"Definition" of being Garou

[Nail Eater]

A few days ago I started to wonder what defines the Garou (or order shapeshifter). Is it Gnosis? If yes then does Skin Dancers, as artificially created, have it? Is it Rage? Then what about Nuwisha? And, if two Garou are in love and want to have children, when one of them undergoes Rite of the Stolen Wolf is he still a Garou and mating will be a breaking of the Litany tenet? Or will he be a Kinfolk with Gnosis (thus reproduction will not lead to a metis)? Is it something else? What do you think (or know)?

[heinrich]

A garou is a garou because he is a garou.
Everything else is a symptom, not a cause.

Unlike Ratkin and Corax, who are transformed into Fera through other means, the Storyteller's Handbook revised states, that a spiritual component is inherent to the garou (most likely since conception). This spiritual component is in part passed on to offspring, creating kinfolk or true born garou. If the spiritual component of both parents is compatible, a Metis is born, if not (different Fera) they hinder one another, reducing the chance of breeding true as either to 5%.

W20 might go a different route, though.

[Nail Eater]

A garou is a garou because he is a garou.
Everything else is a symptom, not a cause.

Unlike Ratkin and Corax, who are transformed into Fera through other means, the Storyteller's Handbook revised states, that a spiritual component is inherent to the garou (most likely since conception). This spiritual component is in part passed on to offspring, creating kinfolk or true born garou. If the spiritual component of both parents is compatible, a Metis is born, if not (different Fera) they hinder one another, reducing the chance of breeding true as either to 5%.

W20 might go a different route, though.

That part was known to me. I was wondering though if there's a way for 2 Garou to have children without creating a Metis. I know that I could send them for an epic quest to Umbra and bend the rules (ST's prerogative) but still I'm searching for an easier way 😈. You know, for example for a pair of Ragabashes who want to scare their Sept a little 😜.

And still there's a Skin Dancers case: do they have Gnosis or not. Cause I've heard both versions.

[Gryffon15]

My take is that if we broke it down to its fundamentals is something like this: a Garou is a human soul bonded with a wolf spirit and blessed by Gaia, the rest is a natural consequence of this.

Garou have gnosis because all spirits do and they are spiritual beings. Sk*n Dancers can mimic Garou through dark rituals but they are a corruption of the Garou state rather then what Gaia originally intended. Rage is a gift to Garou from some spiritual being to help them fulfill their purpose, whether that patron is the Wyrm or Luna. The Nuwishu are close kin to the Garou (closer then the Bunyip imo) but they are technically not Garou as they are bound to Coyote/Trickster with a specific relationship and nature as a consequence.

As for that case, if a Garou totally loses the wolf and is unable of regaining it in such a mystical way, I would say they are no longer Garou as they were and any children they produce with a Garou would be born as ordinarily as any other union of Garou and Garou kinfolk.

[Black Fox]

The rules and setting do not allow for two Garou to have a child that is not a metis. No matter how you may want to twist things to allow it, the setting doesn't.

You either need to diverge from the setting and allow things to be different in your chronicles, or come up with a way to handwave it away as you mentioned.

The Rite of the Stolen Wolf definitely does not change the nature of the Garou who is punished by it. That Garou simply loses his Rage and can't shapechange. The same thing happens to old Garou who happens to lose all their Rage "naturally" through aging. It doesn't make them not Garou.

[Gryffon15]

That’s a good point. I wasn’t familiar with the rite to speak on it at the drop of a hat but with that context I have to agree with Black Fox.

In order for a Garou to no longer be a Garou they would have to literally have their wolf/garou spirit removed from them and that’s something which would take a great deal of mystical power.

[Nail Eater]

My take is that if we broke it down to its fundamentals is something like this: a Garou is a human soul bonded with a wolf spirit and blessed by Gaia, the rest is a natural consequence of this.

Garou have gnosis because all spirits do and they are spiritual beings. Sk*n Dancers can mimic Garou through dark rituals but they are a corruption of the Garou state rather then what Gaia originally intended. Rage is a gift to Garou from some spiritual being to help them fulfill their purpose, whether that patron is the Wyrm or Luna. The Nuwishu are close kin to the Garou (closer then the Bunyip imo) but they are technically not Garou as they are bound to Coyote/Trickster with a specific relationship and nature as a consequence.

As for that case, if a Garou totally loses the wolf and is unable of regaining it in such a mystical way, I would say they are no longer Garou as they were and any children they produce with a Garou would be born as ordinarily as any other union of Garou and Garou kinfolk.

Yup, I agree with that. I also think that theory about losing wolf which give ability to mate without breaking Litany add a little of "dark romance" to W:tA society.

Which left me still with that Skin Dancers Gnosis thing. On one hand I think that they shouldn't have Gnosis because they are more like Mockeries than the Garou. On the other a few of them succesfully blend (infiltrate?) Garou society which would be difficult without Gnosis (how to explain their inability to enter Umbra or tune in/activate Fetishes). The first option give them another edge, the other one is more interesting to play.

[Gryffon15]

I definitely think that one could tell an interesting story of taboo romance with a Garou and another Garou who has ‘lost the Wolf’.

S*in Dancers exist for me in a space similar to the Mocking Breeds. They may be able to harness spiritual power, even gifts or rites, but despite being unions of human and spirit there is one fundamental aspect which distinguishes them (and also creatures like the Ananasi) from most Changing Breeds: they are not blessed by Gaia.

[Nail Eater]

The rules and setting do not allow for two Garou to have a child that is not a metis. No matter how you may want to twist things to allow it, the setting doesn't.

You either need to diverge from the setting and allow things to be different in your chronicles, or come up with a way to handwave it away as you mentioned.

The Rite of the Stolen Wolf definitely does not change the nature of the Garou who is punished by it. That Garou simply loses his Rage and can't shapechange. The same thing happens to old Garou who happens to lose all their Rage "naturally" through aging. It doesn't make them not Garou.

Ok, those are the rules. On the other hand Rites can be used creatively. Rending the Veil is basically a Punishment Rite, using to shred it from mortal enemies of Gaia so they will know fear before death but some Children of Gaia use it to let worthy humans into their society as quasi Kinfolk. I think it can be the same with Rite of the Stolen Wolf: basically it's a Punishment Rite. But, according to one of the stories in "When will you Rage" First Change is not the moment of becoming Garou but rather a moment when one realizes it. Rage is neccesary to shapeshift (including the First Change) to technically someone without Rage isn't a Garou. Or isn't if the Spirits (Storyteller) say so.

Heck, I just invented an NPC, a Theurge female, who uses Rite of the Stolen Wolf on her children so they will not Change and be spared from hardship of a Garou life (which she knows very well).

As for an old Garou, who lost his Rage because of age maybe this is the reason on the Winter Wolf Rite: to die as one of Gaia's chosen, not a mere Kinfolk (with all due respect for them).

[heinrich]

Valkenburg Foundation hat a drug to turn a garou into what his breed form is, but that is 1st edition stuff, and possibly, like the Rite of the Stolen wolf, not changing the essence of the being.

My opinion is, that there should be only one way for two garou to have an non-metis child, and that is adoption.
,
ButI guess, if one had the sperm and the egg and did the conception in vitro, one could use Spirit/Prime Magick to change the spiritual composition of both...

[Nail Eater]

Valkenburg Foundation hat a drug to turn a garou into what his breed form is, but that is 1st edition stuff, and possibly, like the Rite of the Stolen wolf, not changing the essence of the being.

My opinion is, that there should be only one way for two garou to have an non-metis child, and that is adoption.
,
ButI guess, if one had the sperm and the egg and did the conception in vitro, one could use Spirit/Prime Magick to change the spiritual composition of both...

I knew that too. The question is about the essence. I tought also about using the Spheres. But there are two things: I'd rather not use Mages (I was thinking about using the system to beat the system) and I think that it has to be at least Master if not Oracle to do that and change the destiny set by Celestines.

[Black Fox]

Rage is neccesary to shapeshift (including the First Change) to technically someone without Rage isn't a Garou.

I don't agree with that logic. It's like saying human are bipeds; therefore, if a person is injured and one of their legs is amputated then they no longer walk on two legs and thus are no longer human. A Garou without points in Rage is still a Garou; not a kinfolk, human, or something else.

Again, if you want to make changes in your chronicles so the setting is different, that's OK. Many STs make changes to the setting. But in the canonical setting, that rite of punishment doesn't transform Garou into something else. That Garou still has Gnosis, Ancestors, Gifts, and any other powers from being a Garou that does not rely on Rage to work.

As for an old Garou, who lost his Rage because of age maybe this is the reason on the Winter Wolf Rite: to die as one of Gaia's chosen, not a mere Kinfolk (with all due respect for them).

Nope. The Rite of the Winter Wolf is the equivalent of a funeral service (or a sacrament like extreme unction/anointing of the sick in the Catholic church or other communities; or a ritual suicide like seppuku or jauhar) - a ceremony to mark someone's passage from living to death, or to prepare them for death. Communities have lots of ceremonies to mark all sorts of occasions. Garou are much more ceremonious than most people in modern communities. While the Rite of the Winter Wolf is one such rite for this purpose, it is undoubtedly not the only one as not only do Garou die in many other ways, not all tribes and septs use the Rite of the Winter Wolf. It's use it because of the part of the Litany that says Garou should not allow their people to suffer their sickness (i.e. do not become a burden to your community), and it is a way for such Garou to honorably depart. Its use has an implied threat - if that Garou does not allow the rite to be performed, the other Garou will kill them in a way that marks that Garou as dishonorable.

Again, if you want to say otherwise in your own chronicles, go ahead. But that's not something that emerges from the text. It's something that only arises because you want to force this particular result into your game.

Heck, I just invented an NPC, a Theurge female, who uses Rite of the Stolen Wolf on her children so they will not Change and be spared from hardship of a Garou life (which she knows very well).

That can certainly be an unintended result of the rite. It's like buying a gun for self-defense, but then using it to murder a family member. Garou society would likely see that particular use of the rite as a crime. Not only is a Rite of Punishment being used to "punish" a Garou innocent of any crime, its use outside of a sept sponsored criminal hearing/investigation would probably be considered a violation of the sept's laws. And the idea that preventing a Garou from entering Garou society (by forcibly stopping him from his First Change) was "good" would also infuriate them. Even if that particular sept is OK with it for some reason (let's say its a Bone Gnawer sept), I'd think the surrounding septs would be so furious, they would call a Concolation to pronounce judgment on that sept. That this NPC does not believe she is using it as a punishment or that it is a "bad" result, would likely be irrelevant to the other Garou who would see someone using the rite sacrilegiously. But that would still be an interesting NPC with interesting motivations and a good dark secret to uncover. At least, that is how I would run it.

[Nail Eater]

I don't agree with that logic. It's like saying human are bipeds; therefore, if a person is injured and one of their legs is amputated then they no longer walk on two legs and thus are no longer human. A Garou without points in Rage is still a Garou; not a kinfolk, human, or something else.

Again, if you want to make changes in your chronicles so the setting is different, that's OK. Many STs make changes to the setting. But in the canonical setting, that rite of punishment doesn't transform Garou into something else. That Garou still has Gnosis, Ancestors, Gifts, and any other powers from being a Garou that does not rely on Rage to work.

Ok, you got me 🙂. The example of an one-legged human caught me off guard.

Nope. The Rite of the Winter Wolf is the equivalent of a funeral service (or a sacrament like extreme unction/anointing of the sick in the Catholic church or other communities; or a ritual suicide like seppuku or jauhar) - a ceremony to mark someone's passage from living to death, or to prepare them for death. Communities have lots of ceremonies to mark all sorts of occasions. Garou are much more ceremonious than most people in modern communities. While the Rite of the Winter Wolf is one such rite for this purpose, it is undoubtedly not the only one as not only do Garou die in many other ways, not all tribes and septs use the Rite of the Winter Wolf. It's use it because of the part of the Litany that says Garou should not allow their people to suffer their sickness (i.e. do not become a burden to your community), and it is a way for such Garou to honorably depart. Its use has an implied threat - if that Garou does not allow the rite to be performed, the other Garou will kill them in a way that marks that Garou as dishonorable.

Again, if you want to say otherwise in your own chronicles, go ahead. But that's not something that emerges from the text. It's something that only arises because you want to force this particular result into your game.

Here I cannot agree with you. I think that all tribes use this Rite. Of course a Get of Fenris sept can stop using it just as Children of Gaia sept can make their oldest ones undergoing it. I doubt also that it is used as a veiled threat. In modern times it would be a minor transgresion. Of course the ones who refuse will be stripped from their funeral celebrations, maybe will be punished by Rite of Scorn but that's all.

Which brings me back to the original question: are Skin Dancers Garou or not? If yes then how would a Garou react (especially PC) if he discovers that his Ancestor was one of them (Buried Secrets mentions that only Wyrm-tainted Garou end in Dark Umbra, the rest will become Ancestor spirits, and if the pelts were given volountarily the SD won't be tainted).

That can certainly be an unintended result of the rite. It's like buying a gun for self-defense, but then using it to murder a family member. Garou society would likely see that particular use of the rite as a crime. Not only is a Rite of Punishment being used to "punish" a Garou innocent of any crime, its use outside of a sept sponsored criminal hearing/investigation would probably be considered a violation of the sept's laws. And the idea that preventing a Garou from entering Garou society (by forcibly stopping him from his First Change) was "good" would also infuriate them. Even if that particular sept is OK with it for some reason (let's say its a Bone Gnawer sept), I'd think the surrounding septs would be so furious, they would call a Concolation to pronounce judgment on that sept. That this NPC does not believe she is using it as a punishment or that it is a "bad" result, would likely be irrelevant to the other Garou who would see someone using the rite sacrilegiously. But that would still be an interesting NPC with interesting motivations and a good dark secret to uncover. At least, that is how I would run it.

I think that you overreact a little. But in general you are right: it will propably boil nearby Septs. But, on the other hand, IRL humans are able to do worse things to their children. And how many of your PCs will kill this woman without any doubt? Her only sin was that she was a little overprotective. Think of that. Think of an old house in the middle of nowhere, where this woman lives. Maybe during a patrol of a bawn your PCs catch the smell of urine of an unknown Garou (one of the children), which they don't know (maybe they know that woman and her smell and know that she's on the verge of Harano after losing her pack). Imagine her eyes, full of fear, when she says that there's no other Garou there, then anger when the PCs press this issue, later resignation, when the pack's lupus identify her kid as the source of the smell and when she has to admit what she had been doing for at least a few years and then her eyes, full of love, when she is judged. Did you blink already? And if not think about that kid. Without her mother's rites he finally undergoes his First Change. And then see the futility of Garou great war, many times bigotry, hatred toward other tribes or races, sometimes mindless killing. And the knowledge that if the PCs wouldn't involve he could have lived his life free of those troubles. Will they sleep well 😈?

And for Gaia's sake, please stop saying "you can change this or that". I know (and actively use) The Golden Rule. I was asking about canon/your opinions and experiences.

[Black Fox]

Here I cannot agree with you. I think that all tribes use this Rite. Of course a Get of Fenris sept can stop using it just as Children of Gaia sept can make their oldest ones undergoing it. I doubt also that it is used as a veiled threat. In modern times it would be a minor transgresion. Of course the ones who refuse will be stripped from their funeral celebrations, maybe will be punished by Rite of Scorn but that's all.

The Rite Description specifically mentions that the Red Talons and Get of Fenris are the staunchest supporters of the rite. All editions of the game mentions the rite is "almost unheard of" among the Children of Gaia, while W20 adds the Bone Gnawers as well. So there is definitely a wide spectrum of thoughts about. "Almost unheard of" indicates some Children of Gaia know the rite, but clearly the tribe as a while overwhelmingly rejects its use.

As for whether Garou won't kill older, burdensome Garou who reject the Rite of the Winter Wolf, that's open to ST interpretation, but I still think some tribes/septs would do it. We can get clues by looking at the Litany description of Do Not Suffer Thy People to Tend Thy Sickness. There we're told long ago infirm, aged, or mortally wounded Garou would be torn to pieces by their septmates. We're also told today "merciful and dignified practice is to let such an elder choose to end his own life". That sounds like the Rite of the Winter Wolf. But using the word "merciful and dignified practice" indicates there are still other practices out there, not so merciful or dignified. And in Valkenburg Foundation we have a modern example of the Red Talons wanting to kill Lunatic Garou outright rather than let them live because it violates this portion of the Litany. So we understand their mentality.

So I would hold the Red Talons and Get of Fenris kill any infirmed Garou who refuse the suggestion that it is time for them to allow the Rite of the Winter Wolf be performed on them (although they may get several opportunities before the sept takes it into their own hands). I also think traditionalist tribes like the Silver Fangs, Shadow Lords, and Fianna (and possibly the Wendigo) may also do it depending on the nature of the caern their sept is at. The stronger the culture of the tribe or sept that the Rite of the Winter Wolf is the proper thing to do, the likelier it is the sept will take matters in their own hands if infirmed Garou suddenly reject that part of their culture once they become infirm.

Which brings me back to the original question: are Skin Dancers Garou or not? If yes then how would a Garou react (especially PC) if he discovers that his Ancestor was one of them (Buried Secrets mentions that only Wyrm-tainted Garou end in Dark Umbra, the rest will become Ancestor spirits, and if the pelts were given volountarily the SD won't be tainted).

I would hold that Skin Dancers do become Garou. They are also a blasphemous abomination to Gaia as the rite that does so is profane. So mechanically they are exactly the same as Garou, but on a metaphysical scale there is clearly something wrong about them but it doesn't make them not Garou.

Her only sin was that she was a little overprotective. Think of that.

From a Garou perspective, that is not her only sin. First, most Garou would not think she was overprotective at all. They would think she was harming her own child because to be a Garou is a great, great thing. There is no way most septs (who knows, maybe the Bone Gnawers) would allow the argument that she spared her child how "awful" it is to be Garou. They think being Garou is awesome. And as a dying people engaged at the height of a brutal struggle to save Gaia, this Theurge is purposefully sabotaging the Nation as a whole by preventing one of Gaia's protectors from assuming his place. Then of course would be the crime of abusing a Rite of Protection by using it in an inproper fashion. So there's several crimes she's committed.

The typical suspects - Children of Gaia and Bone Gnawers - may mitigate the punishment, but I think most tribes would deal with her very harshly. Some would likely execute her as a traitor and use the rite of Gaia's Vengeful Teeth (again the other usual suspects here - Red Talons and Get of Fenris among them, but probably the other traditionalists as well). Others may just kill her without using the rite.

As for the PCs who have been in my games (that I either run or play in for tabletop), I would say I'd expect something like 10% to be against killing the Theurge, 30% agreeing but feel bad doing so and agonizing over the decision to various degrees during a roleplay scene, and the other 60% swiftly agreeing on her punishment. I think almost all PCs would agree IC that the Theurge was objectively wrong - its just whether they consider the punishment to be mitigated in any way. As for my PCs that I play, it'd probably be almost 100% who'd kill her as I usually play very traditional Garou who don't fit with modern human sensibilities. There's certainly valid PC concepts that would react differently. As an ST, I could see NPCs that are against it especially certain tribes and certain septs with certain types of caern types. I imagine other gaming groups as a whole would split more evenly. In certain large scale LARPs and online games, it might break more 40/60 or 50/50. The larger the game, the more likely players will roleplay with 21st century Western values and wimp out.

Think of an old house in the middle of nowhere, where this woman lives. Maybe during a patrol of a bawn your PCs catch the smell of urine of an unknown Garou (one of the children), which they don't know (maybe they know that woman and her smell and know that she's on the verge of Harano after losing her pack). Imagine her eyes, full of fear, when she says that there's no other Garou there, then anger when the PCs press this issue, later resignation, when the pack's lupus identify her kid as the source of the smell and when she has to admit what she had been doing for at least a few years and then her eyes, full of love, when she is judged. Did you blink already? And if not think about that kid. Without her mother's rites he finally undergoes his First Change. And then see the futility of Garou great war, many times bigotry, hatred toward other tribes or races, sometimes mindless killing. And the knowledge that if the PCs wouldn't involve he could have lived his life free of those troubles. Will they sleep well 😈?

I know certain PCs in my games that not only would kill the Theurge for her crimes, but would probably want to kill the NPC that made this argument in her defense. They would say this stinks of cowardice and defeatism. While they wouldn't kill the NPC who argued this, they would probably keep an eye on them or even mark them out for future reprisals in some fashion. They'd be looking for an opportunity to kill (or at least harm) when it would be justified. That's how angry the argument would make them. They might even ask if they need to make Rage rolls to prevent Frenzy.

That's outside of any OOC discussion whether that character was objectively right or wrong in their evaluation of the Garou's war or the state of their nation. I know plenty of players who might agree themselves, but their PC act differently.

To be honest, I think this would be an interesting plot to run in the game precisely because regardless of what the PCs do, I think the players would enjoy roleplaying through the dilemma of the situation.

[Nail Eater]

The Rite Description specifically mentions that the Red Talons and Get of Fenris are the staunchest supporters of the rite. All editions of the game mentions the rite is "almost unheard of" among the Children of Gaia, while W20 adds the Bone Gnawers as well. So there is definitely a wide spectrum of thoughts about. "Almost unheard of" indicates some Children of Gaia know the rite, but clearly the tribe as a while overwhelmingly rejects its use.

As for whether Garou won't kill older, burdensome Garou who reject the Rite of the Winter Wolf, that's open to ST interpretation, but I still think some tribes/septs would do it. We can get clues by looking at the Litany description of Do Not Suffer Thy People to Tend Thy Sickness. There we're told long ago infirm, aged, or mortally wounded Garou would be torn to pieces by their septmates. We're also told today "merciful and dignified practice is to let such an elder choose to end his own life". That sounds like the Rite of the Winter Wolf. But using the word "merciful and dignified practice" indicates there are still other practices out there, not so merciful or dignified. And in Valkenburg Foundation we have a modern example of the Red Talons wanting to kill Lunatic Garou outright rather than let them live because it violates this portion of the Litany. So we understand their mentality.

So I would hold the Red Talons and Get of Fenris kill any infirmed Garou who refuse the suggestion that it is time for them to allow the Rite of the Winter Wolf be performed on them (although they may get several opportunities before the sept takes it into their own hands). I also think traditionalist tribes like the Silver Fangs, Shadow Lords, and Fianna (and possibly the Wendigo) may also do it depending on the nature of the caern their sept is at. The stronger the culture of the tribe or sept that the Rite of the Winter Wolf is the proper thing to do, the likelier it is the sept will take matters in their own hands if infirmed Garou suddenly reject that part of their culture once they become infirm.

OK, but that doesn't mean that every Fenrir or Talons sept will do it. Look at Golgol Fangs First, or the one from Wind Catchers sept from Chicago, the oldest Gets I remember. As for other tribes I don't know how many old Garou they have. The only exception IMHO, are Shadow Lords. They are known for their ability of using every resources they can lay their hands on. So I believe that, considering their elders, they will let them live and fight the Wyrm to the end... without any support of course. I also believe that they could arrange an agreement with Skin Dancers and use their rite as some kind of "recycling". They could use the BSDs skins (or their fallen camerades), choose a promising Kinfolk and allow him to become Garou. It's a win-win situation: they give a sign for their Kinfolks "be loyal and you could be rewarded", can replenish their ranks, and, as those Kinfolk will likely make Wyrm Sense tingling and they will be the only ones who know the truth, assure their loyalty (no to mention that they know the dark secrets of their new members). I run a story like that once, but I use a Children of Gaia with a practical mind and it was interesting.

From a Garou perspective, that is not her only sin. First, most Garou would not think she was overprotective at all. They would think she was harming her own child because to be a Garou is a great, great thing. There is no way most septs (who knows, maybe the Bone Gnawers) would allow the argument that she spared her child how "awful" it is to be Garou. They think being Garou is awesome. And as a dying people engaged at the height of a brutal struggle to save Gaia, this Theurge is purposefully sabotaging the Nation as a whole by preventing one of Gaia's protectors from assuming his place. Then of course would be the crime of abusing a Rite of Protection by using it in an inproper fashion. So there's several crimes she's committed.

The typical suspects - Children of Gaia and Bone Gnawers - may mitigate the punishment, but I think most tribes would deal with her very harshly. Some would likely execute her as a traitor and use the rite of Gaia's Vengeful Teeth (again the other usual suspects here - Red Talons and Get of Fenris among them, but probably the other traditionalists as well). Others may just kill her without using the rite.

Ok, I can agree with most parts, except the one about seeing Garou's life as glorious. In my World of Darkness most of them are bitter and pathetic creatures, often despising each other. They know that they are losing the war and it can be seen. But in a world like that, when my players would meet mentioned mother they would likely die in her defence.

As for the PCs who have been in my games (that I either run or play in for tabletop), I would say I'd expect something like 10% to be against killing the Theurge, 30% agreeing but feel bad doing so and agonizing over the decision to various degrees during a roleplay scene, and the other 60% swiftly agreeing on her punishment. I think almost all PCs would agree IC that the Theurge was objectively wrong - its just whether they consider the punishment to be mitigated in any way. As for my PCs that I play, it'd probably be almost 100% who'd kill her as I usually play very traditional Garou who don't fit with modern human sensibilities. There's certainly valid PC concepts that would react differently. As an ST, I could see NPCs that are against it especially certain tribes and certain septs with certain types of caern types. I imagine other gaming groups as a whole would split more evenly. In certain large scale LARPs and online games, it might break more 40/60 or 50/50. The larger the game, the more likely players will roleplay with 21st century Western values and wimp out.



I know certain PCs in my games that not only would kill the Theurge for her crimes, but would probably want to kill the NPC that made this argument in her defense. They would say this stinks of cowardice and defeatism. While they wouldn't kill the NPC who argued this, they would probably keep an eye on them or even mark them out for future reprisals in some fashion. They'd be looking for an opportunity to kill (or at least harm) when it would be justified. That's how angry the argument would make them. They might even ask if they need to make Rage rolls to prevent Frenzy.

That's outside of any OOC discussion whether that character was objectively right or wrong in their evaluation of the Garou's war or the state of their nation. I know plenty of players who might agree themselves, but their PC act differently.

Ahhhh, yes, I forgot. Most players will deal harshly with NPCs (when you run a story like that during your game), but they will not harm other player's character even if they could, should or even have to (like during LARPs). My observations are the same. I remember one LARP, when the Warder allowed a BSD messenger enter the Caern (he came with a white flag, but IMHO that doesn't change anything) and traded a Fetish taken from BSD a century ago for lives of a Sept Leader and 4 other Garou taken as hostages by BSD pack. Later he allowed (he was a kind of a leader's deputy) the leader to enter the Caern freely. And only I started to called him -ikhtya (I played Ragabash, so my character didn't frenzy). Instead of tearing my head off (as an Ahroun should) he warned me 3 times before challenging me for a duel. I lost, but still was happy. That's why I love to use my other players as First Mates for the most important NPCs. My players don't know it they are new players or not, so the moral choices are harder.

And thank you for your appreciation 🙂.