Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

So there is a need for a drug to suppress Regeneration?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Retractors would probably do the trick well enough in the unlikely event that a regenerator actually needed surgery. Foreign objects would probably just be pushed out by the regeneration anyway.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I vaguely remember that coming up in Marvel Comics, but I could be mistaken.

I definitely remember an issue of Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. where something related to this came up. Wolverine was a guest character, so I am pretty sure it was Volume 3, issues number 27 and 28. I don't remember specifics, but I recall Wolverine being unzipped from a body bag, on an operating table, and finally getting so annoyed with whomever was helping him out by removing some slugs from his body, that he snatched the scalpel (or whatever instrument was being used), and started doing it himself. He didn't want the wounds to heal over the bullets, forcing him to work even harder to dig them out.

Note that Wolverine's healing factor, after temporarily being nerfed, was then greatly accelerated. Comic readers may recall both ultimately being due to his adamantium being forcibly removed from his skeleton via Magneto being Magneto. This comic is from a few years earlier, so Wolverine either had Regeneration (Regular) or Regeneration (Fast). It would have been really bad if he'd had any faster forms. That being said, I'm not assuming it to be the rule for Regeneration; it makes about as much sense to argue that, as wounds heal, foreign bodies are slowly pushed out by new tissue.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

In the X-Men films Wolverine, who has Regeneration at about this level, expels the bullets and other stuff that has entered his body through wounds while he's healing. Is there anything in the description of the Regeneration advantage that suggests that this isn't the case with the advantage?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

GURPS doesn't address bullets remaining inside wounds in the first place, and it only addresses cleaning wounds in the context of preventing infection (as written, regeneration does not affect infection rolls, but since infection is 1 point per day and doesn't prevent healing the injury (unless you consider it a special case of disease, which is possible but not specified), is completely irrelevant in combination with regeneration).

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Before I answer any of this... did you read my most recent comment? It was made not quite three hours before yours, and I believe it answers your question, or at least, part of your question.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

John Wick is one of your GMs isn't he?

Or at least an adherent of his...

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Yeah, I read your post. I may be misunderstanding something but I see nothing in it that answers my question.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I dunno. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, or the rules in general. The part I thought was relevant was

Re-reading Regeneration in both Characters and Powers, re-reading the healing section in Campaigns makes me think that, anywhere the rules for Regeneration do not explicitly state the difference between how natural healing and Regeneration will work, then I ought not assume they are the same. They still could be the same, though. Also, pardon me if I end up thinking I said something I didn't. I keep on trying to make my full case, then realizing I've got a half (or more) page response as I try to tackle the topic from multiple angles. With re-reading Basic and Powers, looking for answers, I can really see this going either way. If you have a fast-paced Supers game that only rolls to see if something is crippled when it is "context important"... yeah, just assume Regeneration fixes the leg properly. If I want one of those superhero stories grounded with selective realism, this is probably one of the places to apply it, but warn everyone ahead of time.

If you're just talking about the example from the Fox X-Men films... yeah, it is an example of it being handled the opposite way. I didn't bring up my example to "prove" I was "right" and that it should always be handled that way, just that at least one time it was handled that way in a Marvel comic about everyone's favorite Canucklehead. Granted, "...in an official, professional comic" isn't all that high of a standard. Nor is it happening in an adaptation of that source material. They don't cancel each other out, anymore than how Wolverine's healing factor from the Ultimate sub-line behaves should be seen as authoritative with respect to the other versions.

With regards to expelling foreign matter, it is quite possible the specifics matter. Small objects in shallow wounds are expelled, larger objects or deep enough wounds result in the body healing around the object.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Gurps does mention foreign matter in the body in at least 1 spot, teleport perk expulsion in Psionic Powers p 69 covers it. Seems like a reasonable cost and name for a regen perk as well.