Steve Jackson Games Forums

Steve Jackson Games Forums (https://forums.sjgames.com/index.php)
-   GURPS (https://forums.sjgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Is temperature tolerance really that expensive? (https://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=123318)

roguebfl 02-19-2014 05:43 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
From Racial Fire Immunity

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kromm (Post 1486384)
The salient difference is that metabolic hazards such as disease and poison cause injury (direct HP loss), while destructive energy such as blows and fire causes damage (an abstract number that, after considering DR, might lead to HP loss). The fact that the latter must deal with DR is at the heart of the matter . . . there's no fair price for infinite DR, whether you call it "immunity to damage" or something else. Allowing it kills offense, and with it dramatic tension in combat, as few GMs would allow infinite damage to match. And while it's fun to speak in terms of infinite limited DR, most DR reduces all true damage – any force that could in theory degrade all matter, living or otherwise – because putting material (or, in a magical or superscience setting, an energy barrier) in the way attenuates said force. Permitting infinite DR vs. one thing would be followed in about five seconds by players generalizing it to infinite DR vs. all things: "Well, if Immunity to Fire costs 30 points, and Limited, Fire is -40% on DR, then Immunity to Damage should cost 50 points or this game sucks." And from there you can say goodbye to pleasant gaming.

Thus, I'd stand by the design decision not to allow total invulnerability per se. I don't think it has a useful place in a balanced, friendly RPG. Immunity to metabolic threats isn't in the same boat, because metabolic threats aren't primary combat threats (let's be honest: combat is primarily about big doses of kinetic energy occasionally changed up with big doses of electromagnetic energy). And as has been said, you can't infect or poison a rock, so immunity to a metabolic danger actually corresponds to something that's necessary to describe a plausible world, where invulnerability doesn't. GURPS is ultimately built on realism, remember.

All of that said, invulnerability is achievable if you know the game system. Take Injury Tolerance (Diffuse) or a high level of Injury Tolerance (Damage Reduction), either with Limited, Fire, -40%, and add a good level of Regeneration limited with Fire Only (probably worth -60% like Radiation Only); now you'll take just 1-2 HP from fire and heal it instantly. Or use the 328-point Insubstantiality-based build on p. 119 of Powers; you can get the cost down by adding Limited, Fire, -40%. Cost is hundreds of points, but that is what it is – it isn't fair in, say, fantasy for some wizard to have to spend three turns and 18 FP to build up a Fireball, make a roll to hit, pray you don't make your Dodge, and then have that do nothing for a mere 30-40 points. It costs far more than that just to have the Magery 6, FP or Energy Reserve 18+, spell, Innate Attack skill, etc. . . . and while he has other tricks, so do you, as you can also avoid harm from every other fire hazard in the game.

Honestly, though, for a playable race, DR 10 (Limited, Fire, -40%) [30] is fair. It means that most ordinary flame (1d-3 to 1d-1; see p. B433) and burning fuel (1d-1 to 1d; see p. B411 and DF 1, p. 28) can't hurt you. It means that even furnaces and the initial flare of the hottest burning fuel (3d), can't hurt you on average. High-powered magic can hurt you . . . but then, Deathtouch can explicitly hurt undead, too, and they have Immunity to Metabolic Hazards [30]. It's the essence of magic to break nature's rules.


Anthony 02-19-2014 05:43 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaevictis Asmadi (Post 1727932)
In that case, Anthony, you need to take it up with the authors of both GURPS Space and Wikipedia, who are clearly lying or something.

While wikipedia is sometimes wrong, I consider it more likely that you're misunderstanding what it says. Please give specific cites (from Space, too, though I'd need to hunt down my copy of Space, as I only have it in paper form).

Flyndaran 02-19-2014 06:29 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth (Post 1727934)
...
No, it doesn't. Defining fire as exclusively about oxygen is silly. Fire in other oxidizing atmospheres is not exactly the same, but calling it not fire doesn't make any sense.

I do agree that a massive systemic bias toward human shirtsleeve climates as normal is unfortunate.

I agree that defining fire as requiring oxygen is silly. But virtually every definition I've seen does that.
I also think it's silly to define theft as requiring physical objects be taken from others with express purpose of denying them access to it. But that's English for ya'.

roguebfl 02-19-2014 07:08 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyndaran (Post 1727948)
I agree that defining fire as requiring oxygen is silly. But virtually every definition I've seen does that.

Well to be fair it's combustion that is defined as required oxygen, Fire is just the main form of it. so if you want to defined Fire with oxygen you need a definition of fire that does not require combustion.

Ulzgoroth 02-19-2014 07:14 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyndaran (Post 1727948)
I agree that defining fire as requiring oxygen is silly. But virtually every definition I've seen does that.

Even if that's true, it's a nonsense definition to use when actively talking about alien atmospheres.

And I'm quite sure I've seen references to, say, chlorine trifluoride burning things.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyndaran (Post 1727948)
I also think it's silly to define theft as requiring physical objects be taken from others with express purpose of denying them access to it. But that's English for ya'.

Nobody defines theft that way. Theft is usually not for the purpose of denying access.

Anthony 02-19-2014 07:17 PM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyndaran (Post 1727948)
I agree that defining fire as requiring oxygen is silly. But virtually every definition I've seen does that.

Definitions I've seen require oxidation. Oxidation, however, does not require oxygen, it just requires an oxidizer -- you can have flame in a fluorine or chlorine atmosphere fairly easily, and in a bromine, iodine, or sulfur atmosphere with more effort.

Ulzgoroth 02-20-2014 12:22 AM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony (Post 1727939)
Please give specific cites (from Space, too, though I'd need to hunt down my copy of Space, as I only have it in paper form).

Space page 139 has "Silicon-based fluorine-breathers adventuring in an oxygen environment should take the Combustible disadvantage, and possibly Increased Life Support to reflect the extraordinary difficulty of handling fluorine gas."

I do not know why it says this, but the sentence is there.

Anthony 02-20-2014 12:40 AM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth (Post 1728082)
Space page 139 has "Silicon-based fluorine-breathers adventuring in an oxygen environment should take the Combustible disadvantage, and possibly Increased Life Support to reflect the extraordinary difficulty of handling fluorine gas."

Huh. Well, a number of fluorine compounds (I have no idea what sorts of SiF chemistry they're thinking about) are sufficiently strong oxidizing agents that you'll get secondary fire hazards -- for example, HF reacts with many metals to produce heat and hydrogen gas -- but I can't think of anything likely to be present in a fluorine atmosphere which will actually oxidize in air.

Not sure what disadvantage 'spilled blood catches fire and eats through things' actually is.

malloyd 02-20-2014 05:50 AM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony (Post 1728085)
Huh. Well, a number of fluorine compounds (I have no idea what sorts of SiF chemistry they're thinking about) are sufficiently strong oxidizing agents that you'll get secondary fire hazards -- for example, HF reacts with many metals to produce heat and hydrogen gas -- but I can't think of anything likely to be present in a fluorine atmosphere which will actually oxidize in air.

I think the logic here is something like terrestrial tissues are mostly made of stuff that would be Combustable in oxygen too, if it weren't for the fact they have mechanisms to prevent that because they evolved in oxygen. And even then some of them like trees might still have it. Oxygen breathers adventuring in fluorine atmospheres would take it too, if not for the fact that fluorine atmospheres are so aggressive they aren't just Combustable, they're already on fire just from standing in them.

Quote:

Not sure what disadvantage 'spilled blood catches fire and eats through things' actually is.
Sounds like a perk to me

NineDaysDead 02-20-2014 06:15 AM

Re: Is temperature tolerance really that expensive?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony (Post 1728085)
Not sure what disadvantage 'spilled blood catches fire and eats through things' actually is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powers page 144
Acidic Blood (+890%): Corrosion Attack 1d-3 (Always On, -20%; Aura, +80%; Blood Agent, Reversed, -40%; Cyclic, 1 second, 10 cycles, +900%; Melee Attack, -30%) [10]. Notes: Someone with this ability seeps acid if he suffers any cutting, impaling, or piercing injury. He bleeds on the weapon that wounded him – or his foe, if attacked with Claws, Teeth, etc. – which immediately begins to corrode. Until he stops bleeding (see Bleeding, p. B420), the acid drips on everything nearby. This works like any other Aura, and the user can deliberately attack others by flicking his blood around. 10 points.

Add Incendiary +10% to taste.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.