 Seduction Quality, Social Bonus vs Opposite Sex |
  |
 Jan 15 2007, 12:47 AM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 14-January 07 From: San Francisco Member No.: 10,635  |
I'm thinking of a Quality that would look something like this:
Seduction Cost: 5 BP Character gains +2 dice pool modifier to all social interactions with opposite sex but takes a -2 dice pool modifier to all social interactions of the same sex. I could swear I read something to this effect somewhere but I can't find it in the 4th edition book. (No pun intended putting "can't find" and "4th edition book" in the same sentence) I'm a new GM and I probably just imagine the whole thing, but anyone have any feedback? |
 |
 
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 12:52 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 983 Joined: 20-February 06 Member No.: 8,286 |
Shouldn't it be called "Seductive"?
Anyway, you can specialize in Seduction with one of the social skills. No need to restrict it to members of the opposite sex. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 12:59 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 548 Joined: 21-December 06 Member No.: 10,416 |
Seduction is listed under the Con skill as a specialization, in SR4. You coudl use Con for seduction even without that spec. of course. SR3's Companion book might have had appearance traits, but I don't have that book handy. Appearance, the target's tastes, etc. would apply as modifiers.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:11 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
Good Looking And Knows It. It's the example Edge for "how to created edges/flaws" along with its companion Flaw, "Ugly And Doesn't Care."
But they're in the SR2 and SR3 Companions. Seduction is just, yeah... a new Social Skill specialization. However, in the (woefully short, but then again... SR4 isn't for me) Social Modifiers Table, "Subject has romatic attraction to the character" gives a +2 mod. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:19 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
The Seductress mentor spirit provides +2 Con bonus to its followers.
It is a silly quality. For one thing, why do the bonuses only apply to members of the opposite sex? What if they're gay, bi, or bi-curious, or really drunk. For the same reasons, penalties to members to the opposite sex are not appropriate. For that matter, what do you mean by "opposite sex." This is 2070, both medical technologies and social mores have advanced quite a bit. Some characters don't have an opposite sex for one reason or another and no one would see anything wrong with that. How would this quality apply to a hermaphrodite, an intersexual, an asexual, a Bannaum, or anything else one might be through a quirk of nature of the miracles of modern surgery? If anything, it should apply equally to everyone no matter what their sex or gender because sex and gender preferences are neither polar nor static. Rather, the run along a continuum and are somewhat flexible. Those concerns aside, Pronomancers don't need any more help. It is already possible to create a social adept who can turn Jerry Falwell gay. Another +2 seduction bonus is just damn cheesy. Use the Con (Seduction) specialization, instead. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:23 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,526 Joined: 9-April 06 From: McGuire AFB, NJ Member No.: 8,445 |
Creating a Pronomancer is sooooo easy.
Mix 6 parts Magic, 6 parts spellcasting and add a liberal dose of Orgasm or Orgy. Sprinkle with Power foci and/or spellcasting foci as desired. Taadaa. Instant Pornomancer able to make anyone feel the rhythm. :silly: |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:35 AM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
You don't need a social adept to do that, but a social adept can turn him openly gay and the president of GLAAD. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:47 AM
Post
#8
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 14-January 07 From: San Francisco Member No.: 10,635 |
Yeah, I think thats what I was remembering. I think it was a combination of the Seduction specialization and the social modifiers table that I was thinking of. I forgot to mention that it's been a good 6 months ago since I read the entire book for a game that burned viciously as it sank to the bottom of the ocean. Guess what happens when the GM is GMing for the 1st time with players that can't stand each other and the 2 rules lawyers have only read half the rules! Thanks for the fast replies everyone. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:51 AM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...I know, I already have on PC I have to deal with as a GM. She also owns a strip club... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 15 2007, 01:59 AM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,379 Joined: 16-April 02 From: the LI shadows Member No.: 2,607 |
The quality is a little one-sided. If the bonus only applies to the user's opposite sex, what if he/she is gay?
The modifier should read "modifier to all social interactions with the intended partner". |
|
|
|
|
Jan 15 2007, 03:44 AM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 30-December 06 Member No.: 10,493 |
It's also kind of odd that the bonus works on babies. Maybe there should be some kind of age restriction.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 16 2007, 12:14 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 14-January 07 From: San Francisco Member No.: 10,635 |
Ah to be a player again. I could have had a strip club once, but no, I was greedy. I needed my own personal harem, a portable harem. You know, for when the villain goes into his long tedious monologue ...I'll just carefully reach into my pocket... Ok, so I admit this may have been a poorly conceived idea. It's not my fault I'm starving because I can't find anyone to fullfill my roleplaying needs. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 16 2007, 01:30 PM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,002 Joined: 22-April 06 From: Canada Member No.: 8,494 |
I think it should be +2 dice for any person that is sexually attracted to you and -2 dice if they are not (-6 if they are of the same gender). This will take into account any possible situations that a seducer may encounter. Besides the future will be a more open society (more greed but more open). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 02:24 AM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
There's already a test modifier for that that applies to everyone. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 04:36 AM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
the -6 to 'same gender' dispite what you may feel about it is not apropriate for SR3 or SR4. Dunno bout SR1 and 2 since i've never played under those systems. I might say an additional -2 modifier if their not 'compatible' in their sexual tastes to yours. By 'compatible' I mean like a gay hitting on a straight, or like a guy hitting on a lesbian. But you have to really keep in mind if it even applies at all. Again SR is one of those settings where the current 'openly acceptable' standard is.. well. Alot more 'balanced' between straight/gay/bi. Probably alot more of the latter infact. Of course the problem properly portraying that kinda thing in SR is that current day mentality just.. doesnt match the mentality of the SR world. Under SR very little is 'taboo'. Sure some of it might still be considered 'wierd' but then the reaction isnt usually 'EW! GROSS!' it's.. 'Yeah.. what ever floats your boat.' The 'anti-gay' stance thats still quite common in many areas today might well still be prevalent in some areas of the SR world. But the vast majority of countries of the SR world an 'anti-gay' stance is infact considered a 'fringe group mentality'. I mean it's a world where spirits dont really by anyones understanding have a sexual preference... yet you've got even in SR cannon material references to 'sexual intercourse' with spirits, or magicians who have made claims of such etc. I mean.. how the hell do you 'do the deed' with a spirit? And whats it then? Gay? Bi? Straight? Other? I'd probably classify it as 'other' myself since most of that seems to still take place on the astral plane. And.... yeah. Course if it's a possession spirit then it's I guess... what ever body it inhabits. But your partner still isnt really (meta)human. And god forbid some day you go home with some one from a bar for some nookiee and it turns out their a shapeshifter or something. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 10:02 AM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 14-January 07 From: San Francisco Member No.: 10,635 |
Actually, the idea did not stem from the other person's attraction to the character, but more the character's ability to communicate effectively with the other person. The idea was based on the character relying too strongly on using sex appeal to get what he or she wants. The bonus/penalty is the result of the way the character perceives the situation not the target. For example, a female character is more confident talking to men regardless of the man's sexual preference. Because she typically is able to manipulate men easily, she feels more confident talking to men regardless of their interest in her. I suppose better wording would have been the character gains a bonus to all social interactions with a chosen sex but takes a penalty to all social interactions of another sex. I had originally left the wording simple and brief intentionally, because I wasn't trying to take into account all possibilities. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 10:18 AM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,589 Joined: 28-November 05 Member No.: 8,019 |
You got that quality from Fallout 2, didn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 10:50 AM
Post
#18
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 732 Joined: 1-December 06 Member No.: 10,116 |
Yeah but thats really a sort of 'situational modifier'. It's one of those zones systems like SR4's are kinda handy. They dont have one specifically stated in the book. But it's ammazingly easy to implement and as long as the modifier is seemingly appropriate doesnt 'unrealistically skew' the results as far as all involved parties are concenred. I mean regardless of a rulings actual basis on 'true' reality, as long as both players and GMs feel a modifier is 'fair' then it is and everone can more or less be happy with the results even if they dont get what they want becuase it was 'fair'. Heavy Gear for example if I recal actually has some listing on it's modifiers list that under X circumstances the GM can throw in modifiers of say +4 to -4. SR4 while not actually stating such, really does easily allow for it. And honestly I not only would use such a modifier but would acccept it from another GM. I might not agree and might attempt to discuss the issue because I dont feel such an action really meritied such a large modifier or what ever, but overall ti's not too hard to reach a 'balance'. Example: Zoe Trannis, a buxum young 20 something seductress is trying to solicit Kramer Alexander for sexual favours in exchange for money. She's a protitute and besides, to her way of thinking Kramer's abit cute and she might well enjoy 'momentary employment' with him. So we'll give her a Charisma 5, Social group: 4 cause she's a pro. 9 dice. She's specialized in seduction (which breaks the group but i'm trying to keep it simple here) so she's got 12 for the test. So what kind of counter modifiers can we consider for this? Let say Kramer had a bad day. He's not in a good or recptive mood today: -1 dice Now lets say he's effectively gay so we'll throw in another -2 dice. Maybe he's got his eye set on Lary Kingston across the table from him so isnt really paying much attention to Zoe: -1 dice Zoe however, being a professional and perhaps for what ever reason has a better understanding than usual of Kramer so we'll give her a 'situational' +1 as a counter. End result: Zoe gets to roll 9 dice in the opposed test. So she'll probably still get what she wants. If you really dont think thats still realistic you can allways throw in a few more negative dice at her and still be more or less reasonable. And then you could further declare that since Kramer is gay she's goign to need at least 3 hits over how ever many he generates to resist or what ever. Still might be doable. If nothign else her attempts probably wont piss him off however and they might even wind up being friends. I mean even a 'social failure' isnt allways a total loss. You might get a "Thats cute but no. But since I like you here's my number anyway lets hang out some time." It opens the way to developting a contact, as well as a chance for future atempts at seduction. Of course a massive critical failure would rpobably mean saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. Perhaps withotu even knowing why. Which earns an instant icy walkout to a bitchslap. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 17 2007, 05:20 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 906 Joined: 16-October 06 Member No.: 9,630 |
Actually if Kramer actually gay and not bisexual you can rule seduction impossible, try another use of the CON skill.
If it was Joe coming up to a straight Kramer you could bet any attempt at seduction would fail. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 06:02 PM
Post
#20
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,333 Joined: 19-August 06 From: Austin Member No.: 9,168 |
It might fail, but in the "you're funny" sort of way. I'm straight, but I've been hit on by gay guys a few times. It never worked, but it did occasionally result in an embarassed laugh on their part, and some friendly conversation. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 10:51 PM
Post
#21
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 14-January 07 From: San Francisco Member No.: 10,635 |
You're right, I got this idea from Fallout (probably close to word for word). Best single player RPG ever. Maybe I should just turn this into a flaw that only imposes a penalty on social interactions against people who do no find the character attractive. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 17 2007, 11:10 PM
Post
#22
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 906 Joined: 16-October 06 Member No.: 9,630 |
The start is good, the problem is with getting a bonus to seduce members of the opposite sex. Then a penalty to the same sex. It assumes to much.
It might just be simpler to say Seduction gives you a flat +2 bonus on any seduction roles. Leave it to the GM to decide the targets preferences and any dice pool bonus or penalties that go with it. A flaw would be like this 5 BP Lecher. -2 penalty to resist seduction roles made by members of the opposite sex. (Or the same sex if you happen to swing that way) Of course you get 1 point of Notoriety for this quality. This is similar but not the same to addiction. Some one with the sexual addiction would have to make will power rolls rolls to resist the offer or chance at sex. Say from a hooker. Someone with the Lecher quality is simply easily taken in and manipulated by members of the opposite sex (or there preference if the swing the other way.) |
|
|
|
|
Jan 17 2007, 11:47 PM
Post
#23
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 777 Joined: 22-November 06 Member No.: 9,934 |
Stating it as "by the Gender of your Sexual affinity" would be more inclusive and clear. however making things like this forces a character at character generation to denote "how they swing." |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Jan 18 2007, 12:13 AM
Post
#24
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 906 Joined: 16-October 06 Member No.: 9,630 |
It was meant to sound flavorful instead of sterile Why does it matter if it forces the player to pick thier character's sexual preference at creation? They don't have to take the quality. Taking the negative quality addiction forces the player to pick an addiction. So why is this any different? Alot of negative qualitys force a set of behaviors on a player's character. If your thinking about this quality Lecher your either A: Looking to round out your characters personality, in which case your going to have to decided eventually and its best to get it done before play begains. (unless you plan to play a character who is struggling with his/her sexualliity) Or B: You looking for all the easy BP you can get. In which case I'll slap you upside the head by having someone try and seduce every other run. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Jan 18 2007, 12:46 AM
Post
#25
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 777 Joined: 22-November 06 Member No.: 9,934 |
by adding the positive quality it forces everyone to decide, rather than allowing it to come out in roleplay. the negative quality only forces that player to decide the positive quality forces everyone. my group is the kind that tries to get easy BP out of flaws, I feel like slapping them upside the head every session. Addiction (Caffeine) Addiction (Matrix) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th January 2025 - 04:41 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.