There are good reasons for the two to be different. Namely that Inhabitation kills the host and Possession doesn't. That is to say, if you're possessed then it's always possible for someone to kick the spirit out of your body and you'll be good as new, if possibly horribly traumatized. If you're inhabited, the best case scenario for you is that you fully merge with the spirit and you both cease to exist as individual entities, while the most likely scenario is that you're consumed by it and nothing remains of you but a shell. That's a good enough reason to model them differently.FrankTrollman wrote:The obscurantist faction was pretty much out of control since before 5th edition was a thing. The reductionists wanted possession and inhabitation traditionsto be the same. There's honestly no reason why voodoo zombies and insect spirits have to use different mechanics. We have separate possession and inhabitation rules because the obscurantists threw a tantrum.
Now that they control pretty much everything, it doesn't really surprise that they are covering themselves in poop and demanding complex new mechanics for character types that are thematically interchangeable with already extant magical groups.
-Username17
Especially since they want the Inhabitation traditions to be crazy guys who kidnap and murder homeless people over a period of weeks or months, and the Possession traditions to be playable and useful in combat time without the risk of starting Scientology or some other perpetual growth scheme that will inevitably lead to the apocalypse.