User talk:Luigifan18/Mogeko (3.5e Race)
I've been following this issue for some time. I feel I should really inform you that there are still quite a few problems with this. The first, and primary one, I feel I should address is your link in the relationships section. This is in no way shape or form, subtle. It is blatant and obvious, it just doesn't use the exact words. For example, if you were to link to a pornographic video with a black bar over the genitalia. It is still pornography. People will understand it and treat it as such, despite it not technically being shown. I did notice your conversation were you spoke about the qualities of the Mogeko that do not have to do with their main shtick. That is what you need. You need to ignore the sexual aspect completely. For example, look at the Succubus entry in 3.5. A succubus is a being that sleeps with men to steal their souls. You will see nothing about sex in this entry. The nearest it gets is kissing. --Novaform (talk) 03:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
- (Watches it return to mainspace, and puts on his DM face.) "Are you suuuure?" You may want to keep working on it, the hungry Eijis lie at the gates ready to rip and tear anew.
- Also stress bump to Nova's comment about looking at the succubus. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 13:52, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure I took out the sexual references. Is there something I missed? --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:06, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- Other than an early mention of them enjoying regular wanks, nothing I can see. LenKagetsu (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- It doesn't sound as though these creatures could go on adventures in general for a whole ton of different reasons if just their flavor is any indication. Why is this a PC race instead of a monster? That would fit SO much better. --Ghostwheel (talk) 15:41, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm operating under the assumption that a Mogeko PC has already broken away from the pseudo-hive mind, so a lot of the flavor may or may not apply to it in the first place. --Luigifan18 (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- If this is the case, then you should redo the current flavor and take it more in that direction. "While most [race] are [xyz], those who become adventures are [abc]," and then expand on [abc] since the rest isn't particularly relevant to player characters. --Ghostwheel (talk) 16:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- What Ghost said x1000. It will require more than a footnote, it's actually an entire shift in direction of focus.
- Of course... none of that will save you. Fortunately for you I have a few things I want to do before I get back to this. But... it... is.... coming.....
