Wanted: GURPS Power-Downs 1

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

What should be in it, besides the things I've suggested?

I'm not sure this is the best pitch. What would work better, and likely sell better, is a product that handles a subset of power-downs. GURPS Personality is for what you're looking: modeling NPC personality types using GURPS rules, which are mostly going to be disadvantages and quirks. There could be another one for physical disabilities; natural bodies, if you will, to handle a more broad spirit of both human physical flaws and the ins and outs of not being human. Social Engineering more or less has already covered the social traits, obviously; the supernatural might need multiple pitches, or best be part of a broader supplement, much as there disadvantages in the psionics supplements.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by smurf

When you hit 80% that's the lowest you can go.

True, but that shouldn't apply to disadvantages I would think; the -80% limit is to avoid the situation where someone gets a highly advantageous trait at an insane discount.

Plus my players and I don't really care about points so much, so many times, although I do enforce the -80% cap on advantages, in the effort to build the trait as it was envisioned, its true uncapped limitation value might get much higher than that (although in some circumstances I just say "it's a perk now").

[JCurwen3]

I would want to see builds for some of our most common physical and mental illnesses. RPK I think did a good build of Diabetes, for instance. In my perfect world, every mental disorder listing in the DSM-IV would get GURPS stats, as well as every physical condition (is there a "DSM" for physical maladies?). I'll keep dreaming though... maybe I'll take a stab sometime (only to finish several years later, at that point so well-educated on my medical terms and symptoms that I could pass as an M.D.).

I'd also want an expanded treatment of Terminally Ill. The disadvantage is a necessary ingredient of real terminal illnesses, but other than asymptomatic brain aneurisms that sit as ticking time bombs, it's not really "enough". We need detailed rules on progressive symptoms. After all, some forms of cancer get horrifically debilitating before they kill you, such that you're barely better physically than a brain in a jar, and others, like some heart disease, might only involve losing points of HT and maybe ST, or gaining levels of Unfit (losing levels of Fit) and such.

Speaking of cancer, it doesn't come up in the books, but it should be discussed in the context of radiation damage. Certainly, since rads are a real life unit of radiation, one could do the research and calculate risks and progressions, but it'd be nice to have it all laid out in GURPS terms. Maybe I'll work on something like that.

I second someone's mention of expanding and clarifying rules on applying limitations and enhancements to disadvantages. None come to mind at the moment, but I know I've also thought of Cosmic limitations (cosmically badly limiting things).

Maybe add some official rules on interactions between disadvantages and their mirror advantages (for instance, what officially happens when you Afflict someone with Decreased Time Rate when they have one or more levels of ATR, or vice versa - maybe explain what levels of DTR would mean officially since many people debate about that).

And maybe some meaningful quirks (maybe some of them count as full-blown disadvantages) to counterbalance perks from Power-Ups 2. For instance, there are perks for Rules Exemption, Extra Option, Rule of 17 - what about their opposites, like having a rule apply to you that normally doesn't, not having a beneficial campaign option apply to you, or having worse than the normal Rule of 16. Stuff like that.

Codifying what the various Incapacitating and Irritant conditions would be officially as disadvantages would be worth as part of a disadvantageous trait-building toolset would be nice. We have this for Moderate, Severe, and Terrible Pain, sort of detailed as disadvantages in Chronic Pain, and we can use that as a baseline for extrapolating reasonable point costs for things like a Chronic Nausea condition, but it'd be nice to have these fleshed out properly and officially as disadvantages, even if they'd be rarely used as is or in and of themselves.

Probably there's even more that could go into a book (or series of books)...

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Not another shrubbery

Can you give an example of what you mean here? "Vulnerable to temptations" sounds like Compulsive Behavior, but since you reference that disad immediately before, I presume you have something else in mind.

It is like Compulsive Behaviour in many ways, with the important difference being that there's no inner compulsion. Instead the character is vulnerable to temptations, and various other external triggers, so he rolls the equivalent of a Self-Control Roll when encountered.

A good example is Fond of Drink. This Flaw (psych. disad) never compels the character to actively seek alcohol (for that, he must have some sort of Addiction to alcohol), but if he's around other people who consume alcohol, and he has the opportunity to participate, he must make a SCR to say no thanks, of course modified by valid in-character reasons (like if he knows he has to fight an important duel the next morning).

So it's a quite minor tweak, in one way, but in another way it's different enough that it would enrich the RAW if it was included as a formal option, rather than something each payer has to first invent for himself and then talk the GM into accepting (possibly as a -50% Limitation on the basic Compulsive Behaviour cost - "encountered trigger" is weaker than "inner compulsion").

[Peter Knutsen]

More versions of Wounded. It's a good mechanic to represent war veterans and the like, but I think adding just a few more versions of different ways in which an old Wound can inconvenience a character would be nice.

Players can come up with all sorts of new disads of their own, or major variants of existing disads, and submit them to the GM for approval, and may or may not get that approval, but having more official material to choice from in general would just be nice. More ways of saying, during character, "my character has condition X, which obviously sucks" and receive up-front compensation for it.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

More versions of Wounded. It's a good mechanic to represent war veterans and the like, but I think adding just a few more versions of different ways in which an old Wound can inconvenience a character would be nice.

Come to think of it, are there any ways that someone can get Wounded in play? Obviously they can get One Arm and such, but I don't recall Wounded, and clearly sometimes wounds from battle will be persistent as per the Wounded disadvantage. I may very well be forgetting stuff though.

Come to think of it, I'd want more on a few more things besides what I mentioned in my previous post.

I'd want a coherent, consistent rule set that would allow injury to (or spending of) all stats and levelled traits, both of the temporary and permanent kind (Leech, for instance allows temporary damage to attributes that recover at the same rate as FP regen). That includes modifiers on Weakness and and Dependency and Draining and others that cause temporary losses in attributes (besides FP or HP, like ST or HT or even Basic Speed or losing levels of ATR). And how to build abilities with Costs ST or Costs [Whatever].

And I'd like an expansion on aging. Specifically, an advantage / disadvantage treatment of it. Why does Dependency with Aging age you even if you have Unaging? Why not just ban the combo? Clearly one with Unaging can be Afflicted with Dependency with Aging, it's a dirty way to age someone who should never age, and doing this seems to be explicitly allowed by RAW. How do you reverse the aging of others - some kind of modified Healing, or an Affliction of Unaging with Age Control and Extended Duration, Permanent applied directly to the Age Control enhancement? And what about aging others (aside from Leech)? Or the ability to die from aging attacks and damage (not immune to aging), but you Regenerate aging damage over time back to your real age or some base permanent biological age (semi-Unaging)?

[lexington]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

Why does Dependency with Aging age you even if you have Unaging? Why not just ban the combo?

So that you can have a creature that never ages so long as it has access to a certain substance.

[JCurwen3]

Originally Posted by lexington

So that you can have a creature that never ages so long as it has access to a certain substance.

I rather gathered that, but it still stands that it's an unambiguous way an Unaging character can age to death (and rather quickly at that), and there's no prohibition against using it as an Affliction against an Unaging victim, which I'm not entirely sure was the intent. Things like this need to be clarified. I mean, should an Unaging character be immune to the Aging aspect of Dependency if it hits them in Affliction form, or do they need an Unaging that's enhanced to avoid this, or does the attacker need something like an enhancement (maybe a Cosmic, +50% on their Affliction). I'd rule the attacker needs that Cosmic for his Affliction, but by RAW one could argue very easily that it shouldn't be necessary. I'd rather have things like this cleared up. As it is some magical spells can't be readily built as Powers because the Powers system doesn't readily make it clear how to build age-manipulating abilities. Other than Leech which mixes up self-rejuvenation with other-aging in one very costly (much moreso than a Dependeny-with-Aging Affliction) inseparable package or Unaging with Age Control which ostensibly only can (slowly) rejuvenate oneself.

I mean, Unaging and Extended Lifespan costs are often justified based on preventing accelerated aging due to magic or super-science, but the gap there is in the Powers system.

[smurf]

I did a simple power down of Combat Reflexes.

I thought this was overpowered for a what I wanted and thought for -20% we can have Quick Reflexes.

Quick Reflexes (12pts) is identical to Combat Reflexes with the exception of all the rules relating to suprise and mental stun. Quick Reflexes allows +1 to active defence and the bonus for fast draw and any other bonus for being quick. Sorry I do not have the rule book in front of me to be exact.

You cannot have Quick Reflexes and Combat Reflexes but one or the other.

[Mgellis]

Originally Posted by JCurwen3

I'd also want an expanded treatment of Terminally Ill.

I thought about this and I think you could use a version of the Heir rules...

Say someone has terminally ill (two years). They could purchase -2 ST and -2 FP at 50% [-13] to indicate that, at one year, they gain those disadvantages. And, for 25% of the cost, they could add another -3 to ST and -3 to FP [-8], to indicate that at eighteen months they lose even more.

So...you end up with someone who is terminally ill and all stats at 10. After one year, they are down to ST 8 DX 10 IQ 10 HT 10 FP 8 and after eighteen months they are down to ST 5 DX 10 IQ 10 HT 10 FP 5.

Obviously, it does not have to be ST. It could be anything. You could add, say, Chronic Pain, at -50% to indicate that this is when the condition kicks in.

You could even have a condition kick in eventually without terminally ill...I'd say the normal timeline is just two years.

Of course, it's a game, so some abstractions are impossible to avoid, but this seems a good way to model a progressive illness that fits with the existing rules.