Ed wrote: > And organleggers could remove non-cybered limbs and organs as well. If > 'crippled' or 'blind' with 'correctable' is allowed in those settings it > should be allowed for everyone, cybered or not.
Ed wrote: > And organleggers could remove non-cybered limbs and organs as well. If > 'crippled' or 'blind' with 'correctable' is allowed in those settings it > should be allowed for everyone, cybered or not. Ed makes a very good observation here, which got me thinking about what exactly a mitigator is... I have worn a hearing aid all of my scholastic life (ie since kindergarten on up). I needed that hearing aid in order for my hearing to be any where NEAR normal. I've accidentally worn it into a shower or two, been accidentally plunged into a pool a few times, and I have to take it out at night when I sleep. When the batteries die out, I am without a functional "aid". When I sweat too heavily - the hearing aid malfunctions, requiring me to take it off under those circumstances. In short, I need it to be able to function in the environment I operate in. Same is true with glasses. There are circumstances where the loss of the "aid" results in the person being thrown back to a lesser level of functionality. The key here is that mitigators are essentially add on products/equipment that augument the original set of sensory organs such that the loss of such equipment throws the person back to their "secondary" or "original" level of operation. Thus - in cyberpunk terms, a mitigator is ALWAYS equipment whose loss results in falling back to a secondary capacity rather than a total loss of capacity. In the case of cybernetic eyes where the original eyes have been removed - loss of the cyber eyes results in total failure of the optical sensory input. Loss of say, night vision goggles does not result in total loss of vision, just that the vision has now been made to rely upon the "fallback" operation level that is standard without the "aid". If that is to be the general guiding principle in how "mitigators" work, then it would make sense that the mitigator is something that is worn to bring a sensory organ up to "normalacy" rather than anything else. For cyber eyes then, if it is the ONLY system of operation, it should never be given "mitigator" status. Its removal results in no fall back sensory system of comparable value. Now cybernetic lenses (ie, contact lenses) would qualify as a form of "mitigator" because the loss of the lens would force its wearer back to a secondary comparable sensory system. It would appear then, that things which modify cybernetic sensory enhancers are those things which make the "chrome" less reliable than their "meat" counterparts. If using batteries is a problem, maintenance is a problem, reliability is a problem, etc - then that is what should modify the value of cybernetic replacement parts. Thing is? What happens when the legs are not functional? The person gains the disadvantage of lame until the problem is rectified. Organic eyes (absent disease or genetic defects) do not stop working. So does an eye that can break down qualify as a primary system, or a system which mitigates a condition that its organic counterpart would never have had problems with in the first place? It is precisely that "grey area" in my opinion, that results in a situation where reasonable people can disagree upon without the other being able to say "You're being unreasonable". To that end, I would suggest the following test: IF, and only if, the cybernetic device is as reliable as its meat counterpart, it does not qualify as a mitigator against a condition. If its loss of function comes about as a reliability issue, a lack of maintenace issue, or a loss of power issue - it qualifies as a form of mitigator against the condition that comes about at the moment of failure. Yes, a Biological eye can cease to function if damage is applied to it. Yes, it can be removed by an organ runner, but - and this is the crucial part of the argument, the eye itself functions reliably at a natural level of use. A cybernetic eye, IF it functions reliably at a "natural level" as well, might be considered the equal of the eye (ie, zero point quirk) or, it might even be considered a minor advantage (socket: may be replaced with a better eye at a moment's notice). The problem with "equipment generated advantages" is that if you pay the monetary cost associated with it - you get a "point value increase" for the character. If you remove that equipment or lose it, you lose the point value increase. The increase and decrease of character value doesn't follow the same progressions as they do for lower tech level games that do not have the option of cybernetics (ie, loss of limb is a LOSS unless magic is involved!). Ah well, thinking still... ;) _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
