Animal Empathy/Plant Empathy

[Alonsua]

Hi there,

I have read part of the Basic Set and I have seen that Animal and Plant Empathy are mundane advantages. Do you consider them realistic? If so, are their main source nature or nurture?

Thanks for answering.

[Gollum]

Hello.

I personally consider that I have what GURPS names “Animal Empathy” so, yes, I think it is realistic. I may be wrong, of course, because it is the kind of thing that is hard to prove, like intuition or innate talent (for music, drawing…). It may be more a matter of belief than a matter of science.

What I am sure is that I feel very comfortable with animals and, as far as I can remember, I have never been attacked by any animal (dog, cat, snake, bee…), even if I go very close from them as often as I can and regularly stroke pets that I don’t know. I have for instance cut flowers with dozens of bees flying around me without the least problem.

I believe I quickly feel the emotional state of an animal and, so, intuitively know whether I can come nearer. I also “speak” to them. I perfectly know that they don’t understand what I mean (except a few words for domestic ones), but it is the best way I know to reassure them. I speak with a calm voice to make them understand that my intentions are not aggressive. And it sounds to work.

My “Animal Empathy” is probably not as accurate as the one described in GURPS Fourth Edition, but it is still a quick way to describe my ease of communication and very good relationship with animals.

[Gollum]

For the second part of your question (nature or nurture), I believe that, as talent for drawing or music, it comes from nature as well as nurture. I grew up with dogs, cats, a domestic mouse, chickens, ducks, and with a wood near my house. So I have always been surrounded with animals. Now, my brother and my sister, who grew up with me, don’t sound to have this “advantage”. Actually, I just cannot say why I feel so good with animals and why I “understand” them. I have never learned any skill related to animals (except a few riding lessons, very recently).

[sir_pudding]

The ability to use influence skills as completely different skills on nonsapients isn't especially sensible, and hard to relate to anything in fiction or reality.

Personally I have adopted a house rule where instead it turns Animal Handling and Naturalist into influence skills, but YMMV.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The ability to use influence skills as completely different skills on nonsapients isn't especially sensible, and hard to relate to anything in fiction or reality.

Yes. Third edition rules (a straightforward bonus to reaction rolls and animal skills) were more simple and sensible, in my humble opinion.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The ability to use influence skills as completely different skills on nonsapients isn't especially sensible, and hard to relate to anything in fiction or reality.

Personally I have adopted a house rule where instead it turns Animal Handling and Naturalist into influence skills, but YMMV.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. Third edition rules (a straightforward bonus to reaction rolls and animal skills) were more simple and sensible, in my humble opinion.

I'm not sure. Scaring off the wolves with Intimidation + Animal Empathy seems much more logical than needing a wolf-specific skill combined with Animal Empathy.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'm not sure. Scaring off the wolves with Intimidation + Animal Empathy seems much more logical than needing a wolf-specific skill combined with Animal Empathy.

Wolves in general react like carnivora in general and like mammalia react in general, etc. As placental mammals, we share a significant amount of similar thought processes, so it really is a skill to co-opt what you instinctively understand as a human to interact with non-humans.
To avoid skill bloat and maintain adventuring utility, it makes sense to me to jam all that into a single advantage.

Human intimidation is not exactly the same as wolf intimidation. Heck, there are some cultural differences among humans, so it's not just one platonic ideal of a reaction skill.

[Anthony]

It's certainly possible to intimidate and trick animals, and some can be befriended. Whether doing those things should call for Intimidate, Fast Talk/Acting, and Diplomacy, or should be separate skills, is mostly a matter of philosophy (I would probably allow Intimidate to work on animals -- and no particular advantage needed). Personally, I'd junk Animal Empathy and replace it with the Animal Friend talent.

As for plant empathy, plants are generally not capable of having reactions; I would junk it and use the Green Thumb talent.

Originally Posted by Gollum

Yes. Third edition rules (a straightforward bonus to reaction rolls and animal skills) were more simple and sensible, in my humble opinion.

Covered by the talents above.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I'm not sure. Scaring off the wolves with Intimidation + Animal Empathy seems much more logical than needing a wolf-specific skill combined with Animal Empathy.

Intimidation specifically still works without Animal Empathy and isn't the problem. Convincing a wolf that you know where a female in heat is using Sex Appeal (but not being able to convince the drunk at the bar you know where a lady who is into him is because that is Fast-Talk) is the problem.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Intimidation specifically still works without Animal Empathy and isn't the problem. Convincing a wolf that you know where a female in heat is using Sex Appeal (but not being able to convince the drunk at the bar you know where a lady who is into him is because that is Fast-Talk) is the problem.

That's an aspect of weirdness specific to Sex Appeal.

However:
needing Fast-Talk to hide the cues that you're trying to trick the target into doing something when dealing with sapients, but needing a species-specific skill to do the same with all sorts of IQ<6 species even with Animal Empathy is weird.