PDA

View Full Version : Gamer Humor Good Counterpart to the Succubus?



ThinkMinty
2016-02-29, 03:56 PM
Ya know what's weird? Why isn't there a Good-aligned counterpart to the succubus? Some kind of sexy lady angel what tempts people into doing good things with cuteness. Or for that matter, the incubus.

WolfLordBran
2016-02-29, 04:01 PM
As far as I know, there isn't. And honestly, it would defeat the purpose of doing Good, since Good is supposed to be altruistic and "some sexy angel lady who tempts people" isn't altruistic in nature.

Zaydos
2016-02-29, 04:01 PM
Because kittens are the ultimate pinnacle of cuteness and they tempt one not towards good but towards the deepest evils, they make erinyes and succubi both look good. Cuteness, not lust is the ultimate path to darkness!


Serious face: Because at least as defined by D&D such deeds would not be good aligned (altruistic) they'd be neutral (done simply for the prospect of personal gain) which would mean that it'd be a celestial whose actions would defy mortals the chance to be good. Also because celestials are not heavy on recruitment drives since while some things are always Evil regardless of motivations (Evil spells), for acts to be Good they must be done for Good reasons and it's very, very hard to tempt someone into doing something Good as it requires it to be freely chosen for the right reasons.

Amaril
2016-02-29, 04:11 PM
Hmm, could something like an angel of love work? A being that encourages others to do good by making them feel genuinely beautiful and loved? I vaguely remember something like that being part of Eilistraee's MO in Forgotten Realms, reminding drow that they aren't hated, that they can redeem themselves, and that they'll be welcomed back if they do.

Jeivar
2016-02-29, 04:30 PM
I started a thread on this topic a while back, making the point that sex being a weapon of the forces of evil seems really puritan and backwards. I proposed the existence of an angel counterpart who either worked healing magic or lifted a person's spirit through physical intimacy.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?340950-A-logical-opposite-of-succubi-incubi

Admiral Squish
2016-02-29, 04:57 PM
I started a thread on this topic a while back, making the point that sex being a weapon of the forces of evil seems really puritan and backwards. I proposed the existence of an angel counterpart who either worked healing magic or lifted a person's spirit through physical intimacy.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?340950-A-logical-opposite-of-succubi-incubi

I generally agree, it does sort of show a worrying trend. I mean, it's come to the point that it's a standard rule of thumb that if any female NPC shows sexual interest in a party member, that NPC is probably evil. A succubus, a vampire, something else... Honestly, it's a problem with a lot of human societies, though, it's not just a feature of the game. For some reason, we tend to treat anything with sexual connotations as inherently evil at worst, and at best, as taboo or just as a joke.

Keltest
2016-02-29, 05:11 PM
I generally agree, it does sort of show a worrying trend. I mean, it's come to the point that it's a standard rule of thumb that if any female NPC shows sexual interest in a party member, that NPC is probably evil. A succubus, a vampire, something else... Honestly, it's a problem with a lot of human societies, though, it's not just a feature of the game. For some reason, we tend to treat anything with sexual connotations as inherently evil at worst, and at best, as taboo or just as a joke.

While good can be sexy, using sex as coercion is pretty definitely not in the Good MO, for reasons touched upon above. You can be good and enjoy sex, but I have a difficult time believing in the actual goodness of anyone in it just for the sex.

Mr.Sandman
2016-02-29, 05:16 PM
Perhaps an entity that helps people find love? Like a guardian angel/wingman? (Heh, wingman with wings.)

Keltest
2016-02-29, 05:31 PM
Perhaps an entity that helps people find love? Like a guardian angel/wingman? (Heh, wingman with wings.)

Perhaps some sort of diaper wearing cherub with a bow and arrow? We could name him cupid!

Mr.Sandman
2016-02-29, 05:35 PM
Well now I feel stupid.

Seto
2016-02-29, 05:39 PM
Well now I feel stupid cupid.

Fixed that for ya.

comicshorse
2016-02-29, 05:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kJA8v577W8

Zaydos
2016-02-29, 05:59 PM
Hmm, could something like an angel of love work? A being that encourages others to do good by making them feel genuinely beautiful and loved? I vaguely remember something like that being part of Eilistraee's MO in Forgotten Realms, reminding drow that they aren't hated, that they can redeem themselves, and that they'll be welcomed back if they do.

See that could be a pretty good entity, not rewarding with sex, but reminding that good is its own reward because life isn't a 0 sum game and what goes around comes around; that action to help others ends up helping everyone and things end up better for all (your basic reason altruism exists).


Perhaps an entity that helps people find love? Like a guardian angel/wingman? (Heh, wingman with wings.)


Perhaps some sort of diaper wearing cherub with a bow and arrow? We could name him cupid!

And this is the actual Good aligned equivalent to a succubus. It just doesn't tempt mortals, or go 'do X and I'll reward you' it spreads happiness and trusts that happy people are Good people.

ThinkMinty
2016-02-29, 06:07 PM
Perhaps an entity that helps people find love? Like a guardian angel/wingman? (Heh, wingman with wings.)

...so, Cupids?

Anyways, the Good-aligned sexy-monsters do have good intentions: recruiting for Team Good. By treating people nice (in varying ways, the point is more about makin' the mortals feel validated rather than gettin' in their underpants...or not), they'd teach 'em that doing good feels good. Their quarry don't have to start out as good people, they become good people by spending time around a nice Celestial who treats them nice.

Think of it this way: If all it takes to get someone from being Evil or Neutral into being overtly Good is tempting them with the hypothetical scenario of them getting their hands on some chubby-bubbly angelgirl booty or being all hugged up in the strong, comforting arms of a reassuringly handsome cosmic paragon...that would be worth it, no?

Additionally, it would be plainly suicidal, tactically speaking, for the Upper Planes to not have outreach programs in the Prime Material given all the shenanigans Fiends get up to in the realms of mortals.

There has to be at least one Paladin who aspired to Paladin-hood to no longer feel fear or get headcolds. That there are personal benefits to being and doing Good doesn't make it not Good. That it is emotionally satisfying to be benevolent doesn't negate that benevolence.

Sexual feelings can being out the worst or the best in people. A good-aligned sexy-monster would be angling to inspire the latter.

...and now I'm trying to picture what kind of sexy monster them Lawful Neutral Mordon types send after people to try and seduce them into being accountants.

Grim Portent
2016-02-29, 06:37 PM
Given that Good is often associated with the trappings of medieval European christian and chivalric morality, the Good counterpart to the Succubus would technically be an Angel of Chastity.

I suspect it would look like an elderly woman with curlers in her hair and a disapproving expression. Whenever anyone tries to engage in even semi-lewd behavior nearby it makes a point of interrupting them and making them feel too awkward to keep going, followed by a good old fashioned haranguing. :smalltongue:

Malimar
2016-02-29, 06:49 PM
The first thing that sprung to my mind from 3.5 was devas, specifically the movanic deva. But it turns out they're not all that sex-oriented, and the main thing that made me think they were is that they don't like clothes -- they "reluctantly clothe themselves in simple loincloths or coverings".

Slipperychicken
2016-02-29, 07:45 PM
Why isn't there a Good-aligned counterpart to the succubus? Some kind of sexy lady angel what tempts people into doing good things with cuteness. Or for that matter, the incubus.

D&D angels are based off Abrahamic traditions, in which angels, while being stunningly beautiful, embody qualities like chastity and purity. Succubi are bad there precisely because they tempt people into premarital extramarital sex (adultery, and banging people you're not going to marry are big no-nos), and then they do something bad like blackmail people into doing something horrible, or create some hellspawn. There's actually a story in which some mortals banged some angels; The religion's all-powerful and all-knowing god (who is never wrong) was so angry that he basically nuked the mortals' entire city in response.

As for Incubi, the 5th edition dnd monster manual says that male succubi are called incubi, and use the same game statistics


I'm sure you can find an adult comic which contains the sort of creature you're looking for. And I'm sure someone's written up such creatures too.

sktarq
2016-02-29, 07:58 PM
This would require that a celestial act in a non-combat fashion; this is something they are. Deeply unsuited for.

It's a flaw in the game build, I think,that good outsiders have a far smaller group that does anything besides guard,hunt,fight,kill. This disproportion is even worse in the LG angels. The evil outsiders have tempters, accountants, etc. They DO stuff to a degree that angels do not. This is supposed to be why the good Pc's are needed but I think makes a great excuse for why the world is filled with cruelty, spite, and pain.

Millstone85
2016-02-29, 09:07 PM
Changing the cherub Cupid into the angelic race of cupids, and making them look more likehttp://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/hercxena/images/3/3d/Green_monster_02.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20100924134055than anything in diapers, I could imagine them having a very relaxed and what-she-said approach to helping people discover love, find the one, get over a broken heart, and so on. All in a very modern approach to relationships. They could even be hermaphroditic shapechangers just like some depictions of the succubi/incubi.

raygun goth
2016-02-29, 09:43 PM
You should check out Apsaras from Hindu mythology, which are essentially this - they serve as spouses and lovers to virtuous beings as well as gods, and they spend a lot of their time just being beautiful, dancing around, inspiring people, and rolling dice.

goto124
2016-02-29, 10:16 PM
I can easily think of a Neutral counterpart to the succubus/incubus. No, no details, sorry.

I've read somewhere that lust isn't about sex, but about emotions. In that sense, succubi tempt mortals into pursuing their desired emotions at the expense of everyone and everything else.

For the Good side, maybe we could make emotion a two-way street. Good succubi could emphasize on giving and receiving, on how giving can be a gift to both you and your partner, that selflessness (not selfishness) is the way to fulfillment.

I've considering making the Good side have many people from different races, and anywhere along the LGBT spectrum... while the Evil side succubi are all voluptuous humanoid women. I'm not sure if this really works, if only because the Evil side limiting themselves like that seems fairly stupid. But then it seems to work well IRL...


There's actually a story in which some mortals banged some angels; The religion's all-powerful and all-knowing god (who is never wrong) was so angry that he basically nuked the mortals' entire city in response.

Imagine those mortals are high-level wizard PCs. This would be an epic campaign, powerful wo/men firing rockets at one another over petty matters :smallbiggrin:


You check out Apsaras from Hindu mythology [snip] rolling dice.

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tabletop_roleplaying.png

I may have also tossed one of a pair of teleportation rings into the ocean, with interesting results.

FatR
2016-03-01, 01:34 AM
I started a thread on this topic a while back, making the point that sex being a weapon of the forces of evil seems really puritan and backwards. I proposed the existence of an angel counterpart who either worked healing magic or lifted a person's spirit through physical intimacy.

What you've proposed in the linked thread is exactly what actual succubi usually do in my games. Murdering or brainwashing anyone who was stupid enough to kiss you as well as outright charging for sex with evil deeds just aren't viable long-term corruption programs. If you become known for this, you will only be summoned by people who are already morally bankrupt - and if not to use agains their rivals, then for the thrill of screwing a slave that would have killed them if it only could. If, on the other hand, summoning a succubus usually means free sex, including whatever fetishes you might have, with no visible strings attached, why, this is perfect inducement for people who are powerful enough to summon a succubus (but not powerful enough to feel 100% secure doing so).

And then succubus will use the fact that there is no such thing as sex without strings attached, even if those strings take time to manifest. A summoner is lonely and too insecure to approach a living woman? Make him damn himself dangling the lure of true (except, of course, not) love before him. A summoner is hedonistic and seeks sex of superior quality? Oversatiate him and then lure into ever-greater perversion, until he is willing to snuff people for stimulation. A summoner simply wants to get his physical needs out of the way without any emotional attachment to other people? Be such a perfectly convenient and servile sexbot that no living person would ever compare, even if he won't grow dependent without noticing, he would never again have a need to treat any people other than himself, as, well, peope. A summoner shows a streak of desire for domination? Make a show of trying to resist the deal he is pushing on you, so that his secret fantasy would be fullfilled in a way that stains his soul. Of course, just dominating and energy draining a summoner is still an option, if he is it can be done without leaving too much evidence about what happened, and the summoner's soul just is not worth a significant time investment. It is just not even close to default.

goto124
2016-03-01, 01:40 AM
To be honest I've never really gotten the hang of that sort of seduction.

Most horror stories of succubi seem to end up with "and the succubus sucked all the class levels out of the stupid PC". A Good counterpart to THIS succubus would... give positive energy upon intimate contact?

JoeJ
2016-03-01, 02:00 AM
I'm can just imagine some cute little critter saying, "If you stop murdering, I promise I'll be your friend!"

Jeivar
2016-03-01, 02:14 AM
Given that Good is often associated with the trappings of medieval European christian and chivalric morality, the Good counterpart to the Succubus would technically be an Angel of Chastity.


I think medieval chastity had more to do with Victorian romances than historical fact. A woman could divorce a husband who didn't do his duty in bed.

PersonMan
2016-03-01, 04:17 AM
I generally agree, it does sort of show a worrying trend. I mean, it's come to the point that it's a standard rule of thumb that if any female NPC shows sexual interest in a party member, that NPC is probably evil. A succubus, a vampire, something else... Honestly, it's a problem with a lot of human societies, though, it's not just a feature of the game. For some reason, we tend to treat anything with sexual connotations as inherently evil at worst, and at best, as taboo or just as a joke.

I think it's less this, and more that most games don't include sex by default. If "the barmaid flirts with X and they later go upstairs together" is never present in normal resting/time-passing scenes, then sex and sexual interest becomes one of Those Details, that come up only when it's relevant to the plot or when it's part of an obstacle or threat.

If the DM thinks 'this is an adventure game, not a game about sex' and sex never comes up, you're probably going to be on guard when some pretty lady starts hitting on your character because it's out of place and the DM's logic means you know this isn't just going to be a one-night stand, but rather something more dangerous or plot-relevant.

Fearan
2016-03-01, 04:33 AM
You should check out Apsaras from Hindu mythology, which are essentially this - they serve as spouses and lovers to virtuous beings as well as gods, and they spend a lot of their time just being beautiful, dancing around, inspiring people, and rolling dice.

Hell, no. The whole point of Apsaras being spouses and lovers of virtuous humans is exactly to turn them away from the path of virtue and self-mortification, so they would'nt gain godly powers from uncaring LN overdeity Brahma and threaten the World Order.

You know, I'm tempted(heh) to go greek on this. The Graces (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charites) might be exactly, what we seek. To a lesser extend, Muses.

nedz
2016-03-01, 05:49 AM
Unicorns, but they are always platonic.

Milo v3
2016-03-01, 06:22 AM
Pathfinder has a celestial succubus in the form of the Gancanagh Azata.

OldTrees1
2016-03-01, 10:03 AM
Good can be hard
The pinnacle of Good requires both Good ends (Intent) and Good means (Actions)

So any Good counterpart would have to remain consistent with these and also promote these. However their is nothing innately evil about sex.

One of the many ways the celestials can encourage goodness is by example. Through example they can show that despite occasionally being hard one can stay true. Through example they can show that people tend to agree with Good ends. "We want the same things and those things can be done the good way".

With that in mid how would the counterpart to the succubus/devil counterpart(I forget the name) be? It would be showing by example that we all value the good ends of love and that one can love in a virtuous manner. There can be the sideproduct of Aasimars.

ThinkMinty
2016-03-02, 09:49 AM
I've considering making the Good side have many people from different races, and anywhere along the LGBT spectrum... while the Evil side succubi are all voluptuous humanoid women. I'm not sure if this really works, if only because the Evil side limiting themselves like that seems fairly stupid. But then it seems to work well IRL...

Eh, succubi are usually drawn as buxom rather than voluptuous. Those adjectives mean different things.

goto124
2016-03-02, 09:53 AM
Do they not have large hips, for example?

asnys
2016-03-02, 10:48 PM
To be honest I've never really gotten the hang of that sort of seduction.

Most horror stories of succubi seem to end up with "and the succubus sucked all the class levels out of the stupid PC". A Good counterpart to THIS succubus would... give positive energy upon intimate contact?

There is an extremely obscure - and, as far as I know, never actually used - rule for inverse negative levels.

soldersbushwack
2016-03-03, 12:06 AM
I think that the thread's current suggestions do not fit the strong basis in the traditional Abrahamic morals that traditional fantasy has.

In that spirit I would recommend sacred prostitutes of Asherah as a good variant of succubi.

goto124
2016-03-03, 12:32 AM
The whole point of the thread is to reject the traditional Abrahamic morals of traditional fantasy.

Paladins are no longer beholden to chastity or celibacy, might as well extend it :smallbiggrin:

Slipperychicken
2016-03-03, 12:35 AM
long-term corruption programs.

I always figured that a succubus would be more devious than that, using lust as just one part of her greater schemes. One might take a disguise, entrance a married man, then use a combination of feminine wiles, supernatural influence, and perhaps a looming threat of blackmail to push him to greater evils. The work she persuades him into would seem innocent enough at first, but before he knew it he'd find himself steeped in sin, too far over his head with no good way out. And of course, with each of a succubus' followers acting as an agent for her, her influence can take on a sort of exponential growth. The eventual goal there is to enslave huge swaths of mortals, drawing countless newcomers into a cult of hideous debauchery. Due to their powers, most of a succubus's followers might never have guessed that she was a literal demon.

Also, I'd play up a succubus' (or incubus') powers of disguise. One could accomplish a lot by simply replacing the right person. One might kidnap and replace a town's preacher, then use his influence to corrupt the townsfolk. Using the preacher's authority, the demon could quietly persuade individuals that maybe it's okay for a married woman to sleep with the stable-boy just once in a while, and maybe that whole 'no-gambling' thing shouldn't be taken so literally, and god might not mind someone making love to a child or an animal, and so on. Naturally the "preacher" would entice his replacement to work the same way he did, allowing the demon's influence to persist long after he's left the place. Eventually the sinning would reach a critical mass and corrupt the overall culture, making it a big win for the forces of darkness.


tl;dr: I think succubi should have a bigger picture in mind, seeking broad social influence because it's more efficient at corrupting than random acts of lust.

Coidzor
2016-03-03, 03:35 AM
Do they not have large hips, for example?

Gotta have hips to sashay properly, after all.

lelrekt2142
2016-03-03, 08:28 AM
The nymph is at least a neutral counterpart to the succubus, and it's fey rather than celestial.

goto124
2016-03-03, 08:34 AM
I was under the impression nymphs are commonly portrayed as some form of malevolent as well.

Keltest
2016-03-03, 12:23 PM
I was under the impression nymphs are commonly portrayed as some form of malevolent as well.

They range from malevolent to ignorant of human biology. They don't deliberately try to kill you, its just they aren't fully aware that humans cant breathe underwater, or survive without food and water for twenty seven days of orgy, or whatever your nymph-like being of choice does to kill people.

Zaydos
2016-03-03, 01:15 PM
Default D&D nymph also doesn't cause you to drown, or otherwise die (unless you attack them), and are Chaotic Good. They will sometimes grow possessive of lovers and try (peacefully) to keep them from leaving, on rare occasions using the fact that humans can't breathe underwater to keep them there, but usually don't even do that. Mostly they take charismatic good aligned characters as lovers, and heal animals.

That is the default D&D nymph. Mythical nymph ranges more (Circe was a nymph) but they are generally not liable to kill people. They usually have tragic things happen to them.

Now some times when you go to actual fae you get malevolence and ignorance of human biology, but those aren't nymphs anymore than they're succubi,

Hunter Noventa
2016-03-03, 02:03 PM
...and now I'm trying to picture what kind of sexy monster them Lawful Neutral Mordon types send after people to try and seduce them into being accountants.

Some kind of sexy librarian robot?

NRSASD
2016-03-03, 02:07 PM
I've always figured a Modron "succubus" would probably use electroshock therapy to influence people. Modrons seem to be entirely lacking in subtlety.

Coidzor
2016-03-03, 02:32 PM
Some kind of sexy librarian robot?

Sexy bdsm dominatrix librarian robot.


I was under the impression nymphs are commonly portrayed as some form of malevolent as well.

Mostly they just don't want yucky, ugly monsters in their neck of the woods or to be peeped on while bathing unless the person is hot enough to boink. IIRC.

Nymph's Kiss somehow worked it's way into being exalted feat in 3.X, IIRC.

There certainly are bad and/or hostile nymphs, though, especially if one make enemies with one of the courts.

Eldan
2016-03-03, 02:57 PM
While they don't explictely have abilities for it, like a Sucubus, I'd assume an Eladrin would totally be up for it. They even have the whole "must always stay disguised as a mortale while on the material plane" thing going on. Plus, have you seen how Terlizzi draws them?

ThinkMinty
2016-03-03, 04:34 PM
Do they not have large hips, for example?

My definition of large hips and other people's definitions of large hips are probably different. Succubi usually have hips. The rounded hips of a female humanoid who's been through most of if not all of puberty? Yes. Large hips, though? Not really, no.


Sexy bdsm dominatrix librarian robot.

Strange minds think alike, that's what I figured too.

goto124
2016-03-03, 08:25 PM
I like how the librarian is Lawful Neutral, as opposed to Chaotic Evil.

Keltest
2016-03-03, 08:27 PM
I like how the librarian is Lawful Neutral, as opposed to Chaotic Evil.

Librarians are totally lawful evil. Nothing disrupts their delicate order!

Coidzor
2016-03-03, 09:00 PM
I like how the librarian is Lawful Neutral, as opposed to Chaotic Evil.

I'm not following the reference. :smallconfused:

All of the librarians from fiction and real life I can think of are Lawfulish.


Strange minds think alike, that's what I figured too.

Compliance will be rewarded, then punished, then rewarded again. :smallamused:

AceOfFools
2016-03-04, 12:12 AM
Speaking as a man whose wife left him recently, I could really see the good counterpart to a succubus as someone who comes to you at low moments and offers reassurance and validation (sex neither required nor forbidden). Their task is to keep people from falling into despair and abandonig the good fight, or worse following that despair into darkness.

Oddly enough the best example I can think of in fiction is the angel from Its a Wonderful Life.

Dimers
2016-03-04, 12:49 AM
Speaking as a man whose wife left him recently, I could really see the good counterpart to a succubus as someone who comes to you at low moments and offers reassurance and validation (sex neither required nor forbidden). Their task is to keep people from falling into despair and abandoning the good fight, or worse following that despair into darkness.

I got married to one of those several months ago :smallsmile:

I'm pretty sure I've also been a few people's good-aligned sexual angel, within normal human bounds. My romantic relationships have helped people move past emotional problems and be kinder to themselves and others. The first woman I was with stopped smoking, for instance, because she no longer felt so bad that she needed a drug. (She was pregnant at the time, so that really counts as helping two people all by itself.)

Any creature that has a need to love and be loved like humans could benefit from a Good tempter. Someone to distract them from immoral thoughts by offering something more interesting. Someone to show how rewarding it can be to help others. Someone who is close enough to your heart that you care about their opinion even if you ignore most people's. Someone to provide an example of right behavior that doesn't ignore or degrade the body.

Beleriphon
2016-03-04, 09:02 AM
Speaking as a man whose wife left him recently, I could really see the good counterpart to a succubus as someone who comes to you at low moments and offers reassurance and validation (sex neither required nor forbidden). Their task is to keep people from falling into despair and abandonig the good fight, or worse following that despair into darkness.

Oddly enough the best example I can think of in fiction is the angel from Its a Wonderful Life.

I think that would have been a very different movie if if Clarence were actually Clarice. In fact I willing to bet dollars to donuts there already a parody of Its a Wonderful Life that involves exactly what this thread is talking about.

Segev
2016-03-04, 02:01 PM
Also, I'd play up a succubus' (or incubus') powers of disguise. One could accomplish a lot by simply replacing the right person. One might kidnap and replace a town's preacher, then use his influence to corrupt the townsfolk. Using the preacher's authority, the demon could quietly persuade individuals that maybe it's okay for a married woman to sleep with the stable-boy just once in a while, and maybe that whole 'no-gambling' thing shouldn't be taken so literally, and god might not mind someone making love to a child or an animal, and so on.

Let's not overlook the possibility of using disguise to BE that stable-boy, and seduce the married woman, then to BE that married woman, and seduce that stable-boy. Just to make sure neither's initial clumsiness gets in the way of their "second" time "together." Which of course she orchestrates. Heck, she could avoid being either of them the first time, too, if she just flirts outrageously and makes sure to arrange the meeting time and place with each of them.

A classic trick of "real" (i.e. historical fictitious) succubi and incubi was to impersonate a married person's spouse. Tricking them into adultery may not outright make a sinner of them, but the things said and done can be used to manipulate that relationship.

The "good version" of a succubus, focused on true love and happiness for mortals, could also do the "impersonation" thing, playing up being the stable boy to the milk maid, and the milk maid to the stable boy, acting just forward enough in each case to overcome the other's shyness so that the two think a relationship has already formed by the time they're talking together.

Rather than having to urge, "TALK to her, darn you!" she could BE her, and initiate the conversation. And then have a brief one with the milk maid as the stable boy, so that when the stable boy does approach on his own, the milk maid has a conversation to recall, as well.

Icewraith
2016-03-04, 07:31 PM
Good can be hard


That's what she said!

With that out of the way, I think a promising tactic for both good and evil aligned outsiders would be using charm, dominate, command, suggestion, or possession abilities to get mortals to initiate or avoid contact with either beneficial or harmful potential partners.

Another would be infiltrating mortal dreams. Evil would encourage lusting after someone unattainable (or encourage the target to commit destructive acts against an innocent), good might arrange a dream encounter between two shy mortals that secretly like each other or soothe the mind of someone suffering from insanity (or who had previously been tormented by a succubus, un-ruining sex for them).

Yet another would be breeding programs designed to bring celestial or fiendish blood into the lines of influential nobles.

Succubi promote selfishness, finding pleasure in the pain of others, commiting evil acts, slavery, prostitution (sex is a commodity).... They promote idealized and unhealthy body images so that mortals will be unsatisfied with normal lovers and torture themselves trying to look as attractive as the succubi. They incite mortals into either extreme vanity or extreme sloth. They usually appear with the characteristics their target finds attractive dialed up to 11, that no mortal could possibly achieve naturally.

Our good aligned sexy outsider promotes healthy relationships, true love, beauty, art, finding pleasure in bringing pleasure to others, "good" or selfless acts, respecting others' boundaries (sex is a freely given gift, not a way of gaining favor or currency) sort of thing. They promote the idea that all mortal forms are beautiful in their own ways, as well as healthy eating and exercise as a way of keeping the body in good condition. It's not what you're born with, it's what you do with it and how you take care of it that matters. They often incorporate flaws found in mortals (especially scars or mended injuries), but in ways that do not detract from their beauty. Unless they have chosen to maintain a relationship with a mortal for the entirety of the mortal's life, they never adopt a form a mortal race is incapable of achieving.

nedz
2016-03-04, 07:53 PM
Sexy bdsm dominatrix librarian robot.

Or
Incarnum video player with autoloader and robot library.

TeChameleon
2016-03-04, 09:23 PM
I mean, it's come to the point that it's a standard rule of thumb that if any female NPC shows sexual interest in a party member, that NPC is probably evil.

... well, yeah. Have you looked at the average PC?


There's actually a story in which some mortals banged some angels; The religion's all-powerful and all-knowing god (who is never wrong) was so angry that he basically nuked the mortals' entire city in response.
If you're thinking of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, then the problem that resulted in the nuking was less 'sex with angels' (which never actually happened in the story, as the angels were perfectly capable of defending themselves) and more that the entire male populace of the city turned out to (attempt to) rape said angels, which would also violate 'sacred hospitality', as they were already someone's guests.

If you're thinking of the Nephilim (who may or may not have been an entire race of angel/human hybrids), then the only real reference we have for them is that they were a thing, and either they or their dads were a big deal. Yeah, it's kind of ambiguously phrased >.<

More on-topic, I'm slightly amused that Cupid is being held up as an example of a good-aligned succubus-type; he's got his origins (and Xena got this somewhat right, by the way) rooted in the Greek deity Eros, aka the quite literal god of sex. The chubby winged male baby is actually a putto, which doesn't really have any mythic connotations that I know of; they're just a sort of artistic shorthand for... a bunch of unrelated crap, honestly. And finally, the original cherubs wer1e weird looking things, nothing like a chubby toddler- four faces (on a single head, as far as the description goes...) of a man, a lion, an eagle, and a bull, and six pairs of wings (one to fly with, one to cover their eyes, and one to cover their feet... which may or may not have been a euphemism for genitalia).

Angels as described in the Bible could occasionally look more like Lovecraftian horrors than attractive winged people (try looking up Seraphim sometime O.o) :smallconfused:

Anyhow, yeah, cupids could be a decent good-aligned counterpart to succubi.

goto124
2016-03-04, 09:31 PM
... well, yeah. Have you looked at the average PC?

PC: I use Detect Alignment on that suspicious sexy woman.
GM: She pings Good.
PC: Gasp, she's even gone so far as to disguise her alignment! Everyone roll initiative!
GM: *sigh*

Zaydos
2016-03-04, 09:55 PM
I think I've actually had a succubus disguise her alignment before.

They didn't detect alignment on her :smallfrown:

LastCenturion
2016-03-04, 09:55 PM
-snip-
All of the librarians from fiction and real life I can think of are Lawfulish.
-snip-

Really? The first fictional (and for that matter overall) librarian that comes to my mind is named Randall and has long taloned tentacles, dripping with poison, several round black eyes and brown hairy teeth, and an area where eyes would be on a human. I shouldn't listen to Welcome To Night Vale as much as I do...

Coidzor
2016-03-04, 11:56 PM
Really? The first fictional (and for that matter overall) librarian that comes to my mind is named Randall and has long taloned tentacles, dripping with poison, several round black eyes and brown hairy teeth, and an area where eyes would be on a human. I shouldn't listen to Welcome To Night Vale as much as I do...

And I bet Randall doesn't have many problems with overdue books.

Segev
2016-03-05, 01:16 AM
The funny thing about Eros and Aphrodite is that, in modern depictions, their roles are often reversed: Cupid/Eros is a god of love, causing people to fall head over heels for each other in romance, wanting to date, to spend time together, and maybe have sex as just a part of the whole "in love" thing; Aphrodite seems to be around to inspire lust and make people want to tumble into bed at the first available opportunity (often with her).

Zaydos
2016-03-05, 02:02 AM
You can trace that back to ancient depictions too to the extent that it sort of is referenced in Plato's Symposium from the 4th century BCE so that's not exactly new.

TeChameleon
2016-03-05, 02:20 AM
Really? The first fictional (and for that matter overall) librarian that comes to my mind is named Randall and has long taloned tentacles, dripping with poison, several round black eyes and brown hairy teeth, and an area where eyes would be on a human. I shouldn't listen to Welcome To Night Vale as much as I do...
... yes, you need to read more Discworld
Heh. First one to come to mind for me is named The Librarian (although if you asked him his name, the response would almost certainly be 'Ook'), and is an orangutan. Also surprisingly few problems with overdue books :smallamused:

Although if you call him a monkey, he'll probably leap onto your shoulders, grab your ears, and attempt to unscrew your head >.O

EDIT: Although I'd be disinclined to say he was Lawful, either. Odd.

nedz
2016-03-05, 04:33 AM
... yes, you need to read more Discworld
Heh. First one to come to mind for me is named The Librarian (although if you asked him his name, the response would almost certainly be 'Ook'), and is an orangutan. Also surprisingly few problems with overdue books :smallamused:

Although if you call him a monkey, he'll probably leap onto your shoulders, grab your ears, and attempt to unscrew your head >.O

EDIT: Although I'd be disinclined to say he was Lawful, either. Odd.

I thought his alignment was Yellow - in an Orange/Purple kind of way.

PersonMan
2016-03-05, 05:56 AM
PC: I use Detect Alignment on that suspicious sexy woman.
GM: She pings Good.
PC: Gasp, she's even gone so far as to disguise her alignment! Everyone roll initiative!
GM: *sigh*

PC: Miss, I'm pretty sure you're a Succubus.
NPC: You think I'm an incarnate of lust and inhumanly attractive, so much so that I drive mortals to evil and bend them to my will using my charisma? That's...actually one of the best compliments I think I've gotten, apart from the implication that I'm evil!

Grim Portent
2016-03-05, 02:24 PM
apart from the implication that I'm evil!

But evil women are usually more attractive than good ones anyway, so that part's also a compliment. :smalltongue:

Eldan
2016-03-05, 03:35 PM
Most of the ideas mentioned here would be very, very Eladrin things to do. I mean, seriously. Disguising themselves as mortals and inspiring heroes is 90% of what they do.

Zumbs
2016-03-05, 04:23 PM
As far as I know, there isn't. And honestly, it would defeat the purpose of doing Good, since Good is supposed to be altruistic and "some sexy angel lady who tempts people" isn't altruistic in nature.

Because at least as defined by D&D such deeds would not be good aligned (altruistic) they'd be neutral (done simply for the prospect of personal gain) which would mean that it'd be a celestial whose actions would defy mortals the chance to be good. Also because celestials are not heavy on recruitment drives since while some things are always Evil regardless of motivations (Evil spells), for acts to be Good they must be done for Good reasons and it's very, very hard to tempt someone into doing something Good as it requires it to be freely chosen for the right reasons.
By that argument, any reward (say, gold pieces) means that a deed is no longer good aligned, but has become neutral?


I think that the thread's current suggestions do not fit the strong basis in the traditional Abrahamic morals that traditional fantasy has.
That is a very good point. Many (most?) fantasy worlds are polytheistic but deal in the moral absolutes usually associated with monotheistic religions (Good vs Evil). This gives some weird results.

Zaydos
2016-03-05, 05:52 PM
By that argument, any reward (say, gold pieces) means that a deed is no longer good aligned, but has become neutral?

Actually in D&D they do say that a Good aligned character does not help others for the reward but may accept one that is offered. So the official stance is that if you are doing it for the reward it is Neutral not Good. Which is the thing, if you think about Good aligned adventures they aren't "Well if I save these people I get X" they're "Orcs have attacked these farms we must save them"; take for example an offer of two quests: in one a noble is willing to pay good gold for the retrieval of a stolen painting, in the other poor farmers are being attacked by orcs offering a meager pittance of gold in comparison for help. The Good aligned choice is the farmers and the extremely Good aligned one would be to turn down the gold and tell the farmers to use it to rebuild. Of course most PCs are more pragmatic than the extremely good choice (though in older editions paladins were required to give 10% of all their earnings to charities to maintain the goodliness to be paladins), but if you present the two quests to a group of players (as I did recently) you can see a definite push towards the orc one from the good aligned characters.


HELPING OTHERS
When a village elder comes to a good character and says, “Please help us, a dragon is threatening our village,” the good character’s response is not, “What can you pay?” Neutral characters might be that mercenary, and evil characters would certainly consider how to collect the most benefit from the situation. For a good character, however, helping others is a higher priority than personal gain.
A good character might ask a number of other questions before leaping up from her seat and charging to the village’s aid: good characters aren’t necessarily stupid. A good character can be cautious, determining how powerful the dragon is and whether additional reinforcements are required, but she should never say, “Sorry, I’m out of my league. Go find another hero.” It’s just good sense to learn as much as possible about a foe before plunging into battle. Even more, a good character need not be naďvely trusting. Some might go to great lengths to verify that the elder’s story is true and not some villain’s attempt to lure them into a trap.
All her caution or suspicion still doesn’t undermine a good character’s responsibility to offer help to those in need. Altruism is the first word in the Player’s Handbook’s definition of good, and helping others without reward or even thanks is part of a good character’s daily work.


“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

Altruism Definition: 1: unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others


This is not to say that magic, spells, and feats aren’t interesting and exciting ways to reward a valorous character, but since good characters are expected to do good deeds without requiring a reward, always giving them a material award cheapens their
acts—while other types of rewards help build the character’s reputation and establish him or her in the setting (nonmaterial awards also avoid the problem of exceeding the recommended amount of treasure for a particular character level). Heroes inspire great stories, which cause others to retell and emulate those stories, which often results in a new generation of heroes inspired by the previous generation. In a way, that is true immortality.

Also motivations matter. For Good, in D&D, a reward is at best a perk not the reason for doing the deed. Which actually ties back into eladrins and nymphs (and Silver Dragons) who often serve the role of lovers of Good aligned heroes (with eladrins being beautiful shapeshifting celestials to boot) but they don't go 'be good and you can sleep with me' they go 'be good. Look at how everyone is happier. Isn't that the best reward?'* and then the other just naturally happens because hey Good likes Good.

*This ties into real world arguments over whether true altruism actually exists or if it is just a trait that comes about due to realization that what goes around comes around.

Now the suggestions of a celestial that sets up love (i.e. a cupid), or even one that gives good creatures rejuvenating sex (which actually does fall into nymphs' normal role) is quite usable, but these aren't recruiters like succubi. Which makes sense as if Good and Evil used the same means to the same ends they'd not really be meaningful.

Milo v3
2016-03-05, 06:24 PM
Most of the ideas mentioned here would be very, very Eladrin things to do. I mean, seriously. Disguising themselves as mortals and inspiring heroes is 90% of what they do.

PF's Good Succubus is an Eladrin actually (since azata are PF eladrins).

Eldan
2016-03-05, 10:47 PM
Right. Not sure why you'd need a new one, really. All the existing Eladrin could do it.

Vknight
2016-03-06, 01:10 AM
I always went with the good counterpart to the Succubi doesn't tempt you and instead rewards you when you do good.
Rather then here is the sex and do evil for more, of the Succubi. It gives it out once you've shown goodness.

Though I do have a name for the Anti-Succubi as it were.

Milo v3
2016-03-06, 02:42 AM
Right. Not sure why you'd need a new one, really. All the existing Eladrin could do it.
Not... really? Mentally a lot of eladrin fit, but none of them have abilities that are succubus-like.

goto124
2016-03-06, 03:01 AM
What are succubus abilities anyway?

Milo v3
2016-03-06, 03:17 AM
What are succubus abilities anyway?

In the case of the gancanagh, "charming powers, magical suggestion, shapechanging, able to buff people they kiss or have sex with (rather than energy draining them)."

goto124
2016-03-06, 03:32 AM
Sounds like a great prestige class for Bards.

PersonMan
2016-03-06, 04:28 AM
Well, there is a third-party prestige class that's somewhat similar, the BoEF's Sacred Prostitute.

khadgar567
2016-03-06, 04:54 AM
Well, there is a third-party prestige class that's somewhat similar, the BoEF's Sacred Prostitute.

And welcome to gray side where every things become a giant wtf inducing mess

Eldan
2016-03-06, 06:40 AM
Well, look at the SRD succubus. The only more or less relevant abilities she has are charm monster, suggestion, change shape and tongues.

The Ghaele, similarly, has Charm Monster at will. It also has comprehend languages, tongues and some illusions as SLAs and the casting of a 14th level cleric. Now, the list given in the SRD doesn't have much on it that's relevant for sex, but I'm sure you could find something.

The lower level Bralani has Charm Person at will, plus Alternate Form and Tongues.

So really, they have about as much as the Succubus.

goto124
2016-03-06, 07:26 AM
and tongues.

That's what she said...

charcoalninja
2016-03-06, 07:38 AM
Ghaele is perfect for this especially as a counter to succubi since in a final confrontation she just goes super saiyan and blasts the tramp into ash.

Well that and they have all of the relevant spells to make a mortal immune to Succubi. Prot from evil, death ward, freedom of movement, break enchantment, greater restoration, etc.

And they explicitly look like gorgeous women so there we go?

Eldan
2016-03-06, 08:59 AM
I suppose there would be male ones, too. But yeah. Their MO is explicitely to disguise themselves as mortals and then help mortal heroes with their quests. Like sexier Gandalfs. (Gandalfar?)

goto124
2016-03-06, 10:15 AM
Gandalnear.

Milo v3
2016-03-06, 06:35 PM
Well, look at the SRD succubus. The only more or less relevant abilities she has are charm monster, suggestion, change shape and tongues.

The Ghaele, similarly, has Charm Monster at will. It also has comprehend languages, tongues and some illusions as SLAs and the casting of a 14th level cleric. Now, the list given in the SRD doesn't have much on it that's relevant for sex, but I'm sure you could find something.

The lower level Bralani has Charm Person at will, plus Alternate Form and Tongues.

So really, they have about as much as the Succubus.

And the whole.... Act of passion = effect thing, that makes a succubus a succubus rather than just a manipulating shapechanger? Which eladrin has that?

Zaydos
2016-03-06, 06:43 PM
Gandalfir I think, in that Gandalf is Wand Elf in Old Norse and at least wiki tells me alfir is the plural of alfr.

Eldan
2016-03-06, 07:03 PM
That's how I got to Gandalfar. Wiki seems to confirm Svartalfar, Myrkalfar, Dokkalfar and Ljosalfar. So, I think that's correct.

Eldan
2016-03-06, 07:12 PM
And the whole.... Act of passion = effect thing, that makes a succubus a succubus rather than just a manipulating shapechanger? Which eladrin has that?

None, of course. But then, the Succubus also really only needs a grapple check to get the effect. And it's a simple level drain.

That said, I don't think a mechanical effect of the act of passion is even all that necessary. I find the succubus much more interesting as a tempter, than as an assassin that kills by kissing. Honestly, for that role, a poisoned knife would do better in most circumstances. The interesting thing is what they can make people do, not how they can kill them. The same, I would surely hope, goes for the Eladrin. And if they really need to buff someone, they can just cast some touch spells.

Milo v3
2016-03-06, 07:26 PM
None, of course. But then, the Succubus also really only needs a grapple check to get the effect. And it's a simple level drain.

That said, I don't think a mechanical effect of the act of passion is even all that necessary. I find the succubus much more interesting as a tempter, than as an assassin that kills by kissing. Honestly, for that role, a poisoned knife would do better in most circumstances. The interesting thing is what they can make people do, not how they can kill them. The same, I would surely hope, goes for the Eladrin. And if they really need to buff someone, they can just cast some touch spells.

If it has no passionate act stuff it's not really a succubus... Since that's a primary aspect of what a succubus is @[email protected]

I mean, if you just want "Just" a tempter, just use a doppelganger or rakshasa or something.

Bohandas
2016-03-07, 01:10 AM
I started a thread on this topic a while back, making the point that sex being a weapon of the forces of evil seems really puritan and backwards.

I've considered this issue too. The solution I came up with is to retool the succubi as personifications of syphilis and genital herpes, and replace their energy draining attack with one that raises corruption scores (a mechanic from Heroes of Horror)


Unicorns, but they are always platonic.

Don't tempt me to link to clopfics


Well, there is a third-party prestige class that's somewhat similar, the BoEF's Sacred Prostitute.

I don't get why so many people use BoEF when NBoUCK is so clearly and vastly superior. And free.


Hell, no. The whole point of Apsaras being spouses and lovers of virtuous humans is exactly to turn them away from the path of virtue and self-mortification, so they would'nt gain godly powers from uncaring LN overdeity Brahma and threaten the World Order.

How about the sex goddesses of the Church of the SubGenius then? Though admittedly they're more neutral.

goto124
2016-03-07, 02:21 AM
I don't get why so many people use BoEF when NBoUCK is so clearly and vastly superior. And free.

Even Google doesn't know what the NBoUCK is.

Eldan
2016-03-07, 04:26 AM
If it has no passionate act stuff it's not really a succubus... Since that's a primary aspect of what a succubus is @[email protected]

I mean, if you just want "Just" a tempter, just use a doppelganger or rakshasa or something.

But see, with that ability, the only thing the Succubus does is walk up to someone, smile at them, grab them and then drain their life out and kill them. It's not pleasant for the victim, it's not addicting, it's not tempting. It's a boring ability. It's more like a vampire.

Milo v3
2016-03-07, 04:59 AM
But see, with that ability, the only thing the Succubus does is walk up to someone, smile at them, grab them and then drain their life out and kill them. It's not pleasant for the victim, it's not addicting, it's not tempting. It's a boring ability. It's more like a vampire.

Don't care. If it doesn't have anything to do with being a succubus, it shouldn't be called a succubus. I personally think D&D's succubus is too quick in how it kills people and would prefer for it to be a more gradual thing, but it's better than not having any relation to succubi.

PersonMan
2016-03-07, 06:19 AM
Even Google doesn't know what the NBoUCK is.

Behold! (https://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/54104/book-unlawful-carnal-knowledge)

NBoUCK is probably a new version or something.

Segev
2016-03-07, 09:40 AM
The other thing a Succubus can do, aside from draining levels, when she kisses somebody is auto-suggest to them that they want another kiss. She basically is magically addictive with her acts of passion.

Bohandas
2016-03-07, 12:30 PM
Even Google doesn't know what the NBoUCK is.
http://carnal.orfinlir.de/
http://www.lysator.liu.se/~johol/netbooks/CarnalGuide/carnal.txt

Bohandas
2016-03-07, 12:44 PM
As for a good/celestial counterpart to the succubus, what if we homebrewed some sort of bonobo themed guardianal

Mr. Mask
2016-03-07, 08:43 PM
An opposite of a succubus would have to be some kind of celestial of chastity. Its presence would probably reduce lustful urges, in a way that evil-aligned creatures find invasive, but good aligned ones feel is calming. It would be a creature that tries to get you to not succumb to personal physical urges, but choose to do good things in sound mind.

digiman619
2016-03-08, 07:16 AM
The reason that succubi are a evil archetype is that they exist to tempt people into sin. However, depending on the cosmology of your world, what a given deity considers sin can vary greatly. When I GM, I tend to say "Just like I don't want to know the details of your love life, I don't want to know about your character's love life.", but that doesn't mean that it's not worth having in your game. There's a tenancy to see sex as evil, especially in a medieval setting. If it's not a big deal in your setting (as it was in Ancient Greece), then a spirit of pleasure that rewards the forces of Good seems entirely feasible.

Mr. Mask
2016-03-08, 07:46 AM
So, some kind of celestial harem that is sometimes shared with pleasing mortals? I can imagine that, along with deities taking their pick of desirable mortals like the women of Rome did gladiators, for more personal attention.

Icewraith
2016-03-08, 01:05 PM
The succubus uses sex to tempt, torture, corrupt, and enslave mortals.

The celestial counterpart should use sex to encourage, heal, sanctify, and free mortals.

So, if your stereotypical succubus is an impossibly proportioned woman in BDSM gear, the celestial counterpart is extremely attractive but not ridiculously proportioned and decked out in a circa 1960's flower crown and tie-dye robe.

Cazero
2016-03-08, 01:26 PM
The celestial counterpart should use sex to encourage, heal, sanctify, and free mortals.
Aaaand this is the problem with a good counterpart to the succubus.
This sounds awfully rape-y. Rape is not Good. If your celestial could be doing more Good by being a rapist, there is a problem in the power set.
And the 'softcore' alternative of charm replace rape with brainwashing, wich isn't much better.

wumpus
2016-03-08, 01:32 PM
And welcome to gray side where every things become a giant wtf inducing mess

If your RPG is set in the bronze/iron age (and there are plenty to argue that it makes much more sense than the late medieval era typical of King Arthur and high fantasy), then the temples should have their sacred prostitutes (note that alignment should roughly follow the god/ess and can't possibly be as extreme as a succubus (with the "Evil" type and all).


Because kittens are the ultimate pinnacle of cuteness and they tempt one not towards good but towards the deepest evils, they make erinyes and succubi both look good. Cuteness, not lust is the ultimate path to darkness!


Oddly enough, Mr. Scruffy appears to look as close to a "good succubus" as I've seen in fiction lately.

OldTrees1
2016-03-08, 01:39 PM
Aaaand this is the problem with a good counterpart to the succubus.
This sounds awfully rape-y. Rape is not Good. If your celestial could be doing more Good by being a rapist, there is a problem in the power set.
And the 'softcore' alternative of charm replace rape with brainwashing, wich isn't much better.

Consensual. Such a lovely word that marks a great counterpoint to the Succubus don't you think? Such a celestial will not tempt you into sex, but rather welcomes the opportunity, if you grant it, to use sex to show the shared values of good and that one can do good even when it is difficult. If you withdraw your consent at any time (there may even be an established safeword), they too will withdraw to respect the sanctity of consent. A Succubus would use sex as a bait and a stain but the good counterpart would use sex as a medium.

Milo v3
2016-03-08, 06:32 PM
Aaaand this is the problem with a good counterpart to the succubus.
This sounds awfully rape-y. Rape is not Good. If your celestial could be doing more Good by being a rapist, there is a problem in the power set.
And the 'softcore' alternative of charm replace rape with brainwashing, wich isn't much better.
.... what? There was no brainwashing/rape/manipulation mentioned in what your quoting at all....:smalleek:

Mr. Mask
2016-03-08, 06:36 PM
Encouraging people with sex? That's a harem. Some deities are probably very strict with who what and how their harem has sex, and some deities are probably happy to let them have sex with anyone and anything (Norse gods had sex with horses regularly). Cue sex battles between Succubi and celestials to try and convert each other. That sounds like it would be a popular spectator sport....

Malimar
2016-03-08, 06:58 PM
Aaaand this is the problem with a good counterpart to the succubus.
This sounds awfully rape-y. Rape is not Good. If your celestial could be doing more Good by being a rapist, there is a problem in the power set.
And the 'softcore' alternative of charm replace rape with brainwashing, wich isn't much better.

.... what? There was no brainwashing/rape/manipulation mentioned in what your quoting at all....:smalleek:

Rewarding good deeds with sex is akin to prostitution, which can potentially be coercive. But assuming the celestial isn't coerced into the arrangement, yeah, I don't see where rape comes in.

Milo v3
2016-03-08, 07:12 PM
Rewarding good deeds with sex is akin to prostitution
Actually I think it happens before the good deeds. I mean, a buff isn't useful after the adventuring.

Mr. Mask
2016-03-08, 07:18 PM
Whose to say the mortal isn't coerced?

"Oh, you don't want to? That's too bad, I guess you weren't as GOOD as I thought you were?"
"And what about your wife? Celestial freebies, Baby! Really, this is all fine."
"No, no no! There was zero tempting involved, I'm just a magically beautiful angel that told you you can get to heaven by having sex with me, that's all."
"Yeah, you're not straight, I heard you the first time. But Dude, I'm a Celestial! You are NOT gonna get another shot at this."
"Marriage? Uhh, I'm flattered, but while I had sex with you and made you feel loved, I'm a non-exclusive deal. Relationships won't work either, I've got a list of guys and gals to have sex with that's longer than my... righteous standards."
"Hey, Sailor! Are you looking to kill some goblins? Hop on up if you're man enough, and I'll give you a little... buff before you head out. ...No, that is not a euphemism for STDs."


On this note, a celestial playa sounds like hilarious concept which should immediately be squandered.

Icewraith
2016-03-08, 08:46 PM
Whose to say the mortal isn't coerced?

"Oh, you don't want to? That's too bad, I guess you weren't as GOOD as I thought you were?"
"And what about your wife? Celestial freebies, Baby! Really, this is all fine."
"No, no no! There was zero tempting involved, I'm just a magically beautiful angel that told you you can get to heaven by having sex with me, that's all."
"Yeah, you're not straight, I heard you the first time. But Dude, I'm a Celestial! You are NOT gonna get another shot at this."
"Marriage? Uhh, I'm flattered, but while I had sex with you and made you feel loved, I'm a non-exclusive deal. Relationships won't work either, I've got a list of guys and gals to have sex with that's longer than my... righteous standards."
"Hey, Sailor! Are you looking to kill some goblins? Hop on up if you're man enough, and I'll give you a little... buff before you head out. ...No, that is not a euphemism for STDs."


On this note, a celestial playa sounds like hilarious concept which should immediately be squandered.

This is just playing a good aligned succubus, not a good counterpart to the succubus. The point is that you're not just find "evil", replace with "good" -ing the fluff text, there's a different attitude.

The celestial here isn't looking to USE sex for anything. Seeing selfless acts of heroism, with no reward expected or implied in advance, such as a mortal saving a cartload of orphans from being dropped into a snake pit, is just a huge turn-on. Promising sexual favors in exchange for acting appropriately is a huge turn-off, that's what succubi do. In the absence of heroism, anti-succubi dispense relationship advice, encourage romance and consent, promote music and the arts, and prefer to work in disguise. They may be assigned to specific mortals who are predicted to have extremely dangerous lives, and generally work subtly behind the scenes to provide the mortal with information and resources to fulfil their destiny. However, the night before the mortal's destiny comes to pass (such as a climactic fight with a dragon), they are often visited by a mysterious person of their preferred gender who proceeds to screw them silly (if the mortal's into that) (if the mortal is in a committed relationship, anti-succubi are usually capable of instead letting the mortal's lover visit them in an extremely vivid dream, which can even result in pregnancy if both mortals are willing). However, the mortal wakes up in the morning refreshed as if they had gotten a full night's sleep, with the aches and pains and wounds suffered on their journey caused by anything less than plot/Macguffin syndrome healed, and their actions the next day benefit from the blessing of the heavens. After a night like that, the mortal is also able to act with a clearer purpose, as they will have fewer regrets tying them to the mortal realm should they need to make the ultimate sacrifice.

The closest anti-succubi may come to "promising sex" is to heal the madnesses suffered by a mortal who has survived an extended encounter with a succubi or been tortured on the lower planes. In this role the anti-succubus acts less like a divine prostitute and more as a divine sexual therapist.

goto124
2016-03-08, 09:05 PM
A good counterpart to the succubus would need a great understand of sexual morality and ethics.

GnomishPride
2016-03-08, 09:05 PM
Keep in mind that Succubi are CE (as demons), thus the counterpart to the succubus would be a LG Celestial. That should narrow down some of the ideas I think.

Sorry I don't have anything else to contribute. :smalltongue:

goto124
2016-03-08, 09:06 PM
BDSM isn't Evil, but Lawful due to how it relies on power play. Can't discuss it in detail on these forums, but that should give an idea for an Lawful Good Celestial :smallamused:

I find that having anti-succubi "assigned" to mortals reeks a lot of "good sex partners are subservient". We have good-aligned celestials... who literally exist only to give sex to some Chosen PCs, while the evil-aligned succubi are the ones with sexual freedom. We're turning back to the old ideas of sex.

I want anti-succubi as a PC race!

Mr. Mask
2016-03-08, 10:22 PM
Ice: Sexual therapists do NOT have sex with their patients. They are willing to discuss their innermost thoughts and sexual feelings in a safe, non-judgmental environment. Someone who has sex with you, "for your benefit," is not a sexual therapist and will only serve to make your traumatic experiences and emotional confusion worse, not better. Some sexual therapists hire prostitutes for their patients, but this is highly controversial, both from the standpoint of professional ethics, and from the perspective that many in psychology view it as counter-productive if not harmful. Someone who has sex with you, "for your own benefit," isn't helping you, they're a prostitute or a predator, or possibly a sex slave in a harem who is treated as a reward, and either way they are going to leave you when you still needed them for the support you hoped they were offering in the depths of your depression. None of these things fit anything good.

The way you put it sums it up exactly. "Seeing selfless acts of heroism, with no reward expected or implied in advance, such as a mortal saving a cartload of orphans from being dropped into a snake pit, is just a huge turn-on." Celestial playas, people who pick up mortals who fit their tastes. At best they're looking for a good time, at worst they're confusing and hurting people for their own pleasure.


Goto: Succubi are not free. They have to go out and meet their quota of so many mortals enslaved to evil through sex, they have to suffer whatever abuse their victims consider a turn on and learn to enjoy it, and then ultimately they abuse their partners who they only liked as objects. They cannot stop having sex if they wanted to, and the implication is they cannot not want to, as they're born to be addicted. They are slaves to sex and evil, who want other people to be enslaved with them.


The counterpart to succubi isn't reliance on sex, but on non-reliance. You don't need to have sex to be you, to be good, or to be happy. You can be happy with who you are, how you are, where you are in your life and experiences, and don't need sex as an emotional crutch. The Succubus makes you rely on sex, tells you you cannot be happy without it, you are not worthy without it, and you can't be yourself unless you are having sex with it, that you're a hollow person if no one has sex with you. And that is wrong.


I do not wish to participate in this subject further. You can disregard what I said if you choose to.

Lord Raziere
2016-03-08, 10:26 PM
I want anti-succubi as a PC race!

Well if I were designing an anti-succubi race.....

first, they'd obviously be Chaotic Good primarily. second, they would not "tempt" or anything like that. they would teach. they would teach not to judge others sexual preferences, to accept that others have tastes that are not your own. they would teach people to be comfortable with their own sexuality, and try to help them find what they comfortable with, and how to do it well. they would use their shapeshifting to help others experiment to see what their preferences are, and they would not judge them for it, or use it for their own advantage.

they would also hunt down and brutally murder all rapists, in any form.

you cannot have this kind of thing without children of course, and no Good individual would ignore the results of such unions, even if they are Chaotic. Thus they also teach that it doesn't matter what you are born as, as long as you are a Good person. The anti-succubi more than anyone believes that regardless of one's parents, a child is their own person and should be judged on their own Goodness, whether they be human, half-orc or half-dragon/half fire genasi. they more than anyone do not judge anyone by their birth.

They do not think highly of any parents who abandon their children, and any offspring they themselves have, they will raise as best they can while instilling their own values. The offspring of such anti-succubi are thus often raised to be very open-minded and non-judgemental, and the offsprings teenage years can be very interesting as anti-succubi are quite frank and comfortable talking about the issues of such times without seeing why people would be so embarrassed about it. As their offspring gets nearer to marrying age, some can start questioning when they will start seeing grandkids, no matter what the grandkid's appearance is or who their partner is. You could decide to marry some strange hybrid of four different species and they would not bat an eye at this as long as your happy.

ThinkMinty
2016-03-08, 11:13 PM
Personally, I think the Good counterpart of a Succubus would be Chaotic Good. If you were looking for the LG sexymonster, that'd be the Good counterpart to the Erinyes.


There's a whole trope for what I'm talking about, apparently (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeroicSeductress). This is probably also relevant (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EthicalSlut). My apologies for the TVTropes links. As for naming them, Kedesha, an old-timey term for those temple prostitutes, might be work; callin' 'em Anti-Succubus defines them by their opposites too much I think.

So the point would be a tribe of Celestials with heroic seduction as their hat. As written by me, the Kedesha, who're usually Chaotic Good (Always Good, Usually Chaotic to be more specific about it) are shameless, cheerful, kinda foolish sometimes, and very charming. Plus most of 'em are pansexual, and rather than bein' sexually submissive, they're switches so they can enjoy either the top or bottom role (or both!) as needed. Some of them have different and/or more specific orientations and tastes than that, but that's how they tend to roll.


A female Kedesha is typically cute and chubby, with a soft face and an ample, callipygian tush. Her curvy, cuddly body is reassuringly comfortable as well as being hot like the sun.
A male Kedesha, sometimes called a Kadeshadude, is typically handsome in a boyish, reassuring way, with pleasant features and a mild "strongman" build, looking naturally powerful but not particularly sculpted.

Of course, appearances may vary based on their personal preferences for how to look. They tend to have that holy hotness though.

Kedesha are very prone to hugging, display their emotions very openly, and are cosmic experts at cuddling and being playfully suggestive. They're loud, licentious, and should maybe wear more clothing sometimes, but they're very fun to be around.

Cazero
2016-03-09, 05:19 AM
Whose to say the mortal isn't coerced?

"Oh, you don't want to? That's too bad, I guess you weren't as GOOD as I thought you were?"
"And what about your wife? Celestial freebies, Baby! Really, this is all fine."
"No, no no! There was zero tempting involved, I'm just a magically beautiful angel that told you you can get to heaven by having sex with me, that's all."
"Yeah, you're not straight, I heard you the first time. But Dude, I'm a Celestial! You are NOT gonna get another shot at this."
"Marriage? Uhh, I'm flattered, but while I had sex with you and made you feel loved, I'm a non-exclusive deal. Relationships won't work either, I've got a list of guys and gals to have sex with that's longer than my... righteous standards."
"Hey, Sailor! Are you looking to kill some goblins? Hop on up if you're man enough, and I'll give you a little... buff before you head out. ...No, that is not a euphemism for STDs."
This is exactly what I was imagining.
Without those sorts of pressure, celestial "equivalent" of succubus would no longer be sex-based. They can be ethical slut with a Goodness fetish, but their role in the order of celestials would not be built around sex and seduction.
Sex-based powers are either painfuly useless or inherently coercive, aka rape-y.

Keltest
2016-03-09, 07:00 AM
This is exactly what I was imagining.
Without those sorts of pressure, celestial "equivalent" of succubus would no longer be sex-based. They can be ethical slut with a Goodness fetish, but their role in the order of celestials would not be built around sex and seduction.
Sex-based powers are either painfuly useless or inherently coercive, aka rape-y.

Im inclined to agree. Cupid was a much better fit for what were trying to do IMO. The counterpart to empty and abusive sex is legitimate love and caring, with or without intimate acts.

OldTrees1
2016-03-09, 07:50 AM
This is exactly what I was imagining.
Without those sorts of pressure, celestial "equivalent" of succubus would no longer be sex-based. They can be ethical slut with a Goodness fetish, but their role in the order of celestials would not be built around sex and seduction.
Sex-based powers are either painfuly useless or inherently coercive, aka rape-y.

Would you address my comment about consensual sex being used as a medium for demonstrating good values are shared and that sticking to good action is possible?

I think that counts as sex-based despite not necessarily having sex-based powers(although perhaps it could happen to also be physically & mentally rejuvenating/healing as a side effect) and definitively not being built around coercive concepts like seduction.

Cazero
2016-03-09, 08:39 AM
Would you address my comment about consensual sex being used as a medium for demonstrating good values are shared and that sticking to good action is possible?

I think that counts as sex-based despite not necessarily having sex-based powers(although perhaps it could happen to also be physically & mentally rejuvenating/healing as a side effect) and definitively not being built around coercive concepts like seduction.

Consensual sex can definitely be cited as an example to demonstrate good values being shared in an argument. As an actual action to perform, considering it as a prime method of promoting Goodness is disturbingly rape-y because making it a prime method put a serious strain on the consensual part. The succubus doesn't care that much about consent and can still corrupt to extract it, but what would your sex-based celestial do if nobody wants to do it? Nothing and let people suffer? Clearly they need a different method of action. One that is applicable in more situations and thus makes more sense as your primary method. Like friendship.

Sex-based promotion of Good excludes every asexual people and everyone who consider sex to be a very intimate thing to be shared only with a selective few with whom you spend most of your life. You can't blame either of being inherently Evil, yet they will vehemently oppose someone championing Good by virtue of sexing. Seriously. It sounds like an hentai plot. There probably is one, and I'm not sure I want to know how it turns out.

goto124
2016-03-09, 08:55 AM
"Oh, you don't want to? That's too bad, I guess you weren't as GOOD as I thought you were?"
"And what about your wife? Celestial freebies, Baby! Really, this is all fine."
"No, no no! There was zero tempting involved, I'm just a magically beautiful angel that told you you can get to heaven by having sex with me, that's all."
"Yeah, you're not straight, I heard you the first time. But Dude, I'm a Celestial! You are NOT gonna get another shot at this."
"Marriage? Uhh, I'm flattered, but while I had sex with you and made you feel loved, I'm a non-exclusive deal. Relationships won't work either, I've got a list of guys and gals to have sex with that's longer than my... righteous standards."
"Hey, Sailor! Are you looking to kill some goblins? Hop on up if you're man enough, and I'll give you a little... buff before you head out. ...No, that is not a euphemism for STDs."

That sounds like what an evil succubus would sound like - manipulative, pretending to be good, while actually having an evil heart. It's done a lot IRL, with an amazing amount of effectiveness. If it works for mortals, it works for infernal.


Sex-based powers are either painful y useless or inherently coercive, aka rape-y.

Many sex-based powers are written as mind-control powers, which explains why they end up coercive. Even more so if you mean combat powers. Since combat is coercive, using sex in combat means the sex(-based powers) have to be coercive as well.

It because obvious if you try to write mechanics for them - after all, a spell of charm person leads to "make a Will save or do stuff you wouldn't do".


Would you address my comment about consensual sex being used as a medium for demonstrating good values are shared and that sticking to good action is possible?

How... would this even work...? "Oh you save the village, have some sex"? Sex isn't some sort of carrot you use when you want people to behave.

Let's assume you want your good-aligned celestials to have sex as a core part of them, and that you don't want "emotion angels" stripped of the sex.

What I'm imagining, is more a good God of Sex or Spirit of Sex. They specialize in sex, and spread virtues about sex. They don't bother with anything outside the domain of sex, because "muddling sex with stuff that has nothing to do with sex" shouldn't be done anyway.

What they do teach, is sex stuff such as: consent, listening to the needs and wants of your partners without neglecting yourself, mutual love, don't manipulate people (which is exactly what evil succubi do), etc.

Hey, maybe they help mortals discover their true gender identities and sexual orientations? The celestials could even be ascended mortals from across the LGBT spectrum, who have (cough) experience with self-discovery. This would add a humanizing aspect to the celestials too.

OldTrees1
2016-03-09, 09:50 AM
Consensual sex can definitely be cited as an example to demonstrate good values being shared in an argument. As an actual action to perform, considering it as a prime method of promoting Goodness is disturbingly rape-y because making it a prime method put a serious strain on the consensual part. The succubus doesn't care that much about consent and can still corrupt to extract it, but what would your sex-based celestial do if nobody wants to do it? Nothing and let people suffer? Clearly they need a different method of action. One that is applicable in more situations and thus makes more sense as your primary method. Like friendship.

Sex-based promotion of Good excludes every asexual people and everyone who consider sex to be a very intimate thing to be shared only with a selective few with whom you spend most of your life. You can't blame either of being inherently Evil, yet they will vehemently oppose someone championing Good by virtue of sexing. Seriously. It sounds like an hentai plot. There probably is one, and I'm not sure I want to know how it turns out.

If there was no consent then they would not engage in sex. Why would you even presume as much? Where do you expect this celestial to be acting? Remember a Succubus is a corruptor that needs not use sex if that primary method isn't working. Thus it is only reasonable for the counterpoint to be a redeemer that needs not use sex if that primary method isn't working. Just as a Succubus resorts to other temptations, the counterpoint could resort to other means of demonstrating the shared values and good potential in the person they are attempting to guide.






How... would this even work...? "Oh you save the village, have some sex"? Sex isn't some sort of carrot you use when you want people to behave. You might want to reread what I wrote. I explicitly said that Sex as a carrot is a Succubus trick and not what I was talking about. I was suggesting using the joint activity of consensual sex to demonstrate to the other person that that person shares good motivations and that they are capable of sticking to good action. The sex is not the carrot. There is no carrot. Well unless you count the developing self image of being able to be good as a carrot. Does that count? I think the self image of being able to be good is a fine carrot to incentivize being good, don't you?


What I'm imagining, is more a good God of Sex or Spirit of Sex. They specialize in sex, and spread virtues about sex. They don't bother with anything outside the domain of sex, because "muddling sex with stuff that has nothing to do with sex" shouldn't be done anyway.

What they do teach, is sex stuff such as: consent, listening to the needs and wants of your partners without neglecting yourself, mutual love, don't manipulate people (which is exactly what evil succubi do), etc.

Hey, maybe they help mortals discover their true gender identities and sexual orientations? The celestials could even be ascended mortals from across the LGBT spectrum, who have (cough) experience with self-discovery. This would add a humanizing aspect to the celestials too.

Now this is another fine role too (would probably be familiar with "safe sane consensual"). It doesn't act as much as a counterpoint in my opinion but I see the roles acting hand in hand (maybe being the same celestial). They teach the important things about sex(consent, caring about the needs and wants of your partner, mutual love, ...) and then use the acceptance of those lessons to demonstrate that the person can be good and already are part way there.

Cazero
2016-03-09, 10:39 AM
If there was no consent then they would not engage in sex. Why would you even presume as much?
I didn't. I'm simply presuming that as a true equivalent to the succubus, sex/seduction must be a crucial part of the creature methods. And since the celestial is Good, temptation/seduction is out of question, the romance opposite is not really viable (eternal being, mortal, thousands others since the dawn of time and thousands more after the mortal's death, romance is now dead), and consent is required for sex. And consensual sex isn't something trivial to get. So you obtain a poor excuse of a celestial who spends eternities wasting everyone's time with methods that only apply in 0.001% of situations where a celestial would get involved.


Where do you expect this celestial to be acting?
I have no darn clue. Maybe an actual example of it working could help me there.


Remember a Succubus is a corruptor that needs not use sex if that primary method isn't working. Thus it is only reasonable for the counterpoint to be a redeemer that needs not use sex if that primary method isn't working. Just as a Succubus resorts to other temptations, the counterpoint could resort to other means of demonstrating the shared values and good potential in the person they are attempting to guide.
Obviously if you define succubus as a corruptor first with sex as only one of their many weapons, then an opposite has a much broader arsenal as well and works much, much better. But if you define succubus as a corruptor that use sex as a prime weapon, a true opposite needs to have a related prime weapon. The obvious pick is sex and it doesn't work well. What else could work? Having a romantic relationship with an entity that will have to dump you to take care of someone else simply won't work for most people, so it's out too. Would plain old friendship fit?

OldTrees1
2016-03-09, 12:14 PM
Would plain old friendship fit?

I would assume that plain old friendship as a redemption tool would be in every redeemer celestial just as plain old greed is a tool in every corruptor fiend. I did not think it worth explicit mention just like the Succubus using greed is not worth an explicit mention. That probably translates as a yes to your question when asked by you.

wumpus
2016-03-09, 02:40 PM
Obviously if you define succubus as a corruptor first with sex as only one of their many weapons, then an opposite has a much broader arsenal as well and works much, much better. But if you define succubus as a corruptor that use sex as a prime weapon, a true opposite needs to have a related prime weapon. The obvious pick is sex and it doesn't work well. What else could work? Having a romantic relationship with an entity that will have to dump you to take care of someone else simply won't work for most people, so it's out too. Would plain old friendship fit?

Succubi are the living embodiment of illicit sex (Sabine refers to herself as such), but they are generally tasked with corrupting mortals. They might find some other temptation to a character with a low sex drive, or just move on (although they would presumably try just about anything to get a paladin to fall).

In D&D you could say "sex" was their type. Corrupter is their class.

"Rapiness": My understanding was that the succubi/incubi of myth pretty much went straight to rape (especially of sleeping victims). This isn't the modern form (any edition of D&D) and they pretty much exist to work on temptation and deception. I seem to remember the 1e description closing with "win by wit and threat."

Segev
2016-03-09, 03:46 PM
What if the good counterpart works with a sense of family, instead? Make it resemble child, maybe 9-10 years of age, and provide to adults a figure to protect and care for (encouraging altruism), and to be a good example for (encouraging upright behavior). To teens, he's similarly a younger sibling to be a role model for and to protect. To younger kids, he's a friend and sibling to comfort and take care of them. Their MO is to come into the lives of people who are experiencing hardship and sorrow and loss, and provide for them somebody else to care for in order to get outside of themselves. And, at the same time, an emotional bond to soothe whatever pains there are. They may bring with them a previously-adopted "younger sibling" who is actually mortal, smoothing the way to integrate this needy child with a potential caregiver who needs somebody for whom to care.

They'll eventually reveal their nature, and stick around for a little while longer before moving on, but they probably have a tendency to keep in touch. They aren't abandoning you, just trusting that you can stand on your own, now, with the family you've built. Perhaps more than a few adventurers had one as a sibling for a while, inspiring them to want to live up to being that kind of good person.

Milo v3
2016-03-09, 03:57 PM
As an actual action to perform, considering it as a prime method of promoting Goodness is disturbingly rape-y because making it a prime method put a serious strain on the consensual part.
How?


But what would your sex-based celestial do if nobody wants to do it?
The PF one can fight/heal people. Or just kiss them if people consent to it, since it's a flirt.


Nothing and let people suffer?
It don't think it was ever suggested "This thing can only do things related to sex." I mean, the succubus can do more than just have sex.


Sex-based promotion of Good excludes every asexual people and everyone who consider sex to be a very intimate thing to be shared only with a selective few with whom you spend most of your life.
So? Same applies to things like even something as simple as touch spells to heal people, since some people hate being touched by anyone that they aren't intimate with.

It doesn't need to have sex with everyone to promote good.... If it only ends up making some peoples lives better, how is that evil? That's like saying giving to one charity is evil, because you aren't giving to all the charities at once.


You can't blame either of being inherently Evil
I can, since one was an arguement towards something that was never suggested and the other is "You have to include 100% of the population or it's inherently Evil."

ThinkMinty
2016-03-09, 04:07 PM
Sex-based promotion of Good excludes every asexual people and everyone who consider sex to be a very intimate thing to be shared only with a selective few with whom you spend most of your life.

Asexual people still value companionship and hugs ('s why I made my hypothetical CG sexymonster, the Kedesha prone to hugging and cuddle-sex), and the latter are the prudes who enable Succubi by denying nature and making sex and sexuality an illicit thing.

Piedmon_Sama
2016-03-09, 05:06 PM
What if the good counterpart works with a sense of family, instead? Make it resemble child, maybe 9-10 years of age, and provide to adults a figure to protect and care for (encouraging altruism), and to be a good example for (encouraging upright behavior). To teens, he's similarly a younger sibling to be a role model for and to protect. To younger kids, he's a friend and sibling to comfort and take care of them. Their MO is to come into the lives of people who are experiencing hardship and sorrow and loss, and provide for them somebody else to care for in order to get outside of themselves. And, at the same time, an emotional bond to soothe whatever pains there are. They may bring with them a previously-adopted "younger sibling" who is actually mortal, smoothing the way to integrate this needy child with a potential caregiver who needs somebody for whom to care.

They'll eventually reveal their nature, and stick around for a little while longer before moving on, but they probably have a tendency to keep in touch. They aren't abandoning you, just trusting that you can stand on your own, now, with the family you've built. Perhaps more than a few adventurers had one as a sibling for a while, inspiring them to want to live up to being that kind of good person.

This one is a really good idea IMO. Maybe base them on the Slaughterchild/Slaymate (it has two names for some reason) from Libris Mortis, in that they radiate an aura that grants additional spell slots or some other bonus provided they're physically near their protector?

Cazero
2016-03-09, 05:13 PM
How?
By giving the celestial an incentive to rape. The very existence of any sex-only power does that, so imagine what a celestial whose entire existence revolves around magic Good sexing people must endure.


The PF one can fight/heal people. Or just kiss them if people consent to it, since it's a flirt.


It don't think it was ever suggested "This thing can only do things related to sex." I mean, the succubus can do more than just have sex.
And as I said, by that point having the celestial revolve around sex-based powers is stupid. Why have them be the core tool of the creature if in practice they can barely ever use them? Heck, why even have those powers at all if the celestial can do just fine without?


It doesn't need to have sex with everyone to promote good.... If it only ends up making some peoples lives better, how is that evil? That's like saying giving to one charity is evil, because you aren't giving to all the charities at once.
I just have trouble seeing it working. Sex as reward is just plain temptation and undermines the higher standards of Good. Sex for redemption is a form of reward. Sex for magical positive effects coerce the champions of good and virtue into asking to be raped. So that leaves us with what? Sex with random people capable of appreciating it and being bettered for it? That wouldn't be wrong per se, but it sounds like a celestial getting a job in the city watch or a demon mugging random people in dark alleys. It really breaks my expectations from outsiders.


and the latter are the prudes who enable Succubi by denying nature and making sex and sexuality an illicit thing.
Valuing sex as something more than "just fun and games" sounds like a pretty reasonable position to me. One-night stand aren't for everyone. Some people value companionship and hugs.

ThinkMinty
2016-03-09, 05:21 PM
Valuing sex as something more than "just fun and games" sounds like a pretty reasonable position to me. One-night stand aren't for everyone. Some people value companionship and hugs.

Now if there was a way of saying that without sounding like condescension towards people who sometimes or even once have enjoyed non-committal sexythings, we'd be getting somewhere.


Sex-based promotion of Good excludes every asexual people and everyone who consider sex to be a very intimate thing to be shared only with a selective few with whom you spend most of your life.

Asexual people can still willingly enjoy sex as a pair-bonding experience or for the physical sensations, they just don't experience sexual attraction.

Intimate and "thing to be shared with a selective few" are two different things.

Either way, it's sounding kinda like Good-aligned things aren't supposed to be sluts or something, like somehow being a slut is badwrongfun.

Milo v3
2016-03-09, 05:24 PM
By giving the celestial an incentive to rape. The very existence of any sex-only power does that, so imagine what a celestial whose entire existence revolves around magic Good sexing people must endure.
1. The "sex power" of succubi doesn't require sex....
2. Based on that, getting joy from sex = evil since it'd count as incentive to rape by your definition... Which doesn't make any sense.
3. Why would a Celestial based around sex ever do something like that.... it's opposite to the whole point of a celestial succubus....


And as I said, by that point having the celestial revolve around sex-based powers is stupid. Why have them be the core tool of the creature if in practice they can barely ever use them? Heck, why even have those powers at all if the celestial can do just fine without?
It's their main thing, but they don't have to do it 100% of the time. They're flirty celestials, trying to make people happier with flings and casual sex in PF. Just because they can use a sword to defend themselves and try to fight succubi doesn't mean that they never use their powers that are focused towards sex.

I mean, hell, by your arguement succubi shouldn't exist either, since they can do more than just have sex....


Sex with random people capable of appreciating it and being bettered for it? That wouldn't be wrong per se, but it sounds like a celestial getting a job in the city watch or a demon mugging random people in dark alleys. It really breaks my expectations from outsiders.
It's a chaotic good outsider... It doesn't need to be saving the world every three minutes. Also, we're talking about the celestial version of a succubus... which generally is a being that does really really mundane stuff cosmologically... So you sound like you'd be opposed to succubi as well, so why are you in this thread if you seem to be hostile to the concept of outsiders that do relatively mundane things?

ThinkMinty
2016-03-09, 05:28 PM
It's a chaotic good outsider... It doesn't need to be saving the world every three minutes. Also, we're talking about the celestial version of a succubus... which generally is a being that does really really mundane stuff cosmologically... So you sound like you'd be opposed to succubi as well, so why are you in this thread if you seem to be hostile to the concept of outsiders that do relatively mundane things?

I oppose succubi when they're Evil, not because they show a little cleavage. Sex isn't Evil.

Milo v3
2016-03-09, 05:33 PM
I oppose succubi when they're Evil, not because they show a little cleavage. Sex isn't Evil.
That's actually why I rather like that PF has a celestial version of succubi. Highlights that sex isn't evil, abusing sex and using it to manipulating or hurting people is evil.

Leewei
2016-03-09, 05:34 PM
I like the "In Nomine" take on angels and demons.

Generally, all angels and demons have a common origin. Each one belonged to a choir, prior to The Fall. Angels remain in their choir, while demons became something else, entirely.

The In Nomine equivalent to succubi appears to be the Lilim. These are unique among the fallen - they're created by the Arch-demon, Lilith. They're demons of Freedom, are very big on not being bound, and on trading favors. In general, they view mortals as a sad, subjugated lot. A married couple is just a pair of slaves from their point of view. They tend to do what they can to promote oath-breaking, insubordination, and disruption of order.

If this doesn't seem wholly evil, it's because order isn't wholly good. In fact, there are Bright Lilim as well, who do exactly the same sort of thing with a sense of betterment for the mortals they interact with. Lilith herself is big on Freedom to the point where she and her other daughters are entirely tolerant of this.

ThinkMinty
2016-03-09, 05:37 PM
That's actually why I rather like that PF has a celestial version of succubi. Highlights that sex isn't evil, abusing sex and using it to manipulating or hurting people is evil.

What's the PF celestial succubus called?

digiman619
2016-03-09, 07:08 PM
What's the PF celestial succubus called?

As was said earlier in the thread:

Pathfinder has a celestial succubus in the form of the Gancanagh Azata.

Malimar
2016-03-09, 07:46 PM
By giving the celestial an incentive to rape. The very existence of any sex-only power does that, so imagine what a celestial whose entire existence revolves around magic Good sexing people must endure.

1. The "sex power" of succubi doesn't require sex....
2. Based on that, getting joy from sex = evil since it'd count as incentive to rape by your definition... Which doesn't make any sense.
3. Why would a Celestial based around sex ever do something like that.... it's opposite to the whole point of a celestial succubus....

Violence powers give the celestial an incentive to murder. The very existence of any violence power does that, so imagine what a celestial whose entire existence revolves around magic Good violence must endure. :smallconfused: Therefore every celestial ever published that has violence powers is incoherent.

With rare exceptions, celestials are not like you and me: they don't have the freedom to choose to be good or bad like we do. They're made out of Goodness; evil is anathema to their very being. It's not like they make a conscious choice to reject evil and be good like humans do every day. They are Good. A celestial can no more so much as contemplate rape than Voldemort can experience love. If you suggested to a celestial that they commit rape, they would respond in the same way as you would if I suggested you eat the sun. Rape is exactly as much a temptation for a celestial as teleporting to the Kuiper belt and punching out a dwarf planet is a temptation for you -- even if I offered you an "incentive" of a million dollars to go punch out Pluto, it's just not within your capacity to do.

That's where we're coming from on this issue, anyway. Cazero obviously has a viewpoint closer to the "celestials are just humans with wings and halos" end of the scale.

nedz
2016-03-09, 08:32 PM
With rare exceptions, celestials are not like you and me: they don't have the freedom to choose to be good or bad like we do. They're made out of Goodness; evil is anathema to their very being. It's not like they make a conscious choice to reject evil and be good like humans do every day. They are Good. A celestial can no more so much as contemplate rape than Voldemort can experience love. If you suggested to a celestial that they commit rape, they would respond in the same way as you would if I suggested you eat the sun. Rape is exactly as much a temptation for a celestial as teleporting to the Kuiper belt and punching out a dwarf planet is a temptation for you -- even if I offered you an "incentive" of a million dollars to go punch out Pluto, it's just not within your capacity to do.

This is contradicted by the existence of Paladin Succubi. Succubi are [Evil] but can also be Good. It follows then that Celestials who are [Good] can be Evil - or indeed anything they like. In short, they do still have free will.

Malimar
2016-03-09, 09:10 PM
This is contradicted by the existence of Paladin Succubi. Succubi are [Evil] but can also be Good. It follows then that Celestials who are [Good] can be Evil - or indeed anything they like. In short, they do still have free will.

That's what I was thinking of when I cited "rare exceptions", which can be chalked up to inconsistent designers or extreme circumstances. Outside those exceptions, the point stands.

Cazero
2016-03-10, 04:30 AM
Violence powers give the celestial an incentive to murder. The very existence of any violence power does that, so imagine what a celestial whose entire existence revolves around magic Good violence must endure. :smallconfused: Therefore every celestial ever published that has violence powers is incoherent.
The paralellism with violence makes sense but doesn't invalidate my concerns.


With rare exceptions, celestials are not like you and me: they don't have the freedom to choose to be good or bad like we do. They're made out of Goodness; evil is anathema to their very being. It's not like they make a conscious choice to reject evil and be good like humans do every day. They are Good. A celestial can no more so much as contemplate rape than Voldemort can experience love. If you suggested to a celestial that they commit rape, they would respond in the same way as you would if I suggested you eat the sun. Rape is exactly as much a temptation for a celestial as teleporting to the Kuiper belt and punching out a dwarf planet is a temptation for you -- even if I offered you an "incentive" of a million dollars to go punch out Pluto, it's just not within your capacity to do.

That's where we're coming from on this issue, anyway. Cazero obviously has a viewpoint closer to the "celestials are just humans with wings and halos" end of the scale.
Celestial : Excuse me, but may I smite you?
Demon : No.
Celestial : Well. Have a good day then.
Mortal : But it's Slu'rn'tuk the Masochistic ! He would enjoy the smiting ! Please save us !
Celestial : How dare you? The enjoyment of pain does not obliviates the need for a safe, sane and consensual context of the act !
Demon : And this is why Evil will always triumph. Violence is usualy wrong and thus a tool Good can't use properly. Now resume whipping me with your frail human arms and this nonmagical whip that can't hurt me until you die of exhaustion, mortal.
Celestial : Ho wait, I remember now ! Lesser of two Evils. That's how we are allowed to use violence ! I can smite you without your consent because you're an Evil monster already using violence to harm the world on a whole !

-one smiting later-

Mortal : I'm still dying. Can you help me?
Celestial : Alas, I can't heal you with my magic Good sex.
Mortal : Wait, the only way you could save my life is by having sex with me?
Celestial : Yes, but it would be wrong and thus I can't do it.
Mortal : Lesser of two Evils?
Celestial : Is letting you die in a long and painful agony. Sorry, but your dying bias is misleading you. I can clearly sense that you don't really want to have sex right now and considering how badly you're hurt it isn't surprising.
Mortal :...Why do you even have life saving powers that you can't use on dying people?
Celestial : These powers are an important part of my identity and define my place among the ranks of celestials. I am very different from all those others celestials who enjoy consensual sex as much as I do but can't heal people with it.


Unlike any celestial without magical Good sex powers, that one had to consider the option of sex and reject it because rape. This is very different from never having the idea pop up in the first place. Just because a celestial can't make a wrong decision (wich is arguable) doesn't make the situation any less disturbing to me.

Milo v3
2016-03-10, 04:42 AM
Mortal : I'm still dying. Can you help me?
Celestial : Alas, I can't heal you with my magic Good sex.
Mortal : Wait, the only way you could save my life is by having sex with me?
Celestial : Yes, but it would be wrong and thus I can't do it.
Mortal : Lesser of two Evils?
Celestial : Is letting you die in a long and painful agony. Sorry, but your dying bias is misleading you. I can clearly sense that you don't really want to have sex right now and considering how badly you're hurt it isn't surprising.
Mortal :...Why do you even have life saving powers that you can't use on dying people?
Celestial : These powers are an important part of my identity and define my place among the ranks of celestials. I am very different from all those others celestials who enjoy consensual sex as much as I do but can't heal people with it.

Alternatively... if you used PF's existing celestial succubus the following happens.
Mortal : I'm still dying. Can you help me?
Gancanagh: Sure.

- One Cure spell later -

Gancanagh: You know you're pretty cute.

edit: Basically there are more possibilities for celestial succubi than just your interpretation. Not all have to be the first thing that came into your mind on the concept. They don't need to be rapey or useless.

Cazero
2016-03-10, 05:32 AM
Alternatively... if you used PF's existing celestial succubus the following happens.
Mortal : I'm still dying. Can you help me?
Gancanagh: Sure.

- One Cure spell later -

Gancanagh: You know you're pretty cute.

edit: Basically there are more possibilities for celestial succubi than just your interpretation. Not all have to be the first thing that came into your mind on the concept. They don't need to be rapey or useless.
Using gratitude to coerce someone into sex. Now that's insidiously rapey. Succubus would approve.

My problem isn't with celestial having sex, or enjoying sex, or promoting sex. My problem is with celestial having magical Good sex powers. What's the point of putting magic in it? As you just proved, it's much better for everyone to have the magic separate from the sex. And then the focus on sex and seduction become either an informed ability or a hindrance for the celestial.

Milo v3
2016-03-10, 05:45 AM
What's the point of putting magic in it?
You can say that about anything. What's the point of putting magic into combat? What's the point of putting magic into sneaking? What's the point of putting magic into performances? etc. etc.


As you just proved, it's much better for everyone to have the magic separate from the sex.
No... Because that same outsider I mentioned still has magic sex powers.... It just can do things other than sex... just like a succubus.


And then the focus on sex and seduction become either an informed ability or a hindrance for the celestial.
I fail to see how it is a hindrance for the PF celestial succubus (since it has mechanics, it's not an informed ability). I mean, they're constantly wooing, having flings, and flirting, but that doesn't impede them in anyway.

goto124
2016-03-10, 07:15 AM
Mortal: Oh no, I've been wounded and need a heal spell!
Celestial: Why, I do have such a heal spell!
Mortal: Thank goodness! Now if you would-
Celestial: But it requires me to have sex with you.
Mortal: - wait, what?
Celestial: I'm a celestial of sex. Sex is how I heal people. If you don't want sex, you can refuse. You have a choice.
Mortal: Why yes, I could refuse sex and stay wounded. How wonderful that I'm totally making a choice here. You really are spreading the virtues of sex.



For a succubus, is sex a means to an end (former), or an end in itself (latter)? The succubus that feeds off sex the way a vampire drains mortals of blood... falls under the latter, because whatever such a succubus does is to get to the sex itself.

The former would include succubi with contracts to doom more mortals to hell. For these succubi, sex is but a tool, and often not even the best tool most of the time. Being attractive in a non-sexual manner is less suspicious, and sweet-talk without any actual acts of sex can go a long way in convincing mortals to doom themselves.


So if we're creating anti-succubi, which type of succubi are we mirroring? Because the above two types are rather different.

nedz
2016-03-10, 11:50 AM
That's what I was thinking of when I cited "rare exceptions", which can be chalked up to inconsistent designers or extreme circumstances. Outside those exceptions, the point stands.

No it doesn't.

You are arguing that Celestials don't have free will - they do.

The fact that there are examples which contradict your point does not make your point. The exception does not prove the rule - quite the reverse.

Cazero
2016-03-10, 12:34 PM
You can say that about anything. What's the point of putting magic into combat? What's the point of putting magic into sneaking? What's the point of putting magic into performances? etc. etc.
And for all those things, magic can help make you better at it.
But if your celestial starts to use magic to be better at sex, he isn't being Good. He creates an incentive to be the only person people are interested into having sex with. While this matches the kind of goal a succubus could have, it undermines the entire point of the celestial of positive flirting.
So he has magical sex powers completely unrelated to sex itself or anything close, wich is stupid. When someone with strong boundaries says no and risk getting killed for it, the celestial can feel like crap for having weird incoherent powers or be tempted into raping the mortal for his own Good. How is that not a problem?

Segev
2016-03-10, 01:38 PM
Ehhh...

The creature with magical healing sex powers is not raping somebody when they offer their powers and explain how they work, and that person agrees to it, even if they wouldn't have wanted to have sex with the magical healing nymph otherwise. It's not even really coercion if the magical healing sex nymph merely offers it as an option, but doesn't try to push it. Now, it may be, depending on your morals, less wrong to let yourself die than have (consensual) sex with the magical healing nymph, but that's your choice and determination to make.

It would be rape (or close enough) if the magical healing nymph could heal you without having sex, but refused unless you did; then it's willful coercion. But if she really, literally cannot heal you without sexual intercourse, that's just reality. (It also is probably an author's justification for working sex into her story while alleviating the need for a pre-existing emotional or even marital bond to make it "okay," by whatever standards the author upholds. But that's a meta-story analysis, not an analysis of morals accepting the premise of the setting.)

If the only way for the magical healing cleric to heal you is for you to return his holy symbol (held by a villain in the dungeons of doom), it's not coercion for him to tell you that unless you get it back for him and thus restore his powers, he can't heal you. It would be coercion if he could heal you anyway, but demands you get his holy symbol back before he will because he wants other powers it grants him.

khadgar567
2016-03-10, 02:09 PM
Ehhh...

The creature with magical healing sex powers is not raping somebody when they offer their powers and explain how they work, and that person agrees to it, even if they wouldn't have wanted to have sex with the magical healing nymph otherwise. It's not even really coercion if the magical healing sex nymph merely offers it as an option, but doesn't try to push it. Now, it may be, depending on your morals, less wrong to let yourself die than have (consensual) sex with the magical healing nymph, but that's your choice and determination to make.

It would be rape (or close enough) if the magical healing nymph could heal you without having sex, but refused unless you did; then it's willful coercion. But if she really, literally cannot heal you without sexual intercourse, that's just reality. (It also is probably an author's justification for working sex into her story while alleviating the need for a pre-existing emotional or even marital bond to make it "okay," by whatever standards the author upholds. But that's a meta-story analysis, not an analysis of morals accepting the premise of the setting.)

If the only way for the magical healing cleric to heal you is for you to return his holy symbol (held by a villain in the dungeons of doom), it's not coercion for him to tell you that unless you get it back for him and thus restore his powers, he can't heal you. It would be coercion if he could heal you anyway, but demands you get his holy symbol back before he will because he wants other powers it grants him.

that make cleric a jerk( if ı am dm that bastard falls regardless) and nypmh as natural victim with no dark side or evil intend

Segev
2016-03-10, 02:31 PM
that make cleric a jerk( if ı am dm that bastard falls regardless) and nypmh as natural victim with no dark side or evil intend

Why is the cleric who literally cannot heal you without his holy symbol a jerk for informing you of that fact, and that it's being held in the dungeon of doom, but that he'd be happy to heal you if he got it back?

khadgar567
2016-03-10, 02:57 PM
Why is the cleric who literally cannot heal you without his holy symbol a jerk for informing you of that fact, and that it's being held in the dungeon of doom, but that he'd be happy to heal you if he got it back?
He is jerk via putting already injured party in to unnessery fights while nymph just helps parts directly but in an akward way

Milo v3
2016-03-10, 03:28 PM
And for all those things, magic can help make you better at it.
His magic sex powers do that too.


But if your celestial starts to use magic to be better at sex, he isn't being Good.
Because being good at something or making other people good at something is evil now?


While this matches the kind of goal a succubus could have, it undermines the entire point of the celestial of positive flirting.
Except.... it doesn't manipulate people into having sex with them. So.... no. Flirting, passion and flings is the goal of the celestial succubus.


So he has magical sex powers completely unrelated to sex itself or anything close, wich is stupid.
No... he has magical sex powers... and separate magical powers unrelated to sex. Like a succubus.


When someone with strong boundaries says no and risk getting killed for it, the celestial can feel like crap for having weird incoherent powers or be tempted into raping the mortal for his own Good. How is that not a problem?
You really need to stop using that example since as I said before... he'd just cast a friggin cure spell. So is not a chance of happening at all. That stupid example was covered without the person getting killed or any rape involved. Please stop using a nonsensical example.

Segev
2016-03-10, 03:36 PM
He is jerk via putting already injured party in to unnessery fights while nymph just helps parts directly but in an akward way

He's saying that, unless somebody gets his holy symbol back, he can't heal the guy. Maybe the guy can get it back for the cleric. Maybe he hopes somebody else will.

Let's rephrase it since you seem hung up on something:

The guru can cure your lycanthropy only if he has his meditation staff. The evil Meanlord stole it and stuck it in the Dungeon of Doom. The guru is powerless to retrieve it, because he cannot navigate the Dungeon of Doom successfully; he just plain lacks the capability, especially without his meditation staff. You have the potential capacity to successfully penetrate the Dungeon of Doom, defeating or avoiding the Meanlord's minions, and returning with the meditation staff. He tells you this, and even gives you all the advice he can about how to approach the problem.

He's not being a jerk. He's not extorting you. He literally cannot cure your lycanthropy without the meditation staff. If he had it, he'd be happy to, whether you'd done anything for him or not. But you're the only person both capable and likely, at the moment, to even try to get it back.

khadgar567
2016-03-10, 03:58 PM
He's saying that, unless somebody gets his holy symbol back, he can't heal the guy. Maybe the guy can get it back for the cleric. Maybe he hopes somebody else will.

Let's rephrase it since you seem hung up on something:

The guru can cure your lycanthropy only if he has his meditation staff. The evil Meanlord stole it and stuck it in the Dungeon of Doom. The guru is powerless to retrieve it, because he cannot navigate the Dungeon of Doom successfully; he just plain lacks the capability, especially without his meditation staff. You have the potential capacity to successfully penetrate the Dungeon of Doom, defeating or avoiding the Meanlord's minions, and returning with the meditation staff. He tells you this, and even gives you all the advice he can about how to approach the problem.

He's not being a jerk. He's not extorting you. He literally cannot cure your lycanthropy without the meditation staff. If he had it, he'd be happy to, whether you'd done anything for him or not. But you're the only person both capable and likely, at the moment, to even try to get it back.

After your explanation
Guru = quest giver
Cleric = shady npc in dungeon who somehow nows important mob and probably had ultrior motive( plus large amount of backstab potenciel by using negative energy chanelling and deity as cover for murder)
Nymph= victim of someones idiocity since nymph can kill you if she wants via blinding beauty and uneartly grace but she dont instead offers you some help in an awkward way

ThinkMinty
2016-03-10, 04:00 PM
He's saying that, unless somebody gets his holy symbol back, he can't heal the guy. Maybe the guy can get it back for the cleric. Maybe he hopes somebody else will.

Let's rephrase it since you seem hung up on something:

The guru can cure your lycanthropy only if he has his meditation staff. The evil Meanlord stole it and stuck it in the Dungeon of Doom. The guru is powerless to retrieve it, because he cannot navigate the Dungeon of Doom successfully; he just plain lacks the capability, especially without his meditation staff. You have the potential capacity to successfully penetrate the Dungeon of Doom, defeating or avoiding the Meanlord's minions, and returning with the meditation staff. He tells you this, and even gives you all the advice he can about how to approach the problem.

He's not being a jerk. He's not extorting you. He literally cannot cure your lycanthropy without the meditation staff. If he had it, he'd be happy to, whether you'd done anything for him or not. But you're the only person both capable and likely, at the moment, to even try to get it back.

This makes me wonder why all Clerics don't get at least one holy symbol tattooed onto their bodies so they'll always have a spare.

Cazero
2016-03-10, 04:05 PM
You really need to stop using that example since as I said before... he'd just cast a friggin heal spell. So is not a chance of happening at all. That stupid example was covered without the person getting killed or any rape involved. Please stop using a nonsensical example.
Your counterpoint doesn't address the issue. If the celestial can emulate all of his sex powers and more with magic, the very existence of those sex powers is put into question. If he can't, there are possible situations where adapting my example makes it perfectly valid.

Segev
2016-03-10, 04:12 PM
After your explanation
Guru = quest giver
Cleric = shady npc in dungeon who somehow nows important mob and probably had ultrior motive( plus large amount of backstab potenciel by using negative energy chanelling and deity as cover for murder)
Nymph= victim of someones idiocity since nymph can kill you if she wants via blinding beauty and uneartly grace but she dont instead offers you some help in an awkward way

....you're 100% missing my point, and I am at a loss how to clear it up for you. I am sorry.

Malimar
2016-03-10, 06:03 PM
No it doesn't.

You are arguing that Celestials don't have free will - they do.

The fact that there are examples which contradict your point does not make your point. The exception does not prove the rule - quite the reverse.

I said "Most X are Y". You said "There exists at least one X that is not Y". These are not incompatible statements, so you have failed to disprove my claim.

There are more fictions dealing with succubi and celestials than just 3.5 and this isn't the 3.5 forum, but since your counterexample came from 3.5, here's 3.5's actual rule:

Always: The creature is born with the indicated alignment. The creature may have a hereditary predisposition to the alignment or come from a plane that predetermines it. It is possible for individuals to change alignment, but such individuals are either unique or rare exceptions.

TheFamilarRaven
2016-03-10, 06:48 PM
I know I'm a little late jumping into the thread but I do have a few comments to make.

Firstly: counter-part =/= opposite. It means similar but different in some significant way (look it up :smalltongue:). So no, the counter-part of the succubus is not some LG embodiment of chastity. That would be the opposite.

2ndly: although incubi is the proper term for male succubui, they are in fact they're own separate monster listed in the epic player's handbook (if we're strictly talking about dnd 3.5) Actually not so much a point as it is a nitpick because I like nitpicking for some reason... My bad... I mixed up incubus and infernal....

Now, before saying what a good aligned counterpart would be; let's 1st examine what we're trying to differentiate our CG sex-driven outsider from.




SUCCUBUS

Size/Type: Medium Outsider (Chaotic, Demon, Extraplanar, Evil)
Hit Dice: 6d8+6 (33 hp)
Initiative: +1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares), fly 50 ft. (average)
Armor Class: 20 (+1 Dex, +9 natural), touch 11, flat-footed 19
Base Attack/Grapple: +6/+7
Attack: Claw +7 melee (1d6+1)
Full Attack: 2 claws +7 melee (1d6+1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Energy drain, spell-like abilities, summon demon
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 10/cold iron or good, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to electricity and poison, resistance to acid 10, cold 10, and fire 10, spell resistance 18, telepathy 100 ft., tongues
Saves: Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +7
Abilities: Str 13, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 16, Wis 14, Cha 26
Skills: Bluff +19, Concentration +10, Diplomacy +12, Disguise +17* (+19 acting), Escape Artist +10, Hide +10, Intimidate +19, Knowledge (any one) +12, Listen +19, Move Silently +10, Search +12, Spot +19, Survival +2 (+4 following tracks), Use Rope +1 (+3 with bindings)
Feats: Dodge, Mobility, Persuasive
Environment: A chaotic evil-aligned plane
Organization: Solitary
Challenge Rating: 7
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Always chaotic evil
Advancement: 7–12 HD (Medium)
Level Adjustment: +6
A succubus is 6 feet tall in its natural form and weighs about 125 pounds.
COMBAT

Succubi are not warriors. They flee combat whenever they can. If forced to fight, they can attack with their claws, but they prefer to turn foes against one another. Succubi use their polymorph change shape ability to assume humanoid guise, and can maintain this deception indefinitely. Their preferred tactic when dealing with heroes is to feign friendship and create an opportunity to be alone with one of them, whereupon the succubus applies her life-draining kiss. Succubi are not above taking on the role of a damsel in distress when encountered within a dungeon.
A succubus’s natural weapons, as well as any weapons it wields, are treated as chaotic-aligned and evil-aligned for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

Energy Drain (Su): A succubus drains energy from a mortal it lures into some act of passion, or by simply planting a kiss on the victim. If the target is not willing to be kissed, the succubus must start a grapple, which provokes an attack of opportunity. The succubus’s kiss or embrace bestows one negative level. The kiss also has the effect of a suggestion spell, asking the victim to accept another kiss from the succubus. The victim must succeed on a DC 21 Will save to negate the effect of the suggestion. The DC is 21 for the Fortitude save to remove a negative level. These save DCs are Charisma-based.
Spell-Like Abilities: At will—charm monster (DC 22), detect good, detect thoughts (DC 20), ethereal jaunt (self plus 50 pounds of objects only), polymorph (humanoid form only, no limit on duration), suggestion (DC 21), greater teleport (self plus 50 pounds of objects only). Caster level 12th. The save DCs are Charisma-based.

Summon Demon (Sp): Once per day a succubus can attempt to summon 1 vrock with a 30% chance of success. This ability is the equivalent of a 3rd-level spell.

Tongues (Su): A succubus has a permanent tongues ability (as the spell, caster level 12th). Succubi usually use verbal communication with mortals.

Change Shape (Su): A succubus can assume the form of any Small or Medium humanoid.

Skills: Succubi have a +8 racial bonus on Listen and Spot checks.



So now we have some crunch to look at.... we should also establish some sort of preferred mode of operation for the succubus so that we can further differentiate our CG outsider from.

Being a CE, and a demon no less, I would put forth that a succubus is not driven by some higher purpose of "serving evil". That would fall under the domain of Devils. Put simply, a succubus is a creature of impulse. It devours mortal souls (using its Energy Drain ability), for the sheer satisfaction of the sensation. It manipulates mortal not because it desires to see mortals fall south of neutral, but because they simply enjoy toying with emotions, (think "playing with their food"). If it can't woo a mortal through normal means, then it has no qualms against using spells (charm monster) and/or just resorting to rape (grapple check) to get its meal.

However, it is not incapable of putting aside its base desires if it does have some sort of goal it needs completed. (i.e, maybe a certain succubus wants to trick the hero(es) into delivering a powerful macguffin of succubus smiting, and would like to possess such an artifact so that it could destroy the item). But it will use its powers of persuasion/temptation (natural or supernatural) to fool mortals into accomplishing this task. But in general, as long as it has no other goal, a succubus' primary desire is to seduce mortals with the intent of eating their soul for funsies.



So, in my view, a good aligned counter-part needs to differ significantly in two regards (other than the obvious alignment and [sub-types] etc. It needs an ability that is activated when it engages in an act of passion that is NOT detrimental to the recipient. And it needs some sort of behavior that promotes good aligned actions in mortals via consensual boot knocking.

The first issue is easily resolved. I believe this (http://alcyius.com/dndtools/spells/book-of-exalted-deeds--52/elation--45/index.html) is appropriate ability to use. Just change the target effect to be only the recipient, and last for 24 hours. Note that, if this ability follows the same guidelines as the succubus' energy drain. All it needs to do is "embrace" the recipient, like a hug.

So in response to Cazero, that hardly seems "rape-y" ability. And when in doubt, all the creatures needs to do is ask. Asking is the key difference between a succubus and this CG creature. A succbus is more than willing to steal your soul with or without seducing you. The CG outsider does not steal souls with its ability, but it is still respectful of personal space when using its Elation ability, even though it causes no harm to the mortal.

As far as promoting sex goes, I'd imagine this creature would have a thought process along these lines: Sex is fun --> when mortals have fun they're less stressed --> When they're less stressed they're less angry --> when they're less angry they're more kind --> when they're more kind they feel like helping others --> helping others is good --> i.e sex promotes good behavior among mortals.

Compare that to the earlier examples of "I'll have sex with you. But only if you [insert good aligned action]". That kind of reward/punishment system is more fit for a lawful creature, and is dubiously good aligned at best, as was stated earlier.

Lord Raziere
2016-03-10, 09:46 PM
well I dunno about anyone else, but I'm gonna call my counterpart the Lannavia. made the name up, and really my logic on the Lannavia on the good counterpart is that even if CG, you gotta take responsibility for a child and be a good parent if thats the result of your fun. so the Lannavia would not just be about sex itself, but the result of it and making as much good as they can from it. this results in them trying to be the best parent they can to their child- but also a very embarrassing parent, especially since as an Outsider they don't seem to age.

goto124
2016-03-10, 11:53 PM
Now, it may be, depending on your morals, less wrong to let yourself die than have (consensual) sex with the magical healing nymph, but that's your choice and determination to make. [Comment: That doesn't really sound like a choice. But moving on.]

But if she really, literally cannot heal you without sexual intercourse, that's just reality. (It also is probably an author's justification for working sex into her story while alleviating the need for a pre-existing emotional or even marital bond to make it "okay," by whatever standards the author upholds. But that's a meta-story analysis, not an analysis of morals accepting the premise of the setting.)

I'm not sure why a meta-story analysis is unwelcome here, especially when we're here to discuss the meta-story 'moral' of "sex is evil" that's perpetuated by stories of evil succubi.

Even if we accept the premise of 'sex is needed for healing', why in the world does it make sex good? As you said, "that's just reality". Sex would be just an act that happens because it's required. It doesn't say anything about the virtues of sex, or the 'good side' of sex.

Unless that's your intention - emphasizing that sex itself is neutral, it's just how you use it. Still, it's kind of weird to use sex. Other types of "I need stuff to heal you" such as holy symbols are mostly to make healing a bit difficult - stories and games wouldn't be nearly as exciting if all wounds could be healed in a quick snap of the fingers, so authors have to retain the drama somehow. That doesn't require sex, simply having to touch the receiver of the heal (on the head or the hand silly, nothing sexual!) can be dramatic if the healer is locked up in a tower or such.

Lorsa
2016-03-11, 09:06 AM
As far as promoting sex goes, I'd imagine this creature would have a thought process along these lines: Sex is fun --> when mortals have fun they're less stressed --> When they're less stressed they're less angry --> when they're less angry they're more kind --> when they're more kind they feel like helping others --> helping others is good --> i.e sex promotes good behavior among mortals.

Compare that to the earlier examples of "I'll have sex with you. But only if you [insert good aligned action]". That kind of reward/punishment system is more fit for a lawful creature, and is dubiously good aligned at best, as was stated earlier.

I would imagine a good-aligned celestial sex creature would look towards those who suffer from bad self-esteem due to never experiencing romantic love and/or sex, who might, in the long run, end becoming bitter and cynical about the world.

They probably get their satisfaction (not talking about the sexual one here) from helping people to feel better about themselves, realize that they deserve love and affection. Basically, they take on "projects", and by use of flirting & sex, slowly build up the confidence of people until they are able to tackle the world.

At least that's what I envision. Some people need sex to feel better about themselves, and the "good succubus" is there to provide it, so these people don't run the risk of falling for the evil succubus.

goto124
2016-03-11, 09:18 AM
I imagine that sort of good succubi would in practice use not much sex, since the act of sex itself tends to be counterproductive to their goals.

Then again, evil succubi who are smart would also withhold sex if it's counterproductive to their goals, so.

Lorsa
2016-03-11, 09:27 AM
I imagine that sort of good succubi would in practice use not much sex, since the act of sex itself tends to be counterproductive to their goals.

Then again, evil succubi who are smart would also withhold sex if it's counterproductive to their goals, so.

I am not sure why sex itself would be counterproductive to that goal? As far as I know, sexual therapy has shown to provide both psychological and physiological positive effects.

It is true that sex might not be their primary function, but there is no reason it shouldn't be part of their 'arsenal' so to speak.

goto124
2016-03-11, 09:33 AM
Sexual therapy usually does not involve the act of sex itself, due to all the confusing emotions that results.


It is true that sex might not be their primary function, but there is no reason it shouldn't be part of their 'arsenal' so to speak.

Well you are right. My argument is that sex would be a long way from being their main tool, even if it's in their arsenal.

Segev
2016-03-11, 09:44 AM
Comment: That doesn't really sound like a choice. But moving on.It is a choice; if you feel that chastity is more important than your own life, you can choose to stay sick and/or die. The difference between this and the Evil Rapist threatening to kill you if you won't have sex with her is that the magical healing sex nymph isn't the one holding the metaphorical gun to your head.

To use a different example, if you're a horrific racist who thinks black people are the scum of the earth and would never want to taint your purity with association with them, but the cure for your disease requires a blood transfusion from a black woman, it is still a choice to refuse that blood transfusion and die to preserve your racial purity.

(I hope, however, that while people might respect that somebody could have morals which value chastity even above their own life, people would agree that the racist is stupid and reprehensible and more or less serves as an object lesson in how racism is stupid.)


I'm not sure why a meta-story analysis is unwelcome here, especially when we're here to discuss the meta-story 'moral' of "sex is evil" that's perpetuated by stories of evil succubi.It's not that it's unwelcome. It's that it's a distraction from the point I was specifically making: the magical healing sex nymph (MHSN from now on) is not being coercive. The meta-story analysis is about the author and his morals and motives for setting up the situation. If we step past that and accept the situation as presented, we are left trying to analyze the morals of the characters involved. The assertion with which I was disagreeing was that the MHSN was somehow a rapist for offering her services to somebody who might not want to have sex with her under normal circumstances.

She's not trying to coerce him; she just literally cannot magically cure him without sex.


Even if we accept the premise of 'sex is needed for healing', why in the world does it make sex good?Not the point of my argument. While I will agree that it's a valid point to debate in this thread, I have been avoiding it, personally. My sole point was that this specific example was not one of the MHSN behaving in a "rape-y" fashion.


As you said, "that's just reality". Sex would be just an act that happens because it's required. It doesn't say anything about the virtues of sex, or the 'good side' of sex.Agreed.


Unless that's your intention - emphasizing that sex itself is neutral, it's just how you use it.No, my point is that the MHSN isn't raping anybody in any sense of the word, because she isn't putting them into the situation where they must have sex with her to preserve their own well-being, and she's not refusing to help them if they won't sleep with her (but instead literally cannot help them if they won't).


Still, it's kind of weird to use sex. Other types of "I need stuff to heal you" such as holy symbols are mostly to make healing a bit difficult - stories and games wouldn't be nearly as exciting if all wounds could be healed in a quick snap of the fingers, so authors have to retain the drama somehow. That doesn't require sex, simply having to touch the receiver of the heal (on the head or the hand silly, nothing sexual!) can be dramatic if the healer is locked up in a tower or such.The point is that you can have a magical healer who requires a particular behavior from the beneficiary without it being the magical healer coercing him. If it genuinely is a necessary behavior for the magical healer to be able to magically heal his prospective patient, then it's not coercion. Any more than a doctor who (truthfully and correctly) tells somebody they have to have their gangrenous leg amputated is coercing them into letting him cut off their leg. Or who (again, truthfully and correctly) tells somebody they need to lose weight or they're going to suffer a heart attack is coercing them into going on a diet.

Sex came up only because somebody equated the MHSN with a rapist, after having had the MHSN be posited as a way of making sex good.



Honestly, my own morals are very Abrahamic in that sense: sex is a sacred act between a man and his wife. It is the ultimate gift of holy creation given to mankind by God, to be used to bring more of His children into the world and grant them bodies with which to grow and learn. To defile it by performing it outside of wedlock is wrong.

That makes having a "good counterpart" to a succubus who actually is associated with sex very difficult, unless she's going to be marrying her mortal paramour (which has its own problems). Given that we're discussing a fictional setting with potentially different objective morals and certainly many different faiths, I did not feel shutting down the discussion by saying "she's having sex with men who aren't her husband, so she's evil" was useful. (I am not saying people who have sex outside of wedlock are inherently evil, either; I believe it to be a sin, but it is not my place to judge. That is between God and the individuals involved. I am, as it happens, not God. And unless I'm one of the individuals involved in a particular sin, it really isn't my business. I'd much rather be friends with them and leave their choices to themselves, unless ASKED for my opinion or advice.)


My post, to which you replied, was an analysis of whether or not the MHSN was committing rape or a rape-like coercion. She isn't, given the specifics of that situation, any more than the doctor is coercing the guy with the gangrenous leg into letting her mutilate him, or the guru is extorting the heroes into retrieving his holy staff for him: these are the actions required for the MHSN, doctor, or guru to help in the way you want. They can't if you don't take these actions (or allow them to take them with you). So morally and ethically, none are guilty of extortion, and in the case of the MHSN, she is not committing rape in any sense.

That was my sole point.

khadgar567
2016-03-11, 10:27 AM
It is a choice; if you feel that chastity is more important than your own life, you can choose to stay sick and/or die. The difference between this and the Evil Rapist threatening to kill you if you won't have sex with her is that the magical healing sex nymph isn't the one holding the metaphorical gun to your head.

To use a different example, if you're a horrific racist who thinks black people are the scum of the earth and would never want to taint your purity with association with them, but the cure for your disease requires a blood transfusion from a black woman, it is still a choice to refuse that blood transfusion and die to preserve your racial purity.

(I hope, however, that while people might respect that somebody could have morals which value chastity even above their own life, people would agree that the racist is stupid and reprehensible and more or less serves as an object lesson in how racism is stupid.)

It's not that it's unwelcome. It's that it's a distraction from the point I was specifically making: the magical healing sex nymph (MHSN from now on) is not being coercive. The meta-story analysis is about the author and his morals and motives for setting up the situation. If we step past that and accept the situation as presented, we are left trying to analyze the morals of the characters involved. The assertion with which I was disagreeing was that the MHSN was somehow a rapist for offering her services to somebody who might not want to have sex with her under normal circumstances.

She's not trying to coerce him; she just literally cannot magically cure him without sex.

Not the point of my argument. While I will agree that it's a valid point to debate in this thread, I have been avoiding it, personally. My sole point was that this specific example was not one of the MHSN behaving in a "rape-y" fashion.

Agreed.

No, my point is that the MHSN isn't raping anybody in any sense of the word, because she isn't putting them into the situation where they must have sex with her to preserve their own well-being, and she's not refusing to help them if they won't sleep with her (but instead literally cannot help them if they won't).

The point is that you can have a magical healer who requires a particular behavior from the beneficiary without it being the magical healer coercing him. If it genuinely is a necessary behavior for the magical healer to be able to magically heal his prospective patient, then it's not coercion. Any more than a doctor who (truthfully and correctly) tells somebody they have to have their gangrenous leg amputated is coercing them into letting him cut off their leg. Or who (again, truthfully and correctly) tells somebody they need to lose weight or they're going to suffer a heart attack is coercing them into going on a diet.

Sex came up only because somebody equated the MHSN with a rapist, after having had the MHSN be posited as a way of making sex good.



Honestly, my own morals are very Abrahamic in that sense: sex is a sacred act between a man and his wife. It is the ultimate gift of holy creation given to mankind by God, to be used to bring more of His children into the world and grant them bodies with which to grow and learn. To defile it by performing it outside of wedlock is wrong.

That makes having a "good counterpart" to a succubus who actually is associated with sex very difficult, unless she's going to be marrying her mortal paramour (which has its own problems). Given that we're discussing a fictional setting with potentially different objective morals and certainly many different faiths, I did not feel shutting down the discussion by saying "she's having sex with men who aren't her husband, so she's evil" was useful. (I am not saying people who have sex outside of wedlock are inherently evil, either; I believe it to be a sin, but it is not my place to judge. That is between God and the individuals involved. I am, as it happens, not God. And unless I'm one of the individuals involved in a particular sin, it really isn't my business. I'd much rather be friends with them and leave their choices to themselves, unless ASKED for my opinion or advice.)


My post, to which you replied, was an analysis of whether or not the MHSN was committing rape or a rape-like coercion. She isn't, given the specifics of that situation, any more than the doctor is coercing the guy with the gangrenous leg into letting her mutilate him, or the guru is extorting the heroes into retrieving his holy staff for him: these are the actions required for the MHSN, doctor, or guru to help in the way you want. They can't if you don't take these actions (or allow them to take them with you). So morally and ethically, none are guilty of extortion, and in the case of the MHSN, she is not committing rape in any sense.

That was my sole point.

Agreed with you segev plus gurucan still teach some wisdom ( dms choice) to pc so he can control the situation while cleric just have his hands tied unless he gets macguffin back in his hand and for nymphs case its direct and clean as day situation with pcs morals as main problem

Segev
2016-03-11, 11:26 AM
Agreed with you segev plus gurucan still teach some wisdom ( dms choice) to pc so he can control the situation while cleric just have his hands tied unless he gets macguffin back in his hand and for nymphs case its direct and clean as day situation with pcs morals as main problem

Not just morals. Preferences, too. Invert the sexes of those involved if it helps you see it: imagine a magical healing sex satyr (MHSS, now) with a sick-unto-dying woman in the same situation.

Or, perhaps, the MHSN is offering to heal a woman. Or the MHSS offering to heal a man. Or either with the opposite sex, but the prospective patient is gay.

Or simply that the sick individual isn't in to nymphs or satyrs. Or any other reason why, if they weren't sick, they would not want to/be in to sex with this particular magical healing sex being.

Sure, they can "get over it" if they value their health and life more than their comfort with their sexual partner, but since the whole accusation was that it's "rape-y," that sounds a lot like blaming the victim.

Why should it be a less valid objection if it's moral than if it's sexual preference based?

OldTrees1
2016-03-11, 11:33 AM
Not just morals. Preferences, too. Invert the sexes of those involved if it helps you see it: imagine a magical healing sex satyr (MHSS, now) with a sick-unto-dying woman in the same situation.

Or, perhaps, the MHSN is offering to heal a woman. Or the MHSS offering to heal a man. Or either with the opposite sex, but the prospective patient is gay.

Or simply that the sick individual isn't in to nymphs or satyrs. Or any other reason why, if they weren't sick, they would not want to/be in to sex with this particular magical healing sex being.

Sure, they can "get over it" if they value their health and life more than their comfort with their sexual partner, but since the whole accusation was that it's "rape-y," that sounds a lot like blaming the victim.

Why should it be a less valid objection if it's moral than if it's sexual preference based?

You are right it is no less valid.

Resolution: Don't make it an effect triggered by the action but rather part of the action itself. Then any objection is an objection to the action as a whole. So instead of magic ability triggered by sex, the celestial is merely trained in how sex can be healing/therapeutic (as one of their various skill sets). By making it so sex is neither the cost for a benefit nor the benefit for a cost then you avoid coercion.

Segev
2016-03-11, 11:35 AM
You are right it is no less valid.

Resolution: Don't make it an effect triggered by the action but rather part of the action itself. Then any objection is an objection to the action as a whole. So instead of magic ability triggered by sex, the celestial is merely trained in how sex can be healing/therapeutic (as one of their various skill sets). By making it so sex is neither the cost for a benefit nor the benefit for a cost then you avoid coercion.

Really the same difference. In fact, until you made the distinction, I wasn't considering there to be one. ^^;

"Healing kiss" is a similar concept: they kiss you and you get better.

OldTrees1
2016-03-11, 11:43 AM
Really the same difference. In fact, until you made the distinction, I wasn't considering there to be one. ^^;

"Healing kiss" is a similar concept: they kiss you and you get better.

Is it the same difference? Consider the following case:

Testing analogy: I have a moral objection to cannibalism. I am starving and the only food around is my dead friend. Before they died they granted me permission to eat their corpse once they were dead. I am stuck between dying and something I find morally objectionable. But I do not consider my late friend's offer as coercive. Later I die of starvation.

Here we have the action of eating my late friend. The same action that I find morally objectionable is the action that has the benefit. As such I do not find the benefit as being coercive but rather it is merely one of the many traits of the action. When looking at the action as a unit, I judge it as morally objectionable.

khadgar567
2016-03-11, 11:52 AM
Is it the same difference? Consider the following case:

Testing analogy: I have a moral objection to cannibalism. I am starving and the only food around is my dead friend. Before they died they granted me permission to eat their corpse once they were dead. I am stuck between dying and something I find morally objectionable. But I do not consider my late friend's offer as coercive. Later I die of starvation.

Here we have the action of eating my late friend. The same action that I find morally objectionable is the action that has the benefit. As such I do not find the benefit as being coercive but rather it is merely one of the many traits of the action. When looking at the action as a unit, I judge it as morally objectionable.

In that point i think morals are off and only thing you can do is survive so it not similar with having jolly good time with nymph while healing from deadly injury by the way you can hand wave the touch requirement as reiki treatment so it don't raise moral alarms for least and lesser heal stuff

OldTrees1
2016-03-11, 12:00 PM
In that point i think morals are off and only thing you can do is survive so it not similar with having jolly good time with nymph while healing from deadly injury by the way you can hand wave the touch requirement as reiki treatment so it don't raise moral alarms for least and lesser heal stuff

So you are sidestepping my point?

If you are looking at an action and as a unit you find it objectionable, then the pros in that unit are not coercive correct? I am not talking about offers like "eat them and cure light wounds will occur or have sex then cure light wounds". I am talking about offers like "do you want some sexual therapy Y/N?". If they find sexual therapy to be objectionable, then it is not coercive correct?

khadgar567
2016-03-11, 12:13 PM
So you are sidestepping my point?

If you are looking at an action and as a unit you find it objectionable, then the pros in that unit are not coercive correct? I am not talking about offers like "eat them and cure light wounds will occur or have sex then cure light wounds". I am talking about offers like "do you want some sexual therapy Y/N?". If they find sexual therapy to be objectionable, then it is not coercive correct?

you know at least segev gives two separate cases that when handled gives valid result your is pretty much cruel choice (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SadisticChoice) on pc who is preety much either moral wreck or dead anyway

Segev
2016-03-11, 12:38 PM
you know at least segev gives two separate cases that when handled gives valid result your is pretty much cruel choice (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SadisticChoice) on pc who is preety much either moral wreck or dead anyway

Actually, he's offering the same choice I am, if I'm reading him correctly. The point isn't the moral dilemma ("Is violating my belief in chastity acceptable to me to save my own life?") so much as it is that the MHSN isn't committing an evil/rape-y act by making the offer, because it's simply a fact that that is the only way she can help.


From a moral standpoint, an interesting question arises from this example, though: We all pretty much agree, I think, that if a rapist poisons somebody and will give him the antidote only after he sleeps with her, the poisoning victim is being raped; he is not guilty in a moral sense for consenting to sex. Replace poison with a gun to the head, if you like; it's the same rough situation.

Does that mean that, when the MHSN is offering to heal him, he's being raped by circumstances, and thus is not morally committing a sin?

OldTrees1
2016-03-11, 12:40 PM
you know at least segev gives two separate cases that when handled gives valid result your is pretty much cruel choice (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SadisticChoice) on pc who is preety much either moral wreck or dead anyway

1) You continue to fail to address my point.
2) I did not choose to describe the situation as unfortunate circumstance vs objectionable option. That was decided upthread. I merely am discussing the nature of coercion and whether or not it applies to single things in the same manner as it applies to cost->reward things.


Actually, he's offering the same choice I am, if I'm reading him correctly. The point isn't the moral dilemma ("Is violating my belief in chastity acceptable to me to save my own life?") so much as it is that the MHSN isn't committing an evil/rape-y act by making the offer, because it's simply a fact that that is the only way she can help.


From a moral standpoint, an interesting question arises from this example, though: We all pretty much agree, I think, that if a rapist poisons somebody and will give him the antidote only after he sleeps with her, the poisoning victim is being raped; he is not guilty in a moral sense for consenting to sex. Replace poison with a gun to the head, if you like; it's the same rough situation.

You grok it quite clearly. Although you didn't mention my emphasis on single action offers vs Cost->Benefit offers.


Does that mean that, when the MHSN is offering to heal him, he's being raped by circumstances, and thus is not morally committing a sin?

I don't think actions by circumstances get the same word choice as actions by people. However I do think that is accurate for single action offers. My untrustworthy moral intuitions claim it is muddled for cost->benefit offers.

If someone were poisoned(not by me) and I had the antidote, it would be coercion to offer it as a reward for sex (since I could give the antidote without the sex). However if I could not give it without the sex, the antidote is causally linked to the sex but is not the sex, my untrustworthy moral intuitions still dislike it. However upon reflection I believe that is moral disgust at the situation rather than a fair moral judgement of the act of offering.

khadgar567
2016-03-11, 12:52 PM
Is it the same difference? Consider the following case:

Testing analogy: I have a moral objection to cannibalism. I am starving and the only food around is my dead friend. Before they died they granted me permission to eat their corpse once they were dead. I am stuck between dying and something I find morally objectionable. But I do not consider my late friend's offer as coercive. Later I die of starvation.

Here we have the action of eating my late friend. The same action that I find morally objectionable is the action that has the benefit. As such I do not find the benefit as being coercive but rather it is merely one of the many traits of the action. When looking at the action as a unit, I judge it as morally objectionable.


you know at least segev gives two separate cases that when handled gives valid result your is pretty much cruel choice (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SadisticChoice) on pc who is preety much either moral wreck or dead anyway


1) You continue to fail to address my point.
2) I did not choose to describe the situation as unfortunate circumstance vs objectionable option. That was decided upthread. I merely am discussing the nature of coercion and whether or not it applies to single things in the same manner as it applies to cost->reward things.
funny thing is it all the above events can be happened in same module most party is killed and the only one survives with injuries now starving and his own team mates gives him the cruel choice so lets introduce a small variable like the after mentioned nymph now pc can get healed and has small chance that nymph can give him some food so pc survives and now even more determined to avenge his team mates. now revel that nymph is actually angel who can teach pc some divine guidance so he prcs to some class to gain that important wisdom / power from small life changing event
now how its that for answer

Keltest
2016-03-11, 04:23 PM
It is a choice; if you feel that chastity is more important than your own life, you can choose to stay sick and/or die.

That is a false choice, for reasons I hope are readily apparent. Yes, they may have granted permission, but if the only reason they acquiesced is because their life is on the line, theyre still going to feel violated, and I hope you can see why several of us are highly uncomfortable with labeling that "good".

And what happens if theyre unconscious or otherwise unable to say yea or nay? The celestial has no good option there.

Segev
2016-03-11, 04:28 PM
That is a false choice, for reasons I hope are readily apparent. Yes, they may have granted permission, but if the only reason they acquiesced is because their life is on the line, theyre still going to feel violated, and I hope you can see why several of us are highly uncomfortable with labeling that "good".

And what happens if theyre unconscious or otherwise unable to say yea or nay? The celestial has no good option there.

I didn't say it was "good." I said the hypothetical MHSN is not committing rape or rape-like action by making the offer, nor by going through with it if the offer is agreed to.

Milo v3
2016-03-11, 05:30 PM
Your counterpoint doesn't address the issue. If the celestial can emulate all of his sex powers and more with magic, the very existence of those sex powers is put into question.
Well he doesn't since... there seperate things. His SLA's do things charm monster/mirror image/cure *something* wounds/etc.


If he can't, there are possible situations where adapting my example makes it perfectly valid.
Nope, since it doesn't remove things that are already effecting the creature. It buffs a creature if they share an act of passion. There aren't many situations were you call a random person (who isn't part of your party and isn't adventuring with you) a jerk for not giving you a relatively short-duration buff.

ThinkMinty
2016-03-11, 07:06 PM
Is it the same difference? Consider the following case:

Testing analogy: I have a moral objection to cannibalism. I am starving and the only food around is my dead friend. Before they died they granted me permission to eat their corpse once they were dead. I am stuck between dying and something I find morally objectionable. But I do not consider my late friend's offer as coercive. Later I die of starvation.

Here we have the action of eating my late friend. The same action that I find morally objectionable is the action that has the benefit. As such I do not find the benefit as being coercive but rather it is merely one of the many traits of the action. When looking at the action as a unit, I judge it as morally objectionable.

All I got from that is that "sex is cannibalism". Premise for some really esoteric porn? Sure, but not the best metaphor to make your point without getting super sex-negative about it.


I didn't say it was "good." I said the hypothetical MHSN is not committing rape or rape-like action by making the offer, nor by going through with it if the offer is agreed to.

If it's their only way to help, then reality is being coercive, rather than the nymph. The nymph is trying to make the best of the situation. It's sort of like CPR but with outercourse instead of just smooch-like positioning.

If they can help but they're holding it hostage, then they're coercing you.


To make it fair but still naughty, I'd probably give them a Lay on Hands that's most potent when they touch the recipient's butt.

goto124
2016-03-11, 07:20 PM
I didn't say it was "good." I said the hypothetical MHSN [where the 'act' is literally required for healing] is not committing rape or rape-like action by making the offer, nor by going through with it if the offer is agreed to.

Okay.




To make it fair but still naughty, I'd probably give them a Lay on Hands that's most potent when they touch the recipient's butt.

That reminds me of something else from the 101 Reasons to adventure thread:


The king has offered the hand of his plump posteriored princess to whomever can slay the dragon assaulting the kingdom. Normally you wouldn't do something so dangerous, but, well, you like big butts and you can not lie.


…because you're a Paladin.


...and Lay on Hands is a class feature.


...and why else do you think your name would be "Sir" Mixalot?

Lay on Hands alone is just naughty enough, it doesn't need any extra help! :P


While we're at it, I was thinking of powers that are fueled by the arousal of both the celestial and nearby people. Helps when the latter feeds into the former :smallbiggrin:

ThinkMinty
2016-03-11, 07:38 PM
That reminds me of something else from the 101 Reasons to adventure thread:

The king has offered the hand of his plump posteriored princess to whomever can slay the dragon assaulting the kingdom. Normally you wouldn't do something so dangerous, but, well, you like big butts and you can not lie.

Question: Can I still take the quest and slay the dragon (or at least get 'em to stop being a jerk and assaulting everyone), can I take the plump posterior'd princess' hand and give it to the princess herself? Her fat ass is ADORABLE, but I want her to be free to choose her own fate. Liberating a callipygian cutie from compulsion is a higher priority than winning her like a carnival prize, at least for me.

goto124
2016-03-11, 07:51 PM
Considering that this is a royal marriage, there's probably an element of necessity in there. One ponders at the point of marrying a princess off to whoever slays a dragon. Is it "gotta convince someone to save the kingdom, and that someone probably has a lot of or no want for money or anything else"? Is it "this is off-topic and should go somewhere else?"

Ultimately, the princess will likely not get to marry for love, or even be able to so much as 'touch' someone else. Being royalty is hard. Still (or rather, because of that), it's wise you let her choose this once, especially if the marriage itself was purely meant as an incentive for someone to slay the dragon, and the marriage brings few benefits otherwise.

Would Courtly Love with the princess be acceptable?

druid91
2016-03-11, 08:10 PM
I generally agree, it does sort of show a worrying trend. I mean, it's come to the point that it's a standard rule of thumb that if any female NPC shows sexual interest in a party member, that NPC is probably evil. A succubus, a vampire, something else... Honestly, it's a problem with a lot of human societies, though, it's not just a feature of the game. For some reason, we tend to treat anything with sexual connotations as inherently evil at worst, and at best, as taboo or just as a joke.

Well, that's less to do with sex as an evil. And more to do with sex leaving you vulnerable. I know at the tables I've been at, generally speaking ANY attempt to get a PC alone with an NPC who hasn't been vetted time and time again, let alone alone and naked, is met with certain levels of suspicion.

I mean you're talking about a class of people who can be identified in no small part by their paranoid overreactions to otherwise completely mundane objects like boxes, doors, rugs, paintings, or pretty much anything else you can name.

So, it's less that sex is particularly evil, and more that D&D adventurers who live long, gaining a certain level of universal paranoia towards literally everything around them.

Also sex is really really hard to portray in a mature manner that's not just throwaway in D&D. It's either a joke, or a line of your backstory.

Segev
2016-03-11, 08:37 PM
If it's their only way to help, then reality is being coercive, rather than the nymph. The nymph is trying to make the best of the situation. It's sort of like CPR but with outercourse instead of just smooch-like positioning.

If they can help but they're holding it hostage, then they're coercing you.


Precisely. Reality coerces us all the time. Just...usually not with sex.

Segev
2016-03-11, 08:40 PM
Considering that this is a royal marriage, there's probably an element of necessity in there. One ponders at the point of marrying a princess off to whoever slays a dragon. Is it "gotta convince someone to save the kingdom, and that someone probably has a lot of or no want for money or anything else"? Is it "this is off-topic and should go somewhere else?"
The reason, aside from "gotta bribe the hero," is that the King needs somebody who can defend the kingdom to succeed him. Or just wants to marry that strength into the family; in the future, he won't have to bribe that dragonslayer to help out because it will be in their interest.

Also, having The Dragonslayer as your son-in-law does a lot for political clout in a world where sending your son-in-law to deal with recalcitrant nobles is an expected option.

OldTrees1
2016-03-11, 08:45 PM
All I got from that is that "sex is cannibalism". Premise for some really esoteric porn? Sure, but not the best metaphor to make your point without getting super sex-negative about it.

What?! How did ... Just, what?!

Sigh, I am talking about coercion and why single action offers are not coercive unlike the Cost->Reward offers which are coercive.

Cost->Reward offers even when unintended as such dangle the _Reward_ as a carrot to incentive the target/mark accept the offer despite the _Cost_. See those posts talking about rape? debate over whether there is coercion inherent in the offer is why.

Single action offers are cases where the cost and reward are inherently tied to each other as part of the same thing. If I offered you a pencil the pros of having a pencil and the cons of having a pencil are inherently tied to each other by nature of them being the same "having a pencil". When the cons are inherently part of the same thing as the pros, then I am arguing one cannot consider the pros to be coercive.

Now if you get out of this post "He is talking about coercion" then good. If you get "Sex=Cannibalism=Having a Pencil" instead then I give up on communicating to you.

goto124
2016-03-11, 08:51 PM
All I got, is that we should have a race where sex is cannibalism.

Oh wait, black widows and praying mantises.

Zaydos
2016-03-11, 09:07 PM
My take away from this thread is don't have sex with thri-kreen. They will probably eat you.

Which went without saying as I'm a human and one of the defining traits of the original thri-kreen was that they had no problems whatsoever with anthrophagy.

Keltest
2016-03-11, 09:10 PM
All I got, is that we should have a race where sex is cannibalism.

Oh wait, black widows and praying mantises.

Actually, praying mantises only do that because they don't like being observed in the act. It stresses them out.

druid91
2016-03-11, 10:21 PM
Also, I've got to say that the idea of weaponizing sex for good people kind of defeats the point of why Succubi/incubi and their ilk are uniquely evil.

Which is that they weaponize sex. Personal affection isn't something that happens for them, they just pantomime the motions of it in order to murder you.

In turn, what with the existence of Aasimar and half-celestials, it's clear that Angels and mortals do get together, but it's a personal thing. It's not that Succubi/Incubi have sex and are therefor evil. It's that they USE sex, a good thing, to commit evil that makes them evil. They use and abuse positive impulses to create havoc and destruction, and ultimately to betray those they are using and kill them to top the whole evil cake off.

goto124
2016-03-12, 04:19 AM
Also, I've got to say that the idea of weaponizing sex for good people kind of defeats the point of why Succubi/incubi and their ilk are uniquely evil.

Which is that they weaponize sex. Personal affection isn't something that happens for them, they just pantomime the motions of it in order to murder you.

In turn, what with the existence of Aasimar and half-celestials, it's clear that Angels and mortals do get together, but it's a personal thing. It's not that Succubi/Incubi have sex and are therefor evil. It's that they USE sex, a good thing, to commit evil that makes them evil. They use and abuse positive impulses to create havoc and destruction, and ultimately to betray those they are using and kill them to top the whole evil cake off.

To literally weaponize sex is to use sex in combat, which is coercive for hopefully obvious reasons.

Even in a less literal interpretation of weaponizing sex, one would be using sex against someone else, which is still coercive.

There's no way to weaponize sex and be good or sex-positive. In fact, we just discussed sex healing and already agreed it wouldn't be "good". Sex healing of the "my type of healing requires sex and there's no way around it" does nothing to encourage sex-positivity, because what in the name of Eilistraee does sex healing have to do with the virtues of sex(uality)?

One can argue that sex and sexual impulses are neutral, but yes that still does mean sex is not inherently evil.

An issue we've run into when trying to make anti-succubi, is that Evil has much more leeway than Good. Evil can do a mix of Evil and Good acts, as well as all sorts of morally grey acts, on a regular basis without losing alignment as long as they do enough Evil. But for Good? Good has moral standards to uphold. Even morally grey acts can't be performed, at least not on a regular basis! And bringing sex into actions can make the acts morally grey at best. A whole kerfuffle over what consent means, if the receiver had 'really' consented, and so on. Elsewhere on the internet, we have entire arguments over consent. Not very good for designing beings who're supposed to be literal embodiments of Good.

By the way, could someone provide a concrete example of an evil succubus using sex(ual seduction) to bring the downfall of a mortal?

PersonMan
2016-03-12, 02:52 PM
When I hear 'weaponized sex' I think 'the problem with my super power is that I shoot a giant death ray only while doing it' and a montage of various regions being destroyed by a giant laser, followed by a shot of a guy apologizing in quickly-pulled-on jeans to the residents.

McStabbington
2016-03-12, 06:40 PM
An issue we've run into when trying to make anti-succubi, is that Evil has much more leeway than Good. Evil can do a mix of Evil and Good acts, as well as all sorts of morally grey acts, on a regular basis without losing alignment as long as they do enough Evil. But for Good? Good has moral standards to uphold. Even morally grey acts can't be performed, at least not on a regular basis! And bringing sex into actions can make the acts morally grey at best. A whole kerfuffle over what consent means, if the receiver had 'really' consented, and so on. Elsewhere on the internet, we have entire arguments over consent. Not very good for designing beings who're supposed to be literal embodiments of Good.



There's also the fact that "sex for great goodness" is not a story that our society is familiar with at all. I've been doing some amateur study of ancient gods, mostly trying to study for patterns in another game, and what I keep coming across is that there really aren't a lot of stories about goddesses that have both love/sex and goodness in their portfolio's, as it were.

Basically, you tend to see two main groups of goddesses. On one side, there are the mother goddesses like Demeter, Hestia and Frigg. These may have some notion of sexuality and fertility, but it's just a small component in their overall mission in the service of motherhood and family. Sex for it's own sake is not really important.

One the other side, in the older, pre-Christian traditions, you have the warrior/hunter goddesses. The Valkyries, the Erinyes of Greek myth and full-blown goddesses Nemesis and Artemis. These are all quintessentially female, but they are not about sex at all, having sublimated that for the wholesale pursuit of some other mission entirely like vengeance (the Erinyes) and justice (Nemesis). Now it's interesting that these are still seen in Christian imagery: justice, for instance, is typically represented as a blindfolded maiden, possibly winged, carrying a scale and sword, which is an almost wholesale co-opting of the pre-Christian imagery of Nemesis. But in actual Christian storytelling, they've been wholly supplanted by storytelling about maidens. Think about how in the Lord of the Rings, Eowyn casts aside her sword and shield and decides to 1) marry, and 2) become all about growing things. That's not actually all that incidental based on how deeply Tolkien knew and understood early Christian myth.

So long story short, the idea of a goddess being both morally good and decidedly active in her sexuality is a story that is profoundly alien both to Christian myth and the precursor cultures that Christianity has adopted its imagery from like the Norse and Greek/Roman pantheon. If you're female, you're either a mother, or you're a sexless beauty devoted to other things. There are a few exceptions, but even these don't fit neatly into what we're looking for. Aphrodite, for instance, is all about fertility, but she's also very morally grey. There's significant evidence that Freya might have been far more than what we currently know about her, but it appears as if all records of her stories as a member of the Vanir were purposely forgotten/destroyed in no small part because only the stories about the younger Norse pantheon of the Aesir could readily be fit into our larger Christian understanding. It's possible that there were other, older traditions that might have incorporated notions about using sex for the powers of good, but if they did exist, their traditions were forgotten and supplanted by Christianity as they moved through the area rather than incorporated.

TheFamilarRaven
2016-03-13, 01:55 AM
By the way, could someone provide a concrete example of an evil succubus using sex(ual seduction) to bring the downfall of a mortal?

Downfall meaning corruption? Like shifting alignment into evil territory? I'd argue that's not in the succubus' MO. And my brief google search has kind of supported that. There seem to be no myths in which succubi are the cause of human corruption (other than the belief that sex outside of wedlock is a sin.) Rather, they just seem to seduce men and then kill'em.... because they're evil.... And even then there's no specific legends or stories in which succubi appear as seducers hoping to get a quick meal. Unless you equate succubi to sirens.

Edit: I guess that's a downfall... 'cause you're dead...

Segev
2016-03-13, 09:21 AM
By the way, could someone provide a concrete example of an evil succubus using sex(ual seduction) to bring the downfall of a mortal?

Piers Anthony's For Love of Evil, in his Incarnations of Immortality series, has this as one of the main plot drivers.

OldTrees1
2016-03-13, 12:13 PM
Downfall meaning corruption? Like shifting alignment into evil territory? I'd argue that's not in the succubus' MO. And my brief google search has kind of supported that. There seem to be no myths in which succubi are the cause of human corruption (other than the belief that sex outside of wedlock is a sin.) Rather, they just seem to seduce men and then kill'em.... because they're evil.... And even then there's no specific legends or stories in which succubi appear as seducers hoping to get a quick meal. Unless you equate succubi to sirens.

Edit: I guess that's a downfall... 'cause you're dead...

Sex and power as a reward for small tasks. (Although sometimes it is the devil equivalent instead)

Did you know Succubi can evolve ala pokemon evolution if they sacrifice a congregation they themselves have corrupted?

khadgar567
2016-03-13, 01:16 PM
Sex and power as a reward for small tasks. (Although sometimes it is the devil equivalent instead)

Did you know Succubi can evolve ala pokemon evolution if they sacrifice a congregation they themselves have corrupted?

I know there is ascended demon trope but how you suppose to make little naughty succubus evolve in to greater aspect of lust (insert new name) monster

OldTrees1
2016-03-13, 03:08 PM
I know there is ascended demon trope but how you suppose to make little naughty succubus evolve in to greater aspect of lust (insert new name) monster

In 3.5 D&D the Lilitu demon was printed in Fiendish Codex I. The transformation ritual differs for each succubus but involves the sacrifice of a congregation of faithful worshipers that believe they are serving a benign deity. So prep work involves tricking an congregation's worth of people into unknowing worship of a demon lord. After the transformation they continue to go around creating these cults in service of the demon lord they serve.

khadgar567
2016-03-14, 01:47 AM
In 3.5 D&D the Lilitu demon was printed in Fiendish Codex I. The transformation ritual differs for each succubus but involves the sacrifice of a congregation of faithful worshipers that believe they are serving a benign deity. So prep work involves tricking an congregation's worth of people into unknowing worship of a demon lord. After the transformation they continue to go around creating these cults in service of the demon lord they serve.

Thanks for info but i prefer my cultist divine free ( both coruption sense and workship sense)

Segev
2016-03-14, 09:27 AM
Thanks for info but i prefer my cultist divine free ( both coruption sense and workship sense)

Isn't having a cult that is free of divinity kind of missing the point?

Friv
2016-03-14, 09:39 AM
By the way, could someone provide a concrete example of an evil succubus using sex(ual seduction) to bring the downfall of a mortal?

The ur-example is probably The Monk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monk), one of the early big Gothic novels (and I mean early - 1796). Matilda is an ill-defined servant of the devil who seduces and corrupts the titular monk.

khadgar567
2016-03-14, 10:18 AM
Isn't having a cult that is free of divinity kind of missing the point?

let me explain I want obedient slaves that still has sanity left as my cult not murderous psycho zealots trying to usher apocalypse via some drug induced dream about new world order

OldTrees1
2016-03-14, 11:09 AM
let me explain I want obedient slaves that still has sanity left as my cult not murderous psycho zealots trying to usher apocalypse via some drug induced dream about new world order
Ah, I think I miscommunicated. The would be Lilitu's victims are more like the 1st than the 2nd. Imagine a cult worshiping _Insert Female Demon Lord_ under the belief that she was a goddess of fertility. After some corrupting, the Succubus then locks the temple doors, opens a Gate to some abyssal furnace, and burns the congregation alive. Dying in the process, the former Succubus then rises as a Lilitu.

khadgar567
2016-03-14, 11:37 AM
Ah, I think I miscommunicated. The would be Lilitu's victims are more like the 1st than the 2nd. Imagine a cult worshiping _Insert Female Demon Lord_ under the belief that she was a goddess of fertility. After some corrupting, the Succubus then locks the temple doors, opens a Gate to some abyssal furnace, and burns the congregation alive. Dying in the process, the former Succubus then rises as a Lilitu.
no problem on evolution side just mind raping murderous psychos then releasing them on local people is real problem.

OldTrees1
2016-03-14, 11:50 AM
no problem on evolution side just mind raping murderous psychos then releasing them on local people is real problem.

I apologize, I could not parse that sentence. Would you please rephrase it or explain what you said there?

khadgar567
2016-03-14, 12:19 PM
I apologize, I could not parse that sentence. Would you please rephrase it or explain what you said there?

explanation I like creating (harem)cults were every member is high charisma females ( so in this treats case consider me incubus). If i mindrape them and turn them to cultists worshiping me as some god i want the concubines still sane so i can send them to covert ops mission to eliminate my rivals. on the other side of coin the murder focused cultist who works best as pc magnets and i dont want local city to put a bounty on my head so no crazy cultist with dooms day visions