This question came up, and I thought I would see what people thought: Can we play characters who are conventionally super attractive?
Answer the poll if you would, and discuss below why you put that. I didn't see any particular reasons why not, but if you have one, I'd be glad to hear it!
Remember, keep this civil. Don't assume anything about anyone else, don't attack anyone else, be respectful. All that usual good stuff which sometimes doesn't get followed. Just try to be mindful!
~Raccoon
Edit: also, I feel I have phrased the question poorly, and I can't come up with a satisfactory alternative, so I'm just gonna say discuss the topic with that and the various ways you could phrase the question in mind.
Of course. Physical attractiveness is a role play choice. Also, it’s very, very subjective. Doubly so when you consider what’s beautiful to a bugbear is not likely to be beautiful to an elf, or a giff, or a loxodon. So I’d say certainly someone can have a character that’s physically very attractive. They shouldn’t get any kind of mechanical advantage from it, but I don’t see why you couldn’t do it.
This is a typical case of "it's fine unless it causes a problem with other players". There's also an issue of "how much does it come up in games"; having it in your backstory is pretty innocuous, continually talking about it in game is liable to annoy or bore other players.
I think maybe to make it fair attractiveness should align with charisma?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The great Silver Dragon Lord of the Sky, Second in Command of the Dragon Cult, Warlock of Cyno, and Cultist of Jeff. I have a lot of allegiances… Anyways HI! I’m Bananer, pronouns He/Him, andddddd yeah. Bye, ig.
Attractiveness is a very subjective thing. What's attractive to one person isn't attractive to someone else. Any character you play could be "super attractive" depending on the person looking at them.
I don't think you should say "My character is super attractive" there should be physical characteristics that go along with that.
You can play a character as attractive or as ugly as you want, as long as it has no impact it should be fine.
If there's there are attempts to influence game play somehow with any sort of benefit or reaction from others, feeling etc...they it may be problematic.
Well, there is no current Comeliness stat, so the answer is yes or no or maybe, its whatever you want.
There was a Comeliness stat once. Pure physical attractiveness. It sat alongside Charisma, as a separate and distinct score -- charisma is not a measure of physical appearance.
Comeliness reflects a character’s physical attractiveness. It can influence the initial reactions NPCs have to a character. Comeliness is not Charisma. The latter score represents a character’s force of personality.
Comeliness can affect reactions to the PC -- so when you try to determine the outcome of a deception or intimidation check, comeliness would adjust the attitude of the creature, for example.
While there are a lot of problems with the notion of comoliness as a stat, the biggest ones are that it focuses on a specific basis for what is considered "comely" for that setting, then the way to represent that stat in the game is kinda iffy and based in essentialism, and finally it really makes it hard to find the perfect picture for your character because the defaut for pretty much all heroes these days is that they are good looking -- or Comely.
So, yes, folks should be able to play really good looking PCs.
Should being really good looking have an impact on the game? No. It should not.
Because in order for it to do so without becoming all kinds of a nasty ass thing, it needs to set a standard for each and every culture, and then relate how those different standards for each and every culture relate to each other, and the table of modifiers that would come from that for someo worlds might be multiple pages long -- and I guarantee you it would suck.
Which I can do because I did exactly that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
This question came up, and I thought I would see what people thought: Can we play characters who are conventionally super attractive?
I would say, play what you want, with the caveat that it makes sense with the stats and background of the character. for instance the attractive himbo barbarian should have at least a +3 in charisma.
If you are a runway model for a character please have an 18 in charisma at level 1.
Well, there is no current Comeliness stat, so the answer is yes or no or maybe, its whatever you want.
There was a Comeliness stat once. Pure physical attractiveness. It sat alongside Charisma, as a separate and distinct score -- charisma is not a measure of physical appearance.
Comeliness reflects a character’s physical attractiveness. It can influence the initial reactions NPCs have to a character. Comeliness is not Charisma. The latter score represents a character’s force of personality.
Comeliness can affect reactions to the PC -- so when you try to determine the outcome of a deception or intimidation check, comeliness would adjust the attitude of the creature, for example.
While there are a lot of problems with the notion of comoliness as a stat, the biggest ones are that it focuses on a specific basis for what is considered "comely" for that setting, then the way to represent that stat in the game is kinda iffy and based in essentialism, and finally it really makes it hard to find the perfect picture for your character because the defaut for pretty much all heroes these days is that they are good looking -- or Comely.
So, yes, folks should be able to play really good looking PCs.
Should being really good looking have an impact on the game? No. It should not.
Because in order for it to do so without becoming all kinds of a nasty ass thing, it needs to set a standard for each and every culture, and then relate how those different standards for each and every culture relate to each other, and the table of modifiers that would come from that for someo worlds might be multiple pages long -- and I guarantee you it would suck.
Which I can do because I did exactly that.
While all true, because Comeliness was an optional stat that never really took off, and because Charisma had a lot of overlap with it, as a DM I require high Charisma if you want to look conventionally attractive and use it in game. It's amazing how often a dumb person with good looks can convince a nation to vote against their self interests because the pretty person said so.
After Comeliness in AD&D Unearthed Arcana there was another variation published in AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Option: Skills & Powers as a Charisma subability: Appearance.
I feel that linking physical attractiveness to Charisma is a mistake and I am sure you all know at least one person who is conventionally very attractive but the moment they open their mouth, any attractiveness gained by their statuesque appearance vaporizes and their ability to persuade anyone to do anything is met with immediate resistance. Beautiful people can be jerks. Similarly, there are many people who are not considered conventionally attractive who are extremely persuasive. Forcing a player to play an ugly PC because Charisma is a dump stat is a standing in the way of the player desires for no real good reason.
This question came up, and I thought I would see what people thought: Can we play characters who are conventionally super attractive?
I would say, play what you want, with the caveat that it makes sense with the stats and background of the character. for instance the attractive himbo barbarian should have at least a +3 in charisma.
If you are a runway model for a character please have an 18 in charisma at level 1.
I don’t know, I know plenty of people who are drop dead gorgeous and have the personality of a brick. You can be physically attractive and still have Charisma as a dump stat
I think maybe to make it fair attractiveness should align with charisma?
They're explicitly different things. Charisma is force of personality and the ability to influence people. For some uses of it, attractiveness may well be counterproductive. Who's more inherently intimidating? A guy who looks like an underwear model, or a guy who looks like three miles of bad road? In many uses, it's likely neutral. Deception is much more about your ability to spin a line than it is about how attractive you are.
And yes, in the real world, how attractive we think somebody is often does affect how people react to them. But D&D has chosen to separate the two entirely, and it makes sense, because the question of "what is attractive?", which is complex and inconsistent on earth, gets orders of magnitude more so when you introduce multiple intelligent species. A very attractive Goliath probably isn't to a High Elf.
And there's plenty of examples in the real world of people who are generally considered plain or even unattractive who nonetheless have become great successes at various charisma-based careers. (And also anyone you name will get people disagreeing about their attractiveness, because taste is not constant.) And I'm sure I'm not the only one who's observed that if you like somebody, they usually become more attractive to you.
As far as I'm concerned, players can make their characters as attractive or unattractive as they want, but good looks don't mean anything without the ability to use it.
What, exactly, does "super attractive" mean, if it has no game mechanics attached?
I like this question and it has encouraged me to think about it a bit. Now, I have not given the topic enough thought to actually be able to defend this position. Truth be told, it has never really been relevant to any game I have played. However, I can see a good case of it being used much like Alignment is now; it is there, but most of the time it has no real meaning, except when it does.
For example, when you come across a sword that only can be used of those with a Good Alignment, but almost the entire rest of the campaign, it has no mechanical meaning at all other than to give some vague understanding of who the PC is. Similarly, maybe you come across a rare NPC who had a poor childhood experience with conventionally attractive adventurers, that has cemented a strong bias against such people. +5 to DCs related to social interactions with this one NPC, but most other NPCs are not impacted at all by physical attractiveness.
That seems like it could work for anyone who does want physical appearance to have some mechanical impact.
What, exactly, does "super attractive" mean, if it has no game mechanics attached?
If means the same type of thing as any other pure cosmetic.
A feature I've seen in other RPGs which I somewhat like is adding descriptors to attributes, which indicate how success (or failure) should normally be described -- e.g. a character with 'good looking' gets a different description of a success on a persuasion check than someone with 'powerful voice' and both differ from 'smooth talker'.
What, exactly, does "super attractive" mean, if it has no game mechanics attached?
I like this question and it has encouraged me to think about it a bit. Now, I have not given the topic enough thought to actually be able to defend this position. Truth be told, it has never really been relevant to any game I have played. However, I can see a good case of it being used much like Alignment is now; it is there, but most of the time it has no real meaning, except when it does.
For example, when you come across a sword that only can be used of those with a Good Alignment, but almost the entire rest of the campaign, it has no mechanical meaning at all other than to give some vague understanding of who the PC is. Similarly, maybe you come across a rare NPC who had a poor childhood experience with conventionally attractive adventurers, that has cemented a strong bias against such people. +5 to DCs related to social interactions with this one NPC, but most other NPCs are not impacted at all by physical attractiveness.
That seems like it could work for anyone who does want physical appearance to have some mechanical impact.
I could look them up, I suppose (still having the relevant books buried here, somewhere), but I do recall that back in the day, 'comeliness' did have some level of mechanics attached. It was not always a benefit and could actually be more of a detriment to the character (since physically attractive can be taken for stupid, or objectified, treated as a collectable show piece). It can mean more attention from would be suitors than you really want, too.... not just the ones you would prefer your character to have.
At least that is how I remember it being played out, back in the day.
Today? I would say it is mostly a thing best avoided, or ignored, just as 'ugliness' is usually better ignored.
due to each player's potential to have a different picture in mind even when given the same description for a character due to "filling in the blanks".
I also think these questions are ultimately pointless overall due to beauty being subjective and different for each individual "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" after all and not up to the individual that claims their own beauty.
Edit: may I also ask what's the purpose of this question?? Since I don't understand how "attractiveness" matters in-game...
A character being very attractive opens up interesting story options.. my mind instantly goes to the attractive character getting splashed with acid in the face, or getting scarred in some other way. Adventuring is a dangerous job for runway models. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This question came up, and I thought I would see what people thought: Can we play characters who are conventionally super attractive?
Answer the poll if you would, and discuss below why you put that. I didn't see any particular reasons why not, but if you have one, I'd be glad to hear it!
Remember, keep this civil. Don't assume anything about anyone else, don't attack anyone else, be respectful. All that usual good stuff which sometimes doesn't get followed. Just try to be mindful!
~Raccoon
Edit: also, I feel I have phrased the question poorly, and I can't come up with a satisfactory alternative, so I'm just gonna say discuss the topic with that and the various ways you could phrase the question in mind.
Hi, I'm Raccoon_Master, a young genderfluid actor, writer, explorer, and bass vocalist. Pronouns They/Them/Theirs
My Characters: Brormin the Devout Crusher; Morgrom the Cunning Summoner; Thea the Rebellious Beauty;
Check out my EXTENDED SIGNATUR and don’t forget to join the Anything but the OGL 2.0 Thread!
"I don't make sense to you, and I don't make sense to myself. Maybe the only one I make sense to is God" ~ Me, trying to sound smart
Of course. Physical attractiveness is a role play choice. Also, it’s very, very subjective. Doubly so when you consider what’s beautiful to a bugbear is not likely to be beautiful to an elf, or a giff, or a loxodon.
So I’d say certainly someone can have a character that’s physically very attractive. They shouldn’t get any kind of mechanical advantage from it, but I don’t see why you couldn’t do it.
This is a typical case of "it's fine unless it causes a problem with other players". There's also an issue of "how much does it come up in games"; having it in your backstory is pretty innocuous, continually talking about it in game is liable to annoy or bore other players.
I think maybe to make it fair attractiveness should align with charisma?
The great Silver Dragon Lord of the Sky, Second in Command of the Dragon Cult, Warlock of Cyno, and Cultist of Jeff. I have a lot of allegiances… Anyways HI! I’m Bananer, pronouns He/Him, andddddd yeah. Bye, ig.
Check out my support thread! PRAISE JEFF! Join the DragonClub! #BRINGBACKBUTTONSBEST #SAVETHEDAO
(Most of those were links, click on them!!!)
Attractiveness is a very subjective thing. What's attractive to one person isn't attractive to someone else. Any character you play could be "super attractive" depending on the person looking at them.
I don't think you should say "My character is super attractive" there should be physical characteristics that go along with that.
You can play a character as attractive or as ugly as you want, as long as it has no impact it should be fine.
If there's there are attempts to influence game play somehow with any sort of benefit or reaction from others, feeling etc...they it may be problematic.
Well, there is no current Comeliness stat, so the answer is yes or no or maybe, its whatever you want.
There was a Comeliness stat once. Pure physical attractiveness. It sat alongside Charisma, as a separate and distinct score -- charisma is not a measure of physical appearance.
Comeliness reflects a character’s physical attractiveness. It can influence the initial reactions NPCs have to a character. Comeliness is not Charisma. The latter score represents a character’s force of personality.
Comeliness can affect reactions to the PC -- so when you try to determine the outcome of a deception or intimidation check, comeliness would adjust the attitude of the creature, for example.
While there are a lot of problems with the notion of comoliness as a stat, the biggest ones are that it focuses on a specific basis for what is considered "comely" for that setting, then the way to represent that stat in the game is kinda iffy and based in essentialism, and finally it really makes it hard to find the perfect picture for your character because the defaut for pretty much all heroes these days is that they are good looking -- or Comely.
So, yes, folks should be able to play really good looking PCs.
Should being really good looking have an impact on the game? No. It should not.
Because in order for it to do so without becoming all kinds of a nasty ass thing, it needs to set a standard for each and every culture, and then relate how those different standards for each and every culture relate to each other, and the table of modifiers that would come from that for someo worlds might be multiple pages long -- and I guarantee you it would suck.
Which I can do because I did exactly that.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
I would say, play what you want, with the caveat that it makes sense with the stats and background of the character. for instance the attractive himbo barbarian should have at least a +3 in charisma.
If you are a runway model for a character please have an 18 in charisma at level 1.
While all true, because Comeliness was an optional stat that never really took off, and because Charisma had a lot of overlap with it, as a DM I require high Charisma if you want to look conventionally attractive and use it in game. It's amazing how often a dumb person with good looks can convince a nation to vote against their self interests because the pretty person said so.
After Comeliness in AD&D Unearthed Arcana there was another variation published in AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Option: Skills & Powers as a Charisma subability: Appearance.
I feel that linking physical attractiveness to Charisma is a mistake and I am sure you all know at least one person who is conventionally very attractive but the moment they open their mouth, any attractiveness gained by their statuesque appearance vaporizes and their ability to persuade anyone to do anything is met with immediate resistance. Beautiful people can be jerks. Similarly, there are many people who are not considered conventionally attractive who are extremely persuasive. Forcing a player to play an ugly PC because Charisma is a dump stat is a standing in the way of the player desires for no real good reason.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I don’t know, I know plenty of people who are drop dead gorgeous and have the personality of a brick. You can be physically attractive and still have Charisma as a dump stat
They're explicitly different things. Charisma is force of personality and the ability to influence people. For some uses of it, attractiveness may well be counterproductive. Who's more inherently intimidating? A guy who looks like an underwear model, or a guy who looks like three miles of bad road? In many uses, it's likely neutral. Deception is much more about your ability to spin a line than it is about how attractive you are.
And yes, in the real world, how attractive we think somebody is often does affect how people react to them. But D&D has chosen to separate the two entirely, and it makes sense, because the question of "what is attractive?", which is complex and inconsistent on earth, gets orders of magnitude more so when you introduce multiple intelligent species. A very attractive Goliath probably isn't to a High Elf.
And there's plenty of examples in the real world of people who are generally considered plain or even unattractive who nonetheless have become great successes at various charisma-based careers. (And also anyone you name will get people disagreeing about their attractiveness, because taste is not constant.) And I'm sure I'm not the only one who's observed that if you like somebody, they usually become more attractive to you.
As far as I'm concerned, players can make their characters as attractive or unattractive as they want, but good looks don't mean anything without the ability to use it.
What, exactly, does "super attractive" mean, if it has no game mechanics attached?
It's the same as "I wear really fancy clothes" or "I have blue hair".
It's a role-playing aesthetic and has nothing to do with game mechanics.
I like this question and it has encouraged me to think about it a bit. Now, I have not given the topic enough thought to actually be able to defend this position. Truth be told, it has never really been relevant to any game I have played. However, I can see a good case of it being used much like Alignment is now; it is there, but most of the time it has no real meaning, except when it does.
For example, when you come across a sword that only can be used of those with a Good Alignment, but almost the entire rest of the campaign, it has no mechanical meaning at all other than to give some vague understanding of who the PC is. Similarly, maybe you come across a rare NPC who had a poor childhood experience with conventionally attractive adventurers, that has cemented a strong bias against such people. +5 to DCs related to social interactions with this one NPC, but most other NPCs are not impacted at all by physical attractiveness.
That seems like it could work for anyone who does want physical appearance to have some mechanical impact.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
If means the same type of thing as any other pure cosmetic.
A feature I've seen in other RPGs which I somewhat like is adding descriptors to attributes, which indicate how success (or failure) should normally be described -- e.g. a character with 'good looking' gets a different description of a success on a persuasion check than someone with 'powerful voice' and both differ from 'smooth talker'.
I could look them up, I suppose (still having the relevant books buried here, somewhere), but I do recall that back in the day, 'comeliness' did have some level of mechanics attached. It was not always a benefit and could actually be more of a detriment to the character (since physically attractive can be taken for stupid, or objectified, treated as a collectable show piece). It can mean more attention from would be suitors than you really want, too.... not just the ones you would prefer your character to have.
At least that is how I remember it being played out, back in the day.
Today? I would say it is mostly a thing best avoided, or ignored, just as 'ugliness' is usually better ignored.
But I am curious the OP's definition
I put complicated for a few reasons
due to each player's potential to have a different picture in mind even when given the same description for a character due to "filling in the blanks".
I also think these questions are ultimately pointless overall due to beauty being subjective and different for each individual "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" after all and not up to the individual that claims their own beauty.
Edit: may I also ask what's the purpose of this question?? Since I don't understand how "attractiveness" matters in-game...
A character being very attractive opens up interesting story options.. my mind instantly goes to the attractive character getting splashed with acid in the face, or getting scarred in some other way. Adventuring is a dangerous job for runway models. :)