|
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Join Date: Aug 2015
|
Somehow I never noticed this before, but two of the names of Chronic Pain's (B126) severity levels don't match up with the levels of pain listed under Afflictions (B428). Mild Chronic Pain is actually moderate pain and Agonizing Chronic Pain is terrible pain.
Is there some reason for the different terms or is it just a mistake? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
I certainly feels like a mistake. The levels of Chronic Pain should probably be renamed to match with the pain conditions (Moderate, Severe, Terrible). An argument could be made for a Mild level (-1 to rolls, base cost [-2] or [-2.5], +10% as an Affliction) and an Agonizing one (cannot act, as per Agony) with a base cost of [-25], based on how Agony is priced as an Affliction.
One possible reason why there's a different naming scheme between the two is that Chronic Pain functions differently - High Pain Threshold doesn't help (the Disadvantage value is based on how painful it is for the character; a character with High Pain Tolerance and Mild Chronic Pain is arguably being subjected to a level of pain appropriate for Severe Pain in a normal person). But then the fact Severe is named the same between the two doesn't quite follow.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Join Date: May 2007
|
Quote:
My guess would be that this is a legacy thing- that the Chronic Pain disadvantage predates the formalized system of pain levels, and the names were never adjusted to match.
__________________
I predicted GURPS:Dungeon Fantasy several hours before it came out and all I got was this lousy sig. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Join Date: Aug 2015
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Tags |
| rules question |
|
|