If you want floating cities or undead war beasts you have to wait till Magic.
To paraphrase Chris Rock "To Mages the sky's the limit, to psions the limits the sky"
I imagine that the Blue Age was the Age of Technology on Athas.
One of the cool things about Athas is the regression of it's civilization. Green Age was presented as more or less a typical fantasy setting, the Modern Age smacks more like Ancient History with one city state or another depicted like the Babylonians or Incans. And with tribes like the Silt Stalkers and cannibal halflings running around, it seems Athas is getting even more savage.
The Green Age has the longest period of time on Athas... about 9k years from the rebirth to the introduction of Magic by Rajaat to the world. And then 1500 years from then until the start of the cleansing wars.
The Rhulisti had technology in the form of Lifeshaping. The Messenger was an artificial satellite, the lifeshaped items are presented like devices. Hints here and there. (For a collection of every single canon reference to the Blue Age, look here.)
I would guess that apart from the quickly disintegrating Rhulisti culture, the Rebirth races were basically starting from scratch. So depending on when you look, The Green Age could look like The Stone Age, Bronze Age, Medieval, Wuxia, or Psionic Punk(as defined by Manyfist). And once Rajaat throws in Magic, who knows what repercussions that had on society...
I love trying to piece together the Green Age, because most of the Undead you meet are going to at least be from the Cleansing Wars.
I think that Psionic would have reached it's peak just before Rajaat introduced Magic. Maybe in the last pre-magic Green Age King's Age, would there have been psionically driven flying cars. But remember that Athas has always been a metal poor world. I think that an psionic Wuxia or Exalted RPG-esque situation would be more likely.
The DS books seem to hint at a quasi industrial age society with psionic empowered vehicles and trains.
There is a dichotmony in the reference material: There were no psi-powered vehicules per say but rather underground highways equiped with one specific type of psi-powered ferry meant to go back and forth across the highway....so we have a costly underground highway system and psi-ferry made accessible to all who wished to use them yet in other fields such modernism was absent: Other forms of technology, government, laws, ideals, and ways of life were not industrial-age or even pre, again according to the reference material. "City-states", as defined in the encyclopedia, seemed to reign supreme even at the eight of that period.
The accounts of Green Age psionics in CbtSS and MLotLS do not match those of Eberron's high magic period known as the Age of Giants, or Faerûn's Netheril, coming far short of it in their exploits. Modern day's Psionatrix and its potential to blanket all of the planet in a psionic field is already greater than any account I can remember about Green Age psionics.
Someone once talked about how much metal was used up during WWII and how that was a short war in comparison. I am all for more metal in the past.
That makes sense. Another point is that Athas has more than 10,000 years of intense metal mining, and that the tablelands area is the cradle of the planet's civilization much like the middle east is in our own world, when you take Tyr'agi and the Pristine Tower into consideration.
Yet another point is that on our planet, the areas that Dark Sun calls "stony barrens" correspond roughly to what others call scablands, i.e. solid basalt, areas where the ground's been stripped down by erosion clear down to the oceanic basalt, and no one cuts through basalt to mine. Most of the area's minable metals have probably long ago been mined up or blown away, turned to rust powder and blown into the sea of silt.
underground psi-ferry? What.. like a subway in New York? I mean, New Tyr? :P
Ruins in the ringing moutains. Wonder if there was ever mutch in the hinterlands. Athasian geography doesn't make much sense though. Looks like I was wrong see the below post. Knew it was somewhere there doh.
underground psi-ferry?
Guistenal and Saragar both had vast underground tunnels where psi-powered ferries - taking the form of grand ivory plates - took off with psi-conductor and passengers, and safely accelerated to great speeds within the tunnel, providing unhindred, fast, all-day round travel through great distances.
I guess the richest cities of the Green Age - Saragar, Guistenal, perhaps others - had such tunnels linking them to neighboring communities, or so seems to indicate the MLotLS map and the CbtSS accounts made by the intelligent psionic orb.
Someone once talked about how much metal was used up during WWII and how that was a short war in comparison. I am all for more metal in the past.
Interesting point.
I guess I usually go with thinking that Athas was metal poor because for iron to be SO rare in the Modern Age, metal couldn't have been at real-life earth levels 6 or 7 thousand years ago. (Unless there was a giant plague of Rust Monsters.)
But with 14,000+ years of civilization... Ending in 3000 years of constant war (Purge of the Preservers to The Imprisonment of Rajaat) I guess that would use up allot of metal...
Lets say Aprox (Making up) that the earth is 50% Metal
Now take look at Athas, it had 15% Metal.
During the Green (maybe Blue) age Dwarves mined and mined Metal made suits of armor, weapons...etc. This was for an estimate of 9k years? Not to mention the Champions Of Rajaat had to use metal for their genocidal missions (Supplying Human armies). Now lets say modern age Athas has 2% Metal left. This is why Athas is a Metal poor planet.
(I could be wrong, but who really knows?)
we've probably covered most of what we would find in the core materials, but, since we're in 3e, and have access to epic psionics... what would YOU as players and DM's add into a green age setting as far as epic psionics go???
What wouldn't I do? Just using existing things: Strike forces connected by mindlink. dimensional swap on combatants. Creation sites that make food and supplies. Floating vehicles. And then take the Guardian psionic orbs and you have wonderful weapon platforms, capable of mass destruction. Mass teleportation devices to quicken trade routes. I have some really cool ideas for armors that blend magic and psionics (for use by the champions’ armies during the CW). Lots of Ideas, but trying to keep them in the Darksun feel.
I have some really cool ideas for armors that blend magic and psionics (for use by the champions’ armies during the CW). Lots of Ideas, but trying to keep them in the Darksun feel.
Share them!
I would have the majority of the population not being Psionic. Armies would have large Obsidian Orb devices that would bring large morale effects to the field. I like the mind linked squad idea, but it would have to be instigated by individuals to keep with my idea that the majority of the population would not be Psionic. Well more common then most D&D worlds of course...
I would have a large psionic warrior society based on duels and self-improvement. (See wuxia films al-la Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
I would have the Psionic Orbs that were talked about in Mind Lords be prevalent in the more advanced societies, but other nations would not utilize them for moral reasons.
I would have psionic clairvoyant cabals in service to the ruling governments (kings for early green age) that would do nothing but spy on neighboring nations remotely. Of course those cabals could sense other nations psionically spying as well and would would have something of a Clairvoyant Cold War.
By the time Rajaat brought preserving magic into the picture, I would say that the peak of the psionic age was already in something of a slump. I would say this because if psionic devices were so advanced as to have a world wide network of underground subway tunnels (see mind lords again) Magic would be neat, maybe useful, but nothing worthy of the revolution that is implied. Maybe what happened to Saragar was something of a trend in late Green Age society and there were insane psionic overlords popping up all over and sort of grinding down progress and when Rajaat revealed Magic, it was seen as a liberating force and was used to 'shake up' society and bring down oppressive psionic regimes.
The late Green Age before the Time of Magic could have been on the cusp of an industrial age, and the introduction of Magic short circuited that development as people wanted to pick up magic rather then invent new technologies with Psionic Orbs.
Share them!
I would have the majority of the population not being Psionic. Armies would have large Obsidian Orb devices that would bring large morale effects to the field. I like the mind linked squad idea, but it would have to be instigated by individuals to keep with my idea that the majority of the population would not be Psionic. Well more common then most D&D worlds of course...
This is easy. Linked armor allows for communication between wearers. You can do this with rings too.
I would have a large psionic warrior society based on duels and self-improvement. (See wuxia films al-la Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon)
This is something that could definately happen. Psychic Warriors are great.
I would have the Psionic Orbs that were talked about in Mind Lords be prevalent in the more advanced societies, but other nations would not utilize them for moral reasons.
I use them like no ones business. I believe them to be used heavily in the CW. I have some things in development (but Lost Cities is my top priority) that allows for constructs that would house Psychic Warrior Guardians to walk around and fight.
I would have psionic clairvoyant cabals in service to the ruling governments (kings for early green age) that would do nothing but spy on neighboring nations remotely. Of course those cabals could sense other nations psionically spying as well and would would have something of a Clairvoyant Cold War.
You wouldn't need Cabals. Epic Psions could create intelligent, non-living psionic entities that are able to do the same thing, but are loyal to you. With Epic Psionics, why bend life or retrain life when you can make it.
By the time Rajaat brought preserving magic into the picture, I would say that the peak of the psionic age was already in something of a slump. I would say this because if psionic devices were so advanced as to have a world wide network of underground subway tunnels (see mind lords again) Magic would be neat, maybe useful, but nothing worthy of the revolution that is implied. Maybe what happened to Saragar was something of a trend in late Green Age society and there were insane psionic overlords popping up all over and sort of grinding down progress and when Rajaat revealed Magic, it was seen as a liberating force and was used to 'shake up' society and bring down oppressive psionic regimes.
I think psionics would become something coveted. Something only the rich could afford to train in. Rajaat would teach magic to anyone, so the masses flocked to this "free" new source of power.
Someone once talked about how much metal was used up during WWII and how that was a short war in comparison. I am all for more metal in the past.
That'd be me; wish I knew what thread that was as there was a lot of discussion about metal usage, as well as other related things, that'd directly relate to this thread. In a nutshell, organic materials (including people) are a renewable resource, while metals and many other minerals necessary for fighting a war are not. The Green Age was likely "high fantasy" even when it came to metal, although psionics definitely played a greater role in everyday society than they do in most fantasy settings and, as has been discussed, would have changed the dynamics of materials useage. The fact that obsidian is such a potent material on athas, both for use with psionics as well as magic, also probably had a great impact on the Green Age - much of the mining industry might have been sunk into the obsidian market, and perhaps it wasn't until the CW that metal became necessary enough for "big time" mining to occur.
Just another thought. ;)
Guistenal and Saragar both had vast underground tunnels where psi-powered ferries - taking the form of grand ivory plates - took off with psi-conductor and passengers, and safely accelerated to great speeds within the tunnel, providing unhindred, fast, all-day round travel through great distances.
I guess the richest cities of the Green Age - Saragar, Guistenal, perhaps others - had such tunnels linking them to neighboring communities, or so seems to indicate the MLotLS map and the CbtSS accounts made by the intelligent psionic orb.
There are notes scattered around the various DS materials that discuss this, and AFAIK these tunnels were actually built into the bedrock itself and so likely still exist in various parts of Athas. I've used them in several of my DS games, not only as a general "why is there a dungeon in the middle of nowhere?" explanation for some underground adventuring but also as noteworthy plot elements in some campaigns. In one adventure, for instance, I used one of these tunnels (with a somewhat-working psi-platform) as a unique means of getting the PCs to a specific set of ruins in the Ringing Mountains.
That makes sense. Another point is that Athas has more than 10,000 years of intense metal mining, and that the tablelands area is the cradle of the planet's civilization much like the middle east is in our own world, when you take Tyr'agi and the Pristine Tower into consideration.
Yet another point is that on our planet, the areas that Dark Sun calls "stony barrens" correspond roughly to what others call scablands, i.e. solid basalt, areas where the ground's been stripped down by erosion clear down to the oceanic basalt, and no one cuts through basalt to mine. Most of the area's minable metals have probably long ago been mined up or blown away, turned to rust powder and blown into the sea of silt.
Although Athas is basically a water world gone bad, during the Green Age it was covered in forests, lakes, and other "normal" styles of terrain - so to so extend there must have been "more" to the geography than the currently existing bedrock and salt flats. Since we know that defiling leeches everything from the soil, it's possible that the current geographical situation has a lot more to do with rampant defiling during the Cleansing Wars then most think. I think that this line of thought, combined with the "WWII comparison" idea, probably account for both the loss of metals as well as the current prevalence of stony barrens on Athas.
Er...I just realized this doesn't have anything to do with psionics on Athas. How the heck did we get onto this topic? :P
Er...I just realized this doesn't have anything to do with psionics on Athas. How the heck did we get onto this topic? :P
Because talking about Green Age Psionics is also talking about Psionic Orbs and devices. Which is talking about their technology and what extent psionics took the place of things that are metal and industry in a typical fantasy campaign.
So it seems that we are in a sort of consensus that the progression of psionics and psionic orbs in the Green Age increased until Rajaat revealed Magic to the people.
Do you think that near the end of the pre-magic era did the availability of psionic devices and orbs create an ease of life that would rival our industrial age? There's a Meorty picture in Monstrous Compendium 2 in a Renaissance-style dress. If that dress indicates the level of culture in the Green Age similar to our own, then it would follow that would be an trade route system and some industry to support a trade in exotic goods, and specialized labor.
So when you think about Renaissance Europe with at least 15 different races and a dwindling metal supply, how do you think psionics would effect the culture? I REALLY like the idea that Magic took hold so well because Master level Psionics and psionic training required was the province of the wealthy and gifted and Rajaat taught Preserving to EVERYONE. So would Psionic Warriors, Soul Knives and Wilders be relatively common, but Psions be only from the upper classes?
Although Athas is basically a water world gone bad, during the Green Age it was covered in forests, lakes, and other "normal" styles of terrain - so to so extend there must have been "more" to the geography than the currently existing bedrock and salt flats. Since we know that defiling leeches everything from the soil, it's possible that the current geographical situation has a lot more to do with rampant defiling during the Cleansing Wars then most think. I think that this line of thought, combined with the "WWII comparison" idea, probably account for both the loss of metals as well as the current prevalence of stony barrens on Athas.
My guess is that the serious defiling actually started in the anti-preserver Jihad. Put those two wars together and we've accounted for most of the ruin, IMO. But don't forget the Dragon! Or the obsidian cataclysm, or the changing of the sun.
Defiling ruins the soil and probably the structure as well since many types of plant life prevent erosion. Obviously not every inch of land was defiled in those stony barrens, but once you knock big holes in the structure, natural erosion takes care of the rest.
Do you think that near the end of the pre-magic era did the availability of psionic devices and orbs create an ease of life that would rival our industrial age? There's a Meorty picture in Monstrous Compendium 2 in a Renaissance-style dress. If that dress indicates the level of culture in the Green Age similar to our own, then it would follow that would be an trade route system and some industry to support a trade in exotic goods, and specialized labor.
So when you think about Renaissance Europe with at least 15 different races and a dwindling metal supply, how do you think psionics would effect the culture? I REALLY like the idea that Magic took hold so well because Master level Psionics and psionic training required was the province of the wealthy and gifted and Rajaat taught Preserving to EVERYONE. So would Psionic Warriors, Soul Knives and Wilders be relatively common, but Psions be only from the upper classes?
I think you're half-right here - it wasn't that psionics was the province of the rich, it's that it requires so much work to do whereas magic appears to be a much quicker route to power...especially once you figure out how to defile. It may take years of intense training and meditation before someone could manifest the easiest of powers, while even acolyte mages could probably begin casting their first cantrips within the first year of training. For most races - and especially humans - the speed with which they could see results with magic was probably the deciding factor as to why it took hold so quickly and "pushed out" psionics.
In the end, the advent of magic probably had a similar effect on society as, say, going from the bronze to the iron age; it was an additional tool with new uses above and beyond what the people could already do, and so revolutionized society...but it didn't necessarily "better" it on a major scale, just changed the dynamics. I think that the Green Age probably was a lot like
Renaissance-era Europe, as you put it...just with a major psionic twist. But when you really get down to it I don't think you can compare psionics (or even magic), and what they can do for society, to historical earth. There were probably major trade routes, perhaps even flying devices of one sort or another...but it all relied on having an infrastructure of psionic orbs in place, many psions and other psionic-wielding individuals, and enough people to upkeep this system. When you then throw in magic the dynamics change, and people have to adapt to a new way of living - which they do - but since this was all brought about by Rajaat there's a good chance that from the get-go he plotted out how, in the long run, these changes would work to his benefit and make the Cleansing Wars that much easier to start and, in theory, end.
My guess is that the serious defiling actually started in the anti-preserver Jihad. Put those two wars together and we've accounted for most of the ruin, IMO. But don't forget the Dragon! Or the obsidian cataclysm, or the changing of the sun.
Defiling ruins the soil and probably the structure as well since many types of plant life prevent erosion. Obviously not every inch of land was defiled in those stony barrens, but once you knock big holes in the structure, natural erosion takes care of the rest.
Yup, agreed. And that's why I think there was probably a booming metal mining industry during the Green Age, metal was in common use, and it wasn't until the Cleansing Wars that it faded away - at that point in time Athas was enough like Earth that there's really no basis for stating that it's a "metal poor world," it's just that in the millenia since the geography has changed so much that *now* it's a metal-poor world.
I think you're half-right here - it wasn't that psionics was the province of the rich, it's that it requires so much work to do whereas magic appears to be a much quicker route to power...especially once you figure out how to defile. It may take years of intense training and meditation before someone could manifest the easiest of powers, while even acolyte mages could probably begin casting their first cantrips within the first year of training. For most races - and especially humans - the speed with which they could see results with magic was probably the deciding factor as to why it took hold so quickly and "pushed out" psionics.
In the end, the advent of magic probably had a similar effect on society as, say, going from the bronze to the iron age; it was an additional tool with new uses above and beyond what the people could already do, and so revolutionized society...but it didn't necessarily "better" it on a major scale, just changed the dynamics. I think that the Green Age probably was a lot like
Renaissance-era Europe, as you put it...just with a major psionic twist. But when you really get down to it I don't think you can compare psionics (or even magic), and what they can do for society, to historical earth. There were probably major trade routes, perhaps even flying devices of one sort or another...but it all relied on having an infrastructure of psionic orbs in place, many psions and other psionic-wielding individuals, and enough people to upkeep this system. When you then throw in magic the dynamics change, and people have to adapt to a new way of living - which they do - but since this was all brought about by Rajaat there's a good chance that from the get-go he plotted out how, in the long run, these changes would work to his benefit and make the Cleansing Wars that much easier to start and, in theory, end.
That makes me wonder about how sophisticated and structured Green Age Psionics got. I think that the current state of Psionics is a meager shadow of what was once possible.
Brax has written a bunch about Taradanian Psionics. What supplement is that in again?
I'm looking forward to Kal's work in the Appendix II.
What's that going to be about??
What's that going to be about??
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=709116
:embarrass
That makes me wonder about how sophisticated and structured Green Age Psionics got. I think that the current state of Psionics is a meager shadow of what was once possible.
And that right there my friend, is the very topic I was hoping to coax out of people in this thread.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not displeased about what else has popped up in here, it all needed to be covered, but I was also of the mind that current psionic use is a mere shadow of green age stuff.I know most people don't like RAFoaDK, but, the scene where all the champions are attacking Rajaat, and he starts to mentally mess with several of their minds at once (the equivalent, in my mind, to the 2e High Science, Mass Contact maybe?) something Hammannu said it was a long time before he was able to do that to so many minds, and never as many 'strong' minds as what rajaat was able to mess with. (Rajaat was manipulating multiple Epic level minds, which shows how far above the other champions he was in even psionic use). I like to use that as an example of Green Age psionics.
How epically used, someone who has been around for a while, (like Rajaat) and who has researched and refined psionic use within themselves (like Rajaat) they could perform some major impressive stuff. Or, take the mind Lords of the Last Sea. In 2e, the precognition power was good for, what, an hour's look into the future? They looked how far? Thousands of years?? (Some might say they invented the Time Travel power from 2e, I prefer to look at is as yet another example of Green Age psionics being way uber powered).
I think of Green Age athas as a world where 'real' power was psionics. Even a lowly animal has psionics, so any 'real' person will train their mind, or else they aren't much better than an animal themselves, and deserve to be treated as such. (Hence the mind slavery of low ability types, like wild talents).
How can one determine if someone or something is sentient or on an equal footing?? that it can build structures? Even ants (or the thri-kreen) can build structures.. that it can forage and hunt? certainly not.. that leaves only communication and thinking, as a sign of intelligence... the former a way to determine the latter. Psions, true psions, will train their minds higher and higher, seeing it as a way to prove themselves and better themselves. Some take the road of the psychic warrior, and such have their uses, but are perhaps seen by some as more like the army of Rome, serving it's citizens and senetors. Useful, but not high class. A true psion will reach untold heights of power unknown by 'lesser' minds... those who do not devote themselves to the study of the mind may as well be cutting out their own tongue, or sealing themselves within a world of darkness and deafness. The MIND is the 'real' power, to a psion of the Green Age, and as such there are those few masters of each city or region, who devote themselves to it's pursuit. (Think psions of level 30 as being... just the start of a true master... like a 3rd level fighter.. not that great, but probably good enough to be admitted to the town guard... better than a tavern brawler... a psion 30+ could just 'begin' to reach true power..)
I know most people don't like RAFoaDK, but, the scene where all the champions are attacking Rajaat, and he starts to mentally mess with several of their minds at once (the equivalent, in my mind, to the 2e High Science, Mass Contact maybe?) something Hammannu said it was a long time before he was able to do that to so many minds, and never as many 'strong' minds as what rajaat was able to mess with. (Rajaat was manipulating multiple Epic level minds, which shows how far above the other champions he was in even psionic use).
While I've long been a proponent of better Green Age Psionics, and "Pre-Tarandan Psionics," I think that Rajaat's a poor example. I love RaFoaDK, and want to point out that Hamanu repeatedly said that he thought the reason that Rajaat could tweak with them like that was that he'd remade them. Remember that these guys didn't create the epic spells that transformed them into Champions. If you follow Abbey carefully, I think she's suggesting that Rajaat's epic champion-making procedure had a few programmer back-doors. One should not look at what Rajaat could do to his own champions to determine what a Green Age psionicist could do to other people, or even to determine what Rajaat could have done to a bunch of powerful psions that weren't his champions.
I think of Green Age athas as a world where 'real' power was psionics. Even a lowly animal has psionics, so any 'real' person will train their mind, or else they aren't much better than an animal themselves, and deserve to be treated as such. (Hence the mind slavery of low ability types, like wild talents).
That makes sense.
How can one determine if someone or something is sentient or on an equal footing?? that it can build structures? Even ants (or the thri-kreen) can build structures.. that it can forage and hunt? certainly not..
Ah, but remember how persecution of kreen in Urik shut down kreen migration. All was not racial harmony in the Green Age. Whoever ruled Urik at the time ordered all kreen put to death, neh? So how one determines equal footing probably varied from one society to another.
I know most people don't like RAFoaDK, but, the scene where all the champions are attacking Rajaat, and he starts to mentally mess with several of their minds at once (the equivalent, in my mind, to the 2e High Science, Mass Contact maybe?) something Hammannu said it was a long time before he was able to do that to so many minds, and never as many 'strong' minds as what rajaat was able to mess with. (Rajaat was manipulating multiple Epic level minds, which shows how far above the other champions he was in even psionic use). I like to use that as an example of Green Age psionics.
While I've long been a proponent of better Green Age Psionics, and "Pre-Tarandan Psionics," I think that Rajaat's a poor example. I love RaFoaDK, and want to point out that Hamanu repeatedly said that he thought the reason that Rajaat could tweak with them like that was that he'd remade them. Remember that these guys didn't create the epic spells that transformed them into Champions. If you follow Abbey carefully, I think she's suggesting that Rajaat's epic champion-making procedure had a few programmer back-doors. One should not look at what Rajaat could do to his own champions to determine what a Green Age psionicist could do to other people, or even to determine what Rajaat could have done to a bunch of powerful psions that weren't his champions.
I do not think so, Brax. The passage suggests to me, through the parallel Hamanu his making with his own lifelong experience in using the Way and how what Rajaat did seemed a scaled aversion of that, that on that day in the shadow of the Tower Rajaat controlled all of the Champion's minds at once, without sweating, feat which Hamanu says took him hundreds of years to achieve.
This being D&D, I'd surmise this is about levels and scaling. The backdoor explanation is as good but less impressive.
I keep repeating this, but...once, I calculated on the boards what psion level Rajaat needed to control around 15 Champions at once, using - IIRC - psionic domination, and the level required was in the 60s, I seem to recall. The actual calculation is not that hard, you just need to posit the Will save of a Champion and you find out what power DC is required to beat it on every try.
Now, about if Rajaat can be used as an example of epic Green Age psionics, a big No. The guy probably was/is the greatest psion ever, so that ain't a benchmark.
Now, as far as what was "normal" psionics during the Green Age - I think they were probably on-par with modern psionics. The biggest difference is that you had a full-fledged "industrial complex" built upon psionic technology, and overall it sounds like the general state of people in the world was a lot better than it is during the Age of the Sorcerer Kings. A higher standard of living means that people have to spend less time just trying to survive and have more "free" time, which is probably why we see examples of "uber-epic" psionics.
Another thing to note is that, on modern Athas, you've got the Order ruling over the epic psionic realm, while the S-K's have a monopoly on epic-level magic. It's quite possible that the S-K's or high-ranking Order members can pull of feats of power that match the best the Green Age had to offer, but it's a situation where you've only got a few dozen individuals of this potential as opposed to hundreds to thousands during the Green Age.
To summarize: I don't think that Green Age psionics was somehow "more powerful" than it is on modern Athas, it was just that there were *more* powerful psionicists then, in a global society whose technology was based on psionics, and so in comparison to modern Athas it just has the appearance of being such.
I keep repeating this, but...once, I calculated on the boards what psion level Rajaat needed to control around 15 Champions at once, using - IIRC - psionic domination, and the level required was in the 60s, I seem to recall. The actual calculation is not that hard, you just need to posit the Will save of a Champion
Of which one, and under which circumstances? How does Rajaat stop a champion from using epic spells to boost his will bonus up, say, to +200, using variant epic spells with the fortify seed? It's just too unpredictable.
This being D&D, I'd surmise this is about levels and scaling. The backdoor explanation is as good but less impressive.
I'm not sure where you get less impressive from :P but put it this way: Rajaat had motive to put in a back door: he wanted to control his champions.
Rajaat had opportunity to put in a back door: the Champion transformation.
The question remains if Rajaat was smart enough to do it, and you know what I think about that
To summarize: I don't think that Green Age psionics was somehow "more powerful" than it is on modern Athas, it was just that there were *more* powerful psionicists then, in a global society whose technology was based on psionics, and so in comparison to modern Athas it just has the appearance of being such.
I mostly agree, but I also would say that just by playing the numbers, there would be at least some Psionicists that would be more powerful then anything in the modern age.
Of which one, and under which circumstances? How does Rajaat stop a champion from using epic spells to boost his will bonus up, say, to +200, using variant epic spells with the fortify seed? It's just too unpredictable.
What's to stop Rajaat from boosting his DC to +500? :P
These comparaisons, if they are to be useful in any capacity, must be based on Rajaat and his Champions being without equipment or boosting spells/powers.
I think the Mind Lords were a better example, casting their minds forward hundreds of years into the future, past the green age, the time of magic, and further.. to present day.. (they 'did' see that far, right? or was it just to the cleansing wars? I forget) Either way, really long time.
That's a good example of the green age psionics. And while yes, there were more of the powerful psions in the green age, that means, in my mind, that there was more knowledge of how to do high level stuff.. today it would be breaking new ground to recreate the old powers...What's to stop Rajaat from boosting his DC to +500? :P
Lack of people that he trusts to assist him in spellcasting. Mentally controlling someone to assist you in spellcasting arguably violates the boostrapping principle for epic casting; you can't use your own products of epic casting to mitigate epic casting, as I understand. It would arguably be like conjuring your own spell components (see the conjure seed).
Rajaat had motive to put in a back door: he wanted to control his champions.
Rajaat had opportunity to put in a back door: the Champion transformation.
The question remains if Rajaat was smart enough to do it, and you know what I think about that
Lack of people that he trusts to assist him in spellcasting. Mentally controlling someone to assist you in spellcasting arguably violates the boostrapping principle for epic casting; you can't use your own products of epic casting to mitigate epic casting, as I understand. It would arguably be like conjuring your own spell components (see the conjure seed).
Rajaat had a whole lot of Halfling servants, and two very powerful artifacts to help him, the Pristine Tower and the Dark Lens. He has all the tools he needs without needing to rely on his champions to help him.
Artifacts aren't always there when you want them. And if Rajaat were using the lens to dominate Hamanu I think that might have come up in his wonderings. Easiest and most reliable way for Rajaat to control his champions was to put a means for him to control them into the Champion transformation.
If you go by Abbey's account of the relationship between Rajaat and the champions, (and this whole idea of Rajaat controlling them in mass *depends* on that account), then it's clear that Rajaat used his champions as phylacteries. So it's clear that he's slipped something they didn't know about into that transformation, to increase his own power at their expense.
If you go by Abbey's account of the relationship between Rajaat and the champions, (and this whole idea of Rajaat controlling them in mass *depends* on that account), then it's clear that Rajaat used his champions as phylacteries. So it's clear that he's slipped something they didn't know about into that transformation, to increase his own power at their expense.
Not clear to me. I interpreted it clearly one way, you another way. Big surprise. You were surprised, weren't you?! :P
There's a scene where Borys casts a spell at Hamanu, Hamanu uses his anti-human powers to suck it down and return it to Borys 10-fold. Borys is stunned at his powerlessness toward Hamanu and says something like 'What are you?'
I probably got the particulars wrong but the theme is if Hamanu was only figuring out things that Rajaat did to him as late as the final days of the Cleansing Wars, the back doors that Rajaat put in are entirely plausible.
Hamanu's uber power, on the other hand, is indeed such a case but the only one clearly mentionned as such by Abbey. Hamanu doesn't know exactly what his uber power entails, having voluntarily chosen not to explore it.
Hamanu to the remaining Sorcerer-Monarchs:
"Lalali-Puy, Andropinis, and Daskinor, form feet and legs!"
"Borys, Nibenay, and Dregoth, form arms and torso!"
"And I'll form the head!"
- 80s' tv cartoon...DS flavored
If you go by Abbey's account of the relationship between Rajaat and the champions, (and this whole idea of Rajaat controlling them in mass *depends* on that account), then it's clear that Rajaat used his champions as phylacteries. So it's clear that he's slipped something they didn't know about into that transformation, to increase his own power at their expense.
Not clear to me. I interpreted it clearly one way, you another way. Big surprise. You were surprised, weren't you?! :P
I've highlighted an example of the unclear prounoun references I told you about yesterday. You interpreted *what* clearly?
Are you arguing 1) that it's "clear" to you that Abbey did not suggest that Rajaat was using his champions as phylacteries, despite the fact that the Champions came to that conclusion themselves after they failed to kill him,
or
2) that it's clear to you that the phylactery thing was not something that Rajaat slipped into the transformation that the Champions were not aware of, or
3) Did you post what I said and then respond to something else?
I remember no mention that some of the Champions' powers are still unknown to themselves. Albeit arguably a backdoor is not a power meant to be known.
Hamanu's uber power, on the other hand, is indeed such a case but the only one clearly mentionned as such by Abbey. Hamanu doesn't know exactly what his uber power entails, having voluntarily chosen not to explore it.
Remind me again, how many champions has Hamanu killed while choosing not to explore his special gift for killing champions?
Hamanu was constructed to take advantage of some of the back doors that Rajaat placed in the Champion template.Put it this way. If you're making an epic power that permanently fortifies a person, just how much of a mitigating factor would it be to allow a specific key or signature to bypass the person's defenses? It's only a +2 mitigator to allow the caster to totally suspend the spell at will.
I'm just surprised that given the option between imbuing Rajaat with limitless power and making him very powerful, clever, and treacherous, that you'd take the limitless power option.
We're talking about someone that's trapped in an amplified low-level spell here.
We're talking about someone that's trapped in an amplified low-level spell here.
Didn't Abbey have Rajaat able to start extending his influence on the world now that hes not getting 1000 souls a year bolstering his prison? I don't imagine Rajaat limitless in power, but I do have him so amazingly powerful, there's no real reason to give him stats at all, kind of like the Mind Lords...
Apparently your last mention of Hamanu easily being able to kill other Champions is a description of such a backdoor. So that's a backdoor that Hamanu has relative to the other Champs, not a backdoor Rajaat has relative to Hamanu. If Rajaat could control Hamanu he wouldn't have needed to - as per RaFoa DK - craft the mightiest epic spells ever to try to control the dragon that Hamanu became...he would just have controlled him using his trojan connection.
I don't remember a scheme that considers the Champions to be phylacteries in relation to Rajaat. Please describe it better. Thanks.
I've highlighted an example of the unclear prounoun references I told you about yesterday. You interpreted *what* clearly?
The 'situation' described, the 'affair', the 'quoted text', bla bla bla. That's what I interpreted one way. It. The content of your post. The meaning of this or that element of RaFoaDK.
Apparently your last mention of Hamanu easily being able to kill other Champions is a description of such a backdoor. So that's a backdoor that Hamanu has relative to the other Champs, not a backdoor Rajaat has relative to Hamanu. If Rajaat could control Hamanu he wouldn't have needed to - as per RaFoa DK - craft the mightiest epic spells ever to try to control the dragon that Hamanu became...he would just have controlled him using his trojan connection.
More to the point, Hamanu's ability to kill other Champions isn't even a "back door" - it's an aspect of his unique Champion status. Rajaat created him a long time after the other Champions, and given that he *could* kill the other Champions while likewise being immune to most/all of their attacks (as per the Prism Pentad, even), odds are that Rajaat specifically "built" him to do just that - kill Champions (as well as humanity, I'd assume, although that's my personal take on the matter).
Otherwise I'm in agreement with you here (I think) - Rajaat didn't create any back doors, at least not in a Manchurian Candidate sorta sense, because if he had the entire history of the rebellion on up through the end of the Prism Pentad would have been different. He may have been able to influence them more easily than others, but if that was the case it apparently wasn't very effective.
Rajaat didn't create any back doors, at least not in a Manchurian Candidate sorta sense, because if he had the entire history of the rebellion on up through the end of the Prism Pentad would have been different.
How so? Are you assuming that a programmer who puts in a back door can't get chopped to bits and imprisoned in the black by his creations? If so, there are a few programmers I could introduce you to ... :D
How so? Are you assuming that a programmer who puts in a back door can't get chopped to bits and imprisoned in the black by his creations? If so, there are a few programmers I could introduce you to ... :D
Maybe a whole minute goes by before Rajaat dies, during which he even tries to convince Hamanu, with words broadcasted telepathically, to kill all of the Champions. He pleads for him to do it, and Hamanu refuses.
This being D&D, he's have had ten times over the opportunity to pull a Manchurian Candidate on his Champions...but he didn't. His only constructive action that we can see him take during that time is killing Pennarin with a single spell. The rest of the time he seems too preoccupied getting chopped to bits to manage to cast anything more.
A single spoken word, or a projected command thought, and everyone close by would have frozen up as the backdoor programming made them stop in their tracks.
Come on, Pen. Read the scene in RaFoaDK where the Champs figure out they can't kill Rajaat. Then someone says ....
[INDENT]"He can't die", someone said. "Not while we're alive."
No one argued.[/INDENT]
I guess it must have been the utter lack of an explanation for those two lines that made me forget they were written down.
Taking a second look in Abbey's notes might clarify this.
I did read in those notes that the Tower sustained Rajaat's form before he was killed, explaining why past a certain time period in history Rajaat never strayed far from the spire. (Later he housed his essence in his shadow.)
Maybe a whole minute goes by before Rajaat dies, during which he even tries to convince Hamanu, with words broadcasted telepathically, to kill all of the Champions. He pleads for him to do it, and Hamanu refuses.
And this disproves my back door theory and proves your Rajaat is of ultra-uber power ... how exactly?
His only constructive action that we can see him take during that time is killing Pennarin with a single spell. The rest of the time he seems too preoccupied getting chopped to bits to manage to cast anything more.
So he couldn't pull the back door.
This being D&D, he's have had ten times over the opportunity to pull a Manchurian Candidate on his Champions...but he didn't.
Which is why I called it a "back door" rather than a "Mancurian candidate." I'm talking about a special vulnerability to some custom spell or power. Some sort of built in weakness. Not some hypnosis trick.
"He can't die", someone said. "Not while we're alive."
No one argued.
I guess it must have been the utter lack of an explanation for those two lines that made me forget they were written down.
I guess it must have been the utter lack of a need for an explanation for those lines that made me assume you were pulling my leg when you didn't remember them :D
Now that you've looked, can you credit any other reasonable explanation for those words?
Note that in LC we've leaned on that part of the story, in our explanation for why Rajaat left Egendo in the cyst.
Abbey's notes aren't published, so the need for consistency ain't as strong. And frankly, I think that the idea of using his champions as phylactery is a much more interesting story.
And this disproves my back door theory and proves your Rajaat is of ultra-uber power ... how exactly?
Heh, touché. I never did say that scene proved him an ultra-uber being. That was another scene where he controls all of the Champions at once.
The f**ked up thing is that he didn't do that again when the Champions attacked him. I guess Abbey cornered herself and was forced to ignore a previous scene in her novel, just so the Champs could dispatch their master. Not the first time that happens.
Maybe for the time Rajaat controlled the Champs he had used a powerful epic spell booster, or its possible the attacking Champs had powerful resistance spells of their own. Who knows.
So he couldn't pull the back door.
I know you like making fun of our 'mall 'peech and pour enlish skilz, but this is a bit much. Please read between the lines we write, the implied stuff, the stuff we don't write about or the entire page would be filled with a tree of possibilities and maybes and do nots.
If he could control the Champions using a backdoor they wouldn't have been able to chop him to pieces. I can only guess that Rajaat chose not to psionically dominate the bunch - like he did earlier - because he knew that half an hour later he'd be back on his feet and they'd all feel sorry for what they did....except they pulled a fast one and did the unexpected - trap his remains in a prison that needs continous supervision.
I'm talking about a special vulnerability to some custom spell or power. Some sort of built in weakness.
Please point again where you clearly described the meaning of your backdoor concept in the past, since now it's making sense, and before it didn't.
Abbey's notes aren't published, so the need for consistency ain't as strong. And frankly, I think that the idea of using his champions as phylactery is a much more interesting story.
Oh please, everyone's hanging on a few words Denning wrote in an interview about "Maybe there could be other Champions, is all...", but extensive notes by another author cannot be used as supplementary material to fill in the gaps when needed?
As for the phylactery idea, its one of perhaps several other possibilities for the meaning of those quoted words. Those words were never was clear to me, I never did see a phylactery in those words, and even now that you speak of it I still don't see it. It may be the best and most useful interpretation, perhaps, but it ain't clear like you make them to be.
Note that in LC we've leaned on that part of the story, in our explanation for why Rajaat left Egendo in the cyst.
...and there is a note about that passage in my review. Typing it up now as a matter of fact.
Heh, touché. I never did say that scene proved him an ultra-uber being. That was another scene where he controls all of the Champions at once.
The f**ked up thing is that he didn't do that again when the Champions attacked him. I guess Abbey cornered herself and was forced to ignore a previous scene in her novel, just so the Champs could dispatch their master. Not the first time that happens.
It's consistent if you discard your assumption about how powerful Rajaat is. You need time to use a back door. My theorem fits the facts; yours doesn't.
I know you like making fun of our 'mall 'peech and pour enlish skilz, but this is a bit much.
Your english is just fine, Penn, and you've caught my own imperfect writing. I'm not poking fun of your skills when I say you've said something that I can't make sense of. I strongly dislike it when someone pulls a straw man on me, and I don't want to argue against a position that you did not make.
Please read between the lines we write, the implied stuff, the stuff we don't write about or the entire page would be filled with a tree of possibilities and maybes and do nots.
If we agreed about implications and inferences, we would not be arguing in the first place.
If he could control the Champions using a backdoor they wouldn't have been able to chop him to pieces.
Depends what sort of back door. You still need the opportunity to use it.
I can only guess that Rajaat chose not to psionically dominate the bunch - like he did earlier - because he knew that half an hour later he'd be back on his feet and they'd all feel sorry for what they did....except they pulled a fast one and did the unexpected - trap his remains in a prison that needs continous supervision.
That makes no sense. Once he had them dominated he could kill them.
Please point again where you clearly described the meaning of your backdoor concept in the past, since now it's making sense, and before it didn't.
Oh please, everyone's hanging on a few words Denning wrote in an interview about "Maybe there could be other Champions, is all...", but extensive notes by another author cannot be used as supplementary material to fill in the gaps when needed?
False analogy. No one's using the Denning interview to contradict any published statement. We use the Denning interview to contradict the absurd fundamentalist assumption that just because Denning didn't describe other Champions that there weren't any. You're using notes to try to contradict the clear implication of the text. And the notes you cite don't even contradict what I said, they simply offer one alternate source of Rajaat's power. And you've suddenly chosen to ignore the basic principle that we'd agreed on regarding canon. That it's about story, and about general consistency with the body of facts.
As for the phylactery idea, its one of perhaps several other possibilities for the meaning of those quoted words.
Come on, Penn, don't take that vague way out. You're a smart guy and a poet. I asked you for another interpretation. Not a vague statement that there are perhaps other interpretations. If you need time to think about it, that's fine with me. Don't pass off emptiness for argument.
Those words were never was clear to me, I never did see a phylactery in those words, and even now that you speak of it I still don't see it. It may be the best and most useful interpretation, perhaps, but it ain't clear like you make them to be.
The term I'd use is "unambiguous." I laughed when I first heard the words because it sounds like a double negative or a waste of sylables, but unambiguous actually does not mean the same thing as "clear." "Clear" means that anyone can see it. "Unambiguous" means that when you think about all the relevant facts, that there is no other reasonable explanation.
...and there is a note about that passage in my review. Typing it up now as a matter of fact.
Take your time and do it right if it's important to you; there's no rush, and you know what I do with fallacies ... :D
You need time to use a back door. My theorem fits the facts; yours doesn't.
Good god, this is D&D. Think standard or full-round action. Where did you pull "time" from? The backdoor is there, you activate it. Does it take ten minutes to set off a pre-existing contingency spell?
Your english is just fine, Penn, and you've caught my own imperfect writing. I'm not poking fun of your skills when I say you've said something that I can't make sense of. I strongly dislike it when someone pulls a straw man on me, and I don't want to argue against a position that you did not make.
The comment still stands: Me and others are not going to write down a tree of possibilities, covering our asses in discussions such as these. If you talk about phylacteries...I'll probably won't know what you're talking about until you explain, but if you say the defiler warlords might have been useful in the CWs...I'll figure out you're suggesting the usefulness is towards helping the Champs. I won't point out to you that you didn't write it per say, and I'll expect you to do the same with me and others.
That makes no sense. Once he had them dominated he could kill them.
Letting your underlings kill you only to rise again within hours, like everything's ok and sunny is a good way to put them back in their place. The worst thing one can think of doing to his master is killing him...and that doesn't work. After that they give up the idea of betrayal and come back in line.
I'd do that. A painful experience, transitory. As you regenerate, unstopably, you can see the looks of dread on those that killed you. "Are we gonna die, now?", those looks seem to say.
Please point out where you mentionned, in earlier posts, that your backdoor idea could be defined as "a special vulnerability to some custom spell or power. Some sort of built in weakness."
And you've suddenly chosen to ignore the basic principle that we'd agreed on regarding canon. That it's about story, and about general consistency with the body of facts.
Oh I give up. If I'm the only one that wants alternatives to the phylactery theory, or even care about whatever is decided as canon henceforth, then so be it.
I laughed when I first heard the words because it sounds like a double negative or a waste of sylables, but unambiguous actually does not mean the same thing as "clear."
Oooo, ouch. And they send me emails reminding me to be proper because I'm a member of Athas.org? In a single phrase, what I wrote was dismissed at the syntax-level followed by being told the error of my ways.
Take your time and do it right if it's important to you; there's no rush, and you know what I do with fallacies ...
Aaaa, a little to the right Brax. Important for me? Sure, I'll actually never give this out to you then, if its not important to you...
Good god, this is D&D.
It's backstory. And if we make it so that every story that we tell, as background, requires a mechanic, we'll have killed this world and this game forever.
The comment still stands: Me and others are not going to write down a tree of possibilities, covering our asses in discussions such as these. If you talk about phylacteries...I'll probably won't know what you're talking about until you explain,
Hang on -- are you simply asking "what is a phylactery?"
That's OK; I didn't even know what the word meant myself until I heard Chris and others using the term a couple weeks ago. It's explained in Sandstorm and other sources, I think. A phylactery is an object or person that a powerful wizard magicks up so that he can't be killed unless the phylactery (or phylacteries) are killed or destroyed.
It means that Rajaat can't die unless all the Champions are killed.
If you honestly didn't understand what that meant, then I apologize. From your response, I inferred that you did understand and just didn't like the idea, without explaining why.
I think it's a fantastic story that the only way to kill Rajaat would be to kill the Champions. It does credit to Rajaat, it creates incredible conflict (need to kill Oronis too). If you don’t like it, then why don’t you say why you don’t like it, rather than making absurd authority appeals that both of us have said are ridiculous.
Please stop trying to turn requests for clarification into personal attacks. I did not attack your spelling errors or English writing ability. You said something unclear, and I asked you to clarify.
For example, you get all touchy and weird about the following statement which is not even remotely an attack on you. I said:
I laughed when I first heard the words because it sounds like a double negative or a waste of sylables, but unambiguous actually does not mean the same thing as "clear."
Oooo, ouch.
That's just nuts that you take that as an attack on you. I'm talking about when I first heard the word unambiguous, in school. I thought unambiguous was an absurd term at first, and now I understand what it means. "Clear" is subjective, while "unambiguous" is objective. I'm saying that you are right, that I misused the word "clear" above, and that the term that I should have used is "unambiguous." Abbey's statement about phylacteries may or may not have been clear, but it certainly was unambiguous. In other words, a reasonable person might read it and not understand what it means (therefore it is not “clear”), but no one has produced a reasonable alternate meaning for that passage (therefore it is unambiguous).
Now how exactly are you twisting that into an attack on you?
Hang on -- are you simply asking "what is a phylactery?"
That's OK; I didn't even know what the word meant myself until I heard Chris and others using the term a couple weeks ago. It's explained in Sandstorm and other sources, I think. A phylactery is an object or person that a powerful wizard magicks up so that he can't be killed unless the phylactery (or phylacteries) are killed or destroyed.
It means that Rajaat can't die unless all the Champions are killed.
If you honestly didn't understand what that meant, then I apologize. From your response, I inferred that you did understand and just didn't like the idea, without explaining why.
Here is what I thought: You mentionned the champs as phylacteries. Knowing about liches and their phylacteries, i inferred you were saying that the champs acted like a liche's phylactery for Rajaat. Since my interpretation of the novel's passage was not about phylacteries (actually it was about nothing, I have not interpreted that passage at all, not enough data), i wondered how you came to that conclusion.
But it does help that your reference to phylacteries is not about liches' but about Sandstorm's rather unique take on it, which, btw, I never read and which sounds cool.
If you're acting like you can't think of how Rajaat could have been pleading with Hamanu and yet not had the ability to seize control of him through a back door, even according to the rules of free action, standard action etc., then I don't see the point of continuing this.
No one's acting. That's an important point you need to understand. You ask for our language to be precise, so please apply your own advice on this very phrase.
"Rajaat could have been pleading with Hamanu and yet not had the ability to seize control of him through a back door" : This is a suggestion I made already.
You said something unclear, and I asked you to clarify.
Your comments are, willingly or not, most often than not worded so they can be intepreted in a way that is insulting to the reader. In case you din't notice, this - and not the arguments themselves - is why me and others have had these long board discussions with you. Wasn't the last person that felt attacked by your responses...Sysane? I felt attacked a short time before as well. Then all was fine for a while, until it started up again this week: you writting stuff down showing great intelligence and mastery of language on your part, yet a surprisingly poor ability to write down stuff in a way that would ensure people won't feel their person being judged.
About the double negative: The poor and uneducated do not even know what a double negative is, or that you're not supposed to make one. Its what generates scorn from the elite. A suggested laughter on your part about a double negative is thus interpreted as you making a suggestion as to my education level. Worst, if I were american and black, I might have thought you knew of my skin color and were playing on the black man cliché that goes like ... "I didn't do nothing."
I'm not angry now, but is this a bit clearer? Is this explained well enough for you to exercice your sense of empathy and put yourself in my shoes, reading those few lines you wrote, and making the same interpretation I made?
That's just nuts that you take that as an attack on you. I'm talking about when I first heard the word unambiguous, in school.
Within the context of the paragraph that contains your mention of the word "unambiguous", it still seems as if your phrase refers not to that word but to the words you quoted from my previous response. Basically, that what I wrote makes you think about a double negative.
Maybe this whole thing is nothing more than you wording your phrases the way you normally do, which might be just enough different from the way I'm used to (and I do read a lot, why this always looks unlikely to me) that I think this or that word/phrase refers to this or that other word/phrase while its not the case.
Same text (say...one of your paragraphs), two intepretations. No one's aware one reader among the two - me - has misinterpreted. Even I don't know it. And on your side you're wondering how I can possibily think this or that about what you wrote since you clearly meant this or that other thing.
You ask for our language to be precise, so please apply your own advice on this very phrase.
See, I don't take that as an attack, and I don't know why you do. Everyone is unclear sometimes. You've caught me being unclear in the past, and I've not taken that as an attack. When I say you've used an unclear pronoun reference, I'm simply trying to be precise about how you're being unclear. When you say I'm being unclear, without being more precise about what I left unclear, that does not help me clearify. Is that clear? :D
Within the context of the paragraph that contains your mention of the word "unambiguous", it still seems as if your phrase refers not to that word but to the words you quoted from my previous response. Basically, that what I wrote makes you think about a double negative.
I don't recall anything in what you said that looks like a double negative.
I had just used the word "unambiguous," and was explaining what that meant, since I'd just learned the word myself. Just as I had just learned the word "phylactery" in the sense that Sandstorm uses the word. Sandstorm did not make up that usage; I've heard a number of people use it that way. Sandstorm was simply the first source I've seen to clearly explain that usage. I don't generally use grammar tricks to put someone down. Besides, I called you a poet, man, and that's not a compliment that I throw out carelessly. That's a term of high esteem to me; I value your language skills; I wish there were more people who write as well as you do. There are things you do that annoy me, but believe me I've no bone to pick with your language skills, and it astonishes me that someone who writes as well as you would be sensitive about that. When someone reads something I write and says that I'm a dry and boring writer or something like that, I don't take it personally at all; I just laugh. Recognize your own strengths, man, and give yourself some credit.
I've seen so many quarrels break out on the boards because people take the most superfluous things offensively. Lighten up, guys. You both have great things to say, so why not quit worrying about whose syntax created which implied slight, get over it, and get back to Dark Sun?
That's usually when one of the two participants in the quarrel yells at you for posting this, and then you get a taste of the quarrel from the inside.
Not gonna happen though. :D :P
This reminds me that by the time I first came on the boards Xlorep took a dislike to me and chewed me up. I think he forgot he even did it (for several consecutive posts) like a week afterwards. I dismissed the whole thing when I later saw he seemed to like to chew up people, any people, from time to time. He doesn't do that anymore. Probably no longer has the time for such long posts... (Yes, Cliff, I still love you you big bear!)
See, I don't take that as an attack, and I don't know why you do. Everyone is unclear sometimes. You've caught me being unclear in the past, and I've not taken that as an attack. When I say you've used an unclear pronoun reference, I'm simply trying to be precise about how you're being unclear. When you say I'm being unclear, without being more precise about what I left unclear, that does not help me clearify. Is that clear? :D
Then I am sorry for this. Usually people say they always write well, with no errors (this is just an example), so when you find something on them you point it out on the side so they can stop pretending later on and save some digital ink.
Nope.
Thank you for confirming this was a missunderstanding. (I do sound like I'm still at my job...mmmm. /sight)
An unclear pronoun reference is not necessarily an error. There are times when a lawyer or a polititian *deliberately* wants to leave something ambiguous. There are also times where the pronoun reference is simply not material to the point of the sentence, and precise language would require more words and take the focus away from the important part of the sentence. If I'd just said "this isn't clear," you wouldn't have known what part I was having trouble with.
At this point I think the debate has been totally lost in the semantics and "but you said!" responses, and I'm not about to get involved in all of that (been there, done that, don't feel like doing it now), but there's still this whole issue of a "back door" that doesn't at all make sense, no matter how you look at it. Let me break it down into "self-contained" statements:
- If Rajaat had the ability to create *any* sort of "back door" into the Champion's psyche, then there's no reason to expect there to be a limit to what he could do.
- If Rajaat had created a BD for the purpose of protecting himself against his own Champions, he would have done so in a way that he could *instantly* take control of them, nullify their powers, etc. If Rajaat was afraid of his Champions enough to do this, there's absolutely no reason to think that he would "take chances" with them by making anything but an instant I Win BD.
- If Rajaat was even capable of building something into his Champions that would make him immune to their spells and/or powers, then no matter what they did they wouldn't have been able to harm him, trap him, or otherwise. More-so, if he *could* do that, why wouldn't he?
- With Hamanu, Rajaat created a "new version" of Champion that *was* capable of resisting the spells/attacks of his fellow Champions. And yet, he himself still wasn't capable of doing so. This begs the question: If Rajaat could have modified his own form into one that was completely resistant to his own Champions, and more importantly into a form that could destroy his Champions, why would he have created a *new* Champion rather than just changing himself?
Out of this entire discussion, about the only point I think Brax may be right about is the whole Champions-as-Phylacteries idea, although even if that were the case it still does nothing for this whole back door theory - if Rajaat could be affected by the magic and/or psionics of his Champions, then letting them chop him to pieces *despite* not being able to die is a bad, bad idea - regeneration or not, all it'd take was for the Champions to keep smashing his body up, taking turns while they think up a better solution to the problem...and there's no reason to think Rajaat wasn't smart enough to have assumed something like that *could* happen...and if it *could* happen, and he was somehow able to prevent it from occuring in the first place (ala the Back Door Theory) then he would have stopped it.
But he didn't.
if Rajaat could be affected by the magic and/or psionics of his Champions, then letting them chop him to pieces *despite* not being able to die is a bad, bad idea - regeneration or not, all it'd take was for the Champions to keep smashing his body up, taking turns while they think up a better solution to the problem...and there's no reason to think Rajaat wasn't smart enough to have assumed something like that *could* happen...and if it *could* happen, and he was somehow able to prevent it from occuring in the first place (ala the Back Door Theory) then he would have stopped it.
Unless you subscribe that Rajaat wanted to be defeated by his Champions for some unknown purpose. It could be that he used this backdoor thingy to subliminally place the idea of imprisoning him in the Black into the mind of one the Champions in order to strengthen his already considerable power.
Just a thought. I don't necessarily beleive this to be the case but its a possibility.
Unless you subscribe that Rajaat wanted to be defeated by his Champions for some unknown purpose. It could be that he used this backdoor thingy to subliminally place the idea of imprisoning him in the Black into the mind of one the Champions in order to strengthen his already considerable power.
Just a thought. I don't necessarily beleive this to be the case but its a possibility.
Agreed...although it's quite a stretch. I can see him having that as an "emergency plan" just in case his Champions did decide to rebel, although I seriously doubt that he'd have included it in his original plans for the Cleansing Wars - seems awfully convoluted to plan for *most* of the Rebirth Races to be killed (or severely thinned out), after which your Cleansers are supposed to trap you on another plane where you can increase your own power, so you can return millenia later to seek revenge on those Champions and then finish what they started for you.
BTW, has anyone mentioned the fact that Rajaat was/is insane and most likely Chaotic Evil in alignment to boot? The combination doesn't make for the best long-term strategist, which (to me) makes it much less likely that he would include any sort of solid Back Doors and much more likely that he really didn't expect his Champions to ever rebel. This is mostly an opinion (although I think one or more sources do point out that he's insane), but if you agree with it then it is worth pointing out for this particular debate.
If Rajaat had the ability to create *any* sort of "back door" into the Champion's psyche, then there's no reason to expect there to be a limit to what he could do.
That maeks no sense at all. That sounds like you're saying that fact that a power exists proves that the power is limitless, but surely you'd not make such an absurd argument.
Rajaat made his students into Champions, presumably using some sort of epic spell. Therefore by definition he had the ability to put all sorts of convenient stuff into their makeup, as part of the epic spell that made the champions.
The fact that a power exists does not prove that it is limitless. Even the epic rules typically put restraints, limitations, and requirements on their use of powers.
Fact: Rajaat seems incredibly powerful sometimes, but other times you wonder, why doesn't he just do X.
Fact: Rajaat constructed Hamanu to destroy other Champions, but in fact Hamanu is younger and lower level than a number of other Champions. See the WC. And yet he personally defeated Sielba and Kalid-ma.
These and other facts don't prove "back door theory," but "back door theory" fits the published story. Other theories proposed here do not fit the published story. So unless anyone has a better argument than authority appeals to unpublished notes, or strange unexplained assumptions that any power = limitless power, I'm sticking with the idea that Rajaat placed in special weaknesses as well as epic strengths into the Champion Template, and fashioned Hamanu especially in order to take advantage of these weaknesses.
Under the CR sustem in theory my Sorceror Kings well come withen 4 EL of Rajaats CR combined ( I use different rules than Athas.org for stating out Dragons, Avangions etc).
Anyone statted out the Mindlords of Saragar as epic Psions in 3.5 yet?
That maeks no sense at all. That sounds like you're saying that fact that a power exists proves that the power is limitless, but surely you'd not make such an absurd argument.
Rajaat made his students into Champions, presumably using some sort of epic spell. Therefore by definition he had the ability to put all sorts of convenient stuff into their makeup, as part of the epic spell that made the champions.
The fact that a power exists does not prove that it is limitless. Even the epic rules typically put restraints, limitations, and requirements on their use of powers.
I'm not implying that "any power = limitless power" - you're right in that I'd never make such a silly statement. What I'm saying is that, *especially* with an Epic spell that must already have a ridiculously high Spellcraft DC to work, that the difference between putting in one or more minor, inconvenient BDs and putting in a single I Win BD should have been just as viable an option for Rajaat.
I'd prefer to work on theories that fit the facts described in the published story, rather than looking for excuses to ignore incidents that don't fit our pet theories.
Fact: Rajaat seems incredibly powerful sometimes, but other times you wonder, why doesn't he just do X.
Fact: Rajaat constructed Hamanu to destroy other Champions, but in fact Hamanu is younger and lower level than a number of other Champions. See the WC. And yet he personally defeated Sielba and Kalid-ma.
These and other facts don't prove "back door theory," but "back door theory" fits the published story. Other theories proposed here do not fit the published story. So unless anyone has a better argument than authority appeals to unpublished notes, or strange unexplained assumptions that any power = limitless power, I'm sticking with the idea that Rajaat placed in special weaknesses as well as epic strengths into the Champion Template, and fashioned Hamanu especially in order to take advantage of these weaknesses.
Okay, now we run into a *major* issue with your line of reasoning - you're picking and choosing between rules and novels for your justifications, and the novel you appear to be focusing on (RaFoaDK) is one that isn't even considered canon by a majority of the individuals on this board.
As far as straight rules are concerned Hamanu is no different than any other Champion - Beyond the Prism Pentad stats him out, so if you want to go with that then he was just really lucky when he killed those other S-K's. If you want to go off of what the PP says then Hamanu is quite different than the other Champions and doesn't follow rules written in any of the published DS game setting materials. The only place where we have a "full" description of the Rebellion is RaFoaDK, which as already mentioned has many problems with it and can't be taken as canon, and that's also the only place where Hamanu is described as being *extremely* different than the other Champions. The PP describes the re-capture of Rajaat, during which there is no display of "back door" actions of any sort (haha I can't believe I just posted that statement to the forums) ...although Rajaat had changed since they last attacked him and had changed considerably, and of course had a "revenge plan" in place, so who knows in regards to that.
If you can narrow down what exactly you're using for reference here, maybe this BD/no-BD thing can go better. If you want to put full faith in RaF then it's definitely difficult to argue against some sort of BD...but at the same time, if you're using that as your primary source for "what Hamanu is" and how Rajaat and the Champions interacted prior to and during the Rebellion you have to accept the fact that the book is horribly inconsistent, not just with other published materials but even with itself.
Chaotic evil doesn't mean stupid. Giving epic power to the Champions without putting in a means of controling them would have been stupid.
Er, so let me get this straight: Rajaat would have been stupid not to put in a "means of controlling" the Champions, but the "means" that he puts in, as posed by your previous arguments, isn't enough to actually control them when he really, really, reaaaaaaalllly needs to (i.e. when they're trying to murder him)?
This goes right back to my (and I think, Penn's) argument - if Rajaat was smart enough to "build" the Champions in such a way that they posed no threat to him, *and* he considered the possibility of them rebelling to be a real possibility, it's silly to think that he would have only done a half-a$$ed job of it. I'm not denying the idea of their being Back Doors - if I were Rajaat I would have done that myself. What I *do* have an issue with is this idea that these BDs are only powerful enough to give Rajaat control over the Champions at times when they pose *little to no threat to him* but yet, when a situation arrises in which they're actively trying to harm him, these self-same BDs are mostly or completely useless in his defense.
I'm sorry, but I just don't see how that's a logical argument. By all means, if you think this Back Door Theory is good then go with it, but I still don't see how it's a solid enough theory for everyone to accept it.
BTW, has anyone mentioned the fact that Rajaat was/is insane and most likely Chaotic Evil in alignment to boot?
I don't think Rajaat was chaotic evil more so than he was overconfident. It more than likely never crossed his mind that his Champions would dare rebel and turn against him. If I were to peg an alignment on Big R it would be Neutral Evil. As for being insane, I think that goes without saying. You can be insane but still be a genius and manage to function in a competent and coherent manner.
I don't think Rajaat was chaotic evil more so than he was overconfident. It more than likely never crossed his mind that his Champions would dare rebel and turn against him. If I were to peg an alignment on Big R it would be Neutral Evil. As for being insane, I think that goes without saying. You can be insane but still be a genius and manage to function in a competent and coherent manner.
I figured CE because of this apparent "lack of foresight" - if he were NE or especially LE I'm more inclined to believe that he would have expected his Champions to turn on him and would have planned for it, while with a CE alignment it's more reasonable for him to have neglected to account for his overconfidence and egotistical behavior.
The other reason why I've guessed that he's CE is due to the whole Champion situation - they all seem to work alone, getting them in the same room is difficult enough as-is, and once a Champion finished there job it appears that Rajaat really didn't care what they did afterwards. Heck, he didn't even seem to care if they *didn't* finish their jobs, as long as they at least gave the appearance of trying (...if that). Although insanity could account for this, it sounds more like Rajaat just didn't look at the war as a single, combined-effort campaign but instead as a Big Idea ("kill all the new races") with the bare minimum of Smaller Ideas to go along with it ("I can't do this myself, so I need someone to help me"). That just *sounds* chaotic to me, especially when you compare it to the epitomy of Chaotic Evilness, the Demons - they all work towards the same overall goal, but beyond that it's a free-for-all as far as the Archfiends are concerned.
...although it's not like this really matters since it's just speculation.
The insanity is pretty definite, though, and I agree with all your points in regards to overconfidence, insanity != incompetent, etc.Another counter argument for Rajaat not being chaotic is the fact that he created magic. I would imagine that it would take a disciplined mind in order to discover magic. A weaker argument is that Rajaat is also a psion(icist) and back in 2e a character couldn't be chaotic and still be able to manifest powers.
Two good points.
...Although it *did* take him what, a millenia or more to develop magic, including one or more upside-down floating pyramids that he eventually forgot about and/or got tired of and moved elsewhere? ;)
I'll go with the NE alignment though, and retract any arguments I may have made that specifically rely on a CE alignment for justification.
Two good points.
...Although it *did* take him what, a millenia or more to develop magic, including one or more upside-down floating pyramids that he eventually forgot about and/or got tired of and moved elsewhere? ;)
I'll go with the NE alignment though, and retract any arguments I may have made that specifically rely on a CE alignment for justification.
He moved to the Pristine Tower. Upgrading one's real estate isn't a sign of a chaotic mind that's just good business. :P
He moved to the Pristine Tower. Upgrading one's real estate isn't a sign of a chaotic mind that's just good business. :P
True...but couldn't he have at least rented out the old places or something? Especially if one of your places has the ability to turn someone into a full-fledged Dragon...that's just bad financial (and, general) planning, if you ask me. :P
True...but couldn't he have at least rented out the old places or something? Especially if one of your places has the ability to turn someone into a full-fledged Dragon...that's just bad financial (and, general) planning, if you ask me. :P
Not when he was hoping that someone would stumble across it and further ruin the planet. Do you know the insurance pay off on ruining a planet? Its huge!!! ;)
Not when he was hoping that someone would stumble across it and further ruin the planet. Do you know the insurance pay off on ruining a planet? Its huge!!! ;)
Very high, true...or at least it would have been if Lloyds of Bodach wasn't sacked by Irikos and then swallowed up by the Silt Sea.
ok, Rajaat having power, and Rajaat being highly superly intelligent does not make him either omnipotent nor omniscient. ;) nuff said. As for the back door theory, I'd buy that, to a degree.. meaning, he could have had a 'measure' of control over them, but not all of them at once. After all, he could easily compell any single one of them, but eventually, a person might run out of free actions in a round. :PI like the idea of Hamannu being a new version of a champion, a more potent one. One that wouldn't loose to his brethren. Always have liked that idea.
And yes, I like the idea of realistate upgrades, good choice, I wonder what the view is like from the top of the Pristine Tower? Didn't that thing once go to the tops of the original ocean level?? How does it remain standing??
Ok, moving on.
Back on topic :P Epic Green Age psionics.. I think there could have been some major epic items created by circles of Epic Psions back in the Green Age.. I could imagine the Psionatrix being fashioned by some ancient order as some sort of D&D equivalent to a geothermal reactor, (since its power comes from Athas itself, in its description) but it pumps out PSP's, which is what powers everything.
It could have been left over from some ancient civilization. I could see other artifacts of similar power hidden around, or in the hands of the SK's I've always wanted to see an epic version of the Metaconcert power, maybe one that builds in meta-psionic feats or item creation capabilities into its function. Maybe build entire cities in one imagined instant, or personally, I've liked the idea of (to a degree) duplicating the idea of Mythals psionically. (Maybe with the Psionatrix to continuously power it??)
Anyways, just some thoughts from me ;)
Okay, now we run into a *major* issue with your line of reasoning - you're picking and choosing between rules and novels for your justifications
That's a false accusation. I challenge you to show me a single set of rules and novels that contradicts this "back door" theory. I'm looking comprehensively at the published work regarding Rajaat. I'm not "picking and choosing." You're the one trying to toss out stuff that's not convenient like RaFoaDK, which happens to be the one published book that discusses the matter in the greatest detail.
Rajaat's not omniscient or all powerful. But he was smart enough to take advantage of an opportunity. Making the Champions was an opportunity to solidify his grip over them. Not being a complete moron, Rajaat took advantage of this opportunity.
I'm not denying the idea of their being Back Doors - if I were Rajaat I would have done that myself.
Then what exactly is your point?
What I *do* have an issue with is this idea that these BDs are only powerful enough to give Rajaat control over the Champions at times when they pose *little to no threat to him* but yet, when a situation arrises in which they're actively trying to harm him, these self-same BDs are mostly or completely useless in his defense.
Are they? How do we know that Sacha and Wyan truly rebelled out of their own free will?
All I'm saying is that the BDs gave Rajaat an advantage, but not a limitless advantage. That it's easier to give the necessary concentration to seize control over more than a dozen champions when you surprise them, than when they surprise you and clobber you without letting up. Seems quite logical to me.
That's a false accusation. I challenge you to show me a single set of rules and novels that contradicts this "back door" theory. I'm looking comprehensively at the published work regarding Rajaat. I'm not "picking and choosing." You're the one trying to toss out stuff that's not convenient like RaFoaDK, which happens to be the one published book that discusses the matter in the greatest detail.
Okay, now you're trying to use a "God Argument" to validate this Back Door theory, which is ludicrous and bad debate form - just because you can't disprove something doesn't mean that it's true, or that it's even a reasonable explanation. By this logic you could say that Rajaat had a secret psychic connection to halflings living on the dark side of Guthay who told him how to develop the Champion spell (but that no one knows about and so it's never discussed anywhere), that Athas is actually a half-sphere with the entire back-side of the planet missing (hey, there's no official map or statements anywhere saying that's not the case, is there?), etc.
More so, I *have* given you several, logical explanations, based on things that we know or can extrapolate from things that we know, that reasonably identify why there likely weren't any Back Doors and, I hope, also gave alternatives to it (perhaps I didn't give alternatives...so I will in a minute). Namely - Rajaat was not only once, but twice imprisoned by entities he "created."
What it boils down to is that there's no *need* for a BD Theory to explain any of the interactions between Rajaat and the Champions, and if there's no need for one then I don't see why including that idea would somehow "make things better." Sure, Rajaat was able to dominate (or otherwise mentally affect) all of the Champions at once - but it was at a time when they still respected/feared him, weren't prepared to engage him in battle, and quite possibly may have simply "let him do it" for fear that if they resisted he would destroy them. Once they decided that he should be destroyed, however, the only way Rajaat was able to even defeat a single one of them was via surprise and because of Sacha and Wyan telling him about the attack (I think that's how it went - I can't recall the exact details of the rebellion scene from RaF). Sure, none of these are flat-out stated as the reasons for why these things happened, but they also aren't contradicted anywhere, either - so if your pro-BD argument is based on "no contradictions" then my con-BD argument is just as valid.
Rajaat's not omniscient or all powerful. But he was smart enough to take advantage of an opportunity. Making the Champions was an opportunity to solidify his grip over them. Not being a complete moron, Rajaat took advantage of this opportunity.
I've never denied that he *should* have created a Back Door of some sort, or that he wasn't smart enough to do it. It's just that, for whatever reason, it doesn't appear that he *did* do so.
How do we know that Sacha and Wyan truly rebelled out of their own free will?
You're grasping at straws here, more of the "if you can't disprove it then it's a valid argument" stuff. If you want to go with that, then perhaps it was the *traitors* that were dominated by Rajaat and influenced/controlled into destroying him! What a ploy that would be, make your Champions think that they wanted to destroy you when in reality you wanted them to do it! And Sacha and Wyan were just there as scapegoats to make the whole thing sound feasible to the Champion's intelligent brains...brilliant! /sarcasm
All I'm saying is that the BDs gave Rajaat an advantage, but not a limitless advantage. That it's easier to give the necessary concentration to seize control over more than a dozen champions when you surprise them, than when they surprise you and clobber you without letting up. Seems quite logical to me.
...but again, that being the case, there's still no *need* for a BD - if Rajaat caught the Champions by surprise, with a bunch of contingent spells and powers and pre-cast stuff active, he probably could have done whatever the heck he wanted to them without even trying. If your BD Theory is largely based on the domination scene, there are other explanations that work as well - the above idea, or perhaps an epic dominate spell, or maybe at the time of the rebellion the Champions had put up an "anti-Rajaat's-Mind-Control-Spell Spell" (find something that contradicts that theory...), etc.
So yes, I can't argue that this statement of yours is logical - it does make sense. But given that there are alternatives, it simply isn't necessary.
In mechanical terms, I'd say, that the transformation gave the champions, say, a -X on their will saves against Rajaat's telepathy, and a few other goodies like that. Doesn't change the fact that Rajaat's got to have the chance to try to use his powers on them.
Again, sounds reasonable and I can't deny that it's a possiblity...but that still doesn't mean he did it. In mechanical terms, Rajaat could have also made an epic Dominate power or spell with an extremely high save DC, or even a "generic" spell/power that reduces the saves of those affected - either of those spells would be a lot more useful than a relatively minor BD, since he could use them on *anyone,* not just his Champions.
In response to Dirk's last straw man mischaracterization, I said:
That's a false accusation. I challenge you to show me a single set of rules and novels that contradicts this "back door" theory. I'm looking comprehensively at the published work regarding Rajaat. I'm not "picking and choosing." You're the one trying to toss out stuff that's not convenient like RaFoaDK, which happens to be the one published book that discusses the matter in the greatest detail.
Dirk replies:
Okay, now you're trying to use a "God Argument" to validate this Back Door theory, which is ludicrous and bad debate form - just because you can't disprove something doesn't mean that it's true, or that it's even a reasonable explanation.
Okay, now you're using another "straw man argument" to distract from the fact that you are shooting blanks.
I've emphasized on this thread that:
These and other facts don't prove "back door theory," but "back door theory" fits the published story. Other theories proposed here do not fit the published story. So unless anyone has a better argument than authority appeals to unpublished notes, or strange unexplained assumptions that any power = limitless power, I'm sticking with the idea that Rajaat placed in special weaknesses as well as epic strengths into the Champion Template, and fashioned Hamanu especially in order to take advantage of these weaknesses.
That I didn't think that the evidence "proved" back door theory. I simply said that back door theory fit the facts, and that the other theories did not fit the facts. I never even said you had to accept the BD theory; I simply stated my position and defied anyone to disprove it. Are we getting so codependent around here that we can't stand someone holding a position that we disagree with, but can't disprove?
You don't have to agree with me. You don't have to think that my explanation is reasonable. But if you can't form a coherent counterargument without misrepresenting what I said, then don't hit that reply button. You mischaracterize what I've said again, and we're going to have a problem.
I've never denied that he *should* have created a Back Door of some sort, or that he wasn't smart enough to do it. It's just that, for whatever reason, it doesn't appear that he *did* do so.
Based on your brilliant assumption that if there was a back door, Rajaat should have been able to use it flawlessly while getting the crap kicked out of him by a whole pack of Champions that ambushed him.
Next?How do we know that Sacha and Wyan truly rebelled out of their own free will?
[deleting mischaracterization] If you want to go with that, then perhaps it was the *traitors* that were dominated by Rajaat and influenced/controlled into destroying him! What a ploy that would be, make your Champions think that they wanted to destroy you when in reality you wanted them to do it! And Sacha and Wyan were just there as scapegoats to make the whole thing sound feasible to the Champion's intelligent brains...brilliant!
I think it's more reasonable that the people that Rajaat influenced were the ones that tried to let him go, despite the fact that they knew that Rajaat's goal was to exterminate the human race. Next?
if Rajaat caught the Champions by surprise, with a bunch of contingent spells and powers and pre-cast stuff active, he probably could have done whatever the heck he wanted to them without even trying.
And this probability is based on what, exactly?
So yes, I can't argue that this statement of yours is logical - it does make sense. But given that there are alternatives, it simply isn't necessary.
I didn't say it was necessary. I said it was more reasonable in the light of the facts. If it's a choice between making Rajaat 20 levels higher than we'd otherwise make him, and simply saying that he had some special edge over the champions that he had personally made, it seems more reasonable to go with the latter. Feel free to disagree, if you can do so without misrepresenting what I said.
In mechanical terms, I'd say, that the transformation gave the champions, say, a -X on their will saves against Rajaat's telepathy, and a few other goodies like that. Doesn't change the fact that Rajaat's got to have the chance to try to use his powers on them.
Again, sounds reasonable and I can't deny that it's a possiblity...but that still doesn't mean he did it.
That's what I said! Repeatedly!
In mechanical terms, Rajaat could have also made an epic Dominate power or spell with an extremely high save DC, or even a "generic" spell/power that reduces the saves of those affected - either of those spells would be a lot more useful than a relatively minor BD, since he could use them on *anyone,* not just his Champions.
That's a possiblity, but a poor fit for the facts, since as Abbey pointed out, it doesn't explain why Rajaat acted through Champions rather than just zapping everyone himself.
Are they? How do we know that Sacha and Wyan truly rebelled out of their own free will?
Sacha and Wyan did not rebel - hence they were turned into the floating heads for remaining loyal when the other Champs rebelled and given to Kalak by the Dragon.
Now it has been, well, most likely a decade since I read Rise and Fall, so my staetment above is a reference to comments made in the Prim Pentad books.
To follow up with my lack of current knowledge of what the RaFoaDK has in it, I was always under the assumption that the book was written from and is collected from the point of view and memories that Hamanu had - so if this is true, it could very well be that the book is nothing more then pages of lies - but I am not saying that this is true, only that the possibility exists.
One assumption that I think we do have to work from was this, Rajaat always was planning and manipulating events for things he planned in the future - he recruited students for defiling while teach in preserving, he killed off the preservers before he went after the races of the Cleansing - he planned for his long term goal of restoring the halflings. Is he all knowing? - no. Is he so intelligent that it is possible we do not even understand the reasoning for events he set into motion - I think so. It could very well be that he planned and counted on his Champions turning one him, maybe they just did it before he thought they would.
Anyway - that's it for now - more later.
Sacha and Wyan did not rebel - hence they were turned into the floating heads for remaining loyal when the other Champs rebelled and given to Kalak by the Dragon.
Didn't S&W get beheaded for trying to free Rajaat after the rebellion?
Dirk's analysis and rebutal was very good, and I feel that Brax's particular counterarguments to that rebutal were rather weak.
These I feel were the good points that were readily dismissed...and points I wanted to make, but I lack oration skills... :
[INDENT]Sure, Rajaat was able to dominate (or otherwise mentally affect) all of the Champions at once - but it was at a time when they still respected/feared him, weren't prepared to engage him in battle, and quite possibly may have simply "let him do it" for fear that if they resisted he would destroy them. Once they decided that he should be destroyed, however, the only way Rajaat was able to even defeat a single one of them was via surprise and because of Sacha and Wyan telling him about the attack (I think that's how it went - I can't recall the exact details of the rebellion scene from RaF). Sure, none of these are flat-out stated as the reasons for why these things happened, but they also aren't contradicted anywhere, either - so if your pro-BD argument is based on "no contradictions" then my con-BD argument is just as valid.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]If your BD Theory is largely based on the domination scene, there are other explanations that work as well - the above idea, or perhaps an epic dominate spell, or maybe at the time of the rebellion the Champions had put up an "anti-Rajaat's-Mind-Control-Spell Spell"[/INDENT]
In mechanical terms, I'd say, that the transformation gave the champions, say, a -X on their will saves against Rajaat's telepathy, and a few other goodies like that. Doesn't change the fact that Rajaat's got to have the chance to try to use his powers on them.
As far as I can tell, nothing in the blob you quoted makes that theory less likely.
If your BD Theory is largely based on the domination scene, there are other explanations that work as well - the above idea, or perhaps an epic dominate spell, or maybe at the time of the rebellion the Champions had put up an "anti-Rajaat's-Mind-Control-Spell Spell"
Neither of those ideas are incompatible with the BD theory that I explained above. In fact the second actually makes even more sense in conjunction with the BD explanation.
You mischaracterize what I've said again, and we're going to have a problem.
whooow...is this a threat? it sure looks like a threat. are we being a big cyber tough guy? i hope not because the dark sun boards have been a pretty friendly group of folks since i joined, but it seems to have had more confrontations in the last several months since some people have decided to come back.
the code of conduct says
Treat other people you encounter in the rooms just as you would treat them in person--politely.
i have been sitting on the side lines and have combed through several threads, and it has been one person in particular who has been causing the arguments - now why is there a need. reading the posts, i see that this person, while intelligent, is very rude and says things without regard to how others will take their response.
now...back to the topic...kind of...
i do not see how this current conversation the thread has been turned toward has really any revelance on psionics in the green age?
i think that if we wanted a look into how psionics were in the green age, we should use the last sea as an example/biulding block and begin there, as it is the only society that is in the published material that still practices the same form of psionics (before they were formalized into schools) and still have green age technology that they use in their daily lives.
Brax:
I'm not even going to bother quoting you anymore, since you're definitively taking my statements out of context (leaving off my /sarcasm remark from one of my last statements, for instance, and replying to said statement as if I were serious about it), and replying to anything else you say is equally pointless as you seem to be doing your best to keep your responses as ambiguous as possible so you can use them to benefit whatever it is you are currently saying.
Having gotten that out of the way, let me simplify this for you: the idea of a Back Door, built into the Champions by Rajaat, is in no way directly supported by anything, anywhere, in any Dark Sun materials be they rulebooks, novels or otherwise. At best the idea is a *possibility* based on, literally, one scene from one book that almost the entire Dark Sun community considers to be "good flavor text with a dash of historical/canon value" at best and outright incorrect rubbish at worst. There is no statement, anywhere, that this "Back Door" actually exists, so at best we can treat it like a scientific theory - posit the hypothesis, then test it's validity in an attempt to disprove it.
By the same token, we can posit the theory that there was no Back Door and that it was any number of other explanations (which I and others have mentioned) that could also explain what happened. We should, of course, examine those hypothesis' and attempt to disprove them as well.
With the Back Door theory, you have multiple examples of cases where a Back Door, if it existed, was either not used or else was so low-key that it didn't make the least bit of difference. Since this theory is purely speculation, we can also take examples from several other events involving Rajaat and the Champions, and speculate as to how a Back Door would have best been used in those situations, if it existed. As it stands, you are the only person who somehow sees this Back Door theory as the "best fit" across the board, while myself and others look at these varied situations and instead interpret them as indiciations that there *wasn't* a Back Door of any sort.
On the other hand, if you take one of my counter-theories that (as Penn just quoted) "[the mass domination] was at a time when they still respected/feared him, weren't prepared to engage him in battle, and quite possibly may have simply 'let him do it' for fear that if they resisted he would destroy them" you will find that there is nothing at all to contradict this, that it is event-specific enough that you can ignore it if you wish when examining other situations involving Rajaat and the Champions, that it is easy to find other evidence that would support this theory (namely, that the Champions feared Rajaat and his power, at the time this event occurred at least), and that it requires no real special abilities to pull off (other than a high manifester level).
And that's just one of those other theories that doesn't bring up additional questions when you examine it in light of other situations.
As a final note, in regards to the one quote I *will* respond to:
I didn't say it was necessary. I said it was more reasonable in the light of the facts. If it's a choice between making Rajaat 20 levels higher than we'd otherwise make him, and simply saying that he had some special edge over the champions that he had personally made, it seems more reasonable to go with the latter.
You realize that, Back Door or not, unless that Back Door included an "automatic dominate" ability, or something similar, Rajaat would still need to be an extremely high-level psion, right? A 40th-level psion (or someone capable of spending 40 Power Points on a single power through some other means) is still required for him to dominate over a dozen individuals simultaneously, regardless of their saves. There are other mechanical options as well - maybe he was Schism'd and did two simultaneous dominates, or he had a psicrystal that took over concentration of one dominate while he Quickened a second dominate during the same action - which would drastically reduce his psion level, and aside from the Save DC these options work just as fine given my scenario as they do with your Back Door theory.
The *only* way that your BD would help is if the Champions did, in fact, try and resist Rajaat's domination attempt - the power could have been DC 10 for all it matters if they chose not to. And, as I've posited and Penn has agreed with, there's a good reason to think that the Champions may have simply decided to fail their saves - because if they didn't, not only would they have Rajaat to contend with, but they'd also have had to face the might of each other Champion that *had* been dominated by Rajaat.
The other option here that'd make the BD theory plausible is if it did, in fact, assist *specifically* with the manifestation of dominate-style powers used against the Champions. But if we're going to go that far, then it comes around to my argument of "if Rajaat installed a Back Door, and had the capability of making it very potent (such as this "insta-dominate" idea), why wouldn't he have been able to use it when the Champions rebelled?"
If this post doesn't explain my arguments against your BD Theory clearly and effectively enough, I honestly don't know what will.
In mechanical terms, I'd say, that the transformation gave the champions, say, a -X on their will saves against Rajaat's telepathy, and a few other goodies like that. Doesn't change the fact that Rajaat's got to have the chance to try to use his powers on them.
Now Dirk says:
You realize that, Back Door or not, unless that Back Door included an "automatic dominate" ability, or something similar, Rajaat would still need to be an extremely high-level psion, right?
He'd have to be high level. But his necessary level (do the math) would be X levels lower than what he'd need to be without the BD.
There are other mechanical options as well - maybe he was Schism'd and did two simultaneous dominates, or he had a psicrystal that took over concentration of one dominate while he Quickened a second dominate during the same action - which would drastically reduce his psion level, and aside from the Save DC these options work just as fine given my scenario as they do with your Back Door theory.
Like I said before, they all work better in conjunction with a BD than without one.
If this post doesn't explain my arguments against your BD Theory clearly and effectively enough, I honestly don't know what will.
Nothing you've said articulates any intelligible argument against my BD theory, and it's been clear for some time now that you don't know what will. You even said earlier that you weren't opposed to BD theory. Make up your mind before you try to make up mine.
Dirk's analysis and rebutal was very good, and I feel that Brax's particular counterarguments to that rebutal were rather weak.
Those words don't mean what you think they mean. A "rebuttal" would require Dirk to address my arguments, and a "counterargument" presupposes an actual argument.
Brax simply does not believe his posts might be insulting,
On the contrary, I understand that my posts are insulting according to your point of view. I take your word for that. I don't know what I'm doing precisely that gets you wound up, and when I asked you what it was, you said that it was "my problem." That quickly killed any interest I might have had to adapting my style to suit your sensitivities. I don't believe in original sin or other types of vague, generalized blame.
At this point I'm willing to concede every other point, if you want; explain how that theory doesn't "fit the facts" better than your BD theory does.
On the contrary, I understand that my posts are insulting according to your point of view. I take your word for that. I don't know what I'm doing precisely that gets you wound up, and when I asked you what it was, you said that it was "my problem." That quickly killed any interest I might have had to adapting my style to suit your sensitivities. I don't believe in original sin or other types of vague, generalized blame.
Be creative, you'll figure it out. I won't tell you how to act, that would actually be an insult. You need to figure out what you're doing wrong, like we all do in all other facets of our lives. In certain posts when we tried to point to you the stuff we found insulting, you either ignored or rejected the intepretations we made. You do not acknowledge that you're doing something wrong, only that we're "feeling" insulted, according to us. That we can't articulate the problem does not make it less real, and is a testimony to just how good you are with language. A lesser writter I could have managed to point out what he's doing wrong, but the insulting parts of your posts are...general, part of the tone...nothing precise like a blatantly insulting phrase. Nothing that simple.
Maybe someone really good with words, and who knows the concepts behind language and propriety and stuff, could point out specific things to Brax, with - of course - his permission to say so without it being intepreted as an insult?
Be creative, you'll figure it out.
Penn, if you asked me to clarify something I'd said, and I replied "be creative, you'll figure it out," you would not find that insulting?
In certain posts when we tried to point to you the stuff we found insulting, you either ignored or rejected the intepretations we made.
That's rich, Penn. So if you accuse me of saying or meaning X, and I say, no, I didn't mean that at all, I've "rejected" your "interpretation" and thus hurt your feelings more?
That we can't articulate the problem does not make it less real is a testimony to just how good you are with language.
So my ability with language causes you to lose the ability to communicate? I don't believe it, and I don't believe that you believe it. You're smart, lucid. You're also perfectly articulate when you want to be, so long as you have a real argument to articulate.
general, part of the tone...nothing precise like a blatantly insulting phrase.
Yes, I guess when I'm dissapointed in someone, it comes through. I don't have much of a poker face.
At this point I'm willing to concede every other point, if you want
Dirk, I don't *want* you to concede any "point." This isn't a game to me. I'm just looking to offer my point of view and get real feedback on ideas. Precise criticism of what I actually said is useful to me.
explain how that theory doesn't "fit the facts" better than your BD theory does.
You mean this one?
the Champions simply chose to fail their saving throws?
Dirk, have you overlooked Hamanu's commentary on the whole mass possession incident in RoFoaDK? How do you reconcile your than "champions chose to fail their saves" theory with Hamanu's amazement that Rajaat could so easily seize control like that? If Hamanu'd deliberately failed his save, why would that amaze him?
Dirk, have you overlooked Hamanu's commentary on the whole mass possession incident in RoFoaDK? How do you reconcile your than "champions chose to fail their saves" theory with Hamanu's amazement that Rajaat could so easily seize control like that? If Hamanu'd deliberately failed his save, why would that amaze him?
(Yes, that's the one I was referring to)
First off, RaFoaDK is written from the perspective of Hamanu, based on how he remembers the various events of his life - that's really the only reason anyone even refers to that book when try to prove (or disprove) some point or theory, as otherwise there'd be no reconciling it with other (canon) sources. In other words, you can use the argument that "the way he perceived events doesn't necessarily mean that's how they actually happened...that's just how he remembers them, how he interprets them, and when writing down his life story, how he explains them to whomever will read his memoirs."
With that in mind, Hamanu being amazed doesn't mean anything other than that - he was amazed at the power. Heck, it's possible that he *didn't* purposely fail his saving throw...but he was also a "new" Champion, *and* he was constructed differently than the others (especially if you go with the RaF interpretation of these changes...but even the PP and other sources note that he's different), *and* it was, in fact, an amazing feat of mental might - Rajaat pulled off a 40th-level psionic manifestation, after all, regardless of failed saves or not.
(Yes, that's the one I was referring to)
First off, RaFoaDK is written from the perspective of Hamanu, based on how he remembers the various events of his life - that's really the only reason anyone even refers to that book when try to prove (or disprove) some point or theory, as otherwise there'd be no reconciling it with other (canon) sources. In other words, you can use the argument that "the way he perceived events doesn't necessarily mean that's how they actually happened...that's just how he remembers them, how he interprets them, and when writing down his life story, how he explains them to whomever will read his memoirs."
And yet the fact that he remembers them that way is still a fact. You may argue that it's not overwhelming evidence, but it is evidence. Therefore BD theory is more consistent with the body of canonical fact than your theory that the champions deliberately failed their saves. (And for those that discard RaFoaDK as non-canonical, the whole argument is moot, since RaFoaDK is the only source that presents a scene where Rajaat seizes control of all his Champions' minds at once.
With that in mind, Hamanu being amazed doesn't mean anything other than that - he was amazed at the power. Heck, it's possible that he *didn't* purposely fail his saving throw...but he was also a "new" Champion, *and* he was constructed differently than the others (especially if you go with the RaF interpretation of these changes...but even the PP and other sources note that he's different), *and* it was, in fact, an amazing feat of mental might - Rajaat pulled off a 40th-level psionic manifestation, after all, regardless of failed saves or not.
It's also an amazing feat of mental might even with BD theory, i.e. that the champions have some penalty to their saves when their maker tries to manipulate them. It's just *less* amazing than it might have been otherwise. Your theory, just like BD theory, posits a Rajaat that's could potentially be only a few levels higher than the Champions.
One idea occurs to me know that might make your "deliberately failed saving throw" term believable. You could argue that the champions knew that Rajaat would kill them if they did resist. Perhaps this is what you meant, and I just failed to understand you.
One problem you'll face with the literalists is that your interpretation would mean that Rajaat actually did not technically "seize control" of all his champions at once. It would mean that they allowed him to control them. I don't have a problem with that, because like you said, the whole account is from Hamanu's perspective. If they let him control them, Hamanu still might have perceived it as seizing control.
I have been avoiding this thread, but what if this "Back Door" was simply that none of the immunities and resistance granted by the Champion Template function against Rajaat? That whole: your powers don't work on me!!! Like what Rajaat said to Sadira in CS. That seems to work, at least for me. Especially if the champions became reliant on their granted immunities, which they would over the centuries.
Nice - simple, direct, in line with material in the published books, and did I say simple!
Nice - simple, direct, in line with material in the published books, and did I say simple!
Simple is good.
I have been avoiding this thread, but what if this "Back Door" was simply that none of the immunities and resistance granted by the Champion Template function against Rajaat? That whole: your powers don't work on me!!! Like what Rajaat said to Sadira in CS. That seems to work, at least for me. Especially if the champions became reliant on their granted immunities, which they would over the centuries.
Yes, that would be the easiest way to implement my simple description of a "back door." (-x on saves v. Rajaat's powers). In epic terms, what you propose is not that different from a +2 spellcasting DC to allow the caster to cancel the effect at will, except here it would be to suspend the effect or simply ignore it. Ad hoc, I'd say that what you've proposed is a mere +1 DC, since being able to bypass your own effect should far simpler stuff than being able to completely cancel it at will.
Note that Hamanu said the exact same thing to Sadira in RaFoaDK as well. This would fit into my theory that Rajaat made Hamanu special, keying Hamanu to the back doors to enable him to become the ultimate cleanser of Champions.
I have been avoiding this thread, but what if this "Back Door" was simply that none of the immunities and resistance granted by the Champion Template function against Rajaat? That whole: your powers don't work on me!!! Like what Rajaat said to Sadira in CS. That seems to work, at least for me. Especially if the champions became reliant on their granted immunities, which they would over the centuries.
Well...the problem with that is it pushes us in the direction of the "limitless power" issue, and moreso brings up the various problems I and others have mentioned in regards to the Rebellion and the "re-capture" of Rajaat - if he could build something like that into the Champions, then how could they have defeated him not once but twice, and on top of that what's stopping him from also adding a little "off switch" along with the "anti-immunity switch" that simply stops them from attacking him?
As for Sadira, she's a totally different case than the Champions, created thousands of years after the Champions rebelled, created by Rajaat's post-imprisonment minions (who must have "learned" what to do to Sadira from The Big R himself), and was also a purely arcane thing - unlike the Champions she was only a wizard, with no psionic powers.
There's probably more to this than the above, but I can't think of it at the moment.
And yet the fact that he remembers them that way is still a fact. You may argue that it's not overwhelming evidence, but it is evidence. Therefore BD theory is more consistent with the body of canonical fact than your theory that the champions deliberately failed their saves. (And for those that discard RaFoaDK as non-canonical, the whole argument is moot, since RaFoaDK is the only source that presents a scene where Rajaat seizes control of all his Champions' minds at once.
...that last bit is kind of the kicker, since I don't consider RaFoaDK canonical - I like some parts of it, but as I said, beyond thinking of it as "Hamanu's perceptions of events, written down for others to read" I think it conflicts much too much with the rest of the Dark Sun setting to be considered a source of canon material. However, I have no problems looking at it in that light, and trying to work its contents into canon material in a way that makes sense.
As to the first part, I'll grant that it is evidence to support *something* that Rajaat could do above and beyond simple psionics or magic, although I don't see how it necessarily supports a BD Theory - it could very well have been an epic version of dominate, etc. Just because it's evidence of something doesn't at all lead to your "Therefor BD theory is more consistent..." statement.
It's also an amazing feat of mental might even with BD theory, i.e. that the champions have some penalty to their saves when their maker tries to manipulate them. It's just *less* amazing than it might have been otherwise. Your theory, just like BD theory, posits a Rajaat that's could potentially be only a few levels higher than the Champions.
Absolutely - I don't mean to say that my Failed Save Theory, or Epic Dominate Theory, or anything else I've mentioned are solid theories, and I agree that not only might Rajaat have been only a few psion levels higher than the Champs, but that technically he could have even been less powerful...a purposely failed save is a failed save regardless of how powerful the manifester is, after all.
I also agree that if there was a BD that gave the Champs penalties to their saves against Rajaat that it would be less amazing than if they didn't...but since I don't think that's a reasonable answer either I can't really take that as some sort of evidence pro-DB theory (the odds of over a dozen highly powerful individuals all failing their saves, penalities or not, is pretty darn unlikely regardless of the save DC; if this were d20 and, lessay, 15 people were affected, there's a better-than-average chance that at least one would have rolled a nat. 20 and saved no matter what their save bonuses were. That's not really evidence per-se, but something worth noting).
One idea occurs to me know that might make your "deliberately failed saving throw" term believable. You could argue that the champions knew that Rajaat would kill them if they did resist. Perhaps this is what you meant, and I just failed to understand you.
YES! That's *exactly* what I meant - I thought I made it clear, but if not well...it's clear now. Here's the rationale: The Champions knew that their master had invented magic, had an unknown amount of power, and had given them immortality as well as the most prestigious (in their minds) positions of power on the face of Athas...but they had no way of knowing exactly *how* powerful he was, and being the paranoid individuals they are, I can even see them assuming that he *did* have some sort of unique ability to affect and/or control them. With that in mind, if each one of them simultaneously received a mental "knock" from their master, from their point of view all they'd know is that Rajaat was trying to do something to them specifically, for unknown reasons. In that split-second of decision-making time, what would they have thought? I'm guessing it was something like "If I resist this, will he simply destroy me? Is everyone else being affected as well? Does he know that I've thought nasty thoughts about him and he's testing my loyalty?" With those thoughts in mind, the Champions literally not knowing exactly what's going on nor whether or not everyone else is being affected, all they really have to go on is this idea that the being that "created" them is trying to enter their brains, and their two choices are to either attempt and resist or let him do it. I don't think any of them, at that point in time, would have thought resisting was the better choice - better to let Rajaat have his way and hope to the elements that he isn't about to destroy them than to attempt and resist him - an attempt which, for all they knew, might not have any possibility of even working.
Now later on, when they find out that Rajaat plans on killing all the humans as well, things have changed - they have time to rationalize away their paranoia, realizing that if they rebel against him as a group that either he will kill them all or else they'll kill him, but since he's going to eventually get rid of them anyway it's not like their deaths aren't already an eventuality. So they decide to go for it - the group decision being that it's better to stand against him and fail than to continue doing his bidding when, in the end, he's going to dispose of them anyway.
This is actually an aspect of why I don't think Rajaat even felt that something like a Back Door would be necessary - as long as the Champions didn't trust each other, feared him and his unknown powers, and got to reap the rewards of their service to him (i.e. power and prestige amongst mankind) that they'd "regulate" themselves; he wouldn't need any special power over them because he could defeat any of them one-on-one or even several-on-one. His downfall was being so confident in his plans and judgement of his Champions (that they were all too paranoid to ever work together cohesively - IIRC Hamanu mentions that several times in RaF, so I think it's fair to say that for the sake of this argument at least that was one of the "requirements" for becoming a Champion was this inability to "work well with others") that he didn't take into account that, if they *did* decide to all band against him simultaneously, he wouldn't be able to stop them.
One problem you'll face with the literalists is that your interpretation would mean that Rajaat actually did not technically "seize control" of all his champions at once. It would mean that they allowed him to control them. I don't have a problem with that, because like you said, the whole account is from Hamanu's perspective. If they let him control them, Hamanu still might have perceived it as seizing control.
That and, even from a literal standpoint, "seizing control" doesn't necessarily mean that it's against the will of who/whatever your target is. Literally speaking, you can "seize control of the (steering) wheel" because the driver just fell out the door while driving down the highway - the phrasology makes the statement dramatic and does hint at some sort of struggle, but it doesn't necessitate one. Not that it matters (since you agree that it's from Hamanu's perspective) but good to note.
Well...the problem with that is it pushes us in the direction of the "limitless power" issue, and moreso brings up the various problems I and others have mentioned in regards to the Rebellion and the "re-capture" of Rajaat - if he could build something like that into the Champions, then how could they have defeated him not once but twice, and on top of that what's stopping him from also adding a little "off switch" along with the "anti-immunity switch" that simply stops them from attacking him?
You can't add something to an epic spell once it's been cast.
If you meant, what's to stop him from having added an "off switch," the answer is plain in the Epic Rules -- NOTHING. Rajaat *could* have put an off-switch, since that's one of the basic factors that you can add to *any* epic spell that you create. (Granted, if it's something like a fireball, an off-switch doesn't have much function, but a transformation ... that's something different.)
I would say that Rajaat would be too smart to create an off-switch like that, since the possibility exists that Rajaat himself could be mentally coerced, or that someone might find some other way of triggering that key. A bypass, aka a back door, would have been the best strategy. That doesn't mean that it was his only strategy, but all the things that you've said here are synergistic with the BD theory, or simply don't affect it. Even if some champions deliberatel failed saves, or pretended to be controlled to avoid Rajaat's wrath, that would not make the BD less likely, just less necessary under those circumstances.
That and, even from a literal standpoint, "seizing control" doesn't necessarily mean that it's against the will of who/whatever your target is. Literally speaking, you can "seize control of the (steering) wheel" because the driver just fell out the door while driving down the highway
It is true that you can seize control of an inanimate object like a steering wheel without an actual struggle with another person. But here, we're talking about seizing control of a person's mind. If they gave control to him, that means he didn't seize control.
Not that it matters (since you agree that it's from Hamanu's perspective)
I agree that it's from Hamanu's perspective. All perspectives are flawed, but unopposed testimony isn't something we can just disregard, either. If unopposed testimony corroborates theory A and clashes with theory B, you'd need a pretty good reason to choose theory B over theory A.
I don't think that Chris' theory pushes us in the direction of limitless power ... seems to me that all three of us are pulling in the same direction, in the direction that the circunstances do not require us to say Rajaat is dozens of levels higher than the Champions.
A question about this word canon that I keep seeing here. I'm familiar with a few definitions of the word canon, and I'm not sure which one is in common usage here. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/canonical
I've always thought that you guys meant this one:
3. authorized; recognized; accepted: canonical works.
You could read that as saying that there's some sort of official recognition committee that determines what's "canon," or you could read that as saying that a community's general acceptance conveys acceptance. But neither of those interpretations synchs with statements that I've seen lately that "I don't think that X is canon." Unless we've elected some pope of Dark Sun, one person's acceptance or rejection of a book would not affect canonicity. I'm unaware of any official body that states what books are canon and which are not.
What I'm seeing here, is that many people that say that they do not accept RaFoaDK as "canon" seem to rely on it for facts about the Cleansing Wars, about Hamanu, and about Rajaat.
Another example:
Is the Wanderer's Chronicle "canon"? I've yet to run into anyone who would say no. But does that mean that we have to classify the city-state of Eldaarich as part of the "Jagged Cliffs region", since that's where the WC places it? :D
If you meant, what's to stop him from having added an "off switch," the answer is plain in the Epic Rules -- NOTHING. Rajaat *could* have put an off-switch, since that's one of the basic factors that you can add to *any* epic spell that you create. (Granted, if it's something like a fireball, an off-switch doesn't have much function, but a transformation ... that's something different.)
...except that there's no Epic seeds (from the EPH, that is) that even allows for a spell that could create a Champion. *Maybe* you could do it similar to an "origin of..." spell, but I doubt it.
Otherwise that's actually, more or less, my take on the BD thing in regards to what you refer to as "limitless power" - that if he installed a BD, it'd be an "all or nothing" one, not simply something to make it *easier* for him to do soething to them....it'd be something that would give him total control over them, at any time, at the drop of a hat. "Turning off" their Champion-status would work just fine for this, although there is of course no evidence to support the idea.
I would say that Rajaat would be too smart to create an off-switch like that, since the possibility exists that Rajaat himself could be mentally coerced, or that someone might find some other way of triggering that key. A bypass, aka a back door, would have been the best strategy. That doesn't mean that it was his only strategy, but all the things that you've said here are synergistic with the BD theory, or simply don't affect it. Even if some champions deliberatel failed saves, or pretended to be controlled to avoid Rajaat's wrath, that would not make the BD less likely, just less necessary under those circumstances.
I disagree with this: any sort of Back Door, regardless of its potency, has the possibility of being "used" by the enemy. Although with a minor "-X to saves" BD that wouldn't be as big of a deal, but still...who would benefit more from that, Rajaat or some lower-powered enemy that might figure out how to access this BD? As has been pointed out, Rajaat was obviously extremely powerful - so any "-X" save modifier that he'd actually *need* would likely either be very small or very large (depending on how much of a saving throw bonus you figure the Champions have). If it was very small, then it's not really going to make any difference to Rajaat or anyone else anyway...so why bother? If it was very big, then it'd be just as dangerous as a "full off" switch in the hands of the enemy, since it would allow individuals who normally stood no chance of affecting a Champion to actually be able to hit them with powers and such.
I agree that it's from Hamanu's perspective. All perspectives are flawed, but unopposed testimony isn't something we can just disregard, either. If unopposed testimony corroborates theory A and clashes with theory B, you'd need a pretty good reason to choose theory B over theory A.
True...which is why I don't believe in the BD Theory, as there's a lot more "testimony" that calls it into question than there is supporting evidence (namely, a single scene from RaF).
I don't think that Chris' theory pushes us in the direction of limitless power ... seems to me that all three of us are pulling in the same direction, in the direction that the circunstances do not require us to say Rajaat is dozens of levels higher than the Champions.
It does in that, if Rajaat could totally nullify the Champion's powers then there's no reason they should have been able to defeat him. To boot, as you suggested above, adding in any sort of BD that would nullify the Champion's immunities and such would definitely be "bad" in the hands of the enemy, so I doubt Rajaat would ever add that in. It's not "limitless power" but it *is* dangerous, and at odds with your "he's smarter than that" statement.
As for Rajaat's power level, yes, I think everyone can agree that there are multiple ways in which Rajaat could have "done what he did" without being horrifically high-level. Not sure what that has to do with the viability of the BD Theory, but I'll agree with it.
A question about this word canon that I keep seeing here. ...You could read that as saying that there's some sort of official recognition committee that determines what's "canon," or you could read that as saying that a community's general acceptance conveys acceptance. But neither of those interpretations synchs with statements that I've seen lately that "I don't think that X is canon." Unless we've elected some pope of Dark Sun, one person's acceptance or rejection of a book would not affect canonicity. I'm unaware of any official body that states what books are canon and which are not.
What I'm seeing here, is that many people that say that they do not accept RaFoaDK as "canon" seem to rely on it for facts about the Cleansing Wars, about Hamanu, and about Rajaat.
I've gone through this "WTF are you talking about, 'canon'?" question before, so I know where you're at. Basically, there are certain books that are considered to be "absolute truth" when it comes to the Dark Sun setting, there are others that are "close enough" that they're considered canon, there's RaF, and then there's the "er...what the $($#@?" materials. The "ruling body" that dictates canon vs. non-canon is the general DS community, as represented on these boards, which is then taken by the officials at athas.org and released as "WotC-approved Dark Sun Material". Or something like that.
Anyhoo...most people here consider the original boxed set plus the Prism Pentad to be the ultimate canon material, as they were both written (and/or directly influenced) by Troy Denning. After that you've got the revised set, which is largely canon as it rehashes much of what was described in the PP...although it missinterprets parts of the PP and so isn't completely correct. Most DS game materials also take precedence over novels (aside from the PP) when there are conflicts, although *which* game materials are "more" canon than others becomes questionable when dealing with some of the last published Dark Sun books - although the revised set seemed to clarify some aspects of the pre-revised-set game materials that didn't jive with the PP, it and other subsequent post-revised-set products ended up contradicting previously published game materials and so are iffy in regards to how "canon" they should be considered.
As for RaF, it falls into the "meh" category because so much of it contradicts, or at least clashes with, information from the Prism Pentad as well as almost every released game material. RaF has incorrect Champion names and jobs, it makes a mess of the PP's ending (there's been at least one other thread about this, regarding what really happened to the Dark Lens and what "Rajaat's new prison" actually is, as stated in the PP), and of course there's the total whack-job finale to the book. So to a lot of the DS community, RaF is really only appropriate for "Hamanu's perceptions of things" - it's not canon in that you can't quite RaF and say "See! That's what REALLY happened!" but it does have enough descriptive parts, say about the CWs and how the Champions interacted, that it's still worth referring to now and then.
And then there's most of the other novels, which are so screwey that no one refers to 'em.
Another example:
Is the Wanderer's Chronicle "canon"? I've yet to run into anyone who would say no. But does that mean that we have to classify the city-state of Eldaarich as part of the "Jagged Cliffs region", since that's where the WC places it? :D
...If for some reason you needed to put Eldaarich into a "regional category" then yes, that'd be where you'd put it. :P
Otherwise that's actually, more or less, my take on the BD thing in regards to what you refer to as "limitless power" - that if he installed a BD, it'd be an "all or nothing" one, not simply something to make it *easier* for him to do soething to them....it'd be something that would give him total control over them, at any time, at the drop of a hat.
Yes, if you distort another person's argument, you can make it seem absurd, but that's not reasonable discussion. You know very well that's not what I mean. I've asked you not to do that, because your straw man colors the way that I read and respond to everything else that you say. To me, that's a problem. For some reason, Seraph of Dim took my earlier request as some heavy-handed "threat." :D
...except that there's no Epic seeds (from the EPH, that is) that even allows for a spell that could create a Champion.
Oh? Which aspects of championhood would you say could not be accounted for by the combined seeds of "transform" and "fortify"?
*Maybe* you could do it similar to an "origin of..." spell, but I doubt it.
That's to create a creature from scratch.
"Turning off" their Champion-status would work just fine for this, although there is of course no evidence to support the idea.
You've already conceded above that there's evidence of "something," even though that something isn't *necessarily* BD.
I disagree with this: any sort of Back Door, regardless of its potency, has the possibility of being "used" by the enemy.
That's what I just said in my last post, although the epic rules do not discuss this, so the epic board may disagree with me.
Although with a minor "-X to saves" BD that wouldn't be as big of a deal, but still...who would benefit more from that, Rajaat or some lower-powered enemy that might figure out how to access this BD?
Obviously Rajaat would have the most benefit, because Rajaat does know how to access it, while the others only have at most a possibility of knowing how to accessing it.
As has been pointed out, Rajaat was obviously extremely powerful
The Champions were obviously extremely powerful. The issue here is how powerful does Rajaat need to be compared to the Champions. You said above that it's not absolutely necessary for Rajaat to even be higher level than the Champions, and while I think he probably was higher level, I agree that one could construe the facts so that Rajaat was actually lower level than Dregoth is today.
- so any "-X" save modifier that he'd actually *need* would likely either be very small or very large (depending on how much of a saving throw bonus you figure the Champions have). If it was very small, then it's not really going to make any difference to Rajaat or anyone else anyway...so why bother? If it was very big, then it'd be just as dangerous as a "full off" switch in the hands of the enemy, since it would allow individuals who normally stood no chance of affecting a Champion to actually be able to hit them with powers and such.
Not as dangerous, since Rajaat could wrestle the third party for control of the Champion.
True...which is why I don't believe in the BD Theory, as there's a lot more "testimony" that calls it into question than there is supporting evidence (namely, a single scene from RaF).
Oh? Which "testimony" would that be? Source me.
It does in that, if Rajaat could totally nullify the Champion's powers then there's no reason they should have been able to defeat him.
I'm unaware of anything specifically in the champion template that is essential for defeating Rajaat. IF, as Chris proposes, the BD was simply an immunity to the protections of the Champion template, then the champions' other levels and powers might still be enough to defeat Rajaat.
To boot, as you suggested above, adding in any sort of BD that would nullify the Champion's immunities and such would definitely be "bad" in the hands of the enemy, so I doubt Rajaat would ever add that in. It's not "limitless power" but it *is* dangerous, and at odds with your "he's smarter than that" statement.
Congradulations. You just explained the preserver Jihad. Before creating the Champions, Rajaat set out specifically to eliminate those most likely to pull off what you just described. (There are other explations for the preserver jihad.)
As for Rajaat's power level, yes, I think everyone can agree that there are multiple ways in which Rajaat could have "done what he did" without being horrifically high-level. Not sure what that has to do with the viability of the BD Theory, but I'll agree with it.
At this point, I'm OK with you not understanding how one explanation of how Rajaat could have done what he did without being horrifically high level, has to do with Rajaat not needing to be horrifically high level to do what he did. :D Time to cut our losses and move on.
I've gone through this "WTF are you talking about, 'canon'?" question before, so I know where you're at. Basically, there are certain books that are considered to be "absolute truth" when it comes to the Dark Sun setting, there are others that are "close enough" that they're considered canon, there's RaF, and then there's the "er...what the $($#@?" materials. The "ruling body" that dictates canon vs. non-canon is the general DS community, as represented on these boards, which is then taken by the officials at athas.org and released as "WotC-approved Dark Sun Material". Or something like that.
"Absolute truth" requires noncontradiction. Would you claim that a majority of DS fans believe that the "canonical" sources never contradict each other?
Anyhoo...most people here consider the original boxed set plus the Prism Pentad to be the ultimate canon material, as they were both written (and/or directly influenced) by Troy Denning.
What if Troy Denning made conflicting statements about Dark Sun? What then? Cataclysm? Dark Sun's survived a number of those.
After that you've got the revised set, which is largely canon as it rehashes much of what was described in the PP...although it missinterprets parts of the PP and so isn't completely correct.
OK, now you're talking about a hierarchy of sources, which conflicts with your absolute truth construct. Or do I misunderstand you?
Most DS game materials also take precedence over novels (aside from the PP) when there are conflicts, although *which* game materials are "more" canon than others becomes questionable when dealing with some of the last published Dark Sun books - although the revised set seemed to clarify some aspects of the pre-revised-set game materials that didn't jive with the PP, it and other subsequent post-revised-set products ended up contradicting previously published game materials and so are iffy in regards to how "canon" they should be considered.
So ... some absolute truths are less absolute than others?
And if it's just a matter of precedence, why do some folks try to dismiss RaFoaDK's "canon" status without even bringing up a conflicting source? Are certain DS fans' pet ideas more "canonical" than some published works?
I understand the comfortable need for "absolute" constructs, but when you wield them in such an arbitrary and capricious way, you might as well admit that you're a relativist.
...If for some reason you needed to put Eldaarich into a "regional category" then yes, that'd be where you'd put it.
You can put Eldaarich wherever you like in your campaign, but I am not putting Eldaarich in the "jagged cliffs" region.
"Regions" and "ages" are abitrary constructs. One geographer or historian groups things one way, and another geographer groups them another way. The wanderer made this clear when he referred to the "Tyr region." He said right out that this was his arbitrary decision:
In honor of my home city, I call the region I have explored the Tyr Region. This in no way implies that Tyr dominates this vast area-it doesn't-or even that is the largest city in the area-it isn't. All that it is meant by the name is that I started my explorations in Tyr, and this is the region I have explored.
-The Wanderer's Journal, page 67.
BTW, didn't you just say that the original box set was more "canonical" than the revised one?
To psionically dominate 13 individuals, all of whom are of the dragon type (...I don't think they were Dragons yet, but let's go with this anyway), would cost a total of 35 PPs and, assuming there's no items or anything giving "freebie" PPs, 35th manifester level. The Will save DC for this power is 28 + Rajaat's Int. modifier. If Rajaat only happened to be a psion (...), that's 8 ability score increases which he's probably dumping into Intelligence; let's assume he started with an Int of 18 (I'm being really conservative here) - that's an Int of 30. Since we haven't even included any wizard levels, and he *was* the originator of magic and all, let's give him another 8 Intelligence for 35 wizard and/or other class levels...so now we're at 40. On top of that let's tack on a +10 epic Intelligence-boosting item, so now we're at 46 - a +18 Int bonus. With all those feats from levels, let's give him another +2 to power save DCs just for the heck of it.
End result, Will DC 48 to save against Rajaat's psionic dominate.
Going with a strict 2e-to-3e interpretation of the Champions, let's say that they were 20th level wizards/20th level defilers, 10 of each of those levels having been taken prior to 21st level. We also need to add in at least 1 level of Dragon, so let's throw in another 5 levels just because we can. That's a base +14 Will save bonus, plus an extra +12 for their Epic levels - so Will +26. Wisdom probably wasn't an attribute they'd have dumped a lot of ability points into, but I'm going to be nice and say they all had 18's to start with, +4 for the Champion of Rajaat template. That makes Will +32. Let's also say that they, at the least, wore non-epic +5 Resistance items (a reasonable assumption, I think); Will +37. Let's throw in another +2 bonus for who-knows-what just because we can.
End result, the Champs have a Will +39 save.
With that, Rajaat only has a 20% chance of dominating these guys - they'd have to roll 4 or less to fail. So, without a Back Door, and without an Epic version of dominate (which could have an extremely high save DC), the Champions would have *had* to auto-fail their saves in order for the scene from RaF to make sense.
In order to "seize control" of 13 of them, if they made saves, we pretty much would have to say that his Back Door gave enough of a penalty that only a 20 on their save would succeed, and since that'd be a -12 penalty let's go with that as the "Back Door modifier." True, it could have been less, but there's already a good chance of at least 1 of them rolling a 20 - so to go less than that increases the odds of 1 or more Champions saving enough that I think it'd be bad to do it for the sake of this argument.
Now, if that were the case, then anyone else able to access this Back Door (say a Wind Mage who has been studying them, etc.) would be up against a Will +27 save when targeting a Champion. A 20th level psion, manifesting the same power at maximum PP's (he'd have to target other individuals, but whatever...I'm sure he could find some) with a +2 bonus from this or that and let's say a modified Int of 29 would have a save DC of 30; already the Champion has a 10% chance of failing. Since this'd probably be some sort of planned attack against the Champion (after all, how often do you get to attack 'em in the first place? And when you do, how often are you going to have the Secret Back Door Magic Word?), let's throw in a couple more psions using metaconcert, and maybe give this guy an epic-level Int booster, or something else to increase the save DC....and next thing you know, with just another +8 to the save DC, and the Champion has a 50% chance of being dominated.
And of course this could be any number of other powers, right?
My point is this - if your BD is just reducing the Champion's save, then odds are that if it helped Rajaat take control of all the Champs at one time, then it would be powerful enough to be a "big deal" in the hands of the enemy...so even your -X modifier, if you want to go with the idea that "Rajaat is smart enough not to install a BD that might help the enemy," would be more than enough to ruin a Champion should the enemy get ahold of it.
Which brings me back to "well, then...maybe they just decided to *pretend* like they resisted, so none of the other Champs would think they were weaklings, but in reality they all just gave in and let Rajaat 'seize control' of their brains."
Edit: Brax, this post was started while you were writing your last reply; I won't get to reply to that one 'til tomorrow, but please analyze and reply to this post as you feel fit
Now, if that were the case, then anyone else able to access this Back Door (say a Wind Mage who has been studying them, etc.)
Again, that would explain why Rajaat did not create the champions early in the preserver Jihad. My guess is that he believed that the great preservers were all dead by the time he made his Champions. Hence the explanation about stasis.
As you seem to have noticed in your edit reply, I addressed some of other issues in previous posts.
Despite my repeated requests, you've resorted to straw man arguments again with this "secret back door word." Since you're not addressing my BD theory at all, I'll let you continue to argue with yourself. Sorry for butting into your monologue.
Yes, if you distort another person's argument, you can make it seem absurd, but that's not reasonable discussion. You know very well that's not what I mean. I've asked you not to do that, because your straw man colors the way that I read and respond to everything else that you say. To me, that's a problem. For some reason, Seraph of Dim took my earlier request as some heavy-handed "threat." :D
why do you have to start being rude again? the comment I quoted before could have only been read as a threat.
You mischaracterize what I've said again, and we're going to have a problem.
so why are you slinging mud again. spelling my screen name as you have is a direct poke at me.
you asked for people to point out what you were doing to upset people, well i pointed out a tactic used by you that could be offensive to others. now you do this? honestly man what is your problem? if you do not like criticism and cannot handle it like an adult, then do not dish it out!
why do you have to start being rude again? the comment I quoted before could have only been read as a threat.
No one could reasonably read it in context as a heavy-handed threat. Any reasonable person who is familiar with how internet discussions work knows that I simply meant that "if you misrepresent me again I'm going to get annoyed with you." Yes, technically that is a "threat," but not a heavy-handed one. And certainly less discourteous than the misrepresentation itself. Your ludicrous "tough guy" construction spun the comment out of proportion.
you asked for people to point out what you were doing to upset people
Not true. To my knowledge, Pennarin is only one person, and I withdrew the invitation after he punted.
As for your charge that I've behaved childishly, my rebuttal is --
[INDENT]yeah, so?[/INDENT]:P
you asked for people to point out what you were doing to upset people
Not true. To my knowledge, Pennarin is only one person, and I withdrew the invitation after he punted.
As for your charge that I've behaved childishly, my rebuttal is --
yeah, so?
:P
This is just gold!
I'll have great difficulty taking you seriously now, Brax.
You just said, in not so many words, that you will no longer accept explanations as to what you're doing wrong.
Now that, as far as I'm concerned, means only one thing on your part: "I no longer abide to the rules of civilized argumentation. Any attempts by others to impart rules upon me and have me abide by them, I will ignore."
Why would any of us wish to discuss anything with you now, knowing the cost of doing it may be greater than the reward?
Why would any of us wish to discuss anything with you now, knowing the cost of doing it may be greater than the reward?
If you honestly believed your accusations against me, Penn, then you would not continue to discuss anything with me. But since I doubt that you even believe what you're saying, I doubt that I've heard the last of you on this forum. I suspect that is just one more bluff on your part to impress a handful of cronies that would tear you apart if you let them realize how smart and articulate you really are.
This conversation is over for me. Good luck guys, but here's my far-too-delayed advice, given to me from a friend a moment ago: Just let it drop.
Simple, lets hear it, what do you imagin was done in the green age with psionics?? What epic uses did they find for it? And, why do you think the green age was so powerful? And do you feel the SK's should have equally powerful psioinics having originated in the green age?? Do you think Rajaat's Psionics are green age quality??
I think that there were a far greater variety of psionic powers and specialties in the Green Age. But I doubt that they were objectively more powerful as a whole than modern (Tarandan) psions.
you make arguments against how other people write and express themselves, and yet when you are challenged on your own actions, you resort to petty actions and name calling.
I suspect that is just one more bluff on your part to impress a handful of cronies that would tear you apart if you let them realize how smart and articulate you really are.
this is almost funny. you say that pennarin is your friend, but you think that his augments are made to impress the group of "friends" you point a finger at, but you name no names and cannot honestly think that he has went though all of the hassle of writing these posts to protect some image he has here. how does that make any sense?
and your last post?
No one could reasonably read it in context as a heavy-handed threat. Any reasonable person who is familiar with how internet discussions work knows that I simply meant that "if you misrepresent me again I'm going to get annoyed with you." Yes, technically that is a "threat," but not a heavy-handed one. And certainly less discourteous than the misrepresentation itself. Your ludicrous "tough guy" construction spun the comment out of proportion.
am i an unreasonable person? i have been around the message boards long enough to pick up on many things and think that i am a knowledgeable and well informed user of these boards and i read this as a threat. who is "mischaracterizing" someone’s words now. i never said that it was a heavy-handed threat that you made, only that is appeared that you were threatening someone. a threat does not have to exclusively deal with physical violence. so how was i wrong? bullying someone with the verbal or written threat is the same thing as threatening someone with a fist.
why is it that we do not see other members of athas.org out here on these boards making rude comments - where is jon, flip, gab. and yes i bring athas.org into this because you are a representative of that website are you not? regardless of posting your personal thoughts, you represent the website whenever you post. your actions and words influence how others see the site.
right now i would ask that someone from the official site rein in thebrax. i plan on e-mailing some of the moderators and wizards of the coast themselves because i think that they should look and see how the words and actions of those who are running an official website and game that they hold the rights to conducts themselves. how is the relevant to you? well like i said before, everything you post is a reflection upon them, just like a board member of a corporation or a major business represents the company they sit for. i do not think that they would enjoy the fact they have a person in who represents them and their copyright out here on the boards acting in the manner that you have been conducting yourself in.
i am not doing this out of some malicious intent i assure you. i just wanted to make the message board a fun place again where we can all exchange ideas freely without the fear that we will be jumped upon for spelling a word wrong, misusing a verb or noun, using the wrong word, or not understanding what someone is saying. you do do these things and it is uncalled for. people come here for fun and i feel that your actions are driving people away. there have been others who have expressed similar sentiments: sysane, pennarin, kalthandrix, dirk, and myself. now honestly, if there are this many people stepping out on a limb to call you down for something, how many others have chosen to remain silent and not voice their ideas here?
freely without the fear that we will be jumped upon for spelling a word wrong, misusing a verb or noun,
I never jumped on anyone for spelling a word wrong or making a grammatical error. I asked Penn to identify an "unclear pronoun," because I wanted to understand what he meant. Yes, Penn used that to claim that I'd made a personal attack on him and refused to accept my explanation. But that wasn't an attack on his grammar, or on him. That was a polite request for clarification.
Seraph's the one that's jumping on me for misspelling his name :D But a more glaring piece of hypocrisy is where Seraph of D. preaches about the evils of making threats, while making incredibly heavy-handed threats against me and Athas.org:
i never said that it was a heavy-handed threat that you made, only that is appeared that you were threatening someone. a threat does not have to exclusively deal with physical violence. so how was i wrong? bullying someone with the verbal or written threat is the same thing as threatening someone with a fist.
i plan on e-mailing some of the moderators and wizards of the coast themselves because i think that they should look and see how the words and actions of those who are running an official website and game that they hold the rights to conducts themselves. how is the relevant to you?
If you do that, you'll have to provide them specifics and show them actual rules violations, and they'll also look at what I was responding to. You'll also have to explain to them the mystery of how it is that these people that I'm supposedly offending and "driving away" are posting so often, and even following me around.
I'm hereby withdrawing myself from these boards because Seraph has threatened to carry out his personal vendetta with me into a crusade against Athas.org. If anyone asks where I am, please tell them to ask Seraph, and my "friend" Pennarin. The larger community can judge whether what you guys have done here has hurt or helped Dark Sun. Personally I think it's a warning to other DS authors against coming here to get feedback on ideas.
What if the BD worked along the lines of a master vampire and his spawn. There's no real mechanic for how they control them they just do. It could be after centries of being under Rajaat's control the Champions found a way to break that control ( thru psionics or magic, or a combo of the two) shortly before they confronted and imprisoned their master.
I like that idea too, Sysane; nicely described. Take care, and I hope that you and I, at least, resolved our differences.
) - I even deleted all of my posted material for a time! But everything worked out. I think that people just need to step back and take a breath. Please! I am asking as a friend (I hope you think of me as one Brax). We are all friends- Pennarin, Dirk, Sysane, you, me and I hope that this does not cause you to leave.
As I see it, when people start saying things like this:
This is just gold!
I'll have great difficulty taking you seriously now, Brax.
You just said, in not so many words, that you will no longer accept explanations as to what you're doing wrong.
Now that, as far as I'm concerned, means only one thing on your part: "I no longer abide to the rules of civilized argumentation. Any attempts by others to impart rules upon me and have me abide by them, I will ignore."
Why would any of us wish to discuss anything with you now, knowing the cost of doing it may be greater than the reward?
and this:
i plan on e-mailing some of the moderators and wizards of the coast themselves because i think that they should look and see how the words and actions of those who are running an official website and game that they hold the rights to conducts themselves. how is the relevant to you? well like i said before, everything you post is a reflection upon them, just like a board member of a corporation or a major business represents the company they sit for. i do not think that they would enjoy the fact they have a person in who represents them and their copyright out here on the boards acting in the manner that you have been conducting yourself in.
i am not doing this out of some malicious intent i assure you. i just wanted to make the message board a fun place again where we can all exchange ideas freely without the fear that we will be jumped upon for spelling a word wrong, misusing a verb or noun, using the wrong word, or not understanding what someone is saying. you do do these things and it is uncalled for. people come here for fun and i feel that your actions are driving people away. there have been others who have expressed similar sentiments: sysane, pennarin, kalthandrix, dirk, and myself. now honestly, if there are this many people stepping out on a limb to call you down for something, how many others have chosen to remain silent and not voice their ideas here?
I see only two logical possibilities. Either I deserve these accusations, or I don't deserve them. If I deserve them, then I'm a threat to any meaningful discussion, and should leave for the good of the board, since I've been unable to find out what I've done precisely to annoy Penn, and have lost interest in figuring it out [melodrama] since he rebuffed my efforts and set my olive branches on fire. If I don't deserve it, then certain people have singled me out as a scapegoat.[/melodrama], and I should leave for my own good.
Either way, the only solution is for me to leave.
Unlike Seraph, I don't make threats to ruin someone's work and life in the community. When it comes to some silly internet argument, my code of ethics only allows me to "threaten" to stop trying to communicate with someone who acts unreasonably. For me, to escalate beyond that into personal destruction tactics, would be unconscionable. And that means that Penn does not need to worry about me making trouble for him at Athas.org. I don't need his personal approval to work with him civilly. I'm hurt that he has so little regard for me as a human being, but I respect his work and his keen writing skills off this board, and if the feeling is mutual, I'd like to keep working with him.
Well, good thing this convo is "officially" being ended as you're (Brax) now accusing *me* of Straw Man tactics when, quite frankly, I'm not even sure how it is I'm doing that. As far as I'm concerned I've added to my arguments over the course of this debate but haven't outright changed any of them, so I'm not sure at what point things suddenly changed. But you appear to feel the same way, so I think we're just pointlessly butting heads now.
At any rate, whether you stop posting to the forums or not, I'm calling off my involvement with this particular debate - For the record I haven't been offended by anything you've said, I just haven't agreed with most of it nor have I previously, or even now, understood how you can continue with this whole Back Door (of any sort) Theory as being more probable and less complicated or convoluted than simply taking one of of my (or Penn's, or anyone else's who has chimed in) more simplistic ideas.
So, if you're keeping score, I'm calling this a draw - your Back Door theory, no matter what I or others' may think, cannot be disproven...but you have yet to make any arguments that have wholeheartedly swayed a single person - at best a few have come up with their *own* versions of a Back Door theory that might be possible, but ultimately still fall into the same category as yours (and, unless I'm mistaken again, have all been stated as "maybe it worked like this..." as opposed to "you're absolutely correct, it must have been a Back Door!").
At the same time you haven't been able to shoot down all of my theories as either, although you have shown where they have their problems as well (calling each of them into doubt as a "good" solution) as well as where they're feasible, so despite the support of at least Penn (and possibly others - I can't remember anymore) I can't claim a victory either.
In my view of Dark Sun history (mythology?) Rajaat made no Back Doors when creating his Champions, simply relying on their fear, paranoia, and inability to "play nicely with others" as his safety harness against them causing him problems...and in the end this turned out to be *just barely* wrong enough to spell his doom. It works for me, makes the most sense, so that's what I'm sticking with.
Well, good thing this convo is "officially" being ended as you're (Brax) now accusing *me* of Straw Man tactics when, quite frankly, I'm not even sure how it is I'm doing that. As far as I'm concerned I've added to my arguments over the course of this debate but haven't outright changed any of them, so I'm not sure at what point things suddenly changed.
Is that what you think that a "straw man" is? To change your own arguments over the course of a discussion? If that's what you think, that would explain your confusion.
There's nothing wrong with changing your own arguments over the course of a civilized discussion. If we're honest discursants, rather than playing some sort of strange game, then we're going to refine our ideas, and occasionally change our positions. For example, on the last page, I realized that your idea of "deliberately failing saving throws" was not as foolish as I'd supposed, since pretending to be overpowered might keep the Champions from Rajaat's wrath.
A "straw man" means misrepresenting someone else's argument in order to refute it. Since the beginning, you've continually added elements to the "back door" in order to criticize the idea. I asked you to stop doing that specifically; I stated, highlighted, even colored the basic idea and asked you to stop misrepresenting it, and you continued to act as if I meant something quite different when I spoke of a back door.
I could not care less if you agree with me. The only thing that I'm "keeping score" of is the number of times you misrepresent me, because that bears on my assessment of your character.
People tend to think that silence gives consent. If you say that brax said X, and I don't step in to correct your false representation, some people may believe that I actually said x. By continually misrepresenting my position, you've hijacked the thread and dragged out a quarrel that should have ended pages ago.
Take whatever position you like, but please stop misrepresenting mine.
Sacha and Wyan did not rebel - hence they were turned into the floating heads for remaining loyal when the other Champs rebelled and given to Kalak by the Dragon.
Thank you -- Penn's right on this one -- I used the wrong word. My bad. I meant that it's possible that S&W's "loyalty" was actually coerced. That they "failed their saving throws" or whatever v. Rajaat's attempt to control them. It's a speculative possibility, no more or less likely than Dirk's theory that some Champions deliberately failed their saving throws. My BD theory doesn't rely on this; I just threw it out as an interesting possibility, since my purpose here is to explore ideas and possibilities.
Now it has been, well, most likely a decade since I read Rise and Fall, so my staetment above is a reference to comments made in the Prim Pentad books.
Right. AFAIK, RaF does not contradict anything in the PP with respect to S&W's rebellion. I'm just saying that since all the accounts are subjective, that the other Champions would believe that S&W stayed loyal even if if they'd actually been coerced. All the PP and RaF accounts depend on how the Champions perceived things.
To follow up with my lack of current knowledge of what the RaFoaDK has in it, I was always under the assumption that the book was written from and is collected from the point of view and memories that Hamanu had - so if this is true, it could very well be that the book is nothing more then pages of lies - but I am not saying that this is true, only that the possibility exists.
The possibility always exists that a source is lying, but that's not something that you assume without reason. Here, there's no conflicting sources, no facts in dispute. If we were talking about Athasian geography, I'd certainly concede that RaF contains errors where it conflicts with other sources.
One assumption that I think we do have to work from was this, Rajaat always was planning and manipulating events for things he planned in the future - he recruited students for defiling while teach in preserving, he killed off the preservers before he went after the races of the Cleansing - he planned for his long term goal of restoring the halflings. Is he all knowing? - no. Is he so intelligent that it is possible we do not even understand the reasoning for events he set into motion - I think so. It could very well be that he planned and counted on his Champions turning one him, maybe they just did it before he thought they would.
I strongly agree. Rajaat was not all knowing. But he was smart, and we know that he did set things up in order to be able to destroy his champions (remember the broken sword of Rkard). Having a back door, e.g. Chris' idea that the Champion template might not protect against Rajaat's own attacks, seems completely consistent with how Rajaat did things, and it's one of many synergistic tricks that Rajaat could have used to gain an advantage on his servants.
I'm prepping for a corporate law final right now. You'd be amazed at all the sneaky little things that boards of directors put into their corporate charter and by-laws in order to screw their shareholders, in order to take power that no one realizes that they have until too late. When you put the deal and the package together in the first place, it's easy to stack the deck. You don't have to be omniscient to know that it might be useful to have a little extra unseen power advantage, should a conflict arise.
Is that what you think that a "straw man" is? To change your own arguments over the course of a discussion? If that's what you think, that would explain your confusion.
A "straw man" means misrepresenting someone else's argument in order to refute it.
Incorrect. According to reference.com, here's the two variations of the definition for "straw man" that I'm going with:
- a fabricated or conveniently weak or innocuous person, object, matter, etc., used as a seeming adversary or argument: The issue she railed about was no more than a straw man.
- An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.
In regards to this argument, I've accused you of using "straw man tactics" in that you word your arguments in such a way, such as by leaving aspects of them ambiguous or using phrasology that can be interpreted multiple ways, so that when I (or others') try and refute one of your points you can say "you're misrepresenting my statement," then either leave it to us try and correctly interpret it (which we can't because of its ambiguity) or else you re-phrase it just enough so that the next time someone tries to refute it you can say "once again that's not what I said" and keep this cycle perpetually going. In other words, you make a sweeping statement ("a back door best meets the facts as we know them") that in itself isn't "solid" enough to withstand any sort of debate (as there's no evidence to go with it, just the statement of such), and then when someone tries to argue it with you whatever they say can be taken as a misinterpretation - because your initial statment was "conveniently weak" (to quote the above definition) and so can later be ratified into whatever meaning you want.
Since the beginning, you've continually added elements to the "back door" in order to criticize the idea. I asked you to stop doing that specifically; I stated, highlighted, even colored the basic idea and asked you to stop misrepresenting it, and you continued to act as if I meant something quite different when I spoke of a back door.
That right there is the problem - your "basic idea" of *some sort* of back door isn't good enough to argue about, because it is open to so many possible interpretations (which is what I was repeatedly trying to do - nail you down to some specific meaning of "back door.").
Take whatever position you like, but please stop misrepresenting mine.
Kinda difficult to misrepresent a position that isn't clearly defined, and even when you *did* to define it ("a -X penalty to saves") you weren't happy with my expanding that into other, related possibilities as, apparently, that somehow resulted in a misrepresentation of even that clearly-defined statement.
Is that what you think that a "straw man" is? To change your own arguments over the course of a discussion? If that's what you think, that would explain your confusion.
A "straw man" means misrepresenting someone else's argument in order to refute it.
Incorrect. According to reference.com, here's the two variations of the definition for "straw man" that I'm going with:
- a fabricated or conveniently weak or innocuous person, object, matter, etc., used as a seeming adversary or argument: The issue she railed about was no more than a straw man.
- An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated.
That's like telling me that it's not seven forty five, but rather a quarter 'till eight.Fine, let's use your wording. Your misconstruction of my BD argument fit your first definition:
you fabricated a conveniently weak matter as a seeming argument. For example, the password issue you railed about was no more than a straw man.
[snip your painful misconstruction of basic logical concepts]
That right there is the problem - your "basic idea" of *some sort* of back door isn't good enough to argue about, because it is open to so many possible interpretations (which is what I was repeatedly trying to do - nail you down to some specific meaning of "back door.").
I said that Chris' idea was one perfect specific example of what I meant by a back door. I gave the analogy of the +2 Spellcraft factor in the Epic Level Handbook that lets the caster dismiss a spell effect, and said in this case, it was allowing the manifester (Rajaat) to bypass the Champion effect. We're talking about something that works in conjunction with psionic abilities, an epic mass dominate, and you're pretending that I said that it works in conjunction with a password? That's a perfect example of a fabricated, conveniently weak matter stuck in as a "seeming argument."
Kinda difficult to misrepresent a position that isn't clearly defined
If my statement was too vague to argue with, then why did you pretend to disagree with it? Is this part of the rules of the strange game that you call "debate"? Pick a person you want to say that you "beat" in an argument and then mangle his statements into something that you can ridicule? That's no way to create an environment where people can talk about ideas.
Kinda difficult to misrepresent a position that isn't clearly defined
Nonsense; you've shown it's quite easy. Here's another example:
X: I had a wonderful morning.
Y: I disagree. I think it's highly unlikely that you had sex with Paula Abdul this morning. She's thousands of miles from you.
In the example, Y misrepresents X. Y can't reasonably argue that X's statement was poorly defined, making it OK for Y to plug in a "specific" kind of wonderful morning. X didn't say that he had sex with Paula Abdul, so Y misrepresented X. And since Y used that misrepresentation to rebutt a seeming argument, Y's "rebuttal" was a straw man.
If you fabricate specific definitions and explanations for what I said, and put them into my mouth, that's a misrepresentation. And if you argue against that misrepresentation, as if it was my argument, (as Y did to X above) then you've used a straw man.
More clear?
Kinda difficult to misrepresent a position that isn't clearly defined, and even when you *did* to define it ("a -X penalty to saves") you weren't happy with my expanding that into other, related possibilities as, apparently, that somehow resulted in a misrepresentation of even that clearly-defined statement.
I'm never happy when someone fabricates and tacks on something ludicrous onto my argument, pretends that I said it, and then uses the aspect that they tacked on to dismiss the argument. It's a classic logical fallacy, and when you do it deliberately, as you did here, it's rude and hostile. It's like having a neighbor vandalize your house, and then complain that your house is an eyesore because of the graffiti. Maybe that passes for politeness and fair play in your neighborhood, but not in mine.
(a.k.a. what was this topic about again??? we were talking about something interesting, right??? I mean, before the so calle debate)
Simple, lets hear it, what do you imagin was done in the green age with psionics?? What epic uses did they find for it? And, why do you think the green age was so powerful? And do you feel the SK's should have equally powerful psioinics having originated in the green age?? Do you think Rajaat's Psionics are green age quality??
I think that there were a far greater variety of psionic powers and specialties in the Green Age. But I doubt that they were objectively more powerful as a whole than modern (Tarandan) psions.
My reasoning is that Tarandas, who lived 1000 years after the end of the Cleansing Wars, started a philosophy of psionics that seems to be what the Order is based on. They aren't terribly weak ... even the SKs seem nervous about taking them on. And yet when they run into a powerful Green Age artifact like the Psionatrix, they can't even agree on whether it's a psionic artifact or a magical artifact. (see Dragon's Crown, the notes from the Order's grand poobah of metapsionics, or whatever his title was
And yet when they run into a powerful Green Age artifact like the Psionatrix, they can't even agree on whether it's a psionic artifact or a magical artifact. (see Dragon's Crown, the notes from the Order's grand poobah of metapsionics, or whatever his title was
There is one line in there that clarifies it. IIRC it says something like "Use of magic to create an infinite font of psionic energy." Or the like. So its a magic artifact in that magic is what taps all that psionic energy, but for the rest - the use of that energy, its application into various effects - its a psionic artifact.
A classification argument about whether the psionatrix is ultimately a psionic or magical artifact in game terms does not address the Order's philosophical issue with using magic to increase their psionic power. I infer from those notes that the members of the Order were not agreed on the Psionatrix' nature. It's an interesting hidden little irony at the end of DC.
To try to rerail Lyric's thread, I think that it's an illustration that older versions of psionics might seem foreign, almost magic-like to modern, Tarandan psionicists. In 2e we didn't have anything like metacreation, and of all the disciplines it seems the most like arcane magic, so I've kind of treated metacreation like an almost-lost Green-age discipline, something that Tarandas did not really develop.
Classic.
Sometimes the tools of your enemy become your best weapon to use when fighting them.
That's clearly a good strategy in abstract, but clearly the wrong story for the Order. We're talking about the ultimate purists here. A strategy that relies on magic to enhance their psionics would be entirely out of character.
A classification argument about whether the psionatrix is ultimately a psionic or magical artifact in game terms does not address the Order's philosophical issue with using magic to increase their psionic power.
The phrase "Use of magic to create an infinite font of psionic energy." is not written by a member of the Order but by the Wind Mage who created the Psionatrix, and is a description of how that artifact works, unless you were reffering something else ;)
The phrase "Use of magic to create an infinite font of psionic energy." is not written by a member of the Order but by the Wind Mage who created the Psionatrix, and is a description of how that artifact works, unless you were reffering something else ;)
I said this:
And yet when they run into a powerful Green Age artifact like the Psionatrix, they can't even agree on whether it's a psionic artifact or a magical artifact. (see Dragon's Crown, the notes from the Order's grand poobah of metapsionics, or whatever his title was
You responded with a quote that you said "clears it up," so I assumed that your quote was relevant to the Order's view of the Psionatrix.
I'm very glad you reminded me of the Wind Mages' involvement in the psionatrix. That may come in handy for other matters.
You responded with a quote that you said "clears it up," so I assumed that your quote was relevant to the Order's view of the Psionatrix.
I have no idea what the Order's view is concerning the Psionatrix. My quote clears up the nature of the device, not how others dealt with that nature.
I'm very glad you reminded me of the Wind Mages' involvement in the psionatrix. That may come in handy for other matters.
Heh, see, it was worth mentionning, since its the Order's involvement with the Wind Mages' artifact, not the other way around ;) /smart ass
(Yeah, I know, playing with words...what can I say)
It is theoretically possible to create a psionic matrix within a physical containment vessel. Such a psionatrix would require a crystaline matrix (content of parentheses snipped) and numerous enchantments. Magical energies could be tapped and converted directly into psionic power, creating a receptacle capable of providing an infinite amount of mental energy...
... [...]
...The anti-conjuerer Hadis Thumokal of Dasaraches has constructed such a prototype of the device and plans to build a larger and more powerful model. A working psionatrix would be a potent weapon against the psionic enchantments of the foul defiler lords who rise now to destroy us...
... [...]
Check this thread on the Psionatrix: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=600773
If you remember, Penn, one of the problems we ran into with our Othand project involved the placement of the psionitrix. In the adv. it was specifically stated that once construction on it began, it became unmovable (something about it being just too fragile or something - can't remember). With it residing now in Dasachares, this means that the place of its construction must also be Dasachares.
Where is Dasachares? What book were they in?
The other was Dasaraches, in the middle of the Dragon's Crown Mountains. It was designed to be far less of a fortress than the other, and IIRC there are hints that magic kept the building intact all those millenia. In any case, that place - if one can call it a fortress - has no traces it ever was attacked by enemy forces.
Peacebringer imagined a third fortress run by elves (in this case not necessarily a Wind Mage base), in what is today the Crescent Forest. That fortress was destroyed by a defiler warlord, who died during the attack. I married this piece of info with one of my items for the equipment guide and came up with Merovech as the name of that defiler warlord, a survivor of the Jihad who was assigned to the Slayer of Elves.
My quote clears up the nature of the device, not how others dealt with that nature.
Oh, that's perfectly clear. The Psionatrix is an imaginary construct, a work of imaginary fiction like the rest of Dark Sun. :P I was talking about how Green Age psionics may seem weird to Tarandans. (If you lose track of the subject, remember it's right top left on the menu bar :P )
[INDENT]And yet when they run into a powerful Green Age artifact like the Psionatrix, they can't even agree on whether it's a psionic artifact or a magical artifact. (see Dragon's Crown, the notes from the Order's grand poobah of metapsionics, or whatever his title was[/INDENT]
.... there are two things you can comment on: Tarandans and their perceptions, or the Psionatrix's nature.
So I was following the subject
Oh, well if you look at the following bit of text....
[INDENT]And yet when they run into a powerful Green Age artifact like the Psionatrix, they can't even agree on whether it's a psionic artifact or a magical artifact. (see Dragon's Crown, the notes from the Order's grand poobah of metapsionics, or whatever his title was[/INDENT]
.... there are two things you can comment on: Tarandans and their perceptions, or the Psionatrix's nature.
So I was following the subject
*The* subject is Green Age psionics. If you want to argue about the psionatrix' nature, you'll have to find a member of the Order, or someone else that's interested in that. I only mentioned the order's disagreement over the issue. Here's the actual text I was talking about, from Dragon's Crown, book 3, page 28:
This room is the home of one of the Psiologists of Metapsionics. She was killed defending Dasaraches, and her body lies on the Upper Terrace. The desk contains a few old scrolls, and pieces of parchment on which she has recorded her observations. One of her notes: "It is apparent that the Psionatrix does not augment psionic power, as Pharistes has informed us, but actually uses the forces of magic. While it is clear that the gem imitates and is controlled by mental powers, it is a magical artifact, and therefore beyond the Order's agenda." There is nothing else of interest here.
Penn says that it's clearly a psionic artifact; she says it's clearly a magical artifact; I honestly don't care about the classification, but find it interesting that the Order was divided on whether the Psionatrix was a magical or psionic artifact. One of many possible interpretations is that Green Age psionics are different enough from the modern kind that modern psions might have a hard time distinguishing some old psionic effects from magic.
Like I said, there are other interpretations; you could also infer that enchanted and psionically empowered items are hard to distinguish and not that different, any more than a tree burned by arcane fire is different from a tree burned by psionic fire, etc. I only brought up the argument because there are few clues to go on regarding the older psionics. All we know is that they were different. We know that because the history talks of great powerful psionics during the Green Age, but also talks about Tarandas establishing the psionic forms as they are mostly practiced today on Athas, a mere 1000 years ago or so.
Penn says that it's clearly a psionic artifact; she says it's clearly a magical artifact; I honestly don't care about the classification, but find it interesting that the Order was divided on whether the Psionatrix was a magical or psionic artifact.
Aroo? Inverse that, please. If I say anything it's that its magical in nature, and provides psionic effects.
I'm interested in that, and wrote about that, and focused on that because I'm in the equipment bureau for a good reason: Contrary to many, I care about the classification of this and other artifacts and items
To each his own. Its why I'm interested in being in that bureau and you're probably not. Hence, why I focused on the psionatrix's nature, and you focused on Tarandans and their perceptions, which were both - btw - mentionned in your post, and as far as I know we are free to comment on what we choose as long as we don't derail a thread too much I assure you that lawyers have no monopoly on logical concepts. One judge in Nevada railed on a lawyer for pointing out that opposing council was using a straw man argument. The judge thought that "straw man" was a term of mockery.
i had a question now that we are all at peace again.
regarding the pre-Tarandanian (that could be wrong) psionicists and those who still practice psionic in that manner, should there be a separate psion class or at least a replacement level for 1st level characters who use psionics in this manner. the reason i ask is that those who are yearning for pre-green age material should not use the core psion and those who have campaigns or stat npcs from the last sea region should not either; due to the lack of the formalized schooling that arose that basically broke psionics into the disciplines that we have now.
thoughts?
regarding the pre-Tarandanian (that could be wrong) psionicists and those who still practice psionic in that manner, should there be a separate psion class or at least a replacement level for 1st level characters who use psionics in this manner. the reason i ask is that those who are yearning for pre-green age material should not use the core psion and those who have campaigns or stat npcs from the last sea region should not either; due to the lack of the formalized schooling that arose that basically broke psionics into the disciplines that we have now.
That would make sense. Trouble is, Dregoth is now official, and he's a psion, so we need to work through another explanation.
The way that I've gone is treating metacreation as a pre-Tarandan psionic discipline. Few if any metacreation powers were in DS2. I've avoided creating shaper NPCs unless they were born a long time ago. We could also develop a body of lost psionic powers.
One could also make a psionic PrC for Saragar, and just assume that this is how people generally do things there.
Another possibility would be to develop the psiologist, and other Tarandan types, as PrCs that start after four levels of psion. Don't specialize these too much. If we start seeing that most psionic characters today of 5th level and higher follow some Tarandan PrC, that makes the higher level psions more the green age types.
That would make sense. Trouble is, Dregoth is now official, and he's a psion, so we need to work through another explanation.
I actually see no problem with having NPCs such as Dregoth, who learned psionics during the Green Age and are still alive today adapt and learn the "newer" form of psionic disciplines - with powers like psychic reformation, it would make it an easy thing to explain away and not cause a contradiction.
As for Seraph's idea of a replacement level, well it could be done and it would be easy, but replacement levels are not OGC, so we would have to go a different way if it were to become official.
As for making a PrC to handle this, well, I could see something like that. Level 1, they would have to loose their access to their discipline though. I could see this causing problems though. For one, while I can see someone who has not learned the Tardanan form of psioncis picking up on it and modifing their current powers and mindset to conform with this way of using psionics, I have a proble with the idea that someone can basically unlearn the Tardanan way of using psioncis - IMO that would be like trying to unlearn how to read English. You can teach someone who speaks English how to read English (this amzaingly enough does not actually happen as often as we would like in out public schools), but I do not know who you can take someone who can speak and read English and teach to to unlearn how to read. I hope I am being clear here. I am using being able to speak English in place of being able to use psionics. In both cases, both people know how to speak (use psionics), but one now learns how to use the words they are speaking and form written communications (taking psioncis and putting a standardized application to it).
See the issue I am having with this?
I actually see no problem with having NPCs such as Dregoth, who learned psionics during the Green Age and are still alive today adapt and learn the "newer" form of psionic disciplines - with powers like psychic reformation, it would make it an easy thing to explain away and not cause a contradiction.
As for Seraph's idea of a replacement level, well it could be done and it would be easy, but replacement levels are not OGC, so we would have to go a different way if it were to become official.
As for making a PrC to handle this, well, I could see something like that. Level 1, they would have to loose their access to their discipline though. I could see this causing problems though. For one, while I can see someone who has not learned the Tardanan form of psioncis picking up on it and modifing their current powers and mindset to conform with this way of using psionics, I have a proble with the idea that someone can basically unlearn the Tardanan way of using psioncis - IMO that would be like trying to unlearn how to read English. You can teach someone who speaks English how to read English (this amzaingly enough does not actually happen as often as we would like in out public schools), but I do not know who you can take someone who can speak and read English and teach to to unlearn how to read. I hope I am being clear here. I am using being able to speak English in place of being able to use psionics. In both cases, both people know how to speak (use psionics), but one now learns how to use the words they are speaking and form written communications (taking psioncis and putting a standardized application to it).
See the issue I am having with this?
I'm not following. Lose access to a discipline? You could simply say that you have to be a Telepath, Seer, etc. in order to become a Tarandan type.
Or if you're really picky, you could have a rule that they could not pick a metacreation power and become a psiologist or whatever. But I'm not sure that's necessary. Could be that while Tarandan leaders dispise the other forms of psionics, that they aren't incompatible in practice. Just like different forms of martial arts might be opposed philosophically, and yet one might master them both and use the principles synergistically.
They don't lose access, any more than a conventional D&D Paladin loses access to doing evil deeds. It's just a chosen focus.
Could be that we find that the tweaks that we need to make this work, simply aren't worth the time and effort as designers. Could be more messy than it's worth.
The way I see the Tarandan stype of psioncis is that there are the different disciplines - and a psion who learned under this form is basically a specialist - selecting a discipline that they focus on more them others - ie seer, nomad, egoist, ect.
Now, pre-Tarandan psionics would not have the formalized disciplines set up, so while someone could be a seer by having a selection of those powers, but IMO a psion trained under the pre-Tarandan psionic methods would not get the select powers that are broken out in the psionic discipline power lists.
But that is just my take on the whole thing - and like I said, I could be over thinking this.
Why make things so complicated, with extra rules and such? Complete Psionic holds the keys to this discussion and it's solution. Psion = Tarandan psiologist, whereas Wilder, Ardent, Divine Mind, Psychic Warrior, Lurk and so on are Green Age arts. Just my opinion.
Which is great for everyones campaigns individually, but cannot ever be "official" because they are not OGC.
Another possible reading (the ultimate simplification) would be that Tarandas simply restored one of the Green Age psionic styles, or reinvented it. That way, we still have Green Age psions, but also have other things.
I personally dislike having lots of different base classes around; I'd rather we had fewer of them.
Maybe I am over thinking this then.
The way I see the Tarandan stype of psioncis is that there are the different disciplines - and a psion who learned under this form is basically a specialist - selecting a discipline that they focus on more them others - ie seer, nomad, egoist, ect.
Now, pre-Tarandan psionics would not have the formalized disciplines set up, so while someone could be a seer by having a selection of those powers, but IMO a psion trained under the pre-Tarandan psionic methods would not get the select powers that are broken out in the psionic discipline power lists.
But that is just my take on the whole thing - and like I said, I could be over thinking this.
I think that there were a lot of styles and philosophies, but that not all of them were represented by a class or even necessarily a PrC.
There might be Green Age psionic powers that you'd need a feat to learn today. As if they were part of a lost discipline.
The trick would be, think of how circumstances were different then, and come up with powers that focus on those differences. That way it's easy to see how the power would have been lost.
For example, you might have a 2nd level power that lets you take liquid form, moving swiftly and invisibly through water. Maybe some residents of the Lost Sea region still know this power.
Another lost power might let you heal by melding your body with that of a tree.
I'd also infer that there were more *people* in the Green Age than there are now. You might have lost powers that were more useful in more populous times. Powers that help you to seem inconspicuous in a crowd. Powers that help you pick out a certain class of personality or alignment out of a crowd.
etc.
Another possible reading (the ultimate simplification) would be that Tarandas simply restored one of the Green Age psionic styles, or reinvented it. That way, we still have Green Age psions, but also have other things.
I had never thought to take that approach, but find that I'm liking the idea very much. Fits very well IMO.
So you're saying, fluff-wise, something such as that the style of psionics that created the high-psionic era of the Green Age was somehow lost through the CWs and Age of the SKs due to lack of teachers and to the burning of the schools and libraries....and that Tarandas - living during the Age of the SKs - managed to reclaim/discover those techniques and successfuly teach them until they revolutionarized - again - the known world?
Pretty much. To reclaim/rediscover at least one of those techniques. There may be lost disciplines, there are no doubt oodles of lost powers, but I'd say that from the Dawn of the age of SKs to the time of Tarandas there were probably very few psions being trained.
I'd also venture that the Tarandan schools do not teach metacreation; that it seems to "magical" to them, and that the Order doesn't have metacreationists, but that this is simply them being snobby. (If you haven't noticed, they aren't the most open-minded people). "Tarandas taught that there were five disciplines, so that's all there are... that other stuff isn't real psionics." When in fact, perhaps Tarandas didn't teach it because she never found out about it. Nothing stopping a psion trained in her academy from learning the metacreation.
Now I still think that the Green Age still had a wealth of other psionic styles and such. It would be nice to get some feats, maybe a PrC, for Saragar. And could be the soulknife, the psionic monk, thrallherd, etc., are vestiges of Green Age psionic traditions that survived in tiny pockets and only recently are becoming better-known to the world. Maybe the Appendix II will have some surprises for us.
I think psiologists would be much more abondant in the Last Sea region and soul knives too (I can see the latter being like secret police or infiltrators if cross-classed with some rogue levels).
And yes - I believe that the Appendix II will have some great content that will be very useful to a lot of people. Where the Appendix I was kind of lacking in psionic using classes, I think the Appendix II makes up for it with a wide variety of psionc class options.
I like the idea of the Tarandan form of psionics being rediscovered Green Age material - it is much cleaner and easier to handle --> like I said, it is quite possible that I was just over thinking this
You and me both!
I've been advocating approaches that were just as complex, or more, for years on these forums. :embarrass The simpler approach to the problem just hit me on the head during this conversation.I think psiologists would be much more abondant in the Last Sea region and soul knives too (I can see the latter being like secret police or infiltrators if cross-classed with some rogue levels).
I've had soulknives in Eldaarich; I do see them as a Green Age type that survives in pockets, and that does make sense. Not sure about Psiologists in the Last Sea area, though. In Will and the Way, Psiologists seem like the same philosophy as the Order. The ultra Tarandan types. I think they'd be most common in Raam (where Tarandas' school, the psiomarkh (sp?) still stands), and in others of the seven cities.
The OGC restriction is kind of ridiculous. It seems counter-productive for Wizards to put Athas.org in charge of continuing Dark Sun for the masses, and then tie their hands as to what material they can include. They can't even make REFERENCE to material that is not OGC in a release, even if they don't reprint the original material? Ouch!
No; that's a misunderstanding that I was trying to clear up above.
We CAN make references. We can quote. We can even use old DS art, so long as we give credit. We CANNOT make any of WotC's publications obsolete, by reproducing (including paraphrasing) ALL of the book's contents. We are not bound by the OGC agreement, nor do we have all of the freedom that an OGC.
For example, a non WotC d20 publisher could set out to make a game that reproduced OGC rules to the point that no one needed a PHB or DMG or PsiHB. We can't do that. But the d20 publisher could not publish an adventure for Dark Sun, or publish an official set of Dark Sun core rules. We can, and we have.
It's our policy choice not to make references to the new 3.5 books that aren't OGC, such as DMG2, PHB2. That has nothing to do with our agreement with WotC. Athas.org has decided to not publish anything that requires players or DMs to purchase more than the core WotC sourcebooks. I happen to think that the Scout class from the Complete Adventurer really fits Dark Sun, and I'd love to make NPCs for Lost Cities that were Scouts. This would not violate the OGC agreement, but it's against Athas.org's policy to make DMs purchase anything other than the DMG, MM, PHB, and XPH. If we found that DS fans that used our core rules overwhemingly owned the Complete Adventurer book, we'd probably talk about changing the policy. But as things are, I agree with the policy.
Given the little that I understand about intellectual property law, I think that WotC's agreement is extremely generous, which is why we are interpreting our side of the agreement very broadly and going out of the way to make sure that we don't give WotC cause to regret their trust and generosity.
I'd also infer that there were more *people* in the Green Age than there are now. You might have lost powers that were more useful in more populous times. Powers that help you to seem inconspicuous in a crowd. Powers that help you pick out a certain class of personality or alignment out of a crowd.
etc.
And the demihuman races were more numerous. Psionic powers specifically aligned with a race's psychology would be more common as well.
No; that's a misunderstanding that I was trying to clear up above.
We CAN make references. We can quote. We can even use old DS art, so long as we give credit. We CANNOT make any of WotC's publications obsolete, by reproducing (including paraphrasing) ALL of the book's contents. We are not bound by the OGC agreement, nor do we have all of the freedom that an OGC.
For example, a non WotC d20 publisher could set out to make a game that reproduced OGC rules to the point that no one needed a PHB or DMG or PsiHB. We can't do that. But the d20 publisher could not publish an adventure for Dark Sun, or publish an official set of Dark Sun core rules. We can, and we have.
It's our policy choice not to make references to the new 3.5 books that aren't OGC, such as DMG2, PHB2. That has nothing to do with our agreement with WotC. Athas.org has decided to not publish anything that requires players or DMs to purchase more than the core WotC sourcebooks. I happen to think that the Scout class from the Complete Adventurer really fits Dark Sun, and I'd love to make NPCs for Lost Cities that were Scouts. This would not violate the OGC agreement, but it's against Athas.org's policy to make DMs purchase anything other than the DMG, MM, PHB, and XPH. If we found that DS fans that used our core rules overwhemingly owned the Complete Adventurer book, we'd probably talk about changing the policy. But as things are, I agree with the policy.
Given the little that I understand about intellectual property law, I think that WotC's agreement is extremely generous, which is why we are interpreting our side of the agreement very broadly and going out of the way to make sure that we don't give WotC cause to regret their trust and generosity.
Took me around 0.5 seconds to allow scouts in DS. Probably one of the best designed/balenced classes in the game. Psi Scouts mmnnnnn.
Ah. I understand the reasons now. Still, certain non-ogc classes like the Ardent have so much potential in Dark Sun, and perfectly fit the bill for the warrior-psionicist types like the Champions (Decent attack progression and the potential for 9th level powers) and I'd love to see them included in official write-ups. But I am very happy and satisfied with the work of Athas.org , and grateful for their works within the confined of their self-imposed and well-reasoned limitations.
Write up some threads on how to incorporate non Athas.org stuff into DS then. Athasian purists will probably have fits if they see the stuff I can cram in or allow in the game. Wizard/Sorc PrC redone as psionic ones, FR feats, the complete series of books, FR books like Serpent Kingdoms and Lost Empires of Faerun.
I happen to think that the Scout class from the Complete Adventurer really fits Dark Sun, and I'd love to make NPCs for Lost Cities that were Scouts. This would not violate the OGC agreement, but it's against Athas.org's policy to make DMs purchase anything other than the DMG, MM, PHB, and XPH. If we found that DS fans that used our core rules overwhemingly owned the Complete Adventurer book, we'd probably talk about changing the policy. But as things are, I agree with the policy.
That's interesting to read. It was always my understanding that athas.org is bound by the Open Gaming License, just like any other d20 publisher (which is why it is included in athas.org releases) - but that athas.org also has a separate agreement allowing them to use Dark Sun intellectual property (with certain restrictions as mentioned above). Under this understanding, it would be a violation of the Open Gaming License if athas.org used the scout class, for example, in its products, because the scout class is not open content, nor is it Dark Sun IP.
But if I read your post correctly, you are saying that it's just a policy decision not to use non-OGC material, as opposed to a legal requirement. So if athas.org started including non-OGC material in its products, that wouldn't violate the Open Gaming License? Surprising. But interesting to read, nevertheless...
Kam, I believe that Brax meant that you can reference a class in a book somewhere, but you obviously are not allowed to reproduce any of that book's contents. If that reference is only to say that the Walker is identical to the Scout class found in Complete Adventurer, then I don't see the problem.
A strict application of the OGL means that you can't even make references of this kind (although in practice it probably wouldn't be a huge issue). You couldn't include an abbreviated stat block for a scout NPC, for example, or refer to any of the scout's class abilities, so it hardly seems to be worth the effort either way. You may as well just devise a whole new class.
(That said, athas.org has slipped references to closed content into their material before - there's a Forgotten Realms feat in Whispers of the Storm or CSoD, iirc - with no resulting problems, so it may not be a problem in practice anyway).
(That said, athas.org has slipped references to closed content into their material before - there's a Forgotten Realms feat in Whispers of the Storm or CSoD, iirc - with no resulting problems, so it may not be a problem in practice anyway).
...and a Complete Psionics feat in the upcoming Faces of the Forgotten North.
...and a Complete Psionics feat in the upcoming Faces of the Forgotten North.
Naughty!
:P
...and a Complete Psionics feat in the upcoming Faces of the Forgotten North.
What?! Not on my watch.
It should be mentionned that it comes from Complete Psionics though.
Btw Bruno, did any of you notice that Egendo has epic spells and a caster level of 18th? :P
EPIC SPELLCASTING [EPIC]
Prerequisite: Spellcraft 24 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 24 ranks, ability to cast 9th-level arcane spells. OR Spellcraft 24 ranks, Knowledge (religion) 24 ranks, ability to cast 9th-level divine spells. OR Spellcraft 24 ranks, Knowledge (nature) 24 ranks, ability to cast 9th-level divine spells.
Benefit: The character may develop and cast epic spells. If the character is an arcane spellcaster, he or she may cast a number of epic spells per day equal to his or her ranks in Knowledge (arcana) divided by 10. If the character is a divine spellcaster, he or she may cast a number of epic spells per day equal to his or her ranks in Knowledge (religion) or Knowledge (nature) divided by 10.
Special: If the character meets more than one set of prerequisites, the limit on the number of spells he or she may cast per day is cumulative.
9th level spells, check. 24 ranks in spellcraft, check. 24 ranks in Knowledge (arcana), Check! If he can't get epic spells, then characters becoming dragons cannot get it at 21st level either.
Also, Improved Epic Overchannel was something the Bruno came up with to offset the lack of the Practiced caster/manifester feats. I know cause I asked for his help.
He has 21 character levels which means his max ranks in a skill can be 24. And he has 9th level spells
No problems - it says nothing about caster level so he could have a CL of 17 and still cast epic spells as long as he had the ranks.
I'm sure I knew it at one time, but forgot since.
Complete Psionics still needs to be mentionned though ;)
Henseforth, it will be known as Epic Cannibalization!
Henseforth, it will be known as Epic Cannibalization!
Not really digging the name. Sounds like a feat name to Epicly eat people and nothing to do with psionics - but that is just my
:D
Not really digging the name. Sounds like a feat name to Epicly eat people and nothing to do with psionics - but that is just my
:D
The name comes from the leech class ability with the same name.
Yesterday I missed my chance to chat with Dirk, so I could only read about his review after the facts...but I have to say that I' m very happy with the review of FNN's Egendo that resulted from both our thoughts on the matter. It reads beautifully and sometimes even poetically.
I think the mechanics of this would better be handled in the form of a feat, as was postulated at some point. It would work like the Initiate feats for Clerics in other settings and would look something like the following:
Tarandan Psiologist[Psionic]
You know some of the ancient teachings of Tarandas.
Prerequisites Ability to manifest powers as a Psion, 4 ranks in Knowledge (history)
BenefitIn addition to those powers normally granted you, you also have access to the following, which are added to your class power list:
1st - Lightning Bolts out my eyes
3rd - Fire Balls out my arse
6th - I own you
9th - I own yer mom
Normal You have no training as a Psiologist and may select only from the powers normally available to you.
Of course, someone from the Tarandan era could ignore the Knowledge (history) requirements and the powers would be either new and unique, or established powers normally unavailable to the Psion class. You could even have multiple versions such as Tarandan Seer, etc.
The levels are just an example, also. Nothing states that they have to be fixed like that.
Just a thought.
I'm at work all day till 5:30 (right now here its 10:50), so if something's to be done it ought to be after 6...albeit I'm sure there'll be a second version of the doc after the general population will have reviewed it and uncovered the kinks, so we could still discuss any further changes before they're uncovered.
Yesterday I missed my chance to chat with Dirk, so I could only read about his review after the facts...but I have to say that I' m very happy with the review of FNN's Egendo that resulted from both our thoughts on the matter. It reads beautifully and sometimes even poetically.
You want to shoot me that stuff so I can have some input? you can email me. I did write the majority of the Egendo stuff, after Brax passed me the stuff. I would like to have some input.
I guess I misunderstood that facet since you tried to "re-rail" the topic by bringing them up, which is Green Age Psionics. Forgive my ignorance.
By the way, I never mentioned taking levels in anything. That's a feat description (which is now revised.)
Egendo has the kickass Improved Overchannel epic feat.
It should be mentionned that it comes from Complete Psionics though.
Since we can't do this, I'm sure Bruno will catch it and remove it.
Since we can't do this, I'm sure Bruno will catch it and remove it.
It's my fault. wrote the wrong word. typo, just a typo. all better now.
It's my fault. wrote the wrong word. typo, just a typo. all better now.
Lol. Then no one should mention to WotC that athas.org material has a few mentions of...darn. Me and my big green mouth.
:P