|
In the pathfinder 2 play test being androgynous requires a skill feat and training in deception. https://twitter.com/kalindlarastatus/1026203776439513088?s=21
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I look forward to his lawyers' attempting to document that the damage was caused by any assault, because holy poo poo do you need paperwork to prove that stuff. Like, a lot of paperwork. What are the Vegas odds that Hambly gets this 14K and counting and after a while says 'he looked into it and it wasn't feasible right now but he's going to use the money to keep fighting the good fight' and nothing is ever said of it again?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
Vegas doesn't make odds on sure things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
Because it’s Hambley, 3:1. Any other right wing grifter it’d be off the board but Hambley might be just dumb enough to try. Of course, that really just means some right wing lawyer will grift it off him, slap a signature at the bottom of some form letters that look impressive to non-lawyers, and buy himself some new golf clubs. So the end result is it’s a scam either way, the only variable is how far up the chain the scammer is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:In the pathfinder 2 play test being androgynous requires a skill feat and training in deception. Did you get a screenshot of what was said or anything, because that page doesn't seem to exist anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
kongurous posted:The ones that never had mechanics? Are you really the one buying Gorbash these red titles rather than replying directly to him?  Because this is looking pretty angry over rape rules to me. Like it's great that after quadrupling down on how it's "not rape!!", Holden or someone else who came in after he was kicked out did the sensible thing and took a red pen to it. That's also kind of beside the point that Holden is human algae who is totally comfortable excusing sexual harassment and exploiting rape tropes when he wants to. You could've just taken a screenshot of the current charm text if you thought Gorbash was misrepresenting the final phrasing or let it pass because who really gives that much of a poo poo about Exalted?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:45
|
|
|
those were sample abyssal charms, without actual mechanics, and the abyssals book isn't out yet
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
Ahahahaha, Jesus Christ The rape game defender has most definitely Logged On.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
Red text dude, you fuckin suck. Nobody here is melting down but you to the tune of $40. Log off and go outside you weirdo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:56
|
|
|
senrath posted:Did you get a screenshot of what was said or anything, because that page doesn't seem to exist anymore. I messed up the link somehow 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
"I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" I sigh as I spend yet another $10 to try and weakly burn someone on the Something Awful forums over a tabletop RPG like a normal and well-adjusted human being.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Zereth posted:those were sample abyssal charms, without actual mechanics, and the abyssals book isn't out yet What were the rules got dialed down to "only being able to affect NPCs" then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:00
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:What were the rules got dialed down to "only being able to affect NPCs" then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:I messed up the link somehow
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
Clearly this is some Extremely Normal behavior.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:09
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:I messed up the link somehow https://twitter.com/Kalindlara/status/1026203776439513088
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:What were the rules got dialed down to "only being able to affect NPCs" then? I'm legitimately unaware of any, to be quite frank. But it's also a very large book and I'm sure as hell not gonna bother reading charms in trees I'm not currently using.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:20
|
|
|
Could it be that the reason why the game has very large explicit text saying that powers that enable you to rape people can't be used on PCs, has such a thing because at some point in the development process powers actually existed without such protection? And those things were written by the person we're discussing here? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
It's me. I'm the one spending $10 per reply in an argument nobody was going to remember in three days anyway. Owned, Gorbash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
Oh no I have been utterly slain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Could it be that the reason why the game has very large explicit text saying that powers that enable you to rape people can't be used on PCs, has such a thing because at some point in the development process powers actually existed without such protection? Could you point out where those rules are? Like I said, I've never seen them before and would like to read them for myself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
I mean, Lowtax needs to get a new spine somehow. If each of us paid ten bucks for each stupid post about Exalted, he could probably afford a full cyborg conversion by now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
senrath posted:Could you point out where those rules are? Like I said, I've never seen them before and would like to read them for myself. There's a rule in EX3 that's called the "Red Rule" in the fashion of the Golden Rule that basically says "unless all the players involved in a sexual action agree that it's going to happen, it doesn't happen." e: Unless you're talking about this thing that I literally quoted on the previous page  When confronted on this Holden's defense was that it wasn't a Ghost Rape charm, because it summoned Wraiths to Ravish, not Ghosts to Rape. Kurieg fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Aug 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
to be clear, it's this feat:   Any class can become Trained in Deception, but only Rogues can take a Skill Feat at level 1. Character Backgrounds can provide Skill Feats at level 1, such as the Entertainer background providing the Fascinating Performance skill feat at level 1, but none of the current backgrounds provide Close Match specifically, so you'd have to create a custom background for it. EDIT: A closer reading of the feat and the Deception rules suggests that you technically always can portray yourself as a different age, gender, or ancestry, but this feat eliminates the penalty for doing so. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Aug 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
I mean gently caress Pathfinder but that's about the least-charitable possible interpretation of what gradenko_2000 just posted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:There's a rule in EX3 that's called the "Red Rule" in the fashion of the Golden Rule that basically says "unless all the players involved in a sexual action agree that it's going to happen, it doesn't happen." Nope, the red rule was what I wanted, and was in a part of the book I hadn't read. Like I said, I only read the parts directly relevant to the characters I've played. The Abyssals preview was 100% indefensible, but isn't going to actually be the rules because Holden was rightfully thrown off of Exalted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I mean gently caress Pathfinder but that's about the least-charitable possible interpretation of what gradenko_2000 just posted. I was just requoting to properly embed the tweet. But yeah it's a pretty uncharitable reading. senrath posted:Nope, the red rule was what I wanted, and was in a part of the book I hadn't read. Like I said, I only read the parts directly relevant to the characters I've played. The Abyssals preview was 100% indefensible, but isn't going to actually be the rules because Holden was rightfully thrown off of Exalted. Right, but the existence of the Red Rule can probably be attributed to everything Holden did, and the necessity of a boilerplate people can point at and go "See, it's better now." Same reason the last beast book has a sidebar that says "YOU ARE THE loving BAD GUYS."
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
Yeah, everything Holden did definitely has left a stain on Exalted, because everything ends up looked at through a lens of "was this because of something creepy?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Could it be that the reason why the game has very large explicit text saying that powers that enable you to rape people can't be used on PCs, has such a thing because at some point in the development process powers actually existed without such protection? Uuuuh I think it's for the 'seduce' action which is explicitly about, like... wooing someone. I don't think there's even any charms that directly reference it, except for charms that generally improve social abilities. Like, this is a system in which social influence exists. So, you can, mechanically, give someone an Intimacy of Sexual Interest for your character. This explicitly doesn't work on PCs, and also... the GM is a player? So can say 'no' to an attempt to make one of their characters get all hot under the collar. It's... really not a rape system, it's a system for representing the pretty standard fictional idea of 'I will try to romance this person'. And it's really good there's the Red Rule because otherwise the existence of rules for social influence that includes sexual attraction or romantic love can in fact be used to do some pretty drat gross things, in the same way that players of D&D can and do use Intimidate and combat skills to loving torture a goblin. No GM should let that happen, and having a clear rule there is good. Seriously is this what this is all about? The 'you have an anti-harassment policy, so you must cater to creeps' argument? I'm honestly stunned. EDIT: Also, uh, why do we specify 'Holden' when it was both Holden and line dev/actual harasser Morke aka Hatewheel? Like I'm just saying if anything left a stain it's Harasser Man, not his sidekick Mad On Internet Boy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:EDIT: Also, uh, why do we specify 'Holden' when it was both Holden and line dev/actual harasser Morke aka Hatewheel? Like I'm just saying if anything left a stain it's Harasser Man, not his sidekick Mad On Internet Boy. Because Holden's antics started this discussion to begin with and it's easier to say "Holden" than "Holden and Morke".
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I mean gently caress Pathfinder but that's about the least-charitable possible interpretation of what gradenko_2000 just posted. Kalindlara is an actual Pathfinder contributor too, so I'm not sure what she's even trying to do with this. Also the only notable actual parts about gender in the playtest rulebook are: 1) pick a gender for your character (or don't if they don't have one) and 2) don't be a dick to your players because of their gender, gender identity, gender expression, etc. The first is just your usual "fill in the details" step of character creation, the second is a section about being respectful and playing nicely in your games that's right up in the introduction. Paizo ain't perfect, but there's literally nothing there to get upset about. Unless you're the terrible posters on the playtest forums who are complaining about how Paizo is gonna shut their games down because apparently racist slurs are a critical part of their elfgames.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
Arivia posted:1) pick a gender for your character (or don't if they don't have one) and 2) don't be a dick to your players because of their gender, gender identity, gender expression, etc. The first is just your usual "fill in the details" step of character creation, the second is a section about being respectful and playing nicely in your games that's right up in the introduction. Paizo ain't perfect, but there's literally nothing there to get upset about. I had to check this out:     This all seems very reasonable
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:36
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:to be clear, it's this feat: So it's not a just needing a feat to be androgynous, but needing a feat to be a character who can pass for a different gender than they biologically are? Hooo boy. I think this is another one of those wonderful 'the people writing the rules aren't clued in to what the blurbs are being written about' moments. Also, unless PF2 has drastically changed the power scale of feats, that is such a niche edge-case penalty to be removed that I have no idea why anyone would even write that feat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:So it's not a just needing a feat to be androgynous, but needing a feat to be a character who can pass for a different gender than they biologically are? You don't need a feat. You don't need to be trained in Deception (the skill with the Impersonate action) to Impersonate at all. It's specifically referring to not receiving penalties for that use of the Deception skill. In PF 1e you received a -2 penalty to your check for disguising yourself as another gender, but there's no actual penalties listed in the 2e rules for it. In the context of everything else in the book, this really does just come off as "no penalties for a specific use of the Impersonate action." Skill feats are one of the less-clear parts of the playtest book and could probably still use some revision; a lot of them look to be pretty piecemeal and a good portion are just taking a feat to do a thing you used to be able to do without a feat in PF 1e, which is crappy. Speaking of skill feats, they are a new category of feat that is acquired separately from other feats in PF 2e, and you can only spend skill feats on stuff that makes your skills better. (You also get ancestry, class, and general feats, in contrast.) Most classes get a skill feat every two levels.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Why would you need to mechanically buy and use a feat to crossdress and appear as the opposite gender on a game unless you are playing as Bugs Bunny on a campaign where every enemy is Elmer Fudd? E: Or if you are playing as Mulan I guess
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Also, "if applicable" gender is entirely relevant even under 50s suburb Americana gender standards because some of the characters in the game are literally genderless robots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:51
|
|
|
In any other 3.PF game, a feat to make you better at disguising yourself would never get picked, because it would be competing with all the other feats that make you better at combat or spellcasting. PF2 has tried to solve that issue by siloing-off all skill-related feats into their own bucket, while all the combat-related class abilities are in a separate bucket. There's still maybe an issue of how often "no penalties to Disguising yourself" will come up in gameplay, and you're still probably going to prioritize "you can climb walls better" because that's more relevant to exploring dungeons and whatnot, but at least you're no longer picking between it and Power Attack. I do think that there's maybe a disconnect between using Disguise as a form of subterfuge, and "I am going to dress myself androgynously because that is who I am", but then that's why there's no explicit mechanical prohibition from doing so, merely a penalty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 05:58
|
|
|
The penalty is, in effect, a mechanical punishment for doing so. One that puts the GM in the crappy position, where in order for it to matter they have to roll to see if your character's gender presentation passes. That is not a thing I ever want to see come up at a table, especially a table including the usual audience for Pathfinder.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
Again, this is not your presentation in general. This is specifically a penalty when using the Impersonate action. The action language in 2e is a LOT clearer than it was in 3e/PF 1e, and this is referring to a particular action previously called the Disguise skill. This skill feat is NOT about general presentation or character identity. It is about a single clearly delineated use of a skill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 06:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
It still wouldn't hurt for the feat description to make it extremely clear that the feat is about changing your appearance, and has nothing to do with your character's appearance when you're not in disguise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2018 06:14
|
|
