Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

what is the cause of wisdom?

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by EW-Matias View Post
    Ok, but why do Mages strive to retain at least some Wisdom? Why aren't they all Falling lower and lower or Mad? Maybe because they believe that being Wise is Good? How is that not an ethical framework?

    Also, I entirely disagree about the Mad. Cause and consequence are like the chicken and the egg. Their Obsessions consumed them because they were foolish and their Obsessions drive them to commit ever greater Acts of Hubris. Also, the game disagrees: at 0 Wisdom you become one of the Mad, full stop. No other requirements.
    i thought the silver ladder explicitly has low wisdom and they hate it... in some cases lower than many seers

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by mark View Post
      i thought the silver ladder explicitly has low wisdom and they hate it... in some cases lower than many seers
      There is nothing about the Silver Ladder explicit or implied that indicates they would have Wisdom any lower than anyone else. What they chafe at are what they perceive to be artificial limits to Wisdom imposed on them by the Lie and the Exarchs, but that doesn’t necessarily manifest as ending up with less Wisdom.

      Comment


      • #48
        Excuse the slight derail, but a topical question jumped into my mind when the Mad were discussed. I looked into the book but could not find an entry on this anywhere in 2e: Are we sure becoming Mad still turns a PC into an NPC? Neither in the Wisdom section (87-88) nor the Systems paragraph on the Mad (236) could I find word on that. Indeed, you get enough information on how the Mad work straight out of the Corebook to make playing one feasible. It even states reason for why a non-Mad cabal might still keep a Mad cabalmate around.


        Politeness is the lubricant of social intercourse.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by saibot View Post
          Excuse the slight derail, but a topical question jumped into my mind when the Mad were discussed. I looked into the book but could not find an entry on this anywhere in 2e: Are we sure becoming Mad still turns a PC into an NPC? Neither in the Wisdom section (87-88) nor the Systems paragraph on the Mad (236) could I find word on that. Indeed, you get enough information on how the Mad work straight out of the Corebook to make playing one feasible. It even states reason for why a non-Mad cabal might still keep a Mad cabalmate around.
          Huh, you’re right. They appear in the Antagonists section which might imply it, but nothing (I can find) says they can’t be played.

          Comment


          • #50
            I'm honestly really glad to hear that that's no longer a thing. Karma meters stealing characters away from the players has always bothered me.

            Comment


            • #51
              Ascension is still a bitch though, unless you can yo-yo it like Daniel from Stargate.

              Comment


              • #52
                The sun rises and sets. Rain falls downwards. Mage fans disagree about Wisdom.

                So, here's the thing. Mages don't strive to retain Wisdom.

                Why not? Because, in-universe, Wisdom isn't a number. As simple as that. Oh, I'm sure there are four different competing models that ask you a series of questions you're supposed to respond to on a scale of 1-10 and a bunch of calculations are made to convert that into a single, decisive number. That seems like the kind of thing Mages would get up to, especially Mages interested in the nature of their soul. Or others' souls. Especially tasty souls. I bet there's even a debate as to whether a Wise Mage is tastier than a Foolish one. Not in the major Sects, of course. Nah. The Sects are on the up and up. No Reapers in their membership. Nope. Definitely not.

                I don't use the term "morality meter" anymore. I use the term "subjective stat". There's an explanation in my signature. The consequence of that way of looking at things is that Wisdom is the game's way of describing a Mage character's overall arc. Mages are characters who, more and more, evince a kind of out-of-control behavior. Their addictions take ahold of them such that everyone and everything else loses value. What matters is the next hit of Gnosis, of grokking the next Mystery, of that rush of Sight. Wisdom is an indicator of exactly where along that path a character is. How likely is a bystander going to be affected by a Mage's Paradox? To what degree are a Mage's friends and family in danger from Nimbus leakage? Those are the things other Mages see.

                Now, your game might not include both extremes. Probably won't, even! Your character probably hovers around a range of two or three numbers, depending on the kind of story your ST wants to tell. Or maybe it's exactly the kind of game about a fall-from-grace for a Mage who had it together and has pretty much lost her last marbles by the end.

                In-universe, it's easiest to think of Wisdom less as a measure of a Mage's actions and more as a measure of how healthy their soul is. A Mage's soul is a vessel bursting with Truth, a Truth that impresses itself upon reality without particular thought or care. To cast a spell is to unleash that Truth, to claim privilege and impose preference. But oftentimes, especially when young, a Mage does not want to do this willy-nilly. There are still Sleeper concerns they care about. They have priorities in life other than the discovery of another Supernal nuance. For these Mages, the health of their soul is important, because that's what gives them the capacity to choose between those concerns and chasing their Obsessions.

                Wisdom is the principles and practices, the code of thought and behavior, that are recognized to maintain the health of a Mage's soul. Mainly, it is noticed that people who don't follow them are well-correlated with people who have damaged souls, who bleed their Truth into the world. It's not entirely clear what the mechanism between these two things are, of course. Is it cause or effect? Does a murderer murder because his soul is damaged, or did the act of murder damage his soul? A Moros sets up an experiment. He evaluates the health of two souls. One then goes and commits murder. He looks again. No change. He runs this experiment a thousand times. A thousand murders, to test the hypothesis. Some have new cracks. Others do not. It never occurs to him to check on his own.

                You don't have to follow this code. Hell, you can come up with your own. That's what inuring is about, and what forging a Legacy is about: choosing your own path beyond Awakening. You do you. But the soul is the medium of the Supernal and the vehicle of an Awakening. It is the gateway to the Golden Road and the Anima Mundi. Its health matters, whether you care to maintain it or not. You can choose to puncture it and let it spurt forth; that's not necessarily immoral, in itself, but it has consequences. Sometimes those consequences are the point. That's what you're trying to achieve. If so, then fine. Good!

                If not, then maybe you should have paid more attention. They said to eat your vegetables. Maintain a good work-life balance. Go jogging regularly. Have a social life. Try not to murder anyone. Doesn't seem too bad, as dicta go, until it gets in the way of figuring out the last hurdle to that Mystery.


                I call the Integrity-analogue the "subjective stat".
                An explanation how to use Social Manuevering.
                Guanxi Explanations: 1, 2, 3.

                Comment


                • #53
                  I love that post. I recently had the talk with my players that were complaining about Wisdom: That it was preventing them from doing what they wanted to in-game. I told them that maintaining Wisdom was not the goal of the game and that they shouldn't get too hung up on it. It is what it is. It's part of the fun of the game to push the boundaries and see where you end up. Only really reckless characters are going to fall below 3 generally. Which is really only the difference between containing a level 2 Paradox and a level 1 Paradox. It won't nuke your character generally, but the uncontained Paradoxes that infect you with a Condition are where some interesting play lies. Embrace it.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by lnodiv View Post


                    I see the problem.

                    You're claiming that anyone that sticks to a vague, general belief of 'if I do abc and avoid xyz, it will work out best for me' is following an 'ethical framework'.

                    Yes, if you define the term in such a way that literally everyone, everywhere, all the time, would be following it simply by following basic human nature (because human nature is to attempt to do things that work out well for them) then I suppose that Wisdom would be an ethical framework.

                    The problem is that you are talking past everyone else, and everyone else is talking past you, because no one else involved in this discussion defines it that way.

                    We might as well let the discussion die here, because it's impossible to have a meaningful discussion about this topic with such an impossibly broad definition.
                    This, so much this.

                    And to follow up, 'good' for me, and 'good' versus evil are not the same thing. Saying that doing something is good for me is not the same as saying that it is a good thing period. It is a quirk of language that we use the same word (it does come from the fact that many systems of morality use it to mean the same thing, but not everyone does (and frankly I hate that people do, it is the same terrible ideology that lead 1e to having immoral acts give you derangements and poor kids to think they weren't good enough for Santa to bring them things)).

                    Originally posted by Errol216 View Post

                    So, here's the thing. Mages don't strive to retain Wisdom.

                    Why not? Because, in-universe, Wisdom isn't a number.
                    ​I am so happy you said this too.


                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Speaking of the Mad, what happens when they finally figure out everything there is to know about the Obsession that drives them? I mean they get that way by devoting everything they have/are to the pursuit of a single thing, what happens when that thing is attainable and they actually get it?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        It might be tend toward being like the Wisdom-loss Conditions, not entirely achievable Obsessions. Dominate Others and Wield Magic Indiscriminately are things you can do but don't really have a reasonable limit to achieve (factoring in dominating everything as unreasonable). Using the example Mad from Left-Hand Path you have Fulcrum who would want to study or enhance torture, Dr Boyd would be something like 'Euthanize those with awful futures,' which even if you made huge strides in would probably just lead to more work, and the Red Man likely wants to be or be helped.

                        Otherwise maybe they would have period of dormancy before finding a new Obsession. I don't see the Red Man coming back from things even if he's found and counseled.
                        Last edited by nofather; 01-04-2018, 06:39 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by nofather View Post
                          It might be tend toward being like the Wisdom-loss Conditions, not entirely achievable Obsessions. Dominate Others and Wield Magic Indiscriminately are things you can do but don't really have a reasonable limit to achieve (factoring in dominating everything as unreasonable). Using the example Mad from Left-Hand Path you have Fulcrum who would want to study or enhance torture, Dr Boyd would be something like 'Euthanize those with awful futures,' which even if you made huge strides in would probably just lead to more work, and the Red Man likely wants to be or be helped.

                          Otherwise maybe they would have period of dormancy before finding a new Obsession. I don't see the Red Man coming back from things even if he's found and counseled.

                          Not following you at all. Explain further.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Mrmdubois View Post
                            Not following you at all. Explain further.
                            When a Mage hits 0 Wisdom, they become Mad and gain an Obsession, replacing their Virtue. From p237 of the core, 'At that point, she replaces her Virtue with one of her Obsessions. This all-consuming Obsession is called her Fault, and her default state involves working towards it. It might compel her to perform an act or cast a spell over and over, or to chase a Mystery that she will never solve.' I'm going to still call it Obsession for the rest of this post, but in-game it's called a Fault.

                            Not all Obsessions have an achievable end-goal. Examples: Dominate others. Wield Magic Indiscriminately.

                            Because of this, a Mad with similar Obsessions could not 'finish' their Obsession.

                            For example, a Mad with 'Find the Crimson Pagoda' could find the Crimson Pagoda, Obsession done. A Mad with 'Enhance torture techniques,' could conceivably never be done, as there may always be a better method.

                            There were three example Mad in the Left-Hand Path book. Fulcrum, Dr. Boyd, and the Red Man. I used their write-ups for examples of what their Obsessions might look like in second edition.

                            Lastly I suggested that if they had an Obsession you could resolve, they might have a period of dormancy before picking a new one. There is no mechanical source for this, it just seems like a logical (if boring) way the Mad might work.
                            Last edited by nofather; 01-04-2018, 08:15 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by nofather View Post
                              For example, a Mad with 'Find the Crimson Pagoda' could find the Crimson Pagoda, Obsession done.
                              It's also worth noting that as variant long-term Aspirations, Obsessions reward their bearers when they make headway on fulfilling them or change their direction. A Mad One who broke his soul in the pursuit of finding the Crimson Pagoda could naturally see his Fault settle into a similar monomania for studying it, mastering its secrets, or remaking it in his own image. (Similarly, Aspirations — and Obsessions by extension — are meant to be fairly vague and general, as the impositions from Megalomaniacal and Rampant suggest.)


                              Resident Sanguinary Analyst
                              Currently Consuming: Changeling: the Lost 1e

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X