GURPS non-Phobia technophobia?

[Anders]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah just like those "moron" Mennonites that have irrigation, symbolic language, organized religion, yokes, fire, saddles, wagons, houses, domesticated animals, domesticated grains and clothing? 0_o

I doubt the Mennonites are as smug and "holier than Thou" as the people in ST:Insurrection. They were insufferable. Just watch the movie.

Also, they are contrary to one of the central messages of Star Trek - that technology, when properly used, makes life better - not worse. But this is not the thread for movie criticism.

Edit: Look, I'm not saying that everyone who rejects technology are pompous morons. But the people in ST: Insurrection? Oh yes.

[Phantasm]

Getting back to the OP, I use a "Willfully Anachronistic" Quirk to represent someone who can use modern technology but is either more comfortable with slightly older technology (preferring a flip phone or cordless land line over a smartphone, for example) or simply chooses not to use the newer tech.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anders

I doubt the Mennonites are as smug and "holier than Thou" as the people in ST:Insurrection. They were insufferable.

I suspect that the Ba'ku were inspired by the Amish to some extent, but we can't know for certain.

Just watch the movie.

I have, I actually kind of like it. Its main problem is that it feels more like a two-parter episode than a film, I think. It is vastly better than Nemesis (the film that finally broke the even-numbers rule).

[Anders]

The more I think about it, the more I think this is the Primitive disadvantage, with a suitable limitation "Still knows the skills". Which may be worth, say, -60%, giving it a cost of [-2/level]. So someone who is choosing to remain at TL4 when the rest of society is at TL8 would have a -8 points disadvantage.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

Getting back to the OP, I use a "Willfully Anachronistic" Quirk to represent someone who can use modern technology but is either more comfortable with slightly older technology (preferring a flip phone or cordless land line over a smartphone, for example) or simply chooses not to use the newer tech.

I may not use it that much, but just the fact that my barely smart phone lasts a week before recharging says that "older" technology isn't just a meaningless preference.
Modern high tech gear tends to do everything in a mediocre fashion rather than one or two things well.
I'm not sure preferring more straight forward, if older, tools should count as a quirk unless it causes negative reactions in others.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah just like those "moron" Mennonites that have irrigation, symbolic language, organized religion, yokes, fire, saddles, wagons, houses, domesticated animals, domesticated grains and clothing? 0_o

Communities that reject some arbitrary level of technology in order to live in an argraian society exist in the real world. Saying they reject "technology" isn't uncommon, even if isn't technically true.

I hate those silly strawman arguments too. Oh you choose not to do everything we do? Then you're obviously being yourselves hypocritically. Too often people think the over simplified version of complex motivation is the entirety.
I admit to being surprised upon learning that many Amish have cell phones to be used in emergencies. As I believe they aren't against technology but only the over reliance on things, outsiders, etc.

While the disadvantage rules only care about bottom line effect, character creations would benefit from defining the reasons for and nuances of a complex vow.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I hate those silly strawman arguments too.

In fairness, I was irrationally irritated by the Cinemark PSA that meant "no texting in the movie" but said "the movie theater isn't the time or place for technology". I think it's interesting that they changed it later to say "BFF" and "LOL" instead of "OMG" and "LMAO" because people apparently complained about the implied obscenity (which didn't even register with me), but kept the seemingly ironic "technology" line.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

In fairness, I was irrationally irritated by the Cinemark PSA that meant "no texting in the movie" but said "the movie theater isn't the time or place for technology". I think it's interesting that they changed it later to say "BFF" and "LOL" instead of "OMG" and "LMAO" because people apparently complained about the implied obscenity (which didn't even register with me), but kept the seemingly ironic "technology" line.

I thought BFF meant best friends forever.
Technology, if we were really getting technical, would include clothing, fire, literally everything but our naked bodies. Well, I suppose fire shouldn't be allowed in a theater either.
It's a word that everyone seems to define differently especially in different contexts. At least we have Gurps tech levels to give some vague semblance of coherency to the word.

Why can't we just say, "Don't make noises or lights that may bother other audience members"? Making it too specific leads to rules lawyering douches.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I thought BFF meant best friends forever.

It does. They changed "OMG" to "BFF" in response to complaints that "Oh my God" is blasphemy....

Technology, if we were really getting technical, would include clothing, fire, literally everything but our naked bodies. Well, I suppose fire shouldn't be allowed in a theater either.

Notably digital projectors are newer technology than cell phones...

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

It does. They changed "OMG" to "BFF" in response to complaints that "Oh my God" is blasphemy....
Notably digital projectors are newer technology than cell phones...

But while BFF isn't profane it makes no sense in context. It's like all those edited for TV movies where they changed fitting crude dialogue with absolute gibberish.
"Yipee ki-yay, Mr. Falcon!" being the one that springs to my mind.