people generally have a favorable first impression of you and believe you are innocent and nice. i played a character in a "thieves' guild" style campaign with Sanctity and it sure got me out of a lot of scrapes.
i think the Submissive Demeanor feat would require some good role-playing to maintain the benefits of the feat. if the character was brash, aggressive, forward all the time, then he or she shouldn't be getting the bonuses. but if played correctly, i could see it working -- without bringing any element of sexuality into the situation at all.
Evil Wizard: "That one's so weak and helpless, i'm not even go to waste my time on him."
[edit] i find it interesting that the default pronoun in the Vestal Virgin write-up is male.
Last edited:
hunter1828
Butte Hole Surfer
arcady said:
The Imagist base class and a few feats and spells, but all should be just as easily used with Charisma if you so choose. I like the idea of Appearance as nothing more than a way to distinguish looks from personality (too many people I've gamed with say things like "9 Charisma? Dude, he must be ugly!"). I don't know that I want to adopt the ability and use it to modify skill checks.
hunter1828
hunter1828
Butte Hole Surfer
Teflon Billy said:
Submissive Deameanor actually reminds me of Gollum as presented the movie version of The Two Towers. As a Feat, it is something he could turn "on" or "off" as necessary to avoid unwanted attention and to fool people into trusting him.
Just my loose interpretation.
hunter1828
Teflon Billy
Explorer
hunter1828 said:
Huh! I guess I made my save then, cause I wanted to murder Gollum virtually every moment his whiny, cringing, shrill-voiced ass was on screen
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
appearance: not worth a stat
In D&D height, weight, and age are randomly determined or (more often) simply chosen by the player. I treat appearance the same way. If you want your character to be hot, he's hot. If you want him to be nondescript, he's plain. Whatever. The orc your character is butchering doesn't care if his butcher has plucked eyebrows.
In my opinion the game effects of appearance can and should be rolled into Charisma. After all, appearance is included in the definition of Charisma*.
Good example of this is any of those teen "makeover" movies. You know the ones: shy goofy looking girl gets done over by friends/relatives/fairy godmother and suddenly everyone is adoring her and she's so beautiful. It's the exact same girl--same "Appearance" stat--the only difference is attitude: the dumpy girl transforms into a hotty because she becomes aware of her natural looks, gains confidence, and works it. In other words: she uses her Charisma. And her Masterwork clothes and makeup.
I may give a circumstance modifier due to appearance in certain situations (like a Bluff roll to seduce someone), just like I'd give a modifier due to tall height (like an Intimidate roll to... intimidate someone, or a jump roll to reach a high ledge). These minor game effects don't merit full stats (and necesarily, the creation of skills and game mechanic modifiers for that stat). After all, the PHB doesn't have a stat section for shoe size or hair color; you just make that stuff up and move on.
You said earlier that your real life experience tells you that appearance matters. I agree that appearance can make a difference IRL. But I posit that Charisma matters a lot more and even influences and defines what would be a high appearance stat. Look at Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn)or Harrison Ford or Russel Crowe or Tom Hanks or Adrian Brody. These guys are *not* beautiful--compare to Wil Smith or Orlando Bloom (Legolas) or Johny Depp. But they're the definition of charismatic, and that makes people perceive them as beautiful. They work it.
In the same way, there are plenty of very beautiful people who just don't get anywhere in life because they're vapid and dull. They wind up in cheap Cinemax movies or soulless marketing/PR gigs. They work it not.
The lesson I take from that is that appearance can give a small bonus or penalty but charisma (and connections) are much, much, much more important.
Bottom line is that appearance may be important in real life but is not so important in D&D (a game that is, after all, about killing monsters and taking their stuff). That's why I just let players chose their appearance, and only occassionally give circumstance modifiers based on those choices.
-z
*Though, of course, appearance is only a small component of Charisma.
The 3.5 SRD says "Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting." The 3.0 SRD says "Any creature capable of telling the difference between itself and things that are not itself has at least 1 point of Charisma. "
Taking those two together, I view Charisma as a stat that mainly measures self-confidance/self awareness.
Teflon Billy said:
In D&D height, weight, and age are randomly determined or (more often) simply chosen by the player. I treat appearance the same way. If you want your character to be hot, he's hot. If you want him to be nondescript, he's plain. Whatever. The orc your character is butchering doesn't care if his butcher has plucked eyebrows.
In my opinion the game effects of appearance can and should be rolled into Charisma. After all, appearance is included in the definition of Charisma*.
Good example of this is any of those teen "makeover" movies. You know the ones: shy goofy looking girl gets done over by friends/relatives/fairy godmother and suddenly everyone is adoring her and she's so beautiful. It's the exact same girl--same "Appearance" stat--the only difference is attitude: the dumpy girl transforms into a hotty because she becomes aware of her natural looks, gains confidence, and works it. In other words: she uses her Charisma. And her Masterwork clothes and makeup.
I may give a circumstance modifier due to appearance in certain situations (like a Bluff roll to seduce someone), just like I'd give a modifier due to tall height (like an Intimidate roll to... intimidate someone, or a jump roll to reach a high ledge). These minor game effects don't merit full stats (and necesarily, the creation of skills and game mechanic modifiers for that stat). After all, the PHB doesn't have a stat section for shoe size or hair color; you just make that stuff up and move on.
You said earlier that your real life experience tells you that appearance matters. I agree that appearance can make a difference IRL. But I posit that Charisma matters a lot more and even influences and defines what would be a high appearance stat. Look at Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn)or Harrison Ford or Russel Crowe or Tom Hanks or Adrian Brody. These guys are *not* beautiful--compare to Wil Smith or Orlando Bloom (Legolas) or Johny Depp. But they're the definition of charismatic, and that makes people perceive them as beautiful. They work it.
In the same way, there are plenty of very beautiful people who just don't get anywhere in life because they're vapid and dull. They wind up in cheap Cinemax movies or soulless marketing/PR gigs. They work it not.
The lesson I take from that is that appearance can give a small bonus or penalty but charisma (and connections) are much, much, much more important.
Bottom line is that appearance may be important in real life but is not so important in D&D (a game that is, after all, about killing monsters and taking their stuff). That's why I just let players chose their appearance, and only occassionally give circumstance modifiers based on those choices.
-z
*Though, of course, appearance is only a small component of Charisma.
The 3.5 SRD says "Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting." The 3.0 SRD says "Any creature capable of telling the difference between itself and things that are not itself has at least 1 point of Charisma. "
Taking those two together, I view Charisma as a stat that mainly measures self-confidance/self awareness.
Similar Threads
