Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Problem With Hollow Ones

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Enginseer-42 View Post
    There's a difference between 'Imperialism' and 'Eurocentric Imperialism'

    They're not all white power, blood and soil types, but they are at their origin a fairly Western/Eurocentric organization. They also rode the backs pretty hardcore of European and Euro-descended empires into dominating the globe.

    But if we're going to continue the debate, we should take it to another thread. This is suppose to be about the Hollow Ones and not the cultural chauvinism of the Technocracy.
    Last edited by Onkwe; 02-13-2018, 04:06 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      In the end, the Hollow Ones started out to linked to a fashion slash Subculture. As chaos magicians shifting with the currents of the zeitgeist they would work. Heck, as being antiWestern is fashionable, they'd fit the disperates far better.

      The Technos are great villains, and like the very greatest villains, they think they are the purest of heroes. They seem totally hypocritical because of an utter lack of self awareness. The Hollows Ones, as they are now written, are also lacking in self awareness. This lack is a serious problem.
      Last edited by Astromancer; 02-14-2018, 08:06 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        I actually think nihilism is an important element of what makes the hollow ones function. While all the other traditions are bound by a certain approach to magic, be it by means of life for the Verbena, adherence to codes of fate for the Euthanatos, or on "reasonable" theories for the Etherites, all tradition mages are in some way fixed by a specific reference point by which they view the world.

        The Hollowers, on the other hand, come without such a starting point. They accept that if the universe is so malleable to allow all these different and contradictory viewpoints to work, that magic can't actually be that picky. So if all of it works, then nothing is actually all that unique, and if that's the case, anything is as good anything else so long as it holds a strong enough connection to you.

        That is not to say that Hollowers go entirely without belief systems. Some may rationalise how others do magic. "It's got nothing to do with those fancy words, it's about how those words make you feel that gets the power out. You're just like the ecstatics with their pills, feeling is all magic is." or perhaps "The universe doesn't care what you do, the universe doesn't even think, it's just stuff happening. Doing magic just lets you have a say in what that stuff is. Whatever works for you to make that stuff happen is fine, but don't sit here and tell me that the stuff you want happening is proof some man in the clouds came down and did it for us and that they're helping me too and judging me for the privilege."

        I honestly think the goth asthetic of this craft is more a sterotype than anything else, and that most Hollowers don't actually conform to any kind of sub-culture. They are the mages who believe they understand how the universe works more than any other mage because they accept that there is no real structure to it, things work because the human element. "Magic comes from within" in a way. While the verbena and dreamspeakers talk about their spirits and natural connection to the world, the Hermetics and Chorus look to the angels or the ancient texts, and the Etherites try to describe the world with mad theories, the Hollowers consider magic to be something that does not exist independently of the mage, but only happens because the mage wields it into being, the methods are more arbitrary, as long as it works for them.

        In my previous game, I had a hollow one Noir Detective who considered reality a maelstrom of chaos, and that magic was how people create order out of it. The world didn't have intrinsic meaning, you had to cast your own meaning. Yes, the other players made fun of him being a "non-goth goth", but the philosophy matched up too well.

        Their conjecture effectively states that all the work of the traditions is completely arbitrary and meaningless, but they also look at the traditions as all doing the same stuff. In one sense this is a unifying belief as it recognises that the beliefs which divide the traditions are fundamentally irrelevant. But as the same time undermines the very thing that powers these mages will, that they believe at all.

        The problem is that, just like the other traditions, they can't even agree amongst themselves exactly how the universe makes magic happen. Is it all order derived from chaos, or is is the other way around? Is magic based on emotion, or is that too a deception, and it's merely the act of ritual that sets it all off? Perhaps "It's all in the showmanship", the philosophy and knowledge are not actually required. Is the universe reactionary, or is cause and effect meaningless to, perhaps stuff "just happens" not because anything or anyone is listening, but just because you want it badly enough.

        These fundamental differences make it difficult for Hollowers to have any kind of structured hierarchy or anything more organised than a loose alliance. They do, however, have a lot of stake in this world. Just because they might think that tradition magic is pretentious and needlessly complicated doesn't mean they don't think that what the technocracy is doing isn't harmful. Codifying magic as science affects them just as anyone else. And while the jury is out on the Hollower consensus on ascension, the alternative drawn forth by the nephandi is not an attractive notion. Even if they are dead certain the world has gone to shit, it's still a better alternative to no world at all.


        Keepers of the Wyck: A Chronicle I'm running FINALE: Chapter 39: Green Fairy

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Saikou View Post
          I actually think nihilism is an important element of what makes the hollow ones function. While all the other traditions are bound by a certain approach to magic, be it by means of life for the Verbena, adherence to codes of fate for the Euthanatos, or on "reasonable" theories for the Etherites, all tradition mages are in some way fixed by a specific reference point by which they view the world.

          The Hollowers, on the other hand, come without such a starting point. They accept that if the universe is so malleable to allow all these different and contradictory viewpoints to work, that magic can't actually be that picky. So if all of it works, then nothing is actually all that unique, and if that's the case, anything is as good anything else so long as it holds a strong enough connection to you.

          That is not to say that Hollowers go entirely without belief systems. Some may rationalise how others do magic. "It's got nothing to do with those fancy words, it's about how those words make you feel that gets the power out. You're just like the ecstatics with their pills, feeling is all magic is." or perhaps "The universe doesn't care what you do, the universe doesn't even think, it's just stuff happening. Doing magic just lets you have a say in what that stuff is. Whatever works for you to make that stuff happen is fine, but don't sit here and tell me that the stuff you want happening is proof some man in the clouds came down and did it for us and that they're helping me too and judging me for the privilege."

          I honestly think the goth asthetic of this craft is more a sterotype than anything else, and that most Hollowers don't actually conform to any kind of sub-culture. They are the mages who believe they understand how the universe works more than any other mage because they accept that there is no real structure to it, things work because the human element. "Magic comes from within" in a way. While the verbena and dreamspeakers talk about their spirits and natural connection to the world, the Hermetics and Chorus look to the angels or the ancient texts, and the Etherites try to describe the world with mad theories, the Hollowers consider magic to be something that does not exist independently of the mage, but only happens because the mage wields it into being, the methods are more arbitrary, as long as it works for them.

          In my previous game, I had a hollow one Noir Detective who considered reality a maelstrom of chaos, and that magic was how people create order out of it. The world didn't have intrinsic meaning, you had to cast your own meaning. Yes, the other players made fun of him being a "non-goth goth", but the philosophy matched up too well.

          Their conjecture effectively states that all the work of the traditions is completely arbitrary and meaningless, but they also look at the traditions as all doing the same stuff. In one sense this is a unifying belief as it recognises that the beliefs which divide the traditions are fundamentally irrelevant. But as the same time undermines the very thing that powers these mages will, that they believe at all.

          The problem is that, just like the other traditions, they can't even agree amongst themselves exactly how the universe makes magic happen. Is it all order derived from chaos, or is is the other way around? Is magic based on emotion, or is that too a deception, and it's merely the act of ritual that sets it all off? Perhaps "It's all in the showmanship", the philosophy and knowledge are not actually required. Is the universe reactionary, or is cause and effect meaningless to, perhaps stuff "just happens" not because anything or anyone is listening, but just because you want it badly enough.

          These fundamental differences make it difficult for Hollowers to have any kind of structured hierarchy or anything more organised than a loose alliance. They do, however, have a lot of stake in this world. Just because they might think that tradition magic is pretentious and needlessly complicated doesn't mean they don't think that what the technocracy is doing isn't harmful. Codifying magic as science affects them just as anyone else. And while the jury is out on the Hollower consensus on ascension, the alternative drawn forth by the nephandi is not an attractive notion. Even if they are dead certain the world has gone to shit, it's still a better alternative to no world at all.

          See, that's pretty much what I have been describing, but with the switch flipped back to "gloomy". The viewpoint you're describing is very Discordian.

          Maybe my issue is that I just like my Mage games to be more idealistic (if not necessarily optimistic. There's a difference.) than most other WoD players?


          Shameless Technocratic shill.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by The Nilbog View Post
            See, that's pretty much what I have been describing, but with the switch flipped back to "gloomy". The viewpoint you're describing is very Discordian.

            Maybe my issue is that I just like my Mage games to be more idealistic (if not necessarily optimistic. There's a difference.) than most other WoD players?
            I too prefer a rather idealistic Mage (even vergeing on optimistic). Within that though, I find the Hollow Ones (as described Saiku just now) to be a valuable part of the world, the existentialism and nihilism of the modern world given a voice. It's a very real undercurrent in American culture right now or 'nothing matters, it's all just a shell game, beliefs are for fools.' I'd never play one - their beliefs are completely antithetical to mine - but they're not wrong, and I find that makes for compelling NPCs.

            I have plans to use one in my current game - Gnosis 6, but still wearing the 'lord of the grunge club' persona. He has power. The PCs need that power. How do you convince a nihilist to help you?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by BlueWinds View Post

              I too prefer a rather idealistic Mage (even vergeing on optimistic). Within that though, I find the Hollow Ones (as described Saiku just now) to be a valuable part of the world, the existentialism and nihilism of the modern world given a voice. It's a very real undercurrent in American culture right now or 'nothing matters, it's all just a shell game, beliefs are for fools.' I'd never play one - their beliefs are completely antithetical to mine - but they're not wrong, and I find that makes for compelling NPCs.

              I have plans to use one in my current game - Gnosis 6, but still wearing the 'lord of the grunge club' persona. He has power. The PCs need that power. How do you convince a nihilist to help you?
              Get him or her to like you. Just because nothing objectively matters doesn't mean that I can't help someone just because I like them or feel like it. Even if my help ultimately amounts to nothing it might have been fun to do regardless.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by The Nilbog View Post
                The Hollowers have no reason to join the Disparates because no one is trying to destroy them on an organisational basis.
                Jumping back a bit, just because it seems like this wasn't addressed:

                The Hollowers in M20 end up in the Disparates because the Traditions are trying to destroy them... or at least some of them are. The Disparate Alliance comes into being after the fall of Horizon in the metaplot, which means after a Hollower got blamed for or did betray the Traditions. With the Hollowers taking the fall for that among enough of the Traditions, they gave up any alliance with them, and many wanted the help with getting away from the hardcore revenge-y Tradition mages that groups like the Batini can offer.

                Given the metaplot, it's actually one of the more sensible entries into the Disparates.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Weirdboyz View Post

                  Get him or her to like you. Just because nothing objectively matters doesn't mean that I can't help someone just because I like them or feel like it. Even if my help ultimately amounts to nothing it might have been fun to do regardless.
                  For sure. Mages are, above all else, human. But the mere existence of someone who can perform such miracles while believing in 'nothing' is a challenge to some character's beliefs, and especially if the Hollow One is thorny and needles them about it, there's some interesting interplay to be had there!

                  My point wasn't that literal question, but more showing how I see the faction enriching the setting and how I'm using them. I always enjoyed The Merovingian scenes in the Matrix sequels.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BlueWinds View Post

                    I too prefer a rather idealistic Mage (even vergeing on optimistic). Within that though, I find the Hollow Ones (as described Saiku just now) to be a valuable part of the world, the existentialism and nihilism of the modern world given a voice. It's a very real undercurrent in American culture right now or 'nothing matters, it's all just a shell game, beliefs are for fools.' I'd never play one - their beliefs are completely antithetical to mine - but they're not wrong, and I find that makes for compelling NPCs.

                    I have plans to use one in my current game - Gnosis 6, but still wearing the 'lord of the grunge club' persona. He has power. The PCs need that power. How do you convince a nihilist to help you?
                    I feel like you’re misrepresenting existentialism. Existentialists believe that since there is no greater meaning, your actions in the world are ALL THAT MATTER. Because that’s all there is. What you do is more central for the fact that it doesn’t play a part in some greater meaning, but are the entirety of meaning. So in short, everything matters - because that’s all there is.

                    “If nothing that you do matters, all that matters is what you do.”

                    Existentialism exists as a rejection of nihilistic despair or paralysis.
                    Last edited by glamourweaver; 02-14-2018, 06:50 PM.


                    Check out my expansion to the Realm of Brass and Shadow

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by glamourweaver View Post

                      I feel like you’re misrepresenting existentialism. Existentialists believe that since there is no greater meaning, your actions in the word are ALL THAT MATTER. Because that’s all there is. What you do is more central for the fact that it doesn’t play a part in some greater meaning, but are the entirety of meaning. So in short, everything matters - because that’s all there is.

                      “If nothing that you do matters, all that matters is what you do.”

                      Existentialism exists as a rejection of nihilistic despair or paralysis.
                      Granted. I'm misrepresenting it in the same way I see it frequently misrepresented in modern culture.

                      I'm a philosophy major, and enjoy playing around with the edges of things - the way everyone's jumping on this is a good reminder that tone and intentions don't carry well across the internet, and short-form posts like I've been making are easy to misconstrue, lacking the context of a longer discussion.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Saikou View Post
                        I actually think nihilism is an important element of what makes the hollow ones function. While all the other traditions are bound by a certain approach to magic, be it by means of life for the Verbena, adherence to codes of fate for the Euthanatos, or on "reasonable" theories for the Etherites, all tradition mages are in some way fixed by a specific reference point by which they view the world.

                        The Hollowers, on the other hand, come without such a starting point. They accept that if the universe is so malleable to allow all these different and contradictory viewpoints to work, that magic can't actually be that picky. So if all of it works, then nothing is actually all that unique, and if that's the case, anything is as good anything else so long as it holds a strong enough connection to you.

                        That is not to say that Hollowers go entirely without belief systems. Some may rationalise how others do magic. "It's got nothing to do with those fancy words, it's about how those words make you feel that gets the power out. You're just like the ecstatics with their pills, feeling is all magic is." or perhaps "The universe doesn't care what you do, the universe doesn't even think, it's just stuff happening. Doing magic just lets you have a say in what that stuff is. Whatever works for you to make that stuff happen is fine, but don't sit here and tell me that the stuff you want happening is proof some man in the clouds came down and did it for us and that they're helping me too and judging me for the privilege."

                        I honestly think the goth asthetic of this craft is more a sterotype than anything else, and that most Hollowers don't actually conform to any kind of sub-culture. They are the mages who believe they understand how the universe works more than any other mage because they accept that there is no real structure to it, things work because the human element. "Magic comes from within" in a way. While the verbena and dreamspeakers talk about their spirits and natural connection to the world, the Hermetics and Chorus look to the angels or the ancient texts, and the Etherites try to describe the world with mad theories, the Hollowers consider magic to be something that does not exist independently of the mage, but only happens because the mage wields it into being, the methods are more arbitrary, as long as it works for them.

                        In my previous game, I had a hollow one Noir Detective who considered reality a maelstrom of chaos, and that magic was how people create order out of it. The world didn't have intrinsic meaning, you had to cast your own meaning. Yes, the other players made fun of him being a "non-goth goth", but the philosophy matched up too well.

                        Their conjecture effectively states that all the work of the traditions is completely arbitrary and meaningless, but they also look at the traditions as all doing the same stuff. In one sense this is a unifying belief as it recognises that the beliefs which divide the traditions are fundamentally irrelevant. But as the same time undermines the very thing that powers these mages will, that they believe at all.

                        The problem is that, just like the other traditions, they can't even agree amongst themselves exactly how the universe makes magic happen. Is it all order derived from chaos, or is is the other way around? Is magic based on emotion, or is that too a deception, and it's merely the act of ritual that sets it all off? Perhaps "It's all in the showmanship", the philosophy and knowledge are not actually required. Is the universe reactionary, or is cause and effect meaningless to, perhaps stuff "just happens" not because anything or anyone is listening, but just because you want it badly enough.

                        These fundamental differences make it difficult for Hollowers to have any kind of structured hierarchy or anything more organised than a loose alliance. They do, however, have a lot of stake in this world. Just because they might think that tradition magic is pretentious and needlessly complicated doesn't mean they don't think that what the technocracy is doing isn't harmful. Codifying magic as science affects them just as anyone else. And while the jury is out on the Hollower consensus on ascension, the alternative drawn forth by the nephandi is not an attractive notion. Even if they are dead certain the world has gone to shit, it's still a better alternative to no world at all.
                        While this is a legitimate concept for a Hollower character's worldview, I won't say it is the core of the group's thinking. At least, it's not what I've got out of the tradbook.

                        Actually, thinking about it a bit, I'm not assuming anything, I'm not saying my impression is right, but I do frequently get the feeling that a lot of people didn't read the tradbook and making up their views on the Hollowers based on the corebook writeups and maybe older books. Why it isn't wrong per se, it might be misleading. That said, I frequently have the same feeling about the Torreador. The Clanbook gave me a quite different lookout on them, compared to the corebook and the average stereotype.


                        Originally posted by The Nilbog View Post

                        Is it? Is it really? Mage 1e was released the same year as Schindler's List. In the time the original WoD was being published, the world saw the release of Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings films, Metal Gear Solid and Hellboy, to name a few across different media. All wildly successful, thematically complex and very much the result of their creator's vision. The modern world, even before the current geek culture renaissance, has exponentially increased the ability of an artist to create and distribute their art. Sure, it's still hard, but can you imagine trying to pull yourself up from obscurity during the Victorian Era that the romanticist mindset seems to so desperately pine for?
                        Sorry for tha late answer. So, I think yes, it is. It's not about how difficult it is for a person to distribute their art. It's about how society, by and large, views art, stories and such. Our age is very nihilistic and cynical. We, by and large, aren't really believe in stories, or care deeply about art. Even geeks are prone to over-analyze them and dissect them, missing the forest for the tree during the process. And that is still better than the majority, who are just consuming the movies (frequently not the books and comics, which inspired the movies and have much more depth), without really getting touched by the stories. We (in the sense of "we " as the mainstream culture), in my eyes aren't making legends, we are making memes. Billions of people are watching Star Wars, but how many of them are getting really touched by it, by the timeless meanings under the flashy bits?

                        Also, consider the words and the overall attitude mainstream culture viewed and sometimes still do the people who got really interested in stories, music, aesthetics and such. Or rpgs. Geeks. Nerds. Weirdos. Yes, it changed, as mentioned, by the rising of the geek and by some succesfull books, movies and shows. Yes, Harry Potter was a huge milestone, I'd be tha last person debating that.

                        Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the people of 'yore were highly romantic, compared to today's people. But I do believe tha our world is even more materialistic. We do not believe. I'm not meaning it in the religious sense, I'm anything but religious.

                        I think that's precisely why things like HP, or LotR got that big of a thing, or why vampires became such a huge cultural meme for a few years. People are craving for those larger than life things for the wonder, for the deeper truths. And that's the point of the Hollow phylosophy of romanticism. They want to show the people that life is more than the next day at the desk and they do it by example, that's also apart of why they're attracted to the flashy subcultures and countercultures.

                        It's not surprising, really, that they are the group which get along with the Changelings pretty well.

                        So, my firm belief is that the Hollow Ones aren't nihilists, they are romanticists and their whole existence is actually a big NO to nihilism.

                        Edit: Or, at least the ones who care. Some of them are truly nihilist jerks and club kids. Everyone have their good ones and bad seeds.

                        I wanted to say that I think you initial conept is not a wrong one. Actually, I quite like it as a concept. I just think you based it on an inaccurate assesment, or, rather a misinterpretation of the Hollowers.


                        Originally posted by The Nilbog View Post

                        This is not inaccurate. Perhaps I could have phrased my issue better...

                        The Hollowers have no reason to join the Disparates because no one is trying to destroy them on an organisational basis. The Technocracy doesn't care if they live or die, in large part because their paradigm and ideology doesn't really meaningfully conflict. The other Disparates have been negatively and directly effected by the Technocracy, but the Technocracy has never launched a full-scale cultural pogrom against artists.

                        At a more basic thematic level, the Disparates represent perspectives and cultures that have been abused and cast aside by the Eurocentric imperialism that the Technocracy represent. The Hollow Ones, thematically connected as they are to a school of thought born out of that very cultural paradigm, feel immensely out of place.

                        Like, I'm sure Lord Byron wasn't a Technocrat, but I don't think that he would have been as hurt by their methods as the defining figures of other Crafts.
                        First, the disparates aren't just ehnic groups abused by Eurocentric imperialism. They consist of groups like the Templars, or Wu Lung (which is dominant in a large part of Asia) and others.

                        Second, I see the Disparates more like a group banded together by smaller groups who had enough from the Traditions and/or the Union. That fits the Hollowers. They just don't want to associate with either group any more. Also, there's the mentioned hard feelings toward them from the Traditions regarding Concordia's fall, regardless of how much of that was a doing of a splinter group.

                        Third, I have my own beef with the Disparates as a concept, but regardless, I don't see them as an organized, tight-knit group. I just can't see the local Hollowers, Sisters, Templars, Battini, Bata'a and Solificati keeping a war council and taking raids on Hermetic Cahntries. I see it more as a very loose association between the groups.

                        Oh, and because Byron got mentioned... I wouldn't be too caught-up with the actual romanticist period either. Yeah, that was a huge influence, but as mentioned, the Hollowers have their phylosophical roots much deeper than that. They just weren't organized earlier.

                        Edit 2: a final word about the goth stereotype. As I see it it's not that they are, per definition must be goth, or that they're necessarily the goth kids of Mage. It's more like that a lot of them have gotten caught up in the subculture at the time, because it was a good fit for them, for their ideals (and I think it still is, but again, it's not exclusive). The subculture's focus on nonconformism, on romance, on subverting mainstream concepts, the fascination with the macabre, the emphaisi on self-expression, those made it a natural environment for the Hollowers to converge around. I think nowadays they would be more diverse, like being present in the groups you mentioned, like cosplayers, underground artistic circles, fantasy writers and such, but I also think they'd be strongly into several musical and other subcultures as well, including goth.
                        Last edited by PMárk; 02-14-2018, 09:25 PM.


                        If nothing worked, then let's think!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Those are all very reasonable points. If nothing else, this thread has given me some insight into the mindset behind the Hollowers (even if I'm still not really inclined to use them).

                          That said, would anyone be interested if I posted some rotes and other things for my version of the Hollow Ones?


                          Shameless Technocratic shill.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by PMárk View Post
                            Actually, thinking about it a bit, I'm not assuming anything, I'm not saying my impression is right, but I do frequently get the feeling that a lot of people didn't read the tradbook and making up their views on the Hollowers based on the corebook writeups and maybe older books. Why it isn't wrong per se, it might be misleading. That said, I frequently have the same feeling about the Torreador. The Clanbook gave me a quite different lookout on them, compared to the corebook and the average stereotype.
                            As far as I'm concerned, this is absolutely the case. How does the trad book differ from my interpretation?


                            Keepers of the Wyck: A Chronicle I'm running FINALE: Chapter 39: Green Fairy

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I use to not care for Hollow Ones at first either, but I liked them after reading their Trad book and their chapter in the Orphans Survival Guide. IMO they were largely never explained well enough for a lot of people to grasp beyond 80s & 90s goth stereotypes.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by The Nilbog View Post
                                Those are all very reasonable points. If nothing else, this thread has given me some insight into the mindset behind the Hollowers (even if I'm still not really inclined to use them).
                                I'm glad you found it useful.

                                That said, would anyone be interested if I posted some rotes and other things for my version of the Hollow Ones?
                                Oh, I certainly do! As I said, my problem wan't with your concept itself, I could certainly imagine a very intersting Hollower character with that paradigm!


                                Originally posted by Saikou View Post

                                As far as I'm concerned, this is absolutely the case. How does the trad book differ from my interpretation?
                                Well, you are familiar with the corebook writeup, yes? that is the common stereotype, and I'd wager, the initial concept of them (in the sense of how the initial concept of the Brujah was moltov coctail-tossing rebellious anarchist punk neonates). The revised Tradbook is more or less what I wrote above. I always got the feeling that the corebook reflected the simple desire of the writers to include a goth stereotype group into Mage, on the footsteps of Vampire and films like the Craft and the overall cultural zeitgeist. Conversely, the tradbook were written by people (I assume), who actually liked them as a group and a concept, maybe were involved with the groups which inspired them, I dunno. Regardless, I believe they wanted to give it a deeper and wider meaning and phylosophical background.

                                But really it's the same with every subsplat's corebook writeup, compared to their own books.



                                Originally posted by Onkwe View Post
                                I use to not care for Hollow Ones at first either, but I liked them after reading their Trad book and their chapter in the Orphans Survival Guide.
                                Really? I felt their cahpter in the Survival Guide to be more-or-less the extrapolation of the common stereotype. It didn't give me a positive feeling about them, really. To be fair, I read the Tradbook earlier than that, so that could have colored my impression. I just took it, more-or-less as Brucatto sneering on goths.

                                IMO they were largely never explained well enough for a lot of people to grasp beyond 80s & 90s goth stereotypes.
                                Totally agree. I think even most of the writers didn't really want to do more with them, prior to the Tradbook and most people stopped right at the sullen, whiny, always-black-clothes-and eyeliner wearing goth kid stereotype, with dabbling in magic on the top. To be fair, I don't have a problem with the goth aesthetics, I like a lot of things from that subculture (albeit I never considered myself a member of it - or any other subculutre for that matter), so I was okay with a lot of them being close to that, to a point of birthing the stereotype, but I'm glad the Tradbook made them much more depth than that.
                                Last edited by PMárk; 02-15-2018, 09:37 PM.


                                If nothing worked, then let's think!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X