Posting mode: Reply
Password(Password used for file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Read the rules and FAQ before posting.
  • このサイトについて - 翻訳

  • After four months of being ad-free, we're running some ad tests. We ask that you bear with us as we filter out the shitty ads and see what works. Also, please don't block them, and be sure to click those that interest you. Thanks!

    File :1233231435.jpg-(95 KB, 722x599, Philosopher.jpg)
    95 KB Philosopher: A game of Loss and Revelation Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)07:17 No.3552378  
    Hey /tg/, its me again. I'm still working on Mosaic, but as you've probably guessed by now, I enjoy distracting myself with the other random ideas I have along the way.

    This one is slightly odd, and it'll only really make sense, at first, to people who have read or listened to that most remarkable of books, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

    In the books, only presented in detail at a later stage but mention early on, is a girl called Fenchurch, who came to an incredible understanding of the universe and for one moment, really knew what was going on in the world. Then the planet got blown up. and then life continued, as normal.

    The idea behind the game is people who have experienced a similar revelation. They have seen the absolute universal truth. And, rather unfortunately, lost it again. And now they're trying to get it back.

    To their advantage, they have a very slight understanding which still sits with them. Its not really comprehensible, but it does let them pull interesting twists in the logic of the universe- For instance, Arthur Dents flying trick, in which one aims for the ground, and misses, and thereby achieves flight, simply by the action of becoming rather distracted while you are in the act of falling, thus tremendously confusing gravity.

    To their disadvantage, all the "Real" philosophers want them dead, as anyone with an absolute answer will almost certainly put them out of a job, while large numbers of government agents seem to want to abduct them, cut open their brain and see just what the hell has happened to them. They won't learn anything of course, but it might be of advantage to a certain pair of white mice...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:19 No.3552385
    Sounds like a WoD setting game.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:20 No.3552395

    By concept or by naming convention?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:25 No.3552415

    Both. The naming convention is off really, should be something like Philosopher: The Revelation if it would fit. But yeah. I dunno. Concept sounds a bit thin to stretch a whole game around.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:25 No.3552417
    So was anyone else jealous of Arthur when he got to bang her?
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)07:25 No.3552418

    Its not something you'd run a long campaign with, I think. Either a one shot or a short, three session campaign just for a laugh and to see what you could do with it.
    >> hyperion !!LtgOgT0wJFN 01/29/09(Thu)07:25 No.3552419
    OP, I both adore you and want to rip out your intestines and paint with them.

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:28 No.3552427
    If a game about traipsing around a forest fighting the lure of nature with your EMO PAIN can work, so can this.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)07:28 No.3552429

    I've finished one game (ArtifIce) and all I really need for Eurid is an editor (Which is why I'm avoiding working on it). As I said, I am still working on Mosaic, just I get bored after a while. Little distractions like this help restore my enthusiasm for the whole business and thus I'll work more efficiently on Mosaic! The system works! (In my own head)

    Also, a general apology if I seem weird, I'm rather ill currently, and it may be screwing with my mental state.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)07:31 No.3552442
    this sounds pretty interesting. Would there be different philosophical schools, each with a different take on what their insight was, and therefore different powers? For example, a solipsist would destroy things by not looking at them, or an idealist reducing everything to it's least complex form.
    Or, would the various abilities and such be more dependent upon something that, were it not for what we believe to be the laws of the universe, would be common sense, like the aforementioned flight ability?
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)07:35 No.3552457

    I'd say a mixture of both would work. For a formally trained philosopher who received Insight, their reality warping thoughts would fall in line with their particular school of philosophy. For a normal person who came upon Insight through idle thinking, simple twists of logic. Of course, over time, Philosophers could probably teach each other their tricks, if they could understand how they work.

    Hehehe, destroying something by believing its not there. That's a very good one...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:36 No.3552463

    Reminds me of Dungeons and Discourse.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:41 No.3552487
    I think affecting other objects via your Insight would be higher level abilities. Applying a new understanding to yourself seems much easier than applying it to the rest of the world.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)07:46 No.3552506
    I don't know about that, Wesley. Often the most difficult part of any given philosophy is internalizing it. However, with the given Insight that has been aqcuired, the closest area of the universe that you can remember the truth about would probably be the one that you can most easily remember the truth about, and therefore affect, and that is, of course, your own physical being
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:51 No.3552518
    This reminds me of one of the Knacks (or is it a boon?) from Scion, where you can negate an attack you weren't aware of. Something like that might fit? ignore the consequences of an action you're unaware of.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:51 No.3552520
    You may be right, as I'm biased of course; my philosophy is Jedi, so naturally I believe you ought to start with your own self.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)07:56 No.3552547
    Well, if you're talking about what you can effect, it might be wise to define the various aspects of what is.

    Reality (Objective/Subjective?)
    Self (Physical/Immaterial?)

    Hmm... but doesn't this almost automatically set the universe to a Subjective mode and a Dualist account of mind?
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)08:02 No.3552573
    Only if your philosophy is such that it would be so under such a doctrine. The true nature of the universe was open to you for a brief instant, however, and it is up to the gm to decide what that would be.
    But if we continue with the abilities determined by schools of philosophy, it could be that only philosophers that believe in a dualist universe can affect it as such, and cannot be affected by other philosopher's upon the plane of existence that they do not believe exists.
    For a trippier game, it could be that reality is defined by the collective unconscious, and the abilities of philosophers are due to overriding it with insight, but, as we are trying to create a new game, and not simply to imitate old mage, that idea should be tabled for now, and only spoken of if it can be altered enough to not be a complete rip-off.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:06 No.3552596
    ...I can see this leading to some very heated inter-party debates. And, if you're a thinker whose thoughts shape reality, they may well directly translate into a literal conflict...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:07 No.3552599
    Which would be half the fun!
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:10 No.3552620
    So, how would advancement work? Gaining greater and greater portions of Insight, your mind becoming more and more able to tap into the truth of the universe, and yet at the same time more able to twist it- Oh god, you're going for the Hitchhikers solution aren't you? Whenever anyone finds absolute truth, the universe completely changes so that the truth is even stranger than before. That'd be the ultimate anticlimax...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:12 No.3552632
    So, take WoD and insert into it... Wilson's Illuminatus trilogy.

    Man, that DOES sound awesome.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)08:15 No.3552650

    Never read the Illuminatus Trilogy, but I'm always on the look out for an interesting read. Would you reccomend them?
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)08:17 No.3552658
    Yes, yes, a million times yes! GO! Read these books!
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:17 No.3552660
    How is a campaign-ending apocalypse (of knowledge, in this case) an anticlimax?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:17 No.3552662

    Yes. No. 23 Skidoo.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)08:19 No.3552676
    Of course, once you get a DaDaist in the party, things start to get really giraffe.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)08:23 No.3552697
    God bless Bookchan. A few clicks, five minutes, and the whole Illuminatus Trilogy is on my laptop. Replies may be slow, if the books are as good as rumoured.
    >> Xaras !pldw3xanYY 01/29/09(Thu)08:24 No.3552698
    "The Akademia"

    Formed in the days of ancient greece, this group has been working for thousands of years to maintain a productive view of the world that people can work in without that much questions. They have been aware of the existence of people with the ability to violate reality since their founding (was Socrates a titular Philosopher?), and consider them to be highly disruptive to their efforts.

    Because of this, the Akademia (pulling a lot of string) makes sure that all Philosophers are suppressed or turned to serve their cause, even if this involves murder or literally making the targets disappear.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:26 No.3552706
    Don't sweat it. We've got this covered.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)08:35 No.3552748
    Ouch... I'm barely two pages in and this book is hurting my brain. Its awesome but somewhat hard to follow...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:37 No.3552756

    Mwahahahaha. Just as planned.

    Pretty soon we're going to get a game out of this. Hagbard Celine: The Utter Dickery.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)08:46 No.3552794
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:46 No.3552799
    Hmm... lets put some thinking into this. What would certain philosophies let you twist? Which historical philosophers were actually Philosophers? the Akademia are
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:49 No.3552810

    No. Everybody lie down on the floor and stay calm. Fucking JAMs.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)08:55 No.3552829
    Well, there's the three usual categories: Epistemology, Metaphysics, and Ethics. The first two are fairly straightforward, I just have no idea what Ethical theories would allow for. But we might want to keep it at a fairly high level like that rather than getting into the weeds of particular philosophies to prevent class creep like you see in so many RPGs.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:01 No.3552848

    I think rather than thinking in the usual "philosophies as classes" mold, let's go in the other direction. Start with the Revelation that the character recieves. Maybe it is revealed that all minds are one, or that God is dead, or that the purpose of mankind is to serve you, or that everything is illusory. Go with that, and the philosophy of the given character develops as a rationalization of the Revelation that was experienced.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)09:01 No.3552849
    I dunno, Ethics is pretty interesting, and really, why do we care about power balance? It's all about worldview, not what belief in the nature of the universe will give me the biggest bonus.
    Ethics could be a number of things. A Hedonist would eliminate displeasurable things, such as wounds or disease, a Humanist could boost themselves to the highest human potential, and so on.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:08 No.3552874
    Actually, that would be the Revelation/Insight that is remembered, not the whole that was experienced. But anyways, don't get me wrong, I'm all for freeforming like that. I just think we need some kind of general structure to keep things from getting out of hand when everyone wants to introduce their own preferred variations.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)09:09 No.3552879


    This seems a good idea to me. I'm against classes, generally, as a rule, and in a game about philosophy mental flexibility is a useful tool. As for different paths of philosophy, that only applies to a classically trained philosopher. For the untrained who receive Insight, they might do things like the bullet-curving from the Wanted movie. "If No one had ever told you bullets fly straight, how would you make one curve?", that kinda thing.

    Also, BLARGH. my eyes are hurting, and I don't know why...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:10 No.3552883

    What I mean is that you'd return from the Revelation with a general statement like the ones I posted above, and then the philosophy that is generated from that will be represented by abilities that you select from a pool. So it's still not freeforming, but it allows for greater variation within a "school".
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:11 No.3552884
    I don't know if this would be quite what you wanted, but I had this idea for a skill. I based it on the explaination here

    Skill - Zenoist Tortoise Sprint:
    Evade any pursuer by paradox sprinting.
    You are being pursued by something much faster then yourself. However, to stop you they must first catch you. To reach you, they must first reach the point from which you started running. But in the time it takes to do this, you have run a bit further forward. So next your pursuer must reach this new point. But in the time it takes it to do this you've gone forward a tiny bit further. And so on to infinity: every time your pursuer reaches the place where you were, you have had enough time to get a little bit further, and so it has another run to make, and so your opponent has an infinite number of finite catch-ups to do before he can catch you. Thus, you cannot be caught up with. On the other hand, unless they give up first, you can't stop running either...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:17 No.3552931
    That's actually what I was getting at as well. My apologies if I miscommunicated.

    Hmm. So the untrained tend more towards breaking the laws of physics, whereas the trained break the laws of metaphysics. I was thinking it was more of a generalist/specialist distinction, but that probably works better.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)09:21 No.3552954

    Nothing needs be exactly defined just yet, its simply an idea in my head. If its a bad idea, I can just let it drift away...

    Also, oh my god this fucking book. What the hell is up with it? I'm worried by all the little facts which Don't make sense, and I'm utterly terrified with the few scraps of information which Do!
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:24 No.3552972
    You know better than that. In /tg/, even bad ideas get appropriated by someone. (Usually a troll.) Not that this is a bad idea...we wouldn't be discussing it if it were, now would we?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:30 No.3553016

    You speak truth.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:31 No.3553025

    Keep reading. It will all come together in the end.

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:39 No.3553067
    Those extra titles are fucking cheesy
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:40 No.3553068
    post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:41 No.3553074
    post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Salamanders Fanboi !!5UlGlkaxBkH 01/29/09(Thu)09:41 No.3553078
    Hitchhiker's Guide is over-rated and this is terrible.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:41 No.3553079
    post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:42 No.3553081
    post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:43 No.3553087
    post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)09:43 No.3553089

    You are a soulless bastard with no appreciation of truly great humour. I will defend Douglas Adams to the death.

    What do you dislike about the idea? Is it just the relation to hitchhikers, or does some part of the concept piss you off?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:44 No.3553094
    post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:44 No.3553098
    Ignore the troll, EF.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:45 No.3553099
    Or scepticism. This whole concept reminds me of a thing a friend told me.. it was basicly philosophers who could force their ideal or belief onto something. Thus, if you're sceptic about something existence you could make it non-existing.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:45 No.3553100
    post 44 post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:45 No.3553108
    post 45 post 44 post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)09:46 No.3553112
    post 46 post 45 post 44 post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Eldrad, Insane Individual of Incomprehensable Incompetance (Just as Planned.) !!srlFJqQzH9+ 01/29/09(Thu)09:50 No.3553137
    You are a tabletop god, EF.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)09:55 No.3553158

    Sometimes I feel more like a tormenting demon. Constantly popping up and saying "Hey, here's an idea!" and, if I'm lucky, having people get into it. And then, usually, I drift on, and say "Hey, here's an idea!". And there's always a couple of people who look back at the old idea and think. "Dang, that could've been really, really good...". I do intend to finish every project I start... but at the rate I start them, I'm not sure I have enough time in my total lifespan, even factoring in those far off years of retirement.
    >> Eldrad, Insane Individual of Incomprehensable Incompetance (Just as Planned.) !!srlFJqQzH9+ 01/29/09(Thu)09:57 No.3553172

    ADD's a bitch, ain't it? I go through the same trouble with most of my works.
    >> Mr. Butlertron, the Robot Butler 01/29/09(Thu)09:58 No.3553179
    and there's another one! Goeticism! This world is a trap for the soul, and people must excise their sdemonsd to escape. Earthflame, i have some bad news. You are a product of a Philosopher's self-doubt. Enjoy that.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:00 No.3553194
    Have you considered that most of us don't actually play any of the games featured here, and so it doesn't matter if any of them are finished since we just use the discussion generated by your ideas as a convenient distraction from the constant shitstorms?
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)10:06 No.3553232

    I have considered the possibility. It is an interesting one. But, for all the useful discussion, I never really feel I've achieved anything unless I have some proof. An archived thread, a game PDF, a group of people with fond memories etc. Perhaps I'm just vain, or stupid, since none of that is really achievement...


    Really? Splendid! What a fantastic plot hook...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:22 No.3553350
    Hmm... I don't know much about philosophy, but the untrained philosophers could have some funny stuff, like

    "It's only five minutes to the shops". Despite everyone else taking ten minutes to walk there, they stubbornly insist, and believe, that it is a five minute walk for them. They don't take a different route, or go quickly. They merely traverse the entire distance in the time they believe it will take, rather than the time it should.

    "Its just a scratch". No matter how serious the wound, if its initial effects can be easily disregarded, it is reduced to such, dwindling to nothing. This doesn't work on obvious or excessively painful wounds, as it is very clear what those are
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:40 No.3553437
    "It's just the cat." No matter what diabolical threat was sneaking up on you, you turn around and it really was just a cat...an evil cat.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:40 No.3553440
    This is all well and good as an idea etc, but you gotta think how you'd systematise it. I'd say go for abstract stats and skills, more metaphorical than literal, freeform powers with guidelines on philosophy, and let people roam free. Liberal, you know?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:49 No.3553490
    I think you mean Goetia. 'Goeticism' isn't a word.

    Who thinks /tg/ should come up with a game like Earthflame: the Developing. Characters play people obscured behind internet aliases, driven by an undefinable urge to create great games, and have to contend with the myriad distractions of trolls, sage, and occasionally even real life.

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)10:53 No.3553504

    I must admit, I Lol'd
    >> Xaras !pldw3xanYY 01/29/09(Thu)11:07 No.3553576
    Sure is meta around here.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)11:07 No.3553578

    heh, that is indeed a good one.

    Also, were the people earlier in the thread serious about the Illuminatus book making sense? How far do you need to get through? Right to the end of the trilogy? Cos it still seems nonsensical to me...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)11:27 No.3553677
    Hmm... Now I'm wondering what a Nietzschean could do. Or a follower of Sartre... Oh hell, Determinists would be terrifying. both predicting and forcing action...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)11:44 No.3553784

    Speak for yourself, the one I'd be worried about would be the untrained stoner, bringing the universe in line with his now constant high.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)11:54 No.3553861
    Thinking on the events which inspire their Insights- For a trained philosopher, it would be a connection between idea and life, or something of the sort. A strange moment of synergy when reality lined up with their mind and it all made sense. For untrained thinkers, it would simply be a moment of idle contemplation (such as when one is sitting in a cafe, drinking a cup of tea) which suddenly lines up in the same way as a philosopher. However, Something disrupts this, leaving them with only a fragment remaining in their mind.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:07 No.3553911
    I hope this doesn't end up becoming that Dresden Codak thing.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:09 No.3553928
    "Holy shit god's dead. Fuck I spilled my tea."
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:21 No.3553993

    Joseph stared bitterly into his teacup, sitting in a run down service station cafe, with the rain pouring down outside. What was there more than this?

    And he suddenly knew. There was nothing more. There was no god, no objective morality, no limitation or support. Man was truly, utterly free, to be all they could be or to descend into the worst depths of decay. Everything was permitted, nothing was forbidden. He saw infinity, streaming out before him, and all the world made sense. He rose from his seat, wanting to scream it out for all the world to hear.

    He did scream, as the hot tea scalded his groin, the cup tipping over as he rose, placing his hands on the old and unsteady table. And he lost it. He lost it all. Even as one of the waitresses fussed over to him, proffering a towel, he simply stared, desperately trying to find that truth, that incredible freedom. But it was gone.

    He sighed, and ordered another cup of tea. He shoved his hand in his pocket, and drew out the exact change for the meal, even though, up until then, that pocket had been completely empty...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:22 No.3554008
    Running out into the streets in only a towel, screaming about how God is real?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:24 No.3554027
    This is why I think it should be more difficult to affect the outside world.

    Say, perhaps we should adopt Doubt as a power limiter and/or damage system. You may be able to unmake that bullet speeding at your brain, but the fact that it was there and you had to do so is a challenge to your worldview. Voila, induced doubt.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:24 No.3554028
    EF, every time I see your name, I smile, and every time I see it connected to a new game, I cry.

    One day I will drown you.
    You will choke on the saline, but even as the breath leaves your body, you will marvel at the wonderful taste of my despair. Mayhap it will inspire a final game concept, based entirely around inadvertently driving others to hopelessness and suicide... but for once, I won't have to hear about it.

    I'm off to get a new mason jar. Keep up the good work.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:28 No.3554061
    I love you man.
    My idea was a joke.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:37 No.3554106

    Eh, I was feeling creative, and It was fun to flesh it out a little
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:47 No.3554146
    I think the best way to handle it would be to make it a point buy system. You have to buy talents. This allows for a more customizable belief system rather than the class based philosphy wankfest this threatens to become.

    Also, I like the idea that every time you use certain powers or act against your belief system, you get Doubt points. If it gets high enough, you have to deal with it or bad shit happens.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:48 No.3554151
    how the fuck is having PTSD from being a war vet Emo Pain?

    People have emotions. Pathos and catharsis are not bad things.

    Elevating the negative ones to being better than the positive is stupid, but Summerland doesn't, its about deciding to keep going as you are being useful and hating yourself, or being able to join a family.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:54 No.3554173
    Thanks again
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:56 No.3554182

    Only semi-relevant to your point, but this is a philosophically focused thread. It has been argued, by Nietzsche among others, that positive emotions and experiences merely give happiness, comfort, and other such things, which are in the long run worthless. If everyone was always content, nothing would get done. Negative emotion and negative experience encourage action, and advancement. Necessity is the mother of invention, and necessity arises through adversity.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)12:58 No.3554196
    No need to rage, Summerland fa/tg/uy. I approve of that system as I do this nascent one. I was just describing it in glib terms as a point of analogy. Traipsing around the forest is no thinner than delusions of grandeur about having the key to life, the universe, and everything.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:09 No.3554256
    Perhaps you could have a belief score which you use to 'buy' powers? Instead of a doubt score, your belief score just decreases when your worldview is shaken.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:21 No.3554345
    Why not both? Belief determines what you can do and how well you do it, while Doubt is a measurement of costs of doing business in a world that seems determined to stymie your pursuit of the ultimate truth.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:24 No.3554365

    So Belief is a static score that increases at level up, and Doubt is like SAN, an accumulating penalty score that increases when you use your powers and that has to be removed with special procedures?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:30 No.3554405
    Ah, SAN score. I knew it sounded familiar. Yeah, something like that. Although I'm not sure it should increase every time you use a power. Just the ones that are really incongruous with the apparent nature of reality.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:32 No.3554423
    >To their disadvantage, all the "Real" philosophers want them dead, as anyone with an absolute answer will almost certainly put them out of a job

    Probably the most ridiculous thing ever.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:34 No.3554436
    You can't say it's not true.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:34 No.3554439

    Reminds me of this:

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:40 No.3554471
    Yeah I probably can. This "ultimate truth" clearly relates to the practical workings of the universe. That's science. Philosophers wouldn't give a shit. And even if it were philosophy, just because something is true and obviously so doesn't mean everyone believes it. Look at evolution.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:44 No.3554501

    ...Read the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Get the joke. Feel like a twat.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:48 No.3554524
    LOL 42

    Rest assured, I get the joke. But the philosphers in this setting would have to bear little to no resemblance to "real" philosophers at all for it to work. Make them more like cult leaders and then you've got something.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:51 No.3554547

    ...This entire thing is a joke. A parody. A fluting amusement of the imagination. Why the fuck are you taking it so seriously?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:53 No.3554564
    Yes, because people developing mysterious powers based on a dimly remembered glimpse of the eternal truth bears a great deal of resemblance to reality, doesn't it?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:56 No.3554578

    Happened to me just the other day.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:57 No.3554589
    Because this is fucking /tg/.

    Hey maybe we could have wizards except in this setting wizards are lobotomized monkeys with strongly acidic semen that jack off on their opponents.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)13:59 No.3554608

    You're not making sense. Come again.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:00 No.3554614

    what? You're just being an ass now. Seriously dude, calm down. What's with the vitriol?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:00 No.3554615
    Really? Welcome to the club. So what did you get as your ultimate truth? All I got was this shitty "numbers do not exist" bullcrap. Seriously, what the fuck am I gonna do with that?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:02 No.3554624
    Shoo, troll.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:03 No.3554630

    I got TIME CUBE




    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:03 No.3554634
    What vitriol? I'm just suggesting that the "philosophers" would be better thought of as cult leaders if they're really going to be hunting people down for positing physical theories and have enough influence and power to even to do that in the first place. They can still be called philosophers, but that's not what they are.

    It's a suggestion. It does not remove any comedy from the thing. Are we not allowed to put thought into things if they're intended to be humorous now?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:05 No.3554646

    You're reacting extremely badly to negative sentiments associated with your idea. Its not popular. Let it fall.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:07 No.3554653
    Why don't you use an actual argument based in something? No seriously, ANYTHING.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:08 No.3554658

    I hope you never play Metal Gear Solid 3. The main badguy organization there has a name that would give you an aneurism.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:09 No.3554670
    Mocking the views of others ("that's ridiculous", "that idea is equivalent to masturbating monkeys", "LOL SO RANDUM") is not usually the path to get your suggestions taken seriously. If you'd come in with a straightforward, well-reasoned suggestion that we take that out, we could've discussed it. But your initial approach ruined any chance of getting it accepted.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:11 No.3554680

    In the sense of "friends" or "lovers" of wisdom, the term isn't actually that off. They just aren't ACADEMIC philosophers.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:12 No.3554697


    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:14 No.3554706
    I think you're on to something here. This is a group that believes if we were to find out the ultimate truth, the human urge to gain wisdom would die out. As far as they are concerned, this is the worst tragedy that could befall us. To prevent it, they will stop at nothing.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:14 No.3554714
    Okay, I'm getting a lot of people misinterpreting what I'm saying here and I'm not really sure why. I'm sorry if I seem angry or vitriolic but to be honest this is fucking 4chan, it's a pleasant surprise if someone's NOT being an asshole.

    It's a fairly simple change and adds to the humor and danger of the setting. Make the philosophers cult leaders with a vague philosophical bent. The opponents would be planets of evil objectivists (redundant I know) who worship Ayn Rand instead of LOL THIS GUY IS PHILOSOPHER HE HATE TRUTH. Why is this a problem?

    Also see:

    >They can still be called philosophers, but that's not what they are.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:17 No.3554731
    Where's the opportunity for humor there, exactly? Seems the only humor is derived from a single ironic aspect.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:18 No.3554739
    Irony is funny.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:18 No.3554743

    Idea considered.

    Idea rejected.

    Reason: Needless alteration which simply confuses the setting.

    Next idea please?
    >> Viral 01/29/09(Thu)14:19 No.3554749
         File :1233256764.jpg-(21 KB, 225x379, SchrodCat1.jpg)
    21 KB
    I heard Universe Next Door.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:19 No.3554752

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:20 No.3554754
    I'm not sure why we're trying to make humor a critical element of judging the validity of including an element in this game. It's just inspired by a humorous text. Nor am I sure why we should take versimilitude in the character of any particular group as such either.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:22 No.3554768
    Anyways, enough rage. Any ideas what we're going to call the PCs as a group? Philosophers seems intuitive, but that's subject to the same confusion that's caused all this mess. The Enlightened? Seekers?
    >> Viral 01/29/09(Thu)14:25 No.3554782
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:25 No.3554786
    Link it to Socratic recollection, since it fits extremely well thematically.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:27 No.3554792
    I was going to suggest "The Returned" as a vague reference to Plato's cave allegory.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:28 No.3554795

    I'm liking these.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:29 No.3554806
    "Anamnesis" is the Greek word for this, with dual connotations of 'remembering' and 'forgetting'.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:31 No.3554812
    I wish one of these critics would fucking elaborate a bit more but okay. I guess the philosophers are just rich people hiring mercenaries and shit to kill the player? I assume they're not hunting the player down themselves, and they're not cult leaders, so that's really the only option. RICH PEOPLE CONSPIRE LIKE THEY DO IN EVERY OTHER SETTING is significantly less original and humorous than LOL LOOK AT THAT PLANET OF OBJECTIVISTS, SO STUPID or HOLY SHIT PHILOSOPHY COMMANDOS but whatever.

    Fine, I'll drop it. As a sign of good-will, I will toss out some more suggestions that I am less passionate and douchey about.

    - Throw in some elder gods or chaos demons, who are attracted to the character's vaguely divine status, or lawful neutral aliens/cults who can't stand the idea of mere mortals improving their lot in the universal hierarchy as additional opposing factions. Just the philosophers and government seems kind of weak.

    - Some characters could apply their extrauniversal understanding to superscience instead of altering reality on demand. This technology would be really advanced even by space-age standards, but since they only barely understand the theory behind it it's somewhat unreliable. As their understanding grows they are constantly rebuilding and fixing these machines, so they become more reliable as a character levels.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:33 No.3554821
    Personally I like the sound of "Glimpsers". They can have multiple names too, depending on how much whoever they're interacting with respects them.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:34 No.3554828

    No and no. You are adding unecessary elements. It would end up looking like a mish-mash. This is a conceptual game. The emphasis should be on the concept.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:36 No.3554836
    How do either of those fit thematically?

    They don't.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:37 No.3554841
    They don't have to have a set form. I think we'd be better off leaving the details of the Philosophy-Cult-Conspiracy to individual groups. Those who want philosophy commandos can go that route, those who want rich people conspiring can do that. I think this, like all EF-connected games, is going to work better as a sandbox sort of thing.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:38 No.3554850
    How is the emphasis not on the concept? It's just expanded. Nothing is unrelated to the concept. No mundane techie class, no alien beast-tamers, no psykers. Just instead of doing things like "aiming for the ground and missing" themselves, a player could instead choose to build machines that do similarly absurd things.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:39 No.3554854
    If there's a form of the word describing a person, we might be in business, here.

    I like both suggestions.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:41 No.3554859
    Why do we need to arbitrarily yes/no everything? Include all ideas, and let people choose.

    Also, going into an analysing specific parts of the setting, or powers, at this point is a bit silly. Lets get the basics done first, and then we can all go on a personal gush about our particular awesome individual unique ideas.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:41 No.3554860
    I don't know, how do either of those things relate to the concept of glimpsing beyond the veil and pissing people off in the process?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:41 No.3554866
    If we build the mechanics in a sufficiently generic, non-fluff dependent way, there's no reason for this not to be possible.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:43 No.3554870
    This. This fa/tg/uy is the voice of reason. Listen to him.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:45 No.3554876

    My point is they are arbitrary. They're no different from slapping on any other idea or element one might have. There is no cohesion. Cohesion is an important thing.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:45 No.3554877

    Wouldn't including any and all ideas leave a bloated corpse made from tl and dr, rather than something usable?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:49 No.3554902

    Suggesting a "universal hierarchy" pins down the metaphysics too much. Not to mention the addition of cliched/typical fantastic elements to what is otherwise not cliched/typical fantasy.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:50 No.3554911
    Lets stop the horseshit for a second?

    What are we calling the titular "Philosophers"?

    Lets get the basics sorted, and then move on logically and reasonably, rather than debating specifics which have no foundation and may, in fact, be invalidated by the very basics which Should get finished first.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:50 No.3554912
    The rejection is what's arbitrary. The system posited a game focused around doing goofy physically impossible stuff like in the HGttG series, someone suggested an additional path of advancement focused around making goofy physically impossible technology like in the HGttG series. How is that not cohesive? It's not like the concept has been done to death or anything, they're both unique and heavily related to each other.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:54 No.3554931
    Yeah I'm the one who made those suggestions and I'll partially agree with that, completely as far as elder gods and chaos demons are concerned, but Lawful Neutral aliens might just be delusional. There doesn't have to be an actual universal hierarchy, they might just think there's one and that fucking with it is blasphemy. Also gives an opportunity to poke fun at fundamentalists. The setting could use more diverse threats than just a government conspiracy and an intellectual conspiracy, a religious conspiracy works too.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:54 No.3554936
    I think the multiple-terms option is probably our best choice, though I lean heavily towards preferring Anamnetics for the primary 'rulebook' term.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:54 No.3554941
    I understood the HtGttG as being a reference point for the idea, not the core of the idea. The addition of SCIENCE! just seems to make the emphasis less metaphysical. Plus, wacky sci-fi tech has been done to death (whereas things like Arthut Dent's flying trick haven't).

    This'll be my last post regarding the suggestions.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:56 No.3554955
    Suggestions so far:

    The Returned




    The Enlightened

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:56 No.3554960
    Sounds good to me.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:57 No.3554965
    >but Lawful Neutral aliens might just be delusional. There doesn't have to be an actual universal hierarchy, they might just think there's one and that fucking with it is blasphemy.

    This I like.

    Especially considering the Kierkegaardian contrast between the Christian conception of truth (inaccessible to all humanity and must be found in a transcendent/immanent teacher God/Christ) and the Socratic conception of truth (the truth is accessible to all humanity by recollection and inwardness) is used, seeing a religious antagonist might be interesting.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:57 No.3554967
    The Returned
    The Enlightened


    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:58 No.3554976
    Fair enough.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:59 No.3554984
    Anamnetics sounds awesome. Not so fond of ''Glimpsers' or 'Seekers' considering how often the 'ers' suffix gets used (Sliders, Psykers, Espers)
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)14:59 No.3554989
    Or maybe it would be Anamnesics. Where's our Greekfags at?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:02 No.3555007
    It gets used often for a reason. Most occupations have an "er", an "ist", or a "man" at the end of them.
    Works fine for informal speech, though Anamnetics definitely works better as a more formal term.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:02 No.3555013

    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:04 No.3555024
    "I am... an Anamnetist."

    "Dude, shit sucks. Any idea how long it'll take you to get your memory back?"

    >> Xaras !pldw3xanYY 01/29/09(Thu)15:06 No.3555036
    "I am... an Anamnetist."

    "That's not funny, my brother died that way."
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:06 No.3555038
    post 55 post 54 post 53 post 52 post 51 post 50 post 49 post 48 post 47 post 46 post 45 post 44 post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:06 No.3555040
    How about this: Anamnetics is the discipline, and Anamnesics are the people.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:07 No.3555043
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:07 No.3555044
    post 56 post 55 post 54 post 53 post 52 post 51 post 50 post 49 post 48 post 47 post 46 post 45 post 44 post 43 post 42 post 41 post 40 post 39 post 38 post 37 post 36 post 35 post 34 post 33 post 32 post 31 post 30 post 29 post 28 post 27 post 26 post 25 post 24 post 23 post 22 post 21 post 20 post 19 post 18 post 17 post 16 post 15 post 14 post 13 post 12 post 11 post 10 post 9 post 8 post 7 post 6 post 5 post 4 post 3 post 2 post 1
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:08 No.3555054
    Sounds good.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:12 No.3555085
    So, Anamnetics is learnt through a glimpse of absolute truth, and the practice allows one to warp reality with thought, in line with their own philosophical outlook or personal view of reality (same thing really, but philosophical outlook is more formal, while personal perception less). What can it do? we need to work out some limits.
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:14 No.3555097
    I think I like the sound of this. So imagine you've stumbled upon the idea that all sentient life has the same soul. That after you die, you will be reincarnated as someone else, at a different point in time.

    By forcing yourself to remember a specific event, you may be capable of limited mind control. It'd go something like this:

    You're on the run from some Goons, dispatched by a well-published Guru from somewhere that uses too many vowels. You run down an alley, and another, and another, hoping to make them split up. Dead end. You turn around, and see that only two of them have followed you this far. They draw their guns.

    Roll Belief + Self + Metaphysics(or whatever)= SUCCESS! You manage to force a past-life regression on your attacker!

    The Goon on the left suddenly remembers that HE WAS YOU, and in that moment of panic, shoots his compatriot in order to save him/you.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:14 No.3555099
    Damn near anything, given sufficient Belief. Some uses may incur Doubt costs, however.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:17 No.3555127
    Can't be relied on, at least not early on. I feel like characters should be more similar to rogues than wizards. They have to escape from a broad range of dangerous situations, and there are two types of reality altering powers:

    1) Usable at will, reliable, and applied to specific situations (falling)

    2) Broadly applicable but unreliable, uncontrollable, and/or only usable once in a while
    >> Xaras !pldw3xanYY 01/29/09(Thu)15:18 No.3555132
    I was thinking about modern superstition of observation. Stuff like "the milk always boils when your looking the other way" and how errors never show when you have an expert looking at what you're doing.

    A Seeker might use this to his advantage by actually forcing effects by observing or not observing them, or having someone else observe them.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:19 No.3555135
    Right, excellent example. Perhaps we should use an opposed roll system? People, even ordinary ones, would have some resistance to you introducing your freaky ideas into their reality. And objects might have an Anchoring characteristic to the same end, reflecting how well they are tied into the parts of the ultimate truth that you don't know about.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:19 No.3555136
    Sounds fitting to me.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:19 No.3555139
    >we need to work out some limits.

    I think that there should be no hard limits. The catch is the player has to be able to rationalize sufficiently about what they want to do. The emphasis should be on making ontological and metaphysical inferences from a foundational glimpse rather than mechanically defined limits.

    I think the best limiting factor, if anything, should be temporal. Maintaining that sort of recollection puts a severe strain on a finite human being. The movements of metaphysics are not easy, and so cannot be maintained indefinitely. Most abilities should be 'events', singular instances like Dent's flying trick, rather than sustained manipulations.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:20 No.3555141
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:21 No.3555150
    The limit here being doubt costs (or something) resulting from remembering that time you were a goon who shot your friend.

    Something like hilarious miscast effects come into play?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:21 No.3555153
    >I think the best limiting factor, if anything, should be temporal. Maintaining that sort of recollection puts a severe strain on a finite human being. The movements of metaphysics are not easy, and so cannot be maintained indefinitely. Most abilities should be 'events', singular instances like Dent's flying trick, rather than sustained manipulations.

    I definitely agree with this.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:21 No.3555156
    Yeah, stuff like that would fall into the untrained Anamnesic's usual purview.
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:25 No.3555182
    "Time isn't a constant."

    By pushing Belief, your character can perform tasks at a faster pace. Provided that they have all the materials on-hand and the know-how, they could single-handedly assemble a working car from scrap in a matter of minutes. Or reduce travel time.

    Also, in the case of 'pushing your beliefs on others', in C.J. Carajella's Witchcraft (AFMBE rules, but with excessive magic) mundanes had minor magical protection called 'The Denial'. Basically, you -could- try to throw a fireball into the middle of a crowd of people, but their combined disbelief would cause it to fizzle out before it did any damage.

    Thus, normal people (NPCs that aren't Philosophers or whatever) should simply have a passive 'Denial' factor, which could even increase depending on how structured their lives are. (Cops and army people would have more Denial than say, stoners and the homeless.)
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:27 No.3555190
    This feels too much like Mage.
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:29 No.3555200
    Never played Mage. =P I was too busy being a howling eco-terrorist.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:32 No.3555219
    The entire concept is very Mage-y. But we can still make it our own.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:32 No.3555224
    >Thus, normal people (NPCs that aren't Philosophers or whatever) should simply have a passive 'Denial' factor, which could even increase depending on how structured their lives are. (Cops and army people would have more Denial than say, stoners and the homeless.)

    And, as per the Guide, it might be possible to abuse this Denial to masquerade things.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:33 No.3555233
    SEP fields, eh?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:34 No.3555236
    Well let's focus on how to make it distinct from Mage. What do we want to make different, for instance.

    I think dropping the Denial thing is best. We can differentiate from the 'perception/belief is reality' paradigm in Mage.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:36 No.3555248
    Agreed. So should we drop the opposed rolls altogether (except of course in the case of multi-Philosopher combat), or try a different explanation?
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:38 No.3555256
    Actually, I like that better. If you go 'NUMBERS HAVE NO MEANING' and hand someone a dollar bill, everyone will see that it says 100 on it, even though George Washington is still glaring bitterly.

    In my previous Soulhack example, a failure would mean that the Goon in question was simply you in an earlier life.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:40 No.3555274
    Against non-Anamnetic stuff, opposed rolls can be dropped. It's a question of the player coming up with a rationalization and the character succeeding in their recollection (which probably requires a roll).

    Against Anamnetics, opposed rolls would probably work out. Dropping opposed rolls works fine too. With the exception of contradicting effects, I'm not sure why one would need them.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:41 No.3555280
    So, target numbers based on how outlandish your stunt is?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:41 No.3555281
    no way, have have that picture....or did. nevermind.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:42 No.3555287
    Well, the Anamnesics gain their powers from their schools of philosophy, so maybe normal people have resistance powers from mundane schools of thought.
    >> Earthflame !98PcYIvlCI 01/29/09(Thu)15:44 No.3555305
    Holy fuck, you guys have really taken this idea places. Awesome! I'm gonna finish reading the book, and then see if there's anything I can add...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:50 No.3555333
    This brings up a question: how are we going to explain conflicting schools of thought? Imperfect recollection explains why people might have different focuses or central ideas, but it doesn't explain how contradictory effects might be derived from what is presumably a single absolute reality.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:52 No.3555356
    Hmm. I think they might actually believe what they expect to be there, as the big 1 on there is meaningless. So you'd have to tell them, "Here's a hundred bucks," to get them to actually think it's 100 bucks.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:52 No.3555359
    Might make the Anamnetics a bit overpowered. Do we really want them to be that strong? I'd like it better if they were differentiated from mages in that they're essentially mundane people with very specific powers based on absurd trains of thought rather than distinctly non-mundane people with the ability to work their will in very broad ways. If you're fighting someone smart enough to argue against whatever principle you're using (numbers have no meaning, time is relative, etc) then they should get bonuses against your powers so that you have to think of more creative ways to apply them. Glimpsers/ananmesics should be people with weird and occasionally very decisive abilities, not gods. An arcane trickster, not a wizard.

    One thing that should be decided is, does ignorance make someone more or less resistant to Glimpsing/Anamnetics? Are bible-thumpers and zealots easier or harder to affect with their powers? Personally I think it should make them less resistant so that the religious faction would be dangerous due to sheer numbers (with lower resistance to your abilities), the government faction would be dangerous due to superior tactics and technology (with average resistance to your abilities), and the intellectual faction would be dangerous due to high resistance against your powers.
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)15:52 No.3555360
    Give me an example?
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:54 No.3555377
    That is to say, all Anamnetics are presumably on the same essential side and aren't going to fight against each other very often, so we're going to want there to be enemies that can resist the player's powers without using said powers themselves.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)15:58 No.3555413
    Well, I think we're trying to deal with fundamental truths. It just seems that as you try to achieve more spectacular effects, you start to bump up against the other fundamental truths that you don't know about. So I think a target number system would work best.

    For example, if we were to use a d10 system.

    Affecting self = 2
    Affecting an external inanimate object = 3
    Affecting multiple external inanimate objects = 5
    Affecting another person=6
    Affecting multiple other persons=8
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:01 No.3555434

    That can be done without opposed rolls.

    Still, if we do introduce some ability to resist I don't think it should be based on the simple fact of belief or perception. Perhaps a view so fundamentally opposed to the Socratic view of truth would lead to this. Most mundane people wouldn't have this, and so wouldn't have resistance.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:01 No.3555437
    One way of looking at it is the Absolute, universal truth is so broad and wide reaching, it paradoxically includes all the fragments, in a logically impossible way. It is a truth beyond reason, beyond logic, beyond all this crap, and thus any apparent hypocrisy and difficulty between fragments doesn't actually matter.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:03 No.3555452
    Well, if we stick to the idea of limited, weird abilities, I think the conflict can be generated with perfectly normal enemies. Most anamnesics are not going to be soldiers, so if they're facing people with guns, they've got to come up with innovative ways to use their powers to escape, not just overrule whatever their enemies do.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:06 No.3555467
    So close-minded zealots would be harder to affect meaning that the religious faction would be more resistant to your powers and the government/mercenary factions would be better equipped and trained but have less resistance? I just want to make the type of enemy you're facing have a more direct impact on how you apply your powers.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:06 No.3555470
    I don't know enough about it to judge for myself, so how close are we to Unknown Armies?

    Sounds promising. Someone who can mesmerize with words isn't going to be effective if he's being shot at.
    >> Chaotic Cleric 01/29/09(Thu)16:07 No.3555476
    "I think. Therefore, I am. You don't think, therefore you don't."

    "You really believe that will work? I don't think-" *POOF*
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:11 No.3555502
    Or if being shouted down by a religious zealot, or strangled by a mutant space squid.
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:13 No.3555513
    200 posts is autosage, right? Somebody want to summarize and start a new thread? I would, but I've got to go...
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)16:39 No.3555727

    Seconded. Need New Thread!
    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)17:07 No.3555964
    New Thread

    >> Anonymous 01/29/09(Thu)18:06 No.3556497
    Read the scifi short story "Glory". I don't have the author on me at the moment, but it's in "The best scifi and fantasy of the year, 2008, volume 2" if it helps.

    Delete Post [File Only]
    Style [Yotsuba | Yotsuba B | Futaba | Burichan]