Mage the Ascension Question

[Particle_Man]

Hmmm...I thought Mage 2nd ed. had 4 big factions:

The Traditions: Mixture of different paradigms, huddling together for mutual support. By far the weakest of the four factions.

The Nephilem (sp?): Objectively bad demon worshipers. EVIL.

Marauders: Mages that go completely insane. Not a group, really. Better at magic than you, usually.

Technocracy: Fascist group. Pretty much evil. But in Medieval times they were good guys, trying to save peasants from individual nasty wizards. Somewhere along the line, they got all "Animal Farm"/Power Corrupts, etc.

I also thought the magic system was pretty much derived from Ars Magica.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Also, all Mage 2nd.

The Guide to the Technocracy along with Masters of the Art and Initiates of the Art, were the 2nd edition books before revised came along, marking the beginning of the transition towards revised (they were under Jess Heinig as the developer rather than Phil Brucato). The revised books often refer to the Guide to the Technocracy and Masters of the Art on a lot of issues.

It was definately a problem for White Wolf when books from a certain edition, would have to refer to books from previous editions on many subjects. 2nd edition Mage often referred to the Books of Madness which was a 1st edition book. Maybe only Vampire benefitted from having current books for each edition to refer to.

 

[Cassiel]

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?

Your belief in an ideal game, called "Mage: The Ascension," for which there is a "correct" interpretation under which every statement in every book can be fully reconciled to every other statement in every other book, is deeply ironic, considering the nature of the setting.

 

[Umbran]

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.

I can even give you a quote that backs this up - it is in the Protocols.

The Traditions have few "laws" overall. They are too diverse a bunch to agree on much. But there are some rules that are customarily followed, called the Protocols. A mage who breaks the Protocols can expect rebuke and punishment.

One of the Protocols is "Protect the Sleepers; they are ignorant of what they do." (2nd Edition Mage rulebook, pg 46) The Sleepers are those who are not supernatural.

 

[ajanders]

I'm so deeply pleased you're here to tell me how I should be playing my game. Can you give me advice about graduate schools and window treatments as well?

Crothian, I'm very sorry about this.
I apologize if I've hurt your feelings or anyone elses. Clearly I was operating in a smiley impaired mode yesterday.
I do stand by the rest of the post, though.
Thank you all for your patience with my spleen.

 

[Crothian]

Crothian, I'm very sorry about this.
I apologize if I've hurt your feelings or anyone elses. Clearly I was operating in a smiley impaired mode yesterday.
I do stand by the rest of the post, though.
Thank you all for your patience with my spleen.

No feelings hurt in the least, I just was confused by the response and just didn't see what had lead to it. No big deal at all.

 

[WayneLigon]

I also thought the magic system was pretty much derived from Ars Magica.

Only in a vague sense. I really, really was looking forward to 'Ars Magica Modern' when they announced Mage. It was kinda disappointing not to get that.

 

[eyebeams]

Your belief in an ideal game, called "Mage: The Ascension," for which there is a "correct" interpretation under which every statement in every book can be fully reconciled to every other statement in every other book, is deeply ironic, considering the nature of the setting.

The metaphysics of the game are not really the same as the theme and social organizations of the game. I think technology as the enemy was vaguely a part of 1st Edition, but that started to break up by the very first supplement.

 

[eyebeams]

The Guide to the Technocracy along with Masters of the Art and Initiates of the Art, were the 2nd edition books before revised came along, marking the beginning of the transition towards revised (they were under Jess Heinig as the developer rather than Phil Brucato). The revised books often refer to the Guide to the Technocracy and Masters of the Art on a lot of issues.

GttTech was developed by both of them. The "career series" was Jess Heinig. House Thing, on the other hand, was introduced way back in The Book of Chantries.

It was definately a problem for White Wolf when books from a certain edition, would have to refer to books from previous editions on many subjects. 2nd edition Mage often referred to the Books of Madness which was a 1st edition book. Maybe only Vampire benefitted from having current books for each edition to refer to.

I agree. Unfortunately, Mage 2nd never really provided closure on the massive changes it made to the setting ( the crash of the Digital Web and the fall of Doissetep and Horizon were both mid-2nd Ed events), so Revised does feel a bit in media res.

 

[eyebeams]

Only in a vague sense. I really, really was looking forward to 'Ars Magica Modern' when they announced Mage. It was kinda disappointing not to get that.

I find it a bit more accessible than Ars, but it does require more GM adjudication. Plus, the math behind Sphere Effects of different ranks doesn't make any sense.