Subject: Re: MISCELANEOUS WHITE WOLF QUESTIONS
From: [email protected]
Date: 1998/04/27
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.games.whitewolf
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:
>
> MISCELANEOUS WHITE WOLF QUESTIONS
>
> Technocratic Foci
> My understanding of it is that a technomancer's
> focus is simply a device of such advanced technology that it is not yet
> accepted by the reality paradigm.
After a fasion, there's really no such thing as 'advanced' - just accepted
by the Consensus or not - a Hit Mark is an 'advanced' Cyborg, an SoE's steam-
powered automaton may use 'primitive' technology, but might have similar
capabilities - both are outside the Consensus.
> Am I misunderstanding something in this area, or are the rules just
> worthless in that area?
Foci are an interesting subject. The way I see it... and I'm sure I'm
leaving WW cannon far behind here... Foci can be aproached in two, not
entirely contridictory, but opposed ways.
The Mechanistic view concieves of Foci as actually producing the effect,
but the paradigm under which a given focus works is enabled by the Awakened
Will of the mage. Obviously this view works for Convention technomancers,
but Traditions technomancers, and even many Hermetics and others might
lean in this direction as well. Essentially, the mage has a paradigm, and
working within that paradigm, devises a focus - a machine, a ritual, whatever,
- that (given the paradigm is 'true') will nescisarily evoke a certain
effect when used. The Arete comes in as the mechanism for enforcing that
paradigm long enough for the focus to be used. It's easy to see how a
mechanistic mage could get sleepers to use his foci.
The Mystic view concieves of the Mage as producing the effect, the focus
is simply an aid to the focusing of Awakened will. Under such a paradigm
there is a state of being a mage - enlightenment, being chosen by God or
the spirits, or whatever - that qualifies you to use magick, if you're not
a mage, the trapings of one bring you no power. Obviously, most of the
Traditions lean towards mysticism, even the SoE and the Virtual Adepts
might see the 'Genius' or 'Eliteness' of the Scientist or Hacker as more
important than the tools he uses.
At first glance, it seems that the Mystics have the better grasp of the
Metaphysic of Magick. They don't. Each view concentrates more on one
aspect of the Metaphysic than another, but niether is entirely right.
Mystics certainly grasp the subjective nature of reality, and thus quicly
abandon foci - in effect, they make thier personal paradigms so general,
and based on thier individual power, that eventually they can simply
'will' any effect they want. This works, sometimes very well, but it's
not the whole picture. A paradigm that centers on individual power like
that is not accessable to others... a mystic can guide another along the
path to power, but he can't give detailed instruction, for instance.
Another key to the Metaphysis of Magick is that, though belief determines
reality, that belief - the mage's paradigm - must be internally consistent.
The kind of foci-less power exhibited by mystic Masters is possible, but
to maintain it's logical consistency, the paradigm becomes very vague and
general... something as simple as 'As I Will so Mote it Be' fine, if you
don't want to use foci, but what about what other people Will? What about
ungaurded thoughts... ;) Mechanistic mages have a much firmer grasp on
the logic of Paradigms. Such a mage *can* teach his aprentices exactly
what to do to achieve a certain effect... and, his magick will be more
accessible to others if it is ever accepted by the consensus. Furthermore
a detailed, logically consistent paradigm is inately more predictable... the
SoE who uses a blaster to fire a particle beam doesn't have to worry about
inadvertently hitting his acolyte with a particle beam in an ungaurded
moment of rage... the Porthos-style Hermetic Master of Forces is never
safe to be around.
To make matters more confusing, these two viewpoints aren't entirely
contradictory. You can construct a paradigm that allows both mechanistic
and mystic uses of foci (thus we have people like the SoEs and Virtual
Adepts, who straddle the line).
> Mage Player's Guide
> When is the 2nd Edition Mage Player's Guide going to be out?
> In the meantime, can anyone with the first edition copy tell me what sorts
> goodies are in it? Could someone give me the stats on the new Backgrounds
> (Familiar, Sanctum?, anything else).
That's it. Most of the rules and material in the Book of Shadows made
it into Mage 2nd. Familiars basicly eat a little Paradox for you, and,
at high levels, give a an extra dot in your Arete Pool (not quite the
same as a +1 Arete). Sanctums make your magick a bit easier and less
prone to Paradox when you work in them, they also add to your Arcane.
> WoD: Sorcerer
> Two problems in a an otherwise useful book. The first one(not allowing
> Mages, and most other supernaturals to have Hedge Magic) is easily fixed
> with by ignoring the limitation.
Actually, it's a pretty reasonable limitation. Hedge Magic and True
Magick are really just different degrees of the same thing. A mage
can certainly use the same foci and rituals as a Hedge Mage, and get
the same results, it's just that he'll be using Spheres to do it.
> The second one, I just can't see why it was made
> that way, but I do have a simple fix for it. The Healing Path is NOT able
> actually heal wound levels(all it does is increase the healing rate), but
> several other Paths ARE able to heal wound levels? Am I the only one that
> thinks that the "Healing" Path, ought to be best at healing?
No. No. That would make sense.
Subject: Mages Abandoning Foci (Was:MISCELANEOUS WHITE WOLF QUESTIONS)
From: [email protected]
Date: 1998/05/01
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.games.whitewolf,alt.games.whitewolf.mage
In article <[email protected]>#1/2,
[email protected] wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
> > So many Vdepts do go mystical. Likewise, the Science of the SoE often
> > takes on a moral or symbolic bent that would be alien to a purely
> > mechanistic aproach. By the same token, some Trad mages may be rather
> >more mechanistic - the Hermetics are the obvious example.
>
> I agree. Of course the less mystical VA's need a internal matter-energy
> converter for using there computer as a Matter focus, a simple device that
> emits Forces controlling radiation works fine as the add on to make the
> computer do Forces. ... Of course, most of them realize that they don't
> really need these devices after a while, otherwise they would never lose
> their Foci.
Originally, way back with the original 1st ed book, and no suplements,
all mages abandoned foci the same way - though it was obliquely stated
that Convention mages always used foci, it wasn't definite that they
always needed them... As the suplements came out, the Vdepts and SoEs
got hamstrung by the focus rules. (me? bitter? no...)
Anyway, back then, I came up with a whole list of Merits & Flaws, since
there weren't any out yet. Two of them, now that I think of it, really
focused on how 'Mystical' or 'Mechanistic' the mage is. (If you haven't
read the rest of the thread, a 'mystical' mage I'm defining as one who
believes that he produces the magickal effects and that foci are only
aids to concentration, and thus abondons foci quickly, while a Mechnaistic
mage is one who believes that the focus produces the effect - within
the paradigm that he enables by the exercise of Awakened will. It's a
very chicken/egg kind of thing. Part of the point, is that a Vdept or
other Trad Technomancer might take a very mystical aproach while an individual
of some other Trad, might take a more mechanistic aproach than you'd expect.)
It occured to me, in light of that recent discussion that it would be
good to be able to 'customize' an individual mage character to represent
how mystical or mechanistic he might be. So, here's a Merit & a Flaw
to do just that, updated for 2nd edition:
Dogmatic: (1,3,5pt Flaw)
You believe very strongly in your Tradition's paradigm. All
others are clearly wrong. You tend to ridicule other traditions
and study only with your own kind. You may occasionally admit
that there is something to be learned by studying the
'superstitions' of others, even then you gain only half the
experience you would have otherwise [1st Ed: you learn from them
with a minus five penalty to study points (instead of the usual
minus three)]. Of course, you probably won't be able to find
many masters willing to teach you anyway.
This flaw can also get in the way of your understanding of
the metaphysic of magick. At the 3pt level, you do not abandon
the use of a focus until Arete 5 (like a Tradition Technomancer).
At the 5pt level, your belief in your paradigm is so inflexible
that you cannot ever perform magick without the prescribed
methods and trappings of your Tradition.
You can not take the Merit: Paradigm Flexibility.
Paradigm Flexibility: (1-5pt Merit)
You have an easy time understanding other paradigms and
adapting elements of them to your own. [1st Ed: When learning
from mages of other traditions, you reduce the study point
penalty by your rating in this Merit. You can even learn some
spheres from non-mages (Werewolves, Vampires, Mummies, etc).
Generally, a base study point penalty of 5 is assumed, so if you
have Paradigm Flexibility at the maximum level you can learn
anything anyone has to teach at no penalty.] Whenever you face a
penalty due to paradigm differences, that penalty is reduced by
your points in this merit (though you never get a bonus, of
course).
Your investigation of alternate paradigms may also help you
to overcome your dependence on foci. Tradition Technomancers
with at least 3pts of Paradigm Flexibility abandon foci as
quickly as other Tradition mages. Convention mages with Paradigm
flexibility can abandon foci (though they risk much in doing so):
at the 3pt level, at the same rate as Tradition Technomancers and,
at the 5pt level, as quickly as any Tradition mage. No amount of
Paradigm Flexibility allows a mage to abandon foci faster than the
basic Tradition rate of 1 per dot of Arete after the first.
You cannot take the Flaw: Dogmatic.
Questions? Comments? Derisive Laughter?
--- |
Blake 1001, Virtual Adept, Disciple ---|-.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/1317/ '-|---
The rest of my custom Merits & Flaws |
can be found there.
=====================================================================
Mage: The Ascension
Exchange Stories, Ideas and Opinions about Mage: The Ascension.
Subject: Foci, Paradigm, and droping 'em
Blake - 04/18/2001 17:44:43 - [email protected]
DS>>In brief: Why should mystical paradigms have a mechanics advantage
over rational or religious paradigms? <<
They shouldn't. But, they /can/ be different, and have different
advantages and drawbacks.
To try to make my point let me broadly classify magely paradigms into
two types: Mechanistic and Mystic.
To the Mystic, magick is a thing of the self. His magick comes from him
(or perhaps, though him, from some mystical source of which his is a part -
like nature or the One or what-have-you). Foci are not the source of the
power, but the way in which he can consciously shape that power towards
an end.
To the Mechanist, magick is a thing of understanding. The power of an
effect comes from the foci - it's knowing how to make and use foci, by
understanding the principles under which they opperate, that allows him
to use magick.
As the Mystic refines his paradigm and becomes more enlightened, he can
use more abrevieated foci, or none at all. He gains oneness with his
paradigmatic perception of the source of his power - whatever that is -
and can wield that power without any outside aid.
As the Mechanist refines his paradigm and becomes mroe enlightened he can
use more sophisticated foci - foci that are smaller or more depenable or
whatever - more 'advanced' - but he will always need some sort of focus.
However, by placing the power in the tool, he makes the tool useable by
others. A very enlightened Mechanist should be able to work magic as long
as his foci are properly built and used - regardless of who is building
or using them. And, it also follows that the Mechanist will have an easier
time passing his power on to the Unawakened than the Mystic.
(Seriously, what's easier to grasp 'You must learn the Do, become the Do,
forget the Do' or 'Insert tab A into slot B, twist clockwise 90 degrees,
and depress the red button...')
;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
=================================================================
"
900: PRINT "This Digital Web Sector interfaces with Consensual Reality
thru GeoCities."
901: PRINT "Move one step closer to Virtual Ascension by getting your own
Free Home Page ."
990: PRINT "All writing in this site (excepting Trademarks of White Wolf
Game Studios) is Copyrighted, 94, 97, 98, 2001 by Tony Vargas"
999: END OF FILE