Thinking about the Dupes scenario, I was thinking in having humanity as defined the combination of honor and empathy. I'm unsure, tho, as to whether this combination results in a weaker definition or not because a situation might lead to a humanity loss from honor offset by a subsequent humanity gain from empathy (or viceversa).

Lets say humanity as empathy reflects how much you step on people to accomplish your desires. The more humanity, the less you do so.

With humanity as honor, I can see that the interesting part would be the honor conflicts. But I get the nagging feeling that it promotes power hungriness (advance in social rank), which is just the opposite of how an empathic humanity works (for example, by promoting self sacrifice). For example, with honor you could present a conflict between, say, "keep a secret" vs "save your wife" (lose honor on save option), but its just the opposite of "bind cthulhu" vs "save your wife" (lose on cthulhu option).

So what is your opinion on this?

Hi there,

That's really advanced Humanity-stuff which I discuss in detail in the supplement Sex & Sorcery. It is possible and functional to use two definitions of Humanity, as long as they are constructed such that four possible roll-combinations* may occur. All the rules and details are laid out in the book. In fact, you'll find a neat circular diagram, and by applying empathy and honor to it, you'll see that it's a conflict at what I call, in that diagram and section, at the community level.

Other forms of complex Humanity construction are usually not recommended. Nearly all of them I've seen are really dodges to escape the basic constraint or context for play that the Humanity rules demand.

Now, all that said, I strongly suggest that you stick to a simple and singular definition of Humanity for purposes of first-time play.

Best, Ron

* Two gain rolls
One check, one gain roll
One gain roll, one check
Two checks