Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
I am either misunderstanding a nuance or have noticed a somewhat inconsistent use of racial disadvantages between racial templates in supplements. Some monster races have Social Stigma (Monster) [-15] and others have Odious Racial Habit (Eats Other Sapients). Basic Set says that large, dangerous predators should have Social Stigma (Monster), such as vampires and bears. But this seems to be because they eat sapient beings, so Social Stigma (Monster) and Odious Racial Habit (Eats other Sapients) seem to cover a lot of the same ground. What is the difference and should they ever be used together?
For instance, should a race of Tolkien-like orcs have Social Stigma (Monster) or Odious Racial Habit (Eats other Sapients)? Or should they have both--or maybe Social Stigma (Barbarian) and Odious Racial Habit (Eats other Sapients)? |
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
If you’re referring to GURPS ghouls, they eat the corpses of sentients, but are otherwise “civilized” and supposedly don’t kill people willy nilly (not unlike the infected from “I Zombie”). Less monster, more “ew”.
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
My general rule of thumb for distinguishing the traits is that Social Stigmas come with additional social restrictions or limitations of rights, while Odious Racial Habits are just reaction penalties.
So, with Social Stigma (Monster), people not only react to you badly, you also lack significant legal rights, like the right to not be killed out of hand as soon as people learn what you are. Someone staking a vampire, in a setting where vampires are commonly known to exist and be dangerous monsters, isn't going to get convicted of murder or anything, as long as they can prove it was, in fact, a vampire they staked. Odious Racial Habit (eats sentient beings) doesn't do that - you're assumed to be a potential anthropophage, and people will definitely be very uncomfortable or terrified of you as a result, but someone can't just kill you out of hand on those grounds. |
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
Quote:
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
Quote:
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
I'd say "barbarian". Sophavorism is just one of Tolkienite Ork's distasteful qualities. They torture for "sport" and regularly commit atrocities. You need an overview for all of it.
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
The key difference is this:
Odious Racial Habit: Here's something awful that each member of this race demonstrably does, and does sufficiently often that it generates negative reactions most of the time. It reflects being genuinely foul, crude, rude, annoying, or scary.
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
So, for example, a generic tiger would likely have Monster (you would be terrified if you met one at random); a tiger known to be a maneater would have Monster and Odious Personal Habit (that individual tiger seeks out people as prey); but a tigroid species all of whose members preferred to eat people would have Monster and Odious Racial Habit?
|
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
Quote:
Oddly enough, corpse-eaters in DF3 have Restricted Diet (Flesh of other sapient beings) but not ORH (eats sapients). |
Re: Question on when to use Social Stigma vs Odious Racial Habit on Monster Races
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.