Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

I think I might have accepted the +15 if Kromm mentioned the no nuisance roll perk. If the roll to avoid HT loss is 16 or above, ignore it.

But that does raise the question of how one goes about making a character unusually susceptible to temperature.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

Problem is that 'dice of damage' from heat/fire is only minimally correlated with temperature. Between swimming in boiling water, and walking through a bonfire, the boiling water will actually kill you much faster (higher 'damage'), but if I put a lump of tin in the boiling water nothing will happen to it, while if I put it in the bonfire it will melt.

The other problem is that DR in general is mostly about thickness, and thickness is utterly irrelevant to the maximum temperature a material can withstand -- it just determines how long it takes for the heat to get through.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

In the GURPS rule set, hotter fires do more dice, so it seems more than minimally correlated. It might not perfectly reflect differences in convection vs. conduction depending on the medium, but it's close enough.

And no, DR on a character writeup (so how many inches of mild steel or whatever we're talking about is irrelevant unless you're statting up a tank) is about damage resistance that's invariant with regard to time of exposure, unless it's Ablative.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

Hotter fires do more damage, but more exposure also does more damage. The damage, basically, is biased toward a playable approximation of burning humans rather than something either general or particularly accurate.
You seem to be assuming that the damage effects of high heat must be expressed as cyclic burn damage. Anthony, meanwhile, is concluding that they cannot be.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

A steam hex is treated as doing the same damage as a fire hex, despite the fact that a hex of steam is likely under 300°F and the hex of fire is likely above 1000°F. Lava has about the same temperature as a bonfire, but does far more damage. A tight beam burning attack doing the same raw damage as a fire hex is probably above 3000°F.
Nothing in the text of DR implies that it's categorically different from other types of armor, and it certainly can represent X inches of mild steel or whatever -- a typical robot, for example.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

DR bought in a character writeup is not ablative unless you take Ablative or Semi-Ablative. Period.

Therefore, DR without such limitations will protect against damage of the types it's good against each and every turn, forever. There is no difference with longer term exposure.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

So what? Most personal armor DR also lacks the Ablative limitation.
No, DR without such limitations will be as non-ablative as armor which lacks such limitations.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

And said armor won't take damage from said attacks. What happens to the person inside is not related to this issue. Only what happens to the object/character with DR itself.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

Low Tech Companion 2, page 25.

The listed DR values for armor are (obviously) what protection it provides to the wearer, not necessarily (or likely) what it provides to itself.

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 

Optional rules.
But even that one I think covers small perforations rather than actual damage like how cat scratches may break the skin but don't come close to causing 1 point of damage.