LOVE IS OVERBeauty is best left in the eyes of the beholdersBut.. but... Pathfinder isn't allowed to have Beholders! :)
Whoever said love had anything to do with this? This is about appearances. If you dig too deep inside, you leave an ugly hole that is just an eyesore.
Did you not read my post involving the Balor?
Did no one click my link about the prettiest princess?
Anyway, the real way to find out which princess is the prettier is a bit more complex. What are the cultural standards of beauty in the area? What kind of personalities do the two ladies have? Are there any scandals involving either of them that could have damaged their image?
Have either of them tried to manufacture scandals to ruin the other's image? A nice bucket of pig's blood tends to do the trick (make sure that the target is not a latent psion or at least have someone that could deal with her inevitable awakening)
Charismatic humanoids are often pretty, but pretty humanoids are not necessarily charismatic.
Megan Fox has been my go-to example for pretty person who is not charismatic for a while now.
I'm sure you can find plenty of other models-attempting-to-be-actors who also work as examples.
If the person is nice to look at but leaves you cringing whenever they try to communicate, they probably aren't charismatic.
As to the two arguing princesses, which of them is the fairest would depend on the tastes of whoever was doing the judging.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the judge should be careful. Otherwise he'll end up with the world's most ungrateful wife, 10,000 enemy warships parked outside his city walls, and an epic poem recited for millenia about what a jerk he is.
What about that isn't awesome?
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
As I showed above, Charisma is a factor in determining their appearance, but only the Quantity thereof. It doesn't say whether they're beautiful, ugly, or anything in between, just that whatever they are, they've got a lot of it. In other words, Charisma is a measure of your appearance, among other things, but Appearance and Beauty are two distinct and different topics.
This is a really great way of putting it.
Hags are terrifyingly hideous. Mites are just ugly.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
What classes and levels are the princesses?
What is their respective average damage per round? Max damage per round?
What are their caster levels?
How high are their ACs? Hit points?
What feats do they have? Do they have the Princess trait or are they princesses without it?
Which princess cares the most about her appearance, which one judges people based on their appearance the most, which one is the most meta-game genre-savvy, which one understands the most about socially constructed standards of "prettiness," and which one is most likely to recognize and criticize cultural notions of limiting princess/female worth to the upholding of those "prettiness" standards?
|
Indeed, having an impressive appearance is not solely in the realm of physical attractiveness.
Let's take Darth Vader, who has a impressive appearance, whose imposing figure is one that simply cannot be ignored.
To stat him, it would be required that he have a high charisma, representing the sheer force of his powerful personality.
No one would call him beautiful though.
|
Indeed, having an impressive appearance is not solely in the realm of physical attractiveness.
Let's take Darth Vader, who has a impressive appearance, whose imposing figure is one that simply cannot be ignored.
To stat him, it would be required that he have a high charisma, representing the sheer force of his powerful personality.No one would call him beautiful though.
I would.
That black armour looks awesome, that's why loads of people copy it.
In episode 1-3 and when he removes the mask at the end of RotJ, he looks rubbish and nobody cares.
But in the full suit he is physically attractive.
I think Balors are sexy too btw
|
|
Indeed, having an impressive appearance is not solely in the realm of physical attractiveness.
Let's take Darth Vader, who has a impressive appearance, whose imposing figure is one that simply cannot be ignored.
To stat him, it would be required that he have a high charisma, representing the sheer force of his powerful personality.No one would call him beautiful though.
I would.
That black armour looks awesome, that's why loads of people copy it.
In episode 1-3 and when he removes the mask at the end of RotJ, he looks rubbish and nobody cares.
But in the full suit he is physically attractive.
I think Balors are sexy too btw
Thank you.
This a fine example, as the difference in opinion you have displayed here only helps to prove that beauty is subjective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously Charisma doesn't determine beauty. If it did, kobold characters would have a +8 bonus to Charisma.
...hm.
Charisma is totally all about beauty. And to support that, might I recommend some small changes to the Bestiary?...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with that, Titania, is then it makes no sense when you have a +8 Diplomacy versus, say, a kobold, who thinks you mammals are gross. Or a +8 Handle Animal versus a dire rat. Or Disguise at all--Disguise would actually arguably be disadvantaged by a distinctive appearance either way, since the more distinctive you are, the more makeup you'll need. ;D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As has been stated again and again, you can't quantify beauty.
|
|
We just ignore the stuff that's irretrievably stupid. Like appearance being the same stat as magical power for people descended from aberrations.Page 17 of Core:
"Charisma measures a character’s personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
(Emphasis mine.)
Doesn't anybody around here ever actually READ the rulebooks?
Spoken like a man who hasn't ever watched weird Japanese porn.
|
|
Page 17 of Core:
"Charisma measures a character’s personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
(Emphasis mine.)
Doesn't anybody around here ever actually READ the rulebooks?
Precisely. People choose to ignore it because they want their characters to dump CHA but still have good-looking characters, just with 'shyness' or some other nonsense.
Nope. The guy is u.g.l.y., you ain't got no alibi.
And come on. We all know what a girl with a 'nice personality' means, don't we?
Everyone's got different standards for beauty.
Right now, I think mine is "anyone who doesn't show up to rehash the beholder joke".
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Page 17 of Core:
"Charisma measures a character’s personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
(Emphasis mine.)
Doesn't anybody around here ever actually READ the rulebooks?
Precisely. People choose to ignore it because they want their characters to dump CHA but still have good-looking characters, just with 'shyness' or some other nonsense.
Nope. The guy is u.g.l.y., you ain't got no alibi.
And come on. We all know what a girl with a 'nice personality' means, don't we?
somebody hasn't heard of a millihelen.As has been stated again and again, you can't quantify beauty.
Tangential rant ahead:
Helen of Troy's beauty basically had absolutely nothing to do with the Trojan war. Paris was probably prettier, to be honest--Aphrodite favored him because of how attractive he was and she is the one that basically gave him Helen, since pretty boys favored by the goddess of love and beauty get whatever they want and he wanted Helen.
The Greeks weren't really going to win a pretty woman, they were going to rescue one of their kings' sister-in-law because abducting her was a grave insult to his name and power. She could have looked like a Balor and they'd have still gone to war to rescue her because it was really about vengeance, not a woman.
30 Charisma.
"Oh mah gawd, I'm like soooo jealous of her. I can't ever do that. I can't resist having a second stalk of celery a day. I need to learn how to purge without my parents noticing."
8 Charisma!
"Like, look at that fat ho! She is such a heifer. I mean, look at those biceps bulging with fat. She needs to ask Tzitzimitl for some beauty tips asap"
he Greeks weren't really going to win a pretty woman, they were going to rescue one of their kings' sister-in-law because abducting her was a grave insult to his name and power. She could have looked like a Balor and they'd have still gone to war to rescue her because it was really about vengeance, not a woman.
From what little I remember from my lit courses, I seem to also remember that they had agreed to some pact before competing for Helen that they would promise aid. I am vague on the details though.
Yeah, they all agreed that whoever Helen chose, they'd help out if she got inconveniently kidnapped.
And technically, Aphrodite gave Troy Helen because he chose her for the beauty contest. His good looks weren't a factor (though they were why Zeus had him judge). ;D
30 Charisma.8 Charisma!
I don't like either of those characters personally...
You lie, Kobold! Everyone knows that I am the prettiest princess!
I already made that joke!... TWICE!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ladies, ladies, calm down, you're both pretty.
Time to crack open 2e's players option : skills and powers... Lets crack these attributes in half!
The basic formula for who's the prettiest works like this:
elf+10
Epic Fail
30 Charisma.8 Charisma!
Now I know! Beauty is the inverse of charisma. The more charisma you have the uglier you are. The PF pictures proof that I am right.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly. A Mite is just "eww... gross," while a Hag is a thing that cannot be unseen. And, as I said before, Eldritch Horrors are things who's appearance literally breaks your mind if you gaze upon them for even a moment. And that's just regarding appearance; go back to my example of the relationship between God, Metatron, and Humans from Dogma to see how it translates from the visual sense to the auditory sense.
Agree with this sentiment. Aboleths are another great example. Their description starts off with "As befits their hideous primeval appearance..." and they pack a 17 Cha.
Appearance in this case clearly means how well your form can influence others. An aboleth is a truly alien and terrifying creature, and they use their appearance to cow lesser beings into doing their will. Also, Intimidate is keyed off of Cha as well, and being having a terrifying appearance doesn't hurt here.
Edit: That said, appearance is just one piece of the package. Cha is just a lump sum total of a number of factors (personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance), and you can't single one piece out and make a definite claim.
Now I know! Beauty is the inverse of charisma. The more charisma you have the uglier you are. The PF pictures proof that I am right.30 Charisma.8 Charisma!
So these.....urges....I have had towards trees were perfectly natural due to the nonexistence of their charisma scores? Welp, I'm off to become a druid then.
Also, the Trojan War is starting to sound more and more of the War of One Big A-hole. Paris chose the 'prettiest' goddess solely based upon which one offered the best bribe, and he took far more than what was offered as his prize when he looted the treasury.
Hm. I may be tempted to repost my derivative ("apparent") scores later when not on an iPad. They are minor metrics/numbers that have no "real" game mechanics, but are based on your ability scores.
I'll look later.
The short version, as I recall is that each score can only be used in one category (so if you use charisma for beauty, it can't be used in fate, for example). The scores mean nothing except how people (especially of your type) generally think of you.
Power - intelligence or wisdom averaged with strength or constitution
Fate - wisdom or charisma averaged with dexterity or constitution
Beauty - charisma or intelligence averaged with strength or dexterity
If you have a high beauty, creatures that don't have "interest" in your kind think of you like we might think of a brightly colored fish: pretty, pleasant to have around, but not in any way "interesting" beyond that.
Racial modifiers apply: hags have a big penalty to beauty but may have a big bump to fate or power, for example, and cultural impressions can grant an effective 2-3 points difference.
It means nothing, mechanically, but as a method of making an impression.
Really, Helen's beauty was the cause of the Trojan War--since Paris was willing to risk war to get her, after all. Plus the treasure.
It's like asking how much soup do you have to ladle at a homeless shelter to be a good person or gauging how evil a person is based on how many people they killed compared to some known serial killer
Actually, PF did make alignment quantitative. You can find the rules here:
AlignmentParticularly, Ultimate Campaign introduced a 9 point scale, with lower numbers being good or lawful on their respective axis, and higher ones being evil or chaotic. So to answer your question about the soup kitchen: no specific number, but it looks like you must do it earnestly (so whatever is average per volunteering day?) once per week for 9 weeks to go from being the head of a cult sacrificing blind/deaf orphan babies to demons to a saint.
Of course, this numerical stuff is an optional system and all (plus I was grossly oversimplifying the system)....but look at this thread? Half a sentence of fluff about CHA and we spawned how many pages?
So, for a hypothetical character with a completely random stat array of 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16 arranged, perhaps, as follows:
Str: 16
Dex: 12
Con: 15
Int: 13
Wis: 10
Cha: 8Could have the following 4 model possibilities:
Model 1)
Power: AV(Int|Str) 14.5
Fate: AV(Wis|Con) 12.5
Beauty: AV(Cha|Dex) 10Model 2)
Power: AV(Int|Con) 14
Fate: AV(Wis|Dex) 11
Beauty: AV(Cha|Str) 12Model 3)
Power: AV(Wis|Str) 13
Fate: AV(Cha|Con) 11.5
Beauty: AV(Int|Dex) 12.5Model 4)
Power: AV(Wis|Con) 12.5
Fate: AV(Cha|Dex) 10
Beauty: AV(Int|Str) 14.5It's interesting, but still doesn't get around the fundamental problem that Beauty is a qualitative factor while these are all quantitative measures. It's like asking how much soup do you have to ladle at a homeless shelter to be a good person or gauging how evil a person is based on how many people they killed compared to some known serial killer or how bad a war is based on what factor of the casualties in the Vietnam War did it result in; preposterous on the face of it. What part of those scored indicates a preference for redheads or blondes over brunettes? Brunettes over redheads or blondes? Tall vs petite? What part of those scores indicate that you prefer large posteriors but have a low bluff modifier? Long hair? Short hair? Big boobs? Small boobs? Midget fetish? This whole thread basically amounts to an attempt to subject matters of opinion to the metric system; how many meters are your hopes and dreams?
EDIT: I forgot to mention, that's a decent breakdown of what I meant, though. Also, I might have been wrong on the averages - it might be the modifiers added together plus 10. Gets rid of the .5s and makes things easier to read.
That's why there's no game functions tied to it. It's a metric that allows you to - at a glance - guess how people generally view you in a vague way.
Beauty related to looks, but that has nothing to do with attractiveness or persuasiveness: fish, flowers, and birds can be beautiful and still not alluring (to me). Fated just means people tend to interpret how lucky or meant for something "big" you seem. Power is how impressive your might seems.
None of these things say how you look, specifically. They tell you the gist of the results of your looks portray yourself to others. Whether they find you attractive or not is up to them. This doesn't quantify attractiveness (that's covered under charisma). This "quantifies" the way you "seem" in generic non-game-altering terms.
You can seem powerful (relatively) while being completely unpersuasive. Yeah, sure, he's strong, but he won't really ever hurt you (high power, but low charisma).
The purpose of this is to, at a glance, see how people generally think of you. The "hottest" woman I know is my wife. She's beautiful to me. But she would likely not be widely accepted as a Miss America for a number of reasons - reasons that I recognize and understand.
That's both the subjective and objective metrics in play.
This represents the objective side of those things.
Charisma and interaction create the subjective.
While objectively hags are ugly, subjectively they can be persuasive or even alluring.
Fetishists can recognize that there is value in someone who is not of their fetish.
To answer some of your points, though:
1) There's an objective measuring stick for the alignment system - it's the alignment system.
2) I have no real idea what you mean with the Vietnam War thing: it was a terrible war made worse due to all the casualties, if that's what you mean.
3) This doesn't alter anyone's opinions; it's an air you project. Your charisma is what changes others' opinions.
I think you're taking this the wrong way. This isn't a measure of control. It's a measure of description. Instead of denying players, it empowers them while also setting practical and comprehensible limits.
It's an optional system that let's people resolve silly questions relatively easily. :)
An interesting system.
However, for my games, I think I'll still let my players decide how they envisage their characters' looks, while I'll determine how NPCs react to them (with the aid of mechanics). It makes more sense to me to be able to have characters who are "beautiful" at first glance while still being eminently unlikeable and unintelligent.
An interesting system.
However, for my games, I think I'll still let my players decide how they envisage their characters' looks, while I'll determine how NPCs react to them (with the aid of mechanics). It makes more sense to me to be able to have characters who are "beautiful" at first glance while still being eminently unlikeable and unintelligent.
That's actually exactly what this is for - the GM and player customization empowerment within a comprehensible framework.
Basically this is just one more way for a player to go, "here's what I was thinking." and to allow the GM to have a handle on how people respond.
Heck, the names aren't even all that important.
I've variously called Fate, "luck", "wyrd", and "scrappiness" depending on the campaign it's been used in, for example.
Power has been called "might", "fearsomeness", and "danger".
"Beauty" has been all sorts of things.
Basically, it's just a little short-hand way of developing something out of the mechanics without making a mechanical impact to give players a sense of satisfaction and GMs a basic "heads up" and handle on the initial impression people give.
And, you know, allows a GM to sidestep the idea of charisma equaling beauty while still being able to keep weirdness from dissonance cropping up.
To be clear, I actually agree with Kazaan's earlier sentiment:
Appearance =/= Beauty. Having a high Charisma doesn't mean you have a beautiful appearance but that you have a powerful appearance. That could be powerfully revolting. An eldritch horror has an appearance so powerful that it breaks your mind to look at it... and a force of personality that makes you to want to look at it knowing what will happen when you do. A pretty girl with low charisma is just that... "pretty". Not beautiful or gorgeous... she's pretty. She's pleasant to look at when you bother, but the choice is yours. A good looking princess (or peasant, for that matter) with incredible charisma forces you to look. She isn't just "pretty" but drop-dead gorgeous. You couldn't take your eyes off her even if you wanted to. She's a Jessica Rabbit or a Marilyn Monroe; her appearance demands attention and that attention shall be had.
This is just one way of expressing how that attention is grabbed and held alongside of the power of the appearance that Charisma holds. That is all.
EDIT: anyway, this isn't to say that people should even use this system! The entire point of it was to throw out there so that people could use it, if they wanted! I'm looking for it and will post it later.
But isn't beauty derived from the average of two (of four) scores? That means if those scores are not high, one cannot be beautiful. Again, I appreciate your work, but it does introduce that limitation. Which doesn't mesh with the broadness of characters I'd like to be available in my game. That's all.
Example: I'd like to have the following NPC to be a visually gorgeous woman. Here are her scores:
Str 8 Dex 10 Con 11 Int 11 Wis 15 Cha 9
Can't exist if your system is introduced.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finally found it, here (my actual word document is somewhere I can't begin to guess).
In the player’s handbook, six basic ability scores are given: Strength, Constitution, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. These are indicative ability scores, from which all other attributes about a character – all of their capabilities – are derived from. These are the best indicators of exactly what a person can or cannot do, and often works that try to add to these often overly complicate the rule systems they attempt to enhance – they place scores where none are needed. That said, in addition to the six prime, or "indicative" ability scores in the player’s handbook, I use three "derivative" ability scores: Beauty, Luck, and Power. As "derivative" scores, these are not meant to replace or even really augment any game mechanics, but rather mostly for use in how a character is perceived by others: is she thought of as beautiful, powerful, or fated to survive?
Again, these are not meant to replace the ability scores found in the Player’s Handbook. Each of them is derivative – they rely on the indicative scores to be derived. These scores are meant more to be used for the DM and Players to better facilitate role playing rather than game mechanics. If there is no place for derivative ability scores in your game, then do not make use of them. Appearance is the most easily replaced by using charisma. Luck can generally be replaced by dexterity or wisdom. Power can most often be replaced by strength or intelligence. Unlike regular ability scores, these cannot be increased every four levels. They are strictly derivative from other ability scores, meaning that as those improve, these will as well.
To determine a derivative ability score, first a character must have all of their indicative ability scores rolled and assigned. Once the six primary ability scores are determined, derivative ability scores can be generated. Take two relevant ability modifiers from the six primary ability scores of your choice, add them together, and add ten. This will grant you a derivative ability score. Each ability modifier can only be used once to create derivative ability scores. In other words, once a primary ability modifier has been used in one derivative ability score, it can’t be used for another. After developing all three ability scores, you may increase the derivative scores – and only the derivative scores – from a pool of 1d3 points plus a number equal to their level adjustment (not racial HD). Each point spent on one derivative ability score is unavailable for the others, however. In general, this is similar to making a modified average of two preexisting scores, though there can be some significant differences in scores by average.
Beauty: This is the physical appearance a person has, the attractiveness that they exude before anyone interacts with them. Ultimately, physical beauty is not charisma. Someone can look rather unattractive, yet be quite persuasive: former President Abraham Lincoln, or a scarred and battered warlord, for example, are not beautiful persons. Others can be incredible sights to behold, but have no persuasive ability whatsoever: that Wench at the bar, or Paris Hilton, come to mind. Still, those who are truly charismatic do at least care for their physical cleanliness and a moderate amount of their appearance. To derive appearance, choose one of Strength (for well built muscular structure) or Dexterity (for swift, graceful movements) and one of Intelligence (for well-used lexicon, fashion knowledge, and a clever ‘look’) or Charisma (for all-around personality manifested in the flesh). When you have chosen one physical ability score and one mental ability score, add them together plus ten and any other bonuses, and you have your appearance. Alternatively strictly use charisma along with strength or dexterity to show physical beauty characterized by muscular development or toning.
Power: Power is the ability to get what you want done, regardless of any difficulties such a problem presents. Usually the ability to handle problems – whether by overcoming through sheer force or enduring problems that would be far too grueling to others – comes with some measure of respect, but respect does not automatically come with authority or persuasiveness. Examples include boxer who persists through all challengers, or the wizard who holds the keys to the universe in his books. To derive a powerful person, whether magical or mundane, choose one of Strength (to brute-force your way through problems) or Constitution (to endure setbacks and still persist) and Intelligence (to derive logical solutions for the most difficult problems that arise) or Wisdom (to be aware of the right thing to do in any issue that comes up). When you have chosen one physical ability score and one mental ability score, add them together plus ten and any other bonuses, and you have your power. Alternatively strictly use intelligence along with strength or constitution to show sheer mental ability backed up by physical brawn or endurance.
Luck: Luck – also often called Destiny – is all about the perception of some greater destiny involved. A persons luck is best measured in the broad flow of a person’s life: the general tendencies that happen to them. Whether accurate or not, some have even likened it to a person’s lifeline or lifespan (they're "wyrd") – when one’s time is up, it’s up, but not ever before. This, really, is what is described by this ability – the fact that regardless of anything else, a person continues to escape death... this time. "It’s not their fate", it’s often said, "to die here and now. Tomorrow, maybe, but not today." To derive how "lucky" a person seems, how much "destiny" they apparently have, choose one of Constitution (to fortunately survive that wound) or Dexterity (to miraculously be out of the way when that explosion goes off) and one of Wisdom (to clearly recognize danger when it arises, and the proper response) or Charisma (to be able to get what you need). When you have chosen one physical ability score and one mental ability score, add them together plus ten and any other bonuses, and you have your Luck. Alternatively strictly use wisdom along with constitution or dexterity to show a clear understanding of one’s "fate" fortified by able body or quick reactions to work within it.
These ability scores are not necessary, but are presented here so as tools for GMs and players alike to be able to play how others perceive a character whether player character or not, in various ways. Further, this tool can be used in any campaign and any setting as a way to help role play and develop the world at large and the people within it.
The Derivative List: what the derivative scores use
Appearance, Beauty, Sexiness:
** Physical: Strength or Dexterity
** Mental: Intelligence or CharismaCompetence, Power, Reliability:
** Physical: Strength or Constitution
** Mental: Intelligence or WisdomFate, Luck, Wyrd:
** Physical: Constitution or Dexterity
** Mental: Wisdom or CharismaThe Indicative List: what the indicative scores can be used for
Strength: Beauty or Power
Constitution: Power or Luck
Dexterity: Beauty or Luck
Intelligence: Beauty or Power
Wisdom: Power or Luck
Charisma: Beauty or Luck
In that same post,
The real reason for doing this is that a) you have an objective way of saying "that person looks nice/hideous" and b) to give role playing a base from which to spring. That really charismatic person: lucky or pretty? That bar wench might be pretty... but her life really isn't very lucky at all. Or "Man that wizard seems powerful, but that bard looks great, know what I'm sayin'?" Etc.
This does not refute the player's ability to define general qualifications about their appearance - someone with a low beauty score can still describe themselves as "tall, strong, and tanned with dark, wavy hair, and heterochromatic eyes" but it's going to come off differently than someone with a higher beauty score. It allows GMs to say "yeah, (s)he looks hot" without having to give every farmhand/barwench a powerful, persuasive personality. A wizard can look good! ... and be as persuasive as dirt.
It's a way of stepping outside GM fiat and giving crunch without making it really relevant to most adventuring plays. It separates the two.
And most importantly: it's completely optional!
It's not something I force on my players, but I've found that, over all, they like it. It allows the strange, decrepit sorcerer to still have a high charisma - people notice his power, not his beauty. It allows the rogue to seem really lucky - he's known for his Xanatos-Roulettes actually paying off, not how many ranks in bluff and sense motive he has. That type thing.
Anyhoo, YMMV, so enjoy, or not.
So yeah.
Also,
Example: I'd like to have the following NPC to be a visually gorgeous woman. Here are her scores:
Str 8 Dex 10 Con 11 Int 11 Wis 15 Cha 9
Can't exist if your system is introduced.
... eh. To a point. She can have a base 10 of beauty. Using the notes that I'd forgotten about up there, she could have up to a 13.
One question is why the woman above needs to be visually gorgeous. Her appearance, by RAW stat stuff isn't powerful.
As noted, you don't have to use the system. It's an optional tool. But you're already stepping beyond RAW to make the NPC above "visually gorgeous" (as I understand the subjective term) instead of just "pretty". In which case, you'd naturally want less rules.
Which is fine.
Yeah, as I said, I appreciate the thought you've put into it, and like any RPG subsystem it has its pros and cons. I wasn't trying to disparage it at all, just explain why my mileage varies in this case :)