Psychological Limitation Help

[Supreme]

I'm making a character (tentatively) named the "Iron Sage". He's a Buddhist Mystic/Brick. As a Buddhist, he must always be open to non-violent alternatives to confrontations. He must also always offer his enemy a chance to surrender (and thus avoid violence). How many points would you all say this is worth, and what should the specs be?

[Fireg0lem]

Okay, the character tries to avoid combat (a very common situation) but only needs to try, he can still fight if he has to (so its only moderate strength). That's my take on it.

[MisterVimes]

<table cellpadding="0" border="0"><tr><td align="right"><b>Val&#160;&#160;</b></td><td><b>Disadvantages</b></td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="right">15&#160;&#160;</td><td>Psychological Limitation: Favors Non-Violence/Option to surrender (Very Common; Moderate)&#160;</td></tr></table>
<b>Disadvantage Points:</b> 15

[Vondy]

I would go with:

Devout Buddist Monk (Very Common, Moderate)

[loki]

I pretty much agree with the other 2 post only, you may even consider boiling it down to 10 pointer. How committed is he/she to avoiding violence? Sounds like a cool character idea though. Good luck

[Supreme]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
<table cellpadding="0" border="0"><tr><td align="right"><b>Val&#160;&#160;</b></td><td><b>Disadvantages</b></td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="right">15&#160;&#160;</td><td>Psychological Limitation: Favors Non-Violence/Option to surrender (Very Common; Moderate)&#160;</td></tr></table>
<b>Disadvantage Points:</b> 15
That sounds about right.

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by Supreme
That sounds about right.

We're all so very smart:D

[Lord Liaden]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
We're all so very smart:D

But Teleios is smarter. :p

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by Lord Liaden
But Teleios is smarter. :p

Teleios is Destroyer's b!t$#

[Arthur]

It actually sounds more like Very Common and Strong. If he always has to try nonviolent methods, even if it puts him in danger, that sounds like it's beyond "Moderate".

[McCoy]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
<table cellpadding="0" border="0"><tr><td align="right"><b>Val&#160;&#160;</b></td><td><b>Disadvantages</b></td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="right">15&#160;&#160;</td><td>Psychological Limitation: Favors Non-Violence/Option to surrender (Very Common; Moderate)&#160;</td></tr></table>
<b>Disadvantage Points:</b> 15

This is over and above the Code v Killing?

I would say it is at least a 20 point disad. Remember, if he must always attempt a non-violent solution, he cannot attack from suprise, ambush, set a trap, strike first, use an insurance shot, OR allow any teammates to do any of the above.

What's a Code of Chivalry worth in our campagine? Restrictions would be simular, just different source.

[umbra]

Originally posted by D-Man
I would go with:

Devout Buddist Monk (Very Common, Moderate)

That would include a lot more then just being pacifist, you would most likely be a vegetarian, give your money to the poor, try to avoid romantic entanglements etc. (I'm sure there is much more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head).

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by McCoy
This is over and above the Code v Killing?

I would say it is at least a 20 point disad. Remember, if he must always attempt a non-violent solution, he cannot attack from suprise, ambush, set a trap, strike first, use an insurance shot, OR allow any teammates to do any of the above.

What's a Code of Chivalry worth in our campagine? Restrictions would be simular, just different source.

I'd add it to CvK.
He won't kill (a given) and he won't use violence if there is another option.

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by umbra
That would include a lot more then just being pacifist, you would most likely be a vegetarian, give your money to the poor, try to avoid romantic entanglements etc. (I'm sure there is much more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head).

And a social limitation as well (not limiting in some cultures)

[Supreme]

Originally posted by umbra
That would include a lot more then just being pacifist, you would most likely be a vegetarian, give your money to the poor, try to avoid romantic entanglements etc. (I'm sure there is much more but that's all I can think of off the top of my head).
Not all Buddhists, or Sangha (Buddhist clergy), are vegetarians. It has a lot to do with where your order comes from. Tibetan Buddhists (aka Vajrayana) are not vegetarians because they come from the Himalayas where there's not really a lot of good land for crops. Also Sangha don't have to give all their money to the poor. Sangha are supported entirely by the laeity. In this country that just makes them poor automatically, because Buddhist populations here are so low. Though sex and romance are out. Also out are indulgences in many creature comforts like nice clothes, soft cushions, fine foods, etc.

Thought y'all'd like to know.

[Supreme]

Originally posted by MisterVimes
And a social limitation as well (not limiting in some cultures)
How so? Just curious. I converted recently, and I expected certain kinds of reactions to telling people that I was a Buddhist. I have found that most people don't have particularly strong reactions at all. Mostly people just say "oh" or ask what "that means." Of course I'm in the SF Bay Area, where being a Buddhist hardly distinguishes you. Still, in most parts of the country I wouldn't expect much more than eye-rolling. I don't think I could claim many points for eye-rolling.