"Unskilled laborer joins the nobility!"

[Star Gazer]

Not unreasonable bearing in mind the character starts as a junior assistant, I would use life events to increase Soc by at least 1 every time the character is promoted, it's a big thing, getting rank 5 or 6 certainly worth a knighthood when you approach retirement.

Looking at the tables is good to see that personal development is as likely to give Blade skill as an increase in Soc, very useful for stabbing people in the back!

Reminds me of my life except I only made Rank 3,

regards

David

Further, just like the other stats, SOC represents an ability.

Have SOC 3? You're just not that good in social situations. A good example in the US would be Dan Quayle or George Bush Jr. One can be socially awkward and still have immense social standing. SOC is not just how 'society' sees you, but also about how you comport yourself, your knowledge of culture(s), your ability to read people and more.

Sure, it's nice to have that Marine Brigadier General with a SOC F in your party, but her stipend still isn't huge and she's a Traveller. If SOC was just 'imperial rank', then that'd be awfully hard to explain.

And remember, we're in the realm of "Imaginative Justification", if some aspect of the rules doesn't make sense (and isn't an arithmetic or factual error), that's because you haven't come up with a justification yet. There is always one there to find.

 

[rancke]

Further, just like the other stats, SOC represents an ability.

Except that by explicitly linking part of the SOC scale to specific Imperial noble titles Traveller makes it clear that, unlike the other stats, SOC represents a place on a social ladder rather than an ability.


Hans

 

[whulorigan]

SOC represents an ability.

Have SOC 3? You're just not that good in social situations. A good example in the US would be Dan Quayle or George Bush Jr. One can be socially awkward and still have immense social standing. SOC is not just how 'society' sees you, but also about how you comport yourself, your knowledge of culture(s), your ability to read people and more.

Well, according to the MgT Core Rules, p. 5:

Social Standing (Soc): A character’s place in society. Characters with a high Social Standing can claim a noble title in the Imperium and will find life much easier thanks to their reputation and contacts.

Based on the above definition, a High Social Standing correlates to place in society, reputation, and contacts (and the commensurate Noble Title, if appropriate). Low Social Standing would imply the opposite (i.e. no "Place", few meaningful contacts, and little reputation). Social Standing does correlate to social position in society and corresponding rank, if appropriate. Do not confuse Social Standing with charisma and/or personal magnetism.

The principal point of the prior discussion in this thread is not that someone of low Social Standing (as defined above) could not possibly enter the Administrative and/or Diplomatic wings of the government in the Nobles Career (that would simply be a matter of creating an interesting "back-story" for the character). Rather, the point that Hans and others were making above is that it stretches belief to think that someone who has already (i.e. past-tense) gone thru said careers could come out of them without an appropriately increased Social Standing (i.e. the appropriate contacts, reputation (positive or negative) and "place" in society commensurate with their final rank achieved.

While certain political figures may be "awkward" socially, so to speak, that is a very different thing from suggesting that they have no political contacts or "weight" to throw around, or little place and reputation in society. The Careers Paths within the Nobles Career should inherently increase the Social Standing of people with an initially Low Soc-value as the character increases in rank in the career to some minimum level appropriate to the career-rank held.

Social Ability, as you mentioned above, is probably better handled by the Carousing or Persuade Skills, using Soc or Int as the base-stat:

MgT Core Rules, p. 53:
Carouse
Carousing is the art of socialising; of having fun, but also ensuring that other people have fun, of infectious good humour. It also covers social awareness and subterfuge in such situations.

MgT Core Rules, p. 56:
Persuade
Persuade is a more casual, informal version of Diplomacy. It covers fast talking, bargaining, wheedling and bluffing. It also covers bribery or intimidation.

Concerning Social Rank -

Sure, it's nice to have that Marine Brigadier General with a SOC F in your party, but her stipend still isn't huge and she's a Traveller. If SOC was just 'imperial rank', then that'd be awfully hard to explain.

Soc-F at the very least means that a person has social position on the level of a Duke or at the "Subsector or greater" level. So whatever said Briagdier's backstory is, she still has a reputation and contacts at a very high level.

 

[Marchand]

Rather, the point that Hans and others were making above is that it stretches belief to think that someone who has already (i.e. past-tense) gone thru said careers could come out of them without an appropriately increased Social Standing (i.e. the appropriate contacts, reputation (positive or negative) and "place" in society commensurate with their final rank achieved.

Except in post 23 or thereabouts above, I came up with an RL example.

I will now add another: I was recently reading about a guy who had been a senior commander in the Chinese Nationalist army in the civil war, who ended up washing dishes in Hong Kong. Had been a senior administrator, ended up with no contacts worth having and no exalted place in society.

The category error that Ranke and others are making (in my humble opinion) is in regarding the rules, and chargen in particular, as a statistical simulation of a "plausible" universe.

However, almost by definition, PCs are the unusual, not the usual.

 

[whulorigan]

Except in post 23 or thereabouts above, I came up with an RL example.

I will now add another: I was recently reading about a guy who had been a senior commander in the Chinese Nationalist army in the civil war, who ended up washing dishes in Hong Kong. Had been a senior administrator, ended up with no contacts worth having and no exalted place in society.

The category error that Ranke and others are making (in my humble opinion) is in regarding the rules, and chargen in particular, as a statistical simulation of a "plausible" universe.

However, almost by definition, PCs are the unusual, not the usual.

But I think the problem arises when a character with low Social Standing manages to join one of the Nobility Career paths, and the norm is that he has no meaningful increase in Social Standing as a result of his career.

I think one of the suggestions made earlier in the thread (i.e. to use the Navy Career as a template and grant an automatic Soc=10 at Rank-5 and Soc=12 at Rank-6) works well (and is also consistent with the concept of "Administrative Rank-Nobility" in the Imperium). It is a precedent already established in CharGen for the military careers. Expanding it to Nobles seems fairly straightforward.

Decreases in Social Standing (to model the example situations you describe above) should be simulated by entries on the life events and mishaps tables, under the MgT paradigm.

 

[rancke]

Except in post 23 or thereabouts above, I came up with an RL example.

I will now add another: I was recently reading about a guy who had been a senior commander in the Chinese Nationalist army in the civil war, who ended up washing dishes in Hong Kong. Had been a senior administrator, ended up with no contacts worth having and no exalted place in society.

The real life examples you provide does not seem to fit with the rest of the character generation system. As Whulorigan so rightly points out, they are not the norm for low-status people who manage to claw their way up to high government positions.

The category error that Rancke and others are making (in my humble opinion) is in regarding the rules, and chargen in particular, as a statistical simulation of a "plausible" universe.

However, almost by definition, PCs are the unusual, not the usual.

Except that it appears that NPCs are routinely generated using the character generation rules, so the "PCs are special" argument doesn't explain anything.


Hans

 

[CosmicGamer]

As Whulorigan so rightly points out, they are not the norm for low-status people who manage to claw their way up to high government positions.

Nor is it the norm for the rules. In fact it is almost the lowest possible chance without being zero.

If Soc = 2 then you can mostly only qual for noble if it is your first career and you roll a 12.

There are a few other chances based on events that give a bonus to qual rolls.

 

[whulorigan]

If Soc = 2 then you can mostly only qual for noble if it is your first career and you roll a 12. (a few other chances based on events that give a bonus to qual rolls)

Yes, but if you do qualify (no matter how unlikely), your Social Standing should increase as you reach certain higher-ranks within your career.

 

[rancke]

Nor is it the norm for the rules.

Yes it is. If a character manages to enter the Nobles career and claw his way to the top, he'll average a final SOC of around 5. Definitely not the top of society. And it's not completely unlikely that he won't get any boost to his SOC at all.


Hans

 

[Star Gazer]

Except that by explicitly linking part of the SOC scale to specific Imperial noble titles Traveller makes it clear that, unlike the other stats, SOC represents a place on a social ladder rather than an ability.


Hans

Except that the two are not mutually exclusive in any way.

 

[LeperColony]

Perhaps we can resolve the apparent dilemma by recourse to instances where titles and privilege eventually descend on an unexpected and unprepared heir. Like John Goodman's character in King Ralph. He started out a bowler in Vegas, but became the King of England.

 

[whulorigan]

Perhaps we can resolve the apparent dilemma by recourse to instances where titles and privilege eventually descend on an unexpected and unprepared heir. Like John Goodman's character in King Ralph. He started out a bowler in Vegas, but became the King of England.

That is not the problem. After John Goodman became King of England, his Social Standing did not remain ~Soc=5. As King of England, he would not have been denied membership at exclusive clubs¹, he would not have been excluded from "hob-nobbing" with other Heads of State or the British or European Nobility, he would not have been snubbed by heads of International Corporations or Banking & Investment Firms², etc.

1 - In fact HE would have been too exclusive for most of the clubs in question.

2 - In fact, they would be falling all over themselves to have the privilege of an audience with HIM, if it were a possibility.
​

Regardless of his origins, he is now the Head of State of a Major Nation. That means he has High Social Standing by default, based on the meaning of Social Standing (both conventionally and as defined in the MgT Core Rules). Even if he does have "uncouth manners".

The issue from the beginning of this thread (as has been stated previously) has nothing to do with original Social Standing. It has to do with Social Standing after entrance to and mustering out of the Nobles Career paths, regardless of what initial Social Standing was. Apart from Mishaps or Life Events, a high initial Social Standing should remain high (or be higher), and a low initial Social Standing should be raised to high levels thru participation in the Career. That is the issue on the table.

 

[whulorigan]

Defining the Issue

To reiterate: The issue raised is NOT whether or not a person of Low Social Standing can ENTER one of the Noble Career Paths. That is not in debate by anyone currently contributing to this thread, either from a rule-mechanics or philosophical standpoint. It is an (albeit unintentional) straw-man argument.

The issue is: Apart from results rolled on the Mishap or Life Events Tables in Noble CharGen, is it at all reasonable that someone of humble origins who has already entered the Nobles Career could advance to high levels within that career and exit the career still of humble status afterward as the NORM, not the exception.

As regards the OTU: The Imperium has historically rewarded men and women of ability and initiative, and often does so through advances in Social Standing, including elevation to Knighthood and/or the Peerage in some exceptional cases (this is the basis for both Honor-Nobles and Local Rank-Nobles). Further, certain higher levels in various Imperial bureaucracies either prefer or in some cases, actually require a minimum Social Rank as a prerequisite to be qualified for the position. Candidates of ability/talent who have insufficient Social Standing are typically elevated to the appropriate rank in order to enable them to hold the position (this is the basis for Administrative Rank-Nobles). Given this presupposition as regards the OTU, how does that impact the discussion at hand?

 

[atpollard]

To reiterate: The issue raised is NOT whether or not a person of Low Social Standing can ENTER one of the Noble Career Paths. That is not in debate by anyone currently contributing to this thread, either form a rule-mechanics or philosophical standpoint. It is an (albeit unintentional) straw-man argument.

Actually, I have not generally participated in this discussion because in my VERY HUMBLE opinion, this is exactly where the problem lies. The homeless inner city child of an addict/prostitute (to use an extreme example for Low Initial Social) has VERY little chance of entering the diplomatic core, even as a low level clerk.

I agree about all of the 'exceptional' cases mentioned, but the character should have an exceptional Life Event raise his social before he is qualified to enter the profession of 'Nobility'. I suspect that all of the entry level 'Nobility' positions are awarded on more of a 'who you know' than 'what you know' basis. Promotion is merit based, but admission is based on an initial qualification ... which should be 'Soc'.

Beyond that complaint, I think that tossing in automatic Soc based on rank makes perfect sense and has precedent with other careers.

 

[whulorigan]

Actually, I have not generally participated in this discussion because in my VERY HUMBLE opinion, this is exactly where the problem lies. The homeless inner city child of an addict/prostitute (to use an extreme example for Low Initial Social) has VERY little chance of entering the diplomatic core, even as a low level clerk.

In general I would agree with you. But as was pointed out by others earlier, the chance for someone with Soc=2 successfully qualifying for the career under the MgT rules is actually rather remote. So hopefully that should already be reflected under the current rules as they stand.

Beyond that complaint, I think that tossing in automatic Soc based on rank makes perfect sense and has precedent with other careers.

And I would add further: If under the MgT Core Rules a Navy or Marine Officer attaining Rank-5 or Army Officer attaining Rank-6 automatically gains minimum Soc=10 (Gentleman), and a Navy Officer upon attaining Rank-6 automatically gains minimum Soc=12 (Baronet/Baron), then why should we expect any less for someone in the actual Nobles Career proper? Certainly the branches of the Armed Forces are not more Socially-advancing that high-levels of Noble-administered government.

 

[McPerth]

Actually, I have not generally participated in this discussion because in my VERY HUMBLE opinion, this is exactly where the problem lies. The homeless inner city child of an addict/prostitute (to use an extreme example for Low Initial Social) has VERY little chance of entering the diplomatic core, even as a low level clerk.

I agree about all of the 'exceptional' cases mentioned, but the character should have an exceptional Life Event raise his social before he is qualified to enter the profession of 'Nobility'. I suspect that all of the entry level 'Nobility' positions are awarded on more of a 'who you know' than 'what you know' basis. Promotion is merit based, but admission is based on an initial qualification ... which should be 'Soc'.

As for MgT (the only versión I Know where no hard mínimum to entry noble career is, as it also represents Administation and Diplomats), the roll to entry is 10+ modified by SOC. See that a Soc 2 chaacter has a -2 Soc DM, so needing a 12 to enter it (as most of the ones told, an exceptional case).

Beyond that complaint, I think that tossing in automatic Soc based on rank makes perfect sense and has precedent with other careers.

Yes, there are precedents (also in MgT) to this: reaching R5 in the navy gives you mínimum Soc A, and reaching R6 mínimum Soc C (both, in core rules and HG in High Command career).

But I still find too many examples in history about being in a powerful office didn't made you being treated as equals (I repeat the freedmen in som Roman Emperors staffs or the jews in Europe's Middle Ages).

So I would not give them mínimum Soc, though some raising might be in order (as much as they reached powerful offices, those told above were not treated as equals, but they were treated with some respect).

 

[CosmicGamer]

is it at all reasonable that someone of humble origins who has already entered the Nobles Career could advance to high levels within that career and exit the career still of humble means afterward as the NORM, not the exception.

I can not respond to this specifically until you explain further the phrase "humble means".

In regards to Soc characteristic, I think it entirely possible. The norm... my thoughts vary. I think a typical dilettante could move up from wastrel to Ingrate, Black Sheep and Scoundrel without any increase in Social standing. An administrator, still not much of an issue; int, and edu and skills in admin and such may very well be more important than social standing for this nobility career specialization.

As I've mentioned before, I think putting those three specializations together under the title Nobility is the biggest issue. The following is the only one that really seams to fit.

Diplomat.... here we might have an issue but if we consider that the low soc character getting qualified for diplomat is statistically rare and not the norm and moving up through the ranks is statistically difficult with a -DM, then it is not a common thing to have a low SOC high rank diplomat. If somehow the dice fall that way, so be it.

If one hands out free SOC you now make it more common for the low SOC character that somehow gets into the career to gain soc and continue moving up in ranks. Is that the "norm" for people who somehow manage to get a assistant or intern position to all be quite good and capable and earn soc so they keep advancing? I'm not saying that one could not house rule some such. It makes some sense for the diplomat specialty to have higher ranks have SOC rank benefits like navy captains and admirals.

There are those that believe the hard line SOC = position. For those with this view I understand and see how some Nobility career specialties and tables are an issue. I think of all the possible diplomats throughout the imperium though. Does the ambassador of one country to another on some TL8 world have the same SOC as an imperial ambassador of one world to another, as the imperial ambassador of one sub sector to another, as the imperial ambassador to the Aslan... I'd just consider a low SOC ambassador to be one of the smaller fish. In a possibly structured and ranked society, the SOC 14 character is destined to rule and would likely never be a clerk or 3rd secretary of some country on some TL8 world. They would intern within a suitably high soc organization.

I feel that if a DM is applicable, perhaps due to a characters rank in a certain career, then the GM should apply it. There are examples in the rules for navy ranks giving DMs, why not do so for diplomat ranks? In some cases, the skills the person gains as they progress in their careers could help explain how they moved up and how they are capable of doing their jobs An admin task uses that possibly low SOC skill but the character has gained a bit of admin skill over their career and thus gets by.

As regards the OTU: The Imperium has historically rewarded men and women of ability and initiative, and often does so through advances in Social Standing

As I've pointed out before, the OTU Imperium seams a military based governmental structure. Folks that do take initiative and show leadership gain social status while the administrator or diplomat doing a great job pushing papers behind a desk is less likely to be rewarded.

 

[whulorigan]

I can not respond to this specifically until you explain further the phrase "humble means".

I had used "humble origins" and "humble means" as simply euphemisms for low Social Standing, but I realize upon your having pointed them out that the two terms can have different connotations in the context that they are being used.

A character might leave the career with "humble means" had he suffered some type of financial misfortune (and that is not necessarily limited to people of low Social Standing). What I should have implied was that the character should not normally be leaving the career with a Social Status similar to that with which he entered the career.

In regards to Soc characteristic, I think it entirely possible. The norm... my thoughts vary. I think a typical dilettante could move up from wastrel to Ingrate, Black Sheep and Scoundrel without any increase in Social standing. An administrator, still not much of an issue; int, and edu and skills in admin and such may very well be more important than social standing for this nobility career specialization.

As I've mentioned before, I think putting those three specializations together under the title Nobility is the biggest issue. The following is the only one that really seams to fit.

Diplomat.... here we might have an issue but if we consider that the low soc character getting qualified for diplomat is statistically rare and not the norm and moving up through the ranks is statistically difficult with a -DM, then it is not a common thing to have a low SOC high rank diplomat. If somehow the dice fall that way, so be it.

If one hands out free SOC you now make it more common for the low SOC character that somehow gets into the career to gain soc and continue moving up in ranks. Is that the "norm" for people who somehow manage to get a assistant or intern position to all be quite good and capable and earn soc so they keep advancing? I'm not saying that one could not house rule some such. It makes some sense for the diplomat specialty to have higher ranks have SOC rank benefits like navy captains and admirals.

You seem to have hit upon an issue here. I think the Dilettante as described seems to be representing the person of significant financial assets to start, who is effectively living a non-productive lifestyle (the "Remittance Man", so to speak). The Dilettante should probably be required to have the minimum Soc=10 entry requirement of the older rulesets, since the equivalent "career" for lower Social Standing individuals is adequately covered by the Drifter Career. The Dilettante would not need to have the automatic Social Standing increases under that paradigm.

Administrator and Diplomat both seem to have a place under the Noble Career as they are described (and would benefit from the automatic Soc increases suggested in prior posts for High Rank), but perhaps a secondary career path modeled on Administrator (call it "Bureaucrat" like it used to be in CT) should be added to the Citizen Career. Administrator and Diplomat would then cover both Rank and High Nobles (and their higher level staff).

 

[MongooseMatt]

The Dilettante should probably be required to have the minimum Soc=10 entry requirement of the older rulesets

I would argue against this - Dilettante certainly covers the Remittance Man you described. However, it also covers other archetypes.

A low SOC Dilettante, to my mind, might also cover someone like Jade Goody (non-Brits may have to look her up, though anyone from India may remember her...).

Basically, someone who got their 15 minutes of fame and was lucky/smart enough to leverage it. It is their fame that propels them forward, not necessarily their SOC (which may nevertheless improve through the career).

So, someone who is a complete waste of space but always seems to be on your TV. Sort of like Paris Hilton, but without the breeding/social standing/Daddy's money.

Apologies to fans of Miss Goody and Hilton. But both were very much in mind when we worked on Dilettantes.

 

[rancke]

I would argue against this - Dilettante certainly covers the Remittance Man you described. However, it also covers other archetypes.

A low SOC Dilettante, to my mind, might also cover someone like Jade Goody (non-Brits may have to look her up, though anyone from India may remember her...).

I take it that this answers a question that has been nagging me from the start: Is the change in recruitment procedure for the Nobles career deliberate or a mistake. It's deliberate. It's nice to get that cleared up in my mind.

I'd like to emphasise that it's not the chance of a low-status person somehow becoming a Noble (though I do wonder who would be paying for the dilletante lifestyle of a member of the lower lower class ) that bothers me, it's the chance that he could be come a high government official and still remain SOC 2.

Mind you, I do think that mashing administrators, bureaucrats, diplomats, and actual nobles into a single career strains the system though possibly not beyond breaking point.


Hans