Re: Roaming Souls

[Steve Ames <steve>]

> I like the answer of no the elves are not affected.  The soul is.  
> I know of a character who has been placed into an elf.  

This is useful from a background standpoint... ie it showed what one
GM was thinking at one time. However we no longer make rulings or
decisions based on precedence. If there is not a consensus on a ruling
than it was a one time ruling and could be ruled another way another
time. Hence this list... to bring some order to things.

I guess what I'm saying is "its been done this way before" doesn't
make it right.

> I alos know of an adventure when soul strike and soul blade was used
> on free roaming souls without a body.  Since it worked, it was the 
> soul that was affected.  

In that case. But again that was one GMs interpretation on a given night.
And could easily be decided here that it was incorrect and not to be
ruled that way again.

> This also helps with soul striking the character/aerovero.  He has a
> soul so it should work on him to.  Does a guardian spirit have a 
> soul/is a soul?  

Guardian spirits are... spirits. No soul component at all.

> No the soul in an elf shouldn't happen a lot but it brought up some 
> good questions.  When it comes to DP, my problem is that your Body,
> mind,and spirit(and soul)doesn't change with experience but your DP 
> can. (You can change your stats but not the essence of those things).  
> Maybe DP is your will to live.  Beating you up gives you pain and 
> lowers you will to live.  Spell attack you physically do the same.  
> Mental spells that harm you weakens you mental hold on your will to 
> live (WILL TO LIVE is my invented link between all of the essences 
> of a being). 

No worse than a lot of other theories :)

> Spirit attacks weaken your spiritual hold on your will to live.  
> Your soul is a measure of ypour will to live.  It is never destroyed,
> just pushed beyond the power to say with your body,mind,or spirit.  
> When you die, it is too low to sustain your existance.  

What about the soul-less? Elves, undead, etc...?

> A DI is your last chance to fight off the fact of a low will to live.
> (Faith increases your will to live and that is why priest get the 
> ability to stress their common sense to increase there chance of DI)
> You don't have to be alive to have a will to live.  That is why object 
> can resist destruction. Everything has a will to live.  

And now, I'm afraid, we have left the realm of logical discourse. I
don't believe this is correct at all. "will" implies sentience firstly.
That could just be a problem of nomenclature. Perhaps "instinct" would
be better.

> We state it in terms that we can deal with(DP).Your resistance to 
> being hit is your dv, your resistance to dying is your DP, or your 
> will to live.  You don't need all of the aspects(body,mind,etc..)to 
> exist.  You need only one.  This is why elves don't need a soul.  

I'd argue that in order to have a "will to live" you have to have
life-force. Things without life-force are "dead" and should be 
treated in a "structural points" manner... unless they are creatures
(ie undead in which case DP come to represent the "animation force")

> Their will to live is shared by the aspects they have.(If you don't 
> have any of these, you don't exist)  I know I started the Soul in 
> Elves thing, but I am serious about this idea to explain DP.  THis 
> also works for second-lifers because they have a strong will to live 
> so they find someone who has a weak will to live and takes over.  
> Orcs have strong will with translate to strong wills to live.  This 
> is why they don't unconscience as easily as other races.(Please begin
> the tear-up on this idea as soon as possible)