Do non-combat modifiers apply to somebody with Incompetence:Guns?

[BraselC5048]

Anyway, low normal point total character and sky high point character are going to the range, since he needs to put a point in Guns. The thing is, sky high point characters has Incompetence:Guns. So even with the penalties, the non-combat modifiers would mean she still hits the target most of the time, almost as good as somebody who has it at a default of 8 (it's not exactly a shooting contest. We're talking about shots that are about -5 ish, on a range). So would the out of combat modifiers from Tactical Shooting apply to the character with Incompetence:Guns, only some of them, or none? And what about somebody with the skill at default?

I'm actually hoping as few as possible apply the the character Incompetence, and many of them to the character with it at default. Going for a "look at all the things I've seen you do? And you still can't hit that?" ""This is haaarrd." And a bit of comic relief.

[Leynok]

The high point character can't claim any points back from Incompetence if it isn't going to inconvenience him. If you wanted to get points back for it, then increase the penalty that Incompetence gives until they can't use it effectively (An effective score of 6 or less should be fine.)
I'm not familiar with Tactical shooting to help you out there.

[sir_pudding]

Well, the psychological factors probably apply. The environment factors probably do too. The +3 for known range (IMO; there's some debate about this) require that you can make the appropriate sight adjustments, though.

You might also consider not letting the character claim any benefit from sighted shots or aiming, since he probably can't figure out what the sights are supposed to do.

[BraselC5048]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Well, the psychological factors probably apply. The environment factors probably do too. The +3 for known range (IMO; there's some debate about this) require that you can make the appropriate sight adjustments, though.

You might also consider not letting the character claim any benefit from sighted shots or aiming, since he probably can't figure out what the sights are supposed to do.

She's had plenty of firearms training, and knows the basics about guns, at least when it comes to IQ based rolls. She could easily identify what type of gun it is (cheep .38 special), basic gun safety, and what everything does. It's just there's some sort of disconnect when it comes to actually shooting the thing. I figure knowing the precise range doesn't require adjustable sights, but does require having some idea what the heck that actually means when it comes to using it. Plus I figure having a known speed of zero accounts for much of that bonus, which even she would benefit from.

Let's see, basic black head/torso cutout at 10 yards, that's still 9 or less, so 2 hits out of the 6. 1 yard target at 20 yards, round, still 9 or less, no aiming. Default guy is only 1 better (much lower DX,), doesn't quite sound embarrassing enough. It almost seems like an additional 1 or 2 of difference would do the trick. Probably dropping one of the pressure +1's.

(Knowing haw bad you are, embarrassment factor, and likely probably more stressful for Overconfident her then things she could actually get killed doing, but is really good at. Maybe dropping another +1 from pressure. She actually enjoys fighting for her life, and a heck of a lot more then this, in fact this might be just as much pressure as actual combat. Or more. So no pressure bonuses, that puts it right where I want it, can't hit the broadside of a barn even with aiming.)

When her friend shows up, she'll show him what a "cleaning kit" is, and how to do it. (Gun bought at a pawn shop a few months ago, ammo bought elsewhere, who knows who had the gun before he did. Probably malf 16 at best, and maybe Acc 1. "It's not very accurate. It shoots a little left." (from friend with high level of Guns.)

[Toptomcat]

Keep in mind the bell-curve nature of GURPS' skill system, and its sensitivity to 'only one point better' when effective skill is close to 10. 'Only one point better', compared to effective skill 9 (37.5% chance of success), is skill 10 (50% chance of success). That's not really a small difference, even if your instinct is to think 'it's only one little point.'

Also, a point's worth of skill investment is supposedly around two hundred hours of time investment. I might be inclined to rule that getting rid of an Incompetence quirk requires two hundred hours of long, tedious training just to get Madam High Point to baseline, treating the Quirk as a sort of 'negative skill point' for training-time purposes.

[Flyndaran]

It seems like OP implies the high point character is working off default Guns skill.
Perhaps, Incompetence should reduce the maximum Dx based default. Normally skills default from stats above 20 as if they were 20. Perhaps Incompetence should force defaults as if stats were 15.

[vicky_molokh]

It's just one point, sheesh. Those -4 are nasty even if you don't forbid putting points into the skill.

[Kromm]

Yes, it's just a quirk. Don't go nuts. Remember that it has two effects:

1. You cannot learn that skill, so you must use it at default. In the case of Guns, that's DX-4.
2. Your default is at an extra -4. That bumps Guns down to DX-8.

If someone's DX is so huge that even at DX-8, Non-Combat Bonuses (Tactical Shooting, p. 9) give them good odds of a hit . . . fine, they hit. But those same bonuses apply to everyone. In concrete terms, we're talking about a DX 18 incompetent being as good as an ordinary DX 10 person with 1 point in Guns, which seems fair when the DX 18 character has 159 points in DX and Incompetence while the DX 10 person has 1 point in Guns.

The real issue here is whether "going to the range" is enough to let someone buy off Incompetence in order to learn Guns. Personally, I wouldn't allow that. I usually make the condition for losing Incompetence some sort of seriously traumatic event in the field, like being pinned down by gunfire and forced to shoot back at DX-8.

[Flyndaran]

But incompetencies really exist, and aren't all the result of traumatic experiences.

[Railstar]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

But incompetencies really exist, and aren't all the result of traumatic experiences.

Condition for losing incompetence, not gaining it.