PCs with very different reaction modifiers

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I'm skeptical about the validity of the selection of Disadvantages people complain about affecting the entire 'party'.

It's more a case of "if Adam's disadvantage causes problems for Bob, Bob should be the one getting points for it".

[Micah Davis]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's more a case of "if Adam's disadvantage causes problems for Bob, Bob should be the one getting points for it".

Isn’t that all disadvantages? He’s getting a ton of points - In the form of Adam. If your team member can’t speak, is in a wheelchair, is a fanatic, has a Code of Honor, practices non-violence, is an all loving hero, is on the run from the Dark Lord, has a Reputation as bad as the Devil himself, he’s causing you problems.

The party is just a set of tools the players are using to spend with their friends - And unless you play in ways quite dissimilar to my experience, that means you gotta get along and work together.

Still I’d usually not apply a penalty for your obnoxious friend unless they had an EXTREMELY severe modifier - like Reputation (War Criminal in Victim Country), Odious Personal Habit (Eats People), or Appearance (Monstrous). People associate with scumbags all the time. I’d just explain low rolls as “they don’t like your friend” and high rolls with “Gosh, how do you put up with that?”

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I'm skeptical about the validity of the selection of Disadvantages people complain about affecting the entire 'party'.

Some Disads are worse than others. Enemy used to be a really bad one, it's scaled for the one PC that takes it, but that one PC almost always has a grop of buddies, many whom are harden problem solvers... so when teh problem shows up, the one PC has a much easier time of it than they would in a solo campaign.

There is a vast difference between the problems caused by One Hand and the problems caused by Code of Honor (Chivalry)... and those differences are magnified by the type of campaign (heavy combat/action or heavy social/investigative), which GURPS does not really address well (or at all in Basic).

For another thing, if there is a party, all of everyone's disadvantages affect it.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Micah Davis

Still I’d usually not apply a penalty for your obnoxious friend unless they had an EXTREMELY severe modifier,,,

As I mentioned, I tend to only do that in DF/RPG because those social disads get nerfed by the genre conventions of how "Town" works, but yet are still bought at full value. I've also reworked a bunch of them to reduce the social impact and increase the non-social impact.

No, I'm not interested in gather my notes and publishing htem, but a good place to start towards what I've done is here:

https://gurpshexytime.blogspot.com/2...nts-worth.html
https://gurpshexytime.blogspot.com/2...ar-points.html

Charles Saeger has incredible ideas and I just took them and then went a little bit farther.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

As I mentioned, I tend to only do that in DF/RPG because those social disads get nerfed by the genre conventions of how "Town" works, but yet are still bought at full value.

It would probably still be okay if everyone had to do their own buying and selling instead of having a single party merchant to do the work, but I can't figure out a rational way of handling that (sadly, the merchant telepathically knows that you're buying for your obnoxious friend and doubles all his prices).

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It would probably still be okay if everyone had to do their own buying and selling instead of having a single party merchant to do the work, but I can't figure out a rational way of handling that (sadly, the merchant telepathically knows that you're buying for your obnoxious friend and doubles all his prices).

I’ve had a few ideas here. One is to require members of the party to have “shares” in the treasure equivalent to what they’d get out of selling (say, one share per 20% of their selling power). This could be justified as something required by the Adventure Guild or similar - say Wealth is tied to social rank, and the Guild requires variable shares based on said social rank. The GM can also adjust monetary treasure here - say, apply a multiplier based on the party’s average Wealth.

Another is to have Wealth include a Frugality stat - lower Frugality means you tend to waste money on blackjack, booze, etc.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

Enemy used to be a really bad one, it's scaled for the one PC that takes it, but that one PC almost always has a grop of buddies

That's why villains have hired henchmen or use cunning plans to strike their foe when the rest of the party isn't around, or in ways which prevent the rest of the party from responding effectively (e.g., social attacks, assassination attempts from a distance).

[DeadParrot]

IMO, individual character modifiers should be based on individual character traits and not influenced by other characters. I have often run into the 'face' skills need to be treated differently thought.

Ask yourself if you would be OK with averaging the party's combat skills? Is the swashbuckler character's cinematic dance across the bar room's tables going to be ruined because the 'Mongo Smash' character has issues walking around a table without running into something?

I have had more then one game where the GM insisted that face skills had to be role played instead of making a die roll or two. But that same GM had mental grid lock when asked to make the 300lb has trouble getting up player demonstrate the engage 3 enemies in 1 turn action that their character just did with a couple of simple die rolls. This has the result of punishing players who suck at face skills but want to enjoy being good at it via a character while ignoring players who suck at physical skills but play characters that are good physically. This is supposed to be game, not an acting class or PT session.

If Bob designs a face character, don't ruin Bob's fun just because Sam designed a Mongo Smash character that scares small children with a simple glance. By the same thought, don't ruin Sam's fun because Bob's character can't fight a sleeping cat without a high risk of life threatening damage.

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Another is to have Wealth include a Frugality stat - lower Frugality means you tend to waste money on blackjack, booze, etc.

We've already kinda got that with the Compulsions and Addicitons... Carousing, Lecherousness, Charitable, etc. All ways that PCs should be getting stripped of cash and resources.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

That's why villains have...

Yeah, like I said, we've* basically figured out the worse offenders, Enemy, Dependents, Weirdness Magnet†. It's just the Social Disads that keep seeming to be problems for people.


* That's the collective community 'we'.
† The very ones I used to outlaw for being "Make More Work For The GM" Disads.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Another is to have Wealth include a Frugality stat - lower Frugality means you tend to waste money on blackjack, booze, etc.

Wouldn't that just take Compulsive Spending?

[sjmdw45]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

If there's no serious prospect of violence then you _do_ split the party and leave Bob the Uncouth at the bar or back at camp.

Give the PCs a chance to solve their problem in character before you fret about them not being able to.

You could also use magic to disguise Bob the Uncouth as a very attractive but silent wallflower. Or just turn him invisible, which is also good tactically.

Originally Posted by DeadParrot

I have had more then one game where the GM insisted that face skills had to be role played instead of making a die roll or two. But that same GM had mental grid lock when asked to make the 300lb has trouble getting up player demonstrate the engage 3 enemies in 1 turn action that their character just did with a couple of simple die rolls. This has the result of punishing players who suck at face skills but want to enjoy being good at it via a character while ignoring players who suck at physical skills but play characters that are good physically. This is supposed to be game, not an acting class or PT session.

The harsh reality is that player skill always matters. Your character has certain abilities, but if you don't know how to employ them effectively you won't get the full benefit. That applies equally to sweet talking with words, casting spells, and swinging swords. TTRPGs are games about decision-making and you have to make good decisions.

Knowing what kinds of favors a charismatic person can get away with asking for, and how to leverage those favors into financial or military or social success, is just as potentially important as knowing which monsters are susceptible to eyeshots and which can be kited.