Appearance and Jealousy

[oneofmanynameless]

In Basic Set Characters it specifies that sometimes people will be jealous of your appearance and react at a penalty equal to your modifier instead of a bonus. This appears to reduce the cost of the advantage as the advantage is 4 cp per +1 (after standardizing the modifiers) which is 20% cheaper than charisma for the same benefit.

As a GM I've always been unsure how often I should make this come up. Accessibility (Only works a percentage of the time) indicates that for -20% it should fail about 50% of the time. But then appearance only applies to entities that might be attracted to your race at all right? Does that account for any portion of the 20% modifier? If it's even 5% then you'd end up with a 62.5% rate of success which... still to me feels like a lot of jealous people.

So what do people think? How often should appearance cause reaction problems instead of benefits?

[awesomenessofme1]

The book specifically lays out when: Members of the same sex with at least -2 in other reaction penalties.

[AlexanderHowl]

-4 in negative reaction penalties.

[awesomenessofme1]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

-4 in negative reaction penalties.

Yes, that's right. I didn't have my books with me. -2 is the penalty that your positive Appearance is replaced with.

[whswhs]

My understanding was that the 4 points/+1 is not because of the threat of reaction penalties (some forms of Social Stigma have reaction bonuses with "others similar to you," but they still average -5/-1). Rather, it's because your physical beauty affects only your own and very similar species. Observe that Universal, which makes your looks affect everyone, is +25%, which increased 4 points to 5 points.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

How often should appearance cause reaction problems instead of benefits?

Well, I roll randomly to determine if there are penalties or benes for most first encounters... so, somewhere between a 1 in 6 or on a 3 with 3d.

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by whswhs

My understanding was that the 4 points/+1 is not because of the threat of reaction penalties (some forms of Social Stigma have reaction bonuses with "others similar to you," but they still average -5/-1). Rather, it's because your physical beauty affects only your own and very similar species. Observe that Universal, which makes your looks affect everyone, is +25%, which increased 4 points to 5 points.

I see it more as Sense-based (Visual), -20%.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I see it more as Sense-based (Visual), -20%.

But it's clearly not only restricted in that way. Clearly some birds are attracted to visual signals such as plumage; consider the peafowl, the bird of paradise, or even the domesticated chicken. (Or the bower bird with its elaborately constructed stage.) Yet however visually inclined they are, they are not going to respond to a handsome or beautiful human.

I also note that Voice gives you +2 for 10 points. It's clearly Hearing-Based, but it doesn't get -20% for that.

Your interpretation cannot be reconciled with the way other GURPS rules work.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by whswhs

... Your interpretation cannot be reconciled with the way other GURPS rules work.

Some legacy GURPS rules cannot be reconciled with the way 4e does other things.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

Some legacy GURPS rules cannot be reconciled with the way 4e does other things.

Yes, but those rules can be indentified by their being at odds with pretty much all the other rules on related topics. That's hardly the case here. Consider not only the fact that Voice does not have Hearing-Based (-20%), but also the fact that Appearance in the base version does not act on other sighted species, and the fact that taking Universal DOES make it act on all other sighted species (but it still doesn't work on sightless species), despite its costing 5 points per +1 and therefore NOT having "Sight-Based (-20%)." All of these are mutually consistent.

I would also point out that during the playtest of the 4/e Basic Set, the cost of Appearance was intentionally set to 4 points per +1 after extended discussion among the playtesters. I was there and I took part. This was hardly a simple unconsidered retention of a legacy rule.