How "Serious" are Disadvantages?

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Dalin

Note that in that quote I was talking about voluntarily succumbing to disadvantages most of the time rather than rolling. I usually reserve the rolls for important situations. The rest of the time, I just act greedy because that's the type of character I chose to play.

Ah, very much my mistake there!

But from the examples you gave, it does sound like you're describing occasions to succumb that are characterizing but mostly harmless, and glossing over a lot more cases. Making sure to look for a reward or to check out a get-rich-quick scheme, as opposed to stealing Bilbo's sliverware when Greedy in Hobbiton. Also, with Indecisive, by RAW you dither until you make the self-control roll. If you don't roll, you'd dither forever or until the choice is removed by outside action. Voluntarily failing all Indecision rolls while buying milk would leave you stalled there for hours until you're thrown out of the store!

EDIT: Which in turn is why I think autofailing self-control constantly shouldn't be presented as the norm. Most people who see Bilbo's silver probably are wealthy enough that stealing it is only a weak temptation for the Greedy...but it's not no temptation. Voluntarily failing when it'll be a cute character bit is all well and good, but there's opportunities to fail with fallout everywhere.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Otaku

So... am I making anymore sense? Or is this just me missing the forest for the trees again?

The issue is really "when are you required to make self-control rolls?" If you have to make self-control rolls at absolutely any time you want to resist a disadvantage, it tends to be pathological even at high self-control numbers, and is also obnoxious to run unless you choose to simply not attempt resistance most of the time. If you only have to make self-control numbers in extreme situations it's less weird.

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Otaku

So... what if that isn't the kind of "Greedy" character I want to play?

I completely agree that there are many ways of interpreting and roleplaying any given disadvantage. This doesn't really affect, as a player, how often I might roll to resist. Since I am not my character, I regularly make decisions about how to present the character to the rest of the group. If there are some minor greed-inducing situations in a shopping scene in town, I might voluntarily succumb just to breathe life into the character. I could characterize that as "reveling" in it or thinking it's "normal" or genuinely "making an effort" to overcome it but failing and feeling guilty.

Also, note, that I'm not suggesting that anybody else should play this way. This is just the way that I usually do it and it has seemed quite common in the groups I have played with over the years.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

But from the examples you gave, it does sound like you're describing occasions to succumb that are characterizing but mostly harmless, and glossing over a lot more cases.

True. As a player, I would leave it to the GM to manage the consequences of my voluntary failures. If she thinks I'm going to easy on myself, she can provide more scenes where the disadvantage takes center stage. I'm not typically going to go out of my way to create massive problems for my character or the group, though I certainly expect to fail my SC rolls at some deliciously inopportune moments.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Also, with Indecisive, by RAW you dither until you make the self-control roll. If you don't roll, you'd dither forever or until the choice is removed by outside action. Voluntarily failing all Indecision rolls while buying milk would leave you stalled there for hours until you're thrown out of the store!

Yeah, the RAW there is a bit silly, I think. But, ultimately, I suppose my position isn't so very far from yours. I'm fine not presenting failing as "the norm," but I would hope it is ok for players to voluntarily present those aspects of their characters if they want to.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Voluntarily failing when it'll be a cute character bit is all well and good, but there's opportunities to fail with fallout everywhere.

Yes. I've seen a couple of tables where the GM basically doesn't need to do any prep because all the characters are such trigger-happy weirdos that they just bumble around getting themselves into trouble. This can be hilarious and fun but isn't always the sort of game I personally want to play.

I have always interpreted disads a bit more loosely because typical templates (in DF, certainly) present characters with a hefty load of disads. It's never been my impression that we're not supposed to be able to spend a night in town without risking arrest over any of a dozen psychotic (or anti-social) behaviors.

Again, though, I think this is a matter of taste, really. Whatever works for each table is fine by me!

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Dalin

Yes. I've seen a couple of tables where the GM basically doesn't need to do any prep because all the characters are such trigger-happy weirdos that they just bumble around getting themselves into trouble. This can be hilarious and fun but isn't always the sort of game I personally want to play.

I have always interpreted disads a bit more loosely because typical templates (in DF, certainly) present characters with a hefty load of disads. It's never been my impression that we're not supposed to be able to spend a night in town without risking arrest over any of a dozen psychotic (or anti-social) behaviors.

Again, though, I think this is a matter of taste, really. Whatever works for each table is fine by me!

I think we agree on most everything except that I'd rather have the rigorous rules and then only use those Disadvantages if you really mean it. (Which among other things does significantly narrow and maybe skew the set of Disadvantages I think of as playable. I kind of think Slave Mentality is more viable for a PC than Greedy. Which certainly seems to put me out of step with GURPS authors...)

[AlexanderHowl]

I have never met a player who is willing to have their character hijacked by everyone capable of communicating. Not to be crass, but imagine that the character in question is attractive to humans and you can definitely see the issues involved with Slave Mentality pretty quickly. They would be unable to resist any attempt at Sex Appeal and would be unable to decide to leave the presence of their seducer unless they succeeded on an IQ-8 roll. By definition, that results in an unplayable character unless the games involves some very interesting situations.

Even in less questionable circumstances, a character with Slave Mentality can be ordered around by anyone. They could be ordered to play in traffic or to jump off a cliff and could only disobey by succeeding on a Will-6 roll. They could be ordered to commit felonies and would not be able to defy those orders unless they succeeded on a Will-6 roll.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I have never met a player who is willing to have their character hijacked by everyone capable of communicating. Not to be crass, but imagine that the character in question is attractive to humans and you can definitely see the issues involved with Slave Mentality pretty quickly. They would be unable to resist any attempt at Sex Appeal and would be unable to decide to leave the presence of their seducer unless they succeeded on an IQ-8 roll. By definition, that results in an unplayable character unless the games involves some very interesting situations.

Even in less questionable circumstances, a character with Slave Mentality can be ordered around by anyone. They could be ordered to play in traffic or to jump off a cliff and could only disobey by succeeding on a Will-6 roll. They could be ordered to commit felonies and would not be able to defy those orders unless they succeeded on a Will-6 roll.

Approximately true...and still more feasible to manage than having to save or do literally anything to grab some cash, as far as I'm concerned.

Greed means that if you see a way to steal the crown jewels and fail self-control, you have to do it. Or if somebody offers to pay you to kill someone. You don't get any limits unless you manage to set up a conflict of compulsions. (Though this doesn't make you a remotely safe pawn for anybody with a bag of silver, since ripping off a 'client' is also a valid way to resolve the compulsion to get the money.) In particular, you will want to bypass the rest of the party if they'd stop you because what you are doing is dumb and/or evil.

[dcarson]

I'm also happy if a PC is always trying to make self control rolls, recovering alcoholic or such as long as they they have that mean problems for them. Won't meet a contact at a bar, avoids social occasions with a open bar, won't drink with the touchy important person.

[AlexanderHowl]

Greed is supposed to be a major disadvantage. Greed (6-) is the same value as Hemophilia, which can literally kill you, so it is understandable that it would lead to bad things. Anyway, Greed is easily moderated by Honesty and Wealth, so a character with Wealth (Wealthy), Greed (12-), and Honesty (12-) is probably not going to do anything illegal unless there are tens of millions of dollars on the table, though they may do shady things for less money.

[Alden Loveshade]

There can also be a point modifier for the society. I would give less points for Lecherousness in a late 1960s California hippie commune than I would for a Puritan society in 17th century New England.

Most if not all standard GURPS templates give dwarves Greed; in a campaign set in a dwarven underground community, I might give it less points or, depending on the campaign, even no points. In a dwarven society where you're the only one without Greed, being "Greedless" might be looked at with suspicion.

[RyanW]

A lot of what has been said here is why I have strongly considered rewriting the disadvantage system to make "personality" sort of disadvantages far more dynamic. Such characterization aspects get you no CP at character creation (though genuine psychological handicaps would, as do physical and social disadvantages), but playing to them is how you get the "good roleplaying" rewards. And without strict bookkeeping on them, you can be a lot more free to make them fit your character or change them as your character grows.