Preamble:
This thread is a sister thread to GroupDesign: Mix Your Own Metaplot, dedicated to refining the concept of Archivists as laid out in the earlier Groupdesign threads Setting & System Brainstorm, Clusters 2 & 3, Core vs. Optional, and -- probably the best starting point for newcomers, as it lays out the latest and most evolved set of concepts -- Nailing Mechanics. People who've not been following the GroupDesign discussion might feel a bit lost until they've skimmed those old threads, but anyone and everyone who finds this work-in-progress interesting should feel free, indeed encouraged, to contribute.

We've spent some time thrashing out both concepts and raw mechanics for the Archivists, the incorporeal, body-hopping protagonists of our as-yet-nameless game. But it's clear that the nature of Archivists still needs some more definition. As a first attempt to define the problem, I'd suggest this thread should address the following interrelated but rather sprawling set of questions:

(1) Archivists can do things beyond what is humanly possible -- supernatural abilities we've called variously (and with varying degrees of self-importance) Kewl Powerz, Uncanny Knowledgz, Transcendent Traits, and Logoi. But what are these cool things?
(1a) Are there certain mandatory powers that every Archivist must have by definition? (The ability to possess a mortal human Host seems to come close, though you could posit an Archivist incapable of possession which spent all of its time in the Great Library).
(1b) Conversely, to what extent does each Archivist possess unique abilities defined by its human past and manner of becoming an Archivist?
(1c) Is there a common "menu" of available powers that any Archivist could have, though no one Archivist will have all or even most?
(1d) What different types of Archivist might there be (either in alternative settings for the game, or coexisting in the same setting) with different "menus" of mandatory and available powers?

(2) To what extent do Archivists form a society? Do they have a hierarchy? Organized factions with competing agendas? Or are they free agents who work together only when they wish to? (N.B. I suspect this is the topic on which we can safely allow the most variation across alternative settings).

(3) How, exactly, do Archivists interact with their Hosts?
(3a) In particular, how much awareness and self-will does the Host have during "possession," how much does the Host remember afterwards, and how much is the Host's sense of identity protected by simple denial?

(4) Archivists gave up much of their humanity to become what they are. Does this make them tragic, transcendent, or both?
(4a) If the answer is "both" -- and I think this is the most interesting possibility -- then can their human and transcendent natures be reconciled into a harmonious greater whole (thesis+antithesis=synthesis), or must one ultimately be sacrificed to the other?

This list is not meant to be exhaustive: I suspect other people will propose a (5) and even a (6).

Since we're already thinking of providing multiple modular setting elements to allow each gaming group to customize its version of Archivists, each question (especially 1c, 1d, and 2) may well have several equally valid and mutually contradictory answers. It's important to lay out those alternatives, since we need ultimately to write up rules flexible enough to allow all of them. But it is even more important to nail down the core -- the things that hold true across all options.

Excellent list of questions, Sydney.

Here's my personal take on this so far:

(1) Archivist powers are superhuman but not supernatural, within the Setting. In other words, Archivist powers are a natural consequence of the what an Archivist is. I'm aware this this doesn't actually define what these traits are yet, I'm hoping this will become more clear later.
(1a) Archivists need to be Incorporeal (this isn't a Trait with a rating, it's a fundamental quality of the Archivist.) They also need to have some type of Telepathy for communication, and some type of Energy Gathering power, because they can't get their energy from food. This is why I think that the majority of Archivist Powers should be based upon Telepathy and Energy Manipulation. The ability to travel vast distances through Space (and, optionally, Time) appears to be a given as well - I consider that Archivists are essentially "transdimensional" in some sense or another.
(1b) I don't think that there are any unique "powers" as such. Archivists wil have unique personalities and sets of skills, but I don't think that there is any individual power that couldn't be learned by any Archivist (although there ma be "minimum requirements" for learning a power.)
(1c) Yep.
(1d) There is still room for different "backgrounds" for Archivists - these would certainly help to define the skills that an Archivist could have, and possibly also affect choice of powers (would an Archivist have, say, Molecular Manipulation as a power if he din't know what a molecule was?) but this is a trickier call.

(2) If Archivists have exceptional ability to travel, and there are limited ways in which Archivists can hurt one another, I imagine that there will be several Archivist "societies", based upon shared interestes and opinions (although only one of these societies is likely to be called the "Archivists" - and the most likely Optional setting is that the "Nemesis" are a group of "anti-Archivists").

So, any of the Disembodied could be a "free agent", or a member of one or more "factions". Each setting is likely to feature different "factions", who may or may not operate in the same meta-plot.

(3) & (3a) I would still like to see more than one type of Archivist "possession", as this introduces another Difficult Choice into the game. To illustrate:

• Riding - The Archivist exerts no control over the Host's Actions, but has access to the Host's senses. The safest choice, but the lack of influence is a distinct disadvantage. Long periods of Riding (or a botched roll by the Archivist) can cause the Host to feel that he is "being watched" (gains Paranoia traits.)• Guiding - The Archivist speaks to the Host with an Inner Voice, and attempts to persuade the Host to do something. The Host will usually believe that these thoughts are their own, but "voices in my head" are also a classic symptom of Schizophrenia. There is also more chance of the Host realising that they are being possessed.• Driving - The Archivist takes over control of the Host. This is blatant, and the Host is vey likely to realise that they are being possessed (although they may also rationalise this as "i don't know what cam over me...")Driving gives access to the full range of Archivist Powers, but most of these also inflict Burnout on the Host, so this is also a mixed blessing as well.

(Note: "Fading" becomes an unintentional possession "option" under these rules.)

Now, more experienced Archivists may have the means to get away with Driving ther Hosts more often - for example, by using a Telepathic power to alter their hosts memories after the event. However this should be a Wrong Bad Act. The best Archivists should be able to get what they want just by making subtle suggestions to their hosts.

I would also like to see Archivist possession being scientifically detectable in modern settings - for example, an EEG would show unusual readings, or a Geiger Counter may show slightly elevated levels of radiation. This gives the Archivist something else to worry about if they are up against an opponent who knows what they are.

(4) & (4a) Both, without a doubt. Archivsts are both More Than Human and Less Than Human - they have amazing powers at the cost of raw physical sensation - and the only way they can gain physical sensation is by possessing living bodies, which harms the current occupant. This should be an Either/Or - no soulless clone bodies that can be inhabited at no moral cost!

However, the Human and Superhuman natures of the Archivist can, and should, be integrated. This is the balance that keeps the Archivist sane. If the Human side dominates, the Archivist gets sucked into the "lure of the senses" and is likely to end up as a permanently Faded bystander inside a single Host. If the Superhuman side takes over, Archivists lose the compassion that allows them to integrate with their Hosts - they either disappear into the Beyond (like Dr Manhattan in Watchmen) or use humans as living chess pieces in their own personal game.

Anyway, lots here - I hope this helps to show what I think an Archivist actually is, for the purposes of this game. I also want to know what everyone else thinks an Archivist is, so please take the time to post here.

(1) Kewl Powerz, Uncanny Knowledgz, Transcendent Traits, and Logoi.

Telepathy/Telecontrol -- "These aren't the droids you're looking for."

Biological Amplification (yeah, I know it means something else) -- "Strange, I suddenly have the strength of ten men...must be the adrenaline."

Atomic Sight (i.e. X-ray vision) -- "Careful, there's an explosive device behind that steel door. Never mind how I know, just trust me."

Inhuman Statistical Analysis -- "Hmm, by moving this rock three centimeters toward magnetic north, the probability of the desired outcome increases by .0000000000002317 percent. Approximately."

There's more, but that's all I can think of at the moment.

(1a) Yes -- ability to possess a host, telepathy, instantaneous travel (through space and possibly time).

(1b) I think this should be up to the player at character creation. Maybe I want an Archivist whose powers reflect his mortal life. Maybe I want someone who is totally changed by the experience. I don't think we need a mechanic for this.

(1c) Yes, assuming they know of it, or research it for themselves, any Archivist should be able to learn any power.

(1d) I don't know that different types of Archivists would have different powers, since I think they should all have equal ability to learn Logoi. But the three types of Archivists I envision are the Archivists, Nemesis, and Independents. The Archivists and Nemesis are at war (or at least conflict) and the Independents don't really care one way or the other.

(2) My take is that Archivists are essentially each a nation unto themselves. Sure, they form groups and alliances, with a defined leader, but for the most part, they do their own thing.

(3) I think Doug's got the right idea in this area. However, I don't like the idea that Archivists can be detected with technology. Coming up with a pseudo-scientific reason to explain how Archivists control hosts reminds me too much of "super radar-powered laser robots" of the 1950s.

(3a) I think the host has full awareness, just not full control. Okay, so an inhumanly powerful incorporeal creature takes over your body and makes you do thinks. Uhm...yeah, right. You'd rationalize it the same as I would. In modern days, by going to a shrink for a few years without having another occurrence until...bang...you're cured. Phew, thank goodness for modern psychiatry. In the middle ages, you'd realize it was caused by an imbalance in your bodily humours, and have the appropriate fluid drained. Phew, thank goodness for modern leech therapy. In primitive times, you'd know that is was the great whatever-spirit choosing you as special, and go put a pointy rock on the end of long stick, so you can kill anyone who challenges your position from a safe distance. Phew, thank goodness for modern spear technology.

(4) More transcendent than tragic, I'd say.

Andrew Morris wrote: I think Doug's got the right idea in this area. However, I don't like the idea that Archivists can be detected with technology. Coming up with a pseudo-scientific reason to explain how Archivists control hosts reminds me too much of "super radar-powered laser robots" of the 1950s.

Andrew Morris wrote: I think the host has full awareness, just not full control. Okay, so an inhumanly powerful incorporeal creature takes over your body and makes you do thinks. Uhm...yeah, right. You'd rationalize it the same as I would. In modern days, by going to a shrink for a few years without having another occurrence until...bang...you're cured. Phew, thank goodness for modern psychiatry. In the middle ages, you'd realize it was caused by an imbalance in your bodily humours, and have the appropriate fluid drained. Phew, thank goodness for modern leech therapy. In primitive times, you'd know that is was the great whatever-spirit choosing you as special, and go put a pointy rock on the end of long stick, so you can kill anyone who challenges your position from a safe distance. Phew, thank goodness for modern spear technology.

Such good stuff. I've not got much time now but I can't resist stepping out of Moderate-mode and making a few comments:

Doug Ruff wrote: Archivist powers are superhuman but not supernatural...a natural consequence of the what an Archivist is.

Doug Ruff wrote: I would still like to see more than one type of Archivist "possession" [.e.g] Riding - The Archivist exerts no control over the Host's Actions, but has access to the Host's senses. The safest choice, but the lack of influence is a distinct disadvantage. Long periods of Riding (or a botched roll by the Archivist) can cause the Host to feel that he is "being watched" (gains Paranoia traits.)

Andrew Morris wrote: thank goodness for modern spear technology.

Doug Ruff wrote: I would still like some Hosts to know what was happening to them - in fact, I would love to play a Host with this dilemma. 'Cos what am I going to do about it when no-one believes me? Now that sucks just as much as any Archivist dilemma we've come up with so far, IMHO.

Quick mechanics question: If the Archivist is in the "gently nudging" the Host mode, why does that imply that the player is in control? Shouldn't that be exactly where a mediating layer of rules comes in?

In most games if you're driving a car and you try to pull a bootlegger reverse you get to (for example) roll dice, taking into account your driving skill and the condition of the road.

In this game, if you want the Host to go to a library and steal a book you could roll dice, taking into account the Host's "kleptomania" or "upright citizen", and the confusion they're suffering from having done ten uncharacteristic things already this morning.

Which means that, yeah, if you fail your roll (or whatever) then maybe the Host goes to the library, picks up the book, and stops on the verge of surreptitiously slipping it into their handbag. I think that sort of rules-enshrined setback is what you're explicitly promising players when you tell them that they're playing spirits that imperfectly possess human hosts.

EDIT: I do realize that "rolling dice" is not currently in the plans. But it's so much easier to write than "apply a karmic adjudication system complete with resource allocation". The point is you refer to the rules.

Not to turn on the Tony:Sydney "your idea is so cool!" mutual feedback loop again (as seen in the threads Time Travel Party, White Noise, and numerous Capes threads), but.... Tony, your idea is so cool. Yes, I think we should work the "whoops, almost but not quite!" in somehow.

Thanks Sydney. I'll add one more side-thought, then probably vanish again for a while. Sorry I haven't been of more help throughout, but you guys generally say all the stuff I would think of to say, just better.

Anyway, my one more side-thought: Since you've already got the dilemma about whether the Archivists treat their Hosts using Author or Pawn Stance, I think you could benefit from having a Logos that gives them explicit Director Stance abilities.

For instance, in the library example, maybe the second try at getting the book isn't escalating the brutality of control, it's having the Hosts boyfriend show up. Rather than explain what she's doing holding the Heck-o-nomicon, book of the Darned, she's now got a solid motive to hide the book... in her handbag, say. Reflected, rules-wise, by the ability for the player to apply Host-traits more favorable to encouraging the Host to steal the book.

Sydney Freedberg wrote: But I agree we need to work multiple levels of possession by the Archivist into the game.

Sydney Freedberg wrote: And as Andrew says, it has to have something to do with the prevailing beliefs in the Host's culture...

Sydney Freedberg wrote: And if the Host suddenly hears a voice in his or her head saying, "Excuse me, I'm a disembodied being who's been borrowing your body but now I need your help to save humanity from utter annihilation," what the hell does the Host do?

TonyLB wrote: In this game, if you want the Host to go to a library and steal a book you could roll dice, taking into account the Host's "kleptomania" or "upright citizen", and the confusion they're suffering from having done ten uncharacteristic things already this morning.

TonyLB wrote: Since you've already got the dilemma about whether the Archivists treat their Hosts using Author or Pawn Stance, I think you could benefit from having a Logos that gives them explicit Director Stance abilities. For instance, in the library example, maybe the second try at getting the book isn't escalating the brutality of control, it's having the Hosts boyfriend show up.

Andrew Morris wrote:

TonyLB wrote: In this game, if you want the Host to go to a library and steal a book you could roll dice, taking into account the Host's "kleptomania" or "upright citizen", and the confusion they're suffering from having done ten uncharacteristic things already this morning.

Whoa! Major point here, I think. The more your host is suffering from conflicted emotions due to Archivist control, the less easy it will be to control him in future actions. Very neat.

TonyLB wrote: A protagonist (which, in their own story, the Host clearly is) is empowered when they recognize and confront the shadowy forces manipulating their actions and destiny. They gain power over their own destiny again, becoming an active, conscious participant in the behind-the-scenes drama.

Looks like we've had another creative explosion...which is great! I'm going to try and respond to the main points.

Sydney: Thinking about this again, I think that "Riding" and "Suggesting" are actually part of the same mode of possession. Basically, Riding is what the Archivist is doing when they are not actively Suggesting. There may also be times (Fade, extreme Host emotion) where the Archivist has no power to Suggest, all they can do is "ride out the storm."

So perhaps Riding/Suggesting is about being the Passenger, and taking control is about being the Driver? This would bring us down to a simple "one or the other" choice.

Tony: absolutely agree that the Archivist needs to roll (or whatever) to get the Host to do anything from the "passenger seat". And that each successive attempt (related or not) is harder.

Tony/Sydney: I'm a bit wary of having Director stance as an explicit Logos. At risk of being a Sim Spoilsport, I think this is an excessive level of power; manipulating Time is a big enough headache, but allowing an Archivist to simply dictate what happens makes my head spin.

I'd say that if the Archivists want the boyfriend to turn up, they can jolly well possess him too! (With time-travelling Archivists, making him turn up at the right moment shouldn't be too hard either.) So there are ways in which the Archivists can achieve Director-class "effects" without actually assuming Director Stance.

(Side note: IMHO, the closest thing Archivists have to Director Stance is the power to choose who they possess. The less limits there are on this, the closer Archivists are to being Directors.)

Andrew: I need to quote you here,

Andrew Morris wrote: Maybe this is where we work in Doug's idea of Archivists having to worry about detection. At the lowest level of control, there's no way of detecting the Archivist. As they exert more control over their host, there's some sort of "power leakage" that can be detected. I'd shy away from a technological method, leaning instead more toward psionic/empathic talents or magic and such.

Doug Ruff wrote: Another Archivist power - Precognition: this may be a bit too obvious really, but in a "time travel" campaign, the Archivists have already seen the future... has anyone seen the scene in Minority Report where the precog tells Anderton exactly where to go in order to avoid his pursuers? Oooh, just thought of something, the whole "precrime" thing would fit right into this game....

We could just take a different route with the Precog Logos. I think the simplest way of doing so would be to say that the power gives you only short-term sight into the future. Duck now, sniper behind you. Step left, falling bricks. Fire into the closet, hidden thug. And so on.

Oh, and Doug, I think that hosts with powers of their own (similar to Logoi) is a great idea for our planned "expansion modules."

Andrew Morris wrote: We could just take a different route with the Precog Logos. I think the simplest way of doing so would be to say that the power gives you only short-term sight into the future. Duck now, sniper behind you. Step left, falling bricks. Fire into the closet, hidden thug. And so on.

Sydney Freedberg wrote: But if you have Time Travel/Schrodinger's War rules in effect -- which is probably going to be the "Recommended Option" -- then people are going to go back and screw with scenes they were just in anyway, without needing a Precog Logos to know what to do because they were already there; so we'll have to figure out how to deal with the complex version at some point.

Andrew Morris wrote:

Sydney Freedberg wrote: ...people are going to go back and screw with scenes they were just in anyway....

Or we can just say that can't happen. Maybe you can only visit a particular time once. The first implication of that would be that you could never visit a time period where you were alive. I know it doesn't make sense, but it's easier...

Well, maybe "paradox-protected time travel" is a core element, while "paradox-possible time travel" is a custom option.

Andrew Morris wrote: Well, maybe "paradox-protected time travel" is a core element, while "paradox-possible time travel" is a custom option.

Andrew Morris wrote: you could never visit a time period where you were alive.

Sydney Freedberg wrote:
You know, even that won't do it: Other members of your "party" can visit the era & events of your lifetime without your Archivist-self along. There'd have to be some kind of "wake" thrown backwards into time by the process of ascension to Archivism that makes everything in your life off-limits to time travel -- if only because Paradox Protection operates very strongly to preserve the origins of beings who transcend time!

"...maybe backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time travel is invented. We haven't invented it yet, so they can't come to us. They can come to as far back as whatever it would be, say A.D. 2300, but not further back in time." -Carl Sagan, NOVA interview

Well, having a max-into-the-past cutoff date is another option, but I'd still push more for the only-one-instance-of-a-personality-in-any-particular-time-period idea. The former doesn't stop the problem of players going through a scene, then going back and doing it over and over and over...

Another option is to just go firmly into the "elastic timestream" camp. History is fixed and unchangeable. Sort of. Basically, all the major events -- wars, foundation of countries, famous deaths, etc. -- are inviolate. The elasticity effect can be as weak or as strong as we like, and that could actually be one of the elements that players discover during play -- "Hmm...we've done everything we can to make sure Steve never marries Susan, but they always end up getting hitched. Must be a timstream-significant event. We might as well give up on that plan and try something else."

IMHO, this is where one of our earlier concepts comes in useful - the act of observation helps to "cement" reality

Although it is possible to muck about with past events, it's difficult - and the more people that have witnessed the event, the harder it is to change it.
For example, Archivists may be able to prevent a murder at an out-of-town petrol station, but they would find it nigh-on impossible to stop the assassination of JFK.

This is why it's hard to possess famous people - lots of people pay attention to them, so their actions are well documented.

Also, it helps to reduce the "rewind" factor - where the Archivists and Nemesis keep trying to revisit the same battle, in order to win it this time - it just gets progressively harder to change what happened.

I think that this could be incorporated into the mechanics somehow, as a penalty to perform any action that contradicts a well-witnessed event.

And, to bang on about an old topic, it also gives a reaon why Archivists may wish to possess a person "passively" - the sheer act of observing an event (or ensuring that you Host observes it) will help to "cement" it into the Real Version of What Happened.

This is all good, but we're stepping into Mix Your Own Metaplot territory here with all this discussion of the nature of time and how to change history. (Of course, Mix Your Own Metaplot got into the nature of Archivists for a bit, but it appears to have gotten back on course). Could we take all time-travel discussion over there, untangle the threads, and refocus this one on such issues as (1) What Kewl Powerz do Archivists have besides Time Travel and (2) What is the nature of the Host-Archivist relationship, with all the possibilities for gradations of control and intentional or unintentional self-revelation that we were exploring?

N.B.: I'm not Tobias; I don't even play him on TV; and I'm no longer Acting (Left) Foot, so I gleefully admit my lack of authority to moderate this thread. But I can wheedle & whine....

Good point Sydney - and I wholeheartedly agree with moving discussion of the Time-Travel power to the other thread.

After all, you need to know what you're using the power on...

Over in Mix Your Own Metaplot,

I wrote: I think it's possible that both "Fade vs. Burn" and "Freedom vs. Happiness" can apply at both the individual scale and the macro scale. (One problem is that Fade vs. Burn is expressed in negative terms and Freedom vs. Happiness in positive terms, but that's fixable). In fact, you can construct a four-way dilemma as a Cartesian plane and see the entire game as about avoiding the extremes and making Hard Choices to achieve Balance somewhere in the middle.

Lacking graphics capability, I'll do this textually:

Axis 1: Fade vs. Burn

Fade > Burn - Individual: Archivist fades out and drowns in mortal nature.
Fade > Burn - Macro: The Great Library itself fades out of existence, taking all the accumulated wisdom of the Archivists with it.

Burn > Fade - Individual: The Host burns out, dying or losing all humanity.
Burn > Fade - Macro: Civilization burns out, becoming extinct or soullessly materialistic (the Minority Report consumerist dystopia, or perhaps a negative form of Clarke's Childhood's End, where a psychic massmind ascends and leaves mortal humanity an empty husk).

Fade & Burn Balanced - Individual: The Host and Archivist both retain their humanity yet possess Transcendent knowledge and power.
Fade & Burn Balanced - Macro: Civilization evolves to a transhuman state without losing that which makes us human.

Axis 2: Freedom vs. Happiness

Freedom > Happiness - Individual: The Host chooses to screw up his/her life.
Freedom > Happiness - Macro: The Wild Wild West -- or runamuck capitalism destroying the environment.

Happiness > Freedom - Individual: The Host is a happy, passive puppet.
Happiness > Freedom - Macro: Huxley's Brave New World.

Freedom & Happiness balanced - Individual: The Host chooses to do the right thing.

Freedom & Happiness balanced - Macro: Civilization achieves both democracy and equality, both freedom and peace.

N.B. When I say "happiness" here, I'm really talking about what philosophers would call "utility" -- as in "utilitarianism," the greatest good of the greatest number -- I think -- but since I don't quite grasp the term, and most people wouldn't either, I'm gonna steer clear of it.

Sydney Freedberg wrote:
Hey: Maybe instead of putting Fade & Burn in purely negative terms, we can have it also possible for the Host to gain Transcendence from the Archivist's actions -- leading ultimately to revelation of the Archivist's presence.

Can't blame Sydney for wanting to moderate this thread - he spawned it, after all. :)

But the comment on getting back to Archivist abilities, mechanics, and levels of posession is very valid.

I was torn between closing off this thread and the mix your own metaplot thread, because they were bleeding into each other too heavily. But i won't, provided people that keep posting here read the mix your own metaplot thread (up to the timestamp on my post here), so they can see where the post Sydney crossposted came from.

Doug's suggestions on 'cementing' reality and famous people, and the rewind factor (remember that name, Doug, it's a good tag for a mechanic number, IMHO) is good, but I guess belongs more in the Mix your own metaplot thread from this point on.

On Posession/Symbiosis:

I think there should be only 1 type of posession. However, an archivist is free to just sit in the host and 'observe' while posessing, of course. His problem at this time is plain Fade - the longer you sit there, Host-Timewise, the more Fade you will accumulate.

On powers:

- Undisputedly control all physical systems of the Host
- introduce 'ideas' on several levels of consciousness
- converse with Host / straight Mind-to-mind conversation (scary!)
- pain immunity for host (dangerous stuff too!)
- With skill: biofeedback tricks
- With skill: skill transfer from Archivist to Host (and back)
- With skill: telepathy with other humans
- Optional: assist other humans in the became-Archivist transition

Time travel seems to have become a default, which I don't mind.

Difficulties for the Archivist while in the host:
- Host consciousness/skills/values
- Host choice/effectiveness
- predicting effectivity of goal achievement by Host actions.

Some more thought that I came across:
- I'd hate for this to be yet another skills'n'traits-list-game.
- What happens to the archivist if the host dies (I presume injury can be ignored to some point)?

Hey guys. I'm not a part of the project, and I haven't been able to work my way through all of the threads yet in any detail (planning to soon), but this particular topic caught my eye (specifically the time travel bit). If anyone has seen The Butterfly Effect, maybe some sort of option that allows you to go back through your life and screw with events, changing your entire future. You could potentially retain all of your past memories and powers (and you don't have a body) and at some point you must become an archivist but other than that your entire situation has changed. It would be a good idea to have such an effect limited in "range" so that it only effects the archivist and those closely involved with him or her. This could create some fun situations for the players.

(for those unfamiliar with The Butterfly Effect, it is about a guy who discovers that he can go back in time and "repossess" his own body as a child during significant events of his life. Every time he makes a change that he thinks will be for the better he only screws it up more, either for himself or other people. after every change the memory part of his brain is overloaded with memories and he gets a nosebleed)

Kirk

Sounds pretty cool, dumirik. Gotta see if the local video/DVD rental place's got it.

No reason why a GM couldn't run a variant of "Schrodinger's War" where a prelude to Archivism is the Butterfly stage (although it would be more chrysalis-appropriate for the archivist to be the butterfly, I guess).

Kirk, glad to see new folks jumping in to the discussion -- the more brains, the better. So, welcome.

Before we go too far discussing the "butterfly effect" though, I just want to step back a bit and explain that theory. I haven't seen the movie, but I am told they don't really address the theory, instead opting for standard Hollywood fare. The butterfly effect is the theory that any system has significant sensitivity to initial conditions. This is illustrated by the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings on one side of the world causes micro-changes in airflow, which in turn cause minor changes, which go on to cause major changes, etc., resulting in a thunderstorm on the other side of the globe (eventually).

Applied to time travel, the butterfly effect is a supporting argument for the chaotic timestream model. There is a range even within this model, of course, but at the extreme would be something along the lines of going far back in time, doing nothing other than looking around, and heading back to your own time only to discover that intelligent mice with opposable thumbs now rule the planet, with humans as their slaves.

I've been pushing for the elastic timestream model, for three reasons.
1. It's cooler.
2. It allows for plenty of belief systems, be they religion or other form of spirituality.
3. It's a whole lot easier to GM.

The elastic timestream model purports that the major course of history is the result of billions of tiny interactions, leading up to the actual event. To change any event, you'd have to track down every detail that leads to it, and change them all, making gross changes in the timestream very difficult.

I'm with Andrew on this one. I just wasn't aware that what he calls the 'elastic timestream' is what I call the 'statistically dominated psychohistory-like unfolding of events'.

At least Andrew's method of saying it is shorter. :)

BTW, this thread really belongs somewhere else. If you want, I'll spin it off? Elasticity vs. Butterfly?

Dumirik wrote: Hey guys. I'm not a part of the project...

Tobias wrote: BTW, this thread really belongs somewhere else. If you want, I'll spin it off? Elasticity vs. Butterfly?

Andrew Morris wrote:

Tobias wrote: BTW, this thread really belongs somewhere else. If you want, I'll spin it off? Elasticity vs. Butterfly?

Yeah, it might be good to do a "Time Travel Party II" thread and hammer down exactly how time travel works in our game. Anyone else agree? Disagree?

Andrew Morris wrote:

Tobias wrote: BTW, this thread really belongs somewhere else. If you want, I'll spin it off? Elasticity vs. Butterfly?

Yeah, it might be good to do a "Time Travel Party II" thread and hammer down exactly how time travel works in our game. Anyone else agree? Disagree?

Before we go too far discussing the "butterfly effect" though, I just want to step back a bit and explain that theory. I haven't seen the movie, but I am told they don't really address the theory, instead opting for standard Hollywood fare. The butterfly effect is the theory that any system has significant sensitivity to initial conditions. This is illustrated by the idea that a butterfly flapping its wings on one side of the world causes micro-changes in airflow, which in turn cause minor changes, which go on to cause major changes, etc., resulting in a thunderstorm on the other side of the globe (eventually).

Hey guys. I'm not a part of the project...

You are now!

I have been a lurker for a long time, on the Forge in general, and specifically on the Group Design threads.

The way I see how Archivists function, they have to worry about a few things:
1) The amount of power they use with their Hosts. The more power they use, the more Burn their Host takes, and the quicker the Host will die.

That is Power Vs Life.

2) The amount of freedom they give the Host to do what the Host feels is the right thing. If they have complete control of the Host, then there is a greater chance of the Archivist's goal being achieved, but the more questionable the actions.

That is Freedom Vs Control, or Safety.
Since the more control, the less likely the chance of something getting out of the control of the Archivists.

It seems to be a balancing act, trying to use just the minimal amount of control and power, so that the Host doesnt collapse, but not just letting the Host do whatever he or she wants, since then the Archivist would fade away.

I was also thinking about the idea of having Fade and Burn for both Host and Archivist. The idea isnt exactly new, but I havent seen it actually stated in terms of Fade and Burn. The final effects are fairly easy, and those are taken from the original concepts.

Archivist Fade: The Archivist is suppressed by the Host.
Host Fade: This is where the 'Empty Shell' effect of burn would be.

Archivist Burn: The Archivist losses access to Host possession, and/or other powers.
Host Burn: The Host is dead.

Having Hosts have the ability to Fade allows the seperation between an Empty Shell and a dead Host. Although, I don't know how Host Fade would be tracked.

Causes for Fade and Burn are also fairly simple:
Archivist Fade: The Host's emotions and humanity overwhelm the Host.
Host Fade: The Archivist takes full control of the Host, suppressing it.

Host Burn: Hosts take burn when Archivists use their powers.
Archivist Burn: This is the one that is giving me difficulty. The idea of a changing timeline affecting the abilities of the Archivist could be what gives the Archivist Burn, but I was wondering if there was something that an Archivist could do while possessing a Host that would hurt the powers of the Archivist.

There are also most likely other effects that an Archivist would have to worry about, or at least consider, when possessing a Host, but the four I mentioned above were the ones that other people seemed to think were important. They are also the ones that most concern what happens between Archivist and Host.
Most of the other ones are more concerned with the interaction between the Archivists and the timeline, at least the ones I can think of.

{EXTENSIVELY EDITED because the baby started crying and I had to go away & come back}

mholmes52 wrote: I have been a lurker for a long time, on the Forge in general, and specifically on the Group Design threads.

mholmes52 wrote: Having Hosts have the ability to Fade allows the seperation between an Empty Shell and a dead Host.....Host Fade: The Archivist takes full control of the Host, suppressing it. Host Burn: Hosts take burn when Archivists use their powers...

Welcome mholmes52, it's good to have you on board. I like what you're saying already.

I'm going to try a mechanic to express some of the issues that have come up.

Control: Each Host has a maximum trait level (say 10.) This could be a dice pool, a statistic, whatever the game uses.

The Archivist and Host each have a Control rating that determines how much each of themare "in charge". The total control rating is equal to the Maximum trait level. An unpossessed Host has a Control of 10; a completely dominated ("Faded") Host has a Control of 0.

For example: if the Archivist currently has a Control of 4, they cannot use an Archivist trait or Logos at rating higher than 4. The Host has a Control of 6, so they can use their own trait up to a maximum rating of 6 (any points over are temporarily lost.)

An Archivist can cede Control at any time (unless they have become "addicted" to possessing the host in some way.) Gaining more Control requires another conflict.

If a Host ever (voluntarily or involuntarily) exerts a trait which exceeds their Control level, this also automatically initiates a conflict.

For example: Jim the Auto Mechanic is possessed by an Archivist, and only has a Control of 3. The Archivist needs him to use his "Repair Machinery" Trait, which has a value of 5. This exceeds Jim's control, so a conflict ensues. Jim wins the conflict, and his Control rises to 4. Jim will still not be able to use his own ability.

Extreme stress also triggers a conflict.

If the Host ever regains a Control of 10 as the result of a conflict, the Archivist is trapped (Fade). This does not happen if the Archivist voluntarily cedes control - if this happens the Archivist simple leaves the Host.

The more Powerful Archivist logoi require very high Control levels - say, 8 or above. Attempting to use these may accidentally (or deliberately) raise the Archivist's Control to 10 following the conflict. If this happens, the Host loses volition (Fade) and becomes dependent upon the Archivist.

Dumirik wrote: Without sounding like a know-it-all, I was aware of what the butterfly effect is, as well as a decent knowledge of chaos theory

Dumirik wrote: [The movie] is more than just standard hollywood fare and is one of the most thought provoking and inventive thrillers I've seen in a long time.

mholmes52 wrote: Power Vs Life [...] Freedom Vs Control

Sydney Freedberg wrote: As opposed to the Host just falling over dead, which is represented in this scheme by ... uh.... I don't know.

mholmes52 wrote: I was also thinking about the idea of having Fade and Burn for both Host and Archivist. The idea isnt exactly new, but I havent seen it actually stated in terms of Fade and Burn. The final effects are fairly easy, and those are taken from the original concepts.

Archivist Fade: The Archivist is suppressed by the Host.
Host Fade: This is where the 'Empty Shell' effect of burn would be.

Archivist Burn: The Archivist losses access to Host possession, and/or other powers.
Host Burn: The Host is dead.

Sydney Freedberg wrote: Perhaps "Host Fade" becomes "Host Transcendence getting too high at the expense of Host Humanity." The Archivist's use of its powers through the Host starts rubbing off on him/her. The good news is the Host may start gaining Transcendent Knowledge (aka Logoi) him or herself, either temporarily or permanently. The bad news is (a) the Host will start figuring out what's going on, which leads ultimately to insanity or the revelation of the Archivist's presence (b) too much of this sort of thing starts wearing down your Humanity (aka human traits aka passions), so the Host becomes one of T.S. Elliot's "Hollow Men," emotionally empty and detached.

Michael Brazier wrote:

Sydney Freedberg wrote: As opposed to the Host just falling over dead, which is represented in this scheme by ... uh.... I don't know.

Do you really want that to be possible? It'd be a better fit, I think, for the effects of "Host Burn" to be destroying the Host's higher faculties.

Okay, Doug, let's break out the effects of those three axes and see if I'm on the same page as you.

Power Axis
Host's power is higher -> Archivist begins to Fade, taking on host traits
Archivist's power is higher -> Host begins to Fade, taking on Archivist traits
Power is balanced -> Both personalities remain distinct

Sacrifice Axis
Host's sacrifice is higher -> Archivist loses ability to influence host's actions fully and can become trapped in host, but host suffers no Burn
Archivist's sacrifice is higher -> Host begins suffering severe physical damage (Burn), but Archivist has total control of host actions
Sacrifice is balanced -> Archivist retains ability to control host, host takes only moderate amounts of physical damage (Burn)

Truth Axis
Host's truth is higher -> Archivist has limited access to Logoi, but host is completely unaware of anything out of the ordinary
Archivist's truth is higher -> Host begins to understand Logoi and Archivists, but Archivist can use Logoi more freely and has access to the most powerful Logoi
Truth is balanced -> Archivist can use Logoi, host knows something strange is happening, but doesn't have enough information to figure out the truth

This is all very rough, even though the Sacrifice Axis and Truth Axis seem pretty workable. The Power Axis needs some major work. I might also have confused some of the issues, so I'd like to get some feedback on the effects of the three axes proposed by Doug.

It was suggested earlier that there be some conflict that determines where the balance lies in the axes proposed, but I'd like to see a mechanic that is based entirely on player choice. The game is about making hard choices, after all.

Andrew Morris wrote: Okay, Doug, let's break out the effects of those three axes and see if I'm on the same page as you.

Andrew Morris wrote: It was suggested earlier that there be some conflict that determines where the balance lies in the axes proposed, but I'd like to see a mechanic that is based entirely on player choice. The game is about making hard choices, after all.

Sydney Freedberg wrote: And -- to point out the way Andrew's implicit mechanics work -- this means not a sliding scale [...] but instead that each opposed pole is represented by a value that goes up and down on its own. I.e. Humanity and Transcendence can be in balance when both equal 1, or both equal 5, or both equal 50...

OH YEAH!

Andrew Morris wrote: GM: Okay. Much to your surprise, the host has a strong resistance. You both currently have a Sacrifice of 1, but after the boost, his Sacrifice is 5, yours is only 3. Instead of leaping on the Dark Archivist, the host takes control for a moment, and dives off the cliff into the ocean to escape confronting the enemy.

Andrew Morris wrote: Okay, Doug, let's break out the effects of those three axes and see if I'm on the same page as you.

*admiring*

WOO INDEED!
Must say I very much like ^_^ This is going to be one sweet finished game :D

Andrew Morris wrote:
Damn, Sydney, you always seem to find more wisdom in my comments than I put in them to start with. I actually was thinking of a sliding scale, but your concept is cooler. Now, how do we make this mechanic work? Because the first thought that comes to mind (assuming the scores are based on pure player choice) is that there's nothing to stop a player from making a super-powerful character without consequence.

Tobias wrote: Super-power(ful host) is not a problem IF too much obvious tampering with the timestream (this way) has its own drawbacks.

Andrew Morris wrote:

Sydney Freedberg wrote: And -- to point out the way Andrew's implicit mechanics work -- this means not a sliding scale [...] but instead that each opposed pole is represented by a value that goes up and down on its own. I.e. Humanity and Transcendence can be in balance when both equal 1, or both equal 5, or both equal 50...

Damn, Sydney, you always seem to find more wisdom in my comments than I put in them to start with. I actually was thinking of a sliding scale, but your concept is cooler. Now, how do we make this mechanic work?

My own take on this is over in Metaplot because of its cosmic-level implications. Frankly I've not figured out how to apply it to the individual-level Host:Archivist dynamic....

Also, maybe when you increase power, if you say, go too far over the presense limit you start to damage reality. So, say 10 presense is how much the host can handle without damage, and 15 is how much the timestream can handle without damage. This could be modelled either through descriptions or some in-game mechanic. Sort of like a "reality burn".

So we have 3 axes that apply to both the host and the Archivist (power, sacrifice, truth). We have 2 axes for the setting (freedom/safety, humanity/transcendence). We have logoi for Archivists (I think that they should be able to make them themselves, but the GM assigns the Power requirement). If we have the presense limiter it isn't all that much more to monitor. So long as we don't expand it too much further with too many more axes or mechanics this should be a manageble and slick system.

Kirk

My one reservation: I'm not sure we need a third axis labelled "sacrifice." I think we can have just two axes for both setting & individual levels -- Freedom vs. [Whatever] and Transcendence vs. Humanity -- and then have Sacrifice be simply what has to happen -- on either the Host's part or the Archivist's -- when these get out of balance.

Now, the idea of a Presence cap (not an axis) that measures how much power the Host can safely channel is an interesting one.

Yes. I think so too, about the presense cap I mean. And it can be extrapolated further to consider the archivist's presense in the time stream without damaging it.

For sacrifice, we could get rid of that axis and have something like:

Freedom is higher that [whatever], archivist loses ability to influence host actions but host takes no burn. Perhaps freedom in the setting applies to all archivists, so the more freedom you give to the humans, the harder it is to manipulate them.

Control [or whatever] is higher, host begins to take burn and the archivist gains control. Again, perhaps the more you "lock down" the humans, the easier to control they become, but the more likely you are to hurt them.

Balance. Minor control, minor burn. Etc.

Just some thoughts.

Kirk

Or when things get out of balance, the player has to choose to sacrifice (burn/fade out) either Host or Archivist Traits until things are restored.... It's always good to give people responsibility for torturing themselves, since they're much more creatively ruthless than any rule-writer or GM can be.

How about this?

Hosts and Archivists have two attributes: Knowledge (Truth axis, capped by Transcendence for Archivists) and Passion (Freedom axis, capped by Humanity for Archivists.) When Archivists are riding Hosts, they can choose how much Knowledge and Passion to express, and the difference between their expressed attributes and the Host's determine what the Archivist can do:

Host has:
> Knowledge, > Passion -- The Archivist is a passive witness, experiencing what the Host does
> Knowledge, < Passion -- The Archivist controls the Host, but can only do things the Host could do unaided
< Knowledge, > Passion -- The Archivist communicates with the Host, offering suggestions which the Host might accept, and superhuman aid
< Knowledge, < Passion -- The Archivist controls the Host and can employ superhuman powers

Logoi are rated for the minimum difference in Knowledge needed to unlock them. The cost of using Logoi is points taken from an attribute, either Knowledge or Passion; and either the Archivist's, or the Host's. (A fall in Knowledge is "Fade", a fall in Passion is "Burn", in the sense already established.) If any of the four attributes is pushed to 0, the possession ceases. You'll notice that an Archivist can unlock powerful Logoi by using weaker Logoi and paying for them from the Host's attributes only. This tactic is essentially driving the Host to mindlessness and death for power, so reasons not to do this need to be supplied, probably at the macro level.

Finally, if the Archivist has communication but not control, and the Host chooses to cooperate with the Archivist's intentions, there is a chance that both parties gain points: the Host in Knowledge, the Archivist in Passion. By the way, Archivists might deliberately cultivate Hosts in this way, guiding them into the paths that the Archivists had followed and improving their Knowledge, until the Hosts gain a native awareness of the Transcendent -- thus becoming new Archivists!

Doug, can you clear up those mechanics you posted earlier? Maybe an example of how it would work in a game session?

Dumirik wrote: Also, maybe when you increase power [...] you start to damage reality [...] Sort of like a "reality burn".

Sydney Freedberg wrote: Or when things get out of balance, the player has to choose to sacrifice (burn/fade out) either Host or Archivist Traits until things are restored

Or when things get out of balance, the player has to choose to sacrifice (burn/fade out) either Host or Archivist Traits until things are restored

Andrew Morris wrote: Doug, can you clear up those mechanics you posted earlier? Maybe an example of how it would work in a game session?

Andrew Morris wrote: Michael, I just want to be sure I'm understanding correctly. In your system, hosts become (effectively) a non-renewable resource for the Archivist? Using powers wears out the host and/or Archivist?

Doug Ruff wrote: Cursing her own ineptitude, Morgan uses a Logos to erase Tom's memory of his switching the alarms off; however, this is a Presence 8 power. This raises the total Presence to 14 (from 12), so Tom takes another 2 points of Burn.

Tom walks away from the console, satisfied. His Presence drops to it's standard level of 4; Morgan follows suit, dropping her Presence to 3.

Michael Brazier wrote: So, if total Presence goes over 10, then under 10, then over 10 again, the Host gets Burnt twice over? Why then would an Archivist ever let total Presence fall under 10, once she'd let it rise above that? In the example, if Morgan had kept her Presence at 8, Tom's shift to full alertness (from 4 to 8) would have raised the total Presence to 16, 2 points above the prior maximum of 14, for 2 more points of Burn -- a total of 6.

Michael Brazier wrote: What this mechanic doesn't capture is the case of an Archivist trying to persuade a Host to do something without controlling him ... try this: roll a die for each point of the Host's current Presence; each die that beats a target number lowers the Presence requirement for the next Logos used by 1.

Doug - coincidence that it's the Host taking all this Burn and Fade? Could you work an example where the archivist 'suffers' as well?

Tobias wrote: Doug - coincidence that it's the Host taking all this Burn and Fade? Could you work an example where the archivist 'suffers' as well?

Hmmkay-
If the Archivist Burns, I'd assume they were doing something that WOULDN'T be using or taking advantage of the Host's body- its a known fact, humans bodies can take or give only so much.
In previous examples then, the Archivist might take 'Burn' in a situation where they make the Burglers guns misfire instead of giving the Guard superhuman speed- they take Burn because they have to invest more of themselves into the timeframe, as opposed to just riding along or enhancing the Host.
Thus, Polterguiests or "car key gnomes" might really be Archivists making slight changes in situations where they couldn't (or wouldn't) allow a Host to be Burned. Rules might be associated for such a situation:
* Only Logi over a certain point can be opted, otherwise you still have to nudge the Host here or there
* Has to be line of sight of the host (The Guard sees the Guns)

Tobias wrote: Doug - coincidence that it's the Host taking all this Burn and Fade? Could you work an example where the archivist 'suffers' as well?

Doug Ruff wrote:

Michael Brazier wrote: What this mechanic doesn't capture is the case of an Archivist trying to persuade a Host to do something without controlling him ... try this: roll a die for each point of the Host's current Presence; each die that beats a target number lowers the Presence requirement for the next Logos used by 1.

You're right about this being missing. [...] However, the suggestion you've made assumes that te Archivist is going to use a Logos. What if the Archivist is simply trying to persuade them to wear the blue tie to work this morning? (In a time travel campaign, this could be a significant event!)

I know we're waiting for new, focused threads, but in the meantime, couldn't help commenting:

Michael Brazier's idea of Archivist-as-Muse is a very cool one -- it's been sort of implicit in vague ideas about different levels of control, but never put forth with this much punch before -- and we should work out mechanics that allow this option.

I also am intrigued (as I've said) by the idea of Presence caps, but I am loathe to introduce more mechanics than necessary. Perhaps instead of being an independent variable, Presence could be derived in a relatively straightforward manner from things we know we have to have, e.g. the Host's Humanity and/or Free Will?

Now, would a Host with high Humanity (lots of Passions) and lots of independent-mindedness (however we express that mechanically) be one with less room for an Archivist to operate, or more? Or perhaps simply a harder tool to control, but also a much more powerful one, as compared to some passionless, impressionable nebbish?

Arguably Free Will might help the Host resist his/her own Passions, not just the promptings of an Archivist-possessor,* so there might be a four-fold set of options here:

Low Free Will, low Passion/Humanity (balanced at low level): An easily lead milktoast. A nice easy ride, but you won't get anywhere fast.
High Free Will, low Passion/Humanity (unbalanced): Cold and determined and very much in control of themselves -- these can be scary people. The one advantage to possessing them is they don't have overwhelming emotions that might cause the Archivist to Fade.
Low Free Will, high Passion/Humanity(unbalanced): Teenagers, characters from tragic operas, and anyone else whose feelings can override their judgment. Very hard to ride, but damn powerful. If you can get their Passions aligned with what you want, let 'em rip.... and hang on for dear Fade.
High Free Will, high Passion/Humanity (balanced at high level): Martin Luther King. George Orwell. Winston Churchill. Leonardo da Vinci. Fully human and yet fully in control. An Archivist has very little chance of overmastering such personalities -- but if you can influence them, or even make yourself a partern to them, now you're cooking with gas.

{* EDIT -- Possible mechanic: A truly free decision, being inherently unpredictable, is represented by a dice roll: say, 1d6 where 1-3 is "don't do it" and 4-6 is "do it." Human Passions and Archivist influence, whether subtle whispers or brutal overrides, count as modifiers in one direction or another (e.g. "Loves Juliet:5" adds 5 to the probability of Romeo running off after Juliet). A Host's level of Free Will counts as "armor" against both Passions and Influence. And even if the results would be totally determined by Passions/Influence -- e.g. modifiers total +5 on a roll of 1d6, or +19 on a roll of 1d20 -- there should be some kind of critical failure/success mechanic so that on a roll of, say, 20 the decision goes against all the influences in the world.}

Sydney Freedberg wrote: Now, would a Host with high Humanity (lots of Passions) and lots of independent-mindedness (however we express that mechanically) be one with less room for an Archivist to operate, or more? Or perhaps simply a harder tool to control, but also a much more powerful one, as compared to some passionless, impressionable nebbish?

As this thread hasn't been formally closed, I'm going to post this. Tobias, if you want to shut this down, please say, but I think there is still life in this thread.

This is fresh from my related post in the Nailing Axes thread, where Transcendence vs Humanity has come up again, and I have suggested that it is a key element of the "mental state" mechanics, including possession. Also, that it fits Sydney's description of Opposed Good Things, which means that it is ideal to have high, but balanced, "scores" in each of these areas.

I'm going to attempt to write this into the Presence Mechanic in this thread, and I'd like your feedback.

Firstly, Archivists appear to have more Transcendence than Hosts, and Hosts may have more Humanity than Archivists (the base assumption is that an Archivist tends to become somewhat "detached" from their human drives and passions.)

In the Presence mechanic, Archivist Logoi are rated by the Presence which an Archivist must "manifest" within the Host in order to use them.

So, suggestion #1: Hosts and Archivist both have a Transcendence score. For a Host, this is the maximum amount of Presence they can safely contain; for an Archivist, this is the maximum amount of Presence they can manifest.

An interesting consequence of this is that a Host with high enough Transcendence could safely manifest Archivist Powers, and could be on the way to becoming an Archivist themselves.

Suggestion #2: Humanity represents the maximum amount of Passion that a Host or Archivist can safely contain. This means that high Humanity doesn't necessarily mean a nice person - it may also indicate the potential for highly destructive Passions.

I'm thinking that Passions should be "triggered" by circumstances that bring the Passion into play, and they also stack with each other. So if I am affected by Rage(5) and Sorrow(2), that's a total passion of 7.

Here's the sting: during Possession, any Passions of the Archivist or the Host can be triggered, and they will all affect the Archivist and the Host.

So, if the Host has the active Passions Rage(5) and Fear(3), and the Archivist also has Active Passions of Duty(4) and Sorrow(2), that's a total Passion of 14 for both Archivist and Host.

Suggestion #3: Will is determined by the application of Presence (free Will) and Passion ("unfree" Will). The Host is assumed to apply their Presence against the Archivist unless there is a very good reason not to.

For example: An Archivist wants his Host (a policeman) to shoot a fleeing criminal. The Archivist has a Presence of 6, the Policeman has a Presence of 4. But considering this Act triggers the officer's Passions of Duty(4)(to uphold the law) and Fear(2)(of losing his job). The Archivist has one active Passion, Duty(3)(to a Better Future).

Archivist total Will is 6 (Presence) + 3 (Passion) = 9. But the policeman has 4 (Presence) + 4 + 2 (2 Passions) = 10, so he doesn't shoot.

Suggestion #4: Whenever total Archivist + Host Presence exceeds the Host's Transcendence, the Host (always the Host) suffers Burn. Whenever the total Passion exceeds the Host's Humanity, the Host suffers Fade. Whenever it exceeds the Archivist's Humanity, the Archivist suffers Fade.

There are still several rough edges to this (especially, what does Fade do in this system?) but it does seem to allow for high Humanity and high Transcendence to co-exist, while maintaining a coherent(ish) mechanic.

Okay, here's my attempt to rework the mechanics we've been discussing. Feel free to shoot me if I bastardize anyone's ideas too much.

Presence(which I don't like, name-wise -- perhaps "Energy" or something else?), is a wholly independent trait, set at will by the player. Humans start at 0 Presence. Exceptional humans might have Prescence on their own, but certainly not more than 2 points. Even that would have to be someone like, say, Jesus. A score of 1 Prescence could be fairly common, though, perhaps as much as 1-2 percent of the population. Prescence becomes the cap for the total amount of the Archivist's traits that can be used in any action. Host traits are never limited, which is why it makes sense to find the best-suited host for the task at hand.

Increasing Presence causes Burn on a one-for-one basis. Raise Presence by 4, the host takes 4 points of Burn. Presence can be lowered, removing points of Burn on a two-for-one basis, rounded up. Lower Presence by 5, the host gets rid of 3 points of Burn.

Fade is volunatrily taken in order to succeed where it would not ordinarily be possible to do so. The host takes fade in order to allow an action using Archivist traits to succeed, whereas the Archivist takes fade to allow an action using host traits to succeed.

Example of play:

GM: "Okay, you come to vault door. It's securely locked from the outside, leaving you trapped with a limited supply of air."

Player: "Right. First things first, raise Presence to 1 so that I can use Metabolic Control, reducing my host's need for air to almost nothing."

GM: "Sure, no problem, he takes 1 point of Burn. The effect is..."

Player: "Nope, as soon as the Metabolic Control has been established, I lower Presence back to 0."

GM: "Good idea. Okay, your energization of his body was small and fast enough that nothing bad happens to the host. Since you're not actively powering the Logos, it'll wear off in about a day or so, but your host is fine for the moment. What now? You're still trapped in the vault."

Player: "Right, I just needed a moment to think."

(At this point, the player attempts to get more information from the GM, determining if there is anything within the vault that can be used to help escape. Finding no such thing, he decides he'll have to use his Archivist powers to get him out of this jam.)

Player: "All right, I raise Presence to 2 so I can use Molecular Analysis and get a look at the locking mechanism."

GM: "Okay, you now have a mental picture of the entire structure of the vault door, down to the molecular level. In addition to the complex mechanical locking device, there's an electronic time lock and a series of mechanical and electrical alarms. Your host takes 2 points of Burn. You can tell he's feeling a bit sick, but nothing major happens."

Player: "Damn, I'll have to bring out the big guns and energize him up to 7, so I can make him out of phase with other matter and walk through the door. Hey, wait a minute...he's a bank security guard, right?"

GM: "Sure."

Player: "Oh, I'll scan his mind and see if he's got any useful information."

GM: "Smart move. He knows this particular system very well, including a flaw in the locking mechanism. It only works from the inside, and it will set of the alarms, but he can definitely open the door."

Player: "Let's do it then. I'll lower Presence back to 0."

(Since the player is now using the host's abilities, no Burn is generated. The host is now only at 1 Burn, and Presence is back to 0. The player goes on to track down the enemy who locked him in the vault. He's now engaged in a battle with a dark Archivist and has been forced to raise his Presence to 10 during the course of the battle.)

GM: "The dark Archivist deflects your Zero-Point Energy Beam and responds with..."

Player: "Hang on a sec. How easily did he defend against the beam?"

GM: "Very easily. It didn't seem hard at all."

Player: "Oh boy, I might be getting into more trouble, but I'm gonna Fade the host to try and get the beam through."

GM: "How much?"

Player: "Can't risk going too low...5 points of Fade."

GM: "Ouch, you can feel your host's psyche start to crumble as you drain his life-force to power the attack. The Zero-Point Energy Beam is still partially deflected, but it does burn through his shield, vaporizing his left arm."

(And so on.)

Andrew,

Interesting, I'm going to make a couple of comments, and ask a couple of questions.

Firstly, a comment about the Presence scores for Hosts. I'd like to see a bit of a wider range. There are two main reasons for this. The first is that I'd like the opportunity within the rules to "damage" Host Presence - which means that a very low presence needs to be a bad thing, and not the human norm. The second is that a larger range allows for an Archivist to slowly "mentor" a Host by helping them to increase their Presence (with Archivism being the eventual goal. This is Michael's idea originally, but I support it.)

Secondly, a question about Archivist Fade. If Host traits are never limited, how does Archivist Fade help the Host to succeed?

Another question, do you also intend mechanics for the Humanity/Passions angle?

And another comment: I'm kinda attracted to the 2-for-1 rules for removing Burn. It's simple, and accounts for long term effects.

Finally, a note about the term "Presence". I think it's more suitable than "Energy" because it captures more of the essence of what makes a person (or Archivist) special. It has connotations with "personality" "stage presence" and "being all there". It may not seem like a powerful enough word to describe a trait which can power Logoi, but if you think of Presence as being the quality which makes a person more Real, and which therefore gives them more control over reality (and History) then I think that it's more than adequate.

Doug Ruff wrote: I'd like to see a bit of a wider range. There are two main reasons for this. The first is that I'd like the opportunity within the rules to "damage" Host Presence - which means that a very low presence needs to be a bad thing, and not the human norm. The second is that a larger range allows for an Archivist to slowly "mentor" a Host by helping them to increase their Presence (with Archivism being the eventual goal. This is Michael's idea originally, but I support it.)

Doug Ruff wrote: Secondly, a question about Archivist Fade. If Host traits are never limited, how does Archivist Fade help the Host to succeed?

Doug Ruff wrote: Another question, do you also intend mechanics for the Humanity/Passions angle?

Doug Ruff wrote: if you think of Presence as being the quality which makes a person more Real, and which therefore gives them more control over reality (and History) then I think that it's more than adequate.

OK, this makes more sense.

So, it's not about Presence, it's about cosmic power, which Hosts don't have. So, let's call it Energy, as you suggest, and not even bother with giving Hosts a stat for it (it's zero anyway.)

IMHO, this is a roll-back to some of the earlier suggestions for implementing possession and Burn (which isn't necessarily a bad thing.)

I would suggest some tweaks though.

Firstly, the sheer act of possession should involve Energy transfer, the Archivst is inside the Host at this point. So I would suggest 1 (or more!) Energy as an "ante" (which means Burn from the outset. Possession always has consequences.)

Second, how is the Archivist boosting the host's abilities? If it's by "investing power" into the Host, then that's Burn for the Host, not Fade for the Archivist. If it's by sharing knowledge, that's different, but I don't see how this would Fade the Archivst either.

IMHO, Archivist Fade works better when there is an emotional dimension to the mechanics, the Archivist Fades through being overwhelmed by the Host's emotions.

However, your core mechanic is quite workable for straight implementation of Archivist powers and how they Burn the Host. At the cost of providing a means for a Host to Ascend - do you have an alternative mechanic in mind for this, or do you think that we don't need to simulate Hosts turning into Archivists?

Doug Ruff wrote: So, it's not about Presence, it's about cosmic power, which Hosts don't have. So, let's call it Energy, as you suggest, and not even bother with giving Hosts a stat for it (it's zero anyway.)

Doug Ruff wrote: IMHO, this is a roll-back to some of the earlier suggestions for implementing possession and Burn (which isn't necessarily a bad thing.)

Doug Ruff wrote: Firstly, the sheer act of possession should involve Energy transfer, the Archivst is inside the Host at this point. So I would suggest 1 (or more!) Energy as an "ante" (which means Burn from the outset. Possession always has consequences.)

Doug Ruff wrote: Second, how is the Archivist boosting the host's abilities? If it's by "investing power" into the Host, then that's Burn for the Host, not Fade for the Archivist. If it's by sharing knowledge, that's different, but I don't see how this would Fade the Archivst either.

Doug Ruff wrote: At the cost of providing a means for a Host to Ascend - do you have an alternative mechanic in mind for this, or do you think that we don't need to simulate Hosts turning into Archivists?