PDA

View Full Version : what is BoEF



kiryoku
2010-12-16, 08:50 PM
what is the full name and what is it about people are talking about it like its a disease or something

Zeofar
2010-12-16, 08:53 PM
Eheheh... Eheheheheh... Eeheheheh... Ehhh...

No, I'm not laughing at you. It's just the fact that it exists and how plainly you asked about it.

BoEF = Book of Erotic Fantasy. Exactly what it sounds like.

Psyren
2010-12-16, 08:56 PM
Fluff = Nice
Crunch = Meh
Art = Horrible

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 08:57 PM
thanks and is it for d&d or some other game?

Keld Denar
2010-12-16, 09:00 PM
D&D 3.5

Well, kinda...

Assassin89
2010-12-16, 09:01 PM
BoEF is a third party book for D&D, but its use is, to put it lightly, questionable.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:02 PM
thanks thats all my questions

Callista
2010-12-16, 09:04 PM
I really don't understand why anyone would want to use it. It's awkward enough to play out a romance with your character and someone else's character when the players aren't dating, and that's with fade-to-black for the intimate parts. Why in the world would you want to play out an entire sex scene? This is Dungeons & Dragons, not Porn & Playboys. :smallyuk:

Drakevarg
2010-12-16, 09:05 PM
What is BoEF? A miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk, have at you!

Anyway now that that's out of my system, all I really know about the BoEF is this:


Love Life of an Ooze: One ooze. Idiot hits ooze. Two oozes.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:05 PM
thats why i didnt ask where to find it i was just wondering what it was and what it was for.

Zeofar
2010-12-16, 09:08 PM
I really don't understand why anyone would want to use it. It's awkward enough to play out a romance with your character and someone else's character when the players aren't dating, and that's with fade-to-black for the intimate parts. Why in the world would you want to play out an entire sex scene? This is Dungeons & Dragons, not Porn & Playboys. :smallyuk:

I'll tell who would want to act out an entire sex scene..!


*I put on my robe and wizard hat...*

TheMeMan
2010-12-16, 09:08 PM
What is BoEF? A miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk, have at you!

Anyway now that that's out of my system, all I really know about the BoEF is this:

Now, to be fair, some of it actually is kind of interesting, and moderately useful while still being tasteful.

The other 90% on the other hand...

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:13 PM
please tell me that this
*I put on my robe and wizard hat...*
is not in that book

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 09:16 PM
please tell me that this
*I put on my robe and wizard hat...*
is not in that book

It's not.


Now, to be fair, some of it actually is kind of interesting, and moderately useful while still being tasteful.

The other 90% on the other hand...

It's a good rule of thumb to remember - in the BoEF, you will find material that is
A) Balanced
B) Mature
C) Relevant to any game you'd play.

Pick two, at most.

KillianHawkeye
2010-12-16, 09:18 PM
D&D 3.5

Well, kinda...

I think it predates 3.5, actually.

CarpeGuitarrem
2010-12-16, 09:19 PM
Eheheh... Eheheheheh... Eeheheheh... Ehhh...

No, I'm not laughing at you. It's just the fact that it exists and how plainly you asked about it.

BoEF = Book of Erotic Fantasy. Exactly what it sounds like.
My reaction, but when I saw the threat title lol. "Oh please no...you really don't want to know..."

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 09:20 PM
I think it predates 3.5, actually.

Nope, it's 3.5 material. None of the PrCs have Innuendo as a class skill, since it was rolled into Bluff in the transition.

And yes, I picked that example for its utter hilarity.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:21 PM
then what is that wizard robe and boots from and why is it funny?

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 09:22 PM
then what is that wizard robe and boots from and why is it funny?

It's an obscure reference to something decidedly not safe for work or these forums. Just google 'i put on my robe and wizard hat' if you're curious.

DragonOfUndeath
2010-12-16, 09:24 PM
It's an obscure reference to something decidedly not safe for work or these forums. Just google 'i put on my robe and wizard hat' if you're curious.

but please if you value your sanity/innocence don't

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 09:26 PM
but please if you value your sanity/innocence don't

Poor Bloodninja, no one understands his pain...

chiasaur11
2010-12-16, 09:26 PM
It's an obscure reference to something decidedly not safe for work or these forums. Just google 'i put on my robe and wizard hat' if you're curious.

Or, well, don't.

Don't is probably a safer bet.

Also, avoid thinking about any classic folk songs about hedgehogs, or the oddities of a wizard's staff.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:28 PM
was that real text or a joke if its real that dude needs to be sterilized now

Frozen_Feet
2010-12-16, 09:29 PM
Having read through the whole thing a few times, I can say that it's both much better than it's given credit for, and much tamer than you'd expect. At least in my table, the jokes that are thrown around tend to be much more perverted, and the average age of my current group is somewhere around 12. Chances are, if your players are prone to immature sex jokes, those find their ways into the game regardless of whether BoEF is in play.

Zeofar
2010-12-16, 09:30 PM
then what is that wizard robe and boots from and why is it funny?

Essentially it comes down to this:

Someone thinks they're going to have a sexy conversation with a person they meet on a chatroom.

They are instead subjected to someone pretending they are a rather "unique" wizard who acts in the least sexy "sexy" way you could imagine.


was that real text or a joke if its real that dude needs to be sterilized now

It was real, but he made it as horrible as he could intentionally. The other participant apparently wasn't in on it. It's a little something known as "trolling."

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:33 PM
ok what i ment by real was that it was not planed out

DragonOfUndeath
2010-12-16, 09:35 PM
ok what i ment by real was that it was not planed out

oh no the guy did it on purpose and planned it out.

Zeofar
2010-12-16, 09:38 PM
Yeah, I think the guy had a few lines worked out and then improvised on the theme at a few points.

Runestar
2010-12-16, 09:39 PM
There's even a table showing what races can crossbreed with other races.

Needless to say, human was the easiest to brainstorm. :smallcool:

Susano-wo
2010-12-16, 09:39 PM
Essentially it comes down to this:

Someone thinks they're going to have a sexy conversation with a person they meet on a chatroom.

They are instead subjected to someone pretending they are a rather "unique" wizard who acts in the least sexy "sexy" way you could imagine.



It was real, but he made it as horrible as he could intentionally. The other participant apparently wasn't in on it. It's a little something known as "trolling."

Well, it was allegedly real. I wouldn't put it past Swan Boy to make that crap up. Good times, though.:smallbiggrin:
[to add possibly a little more clarity, it comes from a back-page humor column in the gaming magazine "Inquest." It also comes from, I beleive the late 90's]


And because this **** cracks me up: You Can't Ignore My Girth! (http://www.geekstir.com/gary-oak-you-cant-ignore-his-girth)

DragonOfUndeath
2010-12-16, 09:39 PM
Yeah, I think the guy had a few lines worked out and then improvised on the theme at a few points.

It's hard to tell cause you only know he said the same opening line. He could have planned out just about everything or just the "I put on my robe and Wizard hat"

Tengu_temp
2010-12-16, 09:40 PM
It's a good rule of thumb to remember - in the BoEF, you will find material that is
A) Balanced
B) Mature
C) Relevant to any game you'd play.

Pick two, at most.

To be fair, there's a scrying-oriented arcane caster PrC that fits all three criteria. At least until you realize that its intented purpose is pretty much Voyeur Mage. Still perfectly usable in a normal game though.

BoEF is a ridiculous book, but there is nothing too unnerving in it unless you're a small kid and/or a big prude. So if anyone's curious, feel free to check it out. Just watch out for illustrations, they mostly consist of really bad photoshop.

Beelzebub1111
2010-12-16, 09:40 PM
I got it for the Phil Foglio comic in the back...What? I'm a fan.

Kalaska'Agathas
2010-12-16, 09:41 PM
There's even a table showing what races can crossbreed with other races.

Needless to say, human was the easiest to brainstorm. :smallcool:

Heh, I think Dragons were easier. And according to the table in question it would seem that Dragons are easier.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:43 PM
ok.................................

DragonOfUndeath
2010-12-16, 09:43 PM
Heh, I think Dragons were easier. And according to the table in question it would seem that Dragons are easier.

in both senses of the term :eek:

Zeofar
2010-12-16, 09:45 PM
ok.................................

I'm sorry guy, but I think I lead this thread down a road that you don't want to follow :smalleek::smallfrown:.

Kalaska'Agathas
2010-12-16, 09:46 PM
in both senses of the term :eek:

In the immortal words of Hoban 'Wash' Washburn, "That's kinda what I meant."

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 09:48 PM
well we started talking about a book and some how ended up in some odd guys s*x life

Admiral Squish
2010-12-16, 09:57 PM
I got it for the Phil Foglio comic in the back...What? I'm a fan.

I didn't even realize that was there until now. Funny.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 09:57 PM
Great Modthulhu: And we should probably stick with the first one, to avoid getting the thread locked.

Burble.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 10:00 PM
its ok it didn't bother me or is there a rule aganst changing the subject?

Kalaska'Agathas
2010-12-16, 10:00 PM
in both senses of the term :eek:

And this of course was the basis of the Hit Broadway Musical Do Polished Silver Scales Really Reflect Up?

Saint GoH
2010-12-16, 10:01 PM
All hail Glyphstone?

The Glyphstone
2010-12-16, 10:02 PM
its ok it didn't bother me or is there a rule aganst changing the subject?

Not changing the subject so much, but there is a moratorium on Inappropriate Topics, since the boards are PG-13 mandated. BoEF threads are generally accepted as long as discussion about the book's contents doesn't get explicit.


All hail Glyphstone?

You will be eaten first.:smallbiggrin:

absolmorph
2010-12-16, 10:03 PM
Nope, it's 3.5 material. None of the PrCs have Innuendo as a class skill, since it was rolled into Bluff in the transition.

And yes, I picked that example for its utter hilarity.


Poor Bloodninja, no one understands his pain...
Well played, good sir.
And your list of the choices for what BoEF material will be is, by my recollection and guess, pretty much spot-on.

kiryoku
2010-12-16, 10:06 PM
oh ok thanks

Yuki Akuma
2010-12-16, 10:06 PM
The BoEF isn't really as bad as most people make it out to be. Although it's not a book most people would need.

The art, however, is awful.

Psyren
2010-12-16, 10:21 PM
To be fair, there's a scrying-oriented arcane caster PrC that fits all three criteria. At least until you realize that its intented purpose is pretty much Voyeur Mage. Still perfectly usable in a normal game though.


Then there's that other PrC with nearly Incantatrix levels of broken, that has not a damn thing to do with the rest of the book's contents. It's like someone snuck their homebrew in during the editing process and nobody caught it. :smallyuk:

Kalaska'Agathas
2010-12-16, 10:28 PM
Then there's that other PrC with nearly Incantatrix levels of broken, that has not a damn thing to do with the rest of the book's contents. It's like someone snuck their homebrew in during the editing process and nobody caught it. :smallyuk:

Yeah, the Metaphysical Spellshaper hits all the Incantatrix' high points and is only three levels long (literally). And apart from the frankly silly quote at the beginning of the class description, it has nothing that would warrant a 'mature' rating.

absolmorph
2010-12-16, 10:31 PM
Then there's that other PrC with nearly Incantatrix levels of broken, that has not a damn thing to do with the rest of the book's contents. It's like someone snuck their homebrew in during the editing process and nobody caught it. :smallyuk:
Nah, more like it was missed in the editing, or someone wanted a regular thing in there. Still a weird place to put it.
It's the Metaphysical Spellshaper, by the way.


The BoEF isn't really as bad as most people make it out to be. Although it's not a book most people would need.

The art, however, is awful.
I'm pretty sure the are is actually photographs. Weird, awkward and poorly-done photographs, but still photographs. Some just make me raise an eyebrow and give a mental "What." Others make me cringe.

I think the bad rep is from people who are intent on using the material or use the book as an excuse for doing things the other party doesn't want to have a part in. Or hear about. Ever. Not even then.

ryzouken
2010-12-16, 10:34 PM
Two things our group (ab)uses from that book:

Metaphysical Spellshaper, PrC: Take stat damage and expand the cast time to a full round action to power metamagic feats. Fairly absurd when combined with stuff like Arcane Spellsurge, Persistant Spell, and (in epic play) Intensify Spell. All off a 1 level dip with easy pre-reqs (something like 8 skill ranks and a metamagic feat)

Beauty's Caress, Spell: +xd4 Enhancement to Cha for x duration (it's not exactly short either) scaled by CL. Combine with above PrC to Persist and Maximize, now our happy go lucky Sorceror has upwards of 20 points of Cha all day every day, translating to +10 to all DC's and possibly bonus spells. It's a 4th level spell too, meaning we have space to Extend the Persist for 2 day duration and can Empower it, to get even more Charisma. Stupid broken.

One player opted to use both on a double 9's Spirit Shaman/Sublime Chord. They also used a Wish to gain the Nymph's Cha to AC/saves ability (bad DM), Cha again to AC through something else (Battledancer?), Cha to Attack via Snowflake Wardance, Cha to DC's again by the Unseelie Fey template's Winter's Chill ability... etc. The result is a character with skills, saves, AC, attack, and even damage in the triple digits. What's more, this character went through into our epic game, where she picked up epic spellcasting and more. I hate that character with a passion, as it has turned into the second of the group's 40th level PCs that just won't die.

Some characters just need to retire, and some books just need to burn. This's one.

gbprime
2010-12-17, 12:03 AM
The other PrC in there that is worth staring at is Disciple of Aaluran. Full caster, and you can qualify with just 5 skill ranks and a feat. And any PrC that you can qualify for with Sorcerer 2 makes Sorcerer that much better! This 5 level PrC also includes 2 bonus metamagic feats, a sanctuary ability, a mesmerize ability, a disguise self abilty, and access to a clerical domain with "unique" Stun and Daze spells in it (low levels with single targets, high levels with AoE versions).

Unfortunately, the fluff is a "free love" concept, where you're literally handing yourself out to make other people feel better. This makes the PrC difficult to put into a PG-13 setting, and pretty much impossible in a PG setting.

Actually, I shudder in horror at the thought of this PrC being played by the kind of gamer who likes to tell strangers about his character. :smalleek:

sonofzeal
2010-12-17, 12:04 AM
I very much love BoEF, for the sociological information and for the Spells section. There's a lot of really useful, non-perverted spells in BoEF, especially for goody two shoes sorts. I wouldn't want to play a Healer without access to BoEF spells.

woodenbandman
2010-12-17, 12:28 AM
the death of your game

Kalaska'Agathas
2010-12-17, 12:30 AM
the little death of your game

There, fixed that for you?

The Glyphstone
2010-12-17, 12:34 AM
the little death of your game
There, fixed that for you?

http://www.instantrimshot.com

Tyndmyr
2010-12-17, 01:12 AM
The BoEF isn't really as bad as most people make it out to be. Although it's not a book most people would need.

The art, however, is awful.

It really is that bad. See, I have completionist tendancies. It's why I own every single official 3.5 book. So, yknow, I had to read it. All of it.

Yeah, it's that bad.

Supercomputers
2010-12-17, 01:18 AM
There's the second level Cleric spell "Reverse Gender" which is hilarious. If Durkon had been in the closet with Roy he could have cast it, of course the chances of Durkon preparing "Reverse Gender" do not seem very likely.

Tyndmyr
2010-12-17, 01:27 AM
That spell, like the belt of gender changing is initially hilarious. Then players get creative. They get ideas like "what happens if I get pregnant and cast it". Theories involving horrible things to genetics get tried out. Random commoners bear the brunt of these terrible experiments. Please, think of the commoners.

Mordokai
2010-12-17, 01:48 AM
I think commoners have bigger things to worry about. You know, all those nasty cats.

I consider BoEF... worthy of reading. The fluff is mostly entertaining and I don't overly worry myself with brokeness of PrC's and spells, since I don't use them anyway. The art however, really is bad.

Keld Denar
2010-12-17, 01:49 AM
I liked Power Word: Disrobe and the spell Grope. Good fun at parties for everyone!

Roderick_BR
2010-12-17, 08:22 AM
It interestingly switchs from fluffy and useless spells (sumon haren, you'll never spend a night alone again), to some overpowered stuff (strip naked something. level ZERO (or 1, I don't remember) spell. Target gets naked. No saving throw. Adamantive/mithril +5 full plate with heavy fortification and tons of energy resistances? You're not wearing it anymore, sorry) That may be an outdated version, though.

Crasical
2010-12-17, 08:37 AM
A few months back a thread used the BoEF to turn the Virtuoso PRC into a sorcerer PRC, since it advances casting 9/10. We where working on the (apparently incorrect) assumption that Perform:Sexual is a class skill for everyone....

Well, long story short, we ended up with a sorcerer with bardlike buffing abilities that all worked through him molesting his draconic familiar, as well as an alternate version that took levels of Alienist to become a tentacle-monster worshiping rokuganii schoolgirl.


We called the build the 'Pervirtuoso'.

Frozen_Feet
2010-12-17, 09:39 AM
Actually, if I remember right, Perform (Sexual) is indeed a class skill for everyone.

I like to restrict it to classes who normally get Perform as class skill, though, since then it stays better in line with literature I've read with Rogues, Bards and Monks being the best playas.

Yes, Monks. If you don't get it, you haven't read the right sort of novels...

Greenish
2010-12-17, 10:03 AM
At least in my table, the jokes that are thrown around tend to be much more perverted, and the average age of my current group is somewhere around 12.If that's what you're used to… :smalleek:

I got it for the Phil Foglio comic in the back...Damn, now I'll have to find it.

"Yeah, I bought BoEF… for the art!"

Crasical
2010-12-17, 10:33 AM
Actually, if I remember right, Perform (Sexual) is indeed a class skill for everyone.

If you can source that I would be really grateful. The way I read it seemed to imply that Perform-as-a-class-skill is the way it's intended to work.

Wabbajack
2010-12-17, 10:35 AM
It interestingly switchs from fluffy and useless spells (sumon haren, you'll never spend a night alone again), to some overpowered stuff (strip naked something. level ZERO (or 1, I don't remember) spell. Target gets naked. No saving throw. Adamantive/mithril +5 full plate with heavy fortification and tons of energy resistances? You're not wearing it anymore, sorry) That may be an outdated version, though.

That disrobe spell doesn't work with magical equipment.

And the Metamagic Prc could be somewhat fixed if it included a clause like the hellfire warlock, i.e. no ability damage= no benefit, and maybe make it con damage instead of damage of your choosing.

And I concur, the pictures are bad.

Tengu_temp
2010-12-17, 11:21 AM
A few months back a thread used the BoEF to turn the Virtuoso PRC into a sorcerer PRC, since it advances casting 9/10. We where working on the (apparently incorrect) assumption that Perform:Sexual is a class skill for everyone....

Well, long story short, we ended up with a sorcerer with bardlike buffing abilities that all worked through him molesting his draconic familiar, as well as an alternate version that took levels of Alienist to become a tentacle-monster worshiping rokuganii schoolgirl.


We called the build the 'Pervirtuoso'.

That's amusingly messed up. Well done.

Tyndmyr
2010-12-17, 03:11 PM
That disrobe spell doesn't work with magical equipment.

And the Metamagic Prc could be somewhat fixed if it included a clause like the hellfire warlock, i.e. no ability damage= no benefit, and maybe make it con damage instead of damage of your choosing.

And I concur, the pictures are bad.

It's still unbalanced for a cantrip. Consider the effects of losing your mundane quiver, spell component pouch, scabbard, belts, and mundane items in general. Sure, you *can* pick them all up, but there goes action economy. For a cantrip? Nah. Not appropriate.

Necroticplague
2010-12-17, 03:20 PM
The main thing bad about BoEF is the looks everybody gives you when you mention it and savage species in the same sentence. Even when you're only talking about a couple of completely innocent cleric buff spells.And templates.

gbprime
2010-12-17, 03:47 PM
Actually, if I remember right, Perform (Sexual) is indeed a class skill for everyone.

It's not. There's a feat in BoEF that gives it to you as a class skill, but otherwise Perform has to be on your regular list, otherwise it's cross class.

Gnaeus
2010-12-18, 01:11 PM
I also find the disease descriptions helpful for when some PC walks into a tavern and starts in with "Are there girls there? If there are girls there I want to...."

I can respond with "Hold that thought, I have a chart for that :smallbiggrin:".

Morithias
2010-12-18, 02:52 PM
Fridge Brilliance: The BOEF has horrible art on purpose. If they included no pictures, but just words and tables it would look bland, boring, and uninteresting. If the art was super high quality, lustful players would buy it just for the art inside it and ignore the actual material. They made the art 'horrible' so that it was appealing enough to buy, but not to use just as an aid.

In end I have this to say.

The BOEF is the book you can use to auto-judge what level of play your players are at in terms of social maturity, due to almost all of the fluff, and most of the gameplay being balanced (at least compared to some of the WOTC stuff). In the end if you somehow got transported to the Dnd world for real, your body's sexual tendencies wouldn't just shut down, and I find having a book even a 3rd party on hand to handle the rare occasion when this stuff comes up can save you a lot of headaches.

Coidzor
2010-12-18, 02:59 PM
I got it for the Phil Foglio comic in the back...What? I'm a fan.

HUMINA-WHA?! :smalleek: Why am I only now just learning this?! :smallannoyed:

The Tygre
2010-12-18, 08:06 PM
HUMINA-WHA?! :smalleek: Why am I only now just learning this?! :smallannoyed:

A-yup. Phil and Dixy finally get to sex in D&D. :smallbiggrin:

AtlanteanTroll
2010-12-18, 08:08 PM
HUMINA-WHA?! :smalleek: Why am I only now just learning this?! :smallannoyed:

Because those versions stopped being printed due to copyright infringement.

Tengu_temp
2010-12-18, 10:21 PM
In the end if you somehow got transported to the Dnd world for real, your body's sexual tendencies wouldn't just shut down, and I find having a book even a 3rd party on hand to handle the rare occasion when this stuff comes up can save you a lot of headaches.

Do you really need mechanics for sexual encounters? Why not just leave them up to roleplaying the players' imagination?

Dimers
2010-12-18, 11:32 PM
Do you really need mechanics for sexual encounters? Why not just leave them up to roleplaying the players' imagination?

Extending that reasoning, you have no more D&D -- players can imagine or roleplay everything. Some people prefer having mechanics, for various reasons. Anyway, not much of the crunch in BOEF is about the playtime itself, but rather about its repercussions, about the ways sexuality or abstinence can be used for power, about magic related to sexuality, about gender, about offspring and reproduction, and so on. I'd expect a disappointed reaction from anyone who got the book only on the strength of its Tab A / Slot B mechanics.

Vizzerdrix
2010-12-19, 02:35 AM
about the ways sexuality or abstinence can be used for power, about magic related to sexuality,...

Hmm... Didn't the Celts perform such rituals?

Ravens_cry
2010-12-19, 06:10 AM
HUMINA-WHA?! :smalleek: Why am I only now just learning this?! :smallannoyed:
Does the word 'XXXenophile' mean anything to you?:smallamused:

grimbold
2010-12-19, 09:48 AM
sorry you had to learn it that way
its kind of awkward isn't it?

Greenish
2010-12-19, 09:56 AM
Anyway, not much of the crunch in BOEF is about the playtime itself, but rather about its repercussions, about the ways sexuality or abstinence can be used for power, about magic related to sexuality, about gender, about offspring and reproduction, and so on.BoED has some of those, though only in the form of abstaining from something being required for certain spells.

Tyndmyr
2010-12-19, 10:39 AM
Extending that reasoning, you have no more D&D -- players can imagine or roleplay everything. Some people prefer having mechanics, for various reasons. Anyway, not much of the crunch in BOEF is about the playtime itself, but rather about its repercussions, about the ways sexuality or abstinence can be used for power, about magic related to sexuality, about gender, about offspring and reproduction, and so on. I'd expect a disappointed reaction from anyone who got the book only on the strength of its Tab A / Slot B mechanics.

That logic can be used to justify mechanics for absolutely anything. As FATAL shows us, some things you probably don't want or need mechanics for.

A better criteria would be to determine if adding mechanics for something improves the game. And, given the quality of the material in BoEF, that's fairly doubtful.

Morithias
2010-12-19, 11:17 AM
That logic can be used to justify mechanics for absolutely anything. As FATAL shows us, some things you probably don't want or need mechanics for.

A better criteria would be to determine if adding mechanics for something improves the game. And, given the quality of the material in BoEF, that's fairly doubtful.

If you actually swap out the FATAL mechanics for the sexual stuff, with the rule from BOEF you actually have a decent engine. Remove all the fluff and replace it with your own, and it's quite a decent game.

Gnaeus
2010-12-19, 11:22 AM
A better criteria would be to determine if adding mechanics for something improves the game. And, given the quality of the material in BoEF, that's fairly doubtful.

It probably improves SOMEONES game. I mean, there are lots of game books I have never or extremely rarely used, but I know that if I wind up running a campaign in location X they will be helpful. If the players develop some bizarre scheme to raise a generation of half monster children, I have a starting point for rules. It isn't the wierdest thing I have seen PCs do by a long shot.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-19, 01:16 PM
If you actually swap out the FATAL mechanics for the sexual stuff, with the rule from BOEF you actually have a decent engine. Remove all the fluff and replace it with your own, and it's quite a decent game.

But if you remove the sexual mechanics and fluff from FATAL, aren't you left with a blank document?

Morithias
2010-12-19, 01:29 PM
But if you remove the sexual mechanics and fluff from FATAL, aren't you left with a blank document?

No you're left with an engine. That's like saying if you remove the dungeons and dragons from Dnd you're left with a blank document. No you're left with the d20 system.

Seriously out of all the people that 'hate' FATAL, who here besides me has actually analyzed the book?

LOTRfan
2010-12-19, 01:33 PM
I have (don't judge me, I hate hating something without knowing what I hated)!

Realing, although it does spend too much time on rape and sex for my tastes, if you look past it, it is playable. I don't exactly like the system itself, though. The Neraphim power that makes other people rape them is a little out there, though...

Get rid of the skills involving sex, you are left with approximately 4/5 the skill descriptions. Not that so many skills have to do with it, its just the skill (whose exact name I fail to recall) has the longest description.

The wrestling rules were also strange...

The Glyphstone
2010-12-19, 01:34 PM
No you're left with an engine. That's like saying if you remove the dungeons and dragons from Dnd you're left with a blank document. No you're left with the d20 system.

Seriously out of all the people that 'hate' FATAL, who here besides me has actually analyzed the book?

I tried making a character for it. I gave up halfway through out of despair.

LOTRfan
2010-12-19, 01:36 PM
I tried making a character for it. I gave up halfway through out of despair.

Let me guess, was it the critical hit tables or the societal descriptions?

sonofzeal
2010-12-19, 01:38 PM
No you're left with an engine. That's like saying if you remove the dungeons and dragons from Dnd you're left with a blank document. No you're left with the d20 system.

Seriously out of all the people that 'hate' FATAL, who here besides me has actually analyzed the book?
I've read it. It's pretty terrible.


In its defense though - a lot of the reviewers mock the ridiculous proportions of sexual anatomy, but most of them are confusing diameter with circumference. People aren't used to discussing the size of things based on circumference, so the numbers sound ridiculously large. For some reason, the creators actually got their math right on the ones I checked. That's about as much praise as I can give it though.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-19, 01:38 PM
I think it was when I somehow managed a negative head circumference and a.....body part...large enough to inflict bludgeoning damage in any rational system. I've brain bleached the rest away.

Morph Bark
2010-12-19, 01:46 PM
I think it was when I somehow managed a negative head circumference and a.....body part...large enough to inflict bludgeoning damage in any rational system. I've brain bleached the rest away.

Now are you talking lethal damage or nonlethal damage? Because I haven't honestly seen saps get a lot of use, myself.

sonofzeal
2010-12-19, 02:12 PM
I think it was when I somehow managed a negative head circumference and a.....body part...large enough to inflict bludgeoning damage in any rational system. I've brain bleached the rest away.
You definitely did something wrong then. The smallest head circumference would be if you rolled a 1 for initial size (19.2), were female (*0.97), rolled less than 50 for random portion (decrease) and a 100 for the size of the random portion (-1).

Total minimum result: 17.624" circumference, or a 5.6" diameter, for a human head. A kobold head can be smaller, but by less than an inch.


That last conversion is important. It may also explain why your.... body part... seemed so freakishly big. Remember to divide by pi to change from circumference to diameter.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-19, 02:17 PM
You definitely did something wrong then. The smallest head circumference would be if you rolled a 1 for initial size (19.2), were female (*0.97), rolled less than 50 for random portion (decrease) and a 100 for the size of the random portion (-1).

Total minimum result: 17.624" circumference, or a 5.6" diameter, for a human head. A kobold head can be smaller, but by less than an inch.


That last conversion is important. It may also explain why your.... body part... seemed so freakishly big. Remember to divide by pi to change from circumference to diameter.

I'll keep such in mind if I'm ever struck by sufficient insanity to try again.

Keinnicht
2010-12-19, 02:43 PM
I really don't understand why anyone would want to use it. It's awkward enough to play out a romance with your character and someone else's character when the players aren't dating, and that's with fade-to-black for the intimate parts. Why in the world would you want to play out an entire sex scene? This is Dungeons & Dragons, not Porn & Playboys. :smallyuk:

Or F.A.T.A.L.

*Shudder*

Morithias
2010-12-19, 06:22 PM
Or F.A.T.A.L.

*Shudder*

Ok that's it. I'm going to go back to the book and post an entire bloody review on the engine. Keep in mind, the ENGINE.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-19, 06:28 PM
That'd deserve its own thread, though. This one is about the BoEF, and we should be getting it back on topic.

Morithias
2010-12-19, 06:30 PM
That'd deserve its own thread, though. This one is about the BoEF, and we should be getting it back on topic.

I was going to make it it's own thread. posting it in this one would not only break the rules, but also create a thread so mixed up it would be impossible to understand.

Tael
2010-12-19, 06:53 PM
I was going to make it it's own thread. posting it in this one would not only break the rules, but also create a thread so mixed up it would be impossible to understand.

Actually, I did take a look at the engine, and it was pretty terrible by itself. WAY too randomly convoluted and slow to get anything done with, and the level-up system was just retarded. The base engine wasn't broken in and of itself, but it's worse than any other game system I've seen. (counting d20, GURPS, Exalted and Shadowrun's Dice Pool, Unisystem. and Risus.)

Warlawk
2010-12-19, 10:09 PM
Yeah, the Metaphysical Spellshaper hits all the Incantatrix' high points and is only three levels long (literally). And apart from the frankly silly quote at the beginning of the class description, it has nothing that would warrant a 'mature' rating.

I would have to say it is a far cry from hitting "all the Incantatrix' high points". Incantrix is really kinda based in applying metamagic to existing effects, other peoples spells, and taking control of other peoples spells. Not really the same thing as the metaphysical spellshaper. Above and beyond that, the incantrix capstone reduces the level cost of each metamagic feat by 1, while the spellshaper reduces the total of all applied metamagic by 1. So if an incantrix applied Empower (2), Split Ray (2) and Maximize (3) to a spell it would increase by 4 spell levels since each feat is reduced in cost by 1. The spellshaper only reduces the total of all metamagic by one, so applying those same feats would cost 6 spell levels.

No reason you couldn't potentially take both though...

Psyren
2010-12-19, 10:42 PM
I'm not sure there's much else we can say about BoEF. Horrible artwork, interesting (though sometimes random) mechanics and flavor that can't be found in any other source.

The most notable feature about BoEF is... being notable. Because we pretty much all know about it, we can use it as a starting point when discussing things like magical contraception, racial gestation periods, alignment attitudes toward sexuality etc. All of these things can be easily homebrewed, but having them in one book that everyone can point to saves everyone a lot of work.

ideasmith
2010-12-21, 03:00 PM
It's not.



It's a good rule of thumb to remember - in the BoEF, you will find material that is
A) Balanced
B) Mature
C) Relevant to any game you'd play.

Pick two, at most.

Counterexample Spells:
Detect Disease
Ghost Touch
Limited Telepathy
Magic Status
Miss
Sanctuary, Mass

Duke of URL
2010-12-21, 03:21 PM
BoEF is pretty much the poster child for why WotC modified the d20 license agreement to allow WotC to revoke the trademark licensing for objectionable content.

Volos
2010-12-21, 05:12 PM
I actually use part of BoEF in almost every campaign that I run. In every group there is at least one player who wants to seduce the barmaid. In those cases I use the STDs listed in BoEF. It has come down to the point where I have charts for how likely someone is to have a STD (based on race/gender/class/alignment/social class) and another chart for which one they might have. It only takes once for someone to get the point that wasting the group's time and bringing up inappropriate scenes in game is not appreciated at my table.

Greenish
2010-12-21, 05:23 PM
It only takes once for someone to get the point that wasting the group's time and bringing up inappropriate scenes in game is not appreciated at my table.Or you could, you know, just say so.

The Glyphstone
2010-12-21, 05:24 PM
Or you could, you know, just say so.

Sometimes you need the stick to teach a lesson - presumably the table is used when talking fails to achieve results. I don't even have to use the table, I just remind my players that I have it whenever the topic threatens to arise, and they're cowed into behaving simply by the mention.

Greenish
2010-12-21, 05:36 PM
Sometimes you need the stick to teach a lesson -If it's needed for every single campaign, it doesn't seem like the lesson sticks. :smalltongue:

I should think the players keep trying it since it's something they want to do in the game, and figure the slap on the wrist was for the campaign in question only.

[Edit]: Okay, it was "almost every campaign".

Volos
2010-12-21, 09:23 PM
If it's needed for every single campaign, it doesn't seem like the lesson sticks. :smalltongue:

I should think the players keep trying it since it's something they want to do in the game, and figure the slap on the wrist was for the campaign in question only.

[Edit]: Okay, it was "almost every campaign".

Each campaign seems to have new people who don't get it. I move around alot and when I don't move, I have to kick annoying people and bring in new blood. Apparenlty new blood thinks that snide remarks of a sexual nature is acceptable and I attempt to tell them otherwise. But these people are shameless and there isn't much I can do to make them realize that I am not joking when I tell them to quit. The first time I used the STDs to teach the players a lesson there was only a 10% chance that the individual would have something. I rolled and got positive for STD and rolled again into a nasty one. The player had to crit fail to catch the disease. They caught it. They had to crit fail again in order to not only take damage from the STD, but to also have their 'sword' fall off. Oh yeah, it happened. What was intended to be a warning turned into a terrible punishment. Fun times.

sonofzeal
2010-12-21, 10:09 PM
Each campaign seems to have new people who don't get it. I move around alot and when I don't move, I have to kick annoying people and bring in new blood. Apparenlty new blood thinks that snide remarks of a sexual nature is acceptable and I attempt to tell them otherwise. But these people are shameless and there isn't much I can do to make them realize that I am not joking when I tell them to quit. The first time I used the STDs to teach the players a lesson there was only a 10% chance that the individual would have something. I rolled and got positive for STD and rolled again into a nasty one. The player had to crit fail to catch the disease. They caught it. They had to crit fail again in order to not only take damage from the STD, but to also have their 'sword' fall off. Oh yeah, it happened. What was intended to be a warning turned into a terrible punishment. Fun times.
"I am sorry my friend, but the dice... the dice do not like your wang. And in a battle between the dice and your wang, the dice win."