06-12-2012, 08:39 PM | #41 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
|
06-12-2012, 09:08 PM | #42 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Japan
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
It seems that a common misconception is to confuse the capitalized GURPS term "Will" with the everyday word "will". Actually, the Will score by definition of p. B16 is not related to what we call "will" in the real life. Whether the character has a high or low score or N/A score of Will is not directly related to whether he has volition or whatever we refer to as the everyday word "will".
__________________
Gurps Fan, a rules lawyer from the mysterious country of ninja, samurai, and magical girls, the inventor of M.U.N.C.H.K.I.N. |
06-12-2012, 10:06 PM | #43 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
Quote:
I wouldn't mind being able to treat low IQ the same as the other attributes, which might create a niche for IQ N/A, but it seems contrary to the rules.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
06-12-2012, 10:40 PM | #44 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Japan
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
Quote:
However, in this thread I think we're discussing "how people think the rules should be" (opinions), as opposed to "how the current rules work" (facts). True, removing the notion of non-sentience from "IQ 0" and creating a new notation "IQ N/A" do contradict the current rules, but it's not a problem. We're talking about whether allowing "Attribute N/A" is better or not than what's currently written in the GURPS books, and I support the view introducing "Attribute N/A" and distinguishing it from "Attribute 0" is better.
__________________
Gurps Fan, a rules lawyer from the mysterious country of ninja, samurai, and magical girls, the inventor of M.U.N.C.H.K.I.N. |
|
06-12-2012, 11:31 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
Quote:
I think the only attribute where N/A could mean something is IQ. And splitting off N/A from 0 doesn't really do anything to free up the IQ scale. You also have to re-assign the sapience barrier and re-map the deep cognitive limitations of animals at IQ 1 and 2.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
|
06-12-2012, 11:50 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
|
06-13-2012, 01:44 AM | #47 |
Hero of Democracy
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
|
06-13-2012, 02:29 AM | #48 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
|
06-13-2012, 04:08 AM | #49 | |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
Quote:
I can't think of any entities from Star Trek that would obviously have an attribute N/A. Maybe the Borg while connected to the Collective would have Will N/A, but I think that's more a case of using the Collective's Will instead of their own (possibly quite low) Will score. |
|
06-13-2012, 05:20 AM | #50 |
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Yorkshire, UK
|
Re: Attribute N/A, Useful concept or not?
B16 'Machines and Fatigue' already gives us a precedent for using N/A with Attributes (or at least a Secondary Characteristic), namely FP.
PK has an article on his site Nipping Problem Allies in the Bud, which includes a discussion on the issue of non-sentient Allies (Non-Sentient Allies on the Cheap), and the extra 400 points to spend issue created by buying DX and IQ down to Zero. The solution involves non-sentient Allies having IQ (and Per/Will) of N/A for 0 points. Trying to equate N/A in various Attributes to 'real world' characteristics and scenarios isn't the way to look at this; these are Game Mechanic terms and meanings. ST N/A might reasonably apply to a Ghost or other Insubstantial Creature from a material world perspective - but the being probably has a ST score in the insubstantial world. If there is a game mechanical reason why something can't use an Attribute, or can't be affected by something which targets (or is resisted by) that Attribute, then it seems reasonable to say that it has N/A for that Attribute. Whether N/A in all Attributes should cost 0 points is another matter! |
Tags |
attribute n/a, house rules |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|