Youngest Mage to Awaken

[Ambrosia]

It's worth noting, IMO, that children having a good Focus isn't necessarily a contradiction - if anything, children would potentially have less problem 'accepting' a set of paradigms and belief, as they are in that age bracket where nature pretty much intends them to soak up information being taught to them.

*And* they have the uncanny ability to somehow put everything they pick up into some kind of worldview that makes sense. Possibly *only* to them, but the only thing a proper Focus requires *is* for it to make sense in the Mage's head. In that regard, I would sprinkle the Focus of a child-mage with a certain kind of dream-logic, where there are some pieces and things that would maybe make an adult blink a bit in confusion. As they get older, the Focus 'matures' a bit as well, but as long as the focus makes *sense* to the child, it...works.

[Isator Levi]

I'm suddenly imagining that a touch of magic could inform some of the uncanny things that accompany earliest childhood, but parents can't make sense of it or mess it up with a spot of Paradox.

[Astromancer]

The idea of child Mages starting with an Arete of two is about the idea that Child Mages have far less to unlearn. It is influenced by Romantic and mystical views of early childhood. To quote Blake, "to see infinity in a grain of sand/ and Heaven in a wildflower."

[Aleph]

Backgrounds are also most likely to be almost entirely nil for the car majority of infants, let alone fetuses; only a handful, like Avatar or Past Lives, stand a chance of having any sort of rating; so the vast majority of Awakened infants aren't likely to have any Backgrounds. Merits and Flaws that you either have or don't will be there all along; but there aren't that many of those that actually matter in terms of the distinction between Sleeper and Awakened.

But those handful that you mention are the ones that cause problems with this whole idea (and perhaps also Dream, Arcane...supernatural stuff that require little to no world interaction).

A babie could have a Mentor, too, but who cares?...I care more about Avatar stuff, the capabilities, Backgrounds, Merits and Defects that come with having one of these wide Awake. Because this has 0 to do with development and all to do with being Awakened. A mage being an adult, a child or a babie would have rougly the same soul, wouldn't it?. And when that comes with stuff like Echoes 5 (to put an example)...well, that's one complicated childhood.

Now, a few of these rare "problematic" Avatars won't make or break the setting, but when ALL fetuses are Awakened suddenly having a child increases one's chance to be exposed to paranormal phenomena quite a lot. That's why I'm more inclined to go with a vision that, at least, supresses this factoid in most cases.

And about Focus: As I said, debatable. I'm inclined to go with the "no, there's no way. A Focus isn't just belief, it's a whole philosophy that also includes persistent Practice" - but Mage Childs seem to be inclined to disagree with the motion, since they're shown as having what I would ordinarily call very undevelopped Focuses if I didn't know better. So, debatable.

But I don't think having Focus without Spheres (or with lvl 1 Spheres as per Initiates) would do much anyway. That's more a problem with the - very complex-ramifications of your theory, than with the idea itself. That's why I'm more concerned with the Wild stuff.

If all little children are Awakened and have "belief", however, even without a Focus that could suffice to be a force in the Consensus - I'm mentioning this for Heavy Arms first objection ". You do not have to go back in time very far for them to become a dominant force in shaping reality". I hadn't tought much about that originaly because, as you said, fetuses and babies have noting of value to aport to the Consensus (except, maybe, reinforcement for the Foundations from early experience). But with little children in mind, one could have to reconsider that idea...
...Maybe that's why Technocracy can't get rid of the monsters :P

[Aleph]

The idea of child Mages starting with an Arete of two is about the idea that Child Mages have far less to unlearn. It is influenced by Romantic and mystical views of early childhood. To quote Blake, "to see infinity in a grain of sand/ and Heaven in a wildflower."

Yes, of course. That whole section is a tribute to those ideas.

Another reason of why I'm more inclined to go with Heavy Arms version now, preferring it to my own previous proposition

[Dataweaver]

But those handful that you mention are the ones that cause problems with this whole idea (and perhaps also Dream, Arcane...supernatural stuff that require little to no world interaction).

A babie could have a Mentor, too, but who cares?...I care more about Avatar stuff, the capabilities, Backgrounds, Merits and Defects that come with having one of these wide Awake. Because this has 0 to do with development and all to do with being Awakened. A mage being an adult, a child or a babie would have rougly the same soul, wouldn't it?. And when that comes with stuff like Echoes 5 (to put an example)...well, that's one complicated childhood.

Now, a few of these rare "problematic" Avatars won't make or break the setting, but when ALL fetuses are Awakened suddenly having a child increases one's chance to be exposed to paranormal phenomena quite a lot. That's why I'm more inclined to go with a vision that, at least, supresses this factoid in most cases.

My inclinations is to say that the demographics of adult mages doesn't apply to Awakened infants: just because, say, one in a hundred adult mages has Avatar-related complications doesn't mean that one in a hundred Awakened infants do. Remember, the vast majority of these infants are going to go to Sleep before long. And most of those are unlikely to ever Awaken after they go to Sleep. The ones with… complicated Avatars are, in both cases, likely to be the exceptions; in particular, the Child Mages section cites a handful of Backgrounds that they're likely to have, which could be taken as “if you have one of these Backgrounds, you're less likely to go to Sleep and more likely to Awaken of you do” — and as such, these Backgrounds are more likely to be found in Child Mages.

But again, most infants will have “ordinary” Avatars, without the likes of an Avatar or Past Lives Background, or any of the Supernatural Merits or Flaws; and those infants get lulled to Sleep before they're old enough to be viable characters. As for them having an excessive influence on the Consensus, that's where their underdeveloped Foci factor in:

And about Focus: As I said, debatable. I'm inclined to go with the "no, there's no way. A Focus isn't just belief, it's a whole philosophy that also includes persistent Practice" - but Mage Childs seem to be inclined to disagree with the motion, since they're shown as having what I would ordinarily call very undeveloped Focuses if I didn't know better. So, debatable.

There's “underdeveloped”, and then there's “I don't even know how to walk or talk”. I'm not finding the page reference right now; but M20 has a section in it talking about how not all Foci are created equal, and that you need a Paradigm that's robust enough to tackle the issues of the world around you if you're going to be successful as a Mage. I'd say that this holds for Child Mages, too, with the caveat that they tend toward the more simplistic end of what's considered to be a viable Paradigm; but when you get to infants and fetuses, the vast majority simply aren't even in the same ballpark as “viable Focus”. If a robust Focus is a ten-speed bike, the sorts of Foci that Child Mages tend toward would be more like tricycles; and the sports of Foci that fetuses and infants would have would be a box of bicycle parts, not yet assembled.

If all little children are Awakened and have "belief", however, even without a Focus that could suffice to be a force in the Consensus - I'm mentioning this for Heavy Arms first objection ". You do not have to go back in time very far for them to become a dominant force in shaping reality". I hadn't tought much about that originaly because, as you said, fetuses and babies have nothing of value to aport to the Consensus (except, maybe, reinforcement for the Foundations from early experience). But with little children in mind, one could have to reconsider that idea...
...Maybe that's why Technocracy can't get rid of the monsters :P

To be clear, I'm drawing a distinction between “little children” and “infants”. I could see “little children” being a force in the Consensus, if not for the fact that most of them have already gone to Sleep by that point. Infants, by contrast, have “some assembly required” Foci, and for the most part are more likely to be affected by the Consensus than to affect it. Which is why most of them end up going to Sleep.

I'll get back to you on the Wild Talent bit. I have some thoughts on that, but I need to do some research before I can present them properly. It involves a short story written by science fiction author David Brin; I believe it was in a book he wrote called Otherness, and it features an expectant mother who's dealing with what amounts to Progenitors experimenting on her unborn child. It has a very Mage-like ending. But I don't have the book handy right now, and I want to refresh my memory before I go any further.