WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Irlo]

It's up to the father what he does.

If they say the bolded ahead of time in a future or present-tense manner, of course I'm fine with it. Afterwards, though, it's too late - retcons to declared-and-resolved actions are never an option be it in this area or any other.

IMO if the player declares that the PC is engaging in sex but does not declare that they’re engaging in unprotected procreative sex, a DM shouldn’t presume it when deciding to resolve the action.

 

[Shakeshift]

I will add that in my my limited experience in sensitivity reading, I've leaned toward the latter answer on this (and other) questions.

It's harder to define the line there than it is identify what side of the line any given product (or representation) falls on. If nothing else, The Book of Vile Darkness (3.5) serves an excellent example of what not to do

I never saw the Book of Vile Darkness. What was the problem with it?

 

[Faolyn]

It's up to the father what he does.

If they say the bolded ahead of time in a future or present-tense manner, of course I'm fine with it. Afterwards, though, it's too late - retcons to declared-and-resolved actions are never an option be it in this area or any other.

Yeah, you're punishing women.

Given how you probably phrased the question, that response isn't very surprising.

"So, a guy on the forum I frequent says he rolls for chance of pregnancy when a female character has sex. What do you guys think about this?"

 

[Clint_L]

This is such a dumb conversation, but the idea of the DM making that kind of personal decision about someone's character is truly weird to me. That is definitely the kind of character detail that you let the player decide - if they want to play a pregnant character more power to 'em, but that has to be a choice. Fortunately, my home games don't really go in that direction anyway (no one is particularly interested in making it part of the story) and my school games are PG, so it doesn't come up.

 

[GreyLord]

Yeah, you're punishing women.


"So, a guy on the forum I frequent says he rolls for chance of pregnancy when a female character has sex. What do you guys think about this?"

I think this conversation has veered into very uncomfortable areas.

Unless your group is comfortable with such things, I think forcing issues of this kind is rather uncomfortable to force, and can be restrictive of player agency (much like certain actions take away peoples' free agency to choose in real life...to say it without going into deeper detail) if you decide to force certain consequences on them that they did not agree upon before hand.

Why are we discussing such an "Adult" topic anyways, and then taking it to the point where it is becoming very uncomfortable to think about what players are going through (as real people rather than just play things for the DM). ?

 

[humble minion]

One of the things that makes it really, really obvious that D&D was originally written by guys is that the basic PHB has spell descriptions for several different ways to kill people with rainbows, but no ‘Contraception’ spell.

Cleric/Druid, 1st level, ritual with a one month duration do you reckon?

 

[Aldarc]

And it's a very long-odds roll at that.

It's disgusting and misogynistic IMHO that it's even on the table in the first place.

 

[Zardnaar]

I never saw the Book of Vile Darkness. What was the problem with it?

It was geared towards evil PCs and had spells like Mindrape in it.

I'm kind of neutral on the book. If you buy into PCs being evil etc it's handled somewhat tactfully considering when it came out. (2002). And you can get rewarded for things like sentient sacrifice.

BUT even if you buy into that premise it's not that good mechanically and somewhat limited use. The Book of Exalted deeds is much better.

I remember a evil campaign we ran and a Drow cleric of lolth who would animate the dead and polish of captives for power.

It's not the worst 3.0 book but I wouldn't call it good either assuming you buy into evil games.

 

[Staffan]

One of the things that makes it really, really obvious that D&D was originally written by guys is that the basic PHB has spell descriptions for several different ways to kill people with rainbows, but no ‘Contraception’ spell.

Cleric/Druid, 1st level, ritual with a one month duration do you reckon?

The 3e FRCS had two herbs used for this purpose: Cassil for men (1 gp, lasts 3d4 days) and Nararoot for women (2 sp, lasts d4+2 days when brewed into a tea or 2d4+4 days when chewed raw which also tastes very bad).

 

[Umbran]

Has the question been asked yet about tracking cycles? Because that's gonna make a pretty big impact on the roll I would think

Mod Note:
I hope this was an attempt at humor that failed. The problem with such is that the failure mode makes you look... really insensitive.

Everyone, drop this line of discussion, please and thanks.