TL 10 Humans

[Flyndaran]

I don't have a height preference, but understand that our sex differences wouldn't exist without some reasons, most likely from innate general preferences.

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by Agemegos

Improved nutrition, immunisation, better treatment of childhood disease, reduced stress during childhood, and better athletic training seems to have produced, out of the same genetic material as my contemporaries, a swarm of young men over 180 cm tall (and one of my nephews is 197 cm tall).

I've seen discussion that in Japan, despite there being a trend in increasing height over the past few decades, this has peaked recently because doctors recommend that pregnant mothers reduce their eating habits to reduce the birthweight of their child, allowing for an easier birth. Thus, prenatal nutrition is also a likely factor.

[Flyndaran]

Some women take up smoking specifically to reduce birth weight to make delivery easier.

[warellis]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Some women take up smoking specifically to reduce birth weight to make delivery easier.

That sounds like a horrifying way to reduce a baby's birth weight.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

I've seen discussion that in Japan, despite there being a trend in increasing height over the past few decades, this has peaked recently because doctors recommend that pregnant mothers reduce their eating habits to reduce the birthweight of their child, allowing for an easier birth. Thus, prenatal nutrition is also a likely factor.

After an emergency Caesar with my eldest brother and a difficult instrumental with my older sister, my mother had the rest of us born three weeks premature to limit our birth size.

TL10 humans may use exowombs to avoid the whole issue.

[MIB.6361]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Extended Lifespan quadruples maturation rate while Early Maturation 2 quarters it, so it evens out being the same as the TL 8 human maturation rate.

And I completely missed that being there. Even though it's a logical benefit of being a TL 10 human.

Thank you

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I don't know if Appearance (Attractive) is appropriate.

C and I used to joke that if we travelled a few centuries into the past, we would probably be considered Attractive: exceptionally tall (5'8" and 5'7"), no missing teeth, no smallpox scars. . . . But in the early 21st, we're just Average. Your TL10 humans might strike us as Attractive, with their perfect complexions and unusually symmetrical bodies and faces, but I'm not sure that in their own era this wouldn't be discounted.

I think it depends on whether you think the human aesthetic response habituates or not.

Smallpox scars would upgrade the matchmaking value. It meant they couldn't get it again.

[Humabout]

Originally Posted by Rupert

I would say it's a Taboo Trait (Terminal Illness (Cancer)), and thus a feature of the template. As a feature, it's worth zero points.

I'd say this is the best way to handle it, if you absolutely must include it in more than campaign fluff. That said, I don't know many GMs who allow players to get points for Terminal Illness anyway, so it might be a bit of a nonstarter there, too.

Originally Posted by Rupert

I would say it's a Taboo Trait (Terminal Illness (Cancer)), and thus a feature of the template. As a feature, it's worth zero points.

Originally Posted by Anthony

At the resolution of GURPS, cancer is pretty much just a special case of a failed aging roll.

Do you mean to say children don't get cancer? There are plenty of pediatric oncology patients that disagree with that sentiment.

If you mean in a practical sense, take note that Immunity to Cancer is not immunity to aging rolls - that's Unaging.

If you mean that you can interpret a failed aging roll as cancer, I suppose you could, but cancer can easily take less than decades to kill you. So that really isn't gaming out cancer as a disease - something I generally wouldn't consider fun, as a player. Hence my comment about GMs who afflict PCs with such diseases breaking Wheaton's Law.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Humabout

Do you mean to say children don't get cancer?

Median age of cancer diagnosis is 66. Only 1% of cancers occur among children (age <20), only 9% among those age 44-. This is not the type of hazard that GURPS bothers to roll for (and if it did, you'd probably roll it into a generic mortality roll).

[Sam Baughn]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

The symbiotic bacteria used by humans at TL 10 are assumed to provide benefits one TL earlier than nanosymbionts (Biotech, p. 121), so advantages that would come from TL 11 nanosymbionts are available as TL 10 symbiotic bacteria. In order to maintain stable populations of symbiotic bacteria within individuals, the symbiotic bacteria are designed to be sexually communicable and to be transferred from mother to child within the womb. The relevant modifications are Blood Cops, Carcinophages, DNA Repair, Microgravity Biochemistry, Pore Cleaners, and Tooth Cleaners.

I don't think the rules in Bio-Tech work quite the way you are interpreting them. When it says 'Nanosymbionts can do the same jobs, but not until
at least a TL later...' I believe it means that some of the symbiotic bacteria described on that page do the same thing as nanosymbionts, but are available earlier, not that there is a bacterial version of every nanosymbiont. Carcinophage bacteria seem like they would be tricky to make and DNA Repair and Microgravity Biochemistry ones seem pretty much impossible to me (although I am by no means an expert on the subject).