Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-30-2014, 07:41 PM   #21
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toptomcat View Post
That seems more the territory of traits/quirks that the judge should take, rather than anything that should be reflected in traits/appearence levels taken by the contestants. Aphrodite gets her +8 for Universal Transcendant, but it gets partially cancelled out by the judge's Intolerance (Divinity).
Well, there's also the Classic Features perk. So the finer bits can fall on both sides. Though at Transcendent appearance Classic Features would technically not make sense.

...That's a curious side effect of the missing +2 appearance level. Since Classic Features boosts you by one step in appearance, the step from Attractive is larger than others. (As, technically, is the step from Hideous, though that seems unlikely to come up.)
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 01:45 AM   #22
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Well, there's also the Classic Features perk. So the finer bits can fall on both sides. Though at Transcendent appearance Classic Features would technically not make sense.
...
Transcendence: Classic features could be of a specific deity.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 01:47 AM   #23
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not View Post
Does it have a built in enemy, or does the modifier turn negative when you gather -4 total negatives?
These are two effects. First:
Quote:
Originally Posted by B21
Members of the same sex with reason
to dislike you (more than -4 in reaction
penalties, regardless of bonuses) resent
your good looks, and react at -2
instead.
And the second is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by B21
As well, talent scouts, friendly
drunks, slave traders, and other nui-
sances are liable to become a problem
for you.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 02:53 AM   #24
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran View Post
Transcendence: Classic features could be of a specific deity.
The thing is that the Classic Features mechanic doesn't mean anything if your appearance can't be improved by a step, and there's no step above Transcendent.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 06:18 AM   #25
fmultimedia
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otaku View Post

There are two seeming "gaps" in the otherwise natural progression. The CP value and Reaction Penalty jumps between Monstrous and Ugly; there is no [-12] "Very Ugly" appearance that provides a -3 reaction penalty (which would fit the numbers and approximate naming scheme). Similarly, but not quite the same, on the positive side of Appearance there is a jump from costing 4 CP to 12 CP, where again the usual 4 point increments might indicate there should be a 8 CP value. Unlike on the negative side, here it becomes odd because the +1 for Attractive becomes a +2/4 split for Handsome (or Very Beautiful).
Maybe they did this because of costs/mechanics, but I find it mainly realistic. Let me start talking about one race settings and heterosexual relationships.

From my personal experience (both my own and what I can perceive from people around me), when it comes to people of the opposite sex, you can tell plain/slightly above plain/cute (pretty, etc.) from each other instinctively. And that WILL affect you slightly - for example, that nice looking attendant in the shop at the mall makes you slightly more propense to buy, or you react well when a nice looking professor comes into your uni classroom. Anything beyond that level of beauty is not only "wasted" but, more often than not, more prejudicial than beneficial (again, IMHO). Be it because of your low self esteem, because of jealousy/envy, because you feel threatened, or just generally because that person reminds you how not stunning you look - for a whole lot of people, being around very good loking people of the same sex is more disconcerting than anything else, at least initially.


When it comes to the opposite sex, though, things scale up much much faster. OK, plain is plain, kind'a cute is kind'a cute... but after that, there's no room for compromise or middle ground! Very good loking people will draw your attention whether you want it or not, and you will most probably feel inclined to be nice to them - much nicer you would be with less good-looking people in the same circumstances. Take the really cute girl/boy asking for directions on the street / sitting next to you in your classroom / asking you to fill a really long, boring survey (Sad, but true). Therefore the vertiginous increase in reaction bonus for people of the sex you're attracted to.

I stressed heterosexual because I do think gay people have one or more "complicators" going own, namely the fact that the same good-looks on people you are attracted to may cause you yourlsef to feel uncomfortable with your own looks - because, after all, they are the same sex as you! An out of shape male who looks at a "ripped" man will feel both attracted and a bit ashamed that he isn't ripped himself (BTW if it's not clear by now, I am gay =p). I know this may happen with heterosexual people too ("she's WAY out of my league!"), but I think it is far less common than in the gay community.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otaku View Post
just as someone that isn't sexually attracted to me but has some other reason to enjoy my looks (the +2 cap I don't get at all) seems odd.
In this point, I strongly disagree with you: as a gay man, I can tell that it doesn't matter how supposedly stunning a woman looks, I won't feel any more affected by that than another less good-looking, but still pretty lady (that's a +6 becoming a +2). As I implied before, I think that's a bit more tricky for heterosexual men, because there's a lot mixed up when it comes to nice looking people of the same sex: you might feel threatened, you're not supposed to find them good-looking, etc.

All in all, hetero/gay issues put aside, my main point was: I think the way the rules where stabilished is very realistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otaku View Post
Modifiers are included on p.B21. Androgynous and Impressive allow characters to accept a single bonus instead of the split for the higher Appearance levels. The value is +0% and it changes the split values to +3, +4 and +5, respectively. The "special effect" are that Androgynous individuals, as the term implies, have their good looks in a manner that is equally appealing to both sexes while Impressive more about exceptional physical presence instead of sex appeal.
I can see Impressive working in reality - some elderly people, politicians, professors, etc. do have that "air" about them which seems to make them look better than the average. And I think it's not difficult to attribute +3/+4 reaction modifiers to some people of the real world.

But I have a SERIOUS issue with Androgynous. I think this modifier is HIGHLY unrealistic, and built up solely for the sake of "rule completion". Being able to use your good-looks to be attractive to both sexes involves A LOT of skill and not only "raw potential". In fact, I know of very very feel examples of this in reality (Courntney Act being definately one of them =D). And before you come to me saying that it's not about being a drag, I just find VERY HARD to believe you can be very impressed by a man (if you're a male heterosexual) who looks kind'a girly - even if it's very pretty girly. At least in our western culture - I've lived in Japan for two years, and I can say that different cultures do have (very) different approaches to androngynous looks.

And since I meantioned different cultures, let me tell you that you don't need different races to have problems with different aesthetic values. Being a (plain looking) Brazilian who lived in Japan and who have visited Argentina on many occasions, I can tell. Brazilians are obsessed with straight teeth and big curves; lots of girls who are considered stunningly pretty in Japan are deemed ugly in Brazil because of their teeth or because they don't have enough bust/hips, and even some "American beauties" are commonly thought as very plain in Brazil. On the other hand, many Japanese people living in Brazil find women who are considered irresistable by natives as fat and unnatractive. I myself rarely draw attention at all in Brazil, but whenever I go to Argentina, some sort of mojo comes over me and I'm leered at and chatted to in bars and clubs far more often than I'm used to. And all that in a supposedly "globalized world"!!! Imagine what it would be like in a time with no TV, no magazines, no Internet telling you what is pretty and what isn't!

When we get to different races, things get blown completely away in my opinion. Unless for supernatural/mystic reasons, elfs should be only be considered beautiful to cultures that learned to appreciate that. I'm not even saying "human-like races": I really mean culture! Imagine a stereotypical Viking-like culture, where men like their women "butch" - I bet elves are not that popular there!

This is why I think Appearance levels should ALWAYS be bought with the Accessibility modifier for settings where many cultures/races are involved. There's little benefit in being an amazing looking human in a world dominated by orcs!

In a final remark, still talking about cultures, I think different settings might also cause different types of reactions when very good-looking people are involved. In some cultures, being awkward and acting dumb seems very common, while in others, good-looking people seem to draw attention more of a negative kind - crude lines, leering, etc. In some countries, you will most likely get promoted easily , in others, probabilities are you will be harrassed into undesireable intimacy with some superior. I don't know how I would flesh that out in terms of points/costs, but assuming people will just react plain "nice" towards you because you're pretty seems very, very naive to me.

I think this my token of contribution, sorry for my bad English and for all the gayness ^^

Last edited by fmultimedia; 10-01-2014 at 06:30 AM.
fmultimedia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 11:26 AM   #26
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
But I have a SERIOUS issue with Androgynous. I think this modifier is HIGHLY unrealistic, and built up solely for the sake of "rule completion". Being able to use your good-looks to be attractive to both sexes involves A LOT of skill and not only "raw potential". In fact, I know of very very feel examples of this in reality (Courntney Act being definately one of them =D). And before you come to me saying that it's not about being a drag, I just find VERY HARD to believe you can be very impressed by a man (if you're a male heterosexual) who looks kind'a girly - even if it's very pretty girly. At least in our western culture - I've lived in Japan for two years, and I can say that different cultures do have (very) different approaches to androngynous looks.
I think that 'being girly'/'being manly' is something of a secondary effect. GURPS is a system where you pay for the effect first and foremost. So when you buy a +3/+3 Appearance, you're paying for the sort of looks which be considered +3 by both sexes/orientations in the Reference Society; how this is described i something that has to be factored based on the desired result. Being able to easily disguise oneself for the member of opposite sex is something secondary/different - you can get that with a Perk even without Handsome/Beautiful Appearance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
[ . . . ]
This is why I think Appearance levels should ALWAYS be bought with the Accessibility modifier for settings where many cultures/races are involved. There's little benefit in being an amazing looking human in a world dominated by orcs! [ . . . ]
This is why Reference Society matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasy 128
If a level of Appearance is taken at
the standard point cost, its reaction
modifiers can apply either to your own
race and races that closely resemble it,
or to the dominant race in your world
and races that closely resemble it. If
they apply to both, treat this as the
Universal enhancement to
Appearance level (+25%).
So you could be a human who is pretty in the eyes of humans and maybe elves or whatever, a human who is pretty in the eyes of orcs (the dominant culture), or you can pay +25% and be pretty for all of the above.

For smaller groups of people, I suppose you could take Classic Looks: Epitome of Brazillian Beauty. It's a weird wording, but I suppose it's reasonably fair in a campaign where Brazillieros constitute only a small faction of encountered sapients. (The Perk, that is.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
I think this my token of contribution, sorry for my bad English and for all the gayness ^^
Actually, the thing about mixing the higher modifier for appearance and a some sort of nervousness factor for jealousy/self-esteem issues is an interesting addition. I'm not sure how it is to be handled. Normally, in settings where it isn't a Social Stigma, I treat gayness as a Feature, and bisexuality as a Quirk or two (one for being affected by Sex Appeal of both sexes, another if the character takes the higher Appearance modifier of both sexes). Hmm. Maybe characters for whom the second effect is true deserve more than a single point for it, not sure.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 11:53 AM   #27
fmultimedia
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I think that 'being girly'/'being manly' is something of a secondary effect. GURPS is a system where you pay for the effect first and foremost. So when you buy a +3/+3 Appearance, you're paying for the sort of looks which be considered +3 by both sexes/orientations in the Reference Society; how this is described i something that has to be factored based on the desired result. Being able to easily disguise oneself for the member of opposite sex is something secondary/different - you can get that with a Perk even without Handsome/Beautiful Appearance.
That's my (very own, personal) issue (you might not have it at all!): I don't think that in realistic/non-fantasy settings, there is such a thing as "androgynous good looks" worth +3 or +4, except for very, very specific cultures. Japan is the closest place in our world I can think of, but still, although androgynous beauty is accepted and even envied there, it's more of a thing GIRLS find attractive (and therefore men crave) than anything else. Obviously, it's not ALL men, I'm being a generalizing jerk here, but you get the idea. So unless you're thinking of a setting where just about everyone consider androgeny "sexy" or "nice looking", I think it's very unrealistic. You see, Androgynous implies that you can be attractive to both sexes - otherwise, it would be the "Impressive" modifier! Again, not saying the rule shouldn't exist, it's there for completeness and also to make up for cool/remarkable (N)PCs, I just feel it should come with a line or two saying "this isn't something you're gonna see in the modern western world any time soon".

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
This is why Reference Society matters.
So you could be a human who is pretty in the eyes of humans and maybe elves or whatever, a human who is pretty in the eyes of orcs (the dominant culture), or you can pay +25% and be pretty for all of the above.

For smaller groups of people, I suppose you could take Classic Looks: Epitome of Brazillian Beauty. It's a weird wording, but I suppose it's reasonably fair in a campaign where Brazillieros constitute only a small faction of encountered sapients. (The Perk, that is.)
I guess some people are picky and prickly about physics or chemistry, I guess I am about culture and aethetics (I do work academicly with Human Sciences)... The concept that you can be appealing to a whole race really bothers me. Especially in a game which makes you specialize in loads of skills. Being pretty for a specific culture is the most generalization I am able to digest. Also, I think some boundries should most definately be put in some situations, like having Orcs finding Dwarves pretty, unless for mystical reasons.

Finally, there's the thing of the effects of being good-looking: in our recent history of slavery, there are plenty of (sad) examples of how being a good-looking black woman probably got you in more trouble than if you were "plain". I point out that that's not exactly the same as Social Stigma - being a black woman during slavery might be, but there probably isn't a Stigma for something like "hot slave"... How would you handle that?
fmultimedia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 12:31 PM   #28
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
That's my (very own, personal) issue (you might not have it at all!): I don't think that in realistic/non-fantasy settings, there is such a thing as "androgynous good looks" worth +3 or +4, except for very, very specific cultures. Japan is the closest place in our world I can think of, but still, although androgynous beauty is accepted and even envied there, it's more of a thing GIRLS find attractive (and therefore men crave) than anything else. Obviously, it's not ALL men, I'm being a generalizing jerk here, but you get the idea. So unless you're thinking of a setting where just about everyone consider androgeny "sexy" or "nice looking", I think it's very unrealistic. You see, Androgynous implies that you can be attractive to both sexes - otherwise, it would be the "Impressive" modifier! Again, not saying the rule shouldn't exist, it's there for completeness and also to make up for cool/remarkable (N)PCs, I just feel it should come with a line or two saying "this isn't something you're gonna see in the modern western world any time soon".
I mostly treat the Androgynous modifier as 'Same thing as Impressive, but triggers other people's Lecherousness and all other related stuff, and maybe means you get fewer penalties to Disguise, which rarely matters'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
I guess some people are picky and prickly about physics or chemistry, I guess I am about culture and aethetics (I do work academicly with Human Sciences)... The concept that you can be appealing to a whole race really bothers me. Especially in a game which makes you specialize in loads of skills. Being pretty for a specific culture is the most generalization I am able to digest. Also, I think some boundries should most definately be put in some situations, like having Orcs finding Dwarves pretty, unless for mystical reasons.

Finally, there's the thing of the effects of being good-looking: in our recent history of slavery, there are plenty of (sad) examples of how being a good-looking black woman probably got you in more trouble than if you were "plain". I point out that that's not exactly the same as Social Stigma - being a black woman during slavery might be, but there probably isn't a Stigma for something like "hot slave"... How would you handle that?
I'd say that's Enemy. Nobody said it has to be the same enemy each and every time.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 01:34 PM   #29
Otaku
 
Otaku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: South Dakota, USA
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmultimedia View Post
Maybe they did this because of costs/mechanics, but I find it mainly realistic.
And I don't. I almost did one of my monster posts explaining every little thing but... I don't think it is needed. The rules are an Abstraction. Most of us don't cram the entire spectrum of human appearance into seven "levels", or even the 10 that we have if we include Horrific, Monstrous, and Transcendent. There are traits like Charisma or Fashion Sense (let alone the types that feel like they need to use Sex Appeal most of the time) that make a lot of Average people register as Attractive, or Attractive register as Beautiful/Handsome etc.

The "sexual attraction" bonus should be on the beholder, not the person. It is just too mutable and subjective, at least if we are painting with the broad strokes of the actual Appearance rules. Androgynous is a bit misleading because it just means having better features in the huge area of overlap between men and women.
__________________
My GURPS Fourth Edition library consists of Basic Set: Characters, Basic Set: Campaigns, Martial Arts, Powers, Powers: Enhanced Senses, Power-Ups 1: Imbuements, Power-Ups 2: Perks, Power-Ups 3: Talents, Power-Ups 4: Enhancements, Power-Ups 6: Quirks, Power-Ups 8: Limitations, Powers, Social Engineering, Supers, Template Toolkit 1: Characters, Template Toolkit 2: Races, one issue of Pyramid (3/83) a.k.a. Alternate GURPS IV, GURPS Classic Rogues, and GURPS Classic Warriors. Most of which was provided through the generosity of others. Thanks! :)
Otaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2014, 03:13 PM   #30
fmultimedia
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Default Re: [Basic] Advantage Of the Week: Appearance Levels

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I mostly treat the Androgynous modifier as 'Same thing as Impressive, but triggers other people's Lecherousness and all other related stuff, and maybe means you get fewer penalties to Disguise, which rarely matters'.
That's exactlywhy I find it unrealistic: you think there's a kind of beauty that a man can have that will turn the Lecherousness of a truely straight man on (without deceiving your gender, that is)? I know for a fact that no matter the kind of beauty of a girl, I have never been in a situation as to find one sexually attractive (I don't think I am Lecherous, but I think I can recognize people who would turn that on on me if I were). Fewer penalties to desguise seems actually more realistic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I'd say that's Enemy. Nobody said it has to be the same enemy each and every time.
Brilliant! =D

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otaku View Post
And I don't. I almost did one of my monster posts explaining every little thing but... I don't think it is needed. The rules are an Abstraction. Most of us don't cram the entire spectrum of human appearance into seven "levels", or even the 10 that we have if we include Horrific, Monstrous, and Transcendent. There are traits like Charisma or Fashion Sense (let alone the types that feel like they need to use Sex Appeal most of the time) that make a lot of Average people register as Attractive, or Attractive register as Beautiful/Handsome etc.

The "sexual attraction" bonus should be on the beholder, not the person. It is just too mutable and subjective, at least if we are painting with the broad strokes of the actual Appearance rules. Androgynous is a bit misleading because it just means having better features in the huge area of overlap between men and women.
Fair enough, to each his own. I was going on and on about 'cultural' aesthetic values, but you are right too, to a certain point, it is really on a person-by-person basis. Still, it is undeniable that there are people that seem to trigger that sexual attraction on a far wider part of the spectrum of the beholders than others. That's because there are, after all, some beauty standards set in our society and whoever complies to them is much more likely to trigger sexual attraction than poeple who don't. That's why I think Appearance levels should work well with Accessibility (or Frequence of Appearance, or what have you): meaning a chance you have of it affecting other people. In any cross-culture realistic setting (or even single-culture setting, if you want to be VERY realistic), the fact is that there's hardly anyone who can trigger their Appearance bonus all the time.

And of course, anything that goes in levels is an abstraction of reality - Attributes, Skills, etc. But that's what the game is based on, right.

EDIT: forgot to remark: I think the power of dressing up well and making-up is totally underrated in GURPS actually. I go to a shopping mall frequented by the high society, and suddenly all men are at least very attractive, loads of them being very, very attractive. I take the bus every day, and the percentage is so, but so much lower. I am not a "money bitch", just a regular (gay) guy who understood the power of a nice haircut, a shirt that fits well and the power of good quality, trendy clothes. Women have make-up on top of that... I seriously think that you could reach Very Attractive if you're not Ugly, through sheer strength of well spent money and time. At least in nowadays society.

Last edited by fmultimedia; 10-01-2014 at 03:42 PM.
fmultimedia is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
advantage, advantage of the week, appearance, appearance level, week, [basic]

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.