Mage the Ascension Question

[eyebeams]

The later books in Revised edition put more of an emphasis on "technology isn't evil" by essentially introducing at least one technomancer faction to every tradition. For example the Order of Hermes who resemble your most typical high fantasy mage (in fact they're the organization from Ars Magica itself), they got House Thig which used modern and advanced technology with they're magic.

Mage 2nd, actually.

Revised edition did try to be more sympathetic to the Technocracy, introducing a growing schism in the organization and a bunch of Technocrats who viewed themselves as knights of avalon, as well as friends of this rogue agent named John Courage who was supposed to be a noble guy. Later books also went through the whole thing with the Traditions trying to clean themselves of their more luddite-type members.

Also, all Mage 2nd.

 

[eyebeams]

All of which is a pretty in-depth look at the history behind stuff. If you're just flicking through the book for "whats all this about then", then the core book makes it sound like the following happened:

No, it doesn't. Unless you skim it and use your biases to fuill in the blanks. Books generally have no responsibility to sloppy readers.

1. The world existed, and it was crazy nuts. Mages did what they wanted, horrible monsters rampaged, and everything was a mess.

Maybe. It depends on whether or not you believe that the premodern age was "crazy nuts." The WoD's premodern age was not that different, because the supernatural existed at the margins. The game never says mages were in charge of anything in the way the Technocracy is not, and when you assert that they are, you're making stuff up.

2. The technocracy (or it's forebears) came into existence and realised that by manipulating people's beliefs, they could change the world. They did so for the betterment of mankind - instituting a sort of "fairness" to everything.

The Order of Reason had some idealistic elements. In the game's actual setting (intead of what you chose to "flick through") it's about 50/50. That changes once the Craftmasons (who *were* good guys) get purged for being, well, good guys.

Of course, one of Mage's points is that folks shouldn't be "manipulated" into believing things through censorship and repression, but by free exchange. You may recognize this tenet, because scientists like it.

One of Mage's other, more subtle points is that fascism is deceptively appealing. Some people get that. Others don't in a way that rather disturbs me, frankly.

3. The traditions don't like this, and want to 'free' everyone. Since the stability of reality, and the survival of most non-mage members of mankind is an obstruction to this, they want to rip it down and go back to rampant chaos.

Wrong and unsupported by the game. The Marauders come the closest to this position, not the Traditions. If you can't tell the difference between the two, then it's not the game's fault. The Traditions do not have any agenda to destroy reality in any way, shape or form and no not consider the rest of humanity to be an enemy. The books are clear on this.

Now if that's not what the case is, it doesn't really matter - it's what the book is getting across to people.

Your skimming /= content.

This reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Flanders' beatnik folks complain about their kid's unrulyness: "We've done nothin', man, and it's not working!" Generally, it behooves someone to actually read an RPG before playing it. Not to "flick through" it, but to actually read it.

Perhaps Mage is optimistic in the way it expects people to actually read it, which is odd, considering that people who read it badly dislike it for saying preliterate cultures had things of value. The recursive irony there amuses me greatly.

I know that if I came on and complained D&D sucks because I can stack Haste five times and beat everybody up, I'd be pilloried, and rightly so: That statement belies a critique from someone who didn't do more than "flick through" the rules and shouldn't be taken especially seriously.

 

[Rel]

Perhaps Mage is optimistic in the way it expects people to actually read it

Well, I do have to say that Mage (really all the WoD books but I own more Mage books than any other game) compels me to skim it because I feel like I have to wade through all the illustrative fiction to get to the fluff and crunch that forms the foundation of the game. I understand that these stories are in there to try and help give examples of play as well as anecdotes to flesh out the setting but I find the style a bit irritating at times.

I understand why some people would just want to "flick through it".

 

[wingsandsword]

What the Technocracy Realistically Wants: A peaceful, orderly, clean, safe world. No political strife, people happily obey their leaders, their leaders serve the public well with no corruption or greed. A prosperous economy provides jobs for all, and everyone is able to buy everything they need and want, with technology making an answer for every need and want. Advanced medical technology and cybernetics cures almost all ills of the flesh and mind. Nothing truly unexplained or anomalous in science, a mathematical model for everything and the Grand Unification Theory. People don't believe in superstitious nonsense, religion is an abstraction and tradition at best, and magic is nonsense hokum, there is no such thing as a "soul". In a nutshell: The United Federation of Planets. In D&D terms the Technocracy is definitely a Lawful Neutral organization (with significant Lawful Evil and Lawful Good factions).

Only the most outrageous extremist technocrats wants a totalitarian state where all freedom is quashed, there are those who think that it would be good for people, or that the masses need it, but they are a small minority who give the majority a bad image. The worst faction of the Technocrats wants the world to be like Paranoia.

What the Traditions Realistically Wants: A world where people wake up and realize that there is more to the world than what they see. There is an afterlife, there is a higher power, there are spirits and ghosts. For people to realize that Psychics are real and all that folklore passed down had a kernel of truth in it. People tolerate a wide variety of religious and spiritual beliefs, including the practice of magic, and plenty of people acknowledge magic is real, even if they have no interest in it. People have a resurgence of hope, open-mindedness, unity, peace and freedom of thought. Mankind learns to live in harmony with nature, and to respect animal and plant life and the wilderness. Instead of reaching for a bottle of sleeping pills, people probably reach for some chamomile tea or valerian root. People aren't tearing down power plants and throwing out their toilets, but they do realize that technology isn't an end unto itself. People express ideas openly and freely, and the government that governs least governs best. In D&D terms the Traditions are probably Chaotic Neutral (with significant Chaotic Good factions).

Only a handful of ancient masters really want a return to some middle-aged world with no industrial technology, no modern science, and nothing developed after the Renaissance where wizards in robes and pointy hats walk around as custodians of the public and the people all believe in powerful magic but leave it to the "professionals" while dragons, elves and faeries roam free like nothing ever changed. In other words, the extremists of the Traditions want a D&D world.

 

[eyebeams]

Well, I do have to say that Mage (really all the WoD books but I own more Mage books than any other game) compels me to skim it because I feel like I have to wade through all the illustrative fiction to get to the fluff and crunch that forms the foundation of the game. I understand that these stories are in there to try and help give examples of play as well as anecdotes to flesh out the setting but I find the style a bit irritating at times.

I understand why some people would just want to "flick through it".

I agree. That style isn't for everyone.

 

[Voadam]

I enjoyed the world of mage immensely. I only read and played 1e though. While the concepts and world were ultracool I found the vagueness of what the magic system could actually do in specific game mechanics made the game difficult to play and I did not want to run it.

We played a little then went back to other games.

I still use the magic concepts a lot as flavor in running my D&D games.

 

[eyebeams]

What the Technocracy Realistically Wants: A peaceful, orderly, clean, safe world. No political strife, people happily obey their leaders, their leaders serve the public well with no corruption or greed. A prosperous economy provides jobs for all, and everyone is able to buy everything they need and want, with technology making an answer for every need and want. Advanced medical technology and cybernetics cures almost all ills of the flesh and mind. Nothing truly unexplained or anomalous in science, a mathematical model for everything and the Grand Unification Theory. People don't believe in superstitious nonsense, religion is an abstraction and tradition at best, and magic is nonsense hokum, there is no such thing as a "soul". In a nutshell: The United Federation of Planets. In D&D terms the Technocracy is definitely a Lawful Neutral organization (with significant Lawful Evil and Lawful Good factions).

Only the most outrageous extremist technocrats wants a totalitarian state where all freedom is quashed, there are those who think that it would be good for people, or that the masses need it, but they are a small minority who give the majority a bad image. The worst faction of the Technocrats wants the world to be like Paranoia.

The Technocracy employs mind control on *its own members* as a matter of policy. The Technocracy is pro-censorship and operates on the principle of universal authoritarian rule. The Technocracy really is a pretty awful organization in its mainstream -- not just the extremities. It is, however, written to be attractive in the same fashion as many other real world totalitarian movements. It's difficult to talk about comparisons without breaking board rules, so I'll have you look at the Calastia supplement for Scarred Lands as an example of a prosperous, happy and evil nation. The Technocracy is like that. Members do believe that brainwashing, censorship and the summary execution of diehard deviants is what would make people happiest -- but that's immoral stuff by most people's points of view.

It's radical elements are the ones who cannot even disguise their desire for dominion under a philosophy that the end justifies the means. The Union has its Mengeles and they are the outer fringe. The mainstream believes that if you'd just, say turn your brother in to be tortured and have your memory altered, you'd really be a happier guy -- and they *want* you to be happier. They really believe that you would sincerely *be* happier.

What the Traditions Realistically Wants: A world where people wake up and realize that there is more to the world than what they see. There is an afterlife, there is a higher power, there are spirits and ghosts. For people to realize that Psychics are real and all that folklore passed down had a kernel of truth in it. People tolerate a wide variety of religious and spiritual beliefs, including the practice of magic, and plenty of people acknowledge magic is real, even if they have no interest in it. People have a resurgence of hope, open-mindedness, unity, peace and freedom of thought. Mankind learns to live in harmony with nature, and to respect animal and plant life and the wilderness. Instead of reaching for a bottle of sleeping pills, people probably reach for some chamomile tea or valerian root. People aren't tearing down power plants and throwing out their toilets, but they do realize that technology isn't an end unto itself. People express ideas openly and freely, and the government that governs least governs best. In D&D terms the Traditions are probably Chaotic Neutral (with significant Chaotic Good factions).

I think that, aside from wanting the freedom to promote their paradigms, the Traditions don't have much of a consensus on what they do want. This fractured agenda is their main problem and one of the primarily internal conflicts of the game.

Only a handful of ancient masters really want a return to some middle-aged world with no industrial technology, no modern science, and nothing developed after the Renaissance where wizards in robes and pointy hats walk around as custodians of the public and the people all believe in powerful magic but leave it to the "professionals" while dragons, elves and faeries roam free like nothing ever changed. In other words, the extremists of the Traditions want a D&D world.

The Traditions' fringe elements don't really want a world where there's just magic and no science. They want a world where their form of magic is the sole accepted one. That's what makes them scary and hypocritical.

 

[King of Old School]

I think that, aside from wanting the freedom to promote their paradigms, the Traditions don't have much of a consensus on what they do want. This fractured agenda is their main problem and one of the primarily internal conflicts of the game.

The Traditions' fringe elements don't really want a world where there's just magic and no science. They want a world where their form of magic is the sole accepted one. That's what makes them scary and hypocritical.

A-men. That's largely the reason why the Technocracy "won" (as of Mage Revised) -- not because their worldview is superior, but because the Trads couldn't get their stuff together long enough to set a proper agenda, let alone wage a war. There is no such beast as "What the Traditions Want."

Malcolm is also correct (as he is with most of his observations on Mage) that the defining characteristic of the Technocracy isn't science or reason, it's fascism. I think a big part of people's misunderstandings of Mage's take on science and the Technocracy comes from what I think are rather poor definitions of the Sons of Ether and Virtual Adepts in much of the core material. If people could see that there were "reasonable" science-oriented mages in the Traditions, rather than just caricatures of nineteenth-century Scientific Romance holdouts and 2600-reading, L337-speaking computer geeks, perhaps they wouldn't equate the Technocracy with modern technological society. As it stands, a lot of readers think Mage puts all tech-positive folks in the Technocracy camp, and since so many gamers are tech-positive...

(Yes, I'm aware that the caricatures aren't the whole story in Revised material especially, but legacy issues die hard.)

KoOS

 

[Krypter]

I agree with SWBaxter and others that Mage presents a romantic-savage anti-modern anti-scientific ethos predicated on standard po-mo moral relativism. Over a dozen people that have played the game with me and others are also of like mind in this, and yes, they often sympathize with the Technocracy. Neil Postman's Technopoly does a far better job of explaining the Mage ethos, and subtleties therein, than the game. I have read almost all the Mage books and run a campaign for a number of years, and that is how it comes across, irregardless of the writer's intentions. Unfortunately, eyebeams' scornful replies are emblematic of the elitist ("you're reading it wrong") mindset prevalent at White Wolf, and one of the reasons many people shy away from their games.

The game's still fun though, even if in real life I would have serious political issues with the "good guys" of the game. And the magic system is very creative and adaptable, the closest I have seen a magic system come to being an infinity game (where you play with, not within, the rules).

 

[eyebeams]

I agree with SWBaxter and others that Mage presents a romantic-savage anti-modern anti-scientific ethos predicated on standard po-mo moral relativism.

That's why the game has a faction of objectively evil demon-worshippers. Yep. Real relativistic there.

Over a dozen people that have played the game with me and others are also of like mind in this, and yes, they often sympathize with the Technocracy. Neil Postman's Technopoly does a far better job of explaining the Mage ethos, and subtleties therein, than the game.

Actually, Technopoly explains the subject of Technopoly. It's an inspiration if you choose to take mage in a certain direction, but it's hardly the whole of the game. Technopoly doesn;t have much demonology in it, for instance.

I have read almost all the Mage books and run a campaign for a number of years, and that is how it comes across, irregardless of the writer's intentions.

Then you'll be able to pluck a quote out of the chapter in the Mage Storytellers Handbook in the chapter entitled "The Awakened Struggle", where it discusses the differences between the Technocracy and science. Similarly, you'll be able to do the same thing by referring to the Storytelling chapter of Manifesto: Transmissions from the Rogue Council.

Then, with these textual citations in hand, feel free to reiterate your point by somehow reconciling your position with these bits of text, which directly refute them -- I mean, in the text and everything. It should be easy, since you've "read every book," right?

Unfortunately, eyebeams' scornful replies are emblematic of the elitist ("you're reading it wrong") mindset prevalent at White Wolf, and one of the reasons many people shy away from their games.

For someone who critiques the game for casting aspersions on science, you certainly are relying on a sentimental position.

There are some things that fans don't like to hear:

1) You are not necessarily going to get everything you read on the first try.

2) Your ability to get it is not an indicator of something's qualities for anybody but yourself.

3) Some things are matters of taste.

4) You are not entitled to have every game conform to your political or recreational tastes.

5) Your dislike of something does not necessarily have a decent reason, thanks to points 1 to 2.

It may be arrogant, but it's also true. With gaming, I'd add:

6) You changes to something to accomodate what you do like do not replace points 1-2.

With Mage, this last bit is common. The game is extraordinarily flexible and can be modded for supers, space opera, high fantasy and so on -- and even a combination of these in the same campaign. You can take certain facets and emphasize them, so that the heroic Technocracy are fighting loathesome demon-summoners and necromancers.

But Mage is not about occult superheroes in space. It is not about totally heroic Men in Black fighting demons. It has its own distinct theme and it has elements that are not easily reducible to high concept stock phrases. If you don't want to be bothered with *really* getting into that core and running with it, then you can have fun other ways -- but those ways do not magically change what the game was written about.

It's been my experience that good Mage games to wander all over the place, but do eventually work with the core themes of authoritarianism versus liberty, of the pitfalls of human potential and the problems created by real freedom. Other uses of the game are fun, but they tend to be more disposible than the "canon" themes.