Odious Personal Habits

[Bruno]

The thing with OPH: Eats Humans/Humanoids/whatever is that you eat them like you eat chickens, trout, or cows - you "dehumanize" other humans and reduce them to the level of animals in a pretty profound way. Cultures where cannibalism is practiced do it either in drastic survival contexts (the way Western European cultures practice cannibalism today) and in ritual contexts where eating the body is part of a ritual that is reserved for humans - it's specifically reinforcing that you're eating human.

Eating the heart of your enemy to get their power is pretty respectful, in context. The Aztecs seem to have done this sort of cannibalism on special occasions; even though the whole body was (in some ceremonies) butchered, it wasn't treated like animal meat. Excess wasn't preserved, no interesting or complicated ways of cooking to improve flavor, it was eaten on-the-spot as part of the ritual.

The Papua New Guinea tribes that used to eat the body as a funeral practice also did it out of respect for the dead, in a ritual. They didn't say "I'm going to go kill some guy from the tribe over there for dinner" even though with the high level of inter-tribal warfare that wouldn't have been considered murder.

The -15 OPH value is severely devaluing other human beings. Other people loathe it because it implies you think of yourself above everyone else on the food chain, and humans hate and fear anything higher than themselves on the food chain.

The only way I can see cannibalism for simple nutrition being socially acceptable is if it's performed only on a group who has been already "dehumanized" in the public eye - a group with a terrible Social Stigma, in other words.

Eating "Monsters" might be totally acceptable, even if they talk, make tools, wear clothes, build homes, farm plants, and herd animals.


Whether OPH: Eats Humans should be -15 or -20 is, I think, a rather moot point in this edition as it's been repeatedly published as -15. Saying that it's only appeared in supplements and therefore isn't valid is a particularly weird argument.

[jason taylor]

Eating humans identifies you as an Enemy. And one of the chief protections of humanity has always been vindictiveness. If a tiger wants a five-year-old outside the hamlet he is going to have him. But he is also going to have about twenty fellows with some variation of Nasty Sharp Things along his tracks. After this goes on for a few thousand years, tigers with a propensity for five-year-olds become rare.

A cannibal draws the same thing because he has marked himself as a serial-killer at worst and is thus going to be hunted for the same reasons that the small settlement hunts the tiger.

If the cannibal is only a scavenger, it is more complicated and goes deep into the esoteric thoughts of Creatures that Look Like Apes But Visit the Moon.

[Not]

Originally Posted by Bruno

The thing with OPH: Eats Humans/Humanoids/whatever is that you eat them like you eat chickens, trout, or cows - you "dehumanize" other humans and reduce them to the level of animals in a pretty profound way. Cultures where cannibalism is practiced do it either in drastic survival contexts (the way Western European cultures practice cannibalism today) and in ritual contexts where eating the body is part of a ritual that is reserved for humans - it's specifically reinforcing that you're eating human.

Eating the heart of your enemy to get their power is pretty respectful, in context. The Aztecs seem to have done this sort of cannibalism on special occasions; even though the whole body was (in some ceremonies) butchered, it wasn't treated like animal meat. Excess wasn't preserved, no interesting or complicated ways of cooking to improve flavor, it was eaten on-the-spot as part of the ritual.

The Papua New Guinea tribes that used to eat the body as a funeral practice also did it out of respect for the dead, in a ritual. They didn't say "I'm going to go kill some guy from the tribe over there for dinner" even though with the high level of inter-tribal warfare that wouldn't have been considered murder.

The -15 OPH value is severely devaluing other human beings. Other people loathe it because it implies you think of yourself above everyone else on the food chain, and humans hate and fear anything higher than themselves on the food chain.

The only way I can see cannibalism for simple nutrition being socially acceptable is if it's performed only on a group who has been already "dehumanized" in the public eye - a group with a terrible Social Stigma, in other words.

Eating "Monsters" might be totally acceptable, even if they talk, make tools, wear clothes, build homes, farm plants, and herd animals.


Whether OPH: Eats Humans should be -15 or -20 is, I think, a rather moot point in this edition as it's been repeatedly published as -15. Saying that it's only appeared in supplements and therefore isn't valid is a particularly weird argument.

Ever read Stranger in a Strange Land?

[Otaku]

Originally Posted by Bruno

The thing with OPH: Eats Humans/Humanoids/whatever is that you eat them like you eat chickens, trout, or cows - you "dehumanize" other humans and reduce them to the level of animals in a pretty profound way.

Do you? I guess I was trying to make the point that I don't know. This isn't from a supplement I owned and has just sort of been "tossed out there" in this discussion as the definitive -15 Odious Personal Habit that is apparently only good for a -3 reaction. Appearance: Ugly gives a -2 while Hideous gives a -4, just to give you an idea.

Originally Posted by Bruno

Whether OPH: Eats Humans should be -15 or -20 is, I think, a rather moot point in this edition as it's been repeatedly published as -15. Saying that it's only appeared in supplements and therefore isn't valid is a particularly weird argument.

Apparently I failed to communicate, because that was not what I was trying to say.

Did anyone actually quote and cite it? Second post of the thread has Simply Nathan talking about it he didn't go into detail. With so little to go on, when that has been held up as the standard for -15 point Odious Personal Habits, I merely put forth why that might be an unwise standard.

Pointing out that it wasn't in the Basic Set was to emphasize that it isn't something everyone knows and so it would be good for people referring to it to more formally reference it. With nothing to go on but what is in this thread, I don't know if I have had the chance to properly understand the Advantage because I haven't seen the RAW. I don't know if that is supposed to be the minimum threshold for a -15 OPH or if it is merely an example, and as the core rules don't have anything beyond that, something "worse" would still only be recognized as a -3 to reactions, -15 point Odious Personal Habit.

GURPS is not a perfect system; it is the best one I've used but it is definitely not perfect. Something that survived from Man-To-Man to the original Basic Set to 2e and then 3e may have remained because someone got it right the first time or because no one could think of anything better or because it simply wasn't "wrong enough" for anyone to notice, especially someone that had been using it since the 80s. I know some of the stuff I'd seen in older 2e books was similar or the same in 3e books but underwent significant changes for 4e; including things seen in multiple releases. Just being a carryover from an older edition and/or being from a supplement does not make something wrong, but neither do those things guarantee it can't be wrong when you've already got a reason to look at it.

And we do: getting back to p. B22, an OPH worth a -1 reaction (and -5 Character Points) has "body odor, constant scratching, or tuneless humming" as examples. A -2 reaction (worth -10) character points has "constant bad puns or spitting on the floor" as an example. If I wanted a logical progression to that, I'd up it to something like "Defecates on floor." which I might equate to someone willing to eat human flesh when it doesn't involve murder... but someone that thinks it is okay to slaughter other humans as a food source as a part of something other than "eat or die" circumstances?

That isn't getting just a -3 reaction penalty. That's spending potentially the rest of your life locked up, either in an asylum or a prison or being put down as a monster. Probably a -5 or a -6. Now because OPH caps out at "-3 reaction for -15 points" it still might qualify, but again I'm trying to point out it may not be the minimum threshold for these things.

If I'm still not making sense, I'm sorry but I really am making an effort; I had five minutes to answer this and I think I took 50. >.>

[Bruno]

I'm aware of the -4 for Hideous; I think that's more a statement on what they mean by Hideous (and possibly on human's tendency to make snap judgements on appearance).

As for 4e pedigree, I think the first appearance in 4e is in Banestorm, where Ogres manage to collect all of Hideous [-16]; Odious Racial Habit (Eats other sapients) [-15]; Social Stigma (Barbarian) [-10]; Social Stigma (Uneducated) [-5].
Which is a pretty spectacular list.

If that's not the first, then Infinite Worlds might be the first one with Odious Racial Habit (Eats other sapient beings).

It also appears in Fantasy as Odious Racial Habit (Eating Humans) with no point value (on monsters), Odious Racial Habit (Eats sapient beings) [-15], and Odious Personal Habit (Kills and eats human beings) [-15]. There's also Odious Personal Habit (Steals the spirits of newborn infants) [-15], Odious Racial Habit (Coarse and Brutal) [-10], and a bunch of -5 ones.

I'm pretty sure it's in Space, but I can't find my copy.

Horror gives us Odious Racial Habit (Eats human carrion) [-15] and Odious Racial Habit (Necrophilia) [-15] from the Ghoul template. It offers Odious Racial Habit (Eats sapient beings) [-15] as an alternate for "eats human carrion" for fantasy versions. The Wolf-Man has Odious Racial Habit (eats people) [-15], and the Man-Eating animals have it as a personal foible. The Psycho-killer has Odious Personal Habit (Voyeuristic teenager-slaughterer) [-15]. Odious Personal Habit (Kills and eats human beings) [-15] shows up again on the Wendigo (again, it was on the Wendigo in Fantasy too). Odious Personal Habit (Profane, lewd behavior) [-10] is another example of a -10. There's a bunch more but I'm getting tired of looking and my dinner is sort of cold.

Basically, OPH/ORH seems to canonically top out at -15 for a -3 reaction penalty regardless of HOW heinous your habit is.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Not

Ever read Stranger in a Strange Land?

I did a six page paper on that in high school, actually. Comparing and contrasting with Neuromancer.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Whether OPH: Eats Humans should be -15 or -20 is, I think, a rather moot point in this edition as it's been repeatedly published as -15. Saying that it's only appeared in supplements and therefore isn't valid is a particularly weird argument.

As an OPH it's worth -15. There would be other disads attached to it if it's also illegal or associated with a Monster Stigma.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Bruno

The thing with OPH: Eats Humans/Humanoids/whatever is that you eat them like you eat chickens, trout, or cows - you "dehumanize" other humans and reduce them to the level of animals in a pretty profound way. Cultures where cannibalism is practiced do it either in drastic survival contexts (the way Western European cultures practice cannibalism today) and in ritual contexts where eating the body is part of a ritual that is reserved for humans - it's specifically reinforcing that you're eating human.
...

I don't get that at all. I would have zero problem eating human meat. Unless it's specifically stated, which it is not, I cannot accept murderous "dehumanization" as a R.A.W. requirement for OPH: eats people.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

I don't get that at all. I would have zero problem eating human meat. Unless it's specifically stated, which it is not, I cannot accept murderous "dehumanization" as a R.A.W. requirement for OPH: eats people.

It has nothing to do with your personal quirks. OPHs are how other people usually perceive your habits.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

It has nothing to do with your personal quirks. OPHs are how other people usually perceive your habits.

That's not what Bruno wrote. I also doubt that's what she meant, but she's free to correct me.