Optional Restricted Diet?

[Flyndaran]

A bit of a resurrection, but it seems most appropriate to my question.

I have a robot that can either eat like a normal human OR subsist on electricity alone. Electricity is a restricted diet for -10, but normal human food is 0. But having the option to switch is advantageous though I do not know how much or even how to guess.

I feel the answer may be in some kind of adjustment to the ideas here.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I have a robot that can either eat like a normal human OR subsist on electricity alone. Electricity is a restricted diet for -10, but normal human food is 0. But having the option to switch is advantageous though I do not know how much or even how to guess.

I don't think either/or limitation makes sense in that case. I would treat it as a new advantage that would be the opposite of Restricted Diet.

"Normal food, plus a specific form of electricity" seems significantly less broad to me than "anything organic that isn't actively toxic" (Universal Digestion), so I'd peg it at around a perk. If you are more adaptable in what sources you can absorb power from, bump that cost up.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I have a robot that can either eat like a normal human OR subsist on electricity alone. Electricity is a restricted diet for -10, but normal human food is 0. But having the option to switch is advantageous though I do not know how much or even how to guess.

This is arguably just Controllable Disadvantage, which is a Perk.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Reversing -30% to +30% is mathematically simple, but I don't think it yields the proper results.

It's problematic if using multiplicative modifiers, but not for the standard system, where Naked Jumper isn't an Advantage with a base cost of [70], it's an Advantage with a base cost of [100] and a -30% Limitation. With Either/Or Limitations you might be able to argue for an adjustment for when using multiplicative modifiers, but honestly you're just adding in complication for a difference of maybe +1% for the end cost, so it's not really worth it to mess with.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

I was thinking the Doesn't Eat advantage (B50) but add Switchable +10% to it.

Seems odd that being able to eat something besides food costs more than not having to eat anything at all. I thought about Doesn't Eat or Drink (Temporary Disadvantage: Dependency) but I didn't like how the cost came out. Way too expensive a way to add one item to the menu.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Seems odd that being able to eat something besides food costs more than not having to eat anything at all.

Doesn't Eat still requires that you have an energy source, it's just that the energy source can be some ambient energy such as Mana or Sunlight. You can still be cut off from that energy source, and in those cases it is advantageous to be able to go back to eating "normal" food until you can get back to your energy source. It also allows you to pass as a "normal" human more easily if that happens to matter for the character's background (such as if a Vampire, Android, or other human-like being).

[Flyndaran]

That requires doesn't need to eat mean cannot eat under any circumstances. I don't think everyone interprets the advantage that way.

For my robot example, I tend to think of what circumstances could make him panic for lack of resources. Food/water AND/Or electricity is obviously an advantage even though it's one default zero point feature plus a disadvantage.

The Restricted Diet is weird because it is not just a disadvantage but also an advantage as it effectively eliminates the default human food/drink requirement for forms like electricity, radioactives, etc.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

The Restricted Diet is weird because it is not just a disadvantage but also an advantage as it effectively eliminates the default human food/drink requirement for forms like electricity, radioactives, etc.

A robot with a converter that can draw power from virtually any electricity source, or a troll that can eat a wide array of minerals, would have a zero-point feature for having a "diet" of similar versatility but completely different focus compared to human norm. The unusual Restrict Diet merely subsumes that feature.

[Flyndaran]

I may agree if that robot is always in high/ultra tech environments, but I tend to imagine my characters wandering the multiverse where most worlds will be low tech or uninhabited.
The troll would have other problems, but it's hard to imagine a parallel lacking rocks... though I suppose a hypothetical arcology full of just life and metals would be rather "food" sparse for them.

[mehrkat]

Couldn't you do "Doesn't eat" with a limitation "requires access to electricity sources" You just have to decide how much of a limitation it is and apply that modifier based on how often it comes up. The base advantage assumes an incredibly easy power source (magic in a mana filled world, sunlight pretty much anywhere where they only a few minutes or an hour a day, electricity when its everywhere and takes almost no time)

It seems like -20% would be appropriate in most games that they would be able to find but with some effort.

[PK]

<MOD> This was a unique enough topic that I've broken it out into its own thread. </MOD>

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I have a robot that can either eat like a normal human OR subsist on electricity alone. Electricity is a restricted diet for -10, but normal human food is 0. But having the option to switch is advantageous though I do not know how much or even how to guess.

Look at what you're trying to accomplish from a mechanics perspective first, always using a normal human being as the baseline. Humans normally have to eat food and drink water, so how are you changing that?

"I can go without eating and drinking if I act as though I have Restricted Diet (Electricity)."

So this would be Doesn't Eat or Drink (Temporary Disadvantage, Restricted Diet: Electricity, -10%) [9].