[GroupDesign] - System and Setting brainstorm.

[Doug Ruff]

Back again after a couple of days on the road - here's my submission for Cluster 1.

Who are the Archivists?: Archivists were once human. Through some combination of evolution and technology, they became disembodied beings of thought and energy. Before this, they also managed to reach and colonise other stars and planets (useful for different settings, and also brings in the high tech factor.) This technology became unnecessary when Archivists evolved to their current state; they have the innate capacity for Faster Than Light travel. They are also immortal (saving some accident or act of violence.)

(Note: I'd avoid Time Travel if possible - this could get real messy. It is also likely to take over the other listed themes. So I'm proposing FTL travel as a means of traversing distance only. I appreciate that the physics is more complicated than this, but don't want to go there for now!)

What do they do?: As immortal beings of pure thought and energy, they usully spend a lot of time roaming the universe and studying its wonders. However, there is some great threat to their civilisation, perhaps also to the universe itself. A threat that requires a physical response. So right now, some of the Archivists are fighting this threat. Some other Archivists don't really care about the threat. Maybe some other Archivists are the threat (this appears to be a common theme from previous posts.)

Why is possession important?: To fight the threat. Archivists can't exert 'physical' power without a host. Most likely scenario is that they need human bodies to build high-tech gizmos to help fight the war. Of course, the other side is doing just the same...

Regards,

Doug

[Thor]

In the Wim Winder's films "Wings of Desire" and "Far Away So Close" there was a sense that, if you watched everything, what would make you act? That being the kind of question I would love to explore, I want the Archivists to be fully incorpreal and have a very low power to move the Host who has the consequeses of these new actions to live with as well.

I agree that the game would be better if the setting was more flexable. One of the great things we have seen from sorcerer is the multitude of ways that people have transformed the central Metaphore/Mechanic into so many settings and styles. I am completely casual about how we get the Archivist/ Host relationship up and running and more interested in how we make the relationship meaningful and not destructive.

[Doug Ruff]

Hi,

I get the feeling that, all of a sudden, the creative process going on on this thread appears to have evaporated.

Are we still going to do this project? Foot, where are you? Please let me know you're still at the helm!

(Apologies if this is inappropriate, by the way. I'm hoping that this is an acceptable plea for momentum and not just a random act of thread necromancy.)

Regards,

Doug

[Andrew Morris]

I think the idea was to wait until all contributors had a chance to post their ideas before moving ahead. But, yeah, I think it's been long enough to wait. Time for a new thread, Tobias?

[Tobias]

Gentlemen,

You foot loves you. :)

I had exactly the same sense yesterday, but RL prevented an update then. Your claims for action have not lead to any follow-up posts after that with content, so I guess we can assume people are done contributing to cluster #1 for now.

So I'll try to get things summarized today, but RL is a bit harsh. If someone wants to voluteer to do so, it would also be welcome. :)

[Tobias]

Gentlemen (and lurking ladies),

Here's my summary of what has come in cluster one. Note that I also put my own stamp on it at this time. The major points of differing opinions are on a customizable/general setting vs. a specific setting, on low-power vs. high-power posession ability, and on Time travel and FTL on a grand scale vs. more local-based issues.

As to the last point, I will note that Earth-centric is actually one of the important points from the first iteration of issues (we had more collaborators posting then). This does not preclude a backdrop of whole-universe exploration, but actual play would probably be best situated around Earth.

As to the low-power vs. high-power posession issue: many points were previously allocated to hard choices, fast/hard and slow/weak, balance, etc. These points all seem to point to a preference for at least the possibility of hardcore posession with powerful effects (even if it's rare and difficult). The 'abstraction' point could be said to argue for weak posession (since that will make it a less traditional game, unless we slip into a form of Wraith or something similar). I'm going to 'stamp' that high-powered posession IS possible - but, as agreed upon, not without cost (burnout, balance, social issues in Archivist society).

Note that the first 2 points may also be 'solved' by having a hierarchy of Archivists - maybe new ones are restricted to earth or small-time posessions, etc. I don't neccesarily mean we'd get into a 'level' or 'splats' game, but there are possible advantages).

The last issue left, generic/customisable might be the most critical point of disagreement. I will tell you up front that I prefer generic/customisable. However, I can understand the appeal for a strong, gripping setting. I propose we keep the generic/customisable option, but we take 1 setting (and the in-character examples) as a major example of how that setting  is derived from general principles (thus showing both the setting and how it is made by customisation or setting variables) - and we pour some of our hearts into that setting as well. The space-ship setting (which it seems fair to say is a late and somewhat differening addition to the archivist concept) could then be taken as a lower-key counter-example, to show the versatility of the customisability (is that a word?).

Having said all that, this is the definition's I propose we proceed with. At this point, it's valuable if you all chime in here in this thread again so we can see how we all stand on this.

Archivists.

Archivists are incorporeal beings that were once human. Through hard work/accident/catastrophe/magic/technology they have transcended that state and lost their bodies and possibly many of the memories and knowledge of the physical state that goes along with it. They have gained powers that transcend their human state, but are hindered in the fact that they can often only effect some of them when taking posession of a human.

Archivists have a burning goal - 'Answering the Question'. This question is generally a Big Issue facing the Archivists or Humankind (possibly derived from the manner in which they became archivists in the first place). In this they generally have a Nemesis - an opposing faction. This may be some outside agency/event, humankind, an internal faction of archivists, or a kind of anti-archivist. The Big Question is likely to be split up in smaller questions.

The solution to the question always requires some amount of direct interaction with humans (requiring the question to be posed so as to force that contact). This leads to the second area of struggle/conflict for the archivists: a struggle between achieving the Big Issue at the personalised cost of abuse of the host and an archivist´s own ethics - because Archivists can ONLY interact with humans or 'normal realiy' through posession. (This may be due to causality limitations.)

Archivists do have 'off-time' place where they can more freely interact with each other. These might be downtime moments for the playgroup, or the first and last half our of each session. (Open for discussion, but it would give sessions a nice steady session progression). If there is a traditional GM in the role of Nemesis, maybe the players could interact with the GM in a novel manner in this 'off-time'?

Archivists did NOT appear by accident (I would like the "hey I died and WTF now I'm a ghost?" feel). Their existence was, to a large degree, actually sought out (although the last nudge may have been an accident).

The one thing I'm most curious about is how open we should keep the position of nemesis - how far it needs to be defined (so as to have cool rules/suggestions for it). Then again, we could just take the coolest group definition of nemesis and work that out in the example.

Your comments much appreciated, and if new people want to get on board, you're very welcome!

[Andrew Morris]

High Power vs. Low Power
I didn't think this was an issue in dispute. My take was that Archivists were as bad-ass as they wanted to be, but kept in check by the moral and pragmatic concerns of burning out hosts.

General vs. Specific Setting
Since we've moved away from brainstorm and into specifics, I'm gonna say that I strongly dislike the idea of a general setting. The setting is what draws me in and makes me want to play a game in the first place. I mean, I hear about these cool Archivists possessing humans throughout time in order to combat this evil nemesis and find the answer to Big Question, and I think, "Neato. I could get into that." I hear, about a vague concept with no established setting, and maybe the Archivists have an enemy, and maybe they don't, it's all up to me...well, that really doesn't inspire me to want to try it out. As to fleshing out one setting and saying it's an example...eh, could be a good compromise. Let's hear what everyone thinks.

Grand Scale vs. Local Issues
Well, I'm not sure how this can be viewed as anything other than a grand scale, but I'm open to ideas. My take is that the cost of failure for the Archivisists is nothing short of total...uhm...well, I don't know really, but I'm sure it would be bad.

Earth-centric
I like it, but not with any great deal of passion. It's just easier to use that as a starting point, at least.

Archivist Hierarchy
I'm all for it. You're basically a god. You can reshape matter and energy with the power of your mind. You're immortal. And when your boss tells you to reseach biological changes in dung beetles during the 4th Century...well...you're looking at bugs for a century.

The Nemesis
I see this going one of two ways: total opposites or dark reflections. The Nemesis could be another alien race working at cross purposes to the Archivists, opposites in every sense. The other way to go (and it's cooler in my opinion) is to say that the Nemesis is a group of Archivists themselves. For some reason, though, they are skewed, and work against their former companions.

Archivists are incorporeal beings that were once human. Through hard work/accident/catastrophe/magic/technology they have transcended that state and lost their bodies and possibly many of the memories and knowledge of the physical state that goes along with it. They have gained powers that transcend their human state, but are hindered in the fact that they can often only effect some of them when taking posession of a human.

Archivists have a burning goal - 'Answering the Question'. This question is generally a Big Issue facing the Archivists or Humankind (possibly derived from the manner in which they became archivists in the first place). In this they generally have a Nemesis - an opposing faction. This may be some outside agency/event, humankind, an internal faction of archivists, or a kind of anti-archivist. The Big Question is likely to be split up in smaller questions.

The solution to the question always requires some amount of direct interaction with humans (requiring the question to be posed so as to force that contact). This leads to the second area of struggle/conflict for the archivists: a struggle between achieving the Big Issue at the personalised cost of abuse of the host and an archivist´s own ethics - because Archivists can ONLY interact with humans or 'normal realiy' through posession. (This may be due to causality limitations.)

Archivists do have 'off-time' place where they can more freely interact with each other. These might be downtime moments for the playgroup, or the first and last half our of each session. (Open for discussion, but it would give sessions a nice steady session progression). If there is a traditional GM in the role of Nemesis, maybe the players could interact with the GM in a novel manner in this 'off-time'?

So far, I'm with you.

Archivists did NOT appear by accident (I would like the "hey I died and WTF now I'm a ghost?" feel). Their existence was, to a large degree, actually sought out (although the last nudge may have been an accident).

Okay, you lost me. Can you exlain this some more?

The one thing I'm most curious about is how open we should keep the position of nemesis - how far it needs to be defined (so as to have cool rules/suggestions for it). Then again, we could just take the coolest group definition of nemesis and work that out in the example.

Yeah, I think if we doing the "example setting" concept, the nemesis should be part of that.

[Doug Ruff]

Hey, we're back!

I'm cool with most of what Tobias and Andrew have said. I'd like to add the followng comments though:

Archivist Power: Agree that humans provide powers that Archivists lack, but I would argue that this power is largely 'human power' ie the ability to affect physical objects.

Power - if the power is limited by morality only, what about the Nemesis? I think there should be an upper limit to what Archivists (and the Nemesis) can achieve.

I would argue that power is limited by host burnout, how well the Archivist is 'attuned' to their host (possessing a large lump of 'meat' is going to play havoc with your powers until you can adapt) and the risk of detection (this should have consequences, Archivists are Secret Agents!) Detection may be less of an issue in other settings though?

Setting - let's go for one setting now, but with an option on other settings too. The main constraint is that we try and avoid rule mechanics that cannot reasonably be transported to another setting. (by the way, I don't think Detection is a 'mechanic', it's a setting-specific hazard.)

Hierarchy - don't like the idea of a strict 'you do this' hierarchy, but I think we have to define Archivist society and that this society should be transportable between settings. The battleground may change, but the Archivists don't.

The rest seems cool, so I shall await developments for the time being.

Regards,

Doug

[Tobias]

High Power vs. Low Power
I didn't think this was an issue in dispute. My take was that Archivists were as bad-ass as they wanted to be, but kept in check by the moral and pragmatic concerns of burning out hosts.

And with that, it's indeed your 'take'. :)

There are people who'd prefer the Archivists more low-powered. However, given the high interest in 'balance'/'tradeoff'/'burnout', a high power level should at least be possible sometimes.

General vs. Specific Setting
Since we've moved away from brainstorm and into specifics, I'm gonna say that I strongly dislike the idea of a general setting. The setting is what draws me in and makes me want to play a game in the first place. I mean, I hear about these cool Archivists possessing humans throughout time in order to combat this evil nemesis and find the answer to Big Question, and I think, "Neato. I could get into that."

I don't think any of that is under dispute. From hereone is the point where things could diverge, I guess.

Can I ask how you feel about Sorcerer and it's adaptability in general?

I hear, about a vague concept with no established setting, and maybe the Archivists have an enemy, and maybe they don't, it's all up to me...well, that really doesn't inspire me to want to try it out. As to fleshing out one setting and saying it's an example...eh, could be a good compromise. Let's hear what everyone thinks.

Grand Scale vs. Local Issues
Well, I'm not sure how this can be viewed as anything other than a grand scale, but I'm open to ideas. My take is that the cost of failure for the Archivisists is nothing short of total...uhm...well, I don't know really, but I'm sure it would be bad.

I should have been more clear. 'Galaxy-wide vs. Earth'.

Earth-centric
I like it, but not with any great deal of passion. It's just easier to use that as a starting point, at least.

Archivist Hierarchy
I'm all for it. You're basically a god. You can reshape matter and energy with the power of your mind. You're immortal. And when your boss tells you to reseach biological changes in dung beetles during the 4th Century...well...you're looking at bugs for a century.

This is at least amusing. :)

(I can also relate to the comments in the following post about society vs. hierarchy.)

The Nemesis
I see this going one of two ways: total opposites or dark reflections. The Nemesis could be another alien race working at cross purposes to the Archivists, opposites in every sense. The other way to go (and it's cooler in my opinion) is to say that the Nemesis is a group of Archivists themselves. For some reason, though, they are skewed, and work against their former companions.

Archivists did NOT appear by accident (I would like the "hey I died and WTF now I'm a ghost?" feel). Their existence was, to a large degree, actually sought out (although the last nudge may have been an accident).

Okay, you lost me. Can you exlain this some more?

Yes I can. A 'not' was dropped from that:

"I would NOT like the "hey I died and WTF I'm a ghost?" feel".

The one thing I'm most curious about is how open we should keep the position of nemesis - how far it needs to be defined (so as to have cool rules/suggestions for it). Then again, we could just take the coolest group definition of nemesis and work that out in the example.

Yeah, I think if we doing the "example setting" concept, the nemesis should be part of that.

[Thor]

Specific/ General

I guess that I have no particular setting that I would be pulling for. I would certainly want to be able to customize it for a setting that I wanted.

I was talking with some friends about a Warhammerish sort of WWI setting the other day; and wondered if the Archivists setting things back to right would be a possible use of this setting. I was real into it, but I'm sure there are others that would want to play somewhere else.

High/Low Power

I am firmly in the low power camp. ? I suppose that there could be some variation in the ability to affect the host but I am against having outside powers to make thingsa happen. If there is going to be a high power level ouside the host, why bother with the hosts in the first place.

[Andrew Morris]

Can I ask how you feel about Sorcerer and it's adaptability in general?

I like Sorcerer, and I'm glad a friend recommended I pick it up. But honestly, I read through it and wondered where the rest of it was. And the whole "you decide what a demon is" section kinda pissed me off. I understand it wasn't intended that way, but it felt like, "Well, I'm done now, you can just figure out the rest, I can't be bothered to." I really dislike games that expect me to fill in the blanks. I mean, I know I can take a setting and throw out or change what I don't like about it, but let me see what you got, at least. It's kind of like buying a car, and being told, "Well, we don't put tires on our vehicles, because we want you to be free to pick your own." Uhm....what? Put some damn tires on my car! And a setting in my games, for that matter. If I don't like it, I'll change it.

I should have been more clear. 'Galaxy-wide vs. Earth'.

Oh. Okay. Uhm...don't care, personally. I'd probably go with mostly Earth, and maybe a few sessions elsewhere.

Yes I can. A 'not' was dropped from that:

"I would NOT like the "hey I died and WTF I'm a ghost?" feel".

Ahh...well then, I agree.

I guess that I have no particular setting that I would be pulling for. I would certainly want to be able to customize it for a setting that I wanted.

I was talking with some friends about a Warhammerish sort of WWI setting the other day; and wondered if the Archivists setting things back to right would be a possible use of this setting. I was real into it, but I'm sure there are others that would want to play somewhere else.

Thor, I don't think defining a setting would prevent the kind of flexibility I believe you are looking for. Setting would things like: defining who and what the Archivists are, who their enemy is, where in space/time they reside, etc. None of this would affect their ability to travel to other times/places.

If there is going to be a high power level ouside the host, why bother with the hosts in the first place.

Why indeed? Actually, I think that particular "why" is a pretty interesting part of the concept. Why do militaries train covert operatives instead of just building a bunch of missles? Because they are necessary for precision and secrecy. Same deal with Archivists. Sometimes you need a screwdriver, not a chainsaw or sledgehammer.

[Sydney Freedberg]

Aaah, it's good to be back -- both the thread and me personally (am at beach on crappy dial-up connection with ultra-crappy free AOL account  I just got to work -- so pardon my tardy reply).

In general I'm very happy with Tobias's overview post. That won't stop me from writing a lengthy post essentially elaborating on what the Foot has said:


(1) Customizable vs. fixed setting

Ironically, since I'm the guy who proposed open settings in the first place, I confess that I had the same reaction as Andrew when I first read Sorcerer: "Wait -- where's the rest?" But I think Sorcerer is an extreme example of "do it yourself" setting. We can allow customization and still provide a strong framework.

One small example is the idea (Andrew's originally, I think?) that Archivists good, evil, and otherwise can all hang out in their own incorporeal plane, where they don't need hosts. Let's call it "the Great Library."

So, is this Great Library an afterlife? A strange dimension? Hyperspace? Cyperspace? The main databank of a multi-generation colony starship? Guess what: It doesn't matter. We can be highly specific about what the Great Library looks like, what you can and can't do there, what function it fulfills in-game, and so on while still leaving it up to each gaming group to decide the setting details.

Another, bigger example is the idea of enemy Archivists -- which, after some thought and considerable PM'ing with Andrew, I'd say are an essential element, i.e. one that should be a "standard" feature no matter how a given gaming group customizes the setting. (Why? Gamists need equal foes to challenge, Narrativists need a foil making the wrong moral choice about the Premise, and the most compelling enemies are the ones that resemble us -- distorted mirror images that we could one day become).

But are the Dark Archivists (better name, anyone?) just individual rogues, or are they a whole organization, or are they a conspiracy hiding among the good Archivists? Did they cause the Nemesis, do they serve a Nemesis that came into being without them, do they seek to control the Nemesis for their own ends, or are they trying to stop the Nemesis just as desperately as the good guys are -- but with an "ends justify the means" ruthlessness the good guys can't condone? Any of these options produces interesting play, and (as Andrew PM'd me), if the players don't initially know which one is The Truth, you have room for tangled plot twists and shocking realizations.

So, again, you can define very clearly what the Dark Archivists do, what their powers are, even who they are, as individuals, with a bunch of sample characters -- but leave wide open exactly how they use those powers and to what ends. (Imagine a Star Wars game where you had complete stats and lots of description for Darth Vader, but total freedom to decide whose father he used to be and whether he works for an evil Empire, a conspiracy, or a twisted Rebellion).

Likewise, the Nemesis has to be a "clear and present danger," and as Andrew said, it is hard to imagine it as anything less than world-shaking. But is it a mystical plague? A dark god? A conquering empire? As long as it threatens humanity with disaster, I think you can choose any Nemesis you like.

That said, I'd agree that besides specifying "master framework" elements that apply regardless of setting, we should also work on a specific and fairly detailed example setting, where the Nemesis and other aspects are clearly defined.



(2) Earth-centric

For much the same reason that I favor Archivists having been human once, I favor the primary setting being recognizably our world -- or at least parallel-universe variants on it -- or in different time periods on Earth, although I think parallel worlds are easier to manage than time-travel: (a) no paradox problems and (b) there are no historical accuracy errors by the GM, only differences between parallel timestreams. Surreal dreamspaces are a nice diversion, but the heart of the story has to take place somewhere we can understand and care about.


(3) Intentionality

Archivists did NOT appear by accident...

Originally I'd proposed leaving it open whether you became an Archivist by intention or accident, but, well, I was wrong. Tobias is right. There needs to be some [big fancy word] intentionality [/big fancy word] -- the sacrifice of one's humanity to become an Archivist loses moral power if it was purely involuntary.

So this becomes another "master framework element." You became an Archivist at least in part by choice -- even if you didn't know exactly what you were choosing at the time. Now, whether that choice involved rigorous meditation, downloading your brain, or sacrificing your (mortal) life while on a quest for knowledge is a customizable detail.


(3) High power vs. low power:
I think Thor From Toledo, besides making me want to see Wings of Desire again, has hit this nail on the head:

I am against having outside powers to make things happen. If there is going to be a high power level outside the host, why bother with the hosts in the first place.

I'm all for Kewl Powerz, but they have to have a price. So, to force the dilemmas we want, I'd say that Archivists operating independently should be terrifyingly weak, but that Archivists possessing a Host should be terrifyingly powerful -- IF they are willing to make the Host pay the price. If they're not willing to risk the Host's health and sanity, they should be very restricted (although still not as restricted as they are with no Host at all).

That said, Doug's correct that Archivists-in-Hosts should have some limits on their power besides self-restraint, or any Dark Archivists get out of hand very quickly. The most obvious way to do this is to have the Host die if you push too hard, which means even evil bastards (or good guys in extremis) have to choose between holding back to keep their Host intact versus accomplishing one spectacular effect that breaks their tool and leaves them powerless thereafter.

... a struggle between achieving the Big Issue at the personalised cost of abuse of the host and an archivist´s own ethics - because Archivists can ONLY interact with humans or 'normal reality' through posession.

Interestingly, this dilemma pushes us towards a mirror-image of Sorcerer. (1) Instead of playing a human summoner, you play what is essentially a possessing demon. (2) Instead of the Possessors being (mostly) evil, they are (mostly) benign. (3) Instead of the Premise being, "given virtually unlimited power, how callously will you sacrifice others -- and ultimately, your own humanity -- to get what you personally want," the implicit Premise here is, "given great but severely restricted power, how callously will you sacrifice others -- and ultimately your own last vestiges of humanity -- to achieve your high and noble goal?"

[Tobias]

In general I'm very happy with Sydney's overview post. ;)

I think he caught, quite well, the balance between 'set' elements/framework (and their importance) and some degree of freedom/customisation still possible.

I'm also happy to hear about the PM's between Sydney and Andrew - Andrew, how do you feel about the points in this post?

So, is this Great Library an afterlife? A strange dimension? Hyperspace? Cyperspace? The main databank of a multi-generation colony starship? Guess what: It doesn't matter. We can be highly specific about what the Great Library looks like, what you can and can't do there, what function it fulfills in-game, and so on while still leaving it up to each gaming group to decide the setting details.

Agreed.

But are the Dark Archivists (better name, anyone?) just individual rogues, or are they a whole organization, or are they a conspiracy hiding among the good Archivists? Did they cause the Nemesis, do they serve a Nemesis that came into being without them, do they seek to control the Nemesis for their own ends, or are they trying to stop the Nemesis just as desperately as the good guys are -- but with an "ends justify the means" ruthlessness the good guys can't condone? Any of these options produces interesting play, and (as Andrew PM'd me), if the players don't initially know which one is The Truth, you have room for tangled plot twists and shocking realizations.

I think those options are great. I'd like to add another one, if you would: "They couldn't care less about the Nemesis, and are pursuing their own goals - thus removing resources (if an internal faction) or being a pest (if outside faction)"

I'm not sure yet whether this is suitably dramatic (although any playgroup that thinks so could of course make it so). In this case the Dark Archivists deny the importance of the Nemesis over their own personal freedom/goal.

Let me know whether this is one that should be included, in your opinions.

Hmmm, as to a better name for the DA's. Well, that name should fit them whichever opposing role they choose to take. An antonym didn't spring to mind, fully formed... hmm.

Adversaries, disputants, angries, antagonists, corrivals, defamers, saboteurs.

I'm all for Kewl Powerz, but they have to have a price. So, to force the dilemmas we want, I'd say that Archivists operating independently should be terrifyingly weak, but that Archivists possessing a Host should be terrifyingly powerful -- IF they are willing to make the Host pay the price. If they're not willing to risk the Host's health and sanity, they should be very restricted (although still not as restricted as they are with no Host at all).

That said, Doug's correct that Archivists-in-Hosts should have some limits on their power besides self-restraint, or any Dark Archivists get out of hand very quickly. The most obvious way to do this is to have the Host die if you push too hard, which means even evil bastards (or good guys in extremis) have to choose between holding back to keep their Host intact versus accomplishing one spectacular effect that breaks their tool and leaves them powerless thereafter.

A little musing on Kewl Powerz - why are they cool? From 'breaking the rules'? For the sound-n-light show? For the "look at what I've got"?

Because the Kewl Powerz' Kewlness could very well just be related to what Archivists (and the players rooting for them) have on their agenda. They don't neccesarily need to be big and flashy (thus allowing them to blend in the background, so that you could even play this game as a 'what if current reality was really like this?' without breaking the suspense of disbelief too easily.

Then again, they could be big and flashy after all. "Things that make you go BOOOM!".

... a struggle between achieving the Big Issue at the personalised cost of abuse of the host and an archivist´s own ethics - because Archivists can ONLY interact with humans or 'normal reality' through posession.

Interestingly, this dilemma pushes us towards a mirror-image of Sorcerer. (1) Instead of playing a human summoner, you play what is essentially a possessing demon. (2) Instead of the Possessors being (mostly) evil, they are (mostly) benign. (3) Instead of the Premise being, "given virtually unlimited power, how callously will you sacrifice others -- and ultimately, your own humanity -- to get what you personally want," the implicit Premise here is, "given great but severely restricted power, how callously will you sacrifice others -- and ultimately your own last vestiges of humanity -- to achieve your high and noble goal?"

Interesting. I haven't read too much sorceror - does Ron say anything on "larger agenda's" for the demons as a greater group? I remember the Need thing, but that's not what Archivists would be striving for, I reckon.

Thanks for your comments again, guys. I'll leave the floor open till 17:00 my time tomorrow (still at GMT+1) for other people to comment, and can we then get on with cluster 2?

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

Hey folks, start splitting into new threads, please.

Best,
Ron

[Tobias]

Hiya,

Hey folks, start splitting into new threads, please.

Best,
Ron

I was pleased when I noted a 'last post' by Ron, thinking he'd weigh in with something about the Sorceror thing mentioned in the last posts - and then I noticed it's a request for thread-splitting.

:)

Very well. Ron, I earlier gave a 'deadline' of tomorrow 1700 my time for a topic shift to what we're calling cluster 2. At this time I will split the thread, unless I hear something from you before then. Ok?

(To those involved, I will probably split into multiple threads at that time - look for the [GroupDesign] tag. Ron, if want any arrangements to reduce traffic/postage here, let me know.)