Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?

[Not another shrubbery]

In the [Psionic Powers] Do inanimate targets resist Malediction with HT or Will? thread, sp replied to one of my posts:

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Attribute: N/A is absolutely a house rule (and personally one that I don't like at all), by RAW it doesn't exist.

Just to try and keep the thread focused:

1. I think most of us already know the ruling Kromm made.
2. We know the N/A concept for Attributes is non-canonical.
3. From 2, it follows that the use of that concept is a house-rule.

There's no need to repeat the above items here, except for those who may not be aware of them. For those readers, feel free to point them to appropriate references in the books or here in the forums.

Regarding the title topic:
I personally find the idea of a 'N/A' level for attributes useful as an explanation for why Based On X attacks, where X is an Attribute that the target does not have a positive level of, cannot effect that target <for my purposes>. Allowing a +20% Enhancement to allow nearly guaranteed success against targets lacking the particular Att <at a positive level> strikes me as cheesy, so my ruling seems like a return to a better place, where the attacker needs to choose the targeted Att with care if he wants it to have broad effectiveness against a variety of target-types.

[ericthered]

I think in some cases it is absolutely justified:

the DX of a rock. Or an ocean. Or even an AI that can't move by itself. Arguably, these are DX 0. but I just don't see the point of a -200 disadvantage for not being able to move. In almost all cases the lack of movement is summed up in sessile and No Fine manipulators.

[Sunrunners_Fire]

I'd say 'Attribute N/A' isn't a useful concept; or at least I'd find no use for it. I reward player cunning and player knowledge. Why would I want to penalize them for doing something smart like building a power like that and targeting things that are weak against it? I build powers like that. Why should I penalize my players for following my example?

[Anthony]

The real problem is that (Based on different attribute) is miscosted, because of the existence of an extremely broad category of targets that lack particular attributes. If you eliminate that enhancement, the existence of Will 0 targets isn't a problem because the abilities that default to targeting Will are all mind-affecting and therefore useless against objects (likewise, targeting DX for objects incapable of movement is problematic). Stat N/A is a convenient way of marking something as being an invalid target for (based on a different attribute). I might say something like:

'Based on a different attribute':

• A power that targets Per cannot affect targets which lack senses.
• A power that targets DX cannot affect targets which are incapable of physical actions.
• A power that targets Will cannot affect targets which lack volition.
• A power that targets IQ cannot affect targets which lack thinking ability.
• A power that targets ST instead targets HP for targets which are incapable of physical actions.
• This does not apply to the (resisted by X) limitation.
• The Cosmic enhancement may be applied to bypass these restrictions.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Anthony

The real problem is that (Based on different attribute) is miscosted, because of the existence of an extremely broad category of targets that lack particular attributes. If you eliminate that enhancement, the existence of Will 0 targets isn't a problem because the abilities that default to targeting Will are all mind-affecting and therefore useless against objects (likewise, targeting DX for objects incapable of movement is problematic). Stat N/A is a convenient way of marking something as being an invalid target for (based on a different attribute). I might say something like:

'Based on a different attribute':

• A power that targets Per cannot affect targets which lack senses.
• A power that targets DX cannot affect targets which are incapable of physical actions.
• A power that targets Will cannot affect targets which lack volition.
• A power that targets IQ cannot affect targets which lack thinking ability.
• A power that targets ST instead targets HP for targets which are incapable of physical actions.
• This does not apply to the (resisted by X) limitation.
• The Cosmic enhancement may be applied to bypass these restrictions.

You touch on a couple of interesting points. Getting rid of the Based on (Different Attribute) enhancer does solve a lot of problems. I don't know that the loss of freedom would be worth eliminating it (not that that was what you were advocating). Maybe, going back to my first post in that parent thread, we could just attach prohibitive clauses to the modifier, similar to the ones you use in your bullet points.

The bullet points themselves remind me of another idea I had brought up, about the game definition of lacking a characteristic. When Kromm said that certain attacks cannot affect targets without a mind, I wondered "What is a mind in game terms?". Is it something other than just having a zero in relevant Attributes like IQ, Will, and Per?

[Refplace]

I think the concept is useful but not uniformly applicable.

[munin]

"Attribute: N/A" may not be RAW, but obviously an example of "Secondary Characteristic: N/A" exists: FP.

Someone with Will 0 could still buy up Will-based skills or even attempt a Will roll (with some bonuses from something) for Extra Effort, etc. -- some-"one" with Will N/A simply could not. That's an important distinction and potentially worth representing, possibly even for attributes.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by munin

"Attribute: N/A" may not be RAW, but obviously an example of "Secondary Characteristic: N/A" exists: FP.

Someone with Will 0 could still buy up Will-based skills or even attempt a Will roll (with some bonuses from something) for Extra Effort, etc. --

Well no, they couldn't. Something with Will 0 doesn't do anything beyond tropisms, because it's a something, not a someone.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Refplace

I think the concept is useful but not uniformly applicable.

Others have made similar comments. Can you elaborate?

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

Others have made similar comments. Can you elaborate?

Not sure I have anything useful to add to the thread but ok.
A magic sword could be built as everything but HT as N/A or it could have all the attributes. Even with No manipulators and no ability to move..
IQ for able to talk and cast spells
DX to aim with those spells.
ST to say resist knockback in case you chose not to use HP. That one is the most useless without manipulators or movement ability.

So I can see where you may ascribe the NA disadvantage to something but there are plenty of cases where it may not be appropriate.
As far as I can recall the only thing in RAW that is N/A is the machine metatrait that makes it effectively IQ N/A for most mental control type powers and NA for FP.

So we could add more but they should allow you to buy the attribute to 0. Also I would say typically they are advantages and base pricing (very roughly) off Immunity.

In an old game system (Ysgarth) Undead were described s a once living thing that is now missing one or more of its components.
Body, Mind, Soul/Spirit.
Remove anyone and you have an Undead rather then living thing.
Body only gave you a zombie
Body plus Mind gave you an intelligent zombie, say a mummy.
Mind and Spirit gave you a ghost or remove mind for a mindless ghost.
Whatever was missing could not be attacked.

In GURPS we do not remove the Body (HT/ST) as it can be targeted by other insubstantial things.
A rock could have Will if you ascribe to Animist beliefs.
It wants to be a rock and would resist change.
However in other settings it would be just a rock and not have a Will or IQ.

So I see us having multiple levels and options.
Default is normal attributes, bought up or down as appropriate.
Next are some advantages that make you immune to things that would affect that attribute or be resisted by them.
Say ...
Soul Less
You have no soul or spirit and cannot be harmed by anything that affects those characteristics. However you also cannot use them to resist effects.
You may have a mind but normal telepathy and magical mind powers will not work on you. You may not use your Will to resist or block any ability.

EDIT: Most of the original question can be easily handled by GM fiat and a part of the setting.
If you have a malediction that represents pyrokinesis heating someone up but is resisted by Will then the GM needs to plan for that in his campaign and either allow it or not based on what he wants for the feel.