I think I do have to step in and defend those players that play stereotypes. As long as everyone has fun, what is wrong with playing the dumb barbarian, the lawful stupid knight, the blonde airheaded bombshell, or the skank?
I personally will not cater to the player of a minmaxed combat freak, but I am sure he will have fun in a load of other groups, and good for him.
I have no problem with a male player playing a woman of loose morals, just as I have no problem with a womanizing swashbuckler. Fade to black works for a great many situations, both for the rogue going to a brothel as well as the barbarian starting a tavern brawl.
As far as "milking" the Charisma skills goes, what is wrong with that again? Those boards are full of minmaxing tactical tips to get the most out of a weapon and feat combo, but as soon as a player seems to "get more out of" a high charisma - even though it is absolutely in the hands of the DM how far his NPCs will go for some sexual favors - it becomes wrong? Using a charm spell is somehow more acceptable as using good looks and a PC's body?
Then there are the "fixes" for the apparently dire problem of a PC sleeping around.
Sure, actions usually have consequences. If a player has a skanky rogue sleeping her way through her opposition, then that PC is bound to encounter resistance - but not to the point of forcing the player to abandon his PC while the rest of the party can freely dominate their "social niche". If the women of a town are collecting money to get her cursed, why isn't the barbarian that has put 4 men in the temple's healing ward already getting cursed by the men? What about the party wizard showing off the mayor, or the cleric converting the flock of the local priest?
If anyone has more fun playing a stereotype than a "realistic" concept, then he or she would be a fool not to play that stereotype, as long as the group is ok with it.
I personally will not cater to the player of a minmaxed combat freak, but I am sure he will have fun in a load of other groups, and good for him.
I have no problem with a male player playing a woman of loose morals, just as I have no problem with a womanizing swashbuckler. Fade to black works for a great many situations, both for the rogue going to a brothel as well as the barbarian starting a tavern brawl.
As far as "milking" the Charisma skills goes, what is wrong with that again? Those boards are full of minmaxing tactical tips to get the most out of a weapon and feat combo, but as soon as a player seems to "get more out of" a high charisma - even though it is absolutely in the hands of the DM how far his NPCs will go for some sexual favors - it becomes wrong? Using a charm spell is somehow more acceptable as using good looks and a PC's body?
Then there are the "fixes" for the apparently dire problem of a PC sleeping around.
Sure, actions usually have consequences. If a player has a skanky rogue sleeping her way through her opposition, then that PC is bound to encounter resistance - but not to the point of forcing the player to abandon his PC while the rest of the party can freely dominate their "social niche". If the women of a town are collecting money to get her cursed, why isn't the barbarian that has put 4 men in the temple's healing ward already getting cursed by the men? What about the party wizard showing off the mayor, or the cleric converting the flock of the local priest?
If anyone has more fun playing a stereotype than a "realistic" concept, then he or she would be a fool not to play that stereotype, as long as the group is ok with it.