Re: Spirit taxonomy

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Colin Watson (watson@csd.abdn.ac.uk)
Date: Tue 08 Nov 1994 - 20:00:33 EET


Alex:
> [...] you could bind
> a suitably meaty spirit as a _combined_ Intellect/Power/Magic spirit,
> which would be somewhat gross.

Personally I wouldn't have a problem with this. It's no worse than having 3 different spirits bound into the same object, and I imagine the cost (in terms of POW) would (/should) be much the same.

> > You can't bind an Intellect spirit in the same way as you bind a Ghost
> > because the former is (I imagine) a Beast-spirit whereas the latter
> > is a Man-spirit.
>
> This seems very odd. Firstly, it seems counter to the intent of making
> the Binding Enchantment the determining factor in the taxonomy of bound
> spirits and their effects.

I think I see the confusion here. As I see it there are two issues:  #1/ What it takes to bind a spirit (in terms of simply holding it captive).  #2/ What you can do with the spirit when it's in a binding enchantment.

I reckon #1 is dependent upon what the spirit *is* (its "species" or whatever; this might correspond to the entries in the Monster book, or it might use broader categories such as Man-spirit, Beast-spirit, Spirit-spirit etc). But anyway, the ritual of binding is specific to a particular category of spirit. (ie. you can't bind a Salamander in a Ghost Binding Enchantment; but you might be able to bind a Wraith in one.)

I reckon #2 is dependent on the added functionality of the enchantment. The basic binding enchantment simply holds a spirit captive. You can release it to perform a single service or, if you have a command-spell, send it out to perform several tasks. But I think using a spirit's MP or INT or spells while it's bound should be an optional, additional function of the enchantment (with associated extra cost).

The current rules imply that the use of MP/INT/spells is a peculiar quirk of the spirit itself which only manifests when the spirit is bound. That's what I don't like. It's too contrived.

Now, I don't think this necessarily calls for a rules re-write; it's just a different way of understanding the underlying process. Consider "Intellect Spirit Binding Enchantment" to be a convenient "package" which binds a (rather dumb) spirit *and* lets you use its INT. This doesn't preclude binding a Ghost and using *its* INT (though this should, of course, be trickier - perhaps requiring different rituals and more POW).

> And also: since most Beasts can't know spells,
> having fixed INT, why would Beast spirits make very good Intellect spirits?

You've got me there. Mind you, I don't see why fixed INT shouldn't be capable of storing spells, although I agree that fixed INT creatures shouldn't be able to cast 'em.

___
CW.
Glorantha's disk flowed over, and I wasn't there...

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:37:34 EEST