MOD POST WHUT

[milliways-mods.livejournal.com]

Hokay.

This is an issue that has come up several times over the last few months, and was going to be included in the FAQ, but we see a pressing need to inform you all about it now.

Millicanon Rules for Dead Patrons

A)Reproduction

Dead people cannot reproduce. Just as they do not age, they do not produce viable sperm or ova or alien what-have-yous.

B)Metaphysical State Upon Leaving the Bar

You choose, according to your canon's rules, whether or not your character leaves the Bar for other 'verses as a ghost or as a corporeal being. But! If you choose to take your lovely dead character out as a corporeal body, that character has 4.5 days in that 'verse until he, she, or it begins to fade into non-corporeality.

Now.

Is there anything we're missing here? Anything you'd like to see defined?

Comments

[timsbooks.livejournal.com]

I hate to play devils advocate
No i Don't. I live for it.
But is it possible for plot like things to create dead potency? For example, for, say, Tim or someone to instill the sembalance of life in a ghost to enable them to knock someone up?

I'm probably not making much sense, but i do know thier are canons out there where ghosts and the dead retain their potency and...er..rambling.

[indy-go.livejournal.com]

If one can present a case in which it is canonically plausible for the dead to create life, then it would be acceptable. But across the board? No.

[mctrillian.livejournal.com]

I have the one tiny issue with 'undead.'

We have Angua, who is not dead but undead, along with Shelley and I think there are some other werewolves/zombies/vampires who fall into that category.

And then Sheila, who thinks she's died, but has really just narrowly bent it and escaped into the bar right before that.

So, if Sheila were to become pregnant somehow which isn't actually likely, she'd know she's not actually dead, which might cause problems ... and I think Angua's not being able to have children would break Carrot, and so ...

Yeah. Curious where the fine line is.

[timsbooks.livejournal.com]

I'm not a mod, but I don't think werewolves actually count as undead. While they are classified as such in discworld canon, they give live birth, suckle thier young, all that type of thing.

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

The undead... it depends on canon, it depends on a lot.

Vampires, millicanon, has shown, have to adopt. Werewolves aren't dead in every canon. If you are dead or undead in your canon, you can't breed, most likely. Use common sense. Can Angua have children in canon? Is she alive in canon? Can she breed in canon? Then she can breed here.

Sheila, since she is not dead at all, can breed. Think of her potential pregnancy as a potential plot to be explored.

[someonesdog]

Even though werewolves are classed as undead in canon, that's almost a politcal description than a physical one. It probably refers to her status as Hard to Kill.

Not only can Angua canonically have children - as demonstrated by not only the fact that she worries about having Carrot's children, but because she comes from an entire family of werewolves - but canonically so can vampires (se Carpe Jugulum for a vampire family.)

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

Well then.

There's your answer.

[alwaysroomforhope]

Steph is from DC canon, which has a history of reviving dead people like all the time. It's unlikely that this'll happen in Steph's case, because she's currently filling in for Jason Todd as The Dead Robin, but if it does... I assume if she's brought back to life in canon, the Milliways rules don't apply?

[miscellanny.livejournal.com]

Yep.

*grins*

You'd be very much okay to bring her back alive.

[silverageflash.livejournal.com]

1. Is there any reason why pups should know the 4.5 days rule exists? Or would it come as a rude shock?

2. I would suspect that the No Reproduction rule extends to cloning, since we are not dealing with real bodies.

[and-far-away.livejournal.com]

2. Madelyn Pryor. Didn't she give birth in canon?

[nanashi-sama.livejournal.com]

I think what Alex meant was, a dead Millwayser wouldn't be able to provide any genetic material and thus could not clone themselves.

[surexit.livejournal.com]

What about people like Mercutio? He controls his corporeality by will.

Not that he's ever gonna go out the Bar, really.

[and-far-away.livejournal.com]

I think Zeke Stone's a special case, too. Dead, but corporeal in his world because of the whole "hunting escaped damned souls for the Devil" thing.

[maydaybrat.livejournal.com]

Mordred's in the same boat - in his world, he was a ghost who was haunting places. He's as solid as he likes.

[surexit.livejournal.com]

I dunno if Merc's a special case in the same way, just that the way I've set up his millicanon is that he can fade in and out of solidity by conscious effort.

Also, where's the 4.5 rule from?

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

Narnia, I believe.

[surexit.livejournal.com]

Vat you mean?

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

I think it's from Narnia? That's all I know. We are trying to locate the transcripts of the chat where this was decided, as the person who decided it is in Spain.

[surexit.livejournal.com]

Oh, I seeeee. :) I thought you meant there'd been an incident with the Narnian chars where they established that they couldn't be out for more than that. I was all set to argue 'But why must that apply to uuuuuuus?' :p

Question about Merc still remains. :)

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

Dude, we are working on it.

Patience.

Okay? Plz? *frazzled as shit*

[surexit.livejournal.com]

*is well of patience*

*pets gently*

[maid-of-astolat.livejournal.com]

Hokay...this kind of negates my plot that I just spent two weeks coming up with. And also RPed in F-locked posts for over a WEEK NOW. And I must say, I'm rather peeved.

I've seen other 'dead' patrons leave the bar (for other universes not their own)and be just ducky for DAYS/WEEKS.

At this late date, it's kind of hard to shut the barn door once it's been opened.

[maid-of-astolat.livejournal.com]

OK. I've figured out how to make my plot work, since Elaine has already been to the Otherworld, she's been blessed by Lord Arawn of that world. I've always had that idea in the back of my mind because Elaine has already been unBound for a while. She's just had no desire to leave the bar.

Still, this particular declaration, esp, point B, came as a bit of a shock to me, because I thought dead people just couldn't go back to their OWN universes (according to the wishes of the mun).

[golden-age-sand.livejournal.com]

And I suppose an extension of this rule is that a particular character's mortality is directly tied to their place in their own lifetime when they entered the Bar? In other words, if a character enters the Bar (the end of time) in 1950 (reality time) at the age of 15, then takes a field trip to 2542 (reality time), they're still progressing through life as a 15 year old in 1950 ... as opposed to a 607-year-old decaying husk?

For that matter, can it really be said that anyone grows or develops while in the Bar? In practice, one can step into Bar on their 21st birthday, have months or years of life in Bar (love, loss, marriage, children), then step right back out on the day after their 21st birthday. So does the Bar negate the aging process while sustaining the development of memory and the propagation of life? Or would a person exit the Bar into their 21st year of reality at the physical age attained whilest within Bar?

(These deep thoughts brought to you by my first cup of coffee.)

[and-far-away.livejournal.com]

It's been established that the bar's children (Millie, Wade, Seth, etc) are growing up normally - to the given value of normal that applies to each of them. Not sure how that applies to the adults.

[golden-age-sand.livejournal.com]

True. And that seems to indicate that a person's timeline is simply determined by where they start and how they proceed, which is perfectly logical. If you're born in Los Angeles in 1926 the move to Seattle for 20 years, at the end you'll be 20 years old.. The same would apply to Milliways. If you arrive in 1926 at age 5, stay in Milliways for 20 years, then you'll be 25 years old at the end.

But ... so many characters wish to simply fold reality and slip back into their own non-Bar time. They leave reality at 11:30pm, stay in Milliways for 7 hours, then return to reality at 11:31pm ... so are they seven hours older? Over a period of time and repeated "folded time" visits, would they be older than they really are?

[the-woodpecker.livejournal.com]

Maybe it works like a time-turner, in that way. Hermione is actually older than her 'years' would indicate, is she not, because of using the time-turner so obsessively during third year. It takes a while to add up, but it's there...?

[timsbooks.livejournal.com]

Just to chime in my two cents....

A lot depends on if time passes for people here. Tim spends generally the same amount of tiem here as out side, so it passes for him. However, Andrew had time stopped. Not even his hair grew while he was in Milliways, because time wasn't passing for him. So it all depends.

[opalcity-star.livejournal.com]

What about characters who have a pre-established millicanon of being able to spend time in other worlds without any differences in their coporiality?

[forbiddensailor.livejournal.com]

Ooookay. Apparently I'm alone in this, But. I don't understand why these rules are being made to start with.

Both points sound like things that would be a) either entirely determined by the originating canon and its rules

or b) up to the creativity of the mun, depending on the viability which is also determined by the originating canon.

-- Sche.

[winged-defender.livejournal.com]

No, that was my reaction too. I mean, I have no pups or plots that are affected by this, but I was surprised that it was felt we needed rules about it.

[forbiddensailor.livejournal.com]

=\ Indeed

[furikku.livejournal.com]

Ditto.

Especially with the previously posted point that it's already canon for unalive types to gallivant about elsewhere for weeks without going fizzly.

Seems a bit of a pointless set of rulings to me, given that certain canons can circumvent them, and that, dude, it's MILLIWAYS, and half the appeal (at least for me) is that little is set in stone.

I mean, what next, abolition of Millitime and a set of rules on why the Landlord/bar/whatever would have characters show up?

[minkhollow]

Okay, I can kind of see where you're coming from on the first one.
But the second strikes me as... kind of arbitrary, really. I think it's the decimal point more than anything, in giving the time out of Milliways a number. Like... um, someone else up there said, the dead thing usually just gets taken to mean the character can't go back home (bar special cases like Lilly, where they're already ghosts or something).

[street-sparrow.livejournal.com]

Just one question.

How does the second rule apply to dead characters moving into the House of Arch?

[bartyjr.livejournal.com]

Am a bit late replying, but I think rule B is really dumb. Milliways is great because it doesn't have annoying precise rules like that. IMO if a rule isn't needed, we should't have it. Milliways is a creative paradise of RP freedom, right? And I really don't think we should start to go down the road of "it's been done this way before so now everyone should do it this way".

[nomorethesource.livejournal.com]

I also have to assume that Rule b does not supercede a character's own canon about how long they remain corporeal in other realms? Because Charmed has a hell of a lot of dead people that run around interacting with mortals for extreme periods of time. Many of which have been in alternate dimensions for prolonged periods as well.