12-04-2019, 07:22 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ronkonkoma, NY
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
Since GURPS is not a person simulator, I don't see any such system as being too popular. Where GURPS does deal with emotions, it's concerned only with extreme emotions that take control away from the player (e.g., Bad Temper or Bloodlust). When control has not been taken away from the player, they are free to emote however they like. That's what makes it a role-playing game rather than a simulator: you're not just an engine chugging away while the character steers; you're making the decisions.
|
12-04-2019, 08:21 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
If you want more roleplaying, make sure that you give character points for good roleplaying. Say, two points as a typical award, three points for good roleplaying (and announced as such), and rarely an extra point for a really outstanding scene that brought a character to life.
I don't feel at ease with the proposed alternative on several grounds. I'm not happy with being given a finite list of "basic human emotions" that every emotional reaction has to be straitjacketed into; that's like the old "psychology of humors" that informed the lesser Renaissance playwrights. I don't feel at ease with a system under which players can get bonuses by simply announcing that their character is angry, or in love, or whatever; it seems to make roleplaying an exercise in contrived emoting, not very different from games where everyone tries to climb a tree or pick a lock in the hope of going up in a skill, rather than one where emotion emerges naturally from the storyline. And the idea that being emotional gives you bonuses doesn't fit my reality testing; I have the impression, for example, that in a fight the combatant who's lost their temper is at a disadvantage against the combatant who stays cool. This all seems to me to be a solution in search of a problem: an ingenious game mechanic that at best doesn't add anything to the game.
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
12-04-2019, 08:34 AM | #13 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
These are bonuses with substantial penalties. If a Will 10 character gets Anger 19, they get a +9 to attack a specific target, but a -9 to defend against everything. If their Anger increases another level, they gain -1 CP in mental disadvantages and reset to Anger 0. As for categorizing emotions, anything with mechanical consequences must be categorized.
|
12-04-2019, 09:11 AM | #14 |
Join Date: May 2019
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
Your example feels rather imbalanced compared to the All-Out Attack or Committed Attack, the RAW ways of dealing with with someone who wants to harm a specific target at the expense of defense.
|
12-04-2019, 09:19 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
Quite right. Someone who wants to play a character made reckless by anger can choose to have them make Committed Attacks or All-Out Attacks. What the proposed mechanic seems to add is that a dice roll can compel someone to adopt that strategy, whether it makes sense or not functionally and whether it fits their character concept or not. That seems like something that would make many players unhappy. Not to mention that it takes away those moments when the GM describes the situation and asks, "What do you do?"—because that's not decided by the player but by a dice roll.
__________________
Bill Stoddard I don't think we're in Oz any more. |
12-04-2019, 10:21 AM | #16 |
Join Date: Oct 2006
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
I mean, this is already *sort of* covered in Social Engineering in the section about PC's having NPC's using Influence skills on them.
The difference is, it only dictates a penalty; it doesn't dictate how that penalty manifests, emotionally or otherwise. I believe an example was a PC cop pulls an NPC woman over, who proceeds to use Sex Appeal to try to get out of the following ticket. She succeeds, and he receives a penalty to use his professional skill on the ticket. Now, what does that penalty mean? Well, maybe it means he's distracted legitimately by her; he retains control of his character, but maybe he screws up the paperwork in the process as she makes eyes at him. Or maybe he gets angry at the cheap attempt, and goes overboard with the penalty which gets thrown out/voided in the filing process. Or maybe the player decides he is legitimately "seduced," foregoing fighting the penalty and issuing a warning instead. In any case, I feel this is the strongest way of dealing with this in GURPS. It lets player retain their character agency but still makes them feel suitably human. I suppose if you wanted to, you could let the fooling/baiting/enraging mechanics from the Action series work on PC's too, but I think that's removing a bit too much agency from something as important as live combat. On the other hand, if you really do want to check out emotion mechanics, you might check out Mythras or Pendragon and their "Passions" mechanics. They're interesting and, while not suited to all campaigns, fairly flexible. I've dabbled in hacking those into GURPS in a couple different ways with varying success.
__________________
- Danny |
12-04-2019, 01:31 PM | #17 |
Join Date: Sep 2018
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
The assumption for the most part is that the heroic PCs feel their feels but they don't let emotion cloud their judgement.
From a harsh realism state Heightened emotions would probably be a penalty for anything other than sex appeal and maybe performance. Even the assumption that anger would better an attack or fear would improve a defense better represents the extra effort rules than any kind of separate benefit. |
12-04-2019, 03:07 PM | #18 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
First off, there's the matter of the social contract: if you and your players feel that rules governing emotions will improve your game, then use them; if you think they won't, then don't. As such, any such rules are very clearly optional. But then, aren't they all?
I haven't put much thought into this; but my initial take would be to expand on the Fright Check mechanism, which is basically there to add some teeth to Fear (the core element of GURPS Horror). GURPS Powers has something in it about variations of the Terror Advantage that inflict Awe or Confusion rather than Fright, leading to Awe Checks and Confusion Checks; I'd build on that for Emotional mechanics. And I'd definitely implement something like the Stress and Derangement mechanics in such a case — though if there aren't any Things Man Was Not Meant To Know in the setting, Sanity-Blasting Fright Checks will be rare to non-existent, and Derangement will only ever come about from excessive Stress. Put another way, some sort of Stress mechanic is a good idea; some sort of Madness mechanic is more specialized and not as important; it would be more of an advanced rule than a basic rule, as it were. |
12-04-2019, 03:23 PM | #19 |
Join Date: Oct 2006
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
Another mechanic to consider would be the Stability Point mechanic from the article "Mad as Bones," from Pyramid #3/103 "Setbacks." Sort of a lighter, more generic version of the system from Horror.
__________________
- Danny |
12-04-2019, 03:40 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Basic Emotional Mechanics
There's a lot of valuable stuff in that article, yes. I'd go with Stress Points rather than Stability Points myself (and, if used, I'd call the “Long-Term Stress” stuff Stability Points or Madness Points or Derangement points or the like; though I personally prefer to treat the madness stuff as a separate HP-like pool rather than “merely” stress that takes longer to go away); but those are essentially minor quibbles.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|