Sex Appeal with more inclusive?

[David L Pulver]

Just had a thought on Sex Appeal:

Will the Sex Appeal talent use the terminology found in GURPS 4e - that is, instead of it working on "opposite sex" say "those attracted to your sex"?

[zot]

Originally Posted by David L Pulver

Just had a thought on Sex Appeal:

Will the Sex Appeal talent use the terminology found in GURPS 4e - that is, instead of it working on "opposite sex" say "those attracted to your sex"?

Sheesh, talk about a mine field. It's not only about gender; don't forget about bi/omni/poly-sexual people. Maybe better wording would be "those potentially attracted to you" and rename it Amorous or something that doesn't have a gender connotation.

Committing rules for Sex Appeal to text, today, will get you much more offense than religion ever would.

[Shadekeep]

I agree, it should be much more generalised and apply to people who are amenable to being intrigued and/or seduced by the player. And it doesn't need to be strictly sexual, but could function as a level of charming-ness as well. Essentially a lower-level version of Charisma that only works on people who are in some way already predisposed to the player's "type".

[Anomylous]

I doubt that leaving the title as Sex Appeal would cause much offense, in today's increasingly sex-positive society. And it's often hilarious when players try to seduce NPC's and each other. Making it a more vague "lesser version of Charisma" would likely make it a lot less popular.

But I do second the motion to edit out any gender-specific language in the description.

[Shadekeep]

Originally Posted by Anomylous

Making it a more vague "lesser version of Charisma" would likely make it a lot less popular.

I don't really see a mechanical difference there, though. As the talent is written it basically seems to function as I describe, as a subset of the Charisma talent (though with that nice bonus chance of not being killed outright when helpless in combat). Of course it can be role-played very differently, and for me that aspect matters quite a bit. I was always partial to buying Mundane Talents for my characters, even when they had very little application mechanically. So I'm all for it being colourful in role-playing terms.

[larsdangly]

This isn't a mine field, it's just common sense: in 2018 you talk about this sort of thing in a very inclusive, even handed way. There is never a situation in which you mess up by making the tent big.

[Rick_Smith]

Hi all,
I agree that making Sex Appeal more inclusive is a good idea. The saving throw verses ST or IQ (which ever was higher), seemed weird to me. (People with high DX can't be sexy?). Tho an attribute roll to be sexy really does not make that much sense.

I think that this talent could likely use some more thought.

Warm regards, Rick.

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by David L Pulver

Just had a thought on Sex Appeal: Will the Sex Appeal talent use the terminology found in GURPS 4e - that is, instead of it working on "opposite sex" say "those attracted to your sex"?

I believe the sensible thing to do in this case is to use the accepted dictionary definition; which is:

Sex Appeal: (noun) "the quality of being attractive in a sexual way."

This definition - which makes no assumptions - includes everyone and excludes no one.

Which *could* be re-written as:

SEX APPEAL (1). The quality of being attractive in a sexual way. Gives you a saving roll of 3 dice against your ST or IQ (whichever is higher) against being slain by those who find you sexually attractive. If they have you helpless and you make the saving roll, they will take you away to slavery (from which you may someday escape or be freed) instead of killing you. Also: you may use this talent when negotiating with those who find you sexually attractive. Make the same saving roll as above. If you make it, the GM adds 1 to the reaction die roll for his character. If you fail, the GM subtracts 1 for your clumsiness. - as applied to root text from p.12 TFT:ITL

Would that solve the question?

JK

[HunterS]

Didn't have much to add, but wanted to poke my head in and say thank you for keeping the tone of this thread so welcoming and open. I think the comment about "making the tent big" is a great one.

[Shadekeep]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Tho an attribute roll to be sexy really does not make that much sense.

Perhaps the roll simulates successfully carrying off the sexiness. One might be physically attractive (roll vs ST) or seductively charming (roll vs IQ), but it won't necessarily work on every person every time. Even beautiful people can have an off day. ^_^