MGT Only: Build your SOC

[Spinward Scout]

So I figured that SOC is a combination of a bunch of things, so why not build it like that?

You can rate each item by:

0. Unsatisfactory
1. Satisfactory
2. Outstanding

Looks
(Not Attractive, Attractive, Super Model))

Personality
(Odious, Average, Life of the Party)

Fashion
(Slob, Average, Best Looking)

Interactive
(Shy & Introverted, Normal, Outgoing & Extroverted)

Luckiness
(Bad Luck, Normal, Lucky)

And last, but not least:

Professional Standing
(None, Worker, Management)

or

Nobility Rank Modifier

That gives you six different parts of the attribute to combine and make a total that can still range from 0 to 12 (or higher depending on Noble rank).

It would help define the Character a bit more, I'd think.

Does this seem usable to you?

 

[kilemall]

Nope.

Looks more like building charisma.

SOC should probably be half money and half in crowd.

 

[whartung]

Charisma impacts people who don't who you are. SOC impacts people that do know who you are.

 

[Commander Truestar]

Anonymity also has an effect...

Imagine, you enter into a event to see the usual suspects.
Except.....um.....there's "that guy"

He looks innocuous enough.
You check with one of the hostesses and find out he was on the invite list but.....no information.
Where everyone else invited is important, known for a significant function or nobility....all he has is the title "Esquire"
....So, he's not even a noble.

Looking him up and down, he has nothing on him that is identifying.
He even seems to have taken the effort to make sure he's not wearing brand names...and yes, that IS an effort

And, as you circulate around the party, someone in each cluster seems to be watching him and half the clusters are talking about him
The rumor mill literally swirls!

If anyone asks him questions designed to pry information out, he gives non-answers and then asks you about your interests..
...not in him, of course.
He's obviously had training in conversational deflection....

Who?
Is?
He?

In the space of an hour or less, he has risen to a level of social importance you can't imagine.
Why?
Because the room full of influencers and power players "think" he must be important.
Why?
Because no one below the top pinnacles can be both "entirely unknown" and "invite to this party"....

How do I know?
I was that person at a given party.
I was a Spec-F Airman 1st Class told to be at the party in civilian clothing.
I had other orders I followed, to be a sponge and not give out information.

In the end, my CO told me the best his people could figure, "most" of the people had "decided" I was an incredibly high level, super skilled intelligence agent working "directly" for the Office of the President....

 

[Nathan Brazil]

MgT2E's Traveller Companion has a section on "Additional Characteristics" such as Sanity (STY), Wealth (WLT), Luck (LCK), Morale (MRL) and how they are used. Wealth is used as a substitution for purchases and keeping tracking Credits, for example. Nothing on Charisma, but the intro in the section says nothing IYTU campaign has to have only 6 characteristics. The intro even says PSI is considered an optional "7th Characteristic".

There is also an expansion on SOC. SOC as described has NOTHING to do Charisma, sorry to say. However there is no reason not to create your own 7th Characteristic or make it part of SOC in YTU.

Influence (INF) and Psionic Strength (PSI) were used as the 7th and 8th characteristic in MgTE's Traveller Judge Dredd books. Strontium Dog had Sorcery (SOR) even.

 

[Commander Truestar]

MgT2E's Traveller Companion has a section on "Additional Characteristics" such as Sanity (STY), Wealth (WLT), Luck (LCK), Morale (MRL) and how they are used. Wealth is used as a substitution for purchases and keeping tracking Credits, for example. Nothing on Charisma, but the intro in the section says nothing IYTU campaign has to have only 6 characteristics. The intro even says PSI is considered an optional "7th Characteristic".

There is also an expansion on SOC. SOC as described has NOTHING to do Charisma, sorry to say. However there is no reason not to create your own 7th Characteristic or make it part of SOC in YTU.

Influence (INF) and Psionic Strength (PSI) were used as the 7th and 8th characteristic in MgTE's Traveller Judge Dredd books. Strontium Dog had Sorcery (SOR) even.

Over the decades I have run Traveller I have added:
Morals: How close you try to fit into the Morals of the society in which you were raised...
.....IMTU, I also determine what your parents did for work...so, that determines where you were raised with regard to class
.....And that is also part and parcel of determining how moral those around you might be.

Self Loyalty: This works with "Morals" above, and indicates how close you character personally holds themself to the morals they were raised in
Example: Joe the engineer was raised in a very giving, caring society(Fairly high Morals score) but still ended up interested in getting more for
......himself and the hell with others. So, he'd have a "Very" high Self-Loyalty score

Charisma: Is just what it means. You are persuasive, convincing, know how to be and make your words attractive to others.....Like "Leader" skill, but less technical and more social.

Perception: That innate ability to hear that very faint "click" from down the hall and perceive it as a key tumbler turning where others would hear it and assume it's just some random noise...or not here it at all

Morale: Entirely different from "Morals" above, this is a composite of a base 1D6 roll and +mods for all combat Service Ribbons and decorations the character has earned. It has multiple uses. The top one is a counter against every player's desire to be the TriVid hero.
In situations which have "gotten bad" or even worse....I, as the GM roll against this and warn the player, "This is really getting bad and
your character would not be ignoring that" when they pretend their spacer with a body pistol can take on all those armored guys with
PGMP's

Luck: Something I added based on my own beliefs
When the character is created, you roll a D20 - that is their luck - Period
Should they attempt something and fail (ONLY! It does not work with rolls made by others or the consequences of those rolls)
If they fail a roll, they can roll 2D6 to get under (Not Equal To) their luck
If they roll under their "current luck", they get to re-roll the attempt they failed AND 3 points are removed from their luck(recovered 1/24 hr
period in which they have not appealed to luck again)
They can only appeal a failed roll once per roll.
If they continue to appeal to luck, their "current" luck will drop to levels they can't roll under.

 

[amsboethius]

One way that I remember seeing the SOC modifiers handled is that individuals with low SOC could treat their negative modifiers as positive ones in dealing with others of low social status, as a way to reflect in-group/out-group preferences.

 

[kilemall]

One way that I remember seeing the SOC modifiers handled is that individuals with low SOC could treat their negative modifiers as positive ones in dealing with others of low social status, as a way to reflect in-group/out-group preferences.

Base throw for Streetwise, have to roll 2d6 over SOC + Streetwise skill - difficulty modifier for success.

 

[kilemall]

One way that I remember seeing the SOC modifiers handled is that individuals with low SOC could treat their negative modifiers as positive ones in dealing with others of low social status, as a way to reflect in-group/out-group preferences.

Oh, another roll I came up with for SOC awareness-

SOC differences affect the reaction roll. Lower SOC - Higher SOC +2 modifier. Exception is modifiers ignored for natural 2 or 12, great hatred or soul bonding no matter the class distinction.

This is on social situations, for professional situations like the military or medical everyone acts and treats as though all are SOC 8. Those that refuse to behave professionally whether high or low apply their natural SOC with consequences.

If you want to really amp up the class warfare part, try this-

LL -SOC + 7 = ELL (effective law level)

So a LL of 7 would be 7 for average SOC, LL4 for SOC A, and LLB for SOC 3.

 

[bookwyrm]

If you want to really amp up the class warfare part, try this-

LL -SOC + 7 = ELL (effective law label)

So a LL of 7 would be 7 for average SOC, LL4 for SOC A, and LLB for SOC 3.

This idea is so good it's spooky! It's 2d6 and only needs to be used if/when necessary. And it's a great way to help my imagination when considering a populations culture and possible class structure.

 

[kilemall]

The other way to go is ignore common usage of SOC and use it instead for EQ, emotional quotient.

Then it becomes the base stat for any sophont reading/manipulation skill rolls.

So yes Leader, Persuade, Advocate, Carousing, Bribery etc but also Interrogation or Intimidation- not charisma but innate ability to read and manipulate interactions.

Still need some sort of social ranking, my choice is EDU. The idea is that there is a meritocratic element to characters that rank highly in EDU so doctors, scientists, engineers, leaders can achieve and gain stature.

But also, the truly connected have the resources and clout to ensure their children go to the right, best schools and get educated/refined so that explains why there are low INT/high EDU characters.

And if they are pedantic/boorish horrible people, well they likely have a low SOC characteristic.

Can explain differing levels of compensation for salary for similar work.

Would require a bit of rejiggering some of the chargen but less than first glance.

 

[TimInWharfedale]

Spinward Scout - I've come to this discussion a bit late, so apologies. My thoughts are:

1) EXTRA CHARACTERISTICS
Like others who have mentioned it above, I see no reason hwy you shouldn't have SOC as another Characteristic on top of the basic 6. I routinely use others including:

• AGI (Agility - keeping DEX but assigning it to manual handling with AGI for coordination, reflexes etc.)
• APP (Appearance - as already suggested by others).
• STA (Status - used much like your SOC really).
• WEA (Wealth - as also already suggested by others).

I also sometimes use other add on Characteristics such as:

• AWA (Awareness of surroundings, people, things out of place etc. which is similar to PER - Perception used by many).
• SIZ (Size - as used in BRP and similar games - but rejected this as number of Characteristics were growing. instead I make it part of background [ie: short, average, tall, thin, normal, portly etc] and use as modifiers to APP).
• LUC (Luck - again suggested above. I find it difficult to decide whether this is the most important Characteristic of all, or a pointless diversion - I'm still thinking about this!).

So clearly lots of people are using different ideas. But one thing that struck me as really different about your explanation of SOC was this...

2) SUB-CHARACTERISTICS ARE A NEW PROCESS
You have assembled the Characteristic from 6 different sub-Characteristics (ie: Looks, Personality, Fashion, Interaction, Luckiness and Standing) each with 3 outcomes. This is interesting and thought provoking. However, this technique is not used for any other Characteristic, so would make SOC a very unusual add on to any set of 2d6 rules. I'm not saying it's a bad idea just some thought might be given to integrating it more into the standard Characteristics. Why not just have a straight 2d6 with the odd modifier based upon Background? Alternatively why not...

3) ADD SUB-CHARACTERISTICS TO ALL CHARACTERISTICS?
Why not develop sub Characteristics for ALL the existing Characteristics as well? This would introduce a common structure, but possibly at the expense of a headache or two and certainly implies a lot of extra detail. I don't even know if it's either possible or desirable. So here's my off the cuff attempt at do this using DEX as an example - and I've no idea what the outcome will look like!. So MGT1 (I've not got MGT2!!!) describes DEX as: "Physical co-ordination and agility, reflexes. A Character's Dexterity affects his accuracy in ranged combat and his reaction speed." So based upon this helpful description, DEX could have 6 Sub-Characteristics that could look like:

1. Co-ordination (Clumsy, Average, Precise)
2. Agility (Awkward, Average, Graceful)
3. Reflexes (Quick, Average, Quick)
4. Accuracy (Inaccurate, Average, Accurate)
5. Reaction (Dull, Average, Smart) Note: I've split "Reaction Speed" into 2 Sub-Characteristics.
6. Speed (Slow, Average, Fast) Note: I've split "Reaction Speed" into 2 Sub-Characteristics.

4) CONCLUSIONS?
This isn't perfect by any means. There is considerable overlap and the thought of creating and using Sub-Characteristics for EVERY Characteristic, makes me go pale. Why go to the trouble? Is commonality (ie: in how you calculate Characteristics) vital? Should we ignore Sub-Characteristics for ALL Characteristics (including SOC and other add ons) for the sake of simplicity? Thoughts anybody?

Tim

 

[Enoki]

I see SOC as:

Family. What is your pedigree? Are you from a family that people recognize your name? Higher SOC.
Edu: College? Yes? Where did you attend? What level of education did you attain?
Money: How much have you got? The more the better = higher SOC.
Skills: Do you have any that really stand out? Are you a world class professional something? Higher SOC.
Work history: What have you done?
Military rank: The higher the better. Which service you were in. Your list of assignments. The alternate is in whatever civilian field you are in. An award-winning scientist? Higher SOC. A plumber? Lower SOC.

You can be a complete boor and oafish but if you come from a well-connected noble family, went to THE right college, have globs of cash to toss about, and were a high ranked officer in the military, you get a high SOC.

If on the other hand, you're the greatest guy and everybody likes you, but you've come from a working-class family, didn't go to college, haven't got two credits to your name, and never were in the military or some situation where your job came with a "real" title, you get a low SOC.

SOC is about WHO you are, not what kind of personal traits you possess. That would be something like many RPG's having a Chrisma trait listed for the character.

It's also about how you present yourself, your appearance and trappings. You show up somewhere with an entourage in tow like a couple of bodyguards, a personal assistant, maybe a lackey or two, and you are in a $1000 credit suit or dress, you are higher SOC than if you show up in ratty clothes, with a body funk, and act nervous to be there.

It's like ZZ Top and Sharp dressed man...

Of course, if you are a thug or a scoundrel, having a low SOC would be desirable. Thus, when interviewing for a position as such your prison record, gang affiliations, and possession of several wanted posters would be of great benefit to you.

A high SOC would be something like: You came from a barony as family with your mother's side being connected to a well-to-do viscount, and your family is close to the sector Duke. You went to the finest private university in that region of the Imperium where only the most connected or brightest get selected graduating with honors. You were the school fencing champion and on the first string of the handegg team.
You subsequently served in the Imperial Navy as a Lieutenant receiving several medals for heroism and outstanding work. After that, you were knighted and then went to work as an executive in management at the sector branch headquarters of a megacorp. You live in a penthouse in the rich part of town and have several attendants and servants at your beck and call.

 

[mike wightman]

There are two characteristics I have had to add as secondary to the UPP - willpower and perception.

I find that in the games where those stats exist in some form things are a lot easier to adjudicate.

So I have Str, Dex, End, Int, (Per), (Wil), Edu, Soc.

I have toyed with adding secondary stats instead, so keep Str Dex End Int Edu Soc but add

perception (now called awareness, you will see why), willpower, personality

 

[mike wightman]

The other way to go is ignore common usage of SOC and use it instead for EQ, emotional quotient.

Then it becomes the base stat for any sophont reading/manipulation skill rolls.

And is no longer the Social Standing characteristic, it would be better to call it Empathy.

So yes Leader, Persuade, Advocate, Carousing, Bribery etc but also Interrogation or Intimidation- not charisma but innate ability to read and manipulate interactions.

Still need some sort of social ranking, my choice is EDU. The idea is that there is a meritocratic element to characters that rank highly in EDU so doctors, scientists, engineers, leaders can achieve and gain stature.

Social status is much more commonly linked to birthright and wealth. The Romans had very well educated but very low status Greek slaves.

But also, the truly connected have the resources and clout to ensure their children go to the right, best schools and get educated/refined so that explains why there are low INT/high EDU characters.

Truly connected and wealth - so birthright.

And if they are pedantic/boorish horrible people, well they likely have a low SOC characteristic.

Can explain differing levels of compensation for salary for similar work.

Would require a bit of rejiggering some of the chargen but less than first glance.

Or you could just introduce an additional characteristic that defines the person but is not part of the Imperial measurement UPP.

 

[Dragoner]

For soc I have tried different stuff, like making it "social intelligence" though I have generally gone back to high soc DM good for dealing with admin and legal stuff, while low is a bonus on streetwise, basically knowing about the various stratum of society's culture.

 

[Enoki]

The way I play SOC is you must or should be and act the way you would in society for that level of SOC. If you don't it can go down. To get it to go up, you need to do things that will raise it.

So, if you are a noble, you have to act like a noble or people won't take you seriously. No money? Problem. You carouse and gamble a lot? Problem. Associate with the riff raff? Problem. Do nefarious things? Problem. No different than some rich kid or noble today.

You have a low SOC? Streetwise is good. Associating with questionable people doing questionable things? Good.

Same goes for your expenses. You have to wear clothes, have accessories, etc., that look the part for your SOC. You're a baron? Better show up at the next planet with your "People." Problems with immigration there? Your concierge, personal assistant, etc., handles such trivial matters. You might want bodyguards too. That means you need cash to pay all these people. The local rulers / political types might expect you to rub elbows with them.

You were a colonel or captain in the military? You find the local club for ranking officers, if there is one, and make yourself known. Arriving on a shabby merchant ship doesn't bode well unless you can explain that away to your local peers.

All of this makes SOC important to the game, not an afterthought. It becomes a vehicle to what kind of encounters you get into.

For example, you're an Imperial noble on a non-Imperial world. The next system over has some snotty noble the local snotty noble hates. He wants you to go there and make the guy miserable in some way, of course for suitable compensation...

Retired army colonel? The local officer's club (think military version of country club where admittance is restricted and checked to make sure only the 'right' sort get in) is into an intrigue because of a local conflict and wants you to go do some daring deed one last time. Your glorious death is likely, but you will be remembered for your sacrifice and bravery... Sort of like this:

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/the-daring-calcutta-light-horse-raid/

Low SOC merchant? Smuggling, illegal trade goods like name brand knock offs, and that sort of thing are right up your alley.

 

[bookwyrm]

The SOC of Imperial Citizens vs. the SOC of the citizens of a planet in the Imperium vs. the SOC of the citizens of another Interstellar Polity (Alien or Human) vs. the SOC of an Independent System are all different from each other, so I see SOC as very fluid depending on where you are.

I think all of the posts on this thread so far have shown us how varied and complex SOC really is. SOC is all about where one fits in their Society, and possibly where one fits in (or doesn't fit in) another Society.

One big difficulty I've discovered for me is that there is one SOC that is used for multiple Societies in Traveller, and it can slide up & down pretty fast in certain situations.

The Daring Calcutta Light Horse Raid

During a clandestine raid, the Calcutta Light Horse silenced a German transmitter in the neutral harbor of Marmagoa.

warfarehistorynetwork.com

Enjoyed the link! Thanks for sharing!

 

[Enoki]

The SOC of Imperial Citizens vs. the SOC of the citizens of a planet in the Imperium vs. the SOC of the citizens of another Interstellar Polity (Alien or Human) vs. the SOC of an Independent System are all different from each other, so I see SOC as very fluid depending on where you are.

I think all of the posts on this thread so far have shown us how varied and complex SOC really is. SOC is all about where one fits in their Society, and possibly where one fits in (or doesn't fit in) another Society.

One big difficulty I've discovered for me is that there is one SOC that is used for multiple Societies in Traveller, and it can slide up & down pretty fast in certain situations.


Enjoyed the link! Thanks for sharing!

No, it's not. Some independent system where the local ruler is a self-styled "king" is really just the same as some imperial baron on the SOC scale. The title changed but the status level remained the same. What you have to do is adjust the titles and such to fit the situation rather than change the SOC level.

 

[Enoki]

The SOC of Imperial Citizens vs. the SOC of the citizens of a planet in the Imperium vs. the SOC of the citizens of another Interstellar Polity (Alien or Human) vs. the SOC of an Independent System are all different from each other, so I see SOC as very fluid depending on where you are.

I think all of the posts on this thread so far have shown us how varied and complex SOC really is. SOC is all about where one fits in their Society, and possibly where one fits in (or doesn't fit in) another Society.

One big difficulty I've discovered for me is that there is one SOC that is used for multiple Societies in Traveller, and it can slide up & down pretty fast in certain situations.


Enjoyed the link! Thanks for sharing!

It makes for a great Traveller scenario, one of many. You see, the Zhodani have established some sort of spy and intelligence operation in the (fill in the blank) system within the Marshes. They are coordinating a huge piracy operation on our merchant ships at great cost. We can't involve the Imperial Navy as we have neither the resources nor political justification for it. So, we'd like you group of retired gentlemen who have served the Imperium so well in the past to go and...

And now you have a great scenario with lots of gunfire and insanity.