Affliction: Social Advantages/Disadvantages

[PiperHolmes]

Hey all:

Reading the description of Affliction suggests it is not possible to add Social Advantages, but the description for Negated Advantages (in Powers) or Disadvantages (in Characters) doesn't specify what Advantage types can be negated or what Disadvantages can be afflicted.

Should I interpret the latter two references in the context of the Characters Advantage modifier description - i.e. strictly Physical and Mental, possibly Social can be added as a Cosmic/Adding Utility +50% modifier).

[Kelly Pedersen]

Affliction is a physical thing, generally, even if it often has its origins from a supernatural source. It affects the target. That's why adding social advantages is usually disallowed for it, and why I'd definitely extend that to disallowing negating social advantages, or adding social disadvantages - those traits aren't "internal" to the target the way physical and mental ones are, they're about the relationship of the target to the rest of society. You can spray a neurotoxin at someone that paralyzes and blinds them. It's more difficult to picture doing the same and draining their bank balance (Wealth) or how important people think they are (Status).

All that said, I can picture characters who can do that sort of thing (gods of society and so forth), so I agree that a +50% Cosmic enhancement to allow social traits to be added or negated seems fair.

[Mysterious Dark Lord v3.2]

But I can think of at least one case i fiction where an Affliction did just such a thing.

In Finian's Rainbow, wishing magic transformed a Southern Gentleman into a black man, which in that time and place took him from a high Social Rank to a Second-Class Citizen.

It may have been a physical transformation, but the effect still gave a Social Stigma and removed Social Status. Many times and places have Social Advantages and Disadvantages linked to physical states.

Which begs the question - when an Affliction-induced physical transformation would affect Social Status, should the cost be figured into the calculations for the Affliction?

[PiperHolmes]

I was thinking of a spirit type that screwed with uppity types by messing with their connections to society. The scenario I was thinking might best model this would be something like:

Affliction-1 {Malediction 100%, Negated Advantage: Wealth/Filthy Rich [+50%], Negated Advantage: Status 7 [+35%], Disadvantage: Status -2 [+10%], Disadvantage: Struggling [+10%], Variable [+5%], Selectivity [+10%], Extended Duration (1 week per) [+160%]Cosmic/Affects Social Advantages/Disadvantages [+50%] } = 53 points.

Basically the spirit cuts off the affected individual's access to their money and position for a period of some weeks. The money is still there; they just can't access it..problems being authenticated, and their appearance comes off shabbier than usual.

Hm, perhaps add Glamour to this as well? That reflects that the issue is more a matter of difficulty*, and needs to be tested whenever they try to leverage either wealth or social status?

*"Why won't you accept my PIN, Chase card???"

[PiperHolmes]

Originally Posted by Mysterious Dark Lord v3.2

an Affliction-induced physical transformation would affect Social Status, should the cost be figured into the calculations for the Affliction?

Combination of Affliction {Elastic Skin and Social Stigma}? Seems like a workable combination.

I tend to the philosophy that in GURPs anything that results in a quantifiable ingame effect (like a penalty to Reaction Rolls) has a cost element, so the Social Stigma would be required. Otherwise the character in question looks different, but doesn't suffer an impact for it.

Granted that may not be realworld realistic, but GURPs isn't completely simulationist. ;)

[Kelly Pedersen]

Originally Posted by Mysterious Dark Lord v3.2

But I can think of at least one case i fiction where an Affliction did just such a thing.

[snip]
It may have been a physical transformation, but the effect still gave a Social Stigma and removed Social Status. Many times and places have Social Advantages and Disadvantages linked to physical states.

Which begs the question - when an Affliction-induced physical transformation would affect Social Status, should the cost be figured into the calculations for the Affliction?

I would argue that in those sorts of cases, the Affliction is not giving the social disadvantage as such. It's usually afflicting an Alternate Form, which transforms you into something people assume has the appropriate social traits, and treat you as such. However, that assumption can be challenged. The person transformed into a black man in antebellum America can try to convince the people around them that this is not their real form. Even the character turned into a frog can have their friends try to convince society that they're really a human, and should be treated as such. If that's successful, the transformed character won't suffer from the Social Stigma or other social disadvantages at all - but the physical and mental ones of the actual transformation will still apply, which is what the person with Affliction has actually paid points to impose. Remember, too, that unless the character with the Affliction has also paid for an Unusual Background, that the existence of abilities like this will be known among the general populace, or at least those who matter to the campaign, so convincing someone that it's happened won't be as difficult as in the real world.

Directly afflicting a social trait, on the other hand, wouldn't be susceptible to convincing others that it didn't apply. If someone uses Affliction to hit someone with Social Stigma (Valuable Property), the target can talk all they want, but they'll never convince anyone that they aren't supposed to be treated that way, because they are. It's not a case of mistaken identity or anything, it's simply the way the world actually works (for as long as the affliction lasts, at least).

[Black Leviathan]

You're effectively zapping someone with a curse. There are a lot of social disadvantages that wouldn't make much sense in that context but what would or wouldn't be applicable is really dependent on the nature of how the user causes affliction. If I have a ray gun that turns you black in 1920's Alabama then it would give you an affliction of a minor feature linked with an affliction of a social stigma. (Limitation: Persons who are already black are immune). As weird as a social stigma ray seems as an ability that's effectively how it functions in the setting.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by PiperHolmes

I was thinking of a spirit type that screwed with uppity types by messing with their connections to society.

Sounds legit to me, and a perfect fit to the more subtle Fae.

I've always felt that Affliction being limited to Mental and Physical Ads and Disads was an oversight by the game devs.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Sounds legit to me, and a perfect fit to the more subtle Fae.

I've always felt that Affliction being limited to Mental and Physical Ads and Disads was an oversight by the game devs.

I think, on the other hand, it makes perfect sense.

Now, if you want to see someone acquiring a trait, consider what a court of law can do. A warrant is issued for you: You have an Enemy. You are convicted of a crime: You have a Social Stigma. You are placed under conservatorship: That's a lot like Social Stigma (Valuable Property) combined with Social Regard (Venerated). The list could be prolonged. Yet a court is an entirely mundane entity. It would be really strange to say that everyone who's sworn in as a judge acquires several different Affliction advantages.

[Andreas]

When an affliction causes mental changes in people other than the target (by for example making everyone else forget about the target's status), then it would make a lot of sense for everyone to be able to resist (or the one of them who are most likely to resist if it is all or nothing).

Otherwise you could do things like change the memories of a god by overcoming the resistance of an ant.