Quirks, Non Quirks & general silliness .

[Racer]

I don't really play GURPS often , but often help out other GMs with stuff & sometimes sit in on games to play an NPC etc .

Going over PC builds & character sheets in last few years , I've noticed the amount & bizarreness of Quirks growing rapidly . In fact a couple of GM friends have questioned whether they should even allow some . A few of the odder examples :

Always wears socks inside out .

Deeply attracted to any female named 'Emma' / male named 'Malcolm' .

Must eat at least two bananas a day . Gets stressed if they cannot .

Terrified of Koalas - despite being based in late 19th Century South America .

Dislikes odd numbers , but '5' is okay ...

Despite zero evidence , believes various in game FICTIONAL Characters are homosexual ...

Always gets lost in a specific town/city - even though they hardly visit there .

Still uses a VCR .

Collects the protective wax off Cheese whenever possible . Makes miniature sculptures from it .

Always uses ridiculously obscure nicknames for other people , so that hardly anyone else knows who they are talking about .

Will only eat branded beans .

Goes mental if duvets are mentioned ...

Always goes to the wrong Station/Airport/Library when collecting someone or something .

Worries constantly about the Heat Death of the Universe .

Must ALWAYS play 'blue' in boardgames .

Prefers to have AT LEAST two backups for most household objects .

Makes and stores homemade jam - never eats it ...

Despite living in a fantasy setting , deep down doesn't really believe in magic .

Has perfect hearing but likes to watch television with the sound off & subtitles on .

Travels with own toilet seat ...


Some of these are based on their own quirks or those of people they know . Others are possibly chosen to wind up the GM - the 'separate refrigerators for each family member' saga went on for years & became a legend in one gaming group .

Just trying to get an idea of what others would agree are acceptable , plus some of the stranger quirks others have encountered ?

[Xakaz]

As the number of Quirks is usually very limited, I don't really care about them not being restrictive for a character at all. They encourage players to flesh out their characters, and the more characters are fleshed out - the better.

Also:

Must ALWAYS play 'blue' in boardgames

Wow! It's just me!

[coronatiger]

As a GM, I may veto quirks that I'm reasonably certain will never come up in play in a meaningful way (like the Koalas). And I won't go out of my way to make one PC's quirk relevant (like creating a bunch of NPCs named Emma/Malcolm). If it fits the theme of the PC perfectly, I'll allow one completely irrelevant quirk, because it fleshes out the character, as Xakaz put it.

I broadly categorize quirks either as role playing quirks (affects how the player role plays the character) or rules quirks (affects stats or die rolls).

A role playing quirk shouldn't come up (or be brought up) too frequently, because I feel that disrupts the flow of the game.

I prefer it if my players have at least a couple of role playing quirks, but I won't enforce this unless some of the suggested quirks are obviously out-of-character.

I don't mind some quirks being silly in an otherwise "serious" campaign, as long as they don't become too pervasive.

In the current campaign where I'm a player, my character has the following quirks:

• Dislikes being alone
• Enjoys heights
• Loves fondling their girlfriend when they think nobody's watching (the girlfriend is an always-present Ally)
• Prefers finer inns
• Sashays when they walk

I don't think I've ever played any weirder quirks than these.

By the way, having a fantasy-setting character not truly believing in magic would qualify them for Mundane Background. To the annoyance of a mage I played earlier, such people can't supply FP for spells...

[Racer]

Just been messaged another one :

Swing Phobia : absolutely TERRIFIED by swings - but strangely has no problems with climbing ropes ! Rope swings they can go either way ...

And a real life one I forgot about : Can't sit backwards on any transport . Motion sickness isn't a problem , moving backwards just makes them 'feel odd' .

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Racer

Swing Phobia : absolutely TERRIFIED by swings - but strangely has no problems with climbing ropes

Personally, as far back as I can remember, I've been terrified of watching children (when I was a child, my smaller siblings and others younger than me) on swings. I could use them myself, but every time I see a toddler use them I am irrationally convinced that they will start playing around in it and their fragile skulls end up slamming into the metal structure around it at high speed, sustaining horrific injuries and brain damage.

I know intellectually that this is unlikely and even those few times children do injure themselves on swings, it's rarely serious and I've never even heard of anyone being killed (though I don't doubt it has happened somewhere, pretty much every single object in the world has probably killed someone at some point.

I can even manage to restrain myself from forbidding my nieces and nephews from playing in a swing, because to punish them for my irrational terror would be wrong. But I still can't watch them or any other child play in a swing. I have to look away to avoid witnessing the horror and I've got a sinking feeling in my stomach the entire time, even to the point of being queasy and having difficulty breathing.

[Maz]

I'm with the others. I'm not really harsh when it comes to quirks. In fact I tend to allow people 5 pts from quirks even if they do not fill them out right away. Then they are open to be filled out during play (sometimes heavily encouraged by other players).

However I would veto Quirks that would never come into play. Or Quirks that are really played as full fledged disadvantages.

But basically if I can imagine a situation, however contrived, where the Quirk could come into play. I would probably allow it.

For instance. The "wears sock inside out". (From Finding Forrester). My initial reaction is "No. That's a character trait, not worth a quirk". But then, giving it a minute I could see it coming up in a situation where people are in a disguise or someone is impersonating the character or something like that. I can just imagine a scene where the characters are going undercover as soldiers and an officer notice that characters socks being wrongly on and chewing him out for it, causing unwanted attention. And so I would allow it. It might never come up, but I would look for an opportunity for it to happen.

[Culture20]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

As a GM, I may veto quirks that I'm reasonably certain will never come up in play in a meaningful way (like the Koalas). And I won't go out of my way to make one PC's quirk relevant (like creating a bunch of NPCs named Emma/Malcolm). ...

You’re missing a chance to have a giant koala on a billboard or eucalyptus trees above a place the characters must rest. Being deathly afraid of something that doesn’t come into play is why it is a quirk and not a phobia.

[Donny Brook]

I'm pretty lenient with quirks. I don't htink they need to be particularly disadvantageous as long as they promote role-play. Here's my take on these:

Originally Posted by Racer

Always wears socks inside out .

Kind of insufficient influence in play. Might allow it among four other more substantial ones.

Deeply attracted to any female named 'Emma' / male named 'Malcolm' .

I would allow it in a setting where those names are reasonably well known.

Must eat at least two bananas a day . Gets stressed if they cannot .

That's okay IMO.

Terrified of Koalas - despite being based in late 19th Century South America .

Meaningless in the setting, so I'd say no.

Dislikes odd numbers , but '5' is okay ...

I generally ask players to flesh-out a behaviour to define 'dislike' in such quirks, but allow them.

Despite zero evidence , believes various in game FICTIONAL Characters are homosexual ...

I'm not sure what they mean by 'in game fictional character'.

Always gets lost in a specific town/city - even though they hardly visit there .

Might allow this along with four more substantial ones, but I'd need to understand the frequency of visiting more clearly.

Still uses a VCR .

I'd probably think this is too insignificant.

Collects the protective wax off Cheese whenever possible . Makes miniature sculptures from it .

Definitely allow this.

Always uses ridiculously obscure nicknames for other people , so that hardly anyone else knows who they are talking about .

I'd allow it.

Will only eat branded beans .

I'd allow it.

Goes mental if duvets are mentioned ...

Actually sounds too strong for just a quirk.

Always goes to the wrong Station/Airport/Library when collecting someone or something .

I'd allow it, but wouldn't take it!

Worries constantly about the Heat Death of the Universe .

I'd allow it, but they need to roleplay it.

Must ALWAYS play 'blue' in boardgames .

Insufficient playability, unless the campaign is likely to involve board games for some reason.

Prefers to have AT LEAST two backups for most household objects .

I would allow it, and make them pay a premium on Cost of Living.

Makes and stores homemade jam - never eats it ...

I would allow it and make them reduce time available for 'off-screen' activity.

Despite living in a fantasy setting , deep down doesn't really believe in magic .

Sounds more like it might be a Minor Delusion [-5].

Has perfect hearing but likes to watch television with the sound off & subtitles on .

Insufficiently relevant to game play.

Travels with own toilet seat ...

Sounds okay.

[Racer]

Despite zero evidence , believes various in game FICTIONAL Characters are homosexual ...

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I'm not sure what they mean by 'in game fictional character'.

An example would be in a Harry Potter type campaign if a Hogwart's pupil character thought & said 'Martin Miggs The Mad Muggle' from Ron Weasley's comics was homosexual . Or any of the protagonists from the Beedle The Bard book of wizarding fairytales etc . This one stumped me & the GM too .

Think it was based on an old school acquaintance who seemed to think half of British Soap Opera Characters are homosexual , despite no evidence over 10+ years in some cases ... Just very odd & gaming group had a good laugh about it when it was mentioned .

[edk926]

A couple of these could be turned into a benefit. Example, a modern game featuring evidence of something found on a VCR tape that could only be viewed because the "Still uses a VCR" person was the only one that had a VCR player readily available.