I'd love to play, if the timing was right.  Thursday and Saturday work best for me.

Aaaaaand, getting this thread back on topic, what would be ways to address that? I don't want to criticize Ernesto in his own thread, but if we're theorizing ways to improve or rejigger the skin, what would be concerns? I'm seeing a.) Too many powers and b.) The core gifts mechanic doesn't have any consequences for either the Succubus or the gift getter (who should ideally receive those consequences?). Or, should we move discussion on creating a different version of this great skin to another thread and let the author have full reign here?

As for the Incubus, I don't want to be the rough rock star. I actually think the powers are decent, but don't want to start off with the outwardly confident and sexy vibe.

I think the fundamental problem with this skin is that there's not a real teenager behind it--all good skins have a teenager at their core that the monstrous trappings are meant to represent.  It's not that I think this skin lacks that teenager--clearly there's someone inside the skin.  I just think that someone is not a very real person.

You mentioned that you wanted to use it to explore gender confusion.  Is that just because of the shapechange move?  Or do you see other aspects of the skin that would help in that exploration--because focusing on those might give us a more real teenager under that skin to work toward.

Sidenote:
I also don't like that the succubus sex move is about the mechanics of sex.  That, for me at least, is on the wrong side of the veil--and not for any good reason that I can see.

You might have a tough time convincing your GM.  I'd argue that the succubus is one of the most broken skins ever.  Not because its moves are mechanically powerful, per se.  But it breaks the fundamental nature of the game--That there's a fixed amount of happiness, and that if you're gaining, someone else is losing.  A MH succubus that makes people better by fulfilling their desires is the equivalent of an Apocalypse World Character that doesn't need to eat or drink.

In short, it's not feral

Have you seen he Incubus?  It's clearly based on the succubus but full of trade-offs and consequences.  Plus, rock and roll band.

I put together an AW hack based on The Book of Nine Swords, which combines Wuxia with classic Dungeons and Dragons tropes.  Check it out here.

Wow.  There's a lot of wonderfulness there.  Damning Evidence is particularly delicious.

There are places where I find myself wondering what's going on in the fiction with a particular move:

With Rumor mill, do your words literally reshape reality?  If so, say that explicitly in the move.  If not, then maybe have it work as a condition.

Sticks and stones makes no sense.  What's happening there that lets the character roll with Hot?  Is there some magical property of the character's speech that physically damages the person they're lashing out at?

Pass the buck is a really cool idea, but needs more development.  It seems like right now, the Editor can just say "He did it", be automatically believed, and no longer be tangled up by the wronged person's strings.  I think the fiction will be better served if the Editor has to work to justify the blame he's placing.

Should other internal features of characters be influenced by dice rolls?  Tendency to dialogue, patience, desire for a family or a long-term vocation?  Taste in music?  Desire for bloodshed and violence?  Gluten intolerance?  Any of those could change during adolescence or in game-play, but we leave that to the player's discrection.

In fact, desire for bloodshed and violence is influenced by the dice in MonsterHearts:  For many skins, that's what the darkest self is.

MonsterHearts is by design a game where PCs have very little control over their character's feelings.  It's most obvious with Turn Someone On, but it's equally the case for Shut Someone Down, Hold Steady, most of the Darkest Selves, and several skin moves.

The point of MonsterHearts is that these characters aren't really in control of their own feelings and desires, whether it's the sudden desire to make out with other dudes, or the sudden desire to consume the flesh of the living.  Sure, it's removing player agency, but it's doing so in service to the game's theme.

Unlike D&D, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay doesn't let you choose your class.  You roll for it on a table.  Because WFRP is presenting a world that portrays the nasty, brutish, and short reality of middle ages life.  Peasants trod on by those who have achieved power by accident of birth.  If you roll well, hey, you're a Knight or  a churchman.  If you roll poorly, you're a farmer or a guy who crawls around sewers with a terrier for a living.

Ask yourself this:  "Am I okay with shut someone down dictating how I feel about being bullied, or hold steady dictate how fearful I am?  Would I be okay letting a table dictate whether my character is a peasant or a nobleman?"  If you answer "no", then maybe MonsterHearts just isn't the game for you.

If you answer yes, then clearly you have a more specific problem with turn someone on.  Despite all the talk of the Kinsey Scale an fluidity of human sexuality, I agree that it's somewhat unrealistic insofar as as it leads to "everyone is bisexual" syndrome.  That said, "everyone is bisexual" is no less realistic than "that dude is a vampire and that dude is a werewolf".  and just like the latter, the former fits the genre and makes for more interesting play.

If the unrealism of it bothers you, or you're bothered by the move or it's consequences for other reasons, then just house rule it.  I and some of the others maybe wouldn't have as much fun in a game where "Turn Someone On" was de-fanged, but if it's not working for you, then come up with a solution that does.  But don't be afraid to push at your own boundaries, because that's where the most interesting play happens.

So monsterhearts works best when it's a game about the interactions between PCs.  I think that's equally true of PrimeTime Adventures (though I haven't played it).

When a monsterhearts game I played in focused on the larger political struggles between adult monster groups, it really fell flat.  It can handle PCs (or a subset thereof) vs. an NPC menace pretty well, but as soon as those NPC menaces start interacting with each other in ways that the PCs need to be aware of, it takes you away from what makes monsterhearts good.

Urban Shadows (look for it in the hacks section of these forums) is much more about the politics of supernatural factions.  It's great, but doesn't really spend much time on the highschool drama aspect.  If you're inclined you could hack together elements of both.

The nice thing about PTA is that it supports a more diverse group of PCs.  It would be possible to have some of the PCs be highschoolers just discovering the supernatural world and others be high up movers and shakers within that world--without the problems that combining high power and low power characters would cause in a more traditional setting.