What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

[Sean Waters]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Sure, but that's true of any stat. Even so called "objective stat.s" like STR. Who's stronger - the man who can snatch 152 kilos, the man who can only snatch 145, but can clean and jerk 15 kilos more than the first man? Both of them have (presumably) around 14-18 STR. But we can't be more precise in real life.

 

You could work out their best max lift and calculate the minimum strength to achieve that (with or without pushing as required) and that is the STR. if they don't perform at max in all areas then presumably some points of STR are limited. It is unnecessarily complex but it is objectively doable.

 

 

For me at least, such a response is entirely intentional - that's how I see COM: as a measure of physical attractiveness. Not as a measure of interest/sociability. That's PRE, from my standpoint. It's entirely possible to have a person with high COM/Low PRE (physically attractive, but a grating voice, an annoying attitude, or simply aloof and standoffish - whatever) or the opposite: interesting, engaging and attractive - but physically not appealing (low COM/high PRE).

 

Essentially, I see PRE/COM as being largely the non-physical/physical components of social interaction, with the caveat that PRE also has a physical aspect (of the two stat.s, PRE is the more poorly defined)

 

One thing about this debate: it's made me rethink not just COM, but PRE (and, indeed, other skills). As the basis of social skills like oratory, persuasion, seduction and conversation, PRE clearly includes aspects like voice tone, and ability to project an encouraging appearance. However, as the basis for Intimidation, PRE attacks - and the ability to resist PRE attacks, and so on, it also seems to include a fearsome mien. Those two things don't go together very well.

 

I'm loathe to shift things like conversation or oratory to being based on COM: the verbal component seems to me to be more important, with physical attractiveness being an advantage in some situations.

 

However, - and this thought applies to skills generally, now - what about moving the basis of skills (and possibly other things) to incorporate more than one stat?

 

For example, base rolls for seduction or persuasion could be 5+ ((COM+PRE)/4) instead of 9+(PRE/5)? The base roll (for stat.s of 10) would be slighly lower, the progression would be almost the same (though it would be slower at the top end - not necessarily a bad thing).

 

For further examples, Climbing could be 5+((STR+DEX)/4) while lockpicking could be 5+((INT+DEX)/4). Some skills (juggling, for example) could be purely based on a single stat + baseline (10): 5+(10+DEX/4).

 

The advantage of this is that it can be applied to other skills and it increases granularity without adding new stat. You can then differentiate to a greater extent between different types of DEX based activity, and different types of intellectual or social activity. You also introduce slightly more breakpoints, adding a little more granularity.

 

The downside is that characters who rely entirely on one stat. would find some skills would be slower to progress and that it's marginally more complicated: but the complication is only at the Chargen level - it would not change the current sheet layout or gameplay any. I think those limitations are worth the advantages of this approach.

 

If we took this approach, my suggested skill structure would look like this:

 

Fam. Costs 1 point gives base 8- roll

Base skill. Costs 2 points gives 10- roll

Full skill. Costs 3 points, gives CHA based roll

+1 to any skill costs 2 points

+1 to any tight group of skills costs 3 points

+1 to a broad group of skills costs 5 points

+1 to any skill costs 8 points

+1 overall level costs 10 points.

 

Yes, I know I've gotten off topic here so I'm crossposting this to skills issues.

 

cheers, Mark

 

I like the idea of using multiple characteristics in skill calculation. I may quibble about how I'd use them but it is a good idea that we ought to investigate.

[Markdoc]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

You could work out their best max lift and calculate the minimum strength to achieve that (with or without pushing as required) and that is the STR. if they don't perform at max in all areas then presumably some points of STR are limited. It is unnecessarily complex but it is objectively doable.

 

That was the point - they don't perform at max in all levels. I doubt anyone does. That means that as you point out, trying to assign a direct score to this - the simplest and most easily measured of all stat.s - is, as you say, "unnecessarily complex". It's no surprise that everything else is even more subjective and that people will rate other people at different levels on any arbitrary scale. COM is not exceptional in that - that's the general rule.

 

cheers, Mark

[Susano]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Salma Hayek

[Snapdragon]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Just for fun, you should google 'models without makeup'. Here's what I turned up:

http://seehere.blogspot.com/2006/08/celebrities-without-makeup.html

Which isn't so say that these women aren't beautiful; but so much of what is seen in photo shoots is just makeup. Great bone structure helps, but even that can be faked somewhat with makeup. Clear skin, bright eyes, red lips; that can all be faked.

Here's an interesting article about what the brain looks for when looking for a beautiful mate: symmetry, proportions, etc.

http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html

[Thia Halmades]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Dude. Whoa. I feel better nah.

[Kenn]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Those pictures are interesting, but I couldn't help but notice that, and this is probably indicative of the situations, that most of the "without" pictures were candids where the actress in question was frowning/looking displeased, and scrunching up her features.

 

Pictures where they're posed and smiling, but without make-up, would make for a more fair comparison.

 

However, it does reveal another thing that can be done with COM as a characteristic, that would be harder to do with attractiveness being a Talent or Perk.

 

Make-up kit: 1/2 AID to COM, extra time, requires a skill roll, OAF.

[megaplayboy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Just for fun, you should google 'models without makeup'. Here's what I turned up:

http://seehere.blogspot.com/2006/08/celebrities-without-makeup.html

Which isn't so say that these women aren't beautiful; but so much of what is seen in photo shoots is just makeup. Great bone structure helps, but even that can be faked somewhat with makeup. Clear skin, bright eyes, red lips; that can all be faked.

Here's an interesting article about what the brain looks for when looking for a beautiful mate: symmetry, proportions, etc.

http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume6/issue6/features/feng.html

 

Based on those pics, I'd have to say Halle Berry must have a high COM, because she still looks really good, even without makeup or extensive primping.

[Snapdragon]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Those pictures are interesting, but I couldn't help but notice that, and this is probably indicative of the situations, that most of the "without" pictures were candids where the actress in question was frowning/looking displeased, and scrunching up her features.

 

Pictures where they're posed and smiling, but without make-up, would make for a more fair comparison.

 

Some of those pictures are unflattering facial expressions; some of them aren't. The ones of Monroe look like they were taken when she was at home and comfortable. Good lighting and a good photog making his skill roll can make all the difference in the world.

My hat's off to Charlize Theron and Emma Thompson for their movies Monster and Nanny McPhee, since those two pieces really show how much makeup can make a difference in appearance.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

And yet championship weightlifters have never broken the 21-22 marker. Go look at world records for "clean' date=' jerk, and drop." The note under the chart doesn't change reality. The other stats are abstract - you can cap them anywhere. Strength, however, is concrete - and the chart only lines up if Conan on steroids is considered a normal human. [/quote']

 

Yeah, but would you rather play a championship weightlifter or Conan? This is the HERO System, not the Guinness Book of World Records System.

 

If I ever see a Guinness Book of World Records at my table, whoever brought it will not be invited back.

 

To quote a very wise philosopher, "He's f***ing Tarzan!" This game is supposed to be heroic, damn it!

[megaplayboy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Actually, I shudder to think what Paul Anderson might have accomplished with the help of "nutritional supplements".

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Those pictures are interesting' date=' but I couldn't help but notice that, and this is probably indicative of the situations, that most of the "without" pictures were candids where the actress in question was frowning/looking displeased, and scrunching up her features.[/quote']

Agreed. Instead of "Models Without Makeup," they should call it, "The Worst Pictures We Could Possibly Find of Models, Juxtaposed With The Best Pictures Of Them We Could Find."

[SSgt Baloo]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Jean Harlowe

 

Upon closer examination (amd a little Google-fu), I have discovered that this is not Jean Harlow but Greta Garbo. Here's a picture of Jean Harlow:

 

 

...And since tomorrow is Halloween, here's some hot chicks dressed for the holiday:

 

 

Linda Carter

 

Elvira: Mistress of the Dark

 

Vampirella

 

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Yikes, dude. It ain't necessarily the presence of nipplage, or the lack thereof, that renders a pic non-worksafe.

[BNakagawa]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

If you assume 30 to be the pinnacle of human development/achievement, then a 20 COM should be beautiful enough to launch 250 ships.

 

This of course, makes no sense, as even a 10 COM would be beautiful enough to launch 62.5 ships.

 

To correct this, perhaps the scale should be reset so that s 10 COM could launch one ship, then Helen of Troy could be designed as a 30 COM with +40 COM with a -2 limitation (only for the purpose of launching ships)

[megaplayboy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

If you assume 30 to be the pinnacle of human development/achievement, then a 20 COM should be beautiful enough to launch 250 ships.

 

This of course, makes no sense, as even a 10 COM would be beautiful enough to launch 62.5 ships.

 

To correct this, perhaps the scale should be reset so that s 10 COM could launch one ship, then Helen of Troy could be designed as a 30 COM with +40 COM with a -2 limitation (only for the purpose of launching ships)

 

I have seen a suggestion to measure beauty in "milliHelens"(mH?) before. I guess if you have the capacity to launch giant space armadas, we might have to extend the scale to kiloHelens and megaHelens.

[SSgt Baloo]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Yikes' date=' dude. It ain't necessarily the presence of nipplage, or the lack thereof, that renders a pic non-worksafe.[/quote']

 

I have since spoilered the pics that may be NSFW. If Garbo and Harlow need spoilering, let me know.

[Vondy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Yeah, but would you rather play a championship weightlifter or Conan? This is the HERO System, not the Guinness Book of World Records System.

 

If I ever see a Guinness Book of World Records at my table, whoever brought it will not be invited back.

 

To quote a very wise philosopher, "He's f***ing Tarzan!" This game is supposed to be heroic, damn it!

 

Let me see if I can translate your statement: if I want to run an adventurous historical, military, espionage, or western game that doesn't have people who can bench-press a VW Bug I shouldn't be playing Hero? Genres that have highly skilled normal people with a few talents aren't within hero's capabilities? I can't run Flashing Blades, Boot Hill, Gangbusters, Twilight 2000, or even Harn using the Hero rules? Not every game is about f***ing Tarzan, damn it!

 

And, I can only assume you are being obtuse with singling out the weightlifter example while failing to respond to the point it was used in tandem with. It was an example of an impressive albeit real world person as opposed to a fictional character of mythic proportions. I wouldn't want to run a weightlifter, either. But a Pirate Captain, Gunslinger, Private Eye, Green Beret, or Knight who are at the top of their fields without being super-human? Maybe you can't have fun playing anything but soft-rubber games, but why go off on the rest of us for not sharing your tastes?

[Vondy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

However, - and this thought applies to skills generally, now - what about moving the basis of skills (and possibly other things) to incorporate more than one stat?

 

I think skills should be 9 + (Dex/5) without specifying the base skill. Most will routinely default to one base characteristic, but it allows for a situational assignation of the most appropriate base stat. Cimbing, for instance, comes to mind. It could reasonably be a strength roll for some situations, while it could be a dex roll for others.

[Vondy]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Member Of The Appropriate (Inappropriate) Sex. So far it's been all straight males nominating females to drool over.

 

The thread title was "to you." As in, to us as individuals. As a result, I have no desire to nominate people who might be attractive to others.

[Sean Waters]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

That was the point - they don't perform at max in all levels. I doubt anyone does. That means that as you point out, trying to assign a direct score to this - the simplest and most easily measured of all stat.s - is, as you say, "unnecessarily complex". It's no surprise that everything else is even more subjective and that people will rate other people at different levels on any arbitrary scale. COM is not exceptional in that - that's the general rule.

 

cheers, Mark

 

The difference to my mind is that a set of weights is not going to care how you lift them, or be slightly heavier one day than another. Although STR is a blunt tool for measuring, it is consistent and accurate within its parameters - it is not simply a matter of opinion. COM is.

[Sean Waters]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

OK, looking at men then, personally I find Jude Law to be an attractive male. I mean I know Brad Pitt and Jonny Depp are good looking men, perhaps objectively better looking than Jude Law, but I guess they're not my type.

 

That would mean that even though they have higher COM scores (arguably), Jude Law's looks would consistently be more of an influence upon me in social situations. That says to me that COM is not capable, by itself, of modelling physical attraction.

[Egyptoid]

re: attractive Bugs in Viking Drag

 

Bugs re-arranged his entire power pool into Comeliness.

 

=====================

 

but here's a thought, as comeliness goes higher, more and more people find the person attractive.

at 20 Com, the normal max, everyone who SHOULD find the person attractive will do so.

 

as you go higher, 28, 36, 40, etc. then even beings and people who wouldn't normally find this person attractive seem to...

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Let me see if I can translate your statement: if I want to run an adventurous historical, military, espionage, or western game that doesn't have people who can bench-press a VW Bug I shouldn't be playing Hero? Genres that have highly skilled normal people with a few talents aren't within hero's capabilities? I can't run Flashing Blades, Boot Hill, Gangbusters, Twilight 2000, or even Harn using the Hero rules? Not every game is about f***ing Tarzan, damn it!

 

And, I can only assume you are being obtuse with singling out the weightlifter example while failing to respond to the point it was used in tandem with. It was an example of an impressive albeit real world person as opposed to a fictional character of mythic proportions. I wouldn't want to run a weightlifter, either. But a Pirate Captain, Gunslinger, Private Eye, Green Beret, or Knight who are at the top of their fields without being super-human? Maybe you can't have fun playing anything but soft-rubber games, but why go off on the rest of us for not sharing your tastes?

 

Wow, that's not even what I was about.

 

The notion that we have to look in the Guinness Book of World Records to see the extent of our character's abilities. That is what I'm about. It's the same thing I'm always on about with the physics books.

 

You don't need to run your games to a superhuman level. But you for damn sure shouldn't be looking to Halliday and Resnick or the Brothers McWhirter for the limits of your games. You should be looking to Conan Doyle and Burroughs and Robert E. Howard and Lester Dent. That's what the HERO System is about. Not kilograms-meters-seconds, but panels and frames.

 

The real world is not what we're gaming. What we're gaming is adventure fiction, the private eyes and Green Berets and Conans. When those authors were writing their fiction, they weren't thinking, "Oh, I better make sure my strongmen aren't any stronger than what it says in the record books." Eff that noise.

 

Stopwatches and cube roots and tape measures denominated in millimeters have no place in a game where people are leaping from rooftop to rooftop and slinking through alleyways looking for clues and holding on by their fingertips to the side of a building or a cliff or a zeppelin.

[Susano]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Wow, that's not even what I was about.

 

The notion that we have to look in the Guinness Book of World Records to see the extent of our character's abilities. That is what I'm about. It's the same thing I'm always on about with the physics books.

 

You don't need to run your games to a superhuman level. But you for damn sure shouldn't be looking to Halliday and Resnick or the Brothers McWhirter for the limits of your games. You should be looking to Conan Doyle and Burroughs and Robert E. Howard and Lester Dent. That's what the HERO System is about. Not kilograms-meters-seconds, but panels and frames.

 

The real world is not what we're gaming. What we're gaming is adventure fiction, the private eyes and Green Berets and Conans. When those authors were writing their fiction, they weren't thinking, "Oh, I better make sure my strongmen aren't any stronger than what it says in the record books." Eff that noise.

 

Stopwatches and cube roots and tape measures denominated in millimeters have no place in a game where people are leaping from rooftop to rooftop and slinking through alleyways looking for clues and holding on by their fingertips to the side of a building or a cliff or a zeppelin.

 

Damn straight.

[nexus]

Re: What does a "20 Comeliness" look like to YOU?

 

Wow, that's not even what I was about.

 

The notion that we have to look in the Guinness Book of World Records to see the extent of our character's abilities. That is what I'm about. It's the same thing I'm always on about with the physics books.

 

You don't need to run your games to a superhuman level. But you for damn sure shouldn't be looking to Halliday and Resnick or the Brothers McWhirter for the limits of your games. You should be looking to Conan Doyle and Burroughs and Robert E. Howard and Lester Dent. That's what the HERO System is about. Not kilograms-meters-seconds, but panels and frames.

 

The real world is not what we're gaming. What we're gaming is adventure fiction, the private eyes and Green Berets and Conans. When those authors were writing their fiction, they weren't thinking, "Oh, I better make sure my strongmen aren't any stronger than what it says in the record books." Eff that noise.

 

Stopwatches and cube roots and tape measures denominated in millimeters have no place in a game where people are leaping from rooftop to rooftop and slinking through alleyways looking for clues and holding on by their fingertips to the side of a building or a cliff or a zeppelin.

 

Repped