Is there ever a case where saying "I roll to seduce" is acceptable?

When being assaulted by Succubus.

>FATAL above a magical girl game
I suppose exploring the wonders of anal circumference is more acceptable than playing every man's dream.

Sure to do any of the following:
>Distract somebody
>Fool somebody into following you or doing you a favor.
>Convince somebody to do something otherwise against their interests
Plenty of reasons.

There's a temptress in our party who can neutralize any red-blooded man so long as she rolls high enough by distracting them with her wiles then poisoning them.

When attempting to seduce someone, you fucking retard.

With appropriate roleplaying in an appropriate context with a group who considers that kind of thing an acceptable course of action.

I seduce absolutely every fucking one in my games. Men, women, monsters, the party members and tried to seduce the DM once so he could let me survive a death roll. It didn't worked out with the DM though.

Try polymorphing.

Just out of curiosity, do you know of any historical examples/legends of that happening in a related way?

He's referring to the hospitality the nobility were expected to offer people, which the offers or refusal of them were plot points in many Arthurian tales (most famously the case of the Green Knight and... Fuck, I don't recall his name, but the problem was the Green Knight bid his wife kiss the knight, and the knight was conflicted because refusal would be as dishonorable as acceptance.)

youtu.be/jz6vtZ8_0i8

No. The DM/GM is supposed to adjudicate when skill checks are necessary, not the players. A player never gets to say "I roll for X", the DM says, "Roll for X"

Coolio. I read it as giving the D with great promises of wealth/security/love to a maid so the maid would somehow left a backdoor open for invaders to sneak in and open the main gate, ish-Trojan horse style.

Was the green knight a cuck?

Hardly, he was perhaps the most powerful knight in the lore and arguably a sort of nature spirit or demigod rather than a mere mortal.

In unrelated news, there are more than one Lady of the Lake (as Sir Balin kills one) and the chiefest of their number married Sir Pellias.

>Sir Balin

Oh good lord was that man a fuck-up.

Uh maybe in ambiguous situations but usually skills are pretty well defined is they system isn't utter garbage. Like if you have weapon smithing and you say you are going to forge a sword what kind of bitch-ass GM/DM is going to go "Ok roll woodworking lul"?

A little off topic, but I think blind rolls to see if you get something socially takes a lot out of the game. You should roleplay, and once you get to the actual question ("what a beautiful ring, by the way, could I hold it for just a moment?" "It would be just a huge favor if you could let me and my friends through. We promise we won't cause trouble.") You roll if it's conceivable for the person to say yes or no. The roll will present what kind of mood that person is in in that moment, and will lock their answer from there on out.

For all The Adventure Zone podcast does poorly, I think the RP aspect is fairly good. It has a lot of good examples of the players trying to talk their way through a situation, for better or worse.

Played a Tremere seductress. Completely indocrinated, focusing in Domination. She was blood bond immune. (Storyteller allowed it, since her backstory had the Pyramid basically engineer her. )

Everything, and I do mean everything is a tool that must be employed to the benefit of clan Tremere. Sex included.

Kine were rather easily seduced.

An elder Toreador was made to want her so our coterie could have leverage over business we wanted build on his territory. He played with his food. She made herself interesting, then ignored him. Proceeded to tell an Harpy, his childe, her "admiration" for his rival in confidence.

Later in the game, she "defected" to the sabbat to become the mistress of a Paladin.

Sadly, shortly after that point the game ended due to IRL getting in the way.

I'm a guy.

I'd love to kick down the maid's back door.

On principle, sure. But for social aspects, the player should either start talking up the person, or say "I want to flatter this person so I can get information," then the dm should say "ok, what do you say?" It's fine to abstract out metal working, you don't need to tell the DM "ok, I bought this kind of iron, and I hammer it out, and douse it, and hammer it out, and let it sit while I wrap the hilt," but abstracting a social interaction to a bare roll kinda sucks. If one of my players said "I roll to seduce!" I wouldn't let them, I'd want them to talk in character first.

Not really, no.

But first things first, I guess. I'm talking about one of the many small castles in Switzerland that was captured by a group of maybe eight dudes during one of the many shitslings that happened between the nobility and the cities of the region.

Thing you gotta remember is that the garrison letting travellers sleep in their castle's barn wasn't unusual and that garrison of common castles were usually somewhere between eight to thirty people in total.
Story goes that this particular troop arrived in the village below the castle and managed to sweet-talk the maids into letting the crash in the castle's barn in spite of the place being on alert already. From there they overpowered the guards inside and captured the place. Whether they promised the D or appealed to their motherly feelings (which could very well work, seeing how folks engaged in such raids would maybe be in their early 20s.) wasn't really apparent though.

Gawain and the Green Knight

when Samson keeps wrecking all your country's troops and the head honchos offer you 1,100 pieces of silver apiece to go restore the honor of the Philistines.

If the character is manipulating an NPC as part of the narrative, yes.

If the player is just lonely and vicariously fantasizing in the middle of your game, no.

Didn't we have this thread before?

>turkish dwarves are stealing the scenery

I'm kinda curious what the story is with that image.

Some worst Russian fairytale.

Only most days.

> Implying this is not best post ITT.

Literally when using the Persuasion (Seduce) skill in A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones) roleplaying game

They look like cossacks

Tonnura has fraud levels of charisma/appearance/seduction though, it's just not fair. He even turns the outright frigid, abusive bitch of a mom into his personal plaything.

What happened? God damn, this is interesting.

It's pretty entry level humor, so no, I shiggy your diggy.

What's more patrician, oh meister? Please enlighten me!

New Sincerity.

Why are only bards allowed to seduce? Why can't a warrior or wizard or any other class (except monk/priest/paladin of course) be allowed to seduce?

Because in a shit system like D&D, only bards and paladins have Charisma as a primary stat, and it's a definite tertiary option for most martials to being with.

It's also the only real social stat.

See, in a good system like Exalted, which is about more than kick-in-the-door gameplay, social stats are fleshed out into Charisma, Manipulation, Appearance, and even Wits.

That's just raw Attributes. It's not even touching on Abilities proper.
>pic related, Appearance 5 Presence 5 Zenith caste.

fugg

Every time you encounter a new animal, if playing a druid.

when you meet the mother of another partymembers.

Because you are dumb.

>rolling to seduce before you roll to appraise appearance

but really, just ask your GM since most system you're not supposed to just roll checks unless the GM calls for it.

Serious question if you could make your own roleplaying game. What attributes/stats would you add?

What would the perfect make look like in that regard?

In situations where it would be unacceptable to roleplay the seduction attempt.

Serious response:

The attributes of Exalted feel good. I might expand or simplify some of the physical traits (Strength, dex, stamina), but the mental and social traits are all good. Those would be Perception, Intelligence, and Wits for mental, and Charisma, Manipulation, and Appearance for social. All of these are ranked 1-5, with 0 being the default.
Part of the reason they feel good is the way the system assigns them as primary, secondary, and tertiary. I believe starting point allocation for them are 9 for the primary, 7 for secondary, 5 for tertiary. So primary stats can start with one maxed and 2 in the others. A spread of 2, 2, and 3 for secondary, and maxing out one stat for the tertiary.
I’m not sold on being able to max out a stat from game start, although I believe Exalted has provisions against this, optional or otherwise. It’s been a while. It’s a minor point since it’s easy to house-rule around.
It also helps that there's some crossover between categories. Wits, Dex, and Appearance are the low-investment options. A character with no plans on being social can still max out Appearance from the start, and coast on it while the actual party face does the talking. Similarly, a character ignoring the mental stats can still max Wits to think as fast as possible, since this stat is used in combat.

Abilities get dicey. They feel too limited, or too specific (ride and sail are two separate traits, and are 2/5 of the Eclipse caste's skills).

The issue with Exalted is that, while the player sheet and core stats are nice, the interaction and actual use for them isn't great. It's a lot of one-roll dice pool mechanics instead of sequential tests, and the per-turn actions are more limited than I'd like.
d100 systems tend to be a bit better about those. d100 systems also have more satisfying probability increases, as I understand it.

cont.

Dice pool systems see advancement by adding dice to a roll, or sometimes lowering the bar for success (role 6+ instead of 7+). System depending (I'm looking at Exalted) that means the maximum hits increases, while the maximum fails also increases. Some systems see the maximum and minimum increase, which I especially don’t like. The other thing that adding more dice to a pool does is continue smoothing the bell curve. Two dice are an inverted “v”, while three dice start smoothing the curve out, etc., building towards the average roll becoming more and more likely.
d100 is always a percentile roll, so the only real probability change is that the bounds for success increase as a stat is improved. I’m more a fan of this system. Since the calculations are easier, more modifiers can be added to the roll, and modifiers give the GM more control.
Breaking away from dice rolls, I’m a big fan of gear-based progression systems. Increasing some stats is nice (there’s no reason training can’t improve your Ballistics skill) but certain ones do need to be locked, like Toughness, Strength, and equivalent. I’d look to Traveler on that point.

Otherwise I can just keep going. The explicit, unmodified abilities you see in OSR is nice (you have x% chance of being detected while disguised). Etc. Overall I prefer the freedom of NSR however.

Fin.

The elder? After she confessed to the Harpy her interest in the rival, she leaked that her coterie planned on opening a clinic(a front to 3 different player schemes), with a bonus of supplying the Chantry with blood. The prime spots for our needs were the Elder and rival.

The Venture in the group made rumors she and the Rival had gotten along pretty well to the Elder.

So far, she had only flirted with the Rival casually, but she had ignored the Elders advances, gifts, etc. He saw only his object of desire going to another.

She scheduled a meeting with the Rival, and Toreador Elder actually had the car hijacked and she brought to him.

Long story short, we got the right to use his domain for free as long as she was only his.

Best part? This same guy had a feud with a Tremere Ancilla and actually refused to deal with the clan before.

The only reason I didn't blood bind him fully is because she had to pretend blood bonds were a concern for her (V20 clan weakness. ) And the Paladin showed up.

One of the boners (heh) is a succubus, assassin, or something, or someone walks in during?

Is it ever fit to 'roll to seduce' against player characters?

>refusal would be as dishonorable as acceptance

thanks for giving me ideas on how to make this paladin in my group fall :^)

Those are cossacs and they're the helpers of the protagonist. The rock and the tree are there to show those guys are hella strong. I don't remember what the hair dude's deal was. Neither do I remember what's with the huge bird.

The only time you should be saying "I roll to (blank)" is if your character is playing a game within the game.
"I attempt to seduce them" is fine.
As for the question you probably actually mean, of course there are situations where it's useful and appropriate. Just think about the times it comes up in media.
Maybe you're trying to get past a doorman, get information, or lure the guard over so you can grab the keys.

>FATAL
>roll for seduction

what did he mean by this

I'm pretty sure this happened in Berserk.