Social Standing as Campaign Theme

[Carlobrand]

... don't forget that distribution is a ... well, not a bell curve, but a pyramid. So, SOC2 anybodies will be few and far between, as will the SOCC anybody. Unless your players are playing with loaded dice, you won't get many SOC2 doctors anyway. Solving them on an individual basis works just fine.

I wouldn't call 1/36 "few and far between." Unusual, but not so unlikely that I'd question it - party of 6 has about a 15% chance of having someone with a SOC2, or a SOC 12 for that matter. 1/216, that'd be "few and far between."

...There are no impediments getting into the Doctor's career from having low Soc. More to the point, even if there had been, once someone from the gutters has gotten into college and through medical school, his Soc would almost certainly rise to equal his new position in life. ...

Kinda depends on your society and your reason for having a low SOC. Consider that black Americans pre-1964 had a very low social standing, and becoming a black Doctor didn't do much to change that in many parts of the country.

Which brings up a different sort of problem: yes, what constitutes high society is pretty well universal in Traveller culture, but what constitutes low society is likely to vary quite a bit from culture to culture. A Dalit "untouchable" is only an "untouchable" in old India and related Southeast Asian cultures; get away from the culture, and he's just an ordinary Joe - and with a bit of luck can even aspire to high status. In a similar vein, the black Doctor was low status in the dominant culture, but he enjoyed high status within his own subculture.

The SOC stat is unusual among the various character stats for trying to capture a feature that depends more on how others see the character and less on anything intrinsic to the character himself. What constitutes "low brow" or "peasant" garb or behavior varies widely from culture to culture - and with changing styles. An intelligent person can learn to adopt the behaviors of a higher or lower class, in essence raising or lowering his apparent SOC and affecting how others interact with him (though failing in that effort - in either direction - may have some very severe consequences).

 

[rancke]

Kinda depends on your society and your reason for having a low SOC. Consider that black Americans pre-1964 had a very low social standing, and becoming a black Doctor didn't do much to change that in many parts of the country.

But it's still not going to be random. A member of a socially stigmatized ethnic group (SSEG) isn't going to start with a random Soc of 2-12, and any one of this ethnic group that manages to become a doctor may only become Soc 4 instead of Soc 8 (or may even stay Soc 2). But there's not gonig to be any of them who are Soc 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 or 11 or 12.

Which brings up a different sort of problem: yes, what constitutes high society is pretty well universal in Traveller culture, but what constitutes low society is likely to vary quite a bit from culture to culture.

It seems to me that if the social status of two individuals can be compared, they must belong to the same culture, in this case the Imperial culture. If an Imperial baron meets a butcher, a baker, a candlestick maker, or a doctor, he's not going to care if they are members of an SSEG or a culturally dominant ethnic group (CDEG), he's going to consider them as good as any other butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, and doctors. (Although IMTU an Imperial will consider someone from a low-tech culture to be of lesser status than someone with the same job who comes from a high-tech culture. But that's a very broad prejudice.)

Oh, and humans do seem to be a bit more equal than aliens. But that's just imagination.


Hans

 

[DangerousThing]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_status

^^^a limited resource for sure, as the subject is covered in much more depth, esp in marketing.

To me soc is the same as ses. Marc is a sociologist iirc, so it matches up much the same. Why make up rules instead of following reality?

So aren't you saying pretty much what I'm saying, that Soc is more of a calculated thing rather than the rolled stat it is?

It could be based on Income, Job, and Edu. Of course, Traveller is not the highest class of employment.

 

[Ishmael]

it is closer to Weber's views on social stratification.

Soc should be a combination or average of class, or economic position, status, or popularity within the society, and power, or the influence a person has due to political position.

In Trav, Soc is mainly used as a measure of power where a character has Soc based on title, or position within the governing structure.

 

[Dragoner]

So aren't you saying pretty much what I'm saying, that Soc is more of a calculated thing rather than the rolled stat it is?

It could be based on Income, Job, and Edu. Of course, Traveller is not the highest class of employment.

I think the random nature of it, being rolled, forces creativity. However, being such a single digit, cannot fully describe the subtle and nuanced nature of ses. If one chooses to pick it for the purpose of an npc, fine; but also say a the doctor with a low social standing may have killed the mayor's daughter on the operating table with too much ether, or that in the future, nobody would pick a human surgeon over an autodoc.

So if that is what you are saying, then we are in agreement.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

What's you[r] point? I've never made up all the people in a community, but if I did, I would assign social levels rather than rolling for them.

vs.

However, there are no rules in any Traveller version that helps a referee make up groups of NPCs in any way different from PCs.

See, Hans, you're complaining about the rules not doing something that they never claimed to do, and using the lack of a disclaimer saying otherwise as your proof. And, you've already solved the problem in that first sentence - you would assign stuff anyway.

No suggestions that all officers of Imperial forces are considered gentlemen and have a minimum social level of 8, not suggestions that members of small rural communities would tend to have these and those social levels, not suggestions that professors at the subsector's Imperial university would tend to be upper middle or even lower upper class.

And, if they did, I probably wouldn't play such a rigidly defined game. 7 is average, B is Knight, you should be able to figure everything else out from there. On top of which, all of what you ask for is going to change on the various planets of the 3I - not everyone is Imperial in their outlook or life.

For "adventurers" anyway.

Exactly.

Which is also the system "used to randomly determine the station in life of NPCs whose station in life should be pretty obvious in advance."

If it's that frackin' obvious, then why are you using random generation? Just write it down!

Why would you go to the trouble of chargen for an NPC?

Exactly.

Quotes from LBB1:

Finally, the referee deals with new situations that these rules may not cover; after all, no set of rules can totally define the universe and how it works.

and

Characters are the central focus of Traveller

 

[Fritz_Brown]

But it's still not going to be random.

So, why do you keep wanting to make it random by using chargen?

It seems to me that if the social status of two individuals can be compared, they must belong to the same culture, in this case the Imperial culture.

And, there's another part of the problem. If SOC only relates to Imperial status, then it doesn't even require numbers below A. Below the level of gentlemen and nobles there are really just two ranks: those who are scum, and everyone else. The 3I is an incredibly (and bizarrely) egalitarian place. (The individual planets, not so much.)

I wouldn't call 1/36 "few and far between." Unusual, but not so unlikely that I'd question it - party of 6 has about a 15% chance of having someone with a SOC2, or a SOC 12 for that matter.

Then your players aren't working hard enough at their dice throwing.

 

[Carlobrand]

... but also say a the doctor with a low social standing may have killed the mayor's daughter on the operating table with too much ether, ...

Why is the mayor relying on TL 4 medical technology for his daughter? Why does a medical error lower the social stat? Seems to me Herr Doktor can slip that albatross just by performing a home-address transplant - a proven technique used by many, many TL-4 medical quacks.

... or that in the future, nobody would pick a human surgeon over an autodoc. ...

Reviewing some of the rules about robots, I'm not entirely confident about the ability of an autodoc to handle the unexpected. An autodoc supervised by an experienced physician - that has promise. An autodoc by itself - unless you're on some very high-tech world, that sounds like what you'd do for the welfare class.

Just as most of the world isn't lucky enough to be within driving distance of Johns Hopkins or the Texas Medical Center or some similar top-rated facility, most of the Imperium isn't going to have access to a top-of-the-line autodoc without either a lot of bucks or passage to some nearby high-tech world. Most of them will have to be happy with their local fleshy doctor, maybe supervising an autodoc, just as most of us have to make do with whatever hospital happens to be nearest to us. For the most part, that will serve them quite adequately.

 

[Dragoner]

Because it's a tl4 world?


read more on robots.


but incase you noticed, that wasn't at all the point.

 

[Carlobrand]

Because it's a tl4 world?

read more on robots.

but incase you noticed, that wasn't at all the point.

Read more on healthcare.

And, no it wasn't. Your point was that 1) randomness forces creativity, which I agree fully with, and 2) a simple score cannot capture the full complexity of socioeconomic status, which I also agree fully with. There was just this wee teensy little bit that I had some minor disagreement with, having considerable experience of the healthcare field.

 

[Dragoner]

No example will be necessarily perfect, but merely to give reason for why something could be (eg low soc of a doctor). I also know from experience of seeing eastern europe and the soviet union that there doctors were not necessarily a highly respected profession and medicine was practiced in a "assembly line" fashion, often enough.

 

[rancke]

See, Hans, you're complaining about the rules not doing something that they never claimed to do, and using the lack of a disclaimer saying otherwise as your proof.

No, Fritz, I'm pointing out that the rules fail to address a pretty important aspect of running a game. At least, I think that the creation of NPCs is fairly important.

I'm pointing out that from the very beginnig, Traveller writers have been using random social levels for the NPCs they described[*], thus very possibly fooling naive and inexperienced referees into believing that that's how it is supposed to be done.

[*] The sole exception seems to be Imperial noble characters, though I won't rule out the possibility that some non-noble NPCs have had assigned SLs. There's no real evidence for that, but it's possible.​

I've also mentioned the existence of at least one JTAS article that expressely suggests using the character generation system to create NPCs, again giving the inexperienced referee the impression that that's how it's supposed to be. After all, when the people who work for the people who wrote the rules (indeed, sometimes being those very same people) used random SLs for their NPCs, one might suspect that that was how the rules were supposed to be used, mightn't one?

See, Fritz, you and I are hip. We know the score. We don't need no steenkeeng rules. But not everybody are as brilliant as we are. Some people evidently did need rules. And those who did need rules didn't get the rules they needed. If they had, they wouldn't have assigned random SLs to NPCs when it wasn't appropriate and thus introducing setting elements that shakes my suspension of disbelief.

And, you've already solved the problem in that first sentence - you would assign stuff anyway.

Unfortunately, my time machine is on the blink, so I can't hop back to 1977 and give Marc Miller a bit of friendly advice.

And, if they did, I probably wouldn't play such a rigidly defined game. 7 is average, B is Knight, you should be able to figure everything else out from there.

Actually, I don't think so. At least, I've had no luck coming up with a reasonable social ladder that spreads the lower and middle class over nine levels, squeezes everyone from the gentry to planetary level emperors into a couple of levels, and stretches six Imperial noble ranks over six levels. I don't think you could do it either.

And, of course, we shouldn't have to. A social ladder that told us what SL 1-10 actually meant is something the rules should have provided from the start.

On top of which, all of what you ask for is going to change on the various planets of the 3I - not everyone is Imperial in their outlook or life.

How true (Though the typical player character is). Which is why I don't expect a single social ladder to cover every possibility any more than I expect, say, a single tabel of military ranks to cover every possibility. I just want it to cover ONE (the most common one would be nice).


Hans

 

[rancke]

So, why do you keep wanting to make it random by using chargen?

I don't. I want Traveller writers to make it not random by not using random SLs.

If SOC only relates to Imperial status, then it doesn't even require numbers below A.

I don't see why not. Lots of people belonging to Imperial society are non-nobles.

Below the level of gentlemen and nobles there are really just two ranks: those who are scum, and everyone else. The 3I is an incredibly (and bizarrely) egalitarian place. (The individual planets, not so much.)

Provably untrue. The Imperium distinguishes between Soc 8 and Soc 9 (Navy characters have better chance of commision, Diplomats better chance of enlisting) and between Soc 7 and Soc 8 (Marines have better chance of promotion).

And that's just the ones I can prove. Why have 17 social levels if the nine lowest are actually only two? That doesn't make any sense.


Hans

 

[Carlobrand]

No example will be necessarily perfect, but merely to give reason for why something could be (eg low soc of a doctor). I also know from experience of seeing eastern europe and the soviet union that there doctors were not necessarily a highly respected profession and medicine was practiced in a "assembly line" fashion, often enough.

Ayup, there are places where the doctor is more a skilled technician than any sort of elite. And too, you have folk like the guy who got his medical degree from some unaccredited Caribbean medical school, who opens up a cash-or-barter practice in some impoverished neighborhood and has to move every couple of years when the Board of Medicine gets wind of him and sends an investigator around asking questions. Or the guy who's an honest-to-goodness respected doctor in his own country but can't get certified here without additional training and internship that he can't get for lack of money and backing, so he works as a phlebotomist by day and does off-the-record house calls in his working-class ethnic neighborhood at night.

...The Imperium distinguishes between Soc 8 and Soc 9 (Navy characters have better chance of commision, Diplomats better chance of enlisting) and between Soc 7 and Soc 8 (Marines have better chance of promotion). ...

And then there's Pirates: better chance of being recruited if your SOC was 7 or less, and it tended to lower your SOC further on mustering out. That leads me to think that part of low SOC may relate to criminal history, since that kind of thing is at least as carefully documented as any noble rank and tends to follow you as closely - especially if they branded you or tattooed you as part of your punishment. Remember that time you were 16, when you hotwired the car and went joyriding? Well, so does the Starport Authority.

(Or if, like many of the underclass set, you went and got certain tattoos yourself or proudly wear some symbol of your low rank in defiance of the social order, then you probably stand out a bit from the norm.)

Rogues too, you had a better chance if your SOC was below 8 [correction: 8 or below], though in their case there was a chance their career could actually raise their social standing. Apparently, there's more than one way to earn people's respect.

I recall a game in which I gave folk with unusually low SOC a chance at starting the game with a level of Streetwise, Gambling, Brawling, or Dagger, as befitted their humble and difficult teen years.

We had something like this:

2-4 lower class/criminal background/ostracized class: life will be so much better when you get the money to have the gang tatts removed. It might also help if you could get rid of that frightful accent.

5-7 working class: you never learned the social graces, but you did learn the value of hard work - and sometimes you smell like it. At least you don't call everyone, "Guv'nah".

8-9 upper class: mom taught you to stand up straight, use proper etiquette, speak with correct diction and show deference to your betters. People respect that, even if they don't specifically respect you yet.

10-12+ noble class: people are impressed by the title and recognize the family name - and give it very careful thought when dealing with you. After all, you might be someone important - or you might be just another spoiled remittance brat sponging off your family's influence.

 

[mike wightman]

In the OTU Soc as a stat represents position within society - yes?

It is influenced by:

family background (what is your family's social position)

career opportunity (did you improve your social standing thanks to merit or brown nosing)

reward (have you done something that merits an elevated social position)

Remember that this characteristic only applies to dealings with the Imperium and Imperial authorities - you could be the ruler of a high pop world and have a social standing of 2 =)

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I don't. I want Traveller writers to make it not random by not using random [SOC]s.*

It's something they already did, so...

Unfortunately, my time machine is on the blink, so I can't hop back to 1977 and give Marc Miller a bit of friendly advice.

So, the short version of what you could (consistently) say is, "Hey kids! Don't do everything randomly when creating NPCs. Use your own native intelligence and create NPCs that make sense." Right? Perhaps along with, "Hey, guys (like MM) writing new versions of the rule books! Don't make it look like you're using random chargen to make NPCs. Tell the referees to make them up on their own, using common sense."?

Having said all that, I would also suggest that referees be willing to adjust SOCs based on the results of career generation. This wouldn't be a rigid rule, but one based on the roleplay story you will use.

*SL means something different to me (SecondLife), and "SOC" is the Traveller term, so I substituted to avoid confusion.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

I recall a game in which I gave folk with unusually low SOC a chance at starting the game with a level of Streetwise, Gambling, Brawling, or Dagger, as befitted their humble and difficult teen years.

We had something like this:

2-4 lower class/criminal background/ostracized class: life will be so much better when you get the money to have the gang tatts removed. It might also help if you could get rid of that frightful accent.

5-7 working class: you never learned the social graces, but you did learn the value of hard work - and sometimes you smell like it. At least you don't call everyone, "Guv'nah".

8-9 upper class: mom taught you to stand up straight, use proper etiquette, speak with correct diction and show deference to your betters. People respect that, even if they don't specifically respect you yet.

10-12+ noble class: people are impressed by the title and recognize the family name - and give it very careful thought when dealing with you. After all, you might be someone important - or you might be just another spoiled remittance brat sponging off your family's influence.

My work-in-progress homebrew chargen is something like that (and I love those category write-ups), with the background category of "Wretch" getting you an automatic level of Streetwise, and a little grittier selection of background skills. (This is in addition to a homeworld skill or two.) My background categories are: Barbarian, Burgess, Noble, Spacer, and Wretch. Noble and Wretch are based on Standing (my substitute for SOC) outside one standard deviation.

Maybe someday I'll have the chargen done enough to offer it up here.

 

[Carlobrand]

...Remember that this characteristic only applies to dealings with the Imperium and Imperial authorities - you could be the ruler of a high pop world and have a social standing of 2 =)

So, sort of an Al Capone figure, or an Idi Amin, ruthless, cunning, climbing up from humble beginnings and still showing the evidence of them despite the highbrow trappings, more endured by the elite as a matter of practicality than actually accepted among them.

Oooh, that has potential!

 

[saundby]

Or Diskworld: Harry King

 

[Frankymole]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I have posted an essay discussing ways to turn the pursuit of higher SOC into a campaign theme. I've approached it as the result of character's actions within the game that affect their reputation rather than as actions taken to accrue some meta-game points that can be traded for a +1 SOC. I would like to hear from some other Travellers how they would handle changing this under-used stat, and how SOC aids or hinders character within the game.
[/FONT]

Sounds like En Garde - GDW's pre-Traveller game, all based on climbing social levels in musketeers-era France. Great fun and well worth mining for ideas.