Topic: Undead

[GrumpyOldFart]

Let's see, so far as I can tell all undead arise from one of four sources:

1. Disease: Modern conceptions of zombies fall into this category, as do ghouls. Vampires can be and have been argued to fall into this category as well.

2. Divine Intervention: Vampirism as "the curse of Cain" falls into this category. Similar to undead created by magic, the difference being the entity wielding the power resulting in an undead creature.

3. Created by magic: Typical RPG "created undead" of course fall into this category, as do traditional voodoo zombies.

4. Created by events: "Hauntings", undead who are fettered by location, would be an example of this.

There's no particular reason I can spot to confine a given "species" of undead (say, zombies) to a particular method of creation (say, disease) any more than to tie it to a particular base creature type (say, humans). If vampirism is a disease, are elves subject to it in the same way as humans? Are they subject to it at all? Or perhaps does it have different symptoms and get called by a different name when it happens to an elf? Even if it is a disease now, that doesn't necessarily mean it didn't start as a curse, whether from a mortal or Divine source, originally, does it? Is the RM Plague spell a disease, a spell or a curse? Answer: Yes.

Okay, but one of the symptoms is that it makes the victim "immortal"... so in theory there could be one or more of the original targets still around, under the effects of a curse, mixed into a population of who knows how many who are under the effects of a disease with functionally identical symptoms.

In most ways I'd think any "type" (eg vampire) could come about by any of the methods above, within obvious limits. Most things as powerful as Gods won't bother creating something as generally useless as a zombie, an undead produced by disease presumably means there is a corporeal body the disease inhabits, powerful undead created by magic posits a necromancer more powerful still than any of his creations, extraordinary undead created by events must have been created by extraordinary events, etc.

Thoughts?

[yammahoper]

I see the types of undead in a different light, though each of my definitions can easily fall with the catogories provided in the first post.

Animated dead: by virus or magic or tech, these are robot like animations.  The are controlled or programmed or just wild and lack a soul.  Absolution is useless against them.

Free willed undead: these undead have a bound soul/spirit.  They may be controled via magic, will or teck, but they have the capacity to resist.  Such an undead can be absolved.

Abominations; able to resist, typically immune to standard control techniques, these foes have all the superior abilities of soul bound undead but lack a soul, typically devouring/syphoning and otherwise being a destroyer of souls.  Generally immune to absolution.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Animated dead: by virus or magic or tech, these are robot like animations.  The are controlled or programmed or just wild and lack a soul.  Absolution is useless against them.

I can see that. Skeletons and zombies are skeletons and zombies, and whether a zombie is created by disease or by voodoo is beside the point in terms of how to deal with the monster... except that it isn't beside the point, because I doubt you have to wonder whether you can "catch" zombie-ism from a zombie created by voodoo.

Free willed undead: these undead have a bound soul/spirit.  They may be controled via magic, will or teck, but they have the capacity to resist.  Such an undead can be absolved.
Abominations; able to resist, typically immune to standard control techniques, these foes have all the superior abilities of soul bound undead but lack a soul, typically devouring/syphoning and otherwise being a destroyer of souls.  Generally immune to absolution.

Examples, please. I can think of a few examples myself, but I'd like to see how much difference there is between your examples and mine.

Also I'm not sure about "Generally immune to absolution". I would consider a lich to fall into the "abomination" category, but I wouldn't expect it to be immune to absolution. Highly resistant perhaps, by virtue of having been both strong willed enough and expert enough in controlling where magic does and does not go to have survived the process that made him a lich. But if you can get through the armor there's a comparatively normal soul underneath it all.

The reason I divided it as I did was because that's where I could see the major variables being in control and contagion issues. Each of those categories would range from weak to powerful undead with, in many cases, functionally identical symptoms. Zombies are still zombies. But disease undead, of whatever type from zombies to vampires, imply contagion procedures. Undead of any type created by Divine Intervention might be more resistant to outside control than usual. "Usual" pretty much being defined by controlling undead created by mortal magic. This would include liches, although since the magic dominating their existence is of their own making they occupy a special place. Undead created by events... I'd expect control to be dependent on your ability to break it out of the event pattern that defines its existence. Absolution may be something the caster offers as a bargaining chip in negotiations in such a case.

[yammahoper]

Lich is an abomination imo.  Absolution can only temporarily defeat it (its soul being contained in its phylactary thingy).  Its bonus to rr would be based on GM bias/Creature and Treasures rules, talents, spells, items.  A lich is TVI, which is base +25 versus all rr's in my game.  Add in a protections spell (say +20) and a talent (+20), assume a +30 for stat...well, any GM can talor a high resistance.  My point is that abominations are very resistant to death via soul banishment/destruction.

The souls energy devoured by a lich is channeled to its phlactathingy, sustaining it and providing a power source to be tapped at will, providing it near limitless power.  Liches are nasty.

I avoid the virus aproach.  I play a game with more magic than science.

For an intelligent undead seeking an end to its suffering and constant hunger, absolution is a good way out.  imo, undead cant resist thier hunger indefinitly and succumb to it.  Most with eagerness close to glee.

[markc]

I see the types of undead in a different light, though each of my definitions can easily fall with the catogories provided in the first post.

Animated dead: by virus or magic or tech, these are robot like animations.  The are controlled or programmed or just wild and lack a soul.  Absolution is useless against them.

Free willed undead: these undead have a bound soul/spirit.  They may be controled via magic, will or teck, but they have the capacity to resist.  Such an undead can be absolved.

Abominations; able to resist, typically immune to standard control techniques, these foes have all the superior abilities of soul bound undead but lack a soul, typically devouring/syphoning and otherwise being a destroyer of souls.  Generally immune to absolution.

 I agree wholly.




 IMHO all can apply to any type or kind of undead depending on the game world. I know that does not help but it is the way it works in my mind.
 If I were writing a book on undead I think I would provide some outlines for each situation you have listed above. I can also see multiple options for specific types in any game universe. The examples Yammahopper provided above about skeletons were great IMHO. You could break them out by renaming them ie Borges Undead for skeletons that are immune to turning.


MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

I play a game with more magic than science.

I feel like if you allow any form of forensics in the same game with "mystical arts", at some level you are going to have to reconcile the two. In a lot of ways, "detect signature" magic opens up a really huge can of worms.

[RandalThor]

I play a game with more magic than science.

I feel like if you allow any form of forensics in the same game with "mystical arts", at some level you are going to have to reconcile the two. In a lot of ways, "detect signature" magic opens up a really huge can of worms.

I see this, but I also see that it makes sense that people would develop magic much as they do science in our world - unless they couldn't. If magic was either so focused or unpredictable (or, heaven forbid, both) then I can see it not being able to do much (focused) or actively being prohibited for its destructive nature (unpredictable).

Otherwise, people will use it to better their daily lives, which is why I have such a hard time dealing with most games magic systems. It is built almost entirely around adventurer/military type applications. Yes, I get why, but it is still a problem to not have the more "mundane" magic built in there. I also know the arguments: it is expensive. (Not necessarily, many spells currently have no components, in fact RM is big on no components except for the really high-level/permanent type spells), it is only done by few, rare people. (Which only applies if it can only be done by a few, rare individuals, as is for RM it can be done by anyone who is willing to take the time to learn, and really, who wouldn't if it meant they would be better whatever they are.), its too costly. (Was your advanced degree in electrical engineering too costly? What job would you have if you didn't get your degree? Would you really even have a chance at making the same money without it? Not including blind luck in here falling into the perfect job.)

So, I say, that in a world of magic, particularly one that has several thousand years of societal development like most do" magic = science/technology. Go from there.

[providence13]

What kind of society would we have where undead and magic are common place?
Something close to Arcanum (steampunk & magic pc game) and World War Z (Less about zombies and more about how fighting zombies changes society.)
 

[GrumpyOldFart]

Ever read the "Social Implications of Magic" series?

http://search.freefind.com/find.html?id=26202539&pid=r&mode=ALL&n=0&query=social+implications

In a lot of ways I think that needs to be done for whatever magic system you run at least, if not specialized for specific cultures, species, etc. As an example, I'd expect dragons or vampires to have completely different social implications to their magic than humans.

[markc]

What kind of society would we have where undead and magic are common place?
Something close to Arcanum (steampunk & magic pc game) and World War Z (Less about zombies and more about how fighting zombies changes society.)
 

 In the world I am developing undead (Skeletons and Zombies) are used for labor. Also some criminals are sentenced to skelification or zombifaction for their crimes after they are executed or if they die during the term of there sentence.
 Some also sell their bodies before they are dead to be used for what ever service is required but this ties a bit of the person soul to the dead bodies so it is not done lightly. Note: In some areas the above is explained more than in others and in some it is left out completely.
MDC

[RandalThor]

In the world I am developing undead (Skeletons and Zombies) are used for labor. Also some criminals are sentenced to skelification or zombifaction for their crimes after they are executed or if they die during the term of there sentence.

Oh, you have got to have the Free the Undead (or Animated Dead) movement!! That would be awesome.

In (a little) more serious note, there would be lots of conflict over such things. Imagine the American Civil War (or any country's civil, for that matter) occurring because one group wanted to outlaw the practice of using one's ancestors as cheap labor. I don't say free because I am sure there will be upkeep to maintaining ones zombies & skeletons. And, I imagine a god of the dead might just have something to say about it. (Pro or Con depending upon the nature of the god, I imagine.)

[markc]

In the world I am developing undead (Skeletons and Zombies) are used for labor. Also some criminals are sentenced to skelification or zombifaction for their crimes after they are executed or if they die during the term of there sentence.

Oh, you have got to have the Free the Undead (or Animated Dead) movement!! That would be awesome.

In (a little) more serious note, there would be lots of conflict over such things. Imagine the American Civil War (or any country's civil, for that matter) occurring because one group wanted to outlaw the practice of using one's ancestors as cheap labor. I don't say free because I am sure there will be upkeep to maintaining ones zombies & skeletons. And, I imagine a god of the dead might just have something to say about it. (Pro or Con depending upon the nature of the god, I imagine.)

 Yes you have hit it on the head. There is a deity that is mad about it, there is another one that loves it, there is a government that promotes it and there is another that tolerates it but heavily restricts it. This is just one of the themes of the game universe. There are also some rule changes from basic RMSS/FRP/SM:P that makes it at times harder to create (lesser) undead/golums/constructs/summon creatures that also have a huge impact on the game. All in all I think it is coming along nicely (in my head) with a little on paper (mostly maps and some notes) as well as an integration with SM:P that I think works to an extent. 
MDC

[RandalThor]

as well as an integration with SM:P that I think works to an extent. 
MDC

I am not sure what it is, but I kind like the mixing of high-tech with magic, sometimes. For RM/SM I like the original SM setting, not Privateers for it though.

[GrumpyOldFart]

I am not sure what it is, but I kind like the mixing of high-tech with magic, sometimes. For RM/SM I like the original SM setting, not Privateers for it though.

Even with psionics instead of/in addition to magic, it doesn't matter. If the skill of forensics exists and psi/magic exists, players will apply each to the other, period. So while your magic doesn't have to be 'science based', whatever that means, they do have to be able to run in harness together. In other words, you have to have a clearly defined boundary where science either "works _____ way and this is why" or "doesn't work and this is why". There has to be a game-logical rationale, otherwise forensics simply can't be applied to magic because there's no way to gather consistent, reliable data.

[yammahoper]

Magic does not require a logical rationale.  When science meets magic, such as a scanner scanning a magical fire, the scanner may detect banana's and a lethal radiation source.  Magic defies technology.

The other route is scientific magic, were the only limit to learning it is skill and talent and time.

[RandalThor]

Magic does not require a logical rationale.  When science meets magic, such as a scanner scanning a magical fire, the scanner may detect banana's and a lethal radiation source.  Magic defies technology.

The other route is scientific magic, were the only limit to learning it is skill and talent and time.

Except that in practice magic in RPGs does tend to be very logical uniform, and thusly able to be studied in a scientific manner. For example: The Firebolt spell does what it does every time, the only factor that changes the effects at all is the spell casters ability/level. But even that is able to be quantified and figured out as to how it affects the spell. (Yes, much of that is for gaming purposes, but if you aren't enforcing any Spellcasting Random Effects rule, then we can only assume that the magic works in predictable ways, so it is able to be scientifically studied.)

So, if the magic fire detects as "bananas and lethal radiation" the same type of magical fire will detect the same, though maybe at different levels of strength. Which means, that just like with various detection type spells, you should even be able to learn the type of spellcaster, even to an individual spellcaster - if the technological (read=mundane) equipment is even able to sense the magic at all.

[GrumpyOldFart]

When science meets magic, such as a scanner scanning a magical fire, the scanner may detect banana's and a lethal radiation source.  Magic defies technology.

In other words...

...otherwise forensics simply can't be applied to magic because there's no way to gather consistent, reliable data.

No?

[yammahoper]

Since there is no such thing as magic, any "system" designed to prepresent magic is going to have the structure innate to systems, such as spell list.  The Chaotic and Dabbler in RM suffer greatly from this limitation.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Since there is no such thing as magic, any "system" designed to prepresent magic is going to have the structure innate to systems, such as spell list.  The Chaotic and Dabbler in RM suffer greatly from this limitation.

That's the point. While it doesn't have to be (and in fact can't be) science, it has to mesh well enough with it that nobody but a scientist can spot the difference. Otherwise forensics can't be applied to magical effects, and the very fact that magic has a consistent game mechanic should be misleading, according to the concept logic behind the game's magic.

That's why the Dabbler doesn't work. Not because the profession concept doesn't work, but because magical forensics (which is a big part of the profession concept) isn't a fully defined concept in itself. The magical forensics part of the foundation for the house of Dabbler is quicksand, if that makes sense.