Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-24-2020, 02:50 PM   #1
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Reaction Rolls below Bad for objects and Social Advantages for them

B560 4-6 seems like the worst reaction we would give to many objects:
general "acts against them if he can profit"
potential combat "attack"
loyalty "no respect"
commercial/requests basically N/A (objects don't engage in them)

Having a Social Stigma gives a leveled penalty to reaction rolls though (eg the F106 Superior Horse -10 "valuable property" B156 is -2 to reaction rolls per B155) which makes it possible when you roll a 3 to reduce your result to 1 (Very Bad)

VB is "acts against them if it’s convenient" so apparently people just spontaneously decide to harass trained horses (really domestic animals in general per B263, but not wild ones) out of some kind of inherent malice, unless they're particularly charismatic animals.

I don't know why "Valuable" is specified (the "regards you as somebody’s property" does not specify value) but maybe this is some kind of inherent hatred of wealth that causes some kind of reflexive hostility?

It sounds like to cancel this out it would make sense to give most objects the "Pitiable" social advantage (B22). The +3 would cancel out the -2 penalty for being property preventing "acts against" results unless someone is Callous (they ignore that bonus)

This would even allow an unasthetic object to take Unattractive (Universal +25%) [-5] in combination with Valuable Property, because normal people still wouldn't act against the object (Callous ones would be SLIGHTLY more likely to)

An additional problem for objects is they would have lowest possible (-2) "serf" status (B29 "Negative Status usually gives a penalty."). Since the penalty is based on relative status it seems like the only situation where you don't get it is from other -2 serfs. The highest possible (-4) would be from those who are Status+2 and above.

This leads to an interesting situation where higher-status people are just assumed to spontaneously want to destroy property! Lower-status people would not, presumably since they hold property in higher regard.

If we don't want to have this "random chance of high status people vandalizing random cars" the potential penalties can be cancelled out by giving some objects "Social Regard" (B87) to supplement Pitiable.

B87 at first SEEMS to make that mutually exclusive to Stigma though: "membership in a given social group cannot result in both" but SE16 clarifies it:

It’s possible to have both Social Regard and Social Stigma, if they derive from different sources.
For example, old women in the Chinese Empire were Valuable Property for their sex, yet also Venerated for their age
SR4 is perfect to cancel out the -4 that serfs can cancel from, and SS2 is just like "why I have an effective SR2: why I can't possibly have an effective SR4 without being declassified as property"

The only exploit I can figure to stacking Regard with Stigma could be used to give situational bonus (positive reaction from your own minority) but that only applies to Minority Group not to Property (and "other cars" aren't exactly making Reaction Rolls to you, nor muffins to muffins)

For regard types:

a) "Feared" could apply to bombs and weapons, dangerous chemicals

b) "Respected" to soap, food, computers (some people overclock their computers, which puts them in danger, so Venerated isn't appropriate) and other tools (nails, shoes) like clothing/armor which you expect to wear out over time as an unavoidable result of helping.

c) "Venerated" seems like the most appropriate version of Social Regard for many valuable delicate objects around for decoration and not use (antiques, statues, etc)
What's cool about stacking regard+stigma is it "flavors" reaction rolls to property.

On further analysis taking "Subjugated" at -20 might be appropriate (-3 penalties total for being Second Class -1 plus VP-2) I think the extra 5 points is the "Potential Enemy" you get if you escape, so there wouldn't be an extra -1 (total -4) reaction as some might infer from -20?

If that's the case then you'd rely on the Pitiable +3 to cancel out that -3 for the non-callous, just as you would rely on SR4 to cancel out the -4 that Status-2 suffer from Status2+

Then the only way you're going to get a "Very Bad" or worse reaction is from Callous Status 2+ people.

Objects might also have the "Uneducated" stigma (lack of schooling is ALWAYS apparent for brooms and washcloths) plus "Ignorant -4" so more advantages might be needed to offset these extra -5 though...

Is it possible the +4 cap on Social Regard is also "per source" ? Like if you are "Venerated for Age +4" can you also be "Venerated for Magic +4" getting a +8 to reactions?

If that's the case then objects might have different venerations depending on multifaceted values. Like a computer could be "Respected For Being Entertainer +4" and "Respected for being a Mail Carrier +4" to get a +8?

Computers probably would not have Ignorant or Uneducated since they are good at Math.

This would allow a larger spectrum where people are more likely to damage less valuable objects that are ugly, and more willing to tolerate (or even protect and care for) ugly objects which are venerated for different abilities they have.

Instead of trying to destroy the object you would instead want to protect it so you can make it your ally/minion.

This would be situational to cultures of course. A stone-age society would not consider a sleeping computer "Respected" (they don't know it can entertain them or be used to communicate, and probably don't know it's better at them at doing math either) and be very prone to wanting to smash it.

OTOH maybe beauty is subjective and something as rare as a computer is Transcendant to a stone-age person (but "average" in modern day, we're used to it's beauty) so it just trades Social Regard for High Appearance when it falls back in time a few millenia?

Last edited by Plane; 10-24-2020 at 03:06 PM.
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2020, 03:03 PM   #2
Sam Baughn
 
Sam Baughn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and some other bits.
Default Re: Reaction Rolls below Bad for objects and Social Advantages for them

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane View Post
VB is "acts against them if it’s convenient" so apparently people just spontaneously decide to harass trained horses (really domestic animals in general per B263, but not wild ones) out of some kind of inherent malice, unless they're particularly charismatic animals.
If you interpret 'acts against them' to include stealing them or reporting them to the authorities, that seems quite reasonable. Plenty of people would do that to an unattended valuable animal.
Sam Baughn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2020, 03:14 PM   #3
Plane
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Default Re: Reaction Rolls below Bad for objects and Social Advantages for them

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Baughn View Post
If you interpret 'acts against them' to include stealing them or reporting them to the authorities, that seems quite reasonable. Plenty of people would do that to an unattended valuable animal.
I think most people would report unattended animals either out of self-preservation ("worried this dog will bite me") or positive reactions ("don't want it to get hit by a car!" .. "I want it to be safe at home with it's loving owners")

Malicious reporting would be "haha, I want the dog catcher to euthanize it" or "haha, it seems to be enjoying freedom in the outdoors, I want it locked up with humans who abuse it!"

Whether or not stealing/apprehending an animal yourself (more involved than reporting them to a dog-catcher, who then does the kidnapping-by-proxy) is something malicious ("Very Bad" or worse: trying to do them harm) would depend on what you're trying to do afterward, I guess?

Even if the motive is "I want to kill this horse I found wandering down the street" need not be a "destructive" motivation because you could gain something from it: food by eating it or money by selling the meat or FP by sacrificing it in a magic ritual.

Bad (pure motivation of harm) would be something like apprehending it with the intent to kill it purely for the sake of it. It's like turning a normal person Bloodthirsty.
(someone Bloodthirsty OTOH could kidnap and kill horses on "selfish" reactions, because fulfilling your compulsion is presumably a neutral/selfish response)
Other non-kill motives could also exist for abducting the horse (or broom) like just putting it to work for you blowing fields or sweeping decks, but those are just selfish motivations.

I think mental disadvantages explain stuff like why some people go around smashing mailboxes with baseball bats: it's not that they get "Very Bad" reaction rolls, but that "self-interest" reaction rolls are all that would be required to fulfill a compulsion (like "compelled to hit things to express anger" or "compelled to hit things to look dangerous in front of my peers")
Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
callous, pitiable, serf, social regard, social stigma

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.