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 11-16-2014, 03:09 PM   #11
RGTraynor
 
RGTraynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Turners Falls, MA
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

My impression is that you must have a lot of PCs in your campaign with hefty reaction bonuses -- or else NPCs in your world are a surly, unhelpful lot -- because this scale is pretty rough on the average bloke. 14+ is what, 20% or thereabouts?

Otherwise, whatever you find esthetically pleasing. What I added myself is a 25+ result for the very rare occasions when that's what comes up:


25+, Splendid: The NPC is completely dazzled by the characters, and will gallantly suffer hideous torment or death to further their cause, however slightly.


__________________
My gaming blog: Apotheosis of the Invisible City
What are the Gaming Geek Fallacies?

It's not that I don't understand what you're saying. It's that I disagree with what you're saying.
RGTraynor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 03:12 PM   #12
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by RGTraynor View Post
My impression is that you must have a lot of PCs in your campaign with hefty reaction bonuses -- or else NPCs in your world are a surly, unhelpful lot -- because this scale is pretty rough on the average bloke. 14+ is what, 20% or thereabouts?

Otherwise, whatever you find esthetically pleasing. What I added myself is a 25+ result for the very rare occasions when that's what comes up:


25+, Splendid: The NPC is completely dazzled by the characters, and will gallantly suffer hideous torment or death to further their cause, however slightly.


What percentage of favourable reactions would you encounter in your day to day life with a +0 modifier?
Sindri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 05:09 PM   #13
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Alexander deserves a reputation among other leaders and his reputation among his soldiers should certainly be +4 but let's look at your example. You can't just look at averages. With a total of +8 bad and unfavourable reactions simply don't happen, he's capable of hitting excellent and the average is good. That's superb! Significant acts of social engineering don't work by hammering people with charisma, attractiveness and reputation and leaving it at that. It functions through repeated interactions that build on the foundations you set before...
There's more than one approach to social engineering. Some get by on natural magnetism, talent and looks. Some learn to make friends and influence people. Of course, the best results come from combining the two groups, preferably with all of the items in the groups included.

A +2/+8 reaction is the level of Transcendent Appearance (or flat +5 if Impressive/Androgynous). You know, the level worthy of gods of beauty, the level that is supposed to be so good that everyone is instantly swayed by them, without any need for mind control or influence attempts.

But with this table, what to do we get? For non-androgynous, that means that attracted-to-different-sex people don't notice anything above-average about them at all, while attracted-to-their-sex ones on average react Good. In case of Androgynous/Impressive appearance, everyone reacts Favourably. That's pretty underwhelming.

(Same applies to effects of human-maximum-ish Charisma.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
... Which brings us to this. I didn't even consider maintaining the current style of influence skills. I still want to have things work like I described in this ( http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=126069 ) thread where influence skills actually modify the results rather than overriding them.

I'm planning on posting rules for that and haggling at some point later on.
Influence skills that shift reactions are an interesting idea. I've toyed with it. I'm undecided whether I like it or not.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
Also, GURPS Discord is a nice place for (faster) Q&A and overall GURPS dicussion.
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 05:45 PM   #14
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
There's more than one approach to social engineering. Some get by on natural magnetism, talent and looks. Some learn to make friends and influence people. Of course, the best results come from combining the two groups, preferably with all of the items in the groups included.
People have lots of approaches for most things. The presence of multiple approaches means nothing for the efficacy of those approaches. If you want to do something really impressive you simply can't reliably achieve that by hitting people with charisma, attractiveness and reputation and hoping it works out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
A +2/+8 reaction is the level of Transcendent Appearance (or flat +5 if Impressive/Androgynous). You know, the level worthy of gods of beauty, the level that is supposed to be so good that everyone is instantly swayed by them, without any need for mind control or influence attempts.

But with this table, what to do we get? For non-androgynous, that means that attracted-to-different-sex people don't notice anything above-average about them at all, while attracted-to-their-sex ones on average react Good. In case of Androgynous/Impressive appearance, everyone reacts Favourably. That's pretty underwhelming.

(Same applies to effects of human-maximum-ish Charisma.).
Gods of beauty don't have Transcendent Appearance. Perfectly beautiful beings have Transcendent Appearance. Gods of beauty will generally have at least Transcendent Appearance (possibly with "super-androgynous" for +8/+8 and/or universal), Reputation, Status, Charisma, Voice and very high levels of Sex Appeal. Often Awe and maybe even stuff like a limited form of Mind Control.

Likewise if you meet someone with human maximum Charisma but without any other notable features (even the ones that human maximum Charisma makes substantially easier to acquire) who doesn't actively try to impress you and who doesn't behave in such a manner as to gain specific bonuses against you, you're just not going to be guaranteed to be that impressed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Influence skills that shift reactions are an interesting idea. I've toyed with it. I'm undecided whether I like it or not.
I'd be interested in hearing what you've done with it.
Sindri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 03:53 AM   #15
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
People have lots of approaches for most things. The presence of multiple approaches means nothing for the efficacy of those approaches. If you want to do something really impressive you simply can't reliably achieve that by hitting people with charisma, attractiveness and reputation and hoping it works out.
Why not? Lots of celebrities seem to be achieving what they have through Appearance and Voice alone, and they don't even necessarily have maximum levels of either (and Charisma is usually irrelevant without a two-way two-channel communication). Sure, some rely on high Performance instead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Gods of beauty don't have Transcendent Appearance. Perfectly beautiful beings have Transcendent Appearance. Gods of beauty will generally have at least Transcendent Appearance (possibly with "super-androgynous" for +8/+8 and/or universal), Reputation, Status, Charisma, Voice and very high levels of Sex Appeal. Often Awe and maybe even stuff like a limited form of Mind Control.
Now, that would make them gods of singing, power, charm and other stuff. I'm specifically talking about those that are merely so beautiful that they don't need Influence, nor other RMs or nor Mind Control. IIRC the more known example would be the nymphs (though calling them gods is an overstatement).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Likewise if you meet someone with human maximum Charisma but without any other notable features (even the ones that human maximum Charisma makes substantially easier to acquire) who doesn't actively try to impress you and who doesn't behave in such a manner as to gain specific bonuses against you, you're just not going to be guaranteed to be that impressed.
Is this another one of those 'well I am borderline-immune to even very strong social effects, and so can you!'?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
I'd be interested in hearing what you've done with it.
Not enough testing. But mostly it means one never has to choose between using and not using an Influence Skill, assuming good skill levels, which reduces variability.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
Also, GURPS Discord is a nice place for (faster) Q&A and overall GURPS dicussion.
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 07:34 AM   #16
Lamech
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Maybe this table is a little wider than it should be, but the current table is too narrow IMO. Celebs get where they are via a combination of skill, appearance, charisma (or some form that works without the two-way), and voice. Just being pretty and well spoken won't make you famous.
__________________
John
Cee
Martel
Hiriko
Andrew
Lamech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 07:42 AM   #17
Rasputin
 
Rasputin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Sindri, has there been a problem with too many extreme results at your gaming table, or are you merely doing this for aesthetic reasons? Can you give an example of a bad result the original table has given at the table?
__________________
Cura isto securi, Eugene.

My GURPS blog.
Rasputin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 09:40 AM   #18
Edges
 
Edges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: GMT-5
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
A typical someone of the same status level would not be affected by the Reputation (among his troops and other soldiers), making that a net +5 instead, which is barely above neutral.
I don't think Alexander's troops were the only people who had heard of him.
Edges is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 01:14 PM   #19
Sindri
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Why not? Lots of celebrities seem to be achieving what they have through Appearance and Voice alone, and they don't even necessarily have maximum levels of either (and Charisma is usually irrelevant without a two-way two-channel communication). Sure, some rely on high Performance instead.
"being a celebrity" doesn't qualify as "really impressive". I'm speaking within the context of PCs. Putting aside Charisma and Social Engineering's revelations concerning it, there are high skill levels behind most celebrities even if they belong to the celebrity's support structure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Now, that would make them gods of singing, power, charm and other stuff. I'm specifically talking about those that are merely so beautiful that they don't need Influence, nor other RMs or nor Mind Control. IIRC the more known example would be the nymphs (though calling them gods is an overstatement).
Whether a nymph is a god or not, they're certainly not a god of beauty merely a beautiful god. I think it would be quite rare for a believer in a god of beauty if asked to consider them to have average voice and charm and other stuff. "Of course the god of beauty has a pleasant voice" they'd say. It's only if the myths are making a deliberate contrast that they'll have a normal or disturbing voice. That doesn't make them a god of singing, they don't necessarily super high Singing or other skills. Having Status doesn't make them a god of power merely a god with social power. They would be a very strange god if they don't have some kind of combination of Status and Social Regard.

That said, if you want a god of beauty to get auto-excellent against mortals without even trying you could just allow them to buy additional levels of appearance. This is especially appropriate if you want the god to do better than other gods or spirits that are merely of perfect beauty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Is this another one of those 'well I am borderline-immune to even very strong social effects, and so can you!'?
No, that would be silly.

It's a recognition that people with human maximum Charisma have an easy time learning Influence skills and generally use Charisma and those skills as leverage to acquire other social traits. Within the community of people with human maximum Charisma someone with only that Charisma is a hermit.

The situation being described is not one where the person with Charisma is trying. The +4 will make their day to day life substantially more pleasant but our stories about high Charisma people don't involve them passively picking up followers on the bus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Not enough testing. But mostly it means one never has to choose between using and not using an Influence Skill, assuming good skill levels, which reduces variability.
Well you do have to choose whether the risk of a worse reaction is worth the possibility of a better reaction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasputin View Post
Sindri, has there been a problem with too many extreme results at your gaming table, or are you merely doing this for aesthetic reasons? Can you give an example of a bad result the original table has given at the table?
This is a well established flaw of the reaction rules, I'm not wasting my time rehashing pointless anecdotes. The math speaks for itself. Furthermore gaming is itself aesthetic which makes the distinction dubious at best.
Sindri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2014, 01:38 PM   #20
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyv, Ukraine
Default Re: Reaction Table House Rules

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Whether a nymph is a god or not, they're certainly not a god of beauty merely a beautiful god. [ . . . ]
I suppose you're right on that account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
That said, if you want a god of beauty to get auto-excellent against mortals without even trying you could just allow them to buy additional levels of appearance. This is especially appropriate if you want the god to do better than other gods or spirits that are merely of perfect beauty.
Expand the reaction table only to expand trait maximums to compensate? That seems an odd choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
It's a recognition that people with human maximum Charisma have an easy time learning Influence skills and generally use Charisma and those skills as leverage to acquire other social traits. Within the community of people with human maximum Charisma someone with only that Charisma is a hermit.

The situation being described is not one where the person with Charisma is trying. The +4 will make their day to day life substantially more pleasant but our stories about high Charisma people don't involve them passively picking up followers on the bus.
Hmm. So you're saying that it's not possible for these things to happen naturally, only through manipulation. I'm not sure there will be any progress made in either direction on this part of the topic between the two of us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sindri View Post
Well you do have to choose whether the risk of a worse reaction is worth the possibility of a better reaction.
You only get the worse reaction on a failure, and after having some level of reaction modifiers (e.g. +5), you only have a decent chance of failure against the most stubborn people (Will 15-20). So back in the RAW you had to also choose between a Good reaction from a skill roll (also risking a Bad one if your effective skill is low), and whatever reaction you're likely to roll. But now the reaction you roll is extremely unlikely to be worse than the reaction you get on an Influence success.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
Also, GURPS Discord is a nice place for (faster) Q&A and overall GURPS dicussion.
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
house rules, influence skills, reaction modifiers, reaction rolls, social engineering

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 10:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.