Maximum Realistic Reaction Bonus

[Alonsua]

Hi there,

today I have created a very beautiful (+6/2) super charismatic (+4) celebrity-like reputation (+4) singer (+2). Then, I have read the part in "How to be a GURPS GM" where it points out how ".... someone with a +5 reaction bonus, from 3 or 4 social traits, is realistic; one with a +15 reaction bonus, from seven or eight social traits, is cinematic..." and here comes my doubt:

Since I have used 4 social traits (Appearance + Charisma + Reputation + Voice) should I assume that my character is realistic? If I do so, should I apply +16/12 bonus to reaction rolls, or what? What might be the maximum realistic bonus to reactions? Shall I stick to pick only the maximum situational one (like Very Beautiful +6 if she is seen) and use the rest to suck penalties or in quick contests?

Thanks for answering.

[vicky_molokh]

Having someone that beautiful luck out to also be charismatic on the level of some religion-founders and with a great voice looks rather unlikely. Whether that's outright cinematic is a matter of some debate, similar to other improbable-but-not-impossible things.

[Anthony]

To the degree reaction bonuses are realistic at all, they probably aren't strictly additive (so having all of those traits wouldn't add up to a +16). However, any such rule should probably also change the cost of those traits.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Alonsua

Since I have used 4 social traits (Appearance + Charisma + Reputation + Voice) should I assume that my character is realistic?

Such people do exist—gorgeous, charismatic, beloved, and smooth-talking—but they're relatively rare. This is a cinematic trope, but it's not a completely implausible one. The line between realistic and cinematic is very fuzzy in this case. How To Be a GURPS GM isn't telling you where that line is, just that it exists, somewhere.

If I do so, should I apply +16/12 bonus to reaction rolls, or what?

I'd stick with the rules until I've rolled a few reactions. Remember to apply all the given penalties: if characters try to take advantage of all those bonuses to ask for outrageous things, they'll get hefty penalties. They may also gain a negative Reputation (Takes unfair advantage of how much people like them) which will impact rolls, if they do it too much.

[Anders]

Remember also that there are some safeguards built into the system. First of all, you reach a level of diminishing returns - once you're at +10, an extra +1 doesn't get you that much extra. Second, the GM can always override the reaction roll, especially if it would short-circuit the scenario.

[Kabufu]

The GM is always free to fill the world with lecherous perverts constantly hitting on the PC, jealous people that resent the PC for their looks and seemingly easy life, NPCs who will do anything they ask... as long as the NPC looks good and improve their own reputation from being around such a renowned celebrity. A posse of utterly enthralled admirers might actually be full disadvantage, i.e. Enemy (Watcher, Live-tweets your every move).


Having so many fans your can't leave your house and having a million friends, none of whom actually care about you as a person at all are all real phenomena.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Kabufu

The GM is always free to fill the world with lecherous perverts constantly hitting on the PC, jealous people that resent the PC for their looks and seemingly easy life, NPCs who will do anything they ask... as long as the NPC looks good and improve their own reputation from being around such a renowned celebrity. A posse of utterly enthralled admirers might actually be full disadvantage, i.e. Enemy (Watcher, Live-tweets your every move).


Having so many fans your can't leave your house and having a million friends, none of whom actually care about you as a person at all are all real phenomena.

I'm strongly opposed to such an approach to a fairly-bought Advantage. It reminds me of Emily's story about how when she had a character very skilled in jumping, the GM interpreted that as jumping too high and overshooting the target. That's antagonistic.

[Flyndaran]

Curmudgeons and hipsters will at least pretend to dislike anyone that is that popular.
Also some trait insignificant to most will have major impact on some.
I really dislike narrow noses, for example. I just cannot see anyone with one as attractive regardless of other features.

Of course this for when needed, and shouldn't be used by GMs upset about letting a player take so many bonuses. Hamstringing paid for advantages mid-game is not conducive to player fun.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Alonsua

Hi there,

today I have created a very beautiful (+6/2) super charismatic (+4) celebrity-like reputation (+4) singer (+2). Then, I have read the part in "How to be a GURPS GM" where it points out how ".... someone with a +5 reaction bonus, from 3 or 4 social traits, is realistic; one with a +15 reaction bonus, from seven or eight social traits, is cinematic..." and here comes my doubt:

Since I have used 4 social traits (Appearance + Charisma + Reputation + Voice) should I assume that my character is realistic? .

No. She's not realistic. She's a cross between Taylor Swift, Little Orphan Annie and Galadriel. Really high social modifiers are just as "cinematic" as lots of social modifiers.

Now here are some considerations

1. What is her reputation for? Just having a reputation for being beautiful and a great singer doesn't cut it. The adulation for that is baked in. Actually if you want a trait for being generically well regarded because she's a successful entertainer, I'd go with Social Regard, not Reputation.

2. While people who actually make as big time celebrities usually do have a force of personality that makes them stand out a bit from equally or more beautiful and talented people the beautiful and talented celebrities generally don't have more than one or two points of it because they don't need it. Charisma 4 is the kind of force of personality that basically drowns out physical attractiveness.

3. On the flipside given these traits...isn't she rich? Being rich means +1 Social Status unless she's actually bought down her social status because her origins were really humble.

So if you wanted a realistic famous celebrity performer I'd go with

Beautiful +4/+2
Voice +2
Charisma +1 or 2
Social Status +1
Social Regard "Celebrity" +2

And of course Watched By The Media.

Any reputation she had would probably be specific and mixed to bad like "gay friendly", "unlucky in love" or "struggles with substance abuse"

[Anders]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

And of course Watched By The Media.

Having the press as an enemy (Watcher) is probably warranted.