|
|
Are
Ghouls Immune to Plages? Do they spread
them?What Viruses are they Immune
To?Plage-spreading as Anti-Economic
ActivityHow Virus Work and the Ghoul
OptionsPlagues are Hard to Hide (and Ghoul-based, angst-free
campaign)Pickman
ChicksGhoul Factions and
ThrowbacksGhoul Tastes and
EpidemicsThrowbacks, CthulhuPunk and the Hyborian
AgeGhoul Acquired Immunity
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 02:58:15 -0600 (CST)
From:
Chris or Maliki
just a few spot questions on ghouls.
how immune are ghouls to plagues of various sorts (bubonic/pneumonic, ebola, aids, etc...). given that they live off dead flesh, it is likely (i think) that the virus would also be dead before they consumed it. but what about in the environs of an active plague?
which leads to: why don't the ghouls (or the non-trad faction) release a plague into one of the major population centers? not only would there be incredible loss of life (and therefore a full dinner menu) due to the population desity of say, New York City, but the resultant breakdown of medical and police/firefighting services would mean that the bodies might be waiting for a while before they're buried or burnt....which means the ghouls wouldn't have to wait until they were buried to dine...i'm sure the cleanup crews won't notice some missing bodies among the scores of dead.
however, if they aren't immune, perhaps a large scale riot would be in order. there would be less loss of life, perhaps, but again, there would be tremendous disruption of police/med services, making for easy dinner pickup. given the wide array of tensions with in certain NYC communities, supplying weaponry and providing instigation shouldn't be entirely difficult.
of course, in either case, Azlis would prolly be rather pissed, loss of business and all that, but...
From: "Ricardo J. Méndez"
Date: Wed, 21 Oct
1998 22:05:34 -0500
Wow, nasty idea time, Chris.
>how immune are ghouls to plagues of various sorts
(bubonic/pneumonic,
>ebola, aids, etc...). given that they live off
dead flesh, it is likely
>(i think) that the virus would also be dead
before they consumed it.
Not quite. Dead flesh means only that your body is not working anymore, but a virus that can survive in, say, a glass flask, will also surely survive in a dead body environment.
Which does raise an interesting point. What diseases are they immune to? I'd think that anything related with the prolonged exposure of dead bodies wouldn't affect them, like the Black Plague or Cholera or who knows what else (maybe the microbiologists in the list can lend us a hand here?).
It would be an awesome to have the Ghouls somehow get a hold of a nastiest and quicker acting version of cholera and release it into a poor and overpopulated town, which most likely wouldn't receive attenttion until the epidemic is widespread, and then the chaos and madness would cover up for the ghouls while the FEMA team arrives.
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 12:28:23
From: Davide
Mana
>which leads to: why don't the ghouls (or the non-trad faction) release
a
>plague into one of the major population centers? not only would
there be
>incredible loss of life (and therefore a full dinner menu)
due to the
>population desity of say, New York City, but the resultant
breakdown of
>medical and police/firefighting services would mean that
the bodies might
>be waiting for a while before they're buried or
burnt....which means the
>ghouls wouldn't have to wait until they were
buried to dine...i'm sure the
>cleanup crews won't notice some missing
bodies among the scores of dead.
I'll leave the immunity thing to the experts, and expand on the induced epidemic a bit.
Should such a thing happen, I'll pin it on the Young Turks, and not on the Ortodox Ghoulish Faction.
Keep in mind that eating the dead is a religious thing for Ghouls and
Mordiggian is probably keeping close tabs on _how_ you get the dead you consume.
As far as i can remember from printed accounts, Ghouls usually attack
humans to defend their territory (or to avert the risk of being discovered),
but not as a direct means of finding food.
Even the peak in Ghoulish
activity in time of war and plague seems to be a reaction to a sudden explosion
in the nutrients (a reaction commonly observed in the natural world) more
than the result of a planned strategy.
On the other hand, there's the bit about the underground train wreck as portraied by Pickman, that might be seen as a Ghoul stratagem to get a lot of fresh dead fast, but I'd have to check the story to be sure. All in all, Ghouls look a lot as an opportunistic kind of critter, not as an active predator.
Also, there's a few practical considerations:
Bodies waiting to be buried or burned attract a lot of mundane scavengers,such as crows, dogs etc. - competition, from a Ghoul's point of view.
There's also the fact that the evolution of a dead body after burial is decidedly different from the evolution of a dead body left in the open. I'm sure the medicine doctors on the list will be happy to supply lots of grisly details - I'm only a palaeontologist.
In short, we don't know if a dead body left waiting in the street for a week or so would be to the Ghoul's tastes (probably yes, but hey...)
And finally, maybe the body count resulting in an ebola (or what) break-out in NY would be too high for the Ghoul population to efficiently exploit it, and therefore be anti-economic.
Most probably, the Ghoul population in a given area is finely tuned to the supply of dead bodies the area they infest can provide. The usual nutrients/population feedback observed in natural systems, from plancton to elephants (and it applies, with a few tweakings, to humans to, and therefore to sentients in general).
Which leads to another consideration.
A small scale controlled epidemic - or any other way to produce a great number of dead in a short time - would be a likely signal that an increase in Ghoulish population is coming in a given area. Could well be the first step in a forced-breeding strategy as a prelude to an all out war - be it among Ghouls or waged upon humans. Once again the kind of doped-up plan the deviant elements might try to pull.
Veteran of the Ghoul War, anybody?
>>how immune are ghouls to plagues of various sorts
(bubonic/pneumonic,
>>ebola, aids, etc...). given that they live
off dead flesh, it is likely
>>(i think) that the virus would also
be dead before they consumed it.
>Not quite. Dead flesh means only that your body is not working anymore,
but
>a virus that can survive in, say, a glass flask, will also surely
survive in
>a dead body environment.
OK, there's been a lot of cobblers said in the past (particularly in various articles of fiction) about how stable viruses and bacteria are. First, viruses: it varies depending on the virus. Flu (and other enveloped viruses probably - this would include ebola etc.) is stable and infectious for weeks (own experience) but probably months or years at 4oC in the dark in a high protein solution. The presence of protein protects the virus from losing infectivity, dark stops inactivation by UV light and cold stops outgrowth of contaminating bacteria or fungi, and reduces the activity of enzymes which could damage the virus. Non-enveloped viruses (Adenovirus or poliovirus) are likely to be even more stable. Smallpox is odd, in that it is very stable at room temperature for years comfotring thought, isn't it?). This is the situation in controlled (laboratory) environments. Now in real life, there are several other factors which come to bear. Firstly, the biggest variable is how much virus is there in the first place: if you start with 1000 infectious doses and lose 99.9% of the infectivity, then you will still have 1 infectious dose left (conversely if you start with 100 infectious doses, chances are that you won't have any infectivity remaining... but it's all probabalistic in this case). In real life this is really tricky to try and sort out, so it's mostly been skirted around over the years. UV light (as a means of inactivating virus) has been proposed, but I think over rated. Certainly if exposure to the amount of UV in sunlight was going to inactivate a virus, then transmission of respiratory viruses would be much rarer. In this case it's academic, as if the virus is inside a corpse it won't get exposed to light. Lastly, there is temperature - the hotter it gets, the less stable the virus would be (various enzymes will become active during decomposition and destroy infected tissues and the viruses therein). Putrefaction will also reduce transmission to humans (though maybe not ghouls) as if you can _smell_ it then you're more likely to stay away from it!
The situation with bacteria is pretty much the same, but with a couple of caveats. Firstly, dead bodies make a good growth medium - so the bugs may well multiply a lot after death of the host (this is certainly the case with anthrax which actually depends on death and decomposition of the host to disperse spores onto the ground). But on the otherhand, bacteria will compete with each other in a way that viruses cannot (many of the nastier bacteria grow slowly when compared to relatively benign gut bacteria - which may be able to outgrow the pathogens... and use up all their nutrient supplies). Not sure about that though. Bacteri also need water, which may be a limiting factor in really dry environments. Lastly, oxygen is toxic to many bacteria, so as putrefaction increases and more of the body becomes exposed to the air, many bugs will either die, or produce spores.
>Which does raise an interesting point. What diseases are they immune
to?
>I'd think that anything related with the prolonged exposure of
dead bodies
>wouldn't affect them, like the Black Plague or Cholera
or who knows what
>else (maybe the microbiologists in the list can
lend us a hand here?).
I'd guess they are probably immune to most things as ghouls. The problem would be what they got when still human. HIV and hepatitis C are highly possible, Hepatitis B is near certain. Various tapeworms, liver flukes and nasty intestinal parasites would be pretty common too. As for plague and cholera, I'd say that the ghould would have some resistance to these, if only due to the fact that if they were exposed to them they would:
A.) Die (and not be encountered) or
B.) Survive (and be immune).
Whether or not anything contracted as a human would still be circulating in fully developed ghouls is open to debate, but I'd see no reason why you couldn't have (for example) an HIV positive ghoul... this is of course why it is called a "bite and worry" attack!
>It would be an awesome to have the Ghouls somehow get a hold of a
nastiest
>and quicker acting version of cholera and release it into
a poor and
>overpopulated town, which most likely wouldn't receive
attenttion until the
>epidemic is widespread, and then the chaos and
madness would cover up for
>the ghouls while the FEMA team arrives.
Actually, cholera would be spotted PDQ (it's damn obvious!) and _wouldn't_ be ignored by the local, state or federal health authorities. Cholera is actually one of the biggest worries if infrastructure (sewage treatment, clean water supply etc.) breaks down after disasters earthquake, hurricane etc.). You are right, though. Epidemics can act as great cover for other things: take the typhoid epidemic in "Herbert West: Reanimator" as a good example.
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:19:14 -0400
From: Daniel
Harms
>>which leads to: why don't the ghouls (or the non-trad faction)
release a
>>plague into one of the major population centers? not
only would there be
>>incredible loss of life (and therefore a full
dinner menu) due to the
>>population desity of say, New York City,
but the resultant breakdown of
>>medical and police/firefighting
services would mean that the bodies might
>>be waiting for a while
before they're buried or burnt....which means the
>>ghouls wouldn't
have to wait until they were buried to dine...i'm sure
the
>>cleanup crews won't notice some missing bodies among the scores
of dead.
[snip of some good arguments]
I'd add another: this would mean lots of attention and a prolonged investigation, which just might lead back to the ghouls. And if humans find out that a sub-species of corpse-eating monsters killed tens of thousands of people, ghouls would be in great trouble unless they wanted to carry out a full-scale jyhad against the whole world.
(BTW, I'm toying with the thought of a scenario or campaign in which everyone plays a ghoul - something like WoD, only with more cannibalism and less angst.)
I have to say, I'd be much more entertained if all the Goth chicks tried to dress up like Pickman instead of Gaiman's Death.
>(BTW, I'm toying with the thought of a scenario or campaign in
which
>everyone plays a ghoul - something like WoD, only with
more
>cannibalism and less angst.)
As long as it's angst-free I'll buy one...
Not that it would be difficult, to be less angst-ridden than WoD. A nice idea, all in all - my players would probably hate it <EG>
Thanks for solving my Halloween Night Game, pal!
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 18:25:36 -0400 (EDT)
From:
"Andrew D. Gable"
I really like the idea of a Traditionalist-New Wave ghoul conflict and the schism it causes within ghoul society, and also how it may effect Delta Green (would Delta Green ally themselves with Traditionalist ghouls in a battle against the New Wave ghouls?). COUNTDOWN, whenever it comes out, will expand upon this (I believe). I already developed the following idea somewhat. It's really annoying to me that I seem to develop a lot of the ideas they do in COUNTDOWN... so far I've written up an adventure involving PISCES (it'll have to be pre-Shaggai, I guess) and this thing as well.
In one of my adventures, KERBEROS (I vastly prefer the original Greek spelling to the more common Cerberus, dunno why), which, BTW, was a blatant rip-off of the sequel to RELIC, RELIQUARY (excellent, IMHO), I suggested that the New Wave ghouls, having discarded the worship of Mordiggian, recruited some of the greater ghouls to their side and developed their own priesthood. They now worship a god forgotten by the other ghouls, Gyr'tan-haa (who masqueraded as Zeus Lykaon and Cerberus), who represents the savage nature of the New Wave ghouls.
I've also come up with the idea that New Wave ghouls are biologically different from Traditionalists, being evolutionary throwbacks to an earlier day or in some instances living Primals (the ghoul equivalent of a Neanderthal). Needless to say, some of the New Wave ghouls are very ancient indeed. The Beast of Gevaudan (see 'French Churches' post) was either a very early representative of the New Wave or an ancient Primal.
>And finally, maybe the body count resulting in an ebola (or what)
break-out
>in NY would be too high for the Ghoul population to efficiently
exploit it,
>and therefore be anti-economic.
Also, keep in mind what ebola does to a body--major tissue breakdown. Quite possibly not to ghoulish tastes, although maybe some of them like the "slurpy" effect.
Ghouls may be immune to nearly all human diseases, but that doesn't mean they'll want to eat the remains of those humans who died of certain diseases. So, all ye pathologists, what in your fevered imaginations would be the culinary effects of some of the nastier diseases?
> developed their own priesthood. They now worship a god forgotten
by the
> other ghouls, Gyr'tan-haa (who masqueraded as Zeus Lykaon
and Cerberus),
> who represents the savage nature of the New Wave ghouls.
I always thought that the Ghoul Civil-War was a matter of the Orthodox Mordiggian Preisthood against Ghouls who were recruited from, or follow the teachings of violent and aggressive human cults that worshipped Nyarlathotep and Hastur (like the Ghoulie Boyz, gangbangers from GURPS CthulhuPunk). Although you never know with Nyarlat the Gratified; maybe he's posing as Gyr'tan-haa?
> I've also come up with the idea that New Wave ghouls are
biologically
> different from Traditionalists, being evolutionary
throwbacks to an
> earlier day or in some instances living Primals
(the ghoul equivalent of a
> Neanderthal). Needless to say, some of
the New Wave ghouls are very
> ancient indeed. The Beast of Gevaudan
(see 'French Churches' post) was
> either a very early representative
of the New Wave or an ancient Primal.
Hmmm... I like the idea of Neanderthal Ghouls, who may have seen Stygia, Hyberborea and Atlantis. These guys should worship Mordiggian tho', cause Moldy ol'Diggs was quite popular during the whole Conan/King Kull era.
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 09:29:20 -0400
From: Graeme
Price
Dave wrote:
>Ghouls may be immune to nearly all human diseases, but that doesn't
mean
>they'll want to eat the remains of those humans who died of
certain
>diseases. So, all ye pathologists, what in your fevered
imaginations would
>be the culinary effects of some of the nastier
diseases?
Death, mostly. My own opinion is that ghouls would be immune only to those things they have previously encountered, although they may have a heightened resistance to (but not immunity from) all disease. They are unlikely to have previously encounted something like ebola (unless they are ghouls from deepest, darkest Africa) and so should be susceptible to it.
However, does this mean that it will kill them outright? Perhaps on earth, but in the fevered delirium of disease, there is a good chance that they could escape into the Dreamlands. Always nice to have a way out.
