An army composed of Orcs, Goblins and Kobolds attack a village of Dwarves, Halflings and Gnomes called Smolville. After fighting off the attack the party discovers that the marauders are led by a "Queen" who turns out to be an attractive Frost Giantess and the Maruders are actually her army of simps.
If someone came to me with this as their elevator pitch, I would run the other direction. It is juvenile and your concept seems firmly rooted in incel culture (where "simp" as a term, originated--a phrase created to denigrate the folks incels are jealous of). Even acknowledging the term has grown a bit beyond incels (though it is still pretty popular there), the fact you are tying it specifically to an attractive woman reeks of its sexist origins.
Even if you move beyond your specific terminology, the entire motivation behind this adventure would be a simplistic, objectified women driving minions to do her duty. You offer nothing to make her interesting - offer nothing to her character other than her looks. That is a half-baked idea that needs a LOT of work at best, and sexist objectification at worst. Not really sure which of those elements you were going for - but both show this idea is not ready to see the light of day. The former shows this idea is not anywhere close to ready for use; the latter shows this idea should never be released.
Overall, someone might find this funny; as you presently present this idea, those folks are probably not people I would want to ever play with.
Well, a Simp is someone who is excessively attentive or submissive to someone they're romantically or sexually interested in. And as for the Frost Giantess she has a low rank on the Ordning so she prefers to surround herself with weaker humanoids by leading a band of brigands.
Well, a Simp is someone who is excessively attentive or submissive to someone they're romantically or sexually interested in. And as for the Frost Giantess she has a low rank on the Ordning so she surrounds herself with weaker humanoids by leading a band of brigands.
Neither of these points address any of the concerns I raised in my post. The first does not even provide new information - it provides a definition for a word, without addressing the fact this word became mainstream due to hate groups trying to label those they were jealous of “simpletons” to try and make themselves feel better.
Furthermore, you have added an additional layer of potential sexism with your clarification - your post could boil down to “this woman is of a low caste, and, therefore, needs men to make up for her own failings” if not handled well.
Trying to sidestep the articulated issues rather than address them does not exactly inspire confidence in your ability to pull this off in a non-offensive manner.
I’m not seeing what’s funny about it. Some bad guys are following a leader because they find the leader physically attractive. Ok, sure, there’s plenty of reasons folks might follow someone, that’s as good as any. But where is the joke? Why is it funny that they find someone attractive?
Well, I thought it was funny because that was the reason they were following her.
Think about what you need in order for the recipient to view it as a joke. Either (1) they are laughing at the existence of weak men who feel the need to find happiness by subjugating themselves to a larger woman (this is the “joke” popularized by incels), (2) the “joke” is that this woman is followed exclusively by folks who objectify her for her looks and no other reason (a different kind of sexist take on the joke), or (3) the joke is “hehe girls are pretty” (the juvenile take on the joke).
There is no real cleverness or humor to be found here.
Now, that doesn’t mean you cannot use beauty as a key character element without making it sexist. Let’s compare to two very famous, but very different, literary beauties.
Helen of Sparta is “the face that launched a thousand ships.” Men around Greece tried to woo her for her beauty, and all agreed to defend the man who won her over. She was taken by Paris for no reason other than her beauty, launching the Trojan war. In the Iliad, Homer does not treat her as a one-dimensional character defined by her beauty. It is mentioned - and mentioned as an important context for the entire story - but her actual character? She’s practical, intelligent, and one of the few characters with the bravery to tell off a god to the god’s face. Homer goes out of his way to paint her as a person of strong character, whose beauty and the divine attention she receives is a curse she fights against. This also is a major element of other characterizations of Helen, such as Euripides‘ The Trojan Women.
Using a Helen version, your hypothetical frost giant would be someone who is almost resentful of her situation - she would be a person of great talent who wants to be recognized for things other than her beauty, but is not because of the sexist nature of the world she lives in. This is not a joke character - but it is a hard one to pull off unless you have some skill in the topics to be addressed.
Milady de Winter of the Three Musketeers is another famed character - easily one of the best examples of the femme fatale trope. She is beautiful, and knows she is beautiful - and uses that as a weapon. Beauty, however, is not her defining trait - her defining traits are her cunning, cleverness, and insight, allowing her to take advantage of situations and generally run circles around others. Her beauty is a weapon she uses to interact with the world; it does not define her.
This is the easier of the two to make into a believable character - femme fatale’s are popular and there are plenty of tropes to build on. The key for them is remembering that, even if those they control see them only for their beauty, that is because they, the femme fatale, choose to use them that way. They are the active, manipulative player in the situation, orchestrating men’s affections to their own ends. They are not simply passively taking advantage of the fact men are drawn to them - which is sort of what your posts seem to indicate.
Edit: I do want to be clear on my intent here. It seems like you genuinely do not recognize why your idea, as written, is problematic. I am trying to help you see the issues with your current proposal and gently nudge you toward better ideas that might have more general appeal, beyond problematic and/or juvenile groups.
Well, as I've said before she's ranked low on the Ordning compared to other Frost Giants so she surrounds herself with smaller humanoids that she can dominate so I guess that does make her manipulative as well. She despairs at her lower rank in the Ordning due to not being strong enough when compared to other Frost Giants, so she uses manipulation instead.
It is a little low effort, and a trope that was played out long ago.
You need to give a little more thought or a premise that is more blatantly absurd, like the Orcs and the 'smolville' residents are running competing bakeries, and some fued that started as "Goblin chocolate is better than Gnomish chocolate for cookies" debate that snowballed into armed conflict. Let it be silly.
If you want to stick with a Giantess in there, then maybe the Orc leader heard her make some off hand comment about baking styles or wanting to try the Gnome cookies, and now the Orc/goblin leader feels he must wipe out the competition, because she is a good customer he fears loosing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
Well, as I've said before she's ranked low on the Ordning compared to other Frost Giants so she surrounds herself with smaller humanoids that she can dominate so I guess that does make her manipulative as well. She despairs at her lower rank in the Ordning due to not being strong enough when compared to other Frost Giants, so she uses manipulation instead.
Those seem like reasonable character traits and motivations for a villain. And she’s using the tools at her disposal to advance her goals. The femme fatale is a classic. You’re really only a step or two from creating an interesting adversary for the PCs. Still not seeing humor in her followers being smitten by her looks. I mean, she’s got an army at her disposal, no ones laughing at her. Her army was manipulated into following her. I don’t see that as funny, more just tragic that they were so deceived.
An army composed of Orcs, Goblins and Kobolds attack a village of Dwarves, Halflings and Gnomes called Smolville. After fighting off the attack the party discovers that the marauders are led by a "Queen" who turns out to be an attractive Frost Giantess and the Maruders are actually her army of simps.
Why do you think this is funny? What is funny about the reason they follow her is that they find her attractive? Absurd doesn't necessarily mean funny, so beyond the simple absurdity, where is the 'haha' for you? Like, I am really asking to try to understand your perspective here.
If you want to stick with something silly, I think Gnoll's bakery idea is far more interesting and amusing.
In addition to everything said above I’m always loathe to build a whole campaign on a joke anyway. Unless you’ve got a solid and compelling idea underpinning it all you’re really going to get is one brief laugh when it’s first told and then it’s just a campaign. It’s like the players who turn up to new campaigns with a meme character, it’s only funny once and then you’re left with something pretty hollow
Well, I thought it was funny because that was the reason they were following her.
Not all that funny.
Having said that, the humor is not in what you wrote but in how you can execute the story. That depends on the people running the PC and their sense of humor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
An army composed of Orcs, Goblins and Kobolds attack a village of Dwarves, Halflings and Gnomes called Smolville. After fighting off the attack the party discovers that the marauders are led by a "Queen" who turns out to be an attractive Frost Giantess and the Maruders are actually her army of simps.
If someone came to me with this as their elevator pitch, I would run the other direction. It is juvenile and your concept seems firmly rooted in incel culture (where "simp" as a term, originated--a phrase created to denigrate the folks incels are jealous of). Even acknowledging the term has grown a bit beyond incels (though it is still pretty popular there), the fact you are tying it specifically to an attractive woman reeks of its sexist origins.
Even if you move beyond your specific terminology, the entire motivation behind this adventure would be a simplistic, objectified women driving minions to do her duty. You offer nothing to make her interesting - offer nothing to her character other than her looks. That is a half-baked idea that needs a LOT of work at best, and sexist objectification at worst. Not really sure which of those elements you were going for - but both show this idea is not ready to see the light of day. The former shows this idea is not anywhere close to ready for use; the latter shows this idea should never be released.
Overall, someone might find this funny; as you presently present this idea, those folks are probably not people I would want to ever play with.
Well, a Simp is someone who is excessively attentive or submissive to someone they're romantically or sexually interested in. And as for the Frost Giantess she has a low rank on the Ordning so she prefers to surround herself with weaker humanoids by leading a band of brigands.
Neither of these points address any of the concerns I raised in my post. The first does not even provide new information - it provides a definition for a word, without addressing the fact this word became mainstream due to hate groups trying to label those they were jealous of “simpletons” to try and make themselves feel better.
Furthermore, you have added an additional layer of potential sexism with your clarification - your post could boil down to “this woman is of a low caste, and, therefore, needs men to make up for her own failings” if not handled well.
Trying to sidestep the articulated issues rather than address them does not exactly inspire confidence in your ability to pull this off in a non-offensive manner.
What do you mean by address them and how exactly am I side-stepping things?
I’m not seeing what’s funny about it. Some bad guys are following a leader because they find the leader physically attractive. Ok, sure, there’s plenty of reasons folks might follow someone, that’s as good as any. But where is the joke? Why is it funny that they find someone attractive?
Well, I thought it was funny because that was the reason they were following her.
Think about what you need in order for the recipient to view it as a joke. Either (1) they are laughing at the existence of weak men who feel the need to find happiness by subjugating themselves to a larger woman (this is the “joke” popularized by incels), (2) the “joke” is that this woman is followed exclusively by folks who objectify her for her looks and no other reason (a different kind of sexist take on the joke), or (3) the joke is “hehe girls are pretty” (the juvenile take on the joke).
There is no real cleverness or humor to be found here.
Now, that doesn’t mean you cannot use beauty as a key character element without making it sexist. Let’s compare to two very famous, but very different, literary beauties.
Helen of Sparta is “the face that launched a thousand ships.” Men around Greece tried to woo her for her beauty, and all agreed to defend the man who won her over. She was taken by Paris for no reason other than her beauty, launching the Trojan war. In the Iliad, Homer does not treat her as a one-dimensional character defined by her beauty. It is mentioned - and mentioned as an important context for the entire story - but her actual character? She’s practical, intelligent, and one of the few characters with the bravery to tell off a god to the god’s face. Homer goes out of his way to paint her as a person of strong character, whose beauty and the divine attention she receives is a curse she fights against. This also is a major element of other characterizations of Helen, such as Euripides‘ The Trojan Women.
Using a Helen version, your hypothetical frost giant would be someone who is almost resentful of her situation - she would be a person of great talent who wants to be recognized for things other than her beauty, but is not because of the sexist nature of the world she lives in. This is not a joke character - but it is a hard one to pull off unless you have some skill in the topics to be addressed.
Milady de Winter of the Three Musketeers is another famed character - easily one of the best examples of the femme fatale trope. She is beautiful, and knows she is beautiful - and uses that as a weapon. Beauty, however, is not her defining trait - her defining traits are her cunning, cleverness, and insight, allowing her to take advantage of situations and generally run circles around others. Her beauty is a weapon she uses to interact with the world; it does not define her.
This is the easier of the two to make into a believable character - femme fatale’s are popular and there are plenty of tropes to build on. The key for them is remembering that, even if those they control see them only for their beauty, that is because they, the femme fatale, choose to use them that way. They are the active, manipulative player in the situation, orchestrating men’s affections to their own ends. They are not simply passively taking advantage of the fact men are drawn to them - which is sort of what your posts seem to indicate.
Edit: I do want to be clear on my intent here. It seems like you genuinely do not recognize why your idea, as written, is problematic. I am trying to help you see the issues with your current proposal and gently nudge you toward better ideas that might have more general appeal, beyond problematic and/or juvenile groups.
Well, as I've said before she's ranked low on the Ordning compared to other Frost Giants so she surrounds herself with smaller humanoids that she can dominate so I guess that does make her manipulative as well. She despairs at her lower rank in the Ordning due to not being strong enough when compared to other Frost Giants, so she uses manipulation instead.
It is a little low effort, and a trope that was played out long ago.
You need to give a little more thought or a premise that is more blatantly absurd, like the Orcs and the 'smolville' residents are running competing bakeries, and some fued that started as "Goblin chocolate is better than Gnomish chocolate for cookies" debate that snowballed into armed conflict.
Let it be silly.
If you want to stick with a Giantess in there, then maybe the Orc leader heard her make some off hand comment about baking styles or wanting to try the Gnome cookies, and now the Orc/goblin leader feels he must wipe out the competition, because she is a good customer he fears loosing.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
Those seem like reasonable character traits and motivations for a villain. And she’s using the tools at her disposal to advance her goals. The femme fatale is a classic. You’re really only a step or two from creating an interesting adversary for the PCs.
Still not seeing humor in her followers being smitten by her looks. I mean, she’s got an army at her disposal, no ones laughing at her. Her army was manipulated into following her. I don’t see that as funny, more just tragic that they were so deceived.
Why do you think this is funny? What is funny about the reason they follow her is that they find her attractive? Absurd doesn't necessarily mean funny, so beyond the simple absurdity, where is the 'haha' for you? Like, I am really asking to try to understand your perspective here.
If you want to stick with something silly, I think Gnoll's bakery idea is far more interesting and amusing.
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
In addition to everything said above I’m always loathe to build a whole campaign on a joke anyway. Unless you’ve got a solid and compelling idea underpinning it all you’re really going to get is one brief laugh when it’s first told and then it’s just a campaign. It’s like the players who turn up to new campaigns with a meme character, it’s only funny once and then you’re left with something pretty hollow
It's just a single adventure not an entire campaign.
Not all that funny.
Having said that, the humor is not in what you wrote but in how you can execute the story. That depends on the people running the PC and their sense of humor.