Submissive Disadvantage?

[Agent]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

The Imps don't necessarily like or care about the upper demons at all. It's more "Oh, I better do what they tell me!" So they aren't going out of their way to lump more work on themselves.

If they have inborn fear of harmful consequence ('If I don't do this he'll put me in the oven again!') then it could be a form of Cowardice. This would also make them tend to not want to interact with higher ups if they can avoid it/aren't already under a threat of harm. And they will reluctantly submit themselves to 'lesser harm' because they know what the Big Meanies will do to them if they don't.

[GodBeastX]

Originally Posted by Agent

If they have inborn fear of harmful consequence ('If I don't do this he'll put me in the oven again!') then it could be a form of Cowardice. This would also make them tend to not want to interact with higher ups if they can avoid it/aren't already under a threat of harm. And they will reluctantly submit themselves to 'lesser harm' because they know what the Big Meanies will do to them if they don't.

Sorry this isn't the easiest question, but that's why I asked the hive =) Wasn't easy for me.

I could see this, or Reprogrammable too. Definitely have cowardice... reprogrammable description makes it sound like you get told to do things and you can interpret them, but gotta do them.

I think it's probably Cowardice, Reprogrammable or Duty.

[Donny Brook]

Perhaps it could be Social Status (Infernal).

[artichoke]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

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. What would this be?

Sounds like a good case for simply making a custom disadvantage at -10 points. Called it Submissive L2 and be done with it.

L1 would be -5 and would not be "easily". It would be inclined.

Update: You would have to add a clause about protecting personal welfare from obvious major threats, like a high-status person telling you to shoot yourself or go into a bank to rob it with no disguise.

[Celti]

I've simply used variants of the Easily Influenced quirk (Power-Ups 6, p. 18), such as:

Obedient: You have a -1 to resist Influence skills and other people have a +1 to use Influence skills on you when they have a positive reaction bonus for differences in social position.
Eager to Please: You have a -1 to resist Influence skills and other people have a +1 to use Influence skills on you when they are making a Request for Aid.

[artichoke]

Originally Posted by Celti

I've simply used variants of the Easily Influenced quirk (Power-Ups 6, p. 18), such as:

Obedient: You have a -1 to resist Influence skills and other people have a +1 to use Influence skills on you when they have a positive reaction bonus for differences in social position.
Eager to Please: You have a -1 to resist Influence skills and other people have a +1 to use Influence skills on you when they are making a Request for Aid.

A quirk is way too weak for this level of submissiveness:

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.

That is both a lot of people, so it has a wide net — and it's "easily" giving in, which is a huge surrendering of agency.

In the right campaign (and that would be most of them unless you're at or near the top of the social heap — in status, caste, and charisma at the same time), it would be well beyond a -15. A -15 is something like "Fights only in self-defense". That's a lot lot more personal agency than easily giving into anyone who is of higher status, along with anyone who is charismatic.

"Tell me where your group's hideout is (so I can slaughter everyone)." "Sure thing!"

"Give me all of your money and all of your family's money, too." "Anything you ask!"

"Go rob that bank. There's no time for disguise." "Sounds great!"

"Shoot yourself." "Okay."

Submission is potentially very dangerous so it needs to be worded carefully. I was too glib with my suggestion before because I read "easily" as hyperbole. But really, it's better to take all words at face value. Easily giving in really is just too powerful unless the only people encountered in the game who fit the description are people you would already be like that with, like a benevolent king.

How about this wording for your original request:

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 serious threat to that character's personal welfare.

Substitute the word critical for serious (in the personal welfare part) if you want the disadvantage to be worse. Substitute the word moderate for serious (in the willpower penalty part) if you want it to be weaker.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

Sense of Duty is definitely not it. The Imps don't necessarily like or care about the upper demons at all. It's more "Oh, I better do what they tell me!" So they aren't going out of their way to lump more work on themselves.

That doesn't sound like it. SoD is what a Samurai has to a Daimyo, or a Barrayaran Armsman has to a Count. The OP makes it sound like the character has what amounts to an institutionalized Stockholm Syndrome.

I have read one or two stories of that sort of thing from places where hierarchy is unusually brutal. Sometimes it is hard to get someone who has been trampled long enough to realize they are human. Even those sorts don't have Slave Mentality per se.

I think I would call it Weak Will.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

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. What would this be?

Reduced Will, with the Aspected limitation, only vs. "Superiors," with makes it [-4] per level.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by GodBeastX

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. What would this be?

Oddly enough...Selfish. The flip side of their expecting those of lower status to defer to them is that they also expect to be ordered around by their superiors although they'll seize on opportunities for advancement if they exist.

[oma]

If, they're NPCs why wouldn't you just hand wave it and not care about the points? Or are the PCs playing the Imps?

It seems to me that just because you CAN try and stat everything up with GURPS doesn't necessarily mean that it is useful to. Would you save a lot of time just saying, "the imps can't go against their leaders"? It's not like the players need to know about point values and advantages and disadvantages of the creatures in the world. Point values are just to be able to balance player choices right?