03-25-2011, 07:14 AM | #21 |
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: MI
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Right - Lech is having Compulsively Fail at Resisting Sex Appeal Rolls (Even the ones She didn't know she was making at default ;p ) established at creation. High Will gives a bonus to resist Sex Appeal and Fast Talk (among many other things). I don't think immunity to the roll should be as simple as declaring disinterest on the spot.
__________________
"My Dirty Girls on Bikes Calendar ends in December: it doesn't mean the world is going to end, it means it's time to order a new calendar!" ~Burt Chance |
03-25-2011, 08:02 AM | #22 | ||
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Johnston2; 03-25-2011 at 08:55 AM. |
||
03-25-2011, 08:34 AM | #23 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
I find that NPCs will happily use Fast-Talk, but refuse to accede to NPCs fast-talking them into whatever they can using role-playing and fast-talk. As a GM, i try to role-play out the social scenes, but it can take a while, and I'm not going to flirt up a guy until it get's awkward.
The problem is, we are influenced all the time and hardly know it. A Waitress touches you on the shoulder reassuringly, you leave a bigger tip. A sales man fast pitches you into signing a contract. Saying "I don't want to do this because it's bad for my character" is about as bad as role-playing gets. If you do that, why play? It would be like saying "I don't want you to take my pawn because it's bad for my side of the board" The analogy isn't perfect because a GM always has the power to make your character suck the big one, but it's close enough for squash. The point is, Gurps assumes this. There's a sidebar (now I can't find the darn thing) That suggests levying a penalty to PC (or bonus for the social PC) skills against social characters equal to the margin of success on the influence roll. If PCs refuse to acknowledge of social cache, I tend to do just that. Having read a lot about the science of social engineering (it's one of my hobbies, but only academic, sadly), I tend to notice how woefully inadequate most gamers are at understanding just how powerful it is.
__________________
Just Bought: Succesful Job Search! Currently Buying off: Fat *Sigh* and Poverty. Number of signatures inspired: 1 Word of God and Word of Kromm are pretty much the same thing in my book |
03-25-2011, 09:02 AM | #24 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
The difference in resistance is usually one of setting the fair price or the point at which it something becomes reasonable, it's not a modifier to the dice roll. And note that Sex Appeal vulnerability is absolutely set by simple declaration in a lot of cases. Otherwise there'd be no reason you couldn't use your Sex Appeal skill on targets of the wrong sexual orientation (or species!). Though these days I do generally charge a Perk if you want to define your character's sexual interests as negligible, or directed toward something that's really unlikely to come up.
__________________
-- MA Lloyd |
|
03-25-2011, 09:16 AM | #25 |
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The City of Subdued Excitement
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Sex Appeal, along with the other influence skills, do indeed influence the PCs. See the box on B359, where Sex Appeal is used as an example.
I don't see any reason a player should get to decide that their character is immune to Sex Appeal at zero cost any more than they could decide to be immune to Diplomacy, Intimidation, et cetera. If you want that immunity, pay for it. |
03-25-2011, 09:20 AM | #26 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
Of course, much depends also on whether you're offering short-term or long-term sex: a proposition or a proposal, in somewhat old-fashioned terms. Getting someone to agree to a short-term relationship is much faster . . . but if you're dealing with someone to whom any sex entails a long-term relationship, an attempt will automatically fail, too. Bill Stoddard |
|
03-25-2011, 09:21 AM | #27 | |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Milwaukee, WI
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
I could see a Resistant to Influence trait. costing 5 points for +3 and 8 points for +8, that is basically a scaled down Indomitable, and is likewise requires Empathy to crack.
__________________
Just Bought: Succesful Job Search! Currently Buying off: Fat *Sigh* and Poverty. Number of signatures inspired: 1 Word of God and Word of Kromm are pretty much the same thing in my book |
|
03-25-2011, 09:24 AM | #28 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
Bill Stoddard |
|
03-25-2011, 09:28 AM | #29 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Quote:
I could see a general "Resist Influence" skill with Resist Sex Appeal available as a valid optional specialization and/or Technique. |
|
03-25-2011, 09:28 AM | #30 |
GURPS Line Editor
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
|
Re: Resistance to Sex Appeal
Remember that PCs are affected by NPCs' Influence skills. However, to make the experience more roleplaying than rollplaying, this isn't handled as a binary "NPC does/doesn't gets his way" test. Rather, the player gets the option to go along with the NPC's goal. If he decides to hold out, that's fine! But in that case, he suffers a modifier equal to the manipulator's margin of success should he try to act against the goal that the Influence roll was made to support. See p. B359.
In light of this situation, it's game-mechanically sensible to allow Resistant; this is just a specific case of "Mental Resistance" (p. B81). "All Influence skills" is Common; the topmost, Immunity level is named Indomitable [15] (p. B60). Thus, +8 to resist costs 7 points and +3 to resist costs 5 points. I'd split that further into refined (Diplomacy, Fast-Talk, and Savoir-Faire) vs. unrefined (Intimidation, Sex Appeal, and Streetwise), each with Immunity [10], Resistant (+8) [5], and Resistant (+3) [3]. An individual skill would have Immunity [5], Resistant (+8) [2], and Resistant (+3) [1]. The point being that this is not a skill . . . even a Will/E skill would be too costly for what it would do, as Will+3 would cost 8 points, more than any of the above Resistant (+3) traits. I wouldn't link Resistant to Appearance. What I would do is turn the Appearance modifier to Sex Appeal into a differential one based on the mean ("Androgynous") reaction modifier: -6, -5, -4, -2, -1, 0, +1, +3, +4, or +5. Someone who's Attractive (+1) gets +1 vs. Average (0) people, +2 vs. Unattractive (-1) people, etc., but for instance -2 vs. Beautiful (+3) people! Someone who's Unattractive (-1) gets -1 vs. Average (0) people, -2 vs. Attractive (+1) people, and so on, but a big +3 vs. Hideous (-4) people! This would represent people going for the most appealing partner they can get, which with people finding their level and establishing "leagues" means that the beautiful people will tend to stick together. Then there would be a quirk, "Low Standards," that lets the user of Sex Appeal waive this modifier against you when it's a penalty: "Others never suffer a net penalty for relative Appearance when using Sex Appeal on you. If it has the right body parts, you're interested!"
__________________
Sean "Dr. Kromm" Punch <kromm@sjgames.com> GURPS Line Editor, Steve Jackson Games My DreamWidth [Just GURPS News] |
Tags |
heterosexuality, homosexuality, kromm explanation, new skill, sex appeal, social engineering |
|
|