Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I know, the question, "Is Regeneration a Disadvantage" probably sounds silly. Of course it's an Advantage!

But...depending on the GM's interpretation, not being able to switch off Regeneration could be a serious problem.

I have a super-level PC who Jumps from campaign to campaign, GM to GM, not all of whom treat abilities the same. The PC has very fast Regeneration with Switchable. I paid for the enhancement due to a question that came up.

Imagine a character has very fast Regeneration, healing at 1 HP/second. If that characters gets, for example, a broken leg, they would almost certainly be fully healed before the leg could be set in place. In real life, people who heal without having broken limbs properly set can be crippled. So could the regenerating character be permanently crippled because of Regeneration?

What do you think?

EDIT: There's also the question of how would very fast Regeneration affect Surgery? Before the surgeon even finishes making the incision, the first part of the cut has already healed. Even for an extremely fast surgeon, Surgery would essentially be impossible. How would you deal with that?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

It's a thing in modern medicine to rebreak a bone to set it properly, might be hard to break a super's bones but obviously not impossible in your case.

Basic does have rules for temporary, lasting and permanent injuries which remain after all hp are recovered, as well as rules for the surgeries to repair such damage.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

If your Regeneration can harm you in some cases, I'd call it a significant Limitation.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration includes Rapid Healing, which grants a +5 to HT rolls to recover from crippling injuries, so it will generally recover properly. But yes, in a pinch, just rebreak and set, it's a lot easier when the recovery time from such work is measured in seconds instead of weeks.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Given that GURPS doesn't, as far as I know, include any rules for limbs setting improperly when given rapid healing, then a ruling that such happens (rather than the force of the regenerating flesh pushing the bones more or less back into line, or one of many other possible alternatives) would be entirely a house-rule by the GM- and any GM who sprang such a houserule on a player who paid 100 points for an advantage would, in my view, be demonstrating very bad form.

As a general rule, GURPS advantages (barring specific rules to the contrary - or certain limitations) include whatever "subsidiary" abilities are needed to keep the advantage from interfering with ordinary function- high DR doesn't cause your limbs to lock in place due to the thick outer covering, Enhanced Time Sense doesn't make you zone out in boredom as interaction with the outside world seems to take subjective ages, Enhanced Move doesn't cause your bones to break under the great force of running, Doesn't Eat or Drink doesn't keep you from chugging magic potions, and Photographic Memory doesn't make you freeze up under the overload of perfectly remembering every embarrassing thing you did as a teenager.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I understand that Gurps uses a quasi-scientific frame that makes for very funny speculations but i think "Regeneration" is meant to be like in the comics: your body remembers its "unhurt" form and regenerates until it has achieved it.

It's not "tumor like" random regeneration but "Wolverine like" time compression: because being bedridden and then having to make a ton of rehabilitation it's both boring and a bummer.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration explicitly heals "wounds" (B80). Damage causes "injury" (B379, B380) and sometimes wounds (B420). Crippling injuries are also "major wounds" (B421). So IMO canonical regeneration does heal crippling injuries.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Carnifex, from Wild Cards would have a limitation on his Regeneration. The expectation (seen, generally, in media works) is that regeneration does a complete healing of you. It is the exception that it does not.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

RAW, the way crippling works is that you make a HT roll (with a +5 bonus for Rapid Healing, which is included in Regeneration) and if successful, the crippling goes away when the HP are recovered. For a typical PC (HT 11+) this means 98% of the time there's no lasting effect. The remaining 2% of the time is lasting or permanent crippling, which doesn't seem to be affected by regeneration unless you also have regrowth.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I don't play in games where GMs play sleazy tricks.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I have to agree.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

This. I would go play d&d before I would tolerate this. I quit a GURPS group after the rest of the group found spending two hours debating the thickness of rope needed to lift some stuff worthwhile. Sometime Ppl forget that games should be fun.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I would personally call this GM-rhymes-with-muckery.


There is no reason to even think that having regeneration shouldn't mend broken bones and reset them automatically. Otherwise pricing becomes weird. I would call "Heals without regard to set bones" a Nuisance effect worth at *least* -20%.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Hear! Hear! I'd rather leave the campaign than pay extra points for Switchable. A GM who is going to screw you over with that perverse ruling cannot be trusted not to screw you over with another one on another advantage. I'd rather watch videos on YouTube than pay 20% of my character points as an insurance bribe to a GM who runs such an extortion racket.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

For me, the problem is more the bait-and-switch. It's ok if everyone agrees up-front to use that level of "grimdark"; but the GM does not get to suddenly spring on you, that your power, that you paid points for, also counts as a disadvantage.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I agree with these, with the caveat that, if the injury is not healing correctly because of an in-game reason, like a special attack or other muckery (I like that, I think that'll be the code word for that). If it's part of the story/game why, yes.

GM-Muckery, when done to challenge the characters, can be fun and exciting. When done because they're just poor GMs . . . that's a different story.

I'm an acolyte of John Wick, so, I like a little GM-Muckery. I expect, and invite, it. Have fun, challenge my character.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I don't think it's wrong (depending on genre played in) to have injuries that don't heal properly. However, having regeneration should not be worse than not having it.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

In game reasons to temporarily beset a protagonist with problems is all well and good, but from how I read the OPs post it was just a GM being a jerk and interpreting how an advantage works in a weird way.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

The way I see it, Regeneration doesn't affect broken bones at all - they are a 'lasting' crippling effect, and Regeneration doesn't affect those (unless there's Regrowth in there as well). That means that Regeneration wouldn't cause breaks to heal too fast to be set, and if Regrowth is involved, well that brings dismemberments, etc., back to full function so it wouldn't result in a badly healed break either.

If I was presented with this ruling mid-game I'd be pretty annoyed. It doesn't match what you'd expect from the advantage, and it doesn't match the RAW either, and the faster levels of Regeneration are a reasonably expensive purchase and so one shouldn't have to pay extra just to have them not mess you up.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration includes Rapid Healing though, which gives a +5 to HT for determining crippling duration. Assuming that a hero with Regeneration (Very Fast) has a minimum of HT 12 and Luck (it they do not, they should reevaluate their character design), they would be very unlikely to have a lasting crippling injury (much less a permanent one).

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

The way I see this, there are two things.

1) Screwing up with players like this is unfun. But if you agree in advance that their ability has this kind of limitation, sure!

2) Having an advantage that you can't turn off can be troublesome in some situations, like when having to explain to the guards how your clothes are cut all open, but you have no wounds, for the fifth time!

Oh, and yeah, the previous points on how there might be monster abilities that do insta-cripples, or that screw up with your abilities.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Indeed. Nevertheless, it can happen, and if it's got to that point there's a good chance one's Luck is already spent.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I appreciate your comments--thanks!

To clarify, I asked about Regeneration in general, but also touched on my personal situation. Mine is not about a GM approving an advantage before character creation and then giving that advantage negative aspects I wasn't told about. Quoting myself:

I added Switchable +10% from GURPS Powers p. 109 to Regeneration as a precaution in case a GM did interpret a healed but not set broken leg as permanent crippling.

There's also an issue of surgery I probably should have brought up at the beginning, but that might be better for another thread.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration (Temporary Disadvantage: -8 to HT -80%) on the other hand...

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Ouch. The player won't have fun at -8 HT instantly after getting injured; it is basically Regeneration (Temporary Disadvantage: instantly faint at 0 hp, die at -hp). If you can toggle it then the Temporary Disadvantage isn't much of a disadvantage and should be worth much less points. Probably -20% since it is safe(-ish) to keep it on as long as you are out of combat. It is... still game mechanically funky though and basically asks the GM to screw over the Player with a random HT roll for food poisoning or something.

If you want regeneration to mess you up I'd prefer to do something like:

Regeneration (Nuisance Effect: Appearance moves towards Monstrous, lowered DX, etc. based on amount healed Requires significant time and some effort to undo, -25%)

Or for a permanent decrease:
Regeneration (Costs Character Points, *0.2) // 1 CP per multiple of your HP healed. Needs to be taken as physical disadvantages such as decreased Appearance.

Not taken straight from any books, but as long as the limitation is about as limiting as something else in that cost-bracket it should be fine. (I usually compare to something RAW like "Accessibility: Only During the Day, -20%")

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Temporary Disadvantage does not properly allow for Attribute modifiers, that is more the purview of Backlash.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

If you apply that concept to other Advantages, the logic starts breaking down.

"Because of your Acute Vision, the flash of light blinds you twice as long."
"Because of your High Pain Threshold, you didn't notice the sword severed your femoral artery."

Which is something you can do descriptively but not mechanically (IMO).
"Because of your Acute Vision, the flash hurts your eyes the most." (but no game mechanic penalty).
"With your HPT, you almost miss the severity of the injury." (But not actual chance that they would actually miss it).
"I push the femur back into my thigh as the flesh mends around it." (Not required, but gives the suggestion that sometimes regen is gross.)


I'm one of the reasons John likes to talk muckerly about GURPS.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Hmm... it would be a good fit for this thread. Is it really that bad to edit it into the opening post (noting it is an edit to explain why no one addresses it for four pages), and let the discussion commence?

Really asking; in short threads it is an issue, but if this one continues, I'd think we'd adapt pretty readily.

Switchable sounds good to me for such situations, as well as "What, I don't have powers!" bluffs. I mean, some methods of detection don't care if a power is actively being used, but the simple "Why did you stab me! Oh, the pain. Is it still bleeding? Get the First-Aid kit!" stunt seems like a good way to distance yourself from the guy who just took a sword to the chest, and only paused because he needed to remove it before his Regeneration tried to turn it into the world's largest body piercing.

Oh, yeah, that might be part of the practical side of things, especially in a more grounded campaign with firearms; removing bullets before they - and any clothing/grime around them - are trapped in healing wounds. I don't know medicine or firearms all that well, but I was under the impression that such a thing can be an issue in real life, with mundane healing.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Surgery, sure. I will follow your suggestion, and will add a note about the effects of Regeneration on Surgery to the beginning post as an edit--thanks!

EDIT: I just added it.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

They would need to plug up the wound as they go, holding it fast and preventing it from healing; once you've got something that works there, Surgery should be doable relatively normally, albeit perhaps at a malus for needing to do the initial cuts quickly so you have time to wedge something in there (although an assistant following along to plug things up would help immensely). Alternatively, they'd need to use something that causes continuous damage. In that case, instead of a spoon, removing arrowheads may involve some sort of handcranked drill with a grabber fed through a hollow center - drill in, grab the arrowhead, and drill out.

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.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

It's probably not absolutely necessary, but if you need to do surgery on such a character, yes, such a drug would be useful (at least if they have Fast or better regen, and Fast probably isn't terribly difficult to work around). Also, of course, useful for keeping a regenerator restrained.

Those are what I had in mind, yes, although I wasn't aware of the proper term for them. You're basically making use of the GM ruling that regen won't expel foreign materials by having this work in your favor (in other settings, retractors may well not work, as the regen will push them out as the character heals).

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

One thing to consider is that someone with Regeneration would not accept implants (bionics, as they replace missing sensory organs, limbs, and extremities, would be fine unless the character also had Regrowth). In my games, Regeneration always expels foreign matter as part of the healing process (the body does not completely heal if foreign matter remains, the effects are just below the resolution of the system).

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

By comparison, GURPS Magic has an option for Cleansing (p. 94); so perhaps something like it could be an option for Regeneration. Before removing "foreign matter," it allows the caster to specify that something that's integral to the subject such as cyberwear, gold teeth, etc. is not affected by the spell.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

That one is particularly bad since someone with IQ 10, Acute Vision 1 gets treated worse than someone with IQ 16 who has the higher visual perception.

OTOH, Night Vision does actually work this way in some cases.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

That isn't really the same concept apply in in the same way, however.

If we apply the kind of logic that says Acute Vision means being blinded by a strong light source lasts twice as long, or that you won't notice how badly you're injured due to your High Pain Threshold, that is more in line with "Because of how many times your Regeneration has healed your cells in this area of your body, you developed cancer."

We're questioning how many of the real-world or game RAW concerns involved with mundane healing apply and do not apply to Regeneration. If I wanted to compare it so something, it might Damage Resistance. It can still inconvenience you even if it doesn't have crippling bulk or cause appearance issues. Or am I misunderstanding the uFAQ entry again? ^^'

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Wolverine, Cyborg and many others might have different ideas on this.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration is supernatural healing and thus heals supernaturally. It wouldn't "heal improperly", the power is that all wounds heal properly at amazing speeds. Saying otherwise is just trying to pull one over your players. Ban the advantage and have a spine if you don't want it in use.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Regeneration doesn't have to be supernatural. It exceeds human limits, but could be a product of technology, superscience, or just nonhuman physiology. Admittedly the higher levels tend to strain any kind of physical plausibility, but even so.

There are certainly settings where 'heal super fast but with nasty potential complications' is an appropriate trait. I've been reading a bunch of Worm fanfic recently, for instance... I'd certainly agree that trying to impose such complications on stock Regeneration is wrong, but the concept of the complications isn't.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Just because an element is fantastic doesn't guarantee it avoids all drawbacks.

That is why I linked to that post about DR. I was on the side that thought unmodified DR affected appearance, and it needed a modifier to be the "invisible" DR of many comic book heroes. I was wrong. That doesn't mean that the DR, which is "Always on" by default, cannot ever cause complications. For more detail, check the link to the uFAQ.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

However, the default version of any Power probably should be free of inherent defects. Of course, I know of RAW examples where this isn't true. See single-Minded and Invisible as examples.

I hope to see those re-written if there ever is a Gurps 5e. It would be so much clearer if the "default" version of any Power didn't have built-in defects and if your version does it would be because you put them there.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Okay. But Regeneration isn't that.

When it's the advantage by itself, It literally doesn't. In fact it gives bonuses(!) to resist the exact situation OP presented, as it includes the rapid healing advantage! The GM would explicitly have to remove this advantage bundle from Regeneration for this scenario to play out without a critical failure (practically speaking, of course. You could have dumped your health when taking Regeneration!)

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Strictly speaking the fact that Regrowth is a separate advantage means that by the RAW not all wounds heal "properly". Now that's easy for me to forget because I long since decided that Regrowth is dumb and regeneration that is unable to regrow lost extremities should be a Limitation on Regeneration. But by the RAW if you get a crippling wound, Regeneration can't fix that, and you might actually need surgery.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Compound Post as I don't want to double post. So I'm quoting and responding to two posts by two different people.

Which I would most definitely welcome. I would also like to see most Advantages reduced to its most basic form, at least, while it can still resemble the intended Advantage. It really helps with getting exactly what you're aiming for with a trait.

Though I'm not sure if everything being discussed really counts as a "defect", as it were. Complications? Sure, but this is why I brought up Damage Resistance. How it interacts with Afflictions isn't so much a defect as a feature. The same if your (always on) DR is the sort that can prevent hypodermic needles from being used on you, or complicate surgery. It sounds bad when beneficial afflictions, injections, and procedures are on the docket, but can be a real lifesaver when an enemy has you otherwise helpless.

I'm a bit unclear what you think I'm saying. Then again, I cannot say I'm completely clear as to what all I've said. XP My position is not that of the GM mentioned in the opening post. I just think that, with Regeneration, there is reason to believe it may not be completely free of complications. As you said, it provides bonuses for avoiding crippling injuries. That suggests to me that Regeneration doesn't guarantee crippled limbs heal correctly automatically, but thanks to the bonus, it all but guarantees it for individuals with average or better Health.

What I've been saying has at least partially been keeping pace with the larger discussion. So I'm also trying to wrap my head around Regeneration and surgery, Regeneration and foreign material in wounds, Regeneration and cybernetics (or even more mundane medical implants), etc.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Unmodified regeneration isn't that.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Toggling is the whole point of Temporary Disadvantage: if you couldn't toggle the ability you'd just take the Disadvantage, not the limitation, unless you were using this as a means of getting around disadvantage limits the GM imposes.

Not sure how you got to that price, but the idea of progressively worse limitations applying as you use more of your abilities is basically the same as Declining Enhancements

I consider DE to be part of a broader scope "Partly Modified Abilities" based on:

Partially Limited Abilities (P46)
Partly Limited Abilities (PU8p6)

The idea that you can just apply modifiers (enhancement or limitation) to just some instead of all levels.

The easy-math option of "Declining Enhancements" is when you have equal cost per level. For stuff like Regeneration or Leech you can't really do a formula, just treat it like separate advantages...

Rapid Healing [5]
upgrade Slow [5]
upgrade Regular [15]
upgrade Fast [25]
upgrade Very [50]
upgrade Extreme [50]

You would have to use the same thing for appearance levels due to it also having non-linear pricing (which is sad since they're all multiples of 4 so it SHOULD be possible except it skips some multiples of 4)

Assuming someone's Attractive [4] to begin with you could do these Temporary Disadvantages on progressive Regeneration levels:

Shutdown Attractive -4%
Unattractive -4%
downgrade to Ugly -4%
downgrade to Hideous -8%
downgrade to Monstrous -4%
downgrade to Horrific -4%

The flaw in my plan is -4% is 1/25 savings, so while it's fine for the final 3 levels it greats a problem in that it doesn't save points for the first 3 when you split like that.

One option is to just take "Attractive Becomes Ugly -12%" to save 3 points on Regeneration (Regular) [25] and forget about dividing the first three tiers up?

Something like "I can use Rapid/Slow and just be Normal/Unattractive instead of Ugly" seems like it could fairly be called a 0% feature.

The way I'm looking at it is 1/25 of 5 points is 0.2, so you're reducing the first 2 tiers of Regeneration (Rapid Healing and Slow) to 4.8 each (sum 9.6), and then saving 0.6 on the Regular upgrade (14.4) which works out to paying 24 points. You're just avoiding the rounding until the end.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

But are we talking about a modified regeneration?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I wish I'd known about this example during in this November discussion: http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=170987

Which gives an example of even uber-healing being unable to get rid of bullets, supporting the idea I had of designing a severely nerfed "Warp" advantage to represent that process.

I can see grounds for assuming that with EXTREMELY superficial injuries, especially if "out" is the only direction it could possibly be pushed because DR prevents in moving in another direction.

Wolverine's HF in the X-Men 2 film for example did push out a slug that was embedded in his forehead:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfEOlFVSYcAo&t=9 (ff to 1m41s for when it pops out and he opens eyes)

but that's by nature superficial since it did not penetrate the skull (it being adamantium: no way lead it going to get through there)

Probably a more interesting question here is why wolverine actually got knocked down (and seemingly knocked out) as you wouldn't expect that to happen unless it did actually penetrate the skull and hit the brain...

I guess one option is that Wolverine's skull DR operates like "Flexible" (due to "Tough Skin: it's subdermal) even though Adamantium wouldn't actually literally be flexible like chainmail...

The intent being that you could suffer Blunt Trauma on head injuries...

You need flexible DR to stop 10 points of Piercing Damage to suffer 1 HP of Blunt Trauma...

X2 came out in 2003 when https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servic...#United_States says .45 calibers were standard...

so if I go with the "Auto Pistol" on B278 that's 2d damage, so it's possible the cop got a lucky shot (rolling 10 on 2d is rare enough) just enough to inflict 1 HP on wolverine via blunt trauma.

This would not be a major wound (even if the x4 applied, but AFAIK you don't apply wound multipliers to blunt trauma?) but I think B420's "Knockdown and Stunning" rule would apply: Wolverine has less than 20 HP so 1 HP loss is enough to cause a shock penalty for him: so he would need to make a HT roll and probably failed it.

If it was a normal fail then he would've lied prone until his Stun wore off. In theory he might've been able to do an active defense at -4 but nobody was attacking him.

He lies there a LOT longer than you'd expect it to take for him to pass a HT roll to end the stun, so if it was a normal knockdown HT fail, he might've been playing posse at first.

This would make especial sense if you use the "Last Gasp" rules: suffering injury saps you of Action Points, so if your first Do Nothing ended the stun but didn't recover your AP, you might take more Do Nothings until your AP was at max. GM might even decide that Regeneration uses up some AP too.

That couldn't take very long though, and you'd expect Wolverine to jump up to stop Pyro murdering cops sooner if he were conscious, so the simpler explanation is that Wolverine CRIT-failed his HT roll (or failed by 5+) causing an actual knockout.

B423 would then apply: takes 15 minutes to wake up.

Logan didn't take that long so he probably has Recovery... but he took more than 15 seconds... more like 90 seconds.... would that be something like taking 2 levels of Takes Extra Time for a -20% discount to reduce it to 8 points, perhaps?

That'd be 3 minutes recovery at -30, 6 minutes at -40, 12 minutes at -50, and there's be no point in taking TET 6 (24 min) since then you're actually taking longer to do it than if you lacked Recovery altogether.

Another way to slow it down might be if Recovery and Regeneration were Alternative Abilities for him, in which case maybe Recovery only activated after the 1 HP of Blunt Trauma was healed?

If we define "push out bullets" as an Alternative Ability (as I did in the November thread) that'd be another slow-down: 1st Warp runs, 2nd Regen runs, 3rd Recovery runs.

Wolverine opened his eyes instantly after the bullet fell out and the wound closed though, so I don't think this is the right approach, as you would expect a 15-second delay.

Unless... maybe it somehow cycles between all 3 abilities instinctively? You might preprgram how that went.

IE 1 second worth of Recovery is 1 minute's worth, so you would get 15 seconds (minutes) worth of it after 90 seconds if it activated 1 second per 6 seconds. The other 5 seconds of those intervals could be split between Regeneration and Warp (or maybe TK: that could also pull out a bullet hands-free)

I think you would need to opt-in a benefit like that, not just assume it's there and opt out.

My instinct last month to call this Afflictions: Warp was probably a bad idea due to the high base cost of Affliction (10) and of the Advantage enhancement (+1000% for 100pt ability)

Using TK would be a lot simpler, you only need 1 level of TK (5pts) to move a bullet, after all.

TK would need a lot of modifiers to model this... I actually got it to work out to +0% so you could just charge 1 point for it as an Internal Advantage.

Enhancements +170%

1) Reflexive +40%: so you don't need to pay a Concentrate maneuver (included Reduced Time) and so it activates itself w/o conscious input (takes bullets out of you even if you're not aware of them, or unconscious)
2) Persistant +40%: to give TK a duration of 10 seconds so Independent can be used (it requires a duration)
3) Independent +70%: to remove the require for maintaining concentration for it to work
4) Based on HT +20%: because rolling DX to grapple stuff feels weird here

Limitations -170%

1) Reduced (1/10) Range -30% because you don't need more than 1 yard of reach
2) Reduced (1/10) Duration -20% because all you really need is 1 second for Independent to work: Reflexive will re-activate it every second as a free action!
3) Visible -20% this isn't an invisible force, it's actually the tissues of your body connecting with and moving the objects out
4) Blood Agent, Reversed -30% (can only move things he's bled upon)
5) Attraction or Repulsion -60%
6) Requires HT roll -10% (just to round things out, cause some occasional FP costs, shut down the TK if FP was low: this would be distinct from using HT to do DX grapples)

With the last one it's a bit of a headscratcher due to being an internal advantage: "away from me" in this case means "away from my deepest tissues towards my superficial epidermis"

Since a Reflexive ability "activates itself" you could just RP that it's only goal is to expel foreign objects, being a simple intelligence.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I thought about "Uncontrollable" but that would imply Wolverine could prevent his TK from working using a Will roll and that seems wrong.

To reflect how it took such a long amount of time to move a 1lb object less than 1 yard could be done with how you RP the Reflexive/Independent TK. Probably the way it should operate is:

1) telegraphic AOA (determined) to establish a 0 CP grapple at HT+8. There would be -10 vision penalties (operating blind) so you need to offset that, so you roll against HT-2 to grapple the bullet
2) telegraphic AOA (strong) to roll 1d-4 control points at HT+4 to hit. Since a grapple is established there is no -10 vision penalty per TG11's note "Attacks to improve control of an existing grapple or to break free are allowed at -4 in all postures" so this cancels out the +4 for Telegraphic and you can make raw HT rolls to improve CP on the bullet.
3) AOA strong is repeated until CP reaches maximum, which is normally 1 CP, or 2 if using the "double trained ST" optional rule
4) then an All-Out-Attack (Contest: TG20) is used, either for Pickup or for Shoving People Around is used
5) if that fails, AOA strong is used to rebuild spend CP, rinse and repeat until technique succeeds and the bullet is lifted or steps

"Shoving People Around" rules to force the bullet to "take a step". MA118/TG25 says to use the better of ST/DX but in this case HT subs for DX so you would roll against HT instead of rolling against ST 1 of the TK.

Bullets can't make active defenses (like someone who took an All-Out Attack, basically) so they would resist the Quick Contest via TG20's "Strength as a Proxy for Mass" and roll against ST-4.

I'm thinking they probably have ST 0 so that would mean rolling against -4: it would always generate a margin of failure (the lowest possible with a 3 would be MoS 7, up to MoS 22 for an 18) so the TK roll would not need to pass, just fail by a lesser amount.

Alternatively to Shoving People aAound (can a bullet even "take a step"? perhaps things in a Lying posture should be immune to SPA?) would be using the "Pickup" technique, and then after passing that contest using your Move 1 to "walk" the bullet out through the wound channel.

Whichever Quick Contest you use, Control Points can be spent to influence Quick Contests, so as mentioned before, to slow down the TK (explain why Wolverine's HF took so long to kick out the bullet) you could RP "Reflexive" as not using these techniques until it has built up maximum control points, and then spends them all on the contest.

This would repeat until the contest was won, even if it might be better to gamble on doing a 0CP (no bonus to contest) attempt to shove the bullet out faster: the player doesn't control the Reflexive TK (the reflex does) so he doesn't get the option.

Hm, maybe for that reason I should apply the "Unconscious Only" limitation even though it lacks "Uncontrollable"? The idea being that you can't direct what the TK does (only the preprogrammed Reflexive consciousness) so there's no flexibility in options.

Wounds closing quickly is a problem because if the wound is still open the body can just "walk the bullet out" unimpeded. But if the wound has closed, there is now a wall (your flesh) in the way, so it can't get out: it needs to make an exit.

I don't think this was done in the film because the wound wasn't deep enough to close behind the slug: The average thickness of forehead skin is 1.70 mm and superficial fat is 1.99 mm. so there's only about 2.69mm (0.269 centimetres) of flesh atop the skull: there just wasn't enough room for the slug to go deep enough to be buried: this is a problem which would happen if there wasn't a layer of bone right below the skin though, like getting shot in the leg or torso.

One way for the body to get those out would probably be "Kiss the Wall" on MA118. Taking attraction/repulsion prevents "punching" with TK, but since you can move objects you should be able to (after having grappled them) slam them into something, such as your own skin.

This normally does thrust-crushing, but I would not apply the +1 for hitting a hard surface (skin isn't hard, as per the Twofers note)

Thrust crushing for ST 1 is 1d-6 so the TK would opt for an AOA for +2 (it doesn't need to defend) and keep going until it scored 1 HP to form a new exit wound to push the bullet out through.

Once that's created you'd have a window for Shoving Bullets Around until it closed again. If you have hyper-regeneration (HP healed every second) you'll never act fast enough to take advantage of this, which is probably why Wolverine helped things along.

To make TK a bit "smarter", I think maybe it could alter it's approach a bit if the wounds were closing over every second: make 2 attacks per second instead of 1 attack.

So this would be a Rapid Strike (combination) of KissTheWall+ShovingPeople Around (both at -6) so you'd roll at HT-6 for both if there's a barrier impeding the bullet.

Although... you can do "Pickup" with there being a barrier and then just WALK (as much as TK walks) on subsequent maneuvers, so you could probably just use the guaranteed 2 steps that AOA gives after doing Kiss the Wall to walk out...

For that reason RPwise it's probably good to not use "shoving people around" and as a policy always have the internal TK do a "pickup" technique and then just walk: it makes more sense tactically if there's a need to push through a closed scap to get the object out.

Cyborg from Teen Titans had Regeneration? Or you mean not inherently but his metal parts repair themselves... hm I think if it's actually statted as your character it's n olonger considered foreign.

Wolverine's healing factor actually was impeded by the implants, so that could be modeled as his TK constantly trying (and failing) to rip the adamantium off his bones. FP spent on this couldn't be spent on his usual regeneration.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I'm only familiar with him from the Doom Patrol show and the JL movie, but Googling found a wiki page that said he had 'self-regeneration' for his fleshy bits as well as his mechano bits, which is all I'm going on.


Again, it depends on the version. I don't think the movies get into such detail, only saying that his regen enabled him to accept the adamantium in the first place, until it eventually poisons his regen in the last movie.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I could see that as nanobots being able to effect organic repairs in addition to inorganic ones. As opposed to something he might've had prior to becoming a cyborg, which I don't recall being a thing for Vic Stone.

The regen was basically because the surgery caused massive damage people would just die from internal bleeding of normally. I'm sure other guys like Deadpool/Sabertooth/Flash could've taken it, long as you're a fast healer.

Adamantium was sterile/nonpoisonous in the comics I think. I see poison as actually a metaphor here. The key line in the film is:

Adamantium implants leeching into his system,
causing chronic pain and diminished healing

Leeching is probably because his healing factor is gradually deconstructing some of the adamantium: it's not as permanent/indestructible as we're led to think (least not in the movies). Think about how water gradually wears rock away.

In addition to TK for moving foreign objects, you could also give Healing Factor some kind of Internal Corrosive Attack for gradually breaking down objects it's not able to expel (like for example something wrapped tightly around your bones)

Corrosive Attack 1d-3 is 0.1 dice (a perk on a 10/die attack) and if you want it to be slow-working you can take Exposure Time: 1 Week -50% which along with Melee Attack -30% pays entirely for Aura +80%.

There's actually no incentive to take Internal Attack in terms of price reduction here, that's just something you do so your can hit stuff with the inside of your body instead of the outside: otherwise you'd need to reach an outside body part into your body to hit with an aura I think?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

The simplest (and likely best) solution is that foreign matter is expelled from the body by Regeneration. Now, if you want Regeneration to cause permanent issues, just give it a modified Corrupting (-20%) limitation (with each interval of healing being considered one use). The 'corruption' would actually just be the symptoms of things healing wrong.

For example, a character possesses Regeneration (Regular; Corrupting, -20%) [20]. Each HP healed gives the character 5 points of Corruption. When the character reaches 125 points of Corruption, they exchange it for -5 CP in permanent physical disadvantages. Each day that the character goes without needing to use Regeneration removes one point of Corruption, as they recover from any errors in healing.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

What if the foreign matter is Ant Man or something though? Doesn't seem right to take it for granted, which is why I like the InternalTK approach. It's just a perk, so why not charge it?

No reason to limit it to regen/rapid healers either, a Slow Healing or Unhealing creature might also have the ability to remove foreign objects from their bodies.

TK-expulsion is probably only going to be impeded by per-second regeneration. If you're at 10-second intervals or higher that's probably enough time for InternalTK to wrestle the bullet out before wound closes.

Ant Man is another matter: he could probably hang on more than 10 seconds and then the wound closes and it becomes impossible to get him out without creating a new wound.

The "grappling" approach is definitely seeming more realistic/gritty than the Affliction:Warp approach, glad I abandoned that.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Why would Antman be imbedded in someone's wound? And if he was, I find the idea of him being enveloped by flesh and unable to ever get out a bit excessively gross.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

He could always grow to human size again. A little body horror never hurt anyone.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

There's a time and place.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

No, he couldn't. Ant-Man can't grow through any material stronger than his own fleeh in the fictional sources and in a game he couldn't get an attack like that without first paying for it.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

After Pane and Daigoro's back and forth, I may be able to prove somewhat useful, thanks to having been an extreme X-Men fanboy for the 90s, carrying into the early 00s. I'll resist going into excess detail, if only so I can be lazy and not have to double check everything I'm about to say. ;)

The Fox films are not the Marvel Comics, and the Marvel Comics are not the films. Even in the comics, there dozens (hundreds?) of officially published variations of Wolverine. There are also adaptations, some quite well known to different demographics, from multiple forms of media that are not the films or comics. They're also adapting from the original source material, and sometime even from other adaptations e.g. video games based on the films. There are executive mandates and changes in creative teams that change things, but even if we stick to the mainstream, Earth-616 comic book version of Wolverine, with the same creative team, and no interfering executive mandates... you'll find the efficacy of his powers fluctuate according to the needs of the story.

The Earth-616 (main comic book) Wolverine seems to have had Regeneration (Normal) or Regeneration (Fast) as the story needed prior to about 1993. During the Fatal Attractions crossover, Magneto ripped the adamantium from Wolverine's skeleton, leading to him having Regeneration (Slow)... and even that was after some (mostly) off panel recovery time. They hinted his healing factor was "burnt out" from saving his life, then that adamantium may have been stimulating his healing factor, then changed their minds (or creative staff) and said it was the opposite: the healing factor was functionally weaker because it was dealing with the damage the adamntium was constantly doing to his system. Many stupid things happened. Eventually, Wolverine gets his metal-bones back, keeps the accelerated healing factor, but they do mention his healing factor is why he doesn't die from having had adamantium bonded to his bones.

Other characters have survived the process. Most notable is probably Sabertooth, who may or may not have it anymore, and didn't first receive it until... the early 2000s, I think. I believe the process was even originally designed to work on normal humans, it is just their survival rate was terrible and (applying later in-setting factors), they would probably require constant medical maintenance to deal with the side effects Wolverine's healing factor "naturally" handles.

Whew! I know that is a long tangent, but I wanted to explain why how foreign matter is handled by Wolverine's Regeneration is so inconsistent.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Why do you want to crush my dreams of Chest-Buster Man?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

We are talking about both Modified and Unmodified Regeneration, and I believe we are discussing exactly what unmodified Regeneration actually encompasses.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Oh there's always convoluted plot reasons. Maybe he got shot out of a gun at the wound, maybe I threw him into it, maybe he's guiding Miss Frizzle on another field trip into the circulatory system.

In his case, per P76 he could probably just shrink to SM-44 and exit through the pores of the skin.

If you can't shrink that small then it would make sense to need to find (or make) an open wound to exit at SM-19.

He might not need to open the old scab. At SM-19 you can waterslide through the bloodstream until you reach an appropriate place to exit. Like maybe if one body part had less DR than others.

B58 rules for Growth are if max thrust for your current strength is greater than DR of your container then in DR seconds you burst it, but those could probably do for some reanalysis.

Maybe something akin to the Collision rules, like it counts as a zero-velocity collision to expand beyond a container.

I had some discussion with Eric the Red about this back when I could keep my head around that test combat (sorry for abandoning btw ETR, things have got messy IRL) about how defensive slams end up doing less damage than accidental collisions, and proposed the idea that non-attack collisions should take the defensive penalty (-2 damage) plus maybe an extra penalty on top of that.

Getting your healing factor burned out might be a case of paying character points to survive something (maybe CP-fueled Unkillable?) and the GM lets you take those CP out of your existing advantage if you have no unspent CP to pay with?

Adamantium stimulation might be something like training: wolverine is essentially always wearing a 100lb weighted vest (it's just inside his bones) which probably counts as on the job training for learning to get extra FP and ST.

I think an easier take on "he heals faster because the adamantium was hurting him" might just be "he heals faster because the adamantium was TIRING him".

If wolverine had to use FP for Extra Effort a lot more often because of his built-in encumbrance, then if his Regeneration was fueled by FP (which sounds like a realistic take on regeneration) he would have less FP available to fuel it when he's using EE to lug himself around.

My approach falls apart when you consider the many times where he's just lying immobile while healing though because even if you were wearing 200lbs of platemail you don't spend extra FP to lie prone in that platemail, just to walk around in it.

I think traditionally it was always meant to be the bonding process ("hey we're just going to poke 99 tubes in through holes in your body, don't bleed to death!") which was so deadly and what the HF was for.

Maybe the best way to find out is actually look at the failed projects (1-9) where people died and understand HOW they died?

I just think it should do what it says it does: restore HP.

Mechanically that shouldn't be any different than if that HP were restored by Healing advantage or one of the various healing spells.

None of which say anything about expelling foreign materials, so that really ought to be separate.

Healing in particular has a separate approach for curing illnesses, which might be seen as expelling (if not deactivating) foreign matter such as bacteria or viruses, yes?

I don't even know if Healing (or Regeneration) is able to get rid of poison: just restore HP lost to poison, but the poison presumably keeps on going. If Healing/Regen was "expel foreign things" then you could just assume poison gets teleported out.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Bear in mind when doing this sort of analysis that almost no GURPS rules anywhere treat 'expelling foreign materials' as a concern at all. And the few that do seldom actually provide a motivation!

Like it or not GURPS is not written around brutal medical simulation.

Consequently, it's not really reasonable to add on brutal medical simulation, and then ignore the reason that existing rules don't speak to its issues. Regeneration doesn't say how it interacts with foreign matter embedded in the body because as far as the game mechanics are concerned that's not a thing.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Quite plausible. It could also be some weird player/GM deal because they both wanted a lower-CP total campaign, and but Wolverine's player just didn't want to part with him. I'm sure there are several possibilities, especially when I consider how many "weird" things have happened both with the real-life story behind Marvel Comics and and the real-life happenings of various people's gaming groups. ;)

Whoa! Hold up! Unless they've changed it, you're ignoring canon with your hypothesis. Sadly, I no longer have the issue to get a direct reference, but working from memory and summaries, in Wolverine Vol. 2 #164, Wolverine is sent to prison, specifically The Cage (a predecessor of The Raft) for reasons we won't worry about. What does matter is this is after his adamantium skeleton had been restored, his healing factor was cranked up... but The Cage had the technology to suppress super powers (including mutant powers).

Anyway, this is where we are informed Wolverine has to receive shots to compensate for "adamantium poisoning". No, it wasn't invented just for Logan (2017). Given that Wolverine's adamantium was restored by Apocalypse, somewhat infamous for "improving" the powers of those serving him, Wolverine's healing factor may have been amplified to the point where even with adamantium present, it was now Regeneration (Very Fast).

Nope. As stated, adamantium isn't exactly healthy to have in your body. Though Adamantium Beta, if that hasn't been retconned away, isn't as bad as having True Adamantium. The bonding process was developed by Kenji Oyama a.k.a. Lord Dark Wind, but it was stolen from him. The short version is that Lord Dark Wind's process includes an additional treatment that means someone without a healing factor (or similar super power) can survive the process. One example of this is Bullseye.

Though I am sure that the initial process is still incredibly traumatic... and the only reason I suspect the Weapon X program would be concerned with keeping down the failure rate is because they were using True Adamantium (like I said, it reacts with Wolverine's biology to become Adamantium Beta). True Adamantium is crazy expensive, and virtually impossible to recast after it sets.

Can you be more specific?

The Weapon Plus program has had a lot more than one subject per program, and I don't think most involved the adamantium bonding process.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I think we might be getting into the weeds with details about Wolverine's comic history. The point is that he's a cyborg whose regen doesn't spit out his cybernetics, due to whatever justifications specific to his team of writers over the years, so it's not a given that someone's PC would have an issue of their Regen disallowing cybernetics. And that could be for whatever range of justifications that that PC and GM can agree on. Wolverine's only one example, and there are many others, the T-1000 frex.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Apologies. If any further discussion about the details is needed and not obviously related to the core discussion, anyone can just PM me. Getting back to the main topic, I'm still not clear where Regeneration does and doesn't differ from natural healing. I'll explain what I think I understand, however.

Let me be clear; Regeneration is an Exotic trait in humans. Some real-world, non-human life might have Regeneration (Slow), I think, but I'm not exactly a biologist either. ;)

Reading about Regeneration in Basic, it is... ambiguous. I think it happens in addition to whatever natural healing your character is due e.g. a human with Regeneration (Slow) recovers one HP every 12 hours, no roll required. If they are taking it easy, they would also get their daily healing check for natural recovery, and at +5 because all forms of Regeneration include the +5 bonus from Rapid Healing.

Another area of confusion is whether or not the minimum 10 HT requirement from Rapid Healing is also present. It is also worth mentioning that Unhealing and Slow Healing are incompatible with Regeneration but Healing appears to be okay. Unless I misunderstood and it only means someone else can use their Healing advantage on the Unhealing/Slow Healing character, but if that character has the Healing Advantage, they couldn't use it to self-heal.

Does this sound correct? I mean, the bits where I state how I think it works; though I suppose some of the areas where I said I didn't know or wasn't sure may also be correct if there are no official answers. XP

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

This seems rather tangential, but remember that Healing cannot be used to self-heal at all without the Affects Self enhancement from Powers.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

Actually, given what I just said, it is pretty important. I forgot Healing could not be used on yourself with its base build. This means there is one less thing to distinguish the "unnatural" healing from Healing and the "unnatural" healing from Regeneration.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

MA232 has special damage for removing barbed arrows from wounds.

There's also the effect of Swing-Impale weapons.

It doesn't sound like something to be taken for granted. At bare minimum the weight of projectiles in your body would add up over time as encumbrance and set off metal detectors, even ignoring realistic concerns like causing infection, poisoning, extra injury from movement over time.

The blood loss rules are optional rules, so I see your point there.

But if you're ignoring the effects of foreign matter on the body then whether or not the power removes them would not be important.

That Psionc Powers has a perk for teleporting and leaving bullets behind says to me that you probably don't take it for granted though.

Encumbrance IS a basic rule. Anything carried on or in your body with weight can add up to slow you down.

If you happen to be bringing lunch to Magneto, as we know from X2, it's a bad thing to even have even a granule of certain foreign elements inside you.

As long as something doesn't overpenetrate, and so long as DR doesn't stop it, we can probably assume that a projectile has lodged itself in the body.

Melee weapons would be different since they're assumed to be pulled free unless it's swing-impale.

Thrust-Impale apparently has a "leave it in" mandate as of MA106 where foes don't need to win a Quick Contest of Strength to get closer: instead they need to try and get wounded enough to exceed the DR on their backs which gets the weapon stuck.

Technical Grappling also had rules on leaving impaling weapons in and using control points from the attack, kinda similar to biting.

Cutting's difference: no control points from the attack, but you CAN use them to grapple and get free damage from the control points.

B405's swing-impale rules to get weapon free are I think what thrust-impale would use in that situation.

Would be interesting to always use some kind of ST thing for getting impaling weapons free: for example if you did otherwise did "maximum possible injury" why would it matter whether that's from your thrust or your target's thrust? Should probably be same wound depth.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

We discussed this already but modern bullets remaining in wounds they make is very rare. Even 9mm hollow points will make through and through wounds exiting the torso.

They also don't weigh very much. It takes 111 63 grain 5.56mm Nato bullets to add up to 1 lb.

No, it is very much something to be ignored.

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

It could depend on armor: if you wore armor which slowed down the bullet it might not be able to make it all the way through you after dealing with that DR.

I think you determine that w/ the rules on Overpenetration, which appears to require that basic damage exceed a person's HP.

It's a pretty high requirement, to accounts for how grazes don't have much tissue to travel through, one idea might be if using the "grazes" rules in pyramid (I think MoS 1 hits doing half damage?) maybe in addition to suffering half the injury you should also have half the cover DR?

Re: Is Regeneration a Disadvantage?
 

I was actually using Real World penteration data Gurps underestimates the ability of RW pistol rounds to completely penetrate the torso.