Resistant: gain a resistance rolls where none apply normally?

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Seems very odd when Immunity to Magic is [30], and Immunity to Death Vision will be [5].

I'm pretty sure that your premise may be a bit off here to begin with - Immunity to Magic should mean...immunity to magic, as in the non-damaging spells are covered by the Resistant to Magic advantage and the damaging ones are covered by DR. For example, Deathtouch should be stopped by DR (Cosmic, +50%) or DR (Malediction-Proof, +50%) - it's a melee spell which that ignores DR that doesn't have Cosmic. Death Vision is a spell that is resisted normally. Still, you might have a point with the toxins. Some of the poisons have very specific effects on human biology because...it's human biology. GURPS being humanocentric means that allowances must be made in the text. I don't see a problem with Resistant stopping non-damaging problems for things it covers - but damage (like toxic damage) isn't covered by Resistant. It never has been. That's straight up DR, so the toxic damage curare causes should probably be stopped by DR. I've always read most of those poisons as "You've ingested it - take some damage." So looking back at High-Tech it feels more a issue with the poison - not the system itself. That's speaking just as a GM here, not in any authorial capacity. I thought this was covered by Sean before when you asked the same/similar questions, but I can't find the thread. I wonder if you could use your advantage to use Abilities at Default (GURPS Powers, p. 173) to turn your Resistant advantage into temporary DR vs. the threat you are dealing with. Seems like you could make the DR supercheap by taking limited and maybe something like "Internal only."

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I'm pretty sure that your premise may be a bit off here to begin with - Immunity to Magic should mean...immunity to magic, as in the non-damaging spells are covered by the Resistant to Magic advantage and the damaging ones are covered by DR.

Hmm. I should've said Static (Magic) [30]. (I somehow misremembered that there is an Immunity variant that is similar to Static. The distinction is only relevant for magic, not for metabolic hazards, though.)

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

Still, you might have a point with the toxins. Some of the poisons have very specific effects on human biology because...it's human biology. GURPS being humanocentric means that allowances must be made in the text. I don't see a problem with Resistant stopping non-damaging problems for things it covers - but damage (like toxic damage) isn't covered by Resistant. It never has been. That's straight up DR, so the toxic damage curare causes should probably be stopped by DR. I've always read most of those poisons as "You've ingested it - take some damage." So looking back at High-Tech it feels more a issue with the poison - not the system itself. That's speaking just as a GM here, not in any authorial capacity. I thought this was covered by Sean before when you asked the same/similar questions, but I can't find the thread. I wonder if you could use your advantage to use Abilities at Default (GURPS Powers, p. 173) to turn your Resistant advantage into temporary DR vs. the threat you are dealing with. Seems like you could make the DR supercheap by taking limited and maybe something like "Internal only."

I indeed asked Sean about this back in the day, and it was confirmed that Immunity fully negates stuff like this, even when no resistance roll is offered:

Originally Posted by Kromm

Immunity means "I am totally unaffected," not merely "I don't roll" – that is, it does what it says on the tin. This explains the "and" in "You are totally immune to all noxious effects, and never have to make resistance rolls" (boldface added). In the Basic Set, "totally" is emphasized and immunity is listed first for a reason. This explains why it costs twice as much to be immune as to have +8, even though +8 is functionally immune in many cases and far better than +3: Many nasty things do not allow a roll to resist, or specify bad effects even on a successful roll, and Immunity protects fully against these.

Resistant does just mean "If there's a roll, I get a bonus." If there's no roll, too bad . . . you should've bought Immunity. If there are bad effects even on a successful roll, too bad . . . you should've bought Immunity. Again, that's why even the highest level of Resistant costs half as much as Immunity.

As for ongoing rolls, some toxins implicitly have a more severe form of Cyclic wherein success doesn't prevent future rolls. Add +50% for Cosmic to give a character ability this enhancement.

Finally, ventilation is required if you're paralyzed by botulin toxins because paralyzed lungs are rather fatal. The write-up explains this: "The neurological damage the paralysis represents heals as if a lasting crippling injury (p. B422) of the lungs and spine." This isn't the paralysis affliction on p. B429, but something far more severe, closer to a mortal condition causing respiratory arrest. The word "paralysis" here is used in its plain-English sense.

. . . Which is one of the reason I started this thread:
I'm looking for something to represent extreme resistance to such stuff, but not outright immunity. In this specific thread, I'm looking at the 'can (depending on dice) resist Bad Stuff even if it normally offers no Resistance roll'.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Hmm. I should've said Static (Magic) [30]. (I somehow misremembered that there is an Immunity variant that is similar to Static. The distinction is only relevant for magic, not for metabolic hazards, though.)

I indeed asked Sean about this back in the day, and it was confirmed that Immunity fully negates stuff like this, even when no resistance roll is offered:
. . . Which is one of the reason I started this thread:
I'm looking for something to represent extreme resistance to such stuff, but not outright immunity. In this specific thread, I'm looking at the 'can (depending on dice) resist Bad Stuff even if it normally offers no Resistance roll'.

I'd go with the Cosmic as I pointed out earlier - maybe not add it to HT though I probably still might. I'd package it as Resistant + Damage Reduction.Maybe a enhancement that turns your Resistance bonus into DR vs. that particular threat. You'd need to scale it though. So something like "Resistant to Poison (+3) [5]" would need "Damage Resistance (Limited, Poison only, -60%) [2/level], which would result in a enhancement worth +20%. I don't know. It seems weird that you're modeling extreme resistance to something without tacking on other traits. Even Unkillable needs Unaging to be truly immortal...is there a particular reason why you don't want to use DR? It might get even cheaper for ingested poisons and the like.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

So you can kill furniture with Cyanide in your game?

*tsk* No. There aren't any furniture characters in it.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

I'd go with the Cosmic as I pointed out earlier - maybe not add it to HT though I probably still might. I'd package it as Resistant + Damage Reduction.Maybe a enhancement that turns your Resistance bonus into DR vs. that particular threat. You'd need to scale it though. So something like "Resistant to Poison (+3) [5]" would need "Damage Resistance (Limited, Poison only, -60%) [2/level], which would result in a enhancement worth +20%. I don't know. It seems weird that you're modeling extreme resistance to something without tacking on other traits. Even Unkillable needs Unaging to be truly immortal...is there a particular reason why you don't want to use DR? It might get even cheaper for ingested poisons and the like.

Mostly because using DR to resist Poison and similar effects seems to run counter to all precedents. Poisons are generally Contact, Blood and/or Digestive agents, and neither of those interacts with DR in the usual way (it either gets past DR completely, or is stopped completely).
And meaningful levels of Damage Reduction will be ridiculously overpriced: remember that Immunity to Metabolic Hazards is [30], and Immunity to Poison is [15].

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

*tsk* No. There aren't any furniture characters in it.

Robots or whatever. Does Immunity to Metabolic Hazards not work on Cyanide?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by The Benj

It seems more like a good reason why cyanide should have a Resistance roll, to me.

Yeah, I think the "stuff that doesn't normally get a resistance roll, can be resisted at -10 if that makes the effective resistance attribute 3 or more" solution works.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

*tsk* No. There aren't any furniture characters in it.

Ford...I feel like a sofa.

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Mostly because using DR to resist Poison and similar effects seems to run counter to all precedents. Poisons are generally Contact, Blood and/or Digestive agents, and neither of those interacts with DR in the usual way (it either gets past DR completely, or is stopped completely).
And meaningful levels of Damage Reduction will be ridiculously overpriced: remember that Immunity to Metabolic Hazards is [30], and Immunity to Poison is [15].

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah, I think the "stuff that doesn't normally get a resistance roll, can be resisted at -10 if that makes the effective resistance attribute 3 or more" solution works.

You know what - I didn't see this before, but I think this might be the best way to represent it. HT + Resistant Bonus + (-10) to resist something you normally can't seems like the best option here. This way someone resisting cyanide that also has Resistance to Poison (+8) and average HT can shrug off the effects on a roll of 8 or less. That seems workable and requires the lest amount of changes to function.

[sir_pudding]

Really there probably shouldn't be any "unresistible" poisons, diseases or syndromes. There's no substance so toxic that even one molecule will kill 100% of organisms that it is exposed to (except something crazy like a stranglet).

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Ghostdancer

You know what - I didn't see this before, but I think this might be the best way to represent it. HT + Resistant Bonus + (-10) to resist something you normally can't seems like the best option here. This way someone resisting cyanide that also has Resistance to Poison (+8) and average HT can shrug off the effects on a roll of 8 or less. That seems workable and requires the lest amount of changes to function.

The question of the thread is mostly about how to fairly buy the right to use such a HT+Bonus-10 (or -8, which is my preference, but that's not as important) under the assumption that most characters don't get to use it.
It does not look like a valid Rules Exemption / Extra Option [1]. Or do you disagree?