Racial Templates, Educational and Cultural Templates, and Mental Traits

[vicky_molokh]

Greetings, all!

I'm sure we're all familiar with Racial Templates (or more sometimes Cultural Templates) involving mental traits. An example of such traits would be Code of Honour (Halfling), Sense of Duty (Nature) etc., and I'm pretty sure that many will agree that these traits are more properly seen as part of a Cultural Template, not a Racial Template (even if GURPS doesn't use the term). Likewise, an example of an Educational Template would be the Mode Training and the Qun.

Now I'm wondering about the 'proper' way to use such templates and including mental traits on them - in such a way as to avoid any non-obvious plot holes associated with them.

Here are some of my thoughts; I really welcome additions:

Advanced discoveries in Teaching, Propaganda, Sociology, Memetics and possibly even Brainwashing generally make the ubiquitous existence of such templates fit into a setting better. Otherwise, these templates need to be some sort of emergent memes that are highly virulent among certain populations, and totally not virulent among others; they also should be resistant to change, or should undergo a limited number of memetic mutations and then become more-or-less constant.

If these templates are relatively easy to custom-tailor through Sociology or similar skills, then it makes brainwashing dictatorships with zero resistance from population too easy to engineer. It is probably more playable when these templates are emergent and resistant to editing.

Such templates are very useful to creating very alien societies (e.g. the Qunari, the Turians, perhaps even the future humans of 2150 AD, The Girl From Tomorrow etc.).

However, if even emergent templates are highly virulent and they involve some sort of SoD or CoH towards the society they are common in, then it becomes very easy for societies based on them to recruit enemy spies sent into their ranks to their side. However, even if they are not virulent (e.g. a person must willingly and without reservations accept such a template for it to truly apply), BUT it is possible to find out a person's template through use of Empathy and/or Psychology, it will still have an anti-spy effect, albeit a reduced one.

Comments? Opinions? Additions?
Thanks in advance!

[roguebfl]

Most Racial mental triats to me represents how the race thinks meaning it will be rare for those that don't have it, but has next to no impact on how it trasmits to others, that will depend on the person hanging out with the race

[downer]

I believe you are overanalyzing this. So there is a trait in the template. This doesn't have to mean every last single member of the culture has the trait. That suggests an un-GURPS-like stiffness of the concept.

Still, if it's in a trait, then of course, it's something that members of a culture are taught. Like the Vulcans in Star Trek, who teach their kids mental disciplines from toddler age onwards. So there certainly is a major amount of education involved. And it doesn't need anything we haven't developed yet. Societies have at all times been capable of reproducing their specific mindset, even though it was modified a little with every generation. But again, I wouldn't overstate the template concept, templates will change over time, and young people may have slightly different templates, because old ideas are going out of fashion. It's a tool, not a shackle.

I really don't think that the whole meme idea holds water. "Virulence" is not a term to describe ideas or thought patterns, period. That said, there might be trends that go so far as to affect templates. These would have to be rooted in some universal social or economic factor. To give an example from experience: ask anyone who lived through the aftermath of WWII in Germany to throw away edible food - they can't, due to the lasting impression that scarcity left on them. Again, such a trend would affect only those generations who went through those experiences, their descendants would quickly forget what it was like.

In fact, the very idea that societies with a SoD or CoH have an easier time recruiting should be enough to lay such considerations to rest.

Finding out about templates then, even if it is possible, will tell you next to nothing about which culture someone is from. He might just be one of those Hippie freaks who know nothing of Honor and Duty. Similarly, someone hailing from one culture might well still hold his old template, or parts of it, even though he swore allegiance to another culture. Thus, a spy, if well chosen, would not register as different, because he is one of them. That's why agencies like the KGB were so eager to get foreigners into their service, because they would be more convincing. Certainly, language and appearance may matter, but it's also a matter of behaviour.

[starslayer]

I agree with the others posting so far. Humans don't have bestial as a disadvantage, but a human raised by wolves might.

Similarly Elves have 'sense of duty- nature'; a GIVEN elf might have the ADVANTAGE of NOT having sense of duty nature; it would seem weird to the other elves, but could be a personal choice settled on from a young age , some complication from a lack of empathy, or a result of having a 'broad' education that involved being out of the elf-lands.

[PK]

What they said. A mental disadvantage appearing on a racial template is indicative of a baseline shift in the typical personality of a member of that race, as compared to humanity.

For example, DF elves have Sense of Duty (Nature). This doesn't mean it's a hardwired trait, merely that it's so socially prominent that an elf who lacks this disadvantage is unusual for his race. This may be a cultural issue as much as a racial one, sure, but that's sort of beside the point -- if 95% of a race has a given trait, then it should appear on the racial template no matter how they acquired it!

(And do note that some mental disadvantages can be hardwired as well. The Hivers from Traveller come to mind, with their Curiosity and Cowardice, both of which represent inherent aspects of their neurology.)

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

What they said. A mental disadvantage appearing on a racial template is indicative of a baseline shift in the typical personality of a member of that race, as compared to humanity.

For example, DF elves have Sense of Duty (Nature). This doesn't mean it's a hardwired trait, merely that it's so socially prominent that an elf who lacks this disadvantage is unusual for his race. This may be a cultural issue as much as a racial one, sure, but that's sort of beside the point -- if 95% of a race has a given trait, then it should appear on the racial template no matter how they acquired it!

(And do note that some mental disadvantages can be hardwired as well. The Hivers from Traveller come to mind, with their Curiosity and Cowardice, both of which represent inherent aspects of their neurology.)

Oh, absolutely. But even a 95% baseline shift is very significant effect on life. Even more so if the percentage is higher, e.g. 99.95%. For instance a cultural CoH that involves donations of 20% of one's income, even if only 90% of the culture really have the CoH, might result in there not being an official law requiring people to pay taxes (most citizens do, but nothing is done if you don't).

OTOH, if a CoH dictates not entering a dwelling uninvited, this is unlikely to reduce the use of locks even if 99.99% citizens truly have the CoH (because the subset of those who don't and the subset of burglars are likely to intersect a lot).

That being said, it is really interesting under what circumstances (and at what percentages) individual traits (CoHs, SoDs, skills etc.) of the citizens become template traits of a given culture (or education). One such example is of course literacy.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by Rev. Pee Kitty

What they said. A mental disadvantage appearing on a racial template is indicative of a baseline shift in the typical personality of a member of that race, as compared to humanity.

For example, DF elves have Sense of Duty (Nature). This doesn't mean it's a hardwired trait, merely that it's so socially prominent that an elf who lacks this disadvantage is unusual for his race. This may be a cultural issue as much as a racial one, sure, but that's sort of beside the point -- if 95% of a race has a given trait, then it should appear on the racial template no matter how they acquired it!

There are two issues here:

One is the question of how much real freedom players have to choose to create non-human characters who deviate from the mental/cultural norm as defined by the template. Do players have the right to choose to say that "my Elf character does not have SoD (Nature)"? Or doesthe GM have the duty to reject such desires?

Secondly, it would generally be preferable to have all species templates split up into a biological template and a cultural template, to make it easier to simulate such things as a Human raised by Elf, or an Orc raised by non-Orcs. The current species templates consistently fail at making it clear what is biology and what is culture.

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

One is the question of how much real freedom players have to choose to create non-human characters who deviate from the mental/cultural norm as defined by the template.

The way I deal with this is to make dropped template advantages count against their disadvantage limit.

[nerdvana]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

The way I deal with this is to make dropped template advantages count against their disadvantage limit.

But shouldn't that only count if the advantage is truly racial rather than cultural?

[downer]

I'm all in favor of splitting racial and cultural templates. The former should represent physical built-ins, the latter education and preferences. A race whose hormones drive them into a battle-frenzy would have Berserk as racial trait, while a culture that trains its members to fight like madmen would have it as a cultural one. You could drop the latter (the training didn't take, or you refused to participate), but not the former, unless your character had surgery to remove the hormone glands (which might involve giving up other traits, like Combat Reflexes). For existing templates that don't split this, the GM should simply rule which traits are nature and which are nurture.

As for removing cultural traits, I would allow that, but I would also require the player to take a corresponding Social Stigma (Uneducated), Unusual Background, lower Status or Bad Reputation. After all, most societies react with distrust to those who violate their norms.

As for the social consequences Molokh mentioned: of course, if a majority of a culture have a certain trait, that culture is going to reflect that in many ways. If almost everyone is honor-bound to follow the law, there would be few courts and no policemen, because other citizens would immediately sieze any lawbreaker and bring him to court. Such things should be well considered before making something a template trait.