"British Only": How much of a Limitation?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

I already said "Ancestry". At this point' date=' it seems like most people in this thread want to invent some kind of complaint about using a term, than trying to help (at least) get general guidelines. There ain't a whole ot granularity between -1/4 and -2, and certainly not when increasingly specific examples of what it means to be British keep being created...so this isn't exactly as complicated as some are trying to make it to be.[/quote']

 

Going back through the thread, you certainly said

 

Ancestry.

 

This was followed up with a number of questions to further define "ancestry", including:

 

Great Britain or British Commonwealth? What about Australians and Canadians? Are they British? Would you include the Canadians with English' date=' Scott, and Irish surnames, but exclude the Québécois?[/quote']

 

So it would work on most Americans' date=' Australians and Canadians?[/quote']

 

I think' date=' even after reading your other posts, I still want more details than what you have provided [/quote']

 

With that in mind...

 

Approximately what percentage of "British" targets are you expecting to have in the game?

 

That's the key to me - if it will occasionally not work because the target is not British, -1/4. If a significant portion of targets, but well under half, will be immune, -1/2. If about half the targets will be affected, about -1. If the vast majority of targets will not be British, -2 starts to feel right. That means we need to know the targets. You mention "globetrotting", so I'm thinking a pretty high limitation, but it remains campaign-dependent, and definition-dependent. If your game is set in the 1800's, travel is "throughout the British Empire", and anyone who has a single ancestor of British blood (including all colonies, so India, parts of Africa, Asia and South America, etc. etc.), that's a lot more common than if the individuals must have no one who was not an English subject since the days of King Arthur in his ancestry.

 

Add to that, a globetrotting group of adventurers could be big game hunters (lions probably aren't British), C'thulhu investigators ("Is the Shoggoth British?") or fighting against an alien invasion, all of which would add a lot of non-British targets.

 

If the powers affect anyone with any trace of British ancestry I'd call its a -0' date=' possibly as -1/4 at best. If the powers only effect people with born in Britain perhaps a -1, with ancestors from there say within one or two generations it might be worth a -1/2.[/quote']

 

This may well be one of those cases where instead of 'it happens this often' date=' therefore it's this limitation' should be reversed. Set the limitation value to whatever you want; that's how often it will get in your way.[/quote']

 

I agree with this. How you define British is really only a means to an end. In your game, what percentage of targets (not the waitress or shopkeeper, characters whose immunity/susceptibility to this attack will be a significant disadvantage/advantage to the character) will meet your definition of British, whatever that definition may be? Having determined that, it should not be that difficult to set the value of the limitation. By asking the group to set that value, you force them to determine the frequency, which requires a detailed definition of those who will, and will not, meet the definition to assess its frequency.

 

So, with that in mind, and focusing on your one word definition, I repeat the request. Please define "British". Not just repeating it - what does it mean, from the perspective of this power, to be "British" and "not British"? For example:

 

- when asked about his ethnic background, the character's response is, in his heart if not on his lips, 'British'

- the character was born of two persons who, at the time, were citizens of Great Britain

- at least 50% of the character's great-grandparents were born in the United Kingdom

- the character's ancestry can be traced back 30 generations without a single person who was not a British subject in his bloodline

 

- does citizenship matter, whether of the individual or his ancestors?

 

- must the ancestor be 100% British, or have only a trace of British in his bloodline?

 

- does departure taint the bloodline? How many generations ago can the family have moved to Australia, Canada, etc. without tainting the bloodline?

 

- do colonies count? EXAMPLE: Australia, as part of the Commonwealth, is British - will the power work on an Australian aborigine?

 

- can the target be non-human (animal, alien or monster)?

 

- do Scotland, Ireland, Wales, India, Canada, Australia, Guyana, Cyprus, Kenya, Namibia, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Zambia count? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Commonwealth_of_Nations for a complete current list. Does suspension, withdrawal or dissolution alter the status of those with ancestry from those nations retroactively? Does it matter whether the nation recognizes Elizabeth II as their own monarch, distinct from sovereign of the UK?

 

Ultimately, all of this will only allow a more statistical analysis of the proportion of the world's population that are subject to the power, so the easier question is probably "What proportion of targets in your game will be affected by this power?" The fewer that will be affected, the greater the limitation.

 

As to the limitation if it only worked towards people that thought of themselves as British, a lot of these questions remain relevant (from a perceptual, rather than ancestral, point of view), with the intent of answering the question "What percentage of targets in the game will be affected by the power in question?"

[Ragitsu]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

That's quite a bit to reply to, but I agree the issue of bloodlines will have to be addressed. That is something I took into consideration, and will have to consult the Advanced Player's Guide on.

[McCoy]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

I thought RPGers were supposed to both have an open mind' date=' and creativity in spades.[/quote']

 

So another stereotype bites the dust.

 

Also' date=' what stereotype?[/quote']

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39757[/ATTACH]

[Ragitsu]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

I like to think of it as more of a "nice side effect" than a positive stereotype .

[Martin2]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

QUOTE=Ragitsu;2213676]Nah' date=' they just have powers that affect the British only

 

- the character speaks fluent English

.

 

And uses the proper spelling of words!!!!!!

 

[Martin2]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

If Ancestry is the idea.

 

Lets base it on the readers of this thread.

 

Shall we have a poll of people reading this that may have a relative in the past 5 generations that may claim to be British.

 

Oviously mine are all British (my Mothers side 3 generations back are Scotish and my fathers side are English).

[Greywind]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

And uses the proper spelling of words!!!!!!

Adding in extraneous "U" into words is not "proper spelling".

[Steve]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

Hopefully I'm not flogging a dead horse, but I read through the thread and don't recall seeing a non-gamist description of what the power is supposed to do. Just saying it's a mind control attack or an RKA doesn't help me much.

 

When I hear a power description "Only Affects British" and some further information that this means British as defined by ancestry, to me it is either a mystical attack of some kind that only those with some British blood in their veins will respond to, or it somehow targets a specific DNA combination that can only be had by having British ancestry.

 

The mystic version would seem to be an example of "like affects like" in that there is some sort of mystic resonance to being British that this power targets.

 

The second version could be compared to a tailored virus that only affects those with specifc DNA, which in this case means having British ancestry, presumably something like ancient Briton blood in the target.

 

Could we have a plain language description of the power to help in understanding what is being built?

[Ragitsu]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

The mystic version would seem to be an example of "like affects like" in that there is some sort of mystic resonance to being British that this power targets.

 

The second version could be compared to a tailored virus that only affects those with specifc DNA, which in this case means having British ancestry, presumably something like ancient Briton blood in the target.

 

It's definitely magical/spiritual in that it doesn't require a blood test.

[Steve]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

It's definitely magical/spiritual in that it doesn't require a blood test.

 

Ok, it's a magical/spiritual ability that only affects those of British ancestry. Other posts have stated that the effects are greater the "purer" the British ancestry a person has. So here in America, there are possibly people who can trace their ancestry to the Mayflower colonists on both sides of their family tree without mixing in other bloodlines and could thus be considered 100% full-blooded British by ancestry alone.

 

How much British blood does one need to have for the mystic forces to deem one to be "British"? If it's over half your ancestral makeup, that's quite a lot of people in the world.

 

I'll ask again for a plain-language description of the effect desired, without using Hero Power words. It would be helpful to me in understanding.

[Ragitsu]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

How much British blood does one need to have for the mystic forces to deem one to be "British"? If it's over half your ancestral makeup' date=' that's quite a lot of people in the world.[/quote']

 

If this is the case, would you say -1?

 

I'll ask again for a plain-language description of the effect desired' date=' without using Hero Power words. It would be helpful to me in understanding.[/quote']

 

One's a powerful blast at a single target. The other is a weaker but area-effect blast.

[Steve]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

Ok, it's an anti-British mystic attack that can only affect someone who has 51% or more of their ancestry that can be traced to Britain. If you stayed in Asia, Africa or South America, I'd rate that a -2. If the campaign stayed mainly in America, Australia or Canada, I'd give it a -1/2. For a globe-trotting campaign that alternates frequently, I guess -1 is all right.

 

It won't do anything against that Japanese person, but that Israeli standing next to him could have parents who emigrated from London.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

If Ancestry is the idea.

 

Lets base it on the readers of this thread.

 

Shall we have a poll of people reading this that may have a relative in the past 5 generations that may claim to be British.

 

Oviously mine are all British (my Mothers side 3 generations back are Scotish and my fathers side are English).

 

To the poll, my paternal grandparents were from Scotland, my maternal grandparents were Irish and German, so I guess I'm 75% and affected.

 

Ok, it's an anti-British mystic attack that can only affect someone who has 51% or more of their ancestry that can be traced to Britain. If you stayed in Asia, Africa or South America, I'd rate that a -2. If the campaign stayed mainly in America, Australia or Canada, I'd give it a -1/2. For a globe-trotting campaign that alternates frequently, I guess -1 is all right.

 

It won't do anything against that Japanese person, but that Israeli standing next to him could have parents who emigrated from London.

 

It also does nothing against animals, monsters or aliens.

 

I again return the question to the GM: What percentage of valid targets, in the game as envisioned, will be affected by the power? If that's:

 

75% or more: -1/4 (less if significantly closer to 100%; I'd say less than 1 in 10 completely immune)

Less than 75%; no less than 2/3: -1/2

Less than 2/3, but still over half: -3/4

About half, maybe a bit more: -1

Maybe 45% or so: -1 1/4

About 40%: -1 1/2

A third or less: -2

 

I suspect the best approach is to set the frequency for the limitation based on your best estimate for the campaign, then write adventures that will be consistent with that limitation. If you give him -1, then about half of all opponents should be affected by this attack, from mooks right on up to the Big Bads.

[Martin2]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

It won't do anything against that Japanese person, but that Israeli standing next to him could have parents who emigrated from London.

 

Unless that Japanese person is infact not fully Japanese as his Grandfather is British after a love afair during WWII and the Jew is infact Polish and not British.

 

It wil be a nightmare for a GM for Mooks and trying to back date the Villains by several generations to confirm that they had British Great granparents.

 

Or have an optout for a -2 limitation but only specific villains / mooks within 1 generation and strong British belief. Everone else it has no effect/

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

Actually, a simplistic solution for the "GM didn't trace each mook's ancestry back 5 generations" issue would be a simple random roll. If "Only vs British" is set at, say, -1, then about half the villains should be affected. For those the GM has specifically determined are, or are not, British, issue addressed. They should be about half and half. For the others, a 10- comes up exactly half the time (alternatively, 11- is a -1 limitation).

 

If the opposition is drawn from a largely anglo-saxon pool, the GM might up the likelihood, and an attack from an Asian group might reduce it, but it would spare defining all mooks, and bystanders, in the adventure writeup.

[torchwolf]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

Actually, a simplistic solution for the "GM didn't trace each mook's ancestry back 5 generations" issue would be a simple random roll. If "Only vs British" is set at, say, -1, then about half the villains should be affected. For those the GM has specifically determined are, or are not, British, issue addressed. They should be about half and half. For the others, a 10- comes up exactly half the time (alternatively, 11- is a -1 limitation).

 

If the opposition is drawn from a largely anglo-saxon pool, the GM might up the likelihood, and an attack from an Asian group might reduce it, but it would spare defining all mooks, and bystanders, in the adventure writeup.

Just read through the tread and the above "Activation Roll" seems by far the easiest way to handle,

plus the possibility of proportional effect can also be handled like this:

Roll made exactly: 25% effect

Roll made by 1-2: 50% effect

Roll made by 3-4: 75% effect

Roll made by 5 or more: 100% effect

 

(Limitation values could be based on "Proportional" from APG, "Requires A Roll", or guesstimated at about -1/2 extra)

 

...or something like that.

 

EDIT: Wasn't very clear, was I?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: "British Only": How much of a Limitation?

 

Alternatively, you might set the roll at, say, 9- for a -1 limitation, with the proviso that making the roll achieves 100% damage, missing by 1 is 75%, by 2 is 50% and by 3 is 25%. I'd apply this like Damage Reduction - after the target's defenses so even 25% will do something.