Appearances

[Joseph]

Appearance rolls in on the first impression that folks get. How pretty is someone? How attractive?  Part of that rolls in carriage and poise.  Yes' date=' it's non-verbal, but it's that critical first impression. [/quote']
If someone was trying to impress another person on a first impression with carriage and poise instead of just how they looked, I'd probably have them roll Charisma (if simply going off of how they naturally carry themselves) or Manipulation (if they were faking it intentionally for a given effect) instead of Appearance.  

How many folks have pined over a beautiful woman' date=' only to find out that she's about as poisonous as a coral snake after a few minutes? Rude, pushy, inconsiderate? But, she has great poise and wonderful carriage.  [/quote']
Rude, pushy, and inconsiderate people can still be VERY charismatic.  Not all of charisma is being NICE to people.

In game terms' date=' you can poll that one up to high Apperance, low Charisma.  [/quote']
You possibly could, but you could also make an identical character that had high Appearance AND high Charisma, who was still rude, pushy, and inconsiderate.  Harsh personalities WORK for some people, and many people like jerks, plain and simple.

You can justify a boost in Appearance in game terms without someone getting radical surgery by them just exuding that special something that comes from confidence' date=' or you can use the tried and true method used by film and television, and have them let their hair down from the bun, take off their glasses, and put them in a tiny black dress and suddenly wow folks. [/quote']
I don't think so, but whatever floats your boat.  Confidence is Charisma (if real) or Manipulation (if feigned) where I'm coming from. 

With Exalts, you don't even have to use this method. They're infused with little slices of Heavenly Glory.  It just keeps coming out, transmogrifying them as they grow in power.  Blemishes disappear, they become ideals, growing more and more lovely each and every day.  

You could, but nothing in print justifies this for anyone but the Abyssals, or possibly the Lunars, who have shapeshifting Charms that can accomodate it.

I think that you can easily justify an increase in Appearance' date=' especially in game terms.  You can do so in number of ways.[/quote']
Your suggestions mostly have to do with confidence (which I don't think is Appearance), dressing differently (which shouldn't be possible; your ATTRIBUTES should not be variable based on your SITUATION.  A pretty man who dressed to ugly himself wouldn't lower his Appearance by 2 dots, he'd just take a hit on Appearance rolls), or magic (which can justify anything I suppose).


I'm still very close to ditching it for Empathy.  Appearance is useless, and shouldn't be an Attribute.

 

[Jakk Bey]

Appearance just means how attractive you are to folks. Do you look good? Do you look reet?* They used Apperance pretty well in Aberrant, and that might be the place to look at possibilities for use of extra high Appearance.


You can easily justify boosts to Appearance as folks grow in power and confidence.


In the real world, attractive is a bundle of things all rolled up. Dress, attitude, poise, as well as bone structure. It rolls up into something that makes you turn your head and take a second, third, or even get off your bar stool and bring over a drink and hope your line isn't too tired, or that she has a girlfriend who just broke up with her philandering boyfriend and has a mad on for anything male, including her very traumatized tomcat at home. In a game, it boils down to something else.


It just seems that we use Appearance a bit differently. I use Appearance when there isn't any talking, when you are making that first impression, or coupling it with Charisma based rolls in tandem to see if they can interest a party on both the mind and the body levels. You can be damn charismatic, but bone ass ugly and get play.


But it's harder...


*yes, I used reet in a sentence; it rhymes with petite, and I stand by it, because it's a damn fine word that doesn't get ponyed out enough.

 

[Joseph]

Appearance just means how attractive you are to folks. Do you look good? Do you look reet?*

Given how subjective that is, your statement does a good job backing my argument as to why Appearance shouldn't be an Attribute at all.

 

[Jakk Bey]

Then don't use it.  No hoo hoo there. I don't think that Empathy is a good replacement though.  I think that is much more a skill that is cultivated, rather than in born--but it's your table.

 

[Persell]

I actually think that Appearance is a stat that could be raised with experience, perhaps not by mortals but certainly by Exalts and other supernatural beings. Look at some of the examples of the older Dragon-Blooded from the Aspect books, for example, the Windtamer Cynis Mond or the Immaculate Grandmaster Ragara Myrrun. Both are of fairly advanced age and immense power as Terrestrials go and both are so in tune with their element that it has began to effect them physically (Particularly the Windtamer), an effect similiar to this could mean that your Appearance increases as your mastery of Essence does, you become closer to perfection, in all facets of your being, physically etc. and you do literally become more beautiful. (Admittedly I doubt an argument could be made that Myrrun is good looking, he looks like a cliff face, but an Earth Aspect who had a face of crystalline beauty that only became more perfect as his/her power grew)


The same could be argued of someone like Chejop Kejak. Kejak is almost certainly not beautiful in the conventional sense, however appearance is the attribute that dictates your initial impressions of people and I have no doubt that Kejak is an awesome individual to meet in person.


So I think that Exalts/God-Blooded/Whatever could increase their appearance as they increased in power and became closer to the divinity/elemental power or whatever that empowers them

 

[Marquis]

The same could be argued of someone like Chejop Kejak. Kejak is almost certainly not beautiful in the conventional sense, however appearance is the attribute that dictates your initial impressions of people and I have no doubt that Kejak is an awesome individual to meet in person.

wouldn't this be charisma? saying that someone is awesome to meet in person, whether they radiate vast amounts of power, or seem immediately likeable (or scary), could exist regardless of their physical appearance. Someone could be a thoroughly awesome sight and be ugly as sin.


I will agree however, that exalts should be able to increase their appearance with EXP due to their link with supernatural and divine (or infernal) forces. The dragonblooded core specifically states that as they grow in power, DB's take on certain physical traits of their granted aspect. A fire aspect could develop the hypnotic beauty of a flickering candle, a water aspect the serene beauty of a placid lake under starlight. Although it becomes difficult at times to determine what of this is charisma and what is appearance, there is a certain aspect of this transformation as power increases that is purely a base physical change (seperate from personality).


The abyssals are interesting in that they are the only type of exalt (as far as I know) that have appearance limitations as their essence increases. Either they become more ugly and corpse-like or they grow more and more beautiful (almost frighteningly so). I happen to appreciate this particular system, but I am also of the opinion that appearance is an important attribute that doesn't get used nearly enough. Everybody makes instant judgements on people based on how they look (despite how hard they may try not too) and this would inevitably effect pc's in the world of exalted, when they meet people for the first time. Appearance is a difficult ability to consciously USE, but it does play a major role in how people interact with one another. As a storyteller, I usually enforce an Appearance/Presence roll between all PC's and major NPC's upon their initial introduction, just to lay out exactly how they react to one another upon first sight (this can be altered if a player wants to make a charisma roll to give off a certain aura) and the results of the appearance roll vary depending on the successes rolled and the personality of those involved. (Someone who is adverse to beautiful people may be especially put off by a guy with appearance 5 who rolls a lot of successes, for example)


just a few thoughts....

 

[Persell]

wouldn't this be charisma? saying that someone is awesome to meet in person, whether they radiate vast amounts of power, or seem immediately likeable (or scary), could exist regardless of their physical appearance. Someone could be a thoroughly awesome sight and be ugly as sin.

Perhaps, but I think that Appearance is basically in all senses the attribute of first impressions. To paraphrase from Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time Series, if a man descends from a throne, even if he's a knobend (paraphrasing a lot here :wink people will still remember that he did descend from a throne. The inverse is true, if


So basically, while I greatly doubt that Kejak is an unbelievably attractive guy who should give it all up and become a stripper, I nevertheless think that he, without speaking would give off an aura of gravitas and wisdom and his looks would back this up, which would IMO translate into a high appearance in-game (and I agree here with an earlier poster that appearance is passive whilst charisma involves interaction)

 

[MikeOQuinn]

Appearance, to me, is the statistic defining the impression of someone's outward projection (trying not to use 'appearance' as both a statistic and what it's describing, so give me a break).


I tend to think of Appearance 1 as being bland, unnoteworthy rather than ugly. An impressively ugly person who uses that as a tool has a high appearance, just not a pleasant one.


It's the difference between Fame and Infamy. Both get you known to a wide group, and can produce the same effects, you just have to know how to use what you have to your advantage.

 

[Marquis]

So basically, while I greatly doubt that Kejak is an unbelievably attractive guy who should give it all up and become a stripper, I nevertheless think that he, without speaking would give off an aura of gravitas and wisdom and his looks would back this up, which would IMO translate into a high appearance in-game (and I agree here with an earlier poster that appearance is passive whilst charisma involves interaction)

I would definitely be inclined to agree with this. The only problem I see is the description that the appearance attribute is given in the Core book. It is depicted as a measure of pure physical beauty. I'm not sure if Charisma is the attribute most well suited to depicting an aura of gravitas or wisdom (or anything similar to this), because it is true that Charisma is more active, but unless the Appearance attribute is modified as per the core rulebook, it seems more appropriate than appearance. This is, of course, all in my opinion.

 

[Joseph]

So basically, while I greatly doubt that Kejak is an unbelievably attractive guy who should give it all up and become a stripper, I nevertheless think that he, without speaking would give off an aura of gravitas and wisdom and his looks would back this up, which would IMO translate into a high appearance in-game (and I agree here with an earlier poster that appearance is passive whilst charisma involves interaction)

I agree he'd give off that aura, and that aura is Charisma, not Appearance.  Charisma includes an "air of confidence" according to the rule book.  You don't need to ACTIVELY interact with someone to have an air of confidence, that's the whole point of an "air" really.  


Nothing in the book implies Charisma requires active interaction.  Appearance, on the other hand, is pure attractiveness, nothing more.  If you aren't good looking, your Appearance isn't high.

 

[Persell]

Bah fine, I'll acknowledge it, but it just goes to show how absurd the attribute of appearance is as defined in the core book. I do think that it should be broadened to include the demeanour of the character and even their sheer coolness. I accept that Charisma is going to affect the likeability, but it is an attribute that has to involve interaction for me. You could talk to someone and find them incredibly likeable (Charisma) but that charisma wouldn't come into effect until they opened their mouth and instead you'd be thinking is: Wow he/she looks... impressive/hot/wise (Appearance)


C'mon though Joseph, you've got to give me the points for the XP increasing appearance though... please

 

[Joseph]

Bah fine, I'll acknowledge it, but it just goes to show how absurd the attribute of appearance is as defined in the core book.

I agree, it's an absurd Attribute, but in ESSENCE, rather than just as the core book defined it.

I do think that it should be broadened to include the demeanour of the character and even their sheer coolness.

That would take away from Charisma too much.  The better idea is to clearly simply remove it and add in something actually useful, rather than subjective nonsense like Appearance.

I accept that Charisma is going to affect the likeability, but it is an attribute that has to involve interaction for me.

You're interacting with someone just by looking at them, you realize.  Body language is interaction, and "demeanor and coolness" both generally come from body language.  

You could talk to someone and find them incredibly likeable (Charisma) but that charisma wouldn't come into effect until they opened their mouth and instead you'd be thinking is: Wow he/she looks... impressive/hot/wise (Appearance)

Social interaction goes quite some way beyond just what you say and how you say it though.  Thinking they were attractive WOULD be Appearance, but thinking "Wow, he looks like he's the type to be in control of a situation," would be either Charisma or Manipulation, depending on if it was a facade or natural.

C'mon though Joseph, you've got to give me the points for the XP increasing appearance though... please

I all ready admitted there are certain situations in which it would make sense to raise Appearance with experience (though I limited them a bit more than "Just being Exalted," -- Lunars or Abyssals makes sense, Solars somewhat less so for instance).  Unfortunately, as it stands anyone, at any time, can raise their Apperance with XP, even Heroic Mortals.

 

[Silversight]

As an aside, here's something that Neph wrote about describing high Appearance characters.  Mind you, this may be more fitting for those in the Appearance 7+ range, but it still works for 5-7 depending on the circumstances.


"You behold the paragon of all you have ever known or imagined you would find beautiful. The rest of the world will forever seem a place of ugliness and menial brutality compared with the radiance of this transcendent moment. You will never be satisfied again. No lover will compare, and you will whisper her name in every embrace. She will haunt your dreams for as long as you live, and the blurred memory of her will still awaken you drenched in sweat and burning from the fire in your loins to the end of days. Suffer."

 

[Marquis]

"You behold the paragon of all you have ever known or imagined you would find beautiful. The rest of the world will forever seem a place of ugliness and menial brutality compared with the radiance of this transcendent moment. You will never be satisfied again. No lover will compare, and you will whisper her name in every embrace. She will haunt your dreams for as long as you live, and the blurred memory of her will still awaken you drenched in sweat and burning from the fire in your loins to the end of days. Suffer."

Definitely very cool. And certainly an aspect that was made at home in the world of Vampire. The only problem I see is that, not everyone would immediately fall in love that much with someone of such beauty. Some may react negatively, and be inclined to harbour bitter feelings for them. It all depends on how that particular person feels about physical beauty. Then there is the ever present factor of "type." Different people find different looks ugly and beautiful and even with an appearance of 5, if that person just doesn't float your boat, then well too bad. This does not mean that they cannot admit that you are physically "beautiful," but that fact doesn't mean they have to absolutely love you. The only way i see of overcoming this possibilities is for the beauty to have a magical effect. where the attractor is not so much the physical appearance but the magic which is being used to manipulate the other persons feelings.

 

[Andrew02]

Ironically, what Neph is describing in that passage is the use of Irressitable Succubus Style by some disgustingly high powered entity such as the Maiden Clad in the Raiment of Tears. The nature of the charm discounts all that subjective bullshit of some player trying to jerk his way out of having something unpleasant happen to him. Just as you suggest, it is a magical effect.


Might as well pull the same shit you describe with all of the Social Attributes, though. "Oh, I don't think that was a charismatic/manipulative at ALL," and so on.

 

[Marquis]

Very true. I suppose that is the difference between simply relying on an attribute and bolstering that attribute with a charm. Charms, by their nature, denote a magical effect. So where as someone could potentially resist say... a charisma/presence roll, that same charisma/presence roll which is being bolstered by a charm such as "Elegant Tyrants Majesty" (if i'm remembering the charm correctly) would be more difficult to oppose. simply because you are now contending with a magical effect which would override your natural inclinations. (this is an effect, which in my opinion, may not be fully and accurately represented by simply having dice added to the roll. I would say, throw in a willpower roll or a temperance roll to show that the character is having to fend off magical effects.)

 

[Andrew02]

Relying on an Attribute is only viable for the physical attributes and perhaps a few of the mental ones. Social attributes are a clusterfuck of subjective notions.

 

[Halfdead Frodi]

Relying on an Attribute is only viable for the physical attributes and perhaps a few of the mental ones. Social attributes are a clusterfuck of subjective notions.

So I suppose we should simply narrate our games instead of using their rules? After all, attributes are too subjective. I assume dice are similar? Or games rules? Pike off. Oh, and perhaps we should do away with all abilities as well...or charms. Or playing the game, it might be too subjective and not completely concrete. Paper/rock/Scissors is a much better game with simple easy to understand rules and completely concrete results in all circumstances. Perhaps you could try that? But then you might tie and have to try again, so maybe that should also be scrapped...

 

[Andrew02]

Are you a fucking idiot, Frodi? You must be. You simply must be.


Follow the thread, and pay particular attention to what Marquis said. In particular, pay attention to what I have said, you have falsely inferred I have asserted all Attributes are too subjective. It's sloppiness.


Relying strictly upon any of the Social Attributes is impossible. This thread has been all about how subjective Appearance is and therefor should not be an attribute. It is not that difficult to conceive of the fact that Charisma and Manipulation are likewise subjective. I can sit beside another individual and listen to a political speech and have a diametrically opposed reaction. I might be completely convinced on every point made during the speech and be firmly convinced I should vote for the speaker. My companion may be completely unconvinced and dead set on voting for another political candidate.


Appearance 5 Paris Hilton vs. Appearance 3 Girl Next Door. Marquis, Joseph, and others have argued that it doesn't matter Appearance Paris has if the character is more likely to be attracted to Girl Next Door or finds Paris's body type unattractive in general.


In Exalted, there is the very same problem. Charms are well-nigh required to go around it.


Now, the Physical Attributes do not have this problem. In a raw contest of Attributes, a character with Dexterity 5 is faster than a character with Dexterity 4. There is nothing to talk about. There is no, "I don't think physical trait X is fast, so the first character is slower!" A character with Strength 5 is stronger than a character with Strength 4 or lower. Perception 5 beats out Perception 4 or less. No charms are neccessary to ensure the ascendancy of the character with the greater attribute. The physical and mental attributes have this feature. The social attributes do not.


Was that clear enough for you? Hmm? Or did I lose you because Sesame Street came on?

 

[Halfdead Frodi]

Very well. And I will continue to think that a roleplaying game without anything social within it is utter lunacy. Simply removing things because they may or may not be subjective is utter bull. There are too many things integral to the game that are based off of social skills and social abilities for them to be removed. And strength, dexterity and Stamina can be just as 'subjective'. There are any number of KINDS of stregth, and not everyone who is fast is also nimble, nor vice versa. Nor is everyone who is able to keep going and take a fuckload of damage also healthy. Yet Exalted assumes these things of someone who has a single high physical attribute. So, do we remove dexterity because there are fast people who are clumsy? Stamina because some people can be very tough but unhealthy...or very healthy, but easily broken? What of strength because one person can lift a hell of a lot but can't win at arm wrestling to save their life? All attributes are subjective, but the game requires them to function. Removing them means changing the fundementals of the game such that it isn't the same game.


And that's without considering the other 'subjective' element within Exalted. Virtues. Extremely important to all beings within creation, the seat of the Great Curse and what drives the beings of Creation to do what they do and be who they are... but certainly not something you can completely be sure on. Do you posit their removal as well? How does one truly determine what the difference between a Compassion of 3 and a Compassion of 5 is? And if the same individual also has a Convition of 5? Which takes precedence when they captures an enemy who has harmed their people? The Conviction to ensure no threat harms those under their protection, or the Compassion to forgive or have mercy? Not easy to set in stone, but the very essence of a good story...and a necessary part of the game... yet certainly 'subjective'.

 

[Andrew02]

And I will continue to think that a roleplaying game without anything social within it is utter lunacy.

Did you take a Jakk Bey pill today, fuckwit? I did not assert this point. Nothing I have said should have sparked this thought in any rational individual with basic reading comprehension.

Simply removing things because they may or may not be subjective is utter bull.

You must have OD'd on Jakk Bey pills. There is no other possible explanation for it. I did not say that social abilities SHOULD be removed. I simply said that RELYING solely upon social skills without any other effects such as charms is not a VIABLE course of action because people have iterated over and over the subjective nature of things like what the Appearance Attribute represents.


You're being so fucking retarded here.

And strength, dexterity and Stamina can be just as 'subjective'.

As the book defines them, this simply false.

There are any number of KINDS of stregth, and not everyone who is fast is also nimble, nor vice versa. Nor is everyone who is able to keep going and take a fuckload of damage also healthy.

Within the Exalted rules, this simply false.

Yet Exalted assumes these things of someone who has a single high physical attribute.

Yes, it does. You're inventing an argument to respond to that I have not made, fucktard.

So, do we remove dexterity because there are fast people who are clumsy? Stamina because some people can be very tough but unhealthy...or very healthy, but easily broken? What of strength because one person can lift a hell of a lot but can't win at arm wrestling to save their life?

This is bullshit and I hope to God you know it, dumb fuck. In NO WAY does this flow from anything I have said. You are inventing things and making idiotically contrived assumptions for some idiotic reason I cannot fathom.

All attributes are subjective, but the game requires them to function.

The Attributes ARE NOT FUCKING ALL FUCKING SUBJECTIVE. Strength measures a specific, quantifiable area of physical capability, as does Dexterity, as does Stamina. Intelligence, Perception, and Wits offer the same quality. They can all be measured in isolation of the specifics the Social attributes require.


Appearance, though, is NOT required to make the game function (seriously, apart from the single example in the Corebook of a SAMPLE roll, find me something that actually consistently REQUIRES Appearance to function in the Corebook), and it is not impossible for the game to function without Charisma, Manipulation, or any of the other Attributes. The game could simply function with Abilities for the most part excepting special rules constructed EXPLICITLY to function with Attributes (e.g. Lunars and Alchemicals, who are the only ones to require Appearance).

Removing them means changing the fundementals of the game such that it isn't the same game.

Is there any other stupidly obvious things you would like to mention? Perhaps something along the lines of, "removing the white pieces from Chess changes the fundamentals of the game such that it isn't the same game"?

Stupid shit attacking an argument Frodi constructed so he would have stupid shit to say to something I did not bring up.

You have no idea how much restraint it took not to put "fuckwit Frodi" or "fucktard Frodi" in the quote tags. Frodi, I want you to stop huffing gas, or glue, or whatever it is you are taking to making you stupid and listen to me for a moment.


Go back, and look for my posts in this very thread. Read them. Realize I have not made the argument you foolishly construct for me and attribute to me without a shred of evidence to support I have said any such thing. Look at the posts where I say I wish to preserve Appearance in the game because I believe it matters. Realize how retarded you sound by making this shit up and acting like it is something I have said.


I know it's an extra tough big boy job, but I think you might be able to do it enough so you won't spew another long post of false attributions.

 

[Persell]

Definitely very cool. And certainly an aspect that was made at home in the world of Vampire. The only problem I see is that, not everyone would immediately fall in love that much with someone of such beauty.

I am not sure we are talking about love here. Love cannot be controlled or coerced in any way. But obsession can. And supernatural beauty (app 7+) should make, at least mortals, "fall in obsession," so to speak.


I am not a supporter for the Appearance Attribute, though. It is a useless trait, that should be up to the player to define. The active parts of the trait - manipulating people with your looks, appearing fearsome or humble or whatnot - is best covered by Composure (introduced by nWoD).

 

[Persell]

Appearance 5 Paris Hilton vs. Appearance 3 Girl Next Door. Marquis, Joseph, and others have argued that it doesn't matter Appearance Paris has if the character is more likely to be attracted to Girl Next Door or finds Paris's body type unattractive in general.

I think this is the difference between fuckable and lovable. If Paris Hilton is a bitchy airhead there really isn't much reason to spend time with her. Same goes for Girl Next Door. Beauty is often defined as the body possessing symmetry. Then there is the cultural differences and the personal. In some cultures it is important for women to have a really really long neck and some guys just prefer brunettes to redheads.


But what really makes the difference is not looks. It is the spark, the "chemistry" between two people. I guess that is bettere covered by Charisma, if it is covered at all.

 

[Andrew02]

I think this is the difference between fuckable and lovable.

I don't see how you could assert this after you've posited that Appearance causes obsession, not love.

If Paris Hilton is a bitchy airhead there really isn't much reason to spend time with her. Same goes for Girl Next Door. Beauty is often defined as the body possessing symmetry. Then there is the cultural differences and the personal. In some cultures it is important for women to have a really really long neck and some guys just prefer brunettes to redheads.

Appearance doesn't affect Bitchy Airhead status. Universal definitions of beauty are inadequate to whatever task you attempt to use them for. I believe you have not understood the point of the passage you have responded to. Nothing you have said counters anything I have attempted to say at all.


If anything, it just reinforces the point I was trying to make. Your discussion of personality based traits (i.e. bitchy airhead) even helps my assertion that Charisma and Manipulation are equally susceptible to personal and cultural differences.

But what really makes the difference is not looks.

In a raw contest of attributes which the passage existed to serve as an example for, Appearance does make the difference.

 

[Persell]

If Paris Hilton is a bitchy airhead there really isn't much reason to spend time with her. Same goes for Girl Next Door. Beauty is often defined as the body possessing symmetry. Then there is the cultural differences and the personal. In some cultures it is important for women to have a really really long neck and some guys just prefer brunettes to redheads.

Appearance doesn't affect Bitchy Airhead status. Universal definitions of beauty are inadequate to whatever task you attempt to use them for. I believe you have not understood the point of the passage you have responded to. Nothing you have said counters anything I have attempted to say at all.

But it's still funny with the long necks and all. Saw it on discovery. Really screwed up, man.