Modelling Equal Gender Appeal

[RGTraynor]

(scritches his head) Some serious walls of text for a relatively simple question.

I just have to ask this, while we're asking questions: when people post threads about how to model this persnickety combat action, how often do they get grilled about what their "vision" for battle over the gaming table is, whether their players buy into that, whether it's the "right group" for the OP's notion, how "into combat" the table might be, and whether the OP knows what "rabbit holes" he or she's getting into?

No, I didn't think so.

So how about we just assume that the OP has a better notion that we do what his table can or cannot handle, and that if the OP was looking for lectures and cautionary tales as to how terrible it is that his expectations differ from ours, the OP would have asked? Even if it's about the dreaded topic of S-E-X? Eeeesh. Nice way to welcome a newcomer to the board.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by RGTraynor

I just have to ask this, while we're asking questions: when people post threads about how to model this persnickety combat action, how often do they get grilled about what their "vision" for battle over the gaming table is, whether their players buy into that, whether it's the "right group" for the OP's notion, how "into combat" the table might be, and whether the OP knows what "rabbit holes" he or she's getting into?

No, I didn't think so.

So how about we just assume that the OP has a better notion that we do what his table can or cannot handle, and that if the OP was looking for lectures and cautionary tales as to how terrible it is that his expectations differ from ours, the OP would have asked? Even if it's about the dreaded topic of S-E-X? Eeeesh. Nice way to welcome a newcomer to the board.

I've seen some pretty involved discussions about combat questions. Consider the recent thread about bows being useless.

Anyway maybe sexuality is legitimately a more personal and delicate subject than fighting.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Merior

How do you represent 'a man who even the men want'? (Or, for that matter, 'a woman who even the ladies like'?)

Let's bear in mind first of all that what that expression literally describes is Very Beautiful/Handsome. Such people do get a big reaction bonus even from the those not normally attracted to their sex. Add androgynous and you get someone who can use Sex Appeal on just about everyone except people with certain intolerances. (Even then it's not that it won't work so much as they're likely to get violent shortly afterward.)

That being said, it would be fair to say that a non-androgynous person probably could use Sex Appeal on most people, just at a penalty based on just how straight they are. I'd say for more people it's less "fixed reaction" than -10 difficulty for using Sex Appeal for lesser manipulations than actually trying to get a straight person into bed with you.

[Donny Brook]

Is it supposed to be something particular to one or more characters and different from the setting background, or something generally found in-setting? If the latter, just remove the sex-differentiation in the attractiveness traits for that setting.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Merior

1) The Androgynous option for Appearance could possibly work but it doesn't seem to cause attraction, just appeal. (Which I, admit, may be close enough.)

You could state that, in this case, most people who are attracted to women tend to think you're a woman, while most people who are attracted to men tend to think you're a man (characters who are attracted to both either think you're one at random, or are simply unsure). You don't get the full bonus because you're a bit more masculine/feminine than most such people prefer, but you still have a bonus. If the subject finds out you're actually of the sex they are not attracted to, those with appropriate Intolerance will react rather poorly (likely accusing you of tricking them), while those without such a trait would simply cease being interested in the character sexually (but may still be on friendly terms, depending on the situation). At most, this might call for a Perk, for people to always think you are the particular sex they are attracted to.

Originally Posted by Merior

2) I began to try to figure out how to best model an Affliction which induced a 'Bisexual' Quirk via a Sense Based attack, but gave up quickly when I looked at the potential points cost.

Female Variant #5 in the El Goonish Shive webcomic produced pheromones that made everyone find them attractive, not just those who were normally attracted to women (largely because the guy who designed it was a bit of a perv). Something like that would work here as well - but, as you note, it's not going to be very cheap (even if the trait added didn't modify cost at all, enough Area Effect to have an impact on more than just those immediately near you is going to boost cost).

Originally Posted by Merior

3) Looking in "Power Ups 2 - Perks" I found three perks which come close, but didn't work out upon closer inspection and further thought.

• "Passing Appearance" : The 'Androgynous' version might work (at first), but it is about being mistaken for the 'other' gender rather than attraction as is.
• "Extra Option" : This could perhaps work... if there was an optional rule in existence which permitted bypassing the requirement.
• "Rules Exemption" : Not applicable as the issue isn't regarding an optional rule which has been applied.

I think the important part of Passing Appearance is that you're treated as though you were a member of another race/sex/whatever, not necessarily that you're mistaken as such. So, you could use it as justification for a Perk (call it "Even the <Guys/Ladies> Want <Him/Her>", as appropriate).

Originally Posted by Merior

4) The last option would be to have it fall under the aegis of a (likely cinematic) technique based off of Sex Appeal. However my knowledge of how to create that, or what any 'default' could or should be, is distinctly lacking.

I am inclined towards the Technique based path, but have gotten stuck. Could anyone suggest how to get this to work using any of these methods or even a different way?

-10 is the typical Task Difficulty Modifier for "impossible," which "attracting a straight man while you are very clearly a man" would probably count as. So, your "Break the Kinsey Scale" Technique would default to -10, and be bought up normally (whether it's Normal or Hard is up to you, but only results in a difference of [1] in terms of cost). Note this would imply that even without the Technique, a character can attract someone not normally attracted to them at -10 - whether you want that to be the case or not is, again, up to you.

You could also assign each NPC (and PC, for that matter) a value for how attracted they are to each sex, generally on a scale of -10 for "Not at all" to 0 for "attracted normally" (characters with Lecherousness might be at +1 or higher). An asexual person would be at -10/-10, someone mostly one way but with some attraction the other way might be at +0/-5, someone who is equally attracted to both but has a low libido might be at -5/-5, and so forth. The Technique can't every give you a bonus, but could help offset (or outright negate) the penalty.

[dcarson]

If it works just by them being there not from interaction add the Sexy Pose perk which lets you do a Sex Appeal roll without talking to them.

[Donny Brook]

What about Alternate Forms that are identical except for their sex?

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

What about Alternate Forms that are identical except for their sex?

That would be the Hermaphromorph advantage (p. B59).

[Dalillama]

Originally Posted by Varyon

You could state that, in this case, most people who are attracted to women tend to think you're a woman, while most people who are attracted to men tend to think you're a man (characters who are attracted to both either think you're one at random, or are simply unsure). You don't get the full bonus because you're a bit more masculine/feminine than most such people prefer, but you still have a bonus. If the subject finds out you're actually of the sex they are not attracted to, those with appropriate Intolerance will react rather poorly (likely accusing you of tricking them), while those without such a trait would simply cease being interested in the character sexually (but may still be on friendly terms, depending on the situation).

IME that's pretty much how it works, although every once in a while someone of a normally incompatible orientation makes an exception.

[whswhs]

About Sex Appeal, the Basic Set says, "If you aren't willing to vamp people to get what you want . . ." The phrase "what you want" is much broader than "sexual gratification," and certainly many people have used sex appeal to get things other than sexual gratification; consider the concept of a honey trap, for example. And "vamping" can mean "exploiting" as well as "seducing."

In Social Engineering, I expanded on that, to say that any of the Influence skills could be used to obtain sexual gratification, or at least the opportunity for it. And to reinforce that Sex Appeal could be used to obtain other things.

If you think about it, if Sex Appeal could be used to gain admission from a guard, or to get out of a prison cell, or to get someone to talk incautiously, or to distract people from what your partners were doing, it wouldn't be the sort of thing that would be included in the Basic Set.