Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-08-2022, 01:40 AM   #71
dataweaver
 
dataweaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

It's necessitated by taking a Non-Sapient Disadvantage, which in my view incorporates Bestial but goes further. But it implies a discount to the cost of IQ in exactly the same way that No Fine Manipulators implies a discount to DX: No Fine Manipulators removes a significant capability that humans take for granted, which in turn puts a lot of skill usages out of the character's reach; and because much of the value of DX comes from the many skills it enables, taking No Fine Manipulators also results in a -40% Limitation on DX.

The idea here is that “Non-Sapient” is very much the mental equivalent of “No Fine Manipulators”.
__________________
Point balance is a myth.[1][2][3][4]
dataweaver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2022, 06:04 PM   #72
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Wouldn't that also apply to other static-cost disadvantages like Innumerate?
__________________
what this forum is
(17 March 2020 forum rules from Hackard)
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2022, 06:10 PM   #73
Inky
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: UK
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Incidentally, Non-Sapient doesn't necessarily include Bestial. In Basic Set, domestic animals don't have Bestial. Bestial seems to be not so much "doesn't understand things that an animal wouldn't understand" as "lacks Cultural Familiarity (hoomins)". So although you might think that Bestial was the disadvantage for "can't do things an animal can't do", apparently by RAW it's not.

[Basic] Disadvantage of the week: Bestial has some discussion about this. Although the first posting of that thread includes "You have no skills that depend on the ideas or tools of civilisation, and no defaults in them either. Intimidation and Area Knowledge are about your limit in IQ-based skills", which doesn't match Basic Set, which just says "You cannot learn skills that, in the GM’s opinion, rely on “civilized” notions of art or social interaction, and you have no default with such skills". Not sure whether there's a reason for that - maybe another book says something more along the lines of not being able to use skills that involve tools? It does mention that in GURPS Zombies zombies with Bestial can't use equipment.
__________________
Looking for online text-based game at a UK-feasible time, anything considered, Roll20 preferred. http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=168443
Inky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 12:00 AM   #74
maximara
On Notice
 
maximara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sumter, SC
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by mburr0003 View Post
I blame Sean Punch, even though Stoddard, Dell'Orto, Howard, and Riggsby's names are on the Low-Tech book.

In my home games I don't, but as that is the RAW, I tend to try to discuss options as they are in the RAW first, and then offer "how I'd do it" second.

For the record, I do thus:

TL/0 tech: Armoury, Survival, Sewing, etc as seems to fit best (Survival covers a lot of TL/0 sins here).
TL/1: No Survival, use another appropriate skills, Smith is available.
TL/5: Smith is out now, use Machinist instead (Smith or other non-Machinist skills at a penalty to make high tolerance parts for TL/5 only).
TL/6+: Machinist. (Sewing, Armoury, etc are still in.)

Machinist is the skill used to use machines to make high tolerance parts.

Funny how in Skill categories it's not a Craft skill. Clear misstep.
TL 5 is 1730+ and Smiths were still making tools as either the factories didn't ship to where they were or the cost of getting the tools was insane.

You could argue Smithing for Tools survived clear into early TL 6 (~1930s)
__________________
Help make a digital reference for GURPS by coming to the GURPS wiki and provide some information and links (such as to various Fanmade 4e Bestiaries) . Please, provide more then just a title and a page number.
maximara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 06:31 AM   #75
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inky View Post
Incidentally, Non-Sapient doesn't necessarily include Bestial. In Basic Set, domestic animals don't have Bestial. Bestial seems to be not so much "doesn't understand things that an animal wouldn't understand" as "lacks Cultural Familiarity (hoomins)". So although you might think that Bestial was the disadvantage for "can't do things an animal can't do", apparently by RAW it's not.
Neither of your definitions fit how I view Beastial. From Basic, it's anyone lacking a concept of morality (right/wrong), propriety (manners), or property (ownership in the abstract). Animals don't worry about sniffing each other, defecating in public, or making others feel bad even if they are domesticated. Animals regard toys and treats as fair game for whomever can claim it. You'll find these behaviors in domestic as well as wild animals.

Basic didn't include Bestial in the domestic animal meta-trait, but it probably should have. I suspect they were trying to make domestic and wild similar value so you could just swap them out.

It also doesn't see to mirror Cultural Familiarity very well. First off, animals aren't expected to observe cultural normals (dress code, behavior). Second, the costs and penalties don't align (B23). Lack of Cultural Familiarity gives you a reaction penalty to others. Bestial means you can't comprehend the reasons to behave. Third, humans are just as likely to make social faux pas dealing with other humans of a different culture using strange manners or different morality.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 10:03 AM   #76
RyanW
 
RyanW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by naloth View Post
Neither of your definitions fit how I view Beastial. From Basic, it's anyone lacking a concept of morality (right/wrong), propriety (manners), or property (ownership in the abstract). Animals don't worry about sniffing each other, defecating in public, or making others feel bad even if they are domesticated. Animals regard toys and treats as fair game for whomever can claim it. You'll find these behaviors in domestic as well as wild animals.

Basic didn't include Bestial in the domestic animal meta-trait, but it probably should have. I suspect they were trying to make domestic and wild similar value so you could just swap them out.
A domesticated animal can learn things like when the harness is on I'm on the job, I'm supposed to defecate in the box, food on the table isn't for me, etc.
__________________
RyanW
- Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats.
RyanW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 11:51 AM   #77
SilvercatMoonpaw
 
SilvercatMoonpaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
...food on the table isn't for me...
More like "food watched over by hoomans isn't safe to snatch", am I right?
__________________
Pronoun: "They/She"
SilvercatMoonpaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 09:39 PM   #78
naloth
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
A domesticated animal can learn things like when the harness is on I'm on the job, I'm supposed to defecate in the box, food on the table isn't for me, etc.
Beastial doesn't prevent you from learning. A domesticated animal doesn't understand why it has to do the job, but it can be trained to do it especially if there's a tangible reward. Cats aren't really trained to use a box so much as they instinctively use sand like areas. Dogs are "housebroken" but mostly it involves treats and a mix of discipline. I suspect none of the above are capable of appreciating the "why" such behavior is enforced which is exactly the point of Beastial.
naloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 10:06 PM   #79
dataweaver
 
dataweaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
Wouldn't that also apply to other static-cost disadvantages like Innumerate?
Technically, yes. The difference, though, is that the range of skills that Innumerate prevents you from learning is trivial in comparison.
__________________
Point balance is a myth.[1][2][3][4]
dataweaver is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2022, 10:45 PM   #80
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Disconnecting Sapience from IQ

Quote:
Originally Posted by mburr0003 View Post
TL/5: Smith is out now, use Machinist instead (Smith or other non-Machinist skills at a penalty to make high tolerance parts for TL/5 only).
There were "reasonably high tolerance parts" such as gears and cogs by TL2. IIRC, the triphammer dates to late Roman times - that's the forerunner of stamping machines. 2-part coin dies are TL2 as well. Similar dies might have been used to stamp or close mail links. Rivets and nails are TL1.

IIRC, using a lathe to shape or etch soft metals is TL3. That's the forerunner of metal lathing.

By late TL3, gears and screws were in occasional use. By TL4, dedicated machinists certainly existed, although they were mostly an outgrowth of the jewelry trade.

Depending on how you define the skill, lower TL versions of machinist might include specialized Smithing operations to "make the tools that make the tools" such as nail-making, needle-making, and anvil-founding.

If you really object to having TL0-4 versions of Machinist, make the skill a specialization of Jewelry (for fine hand-made gears, etc.), Metallurgy (for anything made from cast metal), or Smithing.

TL5 was actually the heyday of Smithing, since improved metallurgy and technology allowed improved feedstocks as well as for a far greater, cheaper variety of Smithing tools. As late as the 1920s, Smiths were still mending tools, custom-forging parts, and doing gorgeous custom decorative blacksmith work.

Smithing declined in the 1920s and 1930s as automobiles replaced horses and wagons and was mostly killed off by WW2, which saw many anvils and other smiths' tools sold or taken as scrap for the war effort, as well as the destruction of a great deal of decorative iron work.

Post-WW2 fashions, improved machining of custom parts, and cheap mass produced items formerly made by smiths pretty much killed the trade except for a few artisanal metalworkers.
Pursuivant is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.