Statting a teenager--skills needed and likely

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by malloyd

This is slightly confused because Basic actually gives CI a supernatural effect (effective exorcism) which [ought] to have a separate cost from the Rank.

No, it doesn't. It's just that it is rare for someone who doesn't have Clerical Investment to have more than default Religious Ritual

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

No, it doesn't. It's just that it is rare for someone who doesn't have Clerical Investment to have more than default Religious Ritual

Huh? Exorcism is a skill distinct from RR. And IIRC it works at a penalty unless you have True Faith or Clerical Investment or Blessed from some diva.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Molokh

Huh? Exorcism is a skill distinct from RR. And IIRC it works at a penalty unless you have True Faith or Clerical Investment or Blessed from some divinity.

Exorcism defaults from Religious Ritual, and no, you have misremembered. It isn't Clerical Investment. It's Power Investiture.

[vicky_molokh]

Ah, that fixes it. Sorry.

[sieurin]

Don't forget Area Knowledge (Town).

In which she might have a higher score than her parents, who might very well spend less time moving around and talking to people in the area, making do with defaults to find the supermarket, doctor and church. If they are commuters, they probably have a higher skill for the place they work in.

CI vs RR:
As I see it, CI is the specific right, recognised by your religion in whatever manner, to perform religious ceremonies. RR is your place in the "chain of command" in a religious hierarchy. I can easily imagine someone with RR who has no right to perform rituals and isnt supposed to, but who has administrative or even military command over normal duded in the church.

I can imagine a religion in which any member can perform ceremonies and no formal or informal recognition of his duty is neccessary, as well as one which has no formal organisation to speak of (isn't that true of many Jews and Moslems, who get by on Reputation instead?)

Erik

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by sieurin

I can imagine a religion in which any member can perform ceremonies and no formal or informal recognition of his duty is neccessary, as well as one which has no formal organisation to speak of (isn't that true of many Jews and Moslems, who get by on Reputation instead?)
Erik

Many Christians don't recognise a distinction between clergy and laity either - and the lower church you get, the less formal organisation you'll find. Amongst Baptists, being a pastor simply means you are employed as a church minister, Brethern Churches (Quakers etc.) don't even make that much distinction. In both anyone can perform ceremonies, preach etc. - assuming they have the consent of their community, but in many cases a formally trained professional is still the norm. As I understand it many muslim denominations take the same approach. Not sure about the Jews, although I think you may be right there as well.

[sieurin]

I don't think formal per se is neccessary for Clerical Investment - pentecoastal Christians can be pretty big on laity doing things, and I think here in Sweden they are pretty much non-organised (to the point the community have worried about interpretations of dogma) but there tends to be a "standard preacher" in a congregation anyway. He was just granted his CI more informally. :)

(IIRC - I'm an atheist, but had a gig as a musician for a Pentecoastal congretation and associated a lot with them in my youth... its another story.)