[Aliens]"...solitary giant predator caterpillars. Civilization wasn't easy for us"

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

A quirk at most I'd say.

Then why are vegetarians/herbivores a bigger deal?

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Unfortunately the best examples of multiple limbs are cephalopods, and they use their extra arms for just that. More relevant creatures are monkeys. They use their tail as an extra limb, making climbing easier. The size of the creature means weight is an issue. Lots of limbs means you can distribute your weight across more, and thus lighter, branches. However good limb control isn't really a higher brain function, and it's higher brain functions that I feel are important for being good at multiple things at once. Given these are vision based I would put that as the limiter.

So . . . Enhanced Tracking? Because CM is overkill.

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Interloper, in this case, means being seen as a rival for the territory. Juveniles shouldn't be big enough for this to be issue, assuming they even look similar. Also you need somehow to have both lateral and downwards knowledge propagation. Solitary only lends itself to downwards, but I think you need both for a society to grow and develop.

Make no mistake, the quote in the title is very serious. Their ascension to civilization should be difficult. Come to think of it, I wonder how would a society look if most lateral exchange of knowledge was essentially pillow talk.

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Then why are vegetarians/herbivores a bigger deal?

Space only mentions Restricted Diet with regards to specialised gatherers, not even gathers in general let alone all herbivores. The only instance I can find of Restricted Diet(Herbivore) is the stallion in DF5, and the Basic Set horses don't have it. In short there just aren't enough examples of living creatures with restricted diet to make it seem worthwhile. Perhaps start another, more general, topic on this?

So . . . Enhanced Tracking? Because CM is overkill.

That's what I was thinking.

EDIT: Or maybe just a multitasking talent, built along similar lines to the jack-of-trades one built for DF.

Make no mistake, the quote in the title is very serious. Their ascension to civilization should be difficult. Come to think of it, I wonder how would a society look if most lateral exchange of knowledge was essentially pillow talk.

Or as part of a pulling strategy.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Space only mentions Restricted Diet with regards to specialised gatherers, not even gathers in general let alone all herbivores. The only instance I can find of Restricted Diet(Herbivore) is the stallion in DF5, and the Basic Set horses don't have it. In short there just aren't enough examples of living creatures with restricted diet to make it seem worthwhile. Perhaps start another, more general, topic on this?

Originally Posted by B161

Minor Vow: Silence during daylight
hours; vegetarianism; chastity (yes, for
game purposes, this is minor). -5
points.

That's a Vow. I suppose that actual inability to consume 'wrong' food is more serious than not wanting to.

Originally Posted by Dinadon

That's what I was thinking.

EDIT: Or maybe just a multitasking talent, built along similar lines to the jack-of-trades one built for DF.

I wouldn't go as far as a Talent. But right now, I feel that extra arms are not the best deal unless they're bought as 1/5th alternatives.

Hmm.

Originally Posted by B53

You can use extra arms freely for
multiple noncombat tasks. For
instance, with three arms, you could
perform a one-handed task (e.g., use a
computer mouse) and a two-handed
task (e.g., type) simultaneously. You
need Enhanced Tracking (p. 53) to
perform tasks that require attention to
events in more than one place at a
time, however.

I wonder what counts as needing attentions in more than one place at a time. I guess if mousing and keyboarding at the same time doesn't count, then shooting the same enemy you're trying to outmanoeuvre shouldn't count either. What's you opinion?

Originally Posted by Dinadon

Or as part of a pulling strategy.

The only way I can interpret that doesn't seem to make much sense. Could you elaborate?

[Dinadon]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Hmm.
I wonder what counts as needing attentions in more than one place at a time. I guess if mousing and keyboarding at the same time doesn't count, then shooting the same enemy you're trying to outmanoeuvre shouldn't count either. What's you opinion?

Those aren't actually equivalent, your trying to compare input devices to tasks. Find a game that uses both WASD and arrow keys for different task at the same time and see how well you do. I know they're out there, I've played a few. I've also played X3, and that game leads me to belief performing both tasks is non-trivial, even though I've only played with the game's targeting assists on.

The only way I can interpret that doesn't seem to make much sense. Could you elaborate?

Pulling, a farily vernacular term, related to the cheesy chat-up line "get your coat love, you've pulled", to do with courting strategies.

[vicky_molokh]

Don't know about arrow keys and WASD, but I clearly remember driving a car in Terminator: Future Shock. The arrows were for driving, while the mouse was for controlling the weapon, which acted pretty much like an instant-response tank turret. At first it was confused, me being used to turn with the mouse and strafe with the keys. Now I turned the car with the keys, and turned the independent turret with the mouse. I think there's a mission or two in Half Life with similar controls. In some ways this is easier than shooting while somebody ELSE does the steering. Then there's the issue of how piloting using Command Task results in a lower penalty when combined with another Command Task. IOW, I'm not sure.

Ah, pulling as in 'pick-up lines'. Awesome idea. That actually makes the Ur-Quan somewhat predisposed towards natural selection of geeks in favor of jocks. :)

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Then why are vegetarians/herbivores a bigger deal?

Because it's assumed that they'll be in a society where being served meat is standard. The Ur-Quan live in their own society, and they're all rich.

[Darekun]

Re Restricted Diet, I usually figure being an obligate carnivore, gatherer, or grazer is worth -10, and apply Substitution for non-obligate cases.

However, I usually use multispecies cultures, so it affects the ability for PCs to swap rations, and can complicate using Survival to live off the land. When monospecies cultures are the norm, it's probably entirely out, leaving Increased Life Support if anything.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Because it's assumed that they'll be in a society where being served meat is standard. The Ur-Quan live in their own society, and they're all rich.

They're all rich between the first two Doctrinal Wars. I also don't think eating vegetarian in our society is all that difficult. Compare to doing that among Eskimo or the like.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Darekun

Re Restricted Diet, I usually figure being an obligate carnivore, gatherer, or grazer is worth -10, and apply Substitution for non-obligate cases.
....

Real world obligate carnivores still eat some plants. I had a cat that loved to get into my prunes and pie crust.

Grazers should probably not get restricted diet as it's very common. Though they should get slow eater from the sheer volume needed.

[Kissamies]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Trophic Level and Strategy: They're canonically carnivorous, compared to the Hawaiian carnivore caterpillars in this aspect (I assume that means 'refuses to eat foliage even if starving'). Again, their manner of hanging on to something seems like a hint towards Trapper or at least Pouncer. Trapper also seems to fit well with their territoriality. Hijacker is likely an occasional alternative, but definitely not the primary, given the mention of even larger/stronger lifeforms. They get Restricted Diet, right?

Mobility: They're definitely climbers to some extent. I suppose, given that they have no less than 4 pairs of limbs, and no less than 3 of those pairs can be used as legs of sort, that they can walk like terran caterpillars, though they prefer climbing. Brachiator, or even Clinging seems to be highly appropriate. If they're Trappers, though, Super Climbing seems to be a waste. Are there any more reasons choosing one way or another?

I checked out those caterpillars, they are pretty cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQt54x6KmK8

If the Ur-Quan are modelled after those things, they'll have one set of limbs on front for grabbing prey and another set in the back for clinging to whatever they use as base, probably tree trunks or branches. As they are much bigger than those caterpillars, they are likely to just hang upside down most of the time, and that is indeed what they seem to be doing in every official picture of them there is. Probably the most natural posture for them. SC1 manual says that the Dreadnoughts have roped ceilings for clinging on.

Brachiator would seem to be minimum. Clinging with some sort of minor limitation would seem appropriate. Super Climbing probably not. I don't think they move fast even on the ground. Good Basic Speed, probably. Good Move, probably not.