temporarily lowering IQ below 1

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by Anders

An entity with IQ 0 wouldn't be inconvenienced by not having eyes, because there's nothing there to process the information. A disadvantage that doesn't inconvenience you is worth no points.

That's not what Attribute 0 means. With a sufficiently large bonus you can still roll:

Originally Posted by whswhs

Kromm and I discussed IQ 0 while I was working on Template Toolkit 2. There's established precedent that a cybershell that's not running any of the usual sorts of AI has IQ 0, and therefore Per 0. But it can still respond to stimuli that have a sufficiently high bonus to Per rolls; for example, a totally obvious stimulus with +10 to Per gives it a 50/50 chance of noticing. So TT2 adds a new zero-point feature, Insensate, which gives it Per 0 in all situations, or "you never get to make a Per roll for anything." Usable for rocks, vehicles without onboard computers, and so on.

[Andreas]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Conversely, if you want to say that "senses" only refer to senses that the rock itself uses, or the airplane, then having not only Per 0 but also inability to make Per rolls at all seems to mean that it doesn't matter whether you have eyes, or ears, or a sensitive skin, or a radio receiver, because you can't use them. So I don't see any justification for giving you disadvantage points for them, as they don't limit you. It's just like not being able to take -6 points for not having a native language if your IQ is less than 6, or not being able to take levels of Low TL in the same case.

So IQ 1 and lack of senses (blind etc.) would give you many more dissadvantage points than someone who also lack senses, but has IQ 0? That doesn't seem very right.

Or is it the 0 point Insensate trait which makes that happen (rather than IQ 0)? Why would that trait be 0 points in that case? The same disadvantage value as what you would otherwise get for lacking senses seem more appropriate in that case.

[ravenfish]

A point to note is that, if we assume that an IQ 0 entity doesn't get points for being blind, etc., then such an entity will wind up having a higher point total (and therefore being a more expensive ally) than an entity with IQ 1 that is blind, etc., despite not being more effective at anything.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

[AlexanderHowl]

An inanimate object will probably have ST 0 [-100], DX 0 [-200], and IQ 0 [-200]. It will have No Manipulators [-50] and either No Legs (Portable) [-20] or No Legs (Sessile) [-50]. It will also have Blind [-50], Deaf [-20], Mute [-25], No Sense of Taste/Smell [-5], Numb [-20], and Unhealing (Total) [-30]. At a minimum, it will have -720 CP in negative traits.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by ravenfish

A point to note is that, if we assume that an IQ 0 entity doesn't get points for being blind, etc., then such an entity will wind up having a higher point total (and therefore being a more expensive ally) than an entity with IQ 1 that is blind, etc., despite not being more effective at anything.

In the case of a vehicle, it is likely to be much more effective when it is being piloted by a human operator, which is its intended mode of activity. And in that case it is not in any way limited by being "blind," because its human operator can see.

[Harald387]

I feel like this thread has gone off the rails (from "what happens if someone uses Foolishness to reduce a subject's IQ to 0?" to "I'm going to argue that a pet rock needs a detailed stat block"), so let's try to drag it back on point.

As was pointed out, Foolishness can only work on subjects that are IQ 6+ to begin with (M133) and the normal limit is -5 to IQ, in theory reducing it no farther than 1. Magery and Effect may allow a Magery 6+ caster to reduce IQ by 6, though. At that point the caster is spending 6 energy and a 1-second cast time on an R-Will spell; it wouldn't be unbalanced to rule that this incapacitates the subject since it's in the same general ballpark as Agonize, Choke, Tickle, and other 'incapacitating affliction' style spells, with the added limitation that it'd only work to incapacitate someone who's already pretty weak in the brain department to begin with.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Harald387

I feel like this thread has gone off the rails (from "what happens if someone uses Foolishness to reduce a subject's IQ to 0?" to "I'm going to argue that a pet rock needs a detailed stat block"), so let's try to drag it back on point.

Perfectly fair. In that case, I'm going to say that the subject cannot do any intellectual tasks, or use language or technology, because all of those require IQ 6 or higher. They can attempt to perceive things, if they have at least +3 to Per from situational modifiers such as obviousness (there's no reason to suppose they are rendered Insensate). They can attempt to roll against Will 0 (automatically failing by at least 3 points) to resist any Influence roll or psychic or magical attack they can understand, but it may be better for them to just not resist and accept being taken over. They will always fail Fright checks, unless they have Unfazeability or multiple levels of Fearlessness. Their skills based on IQ, Per, and Will fall into the basement.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Perfectly fair. In that case, I'm going to say that the subject cannot do any intellectual tasks, or use language or technology, because all of those require IQ 6 or higher. They can attempt to perceive things, if they have at least +3 to Per from situational modifiers such as obviousness (there's no reason to suppose they are rendered Insensate). They can attempt to roll against Will 0 (automatically failing by at least 3 points) to resist any Influence roll or psychic or magical attack they can understand, but it may be better for them to just not resist and accept being taken over. They will always fail Fright checks, unless they have Unfazeability or multiple levels of Fearlessness. Their skills based on IQ, Per, and Will fall into the basement.

I disagree with some of this:

3.1.3 When I roll against a target number less than 3, when do a result of 3 or 4 still succeed?
Defense rolls may always be attempted, and a 3 or 4 is still a Critical Success. Same thing for Resistance rolls to magic or poison, most forced IQ and HT rolls, and any other resistance roll against a force directly targeting a living or sapient being.

Other rolls (such as skill rolls or physical feats) are impossible if the target number is below 3. However, the dice may still be rolled if the character does not realize the attempt is futile, and if you're rolling vs. a -7 or worse, even a roll of 3 will be a Critical Failure.

That means a lot of Will rolls should still succeed on a 3-4 (not great odds); I'd say that includes any Influence roll or psychic or magical attack resisted by WILL or IQ or PER, and Fear Checks. If they do fail (almost certainly) I'd calculate the margin of failure or Critical failure from whatever their modified number was. Thus with attribute 0 and penalties of -6 you would Critical succeed on 3-4 and Critical fail on 5-18.

[dcarson]

Originally Posted by whswhs

It's exactly like a dog, with IQ 4, not being able to take -6 points for Native Language (None).

Of course they can't get -6 points for Native language(None) there is no written form of dog only spoken. Unless you consider the scent marking a written form. I am now imagining a Ally dog that was raised from birth by some foster animal and has cat or goat or such as their Native Language.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by dcarson

Of course they can't get -6 points for Native language(None) there is no written form of dog only spoken. Unless you consider the scent marking a written form. I am now imagining a Ally dog that was raised from birth by some foster animal and has cat or goat or such as their Native Language.

By definition, in GURPS, animals (IQ less than 6) do not have languages. And any language that has a spoken form is assumed to have a written form as well. If you come from a culture that hasn't developed writing, you do get -3 points for having Native/None. (Though in a campaign set in a world where writing is unknown, I wouldn't count that toward any disad limit.) Except that animals don't get that disadvantage, because not having a language is built into having IQ 5 or less.