Why is Broad-Minded a Quirk?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

More than one line of thought has emerged, actually. Some impute the non-RAW social considerations, others suggest that the 'getting along' in the description is supposed to go only one-way.
.

Well sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Depends on the critter/stranger.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

The earlier question was 'what do you think the 10 points is for?'

The fact that you do not recognise slightly different wording for the same question means I'm wasting my time.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by demonsbane

Do you really think it was needed to point all possible drawbacks?

All? No.

Any? No. A quirk can be effectively neutral as long as it's roleplayable.

But where they went wrong was describing it as beneficial.

Tying this Quirk to its present day "usual" acceptation (for the dominant progressive and globalist ideology) is your interpretation of this trait, and by doing it you're making non-generic assumptions and picking a very specific setting: the modern-day world.

If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that there may be settings where the fact that you get along with other races/species, find them interesting, and are rarely put off by strange appearances is not beneficial. I am guessing that you see the potential drawback being that others in such a the setting may view such traits negatively.

In reply --

Certainly there may be times when different setting-characteristics mean that the GURPS values of some traits will not be representative of how they play in those settings. A good example might be Callous. In a callous society, people who are not callous might be considered wimpy. But this possibility has not prevented the inclusion of Callous as a disadvantage.

Also, note that the only way that people in this alternate society will ever know about your interest in xeno-types is that you act on your interest and they find out. But Quirk-level interest is not something you need to act on if it's risky, so even if you go the route of imputing social consequences in certain societies as the justification for Broadminded being a Quirk, these consequences still don't ever actually have to happen, and so there is no negative to counter the positive elements of 'getting along' and 'not being bothered by looks'.

Broadminded doesn't implies an improved condition from the norm.

It says you get along with others. Presumably you get along with others at some level different from the norm, or there would be no point in mentioning it. It says you are not bothered by strange looks. Presumably this is mentioned because it is different than how you would be without this trait.

Your utter convinction of this Quirk as an objective virtue or as an uncontestable positive trait is the underlying reason making this thread to grow.

The Quirk's description, as written, provides for obvious net benefits from the trait. This is a problem because as a Quirk you get a -1 for it. That's what I think, for the reasons I've been explaining to people who have been discussing the matter with me.

... Broadminded sometimes is the mark of someone who is mentally lost a relativistic view world -hence, objective truth(s) is(are) denied to his understanding. Sometimes it's suited for people who are intellectually unsure, or morally lukewarm. Broadminded can be the mark of potential traitors when the setting is a culture needing protection from foreign influence threatening with ritual taint and/or subtle colonization. This still is a current issue, BTW. There's nothing advantageous in a person being unwilling to protect himself and his people from ethnocide and culturecide.

You will note that none of those things are elements of the description provided on p. B163 for the GURPS trait. They fit with the setting specific matters I addressed a couple of paragraphs above.

Sometimes it makes people gullible or stupid "in a trivial form" (BS, p. 162)...

Nothing in the description of Xenophilia requires the character to be gullible. Whether it's 'stupid' to try to socialize with strangers depends on the situation, and the compulsion to do so therefore justifies the points for Xenophilia. Absent the compulsion in Broadminded, the benefits rule.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

The fact that you do not recognise slightly different wording for the same question means I'm wasting my time.

[shrug]

I answered both questions (and in a fair degree of detail), so I don't see what you find wanting.

[Wraithe]

Originally Posted by Ragitsu

Then why is Chauvinistic worth a -1 in society where prejudice still flourishes? How serious does a view on a subject have to be before it's considered a prejudice anyhow?

Sort of a reverse of broad minded;

Broad-Minded: You potentially garner a negative reaction because you don't share a particular Chauvinism.

Chauvinistic: You potentially garner a negative reaction because you make someone a target of a particular Chauvanism. :)

[demonsbane]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

But where they went wrong was describing it as beneficial.

You get along well with others is easily seen as neutral, because nothing is said about the nature of "the other".

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that there may be settings where the fact that you get along with other races/species, find them interesting, and are rarely put off by strange appearances is not beneficial. I am guessing that you see the potential drawback being that others in such a the setting may view such traits negatively.

There's no difficulty in thinking about settings in which getting involved with foreigners and other 'races' or 'creatures' is dangerous or even traitorous.

A potential drawback is the broad-minded character ending in a jail or executed. Another drawback is none of his fellows notice his "odd" customs and he's finally successful opening the gates to the foreigners, taking the whole people by surprise and being the responsible of the subsequent ethnocide perpetrated by the deceitful foreigners. Another drawback is the character being regarded as the naive of the party or of the entire population group. Etc.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Certainly there may be times when different setting-characteristics mean that the GURPS values of some traits will not be representative of how they play in those settings.

Precisely. That's because I said that GURPS "broad-minded" makes sense being classified as a Quirk and not as a Perk because that keeps the trait approximately in a state of indetermination. That is suitable because its value is too variable and relative.

Your mention of the Callous disadvantage, OTOH, is a different thing: it's a full-blown example of a disadvantage with an almost non-existent degree of incertitude or ambiguity that would need to be switched because a particular setting. All that is addressed in the box Customizing the Rules (BS. p. 486).

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Also, note that the only way that people in this alternate society will ever know about your interest in xeno-types is that you act on your interest and they find out. But Quirk-level interest is not something you need to act on if it's risky, so even if you go the route of imputing social consequences in certain societies as the justification for Broadminded being a Quirk, these consequences still don't ever actually have to happen, and so there is no negative to counter the positive elements of 'getting along' and 'not being bothered by looks'.

The character doesn't know if it's risky. After all, they are foreigners or strangers. The character doesn't know enough of them and still he tends to trust them. Lots of dangerous situations can happen because this. And at minimum, that broad-minded character is at risk of being regarded as the naive of the party, or of the whole poblation.

I find portraying this Quirk as void of drawbacks for qualify it as a Perk is untenable.

Originally Posted by demonsbane

Broadminded doesn't implies an improved condition from the norm.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

It says you get along with others. Presumably you get along with others at some level different from the norm, or there would be no point in mentioning it. It says you are not bothered by strange looks. Presumably this is mentioned because it is different than how you would be without this trait.

No. Different isn't synonym of improved: nothing of all that means you're above the norm. You may be well under the norm, like in the case of fool, an outcast or someone enough naive for granting out of place familiarity to unknow people. I already did this point earlier:

Originally Posted by demonsbane

GURPS broad-minded trait is (...) above the norm or under the norm depending of the GM/players' assumptions & campaign setting.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

The Quirk's description, as written, provides for obvious net benefits from the trait.

You should re-read earlier posts. This Quirk provides many potential drawbacks, unless you're reading it in a very odd way (see below).

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

This is a problem because as a Quirk you get a -1 for it. That's what I think, for the reasons I've been explaining to people who have been discussing the matter with me.

Maybe you're not reading the reasons offered to you. BTW, I already posted in this sense, too (post #61), but for some motive you systematically deny the drawbacks implicit in this Quirk: I maintain it's due to that underlying reason before mentioned.

Originally Posted by demonsbane

Broadminded sometimes is the mark of someone who is mentally lost a relativistic view world -hence, objective truth(s) is(are) denied to his understanding. Sometimes it's suited for people who are intellectually unsure, or morally lukewarm. Broadminded can be the mark of potential traitors when the setting is a culture needing protection from foreign influence threatening with ritual taint and/or subtle colonization. This still is a current issue, BTW. There's nothing advantageous in a person being unwilling to protect himself and his people from ethnocide and culturecide.

And there are times where being broadminded is a good thing if you are immersed in a setting where most values are questionable (Socrates' place & epoch), when there're good reasons for putting in doubt the view world, or when you're a member of an isolated town armored with prejudices rooted in pure ignorance, and there is need of someone able to break the frontiers to open a worthwhile contact with foreigners.

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

You will note that none of those things are elements of the description provided on p. B163 for the GURPS trait. They fit with the setting specific matters I addressed a couple of paragraphs above.

All these things are implicit in the broad-minded Quirk.

However there is a saying: "That one reading a text without previous understanding is like a blind man looking himself in a mirror".

I mean, do you really fail in seeing what is implicit to the Quirk description? Do you want a Basic Set: Characters full of obvious nuances with a +50% number of pages?

Originally Posted by demonsbane

Sometimes it makes people gullible or stupid "in a trivial form" (BS, p. 162)...

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Nothing in the description of Xenophilia requires the character to be gullible. Whether it's 'stupid' to try to socialize with strangers depends on the situation, and the compulsion to do so therefore justifies the points for Xenophilia. Absent the compulsion in Broadminded, the benefits rule.

[I was pointing to p. 163, to the Broad-minded Quirk and not to p. 162 (Xenophilia). I edited my post before your reply.]

Absent the compulsion in the Broad-minded Quirk, there's the tendency to receive dangerous and deceitful strangers with open arms.

My whole point is the Broad-minded trait value is relative, and doesn't grant any absolute net benefit. It's a Quirk.

[Wraithe]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

More than one line of thought has emerged, actually. Some impute the non-RAW social considerations, others suggest that the 'getting along' in the description is supposed to go only one-way.

Well, anyone who is suggesting that either Xenophilia OR Broad-Minded is anything other than one-way is creating it whole cloth. I think the description in Xenophilia is pretty clear, that this disability could cause things to Go Badly For You. It IS a Disadvantage, after all.

I mean, they COULD go well, but you'd best have good Fast-Talk, or something else to tip the scales. (see Dr. Who, I HATE to think what his FT skill is)

If only it had not been written to reflect only benefits.

I guess I can see what you mean in that YOU get along with other races, not that THEY get along with you isn't spelled out in Broad-Minded.
("I just LOVE how _you people_ can shoot those bows!" *Cold Stares from the Elves in the Bar at the Dwarf [Chauvinism -1] + [Broad-Minded -1] who just spoke*) :)

But, I have to admit that I find any ambiguity in Broad-Minded solidly negated by the words: "It gives you a small penalty" less than .25" away on the page, under the description of Quirks. :)

[Ragitsu]

It was foretold by gyromancy.

[demonsbane]

Originally Posted by Wraithe

Well, anyone who is suggesting that either Xenophilia OR Broad-Minded is anything other than one-way is creating it whole cloth.

Speaking of Broad-Minded, I don't agree much. A coin have its reverse:

Originally Posted by Basic Set p. 162

A “quirk” (...) is not necessarily a disadvantage.

In the course of the game sessions and depending of the setting, the coin will fall upon its obverse and/or its reverse. That makes the value of the Broad-Minded Quirk so relative.

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by demonsbane

You get along well with others is easily seen as neutral, because nothing is said about the nature of "the other".

Even if they are bad people, it is advantageous to get along with them.

A potential drawback is the broad-minded character ending in a jail or executed. Another drawback is none of his fellows notice his "odd" customs and he's finally successful opening the gates to the foreigners, taking the whole people by surprise and being the responsible of the subsequent ethnocide perpetrated by the deceitful foreigners....

????
What are you seeing in the trait description to support any of that? There's nothing whatsoever in Xenophilia or Broadminded that says your loyalty needs to be traitorous to your own people.

Another drawback is the character being regarded as the naive of the party or of the entire population group. Etc.

That would depend entirely on features of the setting though, and is not inherent in the trait. (Also as note elsewhere, in terms of Broadminded, the drawback need never come into effect.)

Precisely. That's because I said that GURPS "broad-minded" makes sense being classified as a Quirk and not as a Perk because that keeps the trait approximately in a state of indetermination. That is suitable because its value is too variable and relative.

I don't understand what you are saying there.

Your mention of the Callous disadvantage, OTOH, is a different thing: it's a full-blown example of a disadvantage with an almost non-existent degree of incertitude or ambiguity that would need to be switched because a particular setting. All that is addressed in the box Customizing the Rules (BS. p. 486).

None of that affects the point I was trying to make with the example of Callous. You suggested that despite being beneficially written, Broadminded qualifies as a Quirk because some settings may have features that invert the normal reality of what is beneficial or not. My point in reply is that GURPS doesn't avoid categorizing things as disadvantages merely because some settings might have a different take. It doesn't hesitate to categorize Callousness without reference to settings, so there is no need for it to respect variant settings in regard to Broadminded.

The character doesn't know if it's risky. After all, they are foreigners or strangers. The character doesn't know enough of them and still he tends to trust them.

Wait, you're on the wrong track there ... The 'risk' you were talking about in this part of our exchange is the risk of being ill thought of by his own people for his Broadmindedness.

To reiterate: My point in that regard is that the declared triviality of the trait means that he doesn't need to risk exposing this tendency when it would bother his own people -- and so this is not a drawback -- and so it doesn't counterbalance the benefits in the description -- and so the trait should not merit a free point.

No. Different isn't synonym of improved: nothing of all that means you're above the norm.

'Different' is an 'improvement' if you are dealing with qualities that have inherent values and you start on the negative side.

'Legal' is always an improvement over 'illegal' when you are evaluating the lawfulness of something. 'Nearsighted' is always better than 'blind' in terms of visual senses. Similarly, getting along well with others and not being bothered by strange looks is better than not getting along with others and being bothered by strange looks when it comes to playing a character (in settings where the GM hasn't made specific applicable changes).

Maybe you're not reading the reasons offered to you.

Maybe you're not reading my careful and lucid replies to those posts.

All these things are implicit in the broad-minded Quirk.

For reasons previously given, I disagree.