Flat Black: Status in the Imperial Service

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

I'm not sure there's enough raw power associated with high status in this setting to make it Status.

Well, it's not the kind of feudal Status that comes with Rank - but outside that, how much raw power does Status need? For an example, members of a national legislature, like US Senators or UK Members of Parliament, seem to have Status, but they have very little power as individuals. Their ability to tell officials to do things and require obedience is very limited.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by johndallman

Well, it's not the kind of feudal Status that comes with Rank

Personally, I'm not very convinced by the way some new elaborations of Rank have appeared to stray into the territory already occupied by Status.

but outside that, how much raw power does Status need? For an example, members of a national legislature, like US Senators or UK Members of Parliament, seem to have Status, but they have very little power as individuals. Their ability to tell officials to do things and require obedience is very limited.

And yet, they do get their way. A senator who calls an EPA investigator with some reasonable questions gets a prompt call back with reasonable answers. Joe Blow gets ignored.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

And yet, they do get their way. A senator who calls an EPA investigator with some reasonable questions gets a prompt call back with reasonable answers. Joe Blow gets ignored.

Indeed. The senator has little immediate and personal power, but has a form of indirect power: he can likely affect the EPA's budget for next year if they upset him. He can politically campaign against them, and will be more effective than Jo Blow in doing so because he has political significance. Those kinds of indirect power seem like a hallmark of Status to me.

For Flat Black, could high status individuals do similar (not identical - the details are properties of a particular political system) things? My impression of it is that they could. They might be abusing their status - but so might the senator be if he took against the EPA without justification.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

So, by inference, those ARE the features you mean to have apply to society in the setting?

No, they're just things to bear in mind when choosing between Social Regard and Status as a way of representing a world feature. They can easily be considered things that might need to be changed by house rules; they might even be reasons that you might prefer to handle status without using the rules.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by johndallman

Indeed. The senator has little immediate and personal power, but has a form of indirect power: he can likely affect the EPA's budget for next year if they upset him. He can politically campaign against them, and will be more effective than Jo Blow in doing so because he has political significance. Those kinds of indirect power seem like a hallmark of Status to me.

I see it more as the difference between the general authority of Rank and being in someone's chain of command. To me the hallmark of Status is that its effects pervade society generally and not just government, and that they have to do with people's socialising at least as much as their work.

For Flat Black, could high status individuals do similar (not identical - the details are properties of a particular political system) things? My impression of it is that they could. They might be abusing their status - but so might the senator be if he took against the EPA without justification.

People of high rank certainly expect and get co-operation outside their formal chains of command. But I'm not convinced that that's the hallmark of Status.