[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

This community doesn't allow AI art, but I think this post would fit perfectly in !lewd_ai.

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 3 points 9 months ago

I think so, but all the stuff posted prior to the ban is still available.

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 6 points 9 months ago

I haven't seen lolibooru.moe mentioned yet.

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 3 points 11 months ago

The player could describe what they saw, but nobody except the GM knows if it's true.

It's equally plausible that the paladin failed the check and saw a monster when there was only a dog, or that they passed the check and saw a monster because there was in fact a monster. Their argument to the party would be the same in either case: "that's no dog, it's a ~~space station~~ monster".

The party then must question who saw the correct thing. Did the paladin actually see something everyone else missed? Or are they just seeing things? My point was that the players should not immediately be able to discern the truth. I find that this kind of uncertainty breeds intrigue!

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 7 points 11 months ago

I've never actually played, so this might be standard practice anyway, but I think this would be a great time to have the DM roll privately for each player and not tell them if they passed or failed. If the players only know what their character saw (and not if they pass or fail the check, or even get an idea based on the roll) then metagaming is impossible. This could produce a situation where it's just a dog but the paladin thinks they saw a monster because they failed the roll, or it could be the other way around.
Doing it with DM-only rolls ensures the players have to actually figure out what they saw rather than knowing based on what they rolled or if they passed.

As I said, this could be standard practice, I have no idea. But I hope it is.

1
[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 2 points 1 year ago

If she's unable to move after casting explosion, can she give consent? 🤔

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 3 points 1 year ago

I suppose that would explain why it's hiding!

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 4 points 1 year ago

There's a few other similar images by this artist. It might be worth adding them to this post!

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 7 points 1 year ago

I think most loli art involves some element of shock/confusion/correction/lust/ahegao etc but much more rarely cuter stuff like shyness, romance, and love. That's what I feel makes the difference here, I wish there was more like this.

[-] LongerDonger@burggit.moe 2 points 1 year ago

I only count three guys in that image. Unless you're hungry and you're talking about burgers, in which case, fuckin YES.

1

You'd think they'd have stronger brains with all those mental gymnastics they're doing.

Beautiful art by yours truly <3

1
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by LongerDonger@burggit.moe to c/funny@burggit.moe
view more: next ›

LongerDonger

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF