Spirited Debate

[Redjack_rose]

Hey all!

So a good friend and I ran into a situation in Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment (#3-21) that, though not major at the time, has turned into quite a lengthy and fun debate over it. So... I'm curious as to what others have to say! Spoiler tags inbound! If you do not want spoilers, do -not- click.

Spoiler:

I'm playing a Neutral, Female Aasimar Magus, worshipper of the Empyreal Lord Arshea (NG, Lord of Freedom, Physical Beauty, and Sexuality) while my friend is GM'ing. The scenario leads to discovery/exploration of a Temple of Korada (NG, Lord of Foresight, Forgiveness, and Peace) which has some shady things happening. During the course of the game, Ren (my character) is generally friendly, accepting, and earnest, participating in several of the temple's observances. (She receives 1 heresy point from the mantra, but avoids all others, including refusing to deal lethal damage to the Aasimar honor guard.

During the BBEG fight, she defends one of the unconscious honor guard, even picking her up (I made a joke about Ren say "I'm saving you... valiantly!) and moving her to safety. Ren stayed with the Aasimar until (and even after) someone comes to revive/heal her after the fight.

It is at this point, I inform my friend that Ren would attempt (for lack of a better word) a seduction attempt on the guard she rescued. Ren had made earlier suggestions/hints about showing them (the followers of Korada) her own Lord's observances.

My friend denied me the roll flat out :-(

Now this isn't a "OMG BAD CALL YOU SUCK Q.Q!!!" thread, just curious what others would have to say. From my perspective:

Ren has been earnest and willing to observe their rituals. She had been honest throughout the adventure. During the battle she selflessly protected the Aasimar. She is offering earnest companionship/comfort in these dark times... and she's doing so in accordance with her god and values.

My friends perspective/arguments are:

1. She's an Aasimar, I am below her. (I reminded him I'm an Aasimar too!
2. She's probably has a vow of celibacy.
3. Korada would probably warn (or frown upon) sex.
4. Most "Lawful Good" real religions view sex/sexuality in a negative connotation. (I am to remind him that Korada is NG), because it can produce negative emotions.
5. I didn't have ranks in Profession Prostitute or Seducer.
6. One of the other Aasimar died, thus she's in mourning.
7. Cheesy sticks.
Real 7: My god would frown upon "random sex"?

He had a couple more (our conversation has weaved in and out, so please consider that he has a few more reasons and those above are not as complete as he would describe.

Any way... what you all think? Should I have at least gotten a roll? A fair DC? Would a NG God prevent his followers from such?

(For the record, I rolled any way, and received a 17 (+ which ever skill applies.)

[pres man]

My thoughts:

Spoiler:

Lots of players do not want to deal with sex in their role-playing games (and lots do or don't care one way or another). Sounds like your GM is one of these people. Beyond that, the idea of trying to use a die roll to "make" someone have sex with your character can offend some folks as well.

If a die roll was made, I would probably put it in diplomacy most of the time (instead of some type of profession, now the skill in how well the person performs the acts ...). One thing to keep in mind about diplomacy is it isn't mind control, so someone that really wasn't interested in, still couldn't be convinced to do it. In fact, I would suggest that if they were strongly against it, the better the check the more likely they would be to be uncomfortable around the person in the future (they were strongly tempted and so would try to avoid being around the source of the temptation). So I think it is totally reasonable for a GM to make a call about an individual that the diplomacy check has no chance of passing.

It sounds to me as if your GM may have a problem with Arshea being NG, and thus your attempts at following his/her faith along those lines. I would suggest that promiscuity is not something that usually goes with good. Not because sex itself is "bad", but because irresponsible sex with the potential consequences (pregnancy, disease, etc) is considered bad. Not if a race had a very open lifestyle and could control the negative consequences (I'm thinking of something like the elves in ElfQuest), then it might not be an issue.

Anyway, in conclusion, this is probably something your GM is just not comfortable with. This probably should have been hammered out prior to the character getting introduced into the campaign, so that you'd both have the same expectations.

[Bill Kirsch]

I would have allowed it, and probably rewarded you with extra experience for good role-playing of your religion.
But sex is always tricky at the game table. What kind of rating does your DM have for his campaigns? If he keeps it at a PG-13 level, I could see why he'd probably punt.

I find that the following rule handles almost anything that comes up:

Never say no. Just assign difficulty.

[Jaelithe]

Did your friend point out that attempting a seduction when a person is physically or even emotionally vulnerable could be considered an evil act?

[Redjack_rose]

@Pres-man: Thank you for sharing. ^_^ of course, I'm looking for others opinions and don't plan to debate heavily on the forums over it. A few of your points are similar to my friends. I do believe the "no-roll" situation doesn't apply here, but it does have it's place in much more in-depth (and serious to the plot) situations. I don't feel nameless NPC "Aasimar Guard #2" should represent an "unapproachable" target, but... I also acknowledge it comes down to the play-style/detail of the GM. (In this case, I do not feel the GM provided enough prior detail of this npc to warrant the post-game reasons heaped upon it later in the debate.)

I'm curious whether you think a Good deity (specifically NG) would have teachings against the act intimacy (which is often a good thing) because it can lead to negatives, or if they would focus their teachings on avoiding the negatives itself (entirely possible). Thanks again!

@Billy Kirsch: This particular group are all adults. However, I feel the need to note that I myself shy from explicit details (which may have caused the problem), and thus was as PG-13 as possible.

What would your DC have been under those circumstances? Thanks ^_^

@Jaelithe: He did express a similar opinion, which I responded to.

The first part of my counter is that Ren did not do so out of evil intentions. To her, offering intimacy and companionship at a time like this is a good thing. Unfortunately, "seduction attempt" does have a negative connotation, but that was the best way at the time I could think of to describe it.

Second part being that, even had Ren's intentions been fully selfish (or at worst, evil), the intention of the act has no bearing on it's possibility.

Spoiler:

Unless Aasimar attempted a sense motive (at 7 wisdom do to events written in the scenario, I feel Ren's intentions (assuming they were bad in the first place) has no effect on whether her actions and words are convincing enough.

Thank you as well for responding.