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 06-26-2018, 04:59 AM   #31
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

I've wondered how to stat people who are competent, intelligent and courageous, but who are uncomfortable being the person in authority. This suits some very common character types, both those who shy away from any leadership role and those who are 'natural sergeants', i.e. are perfectly competent giving orders and carrying responsibility, as long as the ultimate source of authority is someone else.

It seems worth more than a Quirk, especially if it works something like Loner/Chummy or Low Self-Esteem, i.e. penalties to mental skills when in a position they are uncomfortable with.

I initially wondered about this for military leaders who are superb when commanding a force up to a certain size, but who utterly lack ambition, talent or confidence for larger command. Some generals have been exceptional in command of a brigade or even division under the authority of an army commander, but are not suited for high command.

And, of course, there is the common archetype of the hard-bitten, hyper-competent sergeant-major/CPO/warrant officer who can perform any military feat he is ordered to do and fears nothing in the world, except a situation where he is forced to take on the unfamiliar role of a commissioned officer.

In many cases, there is an element of class difference involved, where the tough NCO/serjeant/bosun is satisfied in his own station and milieu, but uncertain and diffident in the role of a 'gentleman'. The limit of his ambition may be to serve a good lord, master or officer well and faithfully, not to become one himself. Approached like this, it also suits many fictional valets.

Iconically, such a character might subtly influence their master or officer, even to the point of educating him, but would usually not dream of directly arguing their preferred course of action or disobeying orders. 'Anticipating orders' or creatively interpreting them is fine, but while the character may be more capable than the more senior figure, he'll accept that his less experienced superior is unquestionably in command.

Even if the situation clearly calls for the subordinate character to take on the role of absolute authority, they'll lack their easy competence and confidence when forced into that position.

This sort of Disadvantage is something that I'd want to take for a PC of mine sometime, as when I'm a player, I try to avoid having my PC hog the spotlight and buffalo less assertive players. I'm aware of tendencies toward verbosity, pomposity and a natural assumption of being always right about everything on my part and I must curb my innate instinct to assume command.

So I usually try to give my PCs some Disadvantages that make them less likely to run roughshod over the other PCs when it comes to deciding what to do. I've played a studiously polite and diffident mageling*, a childish, petty, irresponsible teen rogue (with minor sorcerous gifts) and a self-effacing janitor on a spaceship who tended to fade into the background**.

I find that if my PC is the traditional leading man type, decisive and confident, there is a risk of the other players feeling that their PCs are overshadowed and that they have less of a stake in the campaign. While I enjoyed playing such characters as a handsome, charismatic paladin knight in Greyhawk, motor-mouthed fiery revolutionary pistolero with improbable aiming and incredible luck in Brave New World or cocky mutated tactical mastermind Gun Fu master in Gamma World, I can't in honesty deny that in every one of these cases, my PC pretty much decided in what direction the campaign would go and the other players just went along with it.

My current PC, Chase Taylor, is more complex, I guess. He's designed to avoid the status of automatic leader, both by having the lowest status, in a bureaucratic sense, in the team the PCs belong to, and by being friendly, Chummy, humble and Selfless, thus unlikely to buffalo his fellow PCs.

The trouble is that in the first adventure, he was the only PC with front-line combat experience and instead of it being a psychological thriller investigative adventure, there was quite a lot of action. And while Taylor wouldn't throw around his weight or seize command just to gratify his ego, I couldn't justify passivity to the extent that it threatened to allow harm to come to innocent people.

In terms of personality and background, Taylor is very much someone who wants to follow someone he likes and admires, as opposed to someone who wants others to follow him. It's just that this personality trait is pretty hard to convey when the character has awesome skills for commanding a small tactical unit in a SERE exercise gone bad and the characters who might be more natural in the leader role in terms of personality do not have any experience or skills relevant to that situation.

As a Special Forces Weapons Sergeant, Taylor unavoidably had to grown accustomed to leading, training and teaching groups in small unit tactics. But to him, that was a technical task that he happened to do well. For actual leadership, knowing what to do, not just how to do it, Taylor would have relied on his team captain and other officers.

Now that another player has created a PC who functions as the team leader over our PCs, I have to take care to balance the fact that my character is strongly motivated to protect his friends and actually has better skills related to being a team leader in any remotely tactical situation with the requirement to allow the other player to play his character as the actual team leader. Assuming the role of the senior NCO to a team leader perceived as an 'officer'*** would be perfect for that.

*Well, he was actually a scheming and manipulative necromancer, but the other players didn't know that and, anyway, he was never overbearing with them. He may have viewed them as disposable pieces in a four-dimensional chess game with unclear rules, but he never interfered with their ability to discuss the events of the adventures and make whatever decision they thought best.
**Because of his prior career as a spy and covert action specialist for an interstellar intelligence agency.
***Though they were both enlisted during their military career, the new team leader is now an experienced Special Agent of ICE/HSI, which is more or less equivalent to a company officer in the military.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 09:58 AM   #32
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodBeastX View Post
Slave Mentality is what I'm looking for but it's a bit potent. But that's the basis. Let me see if I can toy with it.
Slave Mentality is far too extreme for any realistic character, but it's where I'd start, too.

FWIW, you could also model excessive submissiveness as reduced Will, Duty, Gullibility, an OPH (Constantly apologizing, Offensively obsequious, Passive-Aggressive, etc.), Susceptibility (Influence Skills), or a Quirk.

If you want to create a new disadvantage, or a new variant of Slave Mentality, I'd base it on -5 points with a self-control roll to resist. That would make sense for creatures who are conditioned to obey certain commands, no matter what, and no matter who gives them. In some cases, it might cause them to hesitate before taking independent action, or to behave uselessly while they await orders rather than seizing the initiative.

Example: The Cylon fighter pilots from Battlestar Galactica who always had to spend a couple of seconds coming to a consensus about what to do next in a dogfight. In the meantime, they flew in a straight line setting up a nice, juicy target for Colonial pilots to blast. (Realistically, during WW2, certain British, Japanese, and Soviet pilots had at least a quirk-level version of this trait.)
Pursuivant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 10:11 AM   #33
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

The thing is, having a human with this would require a traumatic experience (a human that is submissive as a SoD seems to be a different thing).

If you give this disadvantage and don't want to make it to dark it has to be given to a robot, a race with a hive mind (or something similar), or an animal. And not all animals; ask your cat how submissive he is feeling.

So this is really kind of related to how dark you want your story to be.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 10:24 AM   #34
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
I've wondered how to stat people who are competent, intelligent and courageous, but who are uncomfortable being the person in authority.
Usually, it IS a Quirk, either Incompetence (Leadership) or "Dislikes being charge," depending on the focus.

In more extreme cases, it could be an actual phobia, particularly if it's a result of PTSD (e.g., an officer or NCO whose orders resulted in his men being killed).

In terms of game effects, I can't see a refusal to lead as being that restrictive unless the character is regularly forced into command positions or the character is supposed to be an incompetent leader or administrator in campaigns which emphasize such things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
It seems worth more than a Quirk, especially if it works something like Loner/Chummy or Low Self-Esteem, i.e. penalties to mental skills when in a position they are uncomfortable with.
Dislike of leadership and/or incompetence in such roles seems like a natural extension of these disadvantages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
I initially wondered about this for military leaders who are superb when commanding a force up to a certain size, but who utterly lack ambition, talent or confidence for larger command.
High level of Tactics (or Operations) skill, low level of Strategy skill.

Possibly a Quirk, like "Permanent NCO/Captain" or "Peter Principled" which acts like a form of Incompetence, penalizing skills like Administration, Leadership, Shiphandling, Strategy, Tactics when attempting to use skills to manage a unit above a certain size.

Alternately, you could have a Quirk like, "The Blue Devils" which acts like a very limited version of Low Self-Image, but activates only when the character is in overall command of a unit above a certain size.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
And, of course, there is the common archetype of the hard-bitten, hyper-competent sergeant-major/CPO/warrant officer who can perform any military feat he is ordered to do and fears nothing in the world, except a situation where he is forced to take on the unfamiliar role of a commissioned officer.
Quirk level Intolerance/Phobia? "Hates being in command of any unit larger than a platoon/company." or "Hates being an officer."

In some cases, it's a sort of inverted snobbery, which is straight out Intolerance (Upper classes and Intelligensia). That gives you the "Don't call me sir! I work for living! Welcome to the University of Hard Knocks, and I'm your professor!" type of drill instructor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander View Post
Iconically, such a character might subtly influence their master or officer, even to the point of educating him, but would usually not dream of directly arguing their preferred course of action or disobeying orders.
High level of Savoir-Faire (Servant or Military), professional competence, and Fast-Talk, possibly Charisma, and Compulsive Behavior/Odious Personal Habit ("Backseat driver," "Manipulates employer/immediate superiors").

In more extreme cases, you get OPH ("Doesn't know his station" or "Uppity") (e.g., "Dash it all, Jeeves, have you seen my plaid jacket?" Yes, sir. Given that it was exceptionally repellant, I took the liberty of giving it to the rag man.")
Pursuivant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2018, 12:33 PM   #35
RedMattis
 
RedMattis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sweden, Stockholm
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

It sounds like a quirk, or possibly a [-5 point] disadvantage. Minus to leadership and other similar traits when lacking any coherent orders, especially under pressure, is certainly a disadvantage, but not one which is likely to come up very often. Most of what it means is just being agreeable with authority otherwise.

It would have impact if the character is a sergeant leader a squad of other players, though that is a bit like creating a modern soldier and giving them "incompetence: firearms". In case the disadvantage/quirk is likely to be relevant I might just amp up the value a bit based on the theme of the campaign. But that would be more like compensation for the player intentionally nerfing their character. I'd be willing to do the same if someone made a Lawyer in a kung-fu campaign. "Here, have an 15 extra points since you've wasted twice that on skills, talents, and abilities which will likely not become relevant in this campaign".
__________________
"Prohibit the taking of omens, and do away with superstitious doubts. Then, until death itself comes, no calamity need be feared"
RedMattis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2018, 11:25 AM   #36
quarkstomper
 
quarkstomper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Enchanted Land-O-Cheese
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

I think the word we're looking for here is "Deferential". The character will usually defer to the wishes of a superior, whether a superior in terms of authority or merely social position. If the character feels he must say "No" to the superior, or even contradict him, he will attempt to do so in a polite, respectful manner, or in as non-confrontational a manner as possible, (even agreeing to the superior's face, but then doing something else behind his back).
__________________
Read "Danger Cay" at Hannibal Tesla Adventure Magazine! Pulp Era Adventure and Two-Fisted Science in the futuristic world of 1935!
quarkstomper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2018, 08:26 PM   #37
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by quarkstomper View Post
I think the word we're looking for here is "Deferential". The character will usually defer to the wishes of a superior, whether a superior in terms of authority or merely social position. If the character feels he must say "No" to the superior, or even contradict him, he will attempt to do so in a polite, respectful manner, or in as non-confrontational a manner as possible, (even agreeing to the superior's face, but then doing something else behind his back).
Except that sounds like SoD. I got the impression that it was something more then SoD but not quite Slave Mentality.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 12:52 PM   #38
artichoke
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Since the OP's framing was clearly not quirk-level, I would suggest that further suggestions stat out three levels.

quirk — for those who want to talk about how this can be a quirk
-5 — closer to the common consensus vision
-30 — closer to the OP's vision

Let's recall the OP's vision (bolded for emphasis):

I have a character that needs to easily give in when a higher caste/status/charismatic/etc person pushes their weight around on them or gives them direction.

This is extreme submissiveness. Not only is there is a huge number of people who qualify (anyone of higher status! and anyone who is more charismatic!) the character has to easily give in. That is an extreme level of personal agency reduction.

So, I tried to reword it to make it more playable (for more campaigns, at least). For a mad cultist or something his original wording works but it certainly isn't playable as a PC unless he/she is under some kind of temporary mind control effect.

I have a character who will face a serious willpower penalty when a higher caste/status, or much more charismatic, person influences him/her to do something that won't be obviously a very serious threat to that character's personal welfare.
artichoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 01:24 PM   #39
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by artichoke View Post
Since the OP's framing was clearly not quirk-level, I would suggest that further suggestions stat out three levels.
Either that or a -5 point* base mental disadvantage which allows a self-control roll.

Alternately, the trait could be modeled as Susceptibility (Influence Skills) if the character can easily be persuaded or commanded by anyone, not just recognized authority figures.
Pursuivant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2018, 01:31 PM   #40
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: Submissive Disadvantage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celti View Post
I've simply used variants of the Easily Influenced quirk (Power-Ups 6, p. 18)
Using those rules, it's simple enough to allow the relevant quirks to be leveled, at -1 per level.

Alternately, create a variation of Susceptible, treating influence skills and reaction rolls as Very Common, and not allowing an attribute roll to resist (+50%), giving a cost of -6 per level. Possibly reduce the cost to -5 points per level for convenience. Treat the various Easily Influenced Quirks as limited versions of the full disadvantage.
Pursuivant is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
custom, disadvantages

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 02:27 AM.


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