Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How the Concept of "Logic" contradicts "Consensual Reality"

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

  • #46
    (Dictating on my phone, so I don't have as much time to use my usual quotes etc.)

    On your first point, I have no problem with the notion of the Consensus reinforcing the Tapestry. But there are some very serious problems with the notion that the Consensus defines the Tapestry. Taking the example of gravity, where did gravity come from in the first place? As others have pointed out, the Tapestry existed before the Consensus did. You might suppose the existence of the One or the Pure Ones, though that doesn't work in worldviews that don't include their kind. And even if you do, you're still operating on the basis that there's more to reality than just the Consensus.

    Going with a more practical example, consider that the Void Engineers used to have space colonies populated by Sleepers. Take one of these colonies where the Sleeper population has grown up with no personal experience with gravity. Now transport that colony onto the surface of the Earth in a remote location, where the Consensus doesn't hold sway. Let's go the extra mile and say that the habitat has no means of observing what's outside of it, and they don't know that they have been transported to the Earth's surface. Will they experience gravity? According to the existence of Earthly Foundations, they will. Even though they are in a reality Zone defined entirely by their experiences in space.

    On the idea of using Sphere variants and Pillars in a modern setting, one major difference between the Arete and Spheres system versus the Foundation and Pillars system is that the latter effectively binds each Foundation and Pillars to a single Focus. The innovation of the Arete and Spheres system is that different Foci can be used with the same Arete and Sphere setup. Which is why the Traditions would end up using the Spheres instead of sticking to the Foundation and Pillars, given a generation or so. It's not just Esperanto.

    But the bulk of the Disparates never bought into the Order of Hermes unification plan. One could argue that they never abandoned the Foundation and Pillars setup. Which is the idea that I like in my games. Again, I'm not saying that everyone should do it this way, or that just using the Spheres for everything is wrong. Just that this way is just as valid as insisting on sticking strictly to the Spheres.


    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
      (Dictating on my phone, so I don't have as much time to use my usual quotes etc.)

      On your first point, I have no problem with the notion of the Consensus reinforcing the Tapestry. But there are some very serious problems with the notion that the Consensus defines the Tapestry. Taking the example of gravity, where did gravity come from in the first place? As others have pointed out, the Tapestry existed before the Consensus did. You might suppose the existence of the One or the Pure Ones, though that doesn't work in worldviews that don't include their kind. And even if you do, you're still operating on the basis that there's more to reality than just the Consensus.
      This is always an interesting point, because as a matter of curiosity I'd love to explore how these things came to be, but for practical purposes it doesn't really matter. We don't need to know what happened before the big bang to understand the rules of our world as it is now. We don't need to know what happened before the Consensus to understand the rules as they are now. It would be nice to know, but that is mostly as a matter of curiosity or for very specific plot points.

      The origin points of the Earthly Foundations themselves are similarly unimportant. All we need to assume is a point T by which they exist. Whether absolute or self perpetuating they will proceed from there.

      Also, note that I am not advocating that all EFs or CCs are embedded in the Consensus, just that most of them can easily be explained that way. Some things need to be outside the Consensus, but not that many.

      Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
      Going with a more practical example, consider that the Void Engineers used to have space colonies populated by Sleepers. Take one of these colonies where the Sleeper population has grown up with no personal experience with gravity. Now transport that colony onto the surface of the Earth in a remote location, where the Consensus doesn't hold sway. Let's go the extra mile and say that the habitat has no means of observing what's outside of it, and they don't know that they have been transported to the Earth's surface. Will they experience gravity? According to the existence of Earthly Foundations, they will. Even though they are in a reality Zone defined entirely by their experiences in space.
      I see what you are getting at, but it largely doesn't work for much the same reason that 0g in space doesn't invalidate a belief in gravity. It's not so much that the Consensus can't touch Earthly Foundations, but it does so by carving out exceptions. Other foundations you mentioned have similar exceptions. The vast disruption of physical space doesn't happen... outside of volcanoes and nuclear bombs and the like. So 0g may be the norm in a Technocratic colony but the colonists will know that there are these relatively rare but important things known as gravity wells. Despite the different circumstances, the realities of Earth and the Colony are too similar to clash.

      That said, if you raised this colony so that not only do they have no experience with Gravity at all, they also have no knowledge of it whatsoever so that there is no known exception they can appeal to...Well there are a number of things that could happen depending on the needs of the game:

      1) There is one thing we already know happens when an irreconcilable reality clashes with that of Earth: it gets dumped into the Deep Umbra. That's what happens to Marauders and unless it was really important to the game that's the most likely thing that would happen here. There may or may not be a lot of chaos while the conflict resolves, either way fits with Mage.

      2) The sealed nature of the colony forms an intuitive boundary between two reality zones and the inability to see or sense between them ensures we avoid any difficult WTF moments. There is no gravity inside the colony, there is gravity outside, there is no conflict.

      3) The colonists could feel the force of gravity but would assume it was due to something else they were familiar with, an acceleration.

      There are other resolutions I could come up with, but they rest on more complicated Consensus possibilities that are only optional.


      Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
      On the idea of using Sphere variants and Pillars in a modern setting, one major difference between the Arete and Spheres system versus the Foundation and Pillars system is that the latter effectively binds each Foundation and Pillars to a single Focus. The innovation of the Arete and Spheres system is that different Foci can be used with the same Arete and Sphere setup. Which is why the Traditions would end up using the Spheres instead of sticking to the Foundation and Pillars, given a generation or so. It's not just Esperanto.

      But the bulk of the Disparates never bought into the Order of Hermes unification plan. One could argue that they never abandoned the Foundation and Pillars setup. Which is the idea that I like in my games. Again, I'm not saying that everyone should do it this way, or that just using the Spheres for everything is wrong. Just that this way is just as valid as insisting on sticking strictly to the Spheres.
      I'm not advocating sticking strictly to the Spheres. I'm saying that the choice to deviate from them comes from the needs of the table not the metaphysics of the game. Even if it is useful to depict the Sisters are more monomaniacally focused, foci-wise, the decision to represent that by using the Pillars comes because you find that appropriate and not because of their choice of language. Don't get me wrong, their choice of language could have a profound effect on how magic works for them in universe, but that in no way affects the rules, it merely opens up an opportunity for you or I to change how we represent magic if we so choose. And if you use variant rules in one game and not in another that in no way implies that the in universe metaphysics are different between games. The rules are merely representative.
      Last edited by Ramnesis; 01-28-2021, 10:13 AM.


      Mage: The Ice-ension: An Epic Game of Reality on the Rink

      Comment


      • #48
        Just one nitpick on the zero-G humans example, meant more for clarification than anything else: EF talks about “obvious violations of normal physical laws”. The connection between “you trip and fall” and “the moon hangs in the sky” is not obvious, and has to be taught; it took Newton to show that the two things are in fact different examples of the same thing. In the baseline physics of Mage, they may not be.

        I've said before that in Mage, if you need to use scientific Instruments to confirm something, that something may actually be part of the scientific Focus rather than an inherent part of the Tapestry. The example I was using then had to do with the germ theory of disease: if you have to look through a microscope to see germs, then the notion that germs cause disease may actually be something that the Æsculapean Order popularized in the 1850s rather than being something that's fundamentally true — which allows, stay, Verbenae to operate their Magick on different principles without it automatically being Vulgar because it's running counter to an EF. At the very least, contradicting the germ theory of disease isn't an obvious violation of normal physical laws. The idea here is that the Tapestry doesn't mandate cells or pathogens; it includes Life Patterns, which the Union's Enlightened Science interprets as cells and pathogens but which other worldviews could interpret differently.

        In the same way, you need a scientific Instrument to connect falling off a cliff with orbital motion: Formulae, Equations, and Sacred or Advanced Mathematics. In the Tapestry, both are Patterns, and the “fall down go ouchie” Pattern is definitely a Forces Pattern. Celestial mechanics, on the other hand, are viewed by many as having a connection to Time or Entropy: see astrology.

        The Patterns in the Tapestry are there, and behave certain ways unless forced to behave differently by Magick; but for the most part, the Earthly Foundations stuff is a “broad strokes” type of thing, with a few general principles enshrined as the sort of thing that requires Vulgar Magick to violate. And as you say, even they have the occasional natural exception.


        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
          Just one nitpick on the zero-G humans example, meant more for clarification than anything else: EF talks about “obvious violations of normal physical laws”. The connection between “you trip and fall” and “the moon hangs in the sky” is not obvious, and has to be taught; it took Newton to show that the two things are in fact different examples of the same thing. In the baseline physics of Mage, they may not be.
          True. The 'gravity' Earthy Foundation of which we speak may only be the trip and fall variety. Since EFs generally only cover what happens and not why it happens they could have been two different EFs and indeed I would assume that they were (or that the moon itself wasn't or was a CC or something like that).

          That said, to someone from a zero g environment the connection between the orbital kind of gravity and the trip and fall kind of gravity would probably be more obvious, not less. If they had to deal with gravity wells, they'd be able to extrapolate the effects within one to a reasonable degree. Amusingly, if we accepted a theory that humans came from space (in Mage) that would be a pretty good explanation of how gravity got started as an EF. The humans knew zero g was the norm, but that specific places had gravity, then they got trapped on those places and within a few generations it was all anyone knew. I don't like it as an origin story but it is an example of how an EF (of the deeply embedded variety) could get started.


          Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
          I've said before that in Mage, if you need to use scientific Instruments to confirm something, that something may actually be part of the scientific Focus rather than an inherent part of the Tapestry. The example I was using then had to do with the germ theory of disease: if you have to look through a microscope to see germs, then the notion that germs cause disease may actually be something that the Æsculapean Order popularized in the 1850s rather than being something that's fundamentally true — which allows, stay, Verbenae to operate their Magick on different principles without it automatically being Vulgar because it's running counter to an EF. At the very least, contradicting the germ theory of disease isn't an obvious violation of normal physical laws. The idea here is that the Tapestry doesn't mandate cells or pathogens; it includes Life Patterns, which the Union's Enlightened Science interprets as cells and pathogens but which other worldviews could interpret differently.
          In general, I think your explanation here is probably the best way of handling Mage without getting bogged down in details. I do think the explanation for the disease is also in the Consensus, just not nearly as powerfully.

          I would not consider disease to be an EF, though.





          Mage: The Ice-ension: An Epic Game of Reality on the Rink

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
            (Dictating on my phone, so I don't have as much time to use my usual quotes etc.)

            On your first point, I have no problem with the notion of the Consensus reinforcing the Tapestry. But there are some very serious problems with the notion that the Consensus defines the Tapestry. Taking the example of gravity, where did gravity come from in the first place?
            Those were the factory settings. Masters of the Art has rules for creating new universes as a use of Prime. Some prime master in the ascended universe made the world of Mage. Ascension is becoming enlightened/powerful enough to ascend to that higher magical universe.

            When the world was created, certain baselines were set, but the consensus re-defines those baselines over time.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Enginseer-42 View Post

              Those were the factory settings. Masters of the Art has rules for creating new universes as a use of Prime. Some prime master in the ascended universe made the world of Mage. Ascension is becoming enlightened/powerful enough to ascend to that higher magical universe.

              When the world was created, certain baselines were set, but the consensus re-defines those baselines over time.
              Well, well, well. The A Wizard Created the Universe theory. Quite an outlier: one line of one book. And let's note that "a wizard did it" it's the textbook definition of a handwave...

              Still interesting. Let's see how it works when you take it to it's logical conclussion:

              This theory has an "infinite regress" problem:

              The Ascended Master has to come from somewhere, least he's *totally* different from any actual mage and much more akin to the Christian God (mages usually are born before they can do magick, and need to learn Prime 9 - this takes time, you know: causality needs to exist prior to this Ascended Master's Ascencion)

              If the world was created by an Ascended master: Who created the universe where those ascended masters lived?. Another ascended master, obviously. Then who created the another ascended master's world? Yet another master...and so on and so fort forever until you get the picture that humanity it's, in fact, eternal. It has always been, and will always be - over infinite overlapping universes

              OR maybe it's a time loop. The Ascended Master also has Time 10 and created it's own universe in the past in order to be born, and then create the universe again. A Paradox (the Paradox). Only problem it's that Prime 9 creates a lesser reality tied to a prior reality so this Master would need Prime 10, at least, to avoid the stacking of infinite universes - but we don't know if Prime 10 can do that, 'cuz 10th levels aren't written (just implied to exist).

              Either way, the conclussion it's that humanity it's eternal, transcends time, created itself, and willingly set the laws that would be the permanent constants of the cosmos. That's the only possible explanation for a purely subjective reality.

              But then, if mages existed forever and magick always kinda worked the same way (ppl learning Prime 9, then doing the Prime 9) one has to wonder: It's there a real difference between humans creating always more or less the same rules of the universe - during an infinite amount of time - and these rules being objective?
              Last edited by Aleph; 01-28-2021, 03:21 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Dataweaver View Post
                Just one nitpick on the zero-G humans example, meant more for clarification than anything else: EF talks about “obvious violations of normal physical laws”. The connection between “you trip and fall” and “the moon hangs in the sky” is not obvious, and has to be taught; it took Newton to show that the two things are in fact different examples of the same thing. In the baseline physics of Mage, they may not be.

                I've said before that in Mage, if you need to use scientific Instruments to confirm something, that something may actually be part of the scientific Focus rather than an inherent part of the Tapestry. The example I was using then had to do with the germ theory of disease: if you have to look through a microscope to see germs, then the notion that germs cause disease may actually be something that the Æsculapean Order popularized in the 1850s rather than being something that's fundamentally true — which allows, stay, Verbenae to operate their Magick on different principles without it automatically being Vulgar because it's running counter to an EF. At the very least, contradicting the germ theory of disease isn't an obvious violation of normal physical laws. The idea here is that the Tapestry doesn't mandate cells or pathogens; it includes Life Patterns, which the Union's Enlightened Science interprets as cells and pathogens but which other worldviews could interpret differently.

                In the same way, you need a scientific Instrument to connect falling off a cliff with orbital motion: Formulae, Equations, and Sacred or Advanced Mathematics. In the Tapestry, both are Patterns, and the “fall down go ouchie” Pattern is definitely a Forces Pattern. Celestial mechanics, on the other hand, are viewed by many as having a connection to Time or Entropy: see astrology.

                The Patterns in the Tapestry are there, and behave certain ways unless forced to behave differently by Magick; but for the most part, the Earthly Foundations stuff is a “broad strokes” type of thing, with a few general principles enshrined as the sort of thing that requires Vulgar Magick to violate. And as you say, even they have the occasional natural exception.
                You know, this is what I was talking about beforehand in my initial statement. I can buy the existence of patterns and how their interaction shapes reality...but gravity being a product of popular belief and how the patterns are interpreted goes back to what I was saying. First off how are these patterns defined? What defines Life, Soul, or Entropy?

                As someone once put it: https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?thre.../post-13742404

                There ultimately is no distinction between Mind, Fate, Spirit, Death, or Prime, in exactly the same way that there ultimately is no difference between Space, Time, Life, Matter, and Forces. We've got a dualist world (maybe) with two kinds of substance and two kinds of extension, but ultimately we have different kinds of manifestations of those substances and extensions.

                Saying that Mind and Spirit and Soul seem too similar is essentially one of those E=mc^2 realizations. Of course they're the same thing, in the same way that Life is just made out of Matter, which is made out of Forces, which is just fields in Space-Time.

                The lines aren't drawn in reality; they're drawn in the human Mind. Incidentally, that's why Mind and Space are seen as reflections of each other - Mind is the thing that perceives distinctions and similarities, while Space is the thing that defines separations and regions.
                Now while he was talking about Awakening, I think this applies to the Ascension setting as well.
                Last edited by ryu238; 02-04-2021, 02:58 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by ryu238 View Post
                  You know, this is what I was talking about beforehand in my initial statement. I can buy the existence of patterns and how their interaction shapes reality...but gravity being a product of popular belief and how the patterns are interpreted goes back to what I was saying.
                  It's quite mind-bending, and that's why most of the people here chalk it as a Foundation.

                  Albeit the foundation wouldn't be so much "gravity", the scientific theory you need a PhD to understand, but "gravity" the phenomena of falling and hurting your butt. If you get what I'm saying.

                  The idea it's to keep fundamental things that everyone would believe on as independant, to have a credible setting, while being vague in the particulars to leave some doors half-open for the bizarre. Like how flat-earthers don't dismiss the force of gravity altogether (nobody would believe stuff doesn't fall to the ground), but rather explain the phenomena away as their Discworld moving upwards

                  Now while he was talking about Awakening, I think this applies to the Ascension setting as well.
                  Akashicks would go beyond that, and say everything it's just one kind of substance: Mind

                  Two monks were watching a flag moving in the wind. One monk said: The flag it's moving. The other corrected: the mind it's moving

                  Also:


                  Ascencion plays with the idea of all the factions of mages having different definitions about what is real. This is what Paradigms are.

                  First off how are these patterns defined? What defines Life, Soul, or Entropy?
                  Spheres are a taxonomy. They exist both as a game mechanic (OOC) and also as part of the setting (IOC).

                  Out of game, they're part of a system used to create your own sub-systems (rotes) instead of picking your spells from a pre-genreated list - the big attractive of Mage as a RPG.

                  And they're largely arbitrary, albeit convinient, like most taxonomies. For instance: You could chalk the sepparation between Mind and Spirit as game balance. But don't get me wrong, this taxonomy has been debated a lot by players. As can be seen in the polemic decision to divide Entropy in Fate and Death for Awakening.

                  In the game, however-ever...

                  Ascencion, unlike Awakening, incorporates the idea that maybe the Spheres aren't such a Constant. But this is not a certainty. There's contradictory material that puts the Spheres as either a Constant, a Paradigm or even less that a Paradigm - a convenient parlance for groups of mages with wildly different Paradigms

                  Some think Spheres are a reflection of the "real reality", of Reality(tm). In general the belief in Spheres, Arete and whatnot are all real things it's called in the comunity as the "Purple Paradigm" (search that, and enjoy the madness). Spheres exist out there. All the mechanics are based arround them. There is one Realm for each Sphere, one Oracle for each Sphere (maybe?), how could they not be Real? - if you go by old canon, Spheres could be the shattered body of the One (that had to divide into mirriads of fragments to create the universe).
                  The irony of mage it's that all the factions of mages figth about the correct way to do magick, but in truth everyone it's doing the same thing.

                  Others think Spheres are just a more or less arbitrary taxonomy. A syncretist theory of magic and a common language, a Paradigm probably based arround the 9 Cornerstones of Reality developped in the court of Thotmes III to allow mages of different factions to work together. But ultimately a Paradigm. Not necessarily the only way to do or understand magick. Sphere Realms may be just the reflection of the work of mages, and Oracles don't need to be divided by spheres (Masters of the Art proposes this, against all the canon where they are shown as related to a Sphere).

                  Late rulebooks have a lot of mechanic pandering to this idea. For instance: Technocracy has it's own variation of the Spheres that can do stuff that the Tradition's version can't (and viceversa). The biggest exponent of this ideology, however it's Dark Ages: Mage. That book uses, OOC; a different system alltogether (Foundations and Pillars instead of Spheres), and has the gall of saying that Arete will be invented or discovered latter - so you can't chalk this as a purely rules thing.

                  My cup of tea it's to understand the spheres being IOC a taxonomy, but one that doesan't need to reflect OOC mechanics. If you understand Spheres this way, the Metaphisics of Magic don't need to be true in the slightest in order to have a coherent setting.
                  Sphere divide of magick could be completely boggus, and still exist as a (wrong) unified theory of magic. That's why I often say that if I were to use Pillars for the moden Traditions - I would still have them talking about Spheres. You can use Vires to throw a fireball and still explain it IOC to a Spirit-Talker as a "Forces effect", even when Forces doesn't exist.

                  Note that IOC Mages also have different oppinions here. Hermetics do believe in the Spheres (albeit have other names for them), but other Traditions are more sceptical. The Sisters of Hippolyta actually refused to join the Traditions, among other things, because they disagreed on their way of systematizing magick on 9 Spheres

                  .
                  .
                  .

                  To see the *actual* definitions of the Spheres, I remit you to the books. All cores have a nice section called Metaphisics of Magic(k) or something like that. That section gives you the definition of the Spheres and how they relate to each other - in theory - to conform the Tapestry (the universe).
                  Last edited by Aleph; 02-04-2021, 04:25 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by ryu238 View Post

                    You know, this is what I was talking about beforehand in my initial statement. I can buy the existence of patterns and how their interaction shapes reality...but gravity being a product of popular belief and how the patterns are interpreted goes back to what I was saying. First off how are these patterns defined? What defines Life, Soul, or Entropy?

                    As someone once put it: https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?thre.../post-13742404



                    Now while he was talking about Awakening, I think this applies to the Ascension setting as well.

                    While it does apply a lot to Ascension, it is worth remembering that magic in Awakening comes from symbols and meaning that are expressed through the Phenomenal World. Because the reality of the symbol and the reality of the expression are both tangible we can describe the interaction between the two in specific ways. Ascension doesn't really have that. Awakening's Arcana may not be the sum totality of the Supernal World, but they are in some way real, and patterns are patterns of them (and possibly other imperceptible things). We can't say that for certain with Ascension's Spheres, there are indications they are real and indications that they are not. Even describing something as a pattern is an attempt to understand it, not necessarily a statement of fact.

                    Besides gravity doesn't need to be understandable as a pattern of anything. It needs to be felt. Consider fantasy novels for a moment. Each separate one has a world with its own physics and metaphysics. Each of them has a reason for gravity to exist (whether the author has defined that reason or not), but they do not all necessarily have the same reason for gravity to exist. Nevertheless, a typical person who moved from one world to another would not necessarily notice the change because the outward presentation of gravity is the same. The "patterns" may be dramatically different and often mutually exclusive, but the presentation is exactly the same.

                    This isn't because there is some rule that says all worlds have to contain gravity. There's no such rule; there doesn't have to be. The expectation is that the world will be like the audience's except where otherwise specified.

                    We are used to the idea that the "why" defines the "what," that if we want to know about something we perceive (the what) we can break it apart and see the way it works (the why). Once you know why things work you can have dramatic effects on what happens. Ascension, like writing, is the opposite. The things people can directly perceive and interact with- their expectations- are the most deeply held, and the reasons for those things are much more fluid. They can be dramatically different and even mutually exclusive so long as they present the same perceptible world. The "what" strongly constrains the "why."



                    Mage: The Ice-ension: An Epic Game of Reality on the Rink

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I always understood it this way.
                      While the air in the lungs you breathe or the touch and flavour of food you eat may not technically be real it is so common for everyone that you need gigantic efford to change it so it becomes real.
                      Logic is used for the world like in the discussions how to change the rules for the next edition of an P&P RPG.
                      If the situation gives the possibility and it is considered a good thing than the consens could for example easily be changed to that rivers are able to flow through the air like for example in Edolas in Fairy Tail. Mages are like Moderators that can edit what they think is unsightly.
                      In our round we decided to that there are True Ones that created the original timelines like Jahwe or Gaia and so need administrative rights from them to change otherwise set in stone facts like Vampiric Curse, being a shapeshifter like a Garou or that Light from Helios is travelling unchanged by neither light nor space.


                      As I am from Austria I need to clarify two things.
                      First my native language is german and so please point out if the english I write is broken so I can improve.
                      Second I do not own VTMV nor any line after M20 because it is not out there and I wait for the translation.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Just throwing this out there, but I think an important role Marauders play in the setting (which is not about mental illness and we would do well to break that association entirely), is that they frame the actual opposite extreme of the Technocracy and thus make clear what the Traditions aren’t...

                        Technocracy: There is only one truth, and while progress can involve healthy debate and study about what undiscovered truths are, it is only a matter of time till a given singular truth is defined and all deviation from that truth and it’s meaning are by definition false

                        Traditions: There are diverse interpretations of meaning, especially via different cultural frameworks, and different perspectives can be equally valid and understanding those multiple perspectives make conception of truths all the more complete

                        Marauders: there are no external facts at all, there is only ones “personal truth”/“opinion”, and any disagreement over someone’s “personal” factual claim, regardless of so-called “evidence”, is merely an attempt to quash their right to their opinion and personal reality

                        As you can see, through this lens the Marauders become a lot more socially relevant to the world today without being a misguided representation of the mentally ill as scary, and takes the weight of the flatearthers and anti-vaxxers off the Traditions a bit
                        Last edited by glamourweaver; 04-10-2021, 10:23 PM.


                        Check out my expansion to the Realm of Brass and Shadow

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          The difference between the Traditions and the Marauders is that the Traditions believe in a Consensus; the Marauders reject it. (Some of the more extreme Marauders reject the Earthly Foundations, too; but it isn't essential to being a Marauder.)
                          Last edited by Dataweaver; 04-10-2021, 09:02 PM.


                          Comment


                          • #58
                            I would phrase that more: The Traditions want to bend Consensus in the favor of their mutlicultural world-view, while the Marauders (on some level, as generalizing about them is hard) want to tear it down.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Just a thought on Earthly Foundations and the Consensus - there is a middle ground between the Consensus having no effect on them and the Consensus changing base physical reality.

                              Let’s say homeopathy not working is due to an Earthly Foundation about reality. If the Consensus (or localized Consensus/reality zone) believes in homeopathy it wouldn’t start working as a default in that case, BUT a Mage employing homeopathy as a practice to work a Life effect to heal would find the effect has become coincidental.

                              To give a more extreme example, if the Consensus held the Earth was flat, the physical shape of Earth in mundane space might not change, but a Mage sailing “to the edge of the Earth” could perform a Spirit effect to physically pass into the Deep Universe “by going over the edge” and that magical act would be coincidental


                              Check out my expansion to the Realm of Brass and Shadow

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                While I prefer to simplify "Consensual Reality" to:

                                * Mages alter reality with belief
                                * Sleepers do not

                                I also think its important sometimes to just play the game by its conceits. Part of what makes the game so much fun is the fact that mages are THEMSELVES not sure how much of reality is actually real since their dreams and ambitions are able to shape it. It's why Marauders exist because you can literally result in the laws of physics bending around you to justify the most absurd premises.

                                If that is the case can you really PROVE logic functions?

                                Every mage is kind of trapped in the Truman show with an existential solipsistic dilemma.

                                Can you prove ANYTHING is real beyond your mind?

                                Edit:

                                In fact, relating to the OP, the problem all mages face is the fact that they are transcendental arguments THEY are God.

                                What is your morality when you are able to dictate reality?
                                Last edited by CTPhipps; 04-10-2021, 10:56 PM.


                                Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X