How to portray shunning?

[cptbutton]

Can characters have a Secret (interacts with shunned people in private)?

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Michele

Being shunned, especially if by a large/important group not the mention by the majority of the people around you, certainly is a Social Stigma.

However, having to shun somebody is a restriction of the freedom of action of a playing character belonging to the relevant group.

Except they don't really have to. Not unless they have some kind of disadvantage that forces them to conform. I would guess Honesty or something even more severe like a 15 point vow to be the perfect elf. Not conforming to society's strictures will of course lead to severe consequences if it becomes known so it may cause a Secret or a Bad Reputation but simply choosing to take the path of least resistance is not a Disadvantage.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Except they don't really have to. Not unless they have some kind of disadvantage that forces them to conform. I would guess Honesty or something even more severe like a 15 point vow to be the perfect elf. Not conforming to society's strictures will of course lead to severe consequences if it becomes known so it may cause a Secret or a Bad Reputation but simply choosing to take the path of least resistance is not a Disadvantage.

Typically if you fail to shun those who have been so designated you suffer socially (at least) as well.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Typically if you fail to shun those who have been so designated you suffer socially (at least) as well.

Which is why breaking that rule is what gives you a Disadvantage.

[Dalillama]

Originally Posted by malloyd

I've occasionally considered letting characters take a -5 point Code of Honor (decent person), or conversely compelling characters that don't conform to community standards to buy a Sociopath advantage, docking them their next few earned xp to pay for it when they start displaying this disregard for social norms, and there is a case to be made for that, but RAW GURPS doesn't usually charge you for conforming to some cultural norm or not.

Even people without any such code of honour, or Honesty, will usually behave in a law-abiding manner because it's convenient to do so. Indeed, lacking any disadvantages causing them to be antisocial, they might always act in a lawful and normative way. Lacking a moral compunction against theft doesn't mean you're going to go around stealing things you could perfectly well afford to buy. Not feeling bad about killing people doesn't mean you're going to murder everyone who annoys you, because murderous rage isn't a normal response to casual annoyance. Etc. If someone doesn't have any specifically antisocial desires, mere lack of moral or ethical compunction won't cause them to act badly absent some particular provocation or stimulus.

[SimonAce]

Outlaw (Shunned) -15 + whatever resource and status loss is campaign appropriate is the easy approach to this, IMO at least

[Michele]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Except they don't really have to. Not unless they have some kind of disadvantage that forces them to conform. I would guess Honesty or something even more severe like a 15 point vow to be the perfect elf. Not conforming to society's strictures will of course lead to severe consequences if it becomes known so it may cause a Secret or a Bad Reputation but simply choosing to take the path of least resistance is not a Disadvantage.

Huh, no, in fact they don't really have to. That's why I assess it, if taken alone, as a -1 Quirk. An Amish PC interacting with a shunned person would be bad roleplaying.

The Basic Set says, p. 162:
"A “quirk” is a minor feature that
sets you aside from others. It has a
negative point value, but it is not necessarily
a disadvantage.
...
However, you must roleplay
them."

Now, if the campaign was entirely set within an Amish community, and every PC and NPC was an Amish, maybe the Quirk would make no sense. But if the campaign also wanders away, and some PCs and many NPCs are not Amish and thus not bound by this, while OTOH the GM plans to have a couple of shunned NPCs having a major role... then I stand by my [-1].

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Any wisdom on how to portray characters or races who make a point of shunning members of certain other groups?

This isn't mere Dislike, nor does it imply any particular hatred of the shunned person/group. Instead, it represents, emotionless, passive community-wide refusal to engage with the shunned, combined with as non-violent attempts to remove them from the community should they not leave on their own.

Historically, think of the Ostracism practiced by the Ancient Greeks, or community-wide shunning or "disfellowshipping" practiced by modern Amish and some fundamentalist Christian or Jewish sects. In those cases, anyone who aids someone who is ostracized/shunned risks suffering the same treatment.

Examples from SF/Fantasy include your snootier elves or ultra-advanced aliens. They don't harm outsiders, but make a point of avoiding them and quickly transport intruders far away from their domains, possibly with their memories wiped. If they need something from "lesser" beings, they take it by peaceful means, usually by teleporting it away, and possibly leaving something that they consider to be of equal value in its place.

I can see 3 ways to handle this:

Code of Honor - Could be built into several existing codes, or it could represent a CoH of its own.

Disciplines of Faith - possibly built into DoF (Ritualism) or (Asceticism) or a new version.

Intolerance - Make Shunning a -50% limitation to Intolerance, because you aren't required to react at -3 to those in the "hated" group. People you shun still react badly towards you, however.

In any case, cost should probably be based on the size and importance of the shunned group, based on Frequency of Appearance, and top out at about -10 points, similar to the more severe versions of the disads listed above.

Conversely, "Shunned by X Group" is a potential Quirk, which represents a very limited Social Stigma.

First, from my very limited reading on shunning, most groups that practice shunning do not practice it on groups outside their own, as a general rule. Shunning instead is a discipline practiced on their own group, which makes sense as shunned people who are not members of their group can more easily go elsewhere where they wouldn't be shunned.

For the group that practices shunning, I'd call it a 0-point feature of their legal code.

For someone who is being shunned, it's probably a -3 or -4 Reputation. It's not a Social Stigma, unless part of being shunned involves being painted white, made to wear certain clothes (effectively an "I'm shunned" uniform) or otherwise made instantly recognizable as someone to be shunned by that group. Otherwise, it's a Reputation and affected by both group size within the campaign area and frequency of recognition.

If you're being shunned by Mormons in Utah in the 1870s-1880s, that's barely a quirk if the characters are globe-trotters, a small group if they regularly travel across the U.S.A., a medium sized group if they're confined to the Old West, and somewhere between a large group and everyone if the setting is Utah. [And might be a Secret (possible death) if the Avenging Angels are taking an interest in you, but that's probably crossed out of shunning.]

Likewise the bigger the group practicing the shunning, the less likely the character is to be recognized as someone who should be shunned as he leaves his locality, either because the members that far away haven't heard that he's to be shunned, or they don't know that he's "Herbert Bloggins, who has been declared shunned," and as long as Herbert Bloggins doesn't feel compelled to tell them so …

[ericthered]

Likewise the bigger the group practicing the shunning, the less likely the character is to be recognized as someone who should be shunned as he leaves his locality, either because the members that far away haven't heard that he's to be shunned, or they don't know that he's "Herbert Bloggins, who has been declared shunned," and as long as Herbert Bloggins doesn't feel compelled to tell them so …

This is really the key to understanding shunning. Shunning is usually practiced by very small, close-knit, and insular communities. Other Communities of the same group won't know that Herbert is shunned, and he can freely interact with them as an outsider. However, if he tells them "I'm one of you", they'll want to know where he's from, and may very well check with his original community to verify why he's so far from home. Or they just hear things through the grapevine.

Shunning is most hurtful because it's liable to strip the subject of most people they know and most of their support structure. Unfriendly behavior on the street is only a big problem if you continue trying to live in the location (which does happen).

I suspect Social Stigma (Excommunicated) is the most appropriate disadvantage.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

. [And might be a Secret (possible death) if the Avenging Angels are taking an interest in you, but that's probably crossed out of shunning.]

Note: this group's activities are confined to the late 1830's in Missouri, though their memory lasted beyond that. If you are at all interested in historical accuracy or portrayal of real-life religions.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by ericthered

<snip>

Note: this group's activities are confined to the late 1830's in Missouri, though their memory lasted beyond that. If you are at all interested in historical accuracy or portrayal of real-life religions.

Fair enough. I've only ever heard of them through western novels (set in the time period I gave, which had them active in Utah). I wasn't sure they were even a real thing.