Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Kuildeous
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby Kuildeous » Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:03 am

ShirtlessOBrien wrote:So if I now understand your position, and I welcome correction if I don't, the best way to explain it is "understanding an out-of-axiom idea creates a contradiction", where understanding is just having a reasonable grasp of the basic ideas about how something works.


I'm no Dean, but here's my interpretation on it.

Yes, we can conceptualize out-of-axiom concepts like cyberware and fireballs and faith healing. As you point out, there are plenty of fictions to support this (including Torg itself).

But no one sane expects this stuff to work right now. We can imagine these things, but we don't expect them to happen. You can show me a cyberarm, and I could talk about how it interfaces with our neurons and how it can be mounted on our skeleton, but I could never expect it to work because it's above my Tech axiom.

The idea of Aysle Ords identifying a tank as a big metal box that moves on its own is simplified, and I can dig it. But I imagine that there may be a few Ords who can conceptualize it, but it still wouldn't work for them because their reality is that these things don't actually work. You can put a bunch of knobs and levers on a dashboard, but no Ayslish Ord is going to expect that pulling this lever will make the treads move.

And of course reality-rated characters go beyond that, and that Ayslish knight may not fully understand the inner workings of that tank, but he's comfortable enough with the notion that pushing that lever makes it go even though this is something not normally experienced in his cosm.
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

Infiniverse Exchange Word template – Infiniverse Exchange template for MS Word users

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 1927
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby TorgHacker » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:42 am

ShirtlessOBrien wrote:
So if I now understand your position, and I welcome correction if I don't, the best way to explain it is "understanding an out-of-axiom idea creates a contradiction", where understanding is just having a reasonable grasp of the basic ideas about how something works. The understanding you or I have of US civics or of iPhones, limited as it may be, is a contradiction in the Living Land. Whereas if we know Core Earth people make much silly talk, hold up hands, talk to shiny rock, that captures the same behaviour but it's not a contradiction. Similarly knowing how a tank works in Aysle is a contradiction but knowing Core Earth has magical metal chariots with no horses that shoot fireballs is not a contradiction. Is that about right?


Right.

ShirtlessOBrien wrote:2. Disconnection may play out slightly differently in different cases depending on what is specified in the module (e.g. disconnecting in the Living Land makes it impossible to understand how engines work at all, disconnecting in Orrorsh leaves you understanding how a car works but bad at driving one and the car won't start for you).


I'm still unclear on the official view this one. My revised headcanon is that since functioning internal combustion engines are Tech 18 but modern automobiles are Tech 19+ depending on the details, it follows that in Orrorsh you can understand "my internal combustion engine won't start" but you no longer remember anything about fuel injection and catalytic converters and your car almost certainly contains enough Tech 19+ elements that it will fail to run.


Right.


TorgHacker wrote:Denizens of other realities literally never even think about such things. Nobody in the Cyberpapacy even thought about time travel before they invaded Core Earth. It never even entered their minds. Even now, when they're told stories about it, Cyberpapacy denizens think it's ridiculous and then don't think about it much again.


Okay. So people are going to notice that in Japan now Pan-Pacifica has taken over all the people writing novels and movies and manga about FTL travel, nanotechnology, super-cybernetics, force fields, androids, teleportation, time travel and whatnot just stop, right? Because as soon as they disconnect, which won't take long, they "literally never even think about such things" again.



So I've been mulling this over, and while I think for the Cyberpapacy it makes sense, it doesn't for Pan-Pacifica. I almost get this feeling like certain 'types' of stories might be contradictory according to Social axiom, but it really doesn't matter much. But then I realized that the solution is right there in the introductory paragraph for the Tech axiom on page 233. Technology appears across many axioms, first theoretically, then crudely/unreliably and then practically, and then in a refined form.

So Core Earth and Pan-Pacifica can have time travel stories and the like, because they are 'theoretical' (actually even lesser hypothetical) but nobody actually thinks it can work. I suspect you wouldn't have such stories in the Cyberpapacy because of World Laws...specifically the Law of the One True Way, as opposed to an axiom.

So for Aysle or the Living Land the reason these things aren't ever even conceived of is that their Tech Axiom is so low these concepts aren't even hypothetical.



Do you have a strong opinion either way on whether the lack of imagination in the invading cosms is because the High Lords have sucked up all the fun, or more because Core Earth is just super special? As far as I recall the fiction mostly supports the latter, but the former raises the stakes and makes the High Lords even more villainous and in need of a punching. It's a pretty depressing multiverse if we're the only cosm amongst trillions where people can make things up.


I do have a strong opinion that Core Earth is special because of the variety of stories we tell. For instance, I can see say, Lord of the Rings not being written in Pan-Pacifica because of a low Magic Axiom.

But in a practical sense, this really isn't something that matters that much.
Dean Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America

Kuildeous
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby Kuildeous » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:59 am

TorgHacker wrote:I suspect you wouldn't have such stories in the Cyberpapacy because of World Laws...specifically the Law of the One True Way, as opposed to an axiom.


This site is dead serious (http://capalert.com/), but some of the reasoning of why movies are bad can seem outlandish.

For example, Alice in Wonderland gets dinged as an offense to God due to its "impossible fantasy imagery, deeds and events throughout". The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe gets dinged as offensive due to "half man, half horse and many other mythological creatures such as a man with a goat's head as characters". Star Wars had "portrayal that Anakin was a virgin birth". And, well, you can imagine the grocery list of offenses in the Harry Potter movies.

It's interesting to think that the Law of the One True Way could actually make these movies contradictions. It's something I had never considered before. Of course, different people have different notions of what would be truly offensive to God, but that's why there a Law of the One True Way.

Now to work into my campaign smuggling Star Wars movies into Spain and France.
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

Infiniverse Exchange Word template – Infiniverse Exchange template for MS Word users

User avatar
MalicWanderer
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby MalicWanderer » Mon Sep 18, 2017 6:00 pm

TorgHacker wrote:So I've been mulling this over, and while I think for the Cyberpapacy it makes sense, it doesn't for Pan-Pacifica. I almost get this feeling like certain 'types' of stories might be contradictory according to Social axiom, but it really doesn't matter much. But then I realized that the solution is right there in the introductory paragraph for the Tech axiom on page 233. Technology appears across many axioms, first theoretically, then crudely/unreliably and then practically, and then in a refined form.

So Core Earth and Pan-Pacifica can have time travel stories and the like, because they are 'theoretical' (actually even lesser hypothetical) but nobody actually thinks it can work. I suspect you wouldn't have such stories in the Cyberpapacy because of World Laws...specifically the Law of the One True Way, as opposed to an axiom.

So for Aysle or the Living Land the reason these things aren't ever even conceived of is that their Tech Axiom is so low these concepts aren't even hypothetical.

[...]

I do have a strong opinion that Core Earth is special because of the variety of stories we tell. For instance, I can see say, Lord of the Rings not being written in Pan-Pacifica because of a low Magic Axiom.

But in a practical sense, this really isn't something that matters that much.

I really like this idea, and extending the sort of axiom 'spread' that Tech has to other axioms (if perhaps to a lesser extent.) It's also easy to imagine Core Earth having a "minor world law" that basically says they can make fiction stories with anything, no matter how far past their own axioms it is. You're right it doesn't really have much impact on the game-rules but I think it's great for helping to set the tone of invading realms. To go back to the manga example, the giant battle robots and cyberninjas might still be doing fine, but the entire Magical Girl genre might be in some big trouble.

User avatar
TiaMaster
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:45 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby TiaMaster » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:03 pm

► Show Spoiler


FIrst, I would like to say that while I believe in being respectful, nobody in this thread said anything insulting or offensive, and if you took it that way, you are too sensitive. People should be able to state that they think you're opinion is ridiculous without worrying you will quit the conversation. And to be clear, I am not just talking about Dean, this has happened before with others. Its just even more so when you take into account customer service about a product that is being sold to customers. And when it comes to forums especially...

But then it was put forth that Dean is NOT in fact community manager, or even involved in customer service. This makes a difference. While I do think he should act in a way befitting someone involved with the product, because he is here by his own volition he should be allowed consideration when he says or does things that people don't agree with. Just need to remember that he doesn't have to answer your questions or even respond.
So I would like to say something I wouldn't normally - thanks for being here Dean.

However this means I am slightly disappointed that we do not here from Darrell like I believe we should. HE should be the one leading the charge.

About the above quote, it clearly explains to me what I just didn't see before. NOW, I get it.
This goes to show that extended dialogue is not necessarily a bad thing, so those that think the conversation should have stopped are wrong, and need to keep this in mind when they would like to extend their opinion on someone just stopping posting about a view that they believe in.

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:23 pm

TorgHacker wrote:So I've been mulling this over, and while I think for the Cyberpapacy it makes sense, it doesn't for Pan-Pacifica. I almost get this feeling like certain 'types' of stories might be contradictory according to Social axiom, but it really doesn't matter much. But then I realized that the solution is right there in the introductory paragraph for the Tech axiom on page 233. Technology appears across many axioms, first theoretically, then crudely/unreliably and then practically, and then in a refined form.

So Core Earth and Pan-Pacifica can have time travel stories and the like, because they are 'theoretical' (actually even lesser hypothetical) but nobody actually thinks it can work. I suspect you wouldn't have such stories in the Cyberpapacy because of World Laws...specifically the Law of the One True Way, as opposed to an axiom.

So for Aysle or the Living Land the reason these things aren't ever even conceived of is that their Tech Axiom is so low these concepts aren't even hypothetical.


Now I've got another thing that confuses me to iron out. Pan-Pacifica is Tech 24 but can imagine FTL and giant mecha just fine, but the Cyberpapacy is Tech 26 and people literally can't imagine Tech 27. I don't see how this falls logically out of The Law of the One True Way because that is specifically about other religions not being able to work miracles, not about what is seen to be technologically possible. It doesn't even make believing in other religions impossible, and the law text itself says the Cyberpapacy has Muslims, Jews, Hindus and whatnot, they just can't do miracles (unless they have Reality skill).

I mean, it's funny. I love the idea of a Cyberpriest with a cyberhead and a laser gun and a techno-cross saying "Intelligent androids? Bah! Impossible! Science fiction!". But I don't see how we're meant to derive that outcome from anything written anywhere.

It seems like in "the fiction" or designer headcanon there's a sort of fifth meta-axiom with a +/- range of allowable thought, and the +/- range is huge for Core Earth, at least +/-21, it is zero for the Cyberpapacy and the Living Land, and at least +/-6 for Pan-Pacifica.

Eric USNA
Posts: 667
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 1:04 am

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby Eric USNA » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:44 pm

TiaMaster wrote:FIrst, I would like to say that while I believe in being respectful, nobody in this thread said anything insulting or offensive, and if you took it that way, you are too sensitive. People should be able to state that they think you're opinion is ridiculous without worrying you will quit the conversation. And to be clear, I am not just talking about Dean, this has happened before with others. Its just even more so when you take into account customer service about a product that is being sold to customers. And when it comes to forums especially...


Okay, things are mostly moving along smoothly, but I just want to jump in here and clarify a couple of things in this paragraph.

1) On this forum (and ideally in life, but I don't moderate life), no one ever gets to decide when someone else is being too sensitive. If someone is bothered or offended by something you've written, you revise your tone and try again, or you just stop conversing with that person. Because that's how civility works. If it's not something that would cause you or even a majority of people to be offended, that doesn't matter. If you're trying to actually talk to someone instead of make them angry, you work with them rather than berating them for not conforming to your sensibilities.

2) Let me say this again - Selling a product and even offering forums for discussion of that product does not obligate us to listen to whatever insults customers want to throw around. I do a lot to make things happen for customers who have a wide variety of requests. I will work with people who are polite, or confused, or frustrated, or whatever. I'm happy to help, and I understand the range of emotions that people face. But anyone who has ever worked in customer service knows that there comes a point where you wrap up the call or just tell the customer to their face that there is nothing more you can do. Knowing when that point is reached is part of my job.

Now, let's go on.

TiaMaster wrote:But then it was put forth that Dean is NOT in fact community manager, or even involved in customer service. This makes a difference. While I do think he should act in a way befitting someone involved with the product, because he is here by his own volition he should be allowed consideration when he says or does things that people don't agree with. Just need to remember that he doesn't have to answer your questions or even respond.
So I would like to say something I wouldn't normally - thanks for being here Dean.


Agreed. The fact that Dean is here answering questions definitely saves me a lot of extra work and time so that I can concentrate on other things. I very much appreciate it.

TiaMaster wrote:However this means I am slightly disappointed that we do not here from Darrell like I believe we should. HE should be the one leading the charge.


Well...there's a lot of discussion here, and we would like Darrell to keep working on writing books and developing upcoming Kickstarters. If we forced him to hang around here as much as Dean does, it would definitely slow our production schedule. I know for a fact that Dean shares any questions from the forums that he is unable to answer, so just think of Dean as the voice of the developers (which he is).

TiaMaster wrote:About the above quote, it clearly explains to me what I just didn't see before. NOW, I get it.
This goes to show that extended dialogue is not necessarily a bad thing, so those that think the conversation should have stopped are wrong, and need to keep this in mind when they would like to extend their opinion on someone just stopping posting about a view that they believe in.


Sure, but did you notice how the tone shifted after my post? Next time, let's try to START there, and I think the conversations will be more productive overall. :)

-Your friendly neighborhood Spi- I mean...administrator

Kuildeous
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby Kuildeous » Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:00 pm

ShirtlessOBrien wrote:I mean, it's funny. I love the idea of a Cyberpriest with a cyberhead and a laser gun and a techno-cross saying "Intelligent androids? Bah! Impossible! Science fiction!". But I don't see how we're meant to derive that outcome from anything written anywhere.

It seems like in "the fiction" or designer headcanon there's a sort of fifth meta-axiom with a +/- range of allowable thought, and the +/- range is huge for Core Earth, at least +/-21, it is zero for the Cyberpapacy and the Living Land, and at least +/-6 for Pan-Pacifica.


Honestly, I don't see where this would be relevant in over 99% of the games out there. Is it a hardship to just accept this as official and then ignore it for your game if it doesn't make sense to you? Is it really going to be a sticking point in your plot?

FWIW, I disagree slightly with what Dean said, but it's also something that isn't going to come up in my game. I'd be surprised if it comes up in more than a handful of games. There's a reason it had to be ruled in the forum; it wasn't important enough to include in the rulebook.
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

Infiniverse Exchange Word template – Infiniverse Exchange template for MS Word users

User avatar
ShirtlessOBrien
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby ShirtlessOBrien » Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:53 pm

Kuildeous wrote:
ShirtlessOBrien wrote:It seems like in "the fiction" or designer headcanon there's a sort of fifth meta-axiom with a +/- range of allowable thought, and the +/- range is huge for Core Earth, at least +/-21, it is zero for the Cyberpapacy and the Living Land, and at least +/-6 for Pan-Pacifica.


Honestly, I don't see where this would be relevant in over 99% of the games out there.


That's okay. To me, the effects of the reality change on people's world and minds is what is actually interesting about the setting. I aim more for Die Hard than Iron Eagle, but if you like Iron Eagle I'm not going to try to yuk your yum.

Is it a hardship to just accept this as official and then ignore it for your game if it doesn't make sense to you?


I've already explained my interest in the topic, as have others. If you aren't interested, is it a hardship to hit the back button on your browser?

Is it really going to be a sticking point in your plot?


I want to know what happens when you talk to Ords, in just the same way that if I am running a zombie game I want to know the exact rules for zombies in this game - do they run, how does the disease spread, how long does it take to turn into a zombie? When you disconnect, what happens? How do you think now? What can you no longer think or do or understand because you can't create contradictions?

FWIW, I disagree slightly with what Dean said, but it's also something that isn't going to come up in my game. I'd be surprised if it comes up in more than a handful of games. There's a reason it had to be ruled in the forum; it wasn't important enough to include in the rulebook.


That depends on the kind of game you are running. If it's more at the "lol pew pew nothing matters" end of the spectrum sure, it doesn't matter. If it's more at the "what would it really be like if this happened?" end of the spectrum it matters a lot if people's minds change a lot when they disconnect and how. I don't think there's anything wrong with either approach.

User avatar
TorgHacker
Posts: 1927
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: Clarification about zones, transformation and Day One LL adventure

Postby TorgHacker » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:28 pm

Kuildeous wrote:
Honestly, I don't see where this would be relevant in over 99% of the games out there. Is it a hardship to just accept this as official and then ignore it for your game if it doesn't make sense to you? Is it really going to be a sticking point in your plot?

FWIW, I disagree slightly with what Dean said, but it's also something that isn't going to come up in my game. I'd be surprised if it comes up in more than a handful of games. There's a reason it had to be ruled in the forum; it wasn't important enough to include in the rulebook.


So, I want to clarify a bit here.

As Kuildeous says, this really is not something at all that was important to be included in the rulebook. What I've said here is 'official' in that I kinda got designated the 'reality guy' by the design crew so I've thought a fair bit about it. But I haven't discussed any of this with Darrell...largely because we don't need to at this point. It's not important enough to be put in writing and it's interesting in a 'how many angels dance on the head of pin' manner that Torg reality discussions can get.

Also, I've only really been considering the 'story' aspects beyond Core Earth since it was brought up here. So it hasn't been put through much rigor yet.

I think I've mentioned what our philosophy is with regards to thinking about reality. It's "what do we want to happen" not "let's come up with some rules and discover the consequences" which is more like philosophy. While that is certainly fun, it isn't conducive for writing rules for a game.

Part of the issue was that I knew in the back of my brain that there was a reason for thinking the way I was thinking, but couldn't recall what that was. And that reason was that there is a range of hypothetical to theoretical to on the cusp to actualization when it comes to tech...but I think it would be valid to also apply that to magic, miracles, social systems and psionics, even though we didn't explicitly say so.

Though I still think the sheer variety of stories is still a Core Earth 'thing'. I'll address the Cyberpapacy issue next.
Dean Gilbert
Torg Eternity designer
Ulisses North America


Return to “Rules Questions (TORG)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest