Optional Restricted Diet?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by PK

So this would be Doesn't Eat or Drink (Temporary Disadvantage, Restricted Diet: Electricity, -10%) [9].

That's not really legal -- it means you simultaneously have the advantages 'Doesn't Eat or Drink' and 'Restricted Diet'. However, Doesn't Eat or Drink (Accessibility: Requires Electricity) is fine and won't be substantially different cost (it might be -20% for [8]).

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

A bit of a resurrection, but it seems most appropriate to my question.

I have a robot that can either eat like a normal human OR subsist on electricity alone. Electricity is a restricted diet for -10, but normal human food is 0. But having the option to switch is advantageous though I do not know how much or even how to guess.

I feel the answer may be in some kind of adjustment to the ideas here.

This is no kind of disadvantage at all. If anything, it's a perk. The character has the option of eating as a normal human, and in addition, they have the option of "eating" as if a robot, from the main power supply.

I'd either call it a Perk and leave it as that, or look at Cast Iron Stomach and see how that might be modified.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That's not really legal -- it means you simultaneously have the advantages 'Doesn't Eat or Drink' and 'Restricted Diet'. However, Doesn't Eat or Drink (Accessibility: Requires Electricity) is fine and won't be substantially different cost (it might be -20% for [8]).

Doesn't Eat or Drink (Temporary Disadvantage: Dependency: Electricity Daily, -15%, costs FP, +0%) [9]?

Either way, it seems clear that it should cost 8-10 points.

[Flyndaran]

That's what I find most interesting about my idea. People either think it's near trivial, or think it's just shy of the full Doesn't Eat/Drink advantage.

Maybe I should instead imagine how prevalent situations where neither are available are. Perhaps that's why we're coming up with wildly different eye-balled numbers.
In modern+ urban societies electricity is pretty darn ubiquitous more so than sunlight, I'd say. But most places on the planet are still rather distant from power lines. And even though humans can digest a huge variety of things, many people still suffer malnourishment and starvation.

[Anthony]

As a side note, Doesn't Eat or Drink with Accessibility or Dependency gets rid of the time requirement of eating, which is a significant benefit. Based on things like slow eater/extra sleep, if recharging costs the same amount of time as eating, and similarly limits what you can do, it's an additional -30% on Doesn't Eat.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by PK

So this would be Doesn't Eat or Drink (Temporary Disadvantage, Restricted Diet: Electricity, -10%) [9].

I don't think that adds up. Machines just take Restricted Diet to represent their power source being more restrictive than normal food. Doesn't Eat or Drink is for representing something like never needing to recharge at all throughout a campaign:

Originally Posted by B263, Machine

You have an eight-hour energy
reserve and need refueling three times
a day. You can modify this with appro-
priate advantages (e.g., Doesn’t
Eat or Drink, for a reactor that can
run for years) or disadvantages (e.g.,
Increased Consumption, for a “gas-
guzzler” engine).

Also, C-31 has Restricted Diet (Fissionables) but not Doesn't Eat or Drink.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

Where does costs FP 0 come from? I thought it was -5% per 1 FP it cos to activate a power.

Normally Dependency makes you lose HP. I meant that it costs you FP instead. Whether that's worth +0% is debatable, of course, but I was in a hurry.

[ericthered]

You're looking at expanding the kinds of food you can eat. I think cast iron stomach is a good starting point here: it greatly expands what you can eat.

I also think "doesn't eat or drink" could be considered a form of "reduced consumption 5". Though 4 levels means you only have to have your "native" food once a month.

So according to that, being able to subsist off of either electricity or human food is probably worth [5].

[PK]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

I don't think that adds up. Machines just take Restricted Diet to represent their power source being more restrictive than normal food. Doesn't Eat or Drink is for representing something like never needing to recharge at all throughout a campaign:

Also, C-31 has Restricted Diet (Fissionables) but not Doesn't Eat or Drink.

Good point. It would be more accurate to call it either Accessibility, Requires Electricity or Trigger, Electricity, but I'd still give the same -10% in a modern game.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by PK

Good point. It would be more accurate to call it either Accessibility, Requires Electricity or Trigger, Electricity, but I'd still give the same -10% in a modern game.

Not sure I understand this correctly. Being able to feed off electricity isn't a net Advantage in GURPS 4e, so what'd I even apply the mod to?
E.g. a Virtual Interface Implant (that is installed into someone's skull and can be powered either off natural neural activity or, if unavailable for 'some' reason, by batteries) has Restricted Diet (Very Common, battery/human bioelectricity) [-10], but not Doesn't Eat or Drink. Larger robots who can only be powered by 'normal' amounts of electricity get Restricted Diet (Very Common, power cells) [-10]. (UT41, THS:CT55 etc.)

This seems like a case of Controllable Disadvantage (although I'd slightly increase the cost in exchange for making it freely togglable without a roll and able to maintain indefinite duration).