Which stigma is this?

[jason taylor]

Suppose there is a society that has a rigorous test in it's rite-of-passage. Those that fail are forbidden to vote in the Clansmoot or to wear heraldry proper to someone who passed but are generally treated compassionately if sometimes patronizingly; they are allowed to retake the test and if they are to obviously handicapped to pass the test at all they are provided for and given honorable labor within their capacity(as custodians of clan shrines and trophies for instance).

This sounds like a low point value Second Class Citizen to me. Would that be accurate?

[Gadget]

Sounds like a variant of Social Stigma: Minor where you are not treated as an adult until you pass the tests

[Dusqune]

I would go with Minor, and possibly the Pitiable advantage, too (depending on exactly how much they are treated compassionately). If both are together, then it would come out to a 0-point trait that would simply disappear once the trials are passed.

[jason taylor]

thank you...

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Suppose there is a society that has a rigorous test in it's rite-of-passage. Those that fail are forbidden to vote in the Clansmoot or to wear heraldry proper to someone who passed but are generally treated compassionately if sometimes patronizingly; they are allowed to retake the test and if they are to obviously handicapped to pass the test at all they are provided for and given honorable labor within their capacity(as custodians of clan shrines and trophies for instance).

So basically it's a meritocracy?

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

This sounds like a low point value Second Class Citizen to me. Would that be accurate?

I'll echo the Social Stigma (Minor) idea. You are describing them as being treated like children, not taken seriously by the adults because they've not become adults yet. (Second-Class Citizen) would be if they have differing (and lesser) rights and protections under the reference society's laws than someone who has passed.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

So basically it's a meritocracy?

In the sense of being a Hobbesian race to the top, no. It is a federation of clans and nepotism does have a strong place. But it does have strong meritocratic aspects too. An example of the complication is that aristocrats(not quite the word) advance through a Masonic like Path of Honors, rather then inheiriting titles, but they cannot begin training without the sponsorship of another aristocrat-who is made to know before hand that his reputation is tied up with the performance of his client. They often are reliatives, but non-relations are often sponsored too; say an individual who impresses a noble, or a noble patron who makes this his philanthropy.

I am pictureing the amount of rigor to be applied in rites of passage as an minor ideological dispute as lessening the rigor is regarded as stealing the bragging rights of those who had passed as well as reducing the general hardihood of the population, whereas increasing it to much makes to many failures and no one wants that either. The details very from clan to clan.

My motive for this was simply enjoying worldbuilding. Now that I think about it, though, it sounds like a good source for a plot similar to Sperry's Call It Courage.

[gruundehn]

I can see a major problem with this setup. Once an "aristocrat" has enough reputation that he can ignore the negative reputation of someone he sponsored the system will start to fall apart. A secondary aspect of this idea is that for the greater advantage of the sponsor a conspiracy may be set up with others to ignore the problems created by a poor appointee. Both of these are firmly rooted in human nature.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by gruundehn

I can see a major problem with this setup. Once an "aristocrat" has enough reputation that he can ignore the negative reputation of someone he sponsored the system will start to fall apart. A secondary aspect of this idea is that for the greater advantage of the sponsor a conspiracy may be set up with others to ignore the problems created by a poor appointee. Both of these are firmly rooted in human nature.

That's not a problem. That's a narrative opportunity. Thank you.

In fact that is not the only fail-safe engineered into the system. To actually qualify one must go through a course similar to a military academy. This necessarily an apprentice at a lower rank(treated as the equiv of a common spacer in the naval or mercantile fleets for instance). To finally pass, one must be approved by the faculty, by ones peers, and by a given clan(usually one's own). Certain types of, subsidised traders must all be commanded by successful applicants to make them usable as naval auxilieries. Similar requirements are needed to promote to a new level, and a number of offices are restricted based on how far advanced a given candidate is. Automatic demotion is given to the lower qualified among each path. Which is why there is a higher suicide rate among "patricians" and "matrons" especially patricians(those aren't just forms of address; patricians are trained in areas relating to foreign relations and matrons trained in running the city; a patrician might expect to be a ships captain for instance, or a regular military officer whereas a matron will typically be a tribal lawmaker, an interclan diplomat, or a politcal kingmaker) by the way. But I am hardly intending to make the system free from corruption; in fact a few opportunities for it makes it seem more real.

Normal citizens have a less strict system. Passing the militia course(which is roughly equiv to a typical military's basic training, though modified by local cultural predilections), or going on a long mercantile voyage in one of his clan's ships with reasonable honor is considered enough to be accounted full clansfolk in most clans and these. These feats are tough and intended to be, but not outside the capabilities of normal people; those who have done this are usually simply given a nominal test. Another posibility is to make a "dubbingwork"; a demonstrable accomplishment in the specialty they work in. That is more likely for those who are less physically qualified but more qualified in other senses.
Perhaps "rigorous" had harsher connotations then I meant it. It is not a Sparta as such, though it does expect a lot. What I was trying to do was Gurpsify the fate of the unsuccessful.

It may well be the system would not work. The clan concept and the civic concept of social organization don't seem to be found together very often; one tends to marginalize the other. It is however an interesting thought experiment to see how it might be done.

[gruundehn]

Jason, remember that one of the strongest impulses in human nature is for a parent to try and make their child succeed. Parents will find a way to game this system and get their children past the point where they would naturally end up. So look at your system and ask yourself: How long would this last before some "aristocrat" gets something changed so that his child gets to go forward in spite of qualifications? You might, if you think it would make a good campaign, have the campaign during the breakdown of the system.