11-07-2015, 09:02 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
|
Protecting your young
Looking at creating a bestiary now, and I wonder if it would be appropriate to give some animals (like female bears) a level or two of Higher Purpose for when they fight to defend their young? Maybe coupled with a highly selective Bad Temper?
__________________
“When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive, to think, to enjoy, to love ...” Marcus Aurelius |
11-07-2015, 09:19 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Protecting your young
Selective Bad Temper + a limited Beserk for it to trigger is probably best. Lots of all out attacks and a disregard for personal safety is plenty scary.
__________________
My GURPS stuff |
11-07-2015, 09:36 AM | #3 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Protecting your young
Higher Purpose is supernatural or cinematic, not realistic.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
11-07-2015, 12:44 PM | #4 |
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: New Zealand.
|
Re: Protecting your young
With herbivores bad temper would seem more appropriate. Default berserk wouldn't fit. As the off switch for berserk is dispatching a foe not ensuring the safety of your young.
Some animals don't have the same attack instinct. Sheep do for a small window of time Cows do. (And unlike bulls they don't close their eyes when they charge and so are more dangerous)
__________________
Waiting for inspiration to strike...... And spending too much time thinking about farming for RPGs Contributor to Citadel at Nordvörn |
11-07-2015, 02:37 PM | #5 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
|
Re: Protecting your young
Quote:
At least women for their own young children. With men, parentage can be uncertain, especially children from concubines, bed-slaves and the like. |
|
11-07-2015, 02:53 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and some other bits.
|
Re: Protecting your young
Given that humans are the default racial template, I wouldn't bother adding any traits to animals to make them more protective of their offspring; humans are already about as protective as you get.
Also, is this bestiary project going to be a complete 'GURPS Animals' book or just a bestiary for your setting? If it's the former, that's a pretty big project; would you like any help? I once started my own, but gave up when it became obvious quite how daunting a project it was and how unqualified I was to do it. |
11-07-2015, 03:04 PM | #7 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
|
Re: Protecting your young
Bestiary for my setting.
__________________
“When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive, to think, to enjoy, to love ...” Marcus Aurelius |
11-07-2015, 03:55 PM | #8 | |
Join Date: Dec 2008
|
Re: Protecting your young
Quote:
Edit: Also, before statting a bunch of animals, bear in mind that some of that has already been done with GURPS Animalia, a fan project found here: http://panoptesv.com/RPGs/animalia/animalia.html |
|
11-08-2015, 08:34 PM | #9 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Upper Peninsula of Michigan
|
Re: Protecting your young
What dfinlay said. It's a matter of being more serious: if you're in a fight over dominance or territory, the loser is going to slink off when the winner has done them a fair amount of injury, so by definition -- if you challenge them because you think you're going to win -- you're going to win without serious injury.
Threaten an animal's young, and someone with the motherly defense instinct is going to stay fighting until unconsciousness, and risky attacks might leave them open to injury but give them more chance to do serious injury to you -- enough that whatever you're trying to eat isn't worth the cost. A lion can take down an antelope, but maybe if it gets gored a couple of times it will decide to try for another antelope. |
11-09-2015, 12:50 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: Protecting your young
TBH I'd just do it as bad temper tied to certain things.
There is a big difference in the animal world between aggressively trying to see off threat and fighting until injured and dead. Especially with carnivores. There are actually not many parents in the natural world (thinking mainly larger mammals*) that will actually fight a serious threat risking injury or death for their young. Remember if a mother is injured or killed protecting this years young she risk the futures of all her potential future young. A relatively common physiological reaction in female big cats after the death of their cubs is to go back in season (males big cats 'know' this)! Infant mortality is high in the animal world, rising injury is a really serious business for an adult (especially a carnivore). Most physical confrontation outside of predator/prey interaction is based more on physical intimidation and driving a threat away. Where it gets odd is with humans and our perception of it with other animals. Take the classic getting between a bear and it cubs, an adult large bear is an overwhelming physical threat to us, so what to another bear would be a bear defending it territory/cubs, is a deadly threat to us. Going the other way a bear defending it's territory against a human doesn't realise that a human with a suitable gun is a serious threat. When it comes to humans vs. threatening animals we don't do competing threat displays and intimidation as per large carnivores, we shoot to kill to end a threat (because it's our best chance of avoiding danger, we're not so good at withstanding the threat by looking scary back of fleeing it) Not forgetting that most humans don't "act" in the usual way compared to other animals in the wild (most of which would have smelled bears and run a mile) and that can cause confusion (a protective mother bear is already thinking "hang on you've clearly smelt my cub is here, and me, the fact your still here can't be good and is limiting my options", where as most human will still be at the "what's that" stage) So mother bears charged armed humans are not blindly charging large bore death to sacrifice themselves for their young, it's more like a bizarre combination of unusual events (Humans with guns being an out of context problem for most animals) *Pack animals tend to be more likely to because the risk to the individual from injury is mitigated by the insurance of the group, but it still not that common. Last edited by Tomsdad; 11-09-2015 at 03:11 AM. |
Tags |
advantage, bestiary |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|