View source for What is a curse?

I (Jamie) have been becoming increasingly frustrated with what seems to be an ever-moving and narrowing target as to what defines a "Curse."  It is important to the game because we have rituals that affect curses, and thus the definition should be well-defined.

In another forum, I posted (then retracted but too late...) these points, and Bruce responded.  I'm editing out much of the undeserved vitriol and trying to make my points rather than attack anyone.

These have all been defined as NOT curses:

<span style="color:green;">1) An effect that forces the character to pursue his or her most basic lusts except when faced with imminent threat (that one affected Kaitlin).<br>
<span style="color:red;">Technically, the level one power of the infernal "Path of Pleasure" - "Ecstasy" insures that the target experiences intense pleasure of the caster's choice. While the effect does have a mechanic game modifier, its minor by most thaumaturgic standards and amounts in my opinion, to little more than an infernal party trick. Is it a curse? If it is a curse, its a fun one, that few real people would take seriously. I will admit, based on my own "vague" definition of a curse, it may well qualify.<br>
<span style="color:green;">[[Widow's Spite]] causes minor itches and irritation.  It might be described as a "parlor trick," but is still a curse.

<span style="color:green;">2) An effect that changes the character's basic nature against his will. <br>
<span style="color:red;">Degradation - the level three power on the infernal "Path of Defiler" has two alternating and distinct effects. The first is the ability to temporarily change a target's nature. The second is to temporarily inflict a target with a derangement. While the second alternating effect sounds like a curse to me, the first effect takes nothing from the target. The target is forced to see his or her life through different eyes, live his or her life differently in order to regain willpower - but in many ways that could ultimately be a beneficial experience that could promote greater understanding and or enlightenment.<br>
<span style="color:green;">The first use takes what to me is the most important thing from the victim:  Free will.  The victim looses the choice to try to be what he or she wants to be, and must instead be what the caster forced him or her to be.  Yes, this can be enlightening, but so can any ordeal.  What does not kill you may make you stronger, but that does not mean that it wasn't a curse.<br>
<span style="color:green;">Remember also, the Gypsy curse that affected Kaitlin. In some ways, it gave her much of what she wanted:  She became a full-blooded Gypsy.  Even without the other effects, it is still a curse.  For as long as it remained in effect, she was something other than she had originally been, and could not return to what she was before without removing the curse.

<span style="color:green;">3) A permanent effect that leaves a mystical trail for anyone who cares to follow. <br>
<span style="color:red;">If the level one thaumaturgic ritual "Illuminate the Trail of Prey" and the level three thaumaturgic ritual "Track the Transgressor" are curses, then I will concede that the necromantic ritual that allows Ambrogino Giovanni's agents to track the characters is also a curse.<br>
<span style="color:green;">I think there is a substantial difference between the tracking ritual that stems from the Anexhexaton and such rituals as [[Illuminate the Trail of Prey]] and [[Track Transgressor]]:  The latter two are divinations that must be actively cast by the person wishing to follow the trail.  The magic affects the trail the victim leaves behind, or perhaps the senses of the caster, not the victim.  The Anexhexaton's tracking is something that invades the body its victim, remains indefinitely, and allows anyone who wants to (not just Ambrogino) to track the victim.  It brings unwanted attention from any number of curious people:  In this way, it acts in a manner similar to [[Devil's Touch]], influencing the way others react to the victim.<br>

<span style="color:green;">4) An effect that slowly invades and corrupts a character's soul, turning him into someone else. <br>
<span style="color:red;">This is a more complex issue for the following reasons. The effect that is invading and rewriting your memories and soul, isn't one effect, but two distinct and interlocking effects. If the effect changed one or even just a few of your memories, I could not actually call that a curse. However, taken en toto, these two complex and interlocking effects are a curse - for you - because you despise the person they are remaking you into. Consider this however, if this same effect were used on the most heinous, demented and violent criminals in mortal society to remake them into healthy, constructive and morally upstanding people - would you feel it a curse? Would anyone? Though the person who came up with the ritual was criminally insane, his reason for doing so wasn't the pain and anguish that it would inflict on its target, it was the chance to cheat death. Magic - like morality - is interpretable.<br>
<span style="color:green;">Again, I must disagree:  It doesn't matter if the person we are turning into was the greatest paragon of virtue we could imagine.  It is still changing us into someone else.  And to answer your question, yes.  A curse may be used as a punishment, but can be used for other reasons.  Ultimately, the point of casting any given ritual is to benefit the caster.  The principles invoked are just means to serve this end.

'''Curse vs Enchantment'''<br>
<span style="color:green;">It seems that definitions such as "curse," "ward," and "enchantment," along with many other potential categories are mutable and vastly subject to interpretation.  Curse and Enchantment particularly overlap:  Is a person enchanted to damage his enemies with [[Flesh of Fiery Touch]], or cursed to be unable to touch those he loves for fear of causing them great pain?  One person might take a ritual that terrified anyone who saw his face as a great boon (if used in certain circumstances), while another would be horrified by the prospect.  Ultimately (and I just figured this distinction out as I write this), I think the difference is control:  If I can STOP scaring everyone who sees me, it is an enchantment.  If I cannot, it is a curse.  Still, that is a pretty fine distinction that does not include what we would call "permanent enchantments," such as Brian's rituals that enchant his weapons.  I think that this may be an unwanted ambiguity in the word "enchantment."

'''Value Judgements'''<br>
<span style="color:green;">I think the guiding principle (and in my judgment, error) that Bruce has used is whether an effect is maleficent, or at least intended to harm the subject.  I think rather that a curse inflicts the target with a change over which he has no control.  If I can turn my heartbeat on and off at will, it is not a curse.  If my heart just goes as long as the ritual is in effect, it is.

'''Span of categories'''<br>
<span style="color:green;">This is just my opinion, but it seems that narrowing categories too much is asking for trouble.  If every spell must fit into one and only one category, there are still dozens or hundreds of rituals and path effects per category.

<span style="color:green;">After a month of waiting...<br>
'''Come on guys!  It would really help to get this resolved, and if no one says anything, it just sits!'''