Technique for Acting/Disguise to pass as opposite gender

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Plane

There's a 2-point difference between optional specialties and other uses, does the gap need to be bigger? Maybe allow it as a technique?

...Well at a minimum, that solution would contradict your assertion that only people who work in a menswear department would take that optional specialization...

I don't really think that tie-tying implies any wider proficiency with knots though.

What might actually work a little for this would be One-Task Wonder. I'd suggest allowing it to be a leveled perk with levels after the first giving +1 to the attribute roll. Still a bit much but at least it's both narrow and cheap...

[Balor Patch]

Passing Appearance from Power Ups 2: Perks p.4 doesn't seem to have been mentioned.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Balor Patch

Passing Appearance from Power Ups 2: Perks p.4 doesn't seem to have been mentioned.

Well, really, it has, because Androgynous is one of the examples of the broader category of Passing Appearance, so in talking about Androgynous we're talking about Passing Appearance. And Androgynous seems to be the relevant category. I can't see why any other sort of Passing Appearance would come into effect here.

[Kromm]

First, realize that the "-1 to -5 to disguise yourself as someone very different from you" has a context: Albinism (p. B165), Extreme Sexual Dimorphism (GURPS Power-Ups 2 Perks, p. 10), or Bulky Frame (GURPS Power-Ups 6 Quirks, p. 22) gives just -1 to Disguise. Being morbidly under- or overweight, or a medical dwarf or giant, gives -2 (pp. B18-20). Only the greatest extremes of weight and bulk, or having a severe spinal deformity that bends you over double (p B139), gives -3. Going up to -5 is the limiting case ("maximum of five levels") of Unnatural Features, where you no longer resemble your race! On the positive side, Easily Mistaken Sex (Quirks, p. 14) – the disadvantageous version of Androgynous – provides a mere +1 to pass as the other sex.

In light of that, I'd modify an earlier suggestion and say that changing your apparent sex is Disguise-0 with the Androgynous perk, Androgynous modifier on Appearance, or Easily Mistaken Sex quirk; that's what "With minimal effort" means. Since Easily Mistaken Sex quantifies its effects, that means most people roll at Disguise-1 to play at belonging to another sex . . . which seems fine, because it would be the penalty to cover up Bulky Frame, Extreme Sexual Dimorphism, or Overweight, all of which imply a significant amount of body mass "in the wrong place." For someone with any kind of Classic Features perk that emphasizes sex differences, go to Disguise-2; in effect, they have the usual -1 for being a member of another sex and an extra -1 for a variation on Extreme Sexual Dimorphism.

Those with Androgynous in a sense "pay" for their small edge by getting their exploitable peak reaction bonus reduced by up to -3. Those with Classic Features are in a sense "compensated" for their small flaw by the fact that they get an Appearance bump they can exploit for up to +3 to reactions. I use the word "exploit" because these are perks, and players will work to experience the good side more often than the bad side.

You'll note that I didn't vary this modifier for Appearance level. I honestly don't think that matters. High Appearance doesn't necessarily mean anything as serious as even Classic Features (Macho Man/Girly Girl) or Extreme Sexual Dimorphism; it just means nice aesthetics, which may well reflect a delicate balance rather than extremes for your sex. Indeed, real-world studies on attractiveness associate it with symmetry and epitomizing the cultural average. Such things are almost trivially easy to mar, and can be wiped out at no special penalty while making the Disguise roll.

[Anders]

I'd have you make another roll if you have to speak. Post-pubertal trans women often need months of voice training before they sound like pp cis women.

[Kromm]

Note that the basic Disguise penalty for portraying another sex "stacks" with the others I mentioned.

Sure, it's "just" -1 for a man to pose as a woman, but if you're an Overweight man with a Bulky Frame, that's -3 . . . and if you're a hairy, beardy macho man with Classic Features, you started at -2 and you're now at -4.

Likewise, it's "just" -1 for a woman to pose as a man, but if you're some heroin-chic runway model with Skinny, that's -3 . . . and if you have high-estrogen features that give Classic Features, you started at -2 and you're now at -4. Toss in another -1 if you have extreme breast implants that give you Extreme Sexual Dimorphism. That's -5; there's a reason why critics of portrayals of women in the media use language like "barely looks human."

But don't make the mistake of assuming that high-Appearance men are all hairy, bulky musclemen, or that all high-Appearance women resemble the icons that Hollywood and the fashion industry promote. Those people roll at -3 or worse not due to masculine or feminine good looks, but because they have extreme looks we're told are attractive. You can have Very Beautiful/Handsome and not have a particularly interesting body or unusual hormone levels, just really amazing symmetry that brings you close to the "ideal woman" or "ideal man" in your culture. And you can wreck symmetry by applying extra makeup or a fake wart to one cheek, which is hardly a master-level trick.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Anders

I'd have you make another roll if you have to speak. Post-pubertal trans women often need months of voice training before they sound like pp cis women.

That's on the Acting/Mimicry side of the equation. There, the penalties get a lot steeper a lot more quickly – merely impersonating someone else gives -5! The Distinctive Speech quirk gives -2 to Acting, so I'd go with that and say the Acting technique might default to Acting-2. That way, the +2 from Voice, which officially affects Mimicry but not Acting, would cancel it out.

Realistically, what most often gives away people trying to pass isn't appearance or voice, but conduct. They're portraying someone who would've lived completely different life experiences from them, and unless they've done a lot of research (i.e., learned a perk or technique), they tend to exaggerate in some areas and have blind spots in others. Easily Mistaken Sex would still give +1 here, making the default just Acting-1, because it's meant mainly to represent trans people, who are de facto members of another sex and so have some advantage here . . . but most are still socialized as the wrong sex, so the penalty doesn't just go away.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Realistically, what most often gives away people trying to pass isn't appearance or voice, but conduct.

I believe this was a plot point in Huckleberry Finn.

[Alden Loveshade]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Realistically, what most often gives away people trying to pass isn't appearance or voice, but conduct.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I believe this was a plot point in Huckleberry Finn.

I agree about Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, where the male Huck tried to pass as a girl. But I believe the affects of conduct will vary a great deal by the society. In Mark Twain's day, there was a definite distinction made between "boy behavior" and "girl behavior." For one small example, walking and sitting in a dress are significantly different that doing the same while wearing pants. There were also gender issues involving gestures, eating habits, etc. This became even greater with adults.

In modern day America, I've known several males whose behavior patterns would have traditionally been considered "feminine," and several females whose behavior patterns would have traditionally been considered "masculine."

So while I certainly agree that "gender-based" conduct would be a significant factor in many societies, I don't believe it would be in all of them.

[Kromm]

There will for sure be variations from place to place and period to period!

As important as it is to be inclusive and respectful in game books and at the gaming table, though, remember that very little of the real world is there yet. The majority of people to subscribe to "traditional" views of male and female socialization. I see this in North America, I saw this in South America and Europe, and I suspect that it's fairly global (e.g., my friends from East and South Asia inform me that it's even worse where they came from).

To put it in perspective: I live in a notably liberal, progressive area of a liberal, progressive city in a fairly liberal, progressive country. Yet almost all of the little boys are dressed differently from almost all of the little girls, the two still play with different toys, and parents still encourage them to play differently. The overwhelming majority of women dress extremely differently from the overwhelming majority of men. I get very snarky comments from men who see my mid-back-length hair and unisex boots and jacket from behind, only to see my stubble and Adam's apple when I turn around (I don't have an especially masculine physique).

While I know plenty of forward-thinking parents who are working to break that mold, I think we'll be a solidly TL9 society before I'd soften Acting penalties for gender roles being confused with sex . . . though I'd be willing to agree that those penalties might have been steeper at lower TLs. Perhaps it's something like (TL-12)/2, drop fractions: -5 at TL1-2, -4 at TL3-4, -3 at TL5-6, -2 at TL7-8, -1 at TL9-10, and no penalty at TL11+, with an extra penalty in theocracies and other ultra-conformist societies, and perhaps a small bonus in progressive enclaves.