I know the idea of Horrors in SR, or indeed the whole concept of Earthdawn/Shadowrun crossover, is not to everybody's taste, so this thread might not be for you.
But for those who get a kick out of this kind of thing, I present the following tidbit for your consideration. It'd be nice to pretend that any discussion it provokes might be going on in some secret corner of MagickNet, so role-playing it would be cool, but... whatever.
Full Version: The 8 questions of JsonaVar (E/S crossover teaser)
| QUOTE |
| As past verses plead, surely none shall close the doors on the Horoi lest first they answer the eight questions of Jsona Var. Else we stand forever on our side of the door and lash at them as they pour hence. |
from 'On Cosmology and Other Dimensions' (using the Muerkin translation)
This fragment of text, thousands of years old, has been the subject of intense debate amongst those thaumatological scholars lucky enough to see it. The Horoi mentioned are powerful kinds of evil and sadistic spirits (also called Horrors, or The Enemy) which- if certain sources are to be believed- have been plaguing the world since its creation, and which are supposed to grow particularly powerful and dangerous in those ages when magic flourishes in the world. These entities are said to thrive on pain and suffering, they corrupt and tempt weak minds, and they plot to turn the world into a living hell, or else destroy it outright.
It is said that much of the secret history of the world is the story of the battle between the Horoi and those beings who seek to thwart them. If there is truth in this, then it is tempting indeed to dream that the Horoi might one day be banished from the Earth forever. Certainly various scholars have spent years trying to discover more about the ‘eight questions of Jsona Var’. Some equate the name with that of an ancient dragon who supposedly perished in the Fourth Age of magic and was known as Vasdenjas (“Master of Secrets”, which in another ancient dialect might be rendered Dsjena’Va), but this is pure speculation.
Another partial piece of text (unearthed several years ago at an archaeological dig in a location that has been kept top secret) does not contain any specific reference to ‘Jsona Var’ but has nevertheless excited much interest as it takes the form of a series of questions which certainly ‘fit the bill’, even if they are a little enigmatic (perhaps exacerbated by the process of translation):
| QUOTE |
| Can any meeting of minds be flawless? Can all motives ever be aligned? Can a tapestry be woven that never frays at the edges? Can the moth ever be kept from the flame? Can one island ever be sufficient? Can a tree ever spread its roots out through the sea? Can suffering ever lose its sting? Can any beast be tamed? |
| QUOTE (Witness) |
| Can any meeting of minds be flawless? Can all motives ever be aligned? Can a tapestry be woven that never frays at the edges? Can the moth ever be kept from the flame? Can one island ever be sufficient? Can a tree ever spread its roots out through the sea? Can suffering ever lose its sting? Can any beast be tamed? |
No, there cannot be a flawless meeting of the minds, because all minds are flawed.
All motives can be aligned, but only by removing those whose motives are incompatible.
Sure, make it out of metal.
Lock the moth away and allow no fire sources.
Sufficient for how many?
Sure, with a little genetic engineering to let it process salt water.
After a while all senses dull to constant stimulation.
Nope, not any beast. Broken perhaps, which may be the same thing depending on how you look at it.
Hmm. Literal!
Yes, any meeting of minds can be flawless.
Yes, but not with each other.
Yes, as long it has no edges.
Kill it.
Yes, no island is truly alone; they are, by definition surrounded by the vast, living sea. As long as it is always living and vast, an island is always sufficient.
If one can remove all the salt from the ocean, yes.
Yes, if one loses suffering.
Should any beast be tamed, rather than befriended?
And do the dudes who made Earthdawn have any idea what the answers are?
Yes, but not with each other.
Yes, as long it has no edges.
Kill it.
Yes, no island is truly alone; they are, by definition surrounded by the vast, living sea. As long as it is always living and vast, an island is always sufficient.
If one can remove all the salt from the ocean, yes.
Yes, if one loses suffering.
Should any beast be tamed, rather than befriended?
And do the dudes who made Earthdawn have any idea what the answers are?
| QUOTE (emo samurai) |
| And do the dudes who made Earthdawn have any idea what the answers are? |
Uh actually, although the first quote is from ED (well kinda- I threw in my own more ancient-sounding translation, but compare to the more exact quote in the hyperlinked thread), the 8 questions above- which may or may not be those of Jsona Var- are my own contribution. And yes I know what they're getting at.
EDIT: and the challenge I'm throwing out here is not so much 'what are the answers' as 'what might the questions really mean?'
| QUOTE |
| Can any meeting of minds be flawless? Can all motives ever be aligned? Can a tapestry be woven that never frays at the edges? Can the moth ever be kept from the flame? Can one island ever be sufficient? Can a tree ever spread its roots out through the sea? Can suffering ever lose its sting? Can any beast be tamed? |
Yes -- if you can take every thought, will, and feeling and mesh them together into one being, that is the sum of all the parts of the others. There are no flaws to the meshing of all minds, for each flaw present in one mind is meshed with the lack of such a flaw in another. Indifference to Hatred and Love, Selflessness to Greed, Fairness to Mercy and Cruelty.
Yes -- when the accomplishment of every motive requires a single goal.
Yes -- when the tapestry woven has no edges, but is neverending and complete in itself. When the pattern weaves back upon itself, there is no edge to fray. No thread to be pulled out, that will unravel the pattern.
Yes -- when there is no need for destruction to balance creation, there will be no need for the moth to seek the flame. When understanding has been reached, the moths of metahumanity will not seek the destroying flame, the corrupt power.
Yes -- when all that exists is an island. For what is this world, but an island in the sea of existance?
Yes -- what is metahumanity but the roots of your civilization? When it truly becomes one civilization, then the roots of the tree will have spread through the sea.
Yes -- when faced with perfect acceptance and peace, there is nothing for suffering to sting.
Yes -- every beast is tamed by its nature, but its nature is not metahumanity.
The 8 questions provide the basis of the riddle -- but not the answer. To stand against the Scourge, all are required -- but knowing each answer is not enough. Each answer must be lived, breathed, understood, and made true for all that dwell beneath the sun.
And so I challenge you thus:
To forge a flawless meeting of all minds, where all motives are joined together, into a tapestry that cannot be frayed, where understanding has been reached and this world is complete in itself, with every being standing in one civilization, and all have found perfect acceptance, and all beasts have joined in their place in the pattern: It is then that the Enemy shall falter, and in that moment, shall those who dwell beneath the stars survive.
Edit: Fixed a typo.. Scourge! Scourge! not surge!
So the 8 questions were never really asked to begin with?
I like how a lot of key words in the questions are double entendres; every usage of "any" is ambiguous.
I like how a lot of key words in the questions are double entendres; every usage of "any" is ambiguous.
Dawnshadow: dude, I love you. Great effort!
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
EDIT (for some reason I've got a bit of Douglas Adams on the brain this morning, I'll have to get the street doc to see if he can get it off)
More seriously if these questions referred to a series of artifacts or wards, or clues to their whereabouts of their formulations it could be the basis for a fun campaign.
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
EDIT (for some reason I've got a bit of Douglas Adams on the brain this morning, I'll have to get the street doc to see if he can get it off)
More seriously if these questions referred to a series of artifacts or wards, or clues to their whereabouts of their formulations it could be the basis for a fun campaign.
stevebugge:
>>[Llerron]: My esteemed colleague Dawnshadow makes an interesting interpretation of the 8 questions, but I question his optimism. Perhaps not all the answers are yes, and these questions dare us to accept that and seek another route?
>>[Llerron]: My esteemed colleague Dawnshadow makes an interesting interpretation of the 8 questions, but I question his optimism. Perhaps not all the answers are yes, and these questions dare us to accept that and seek another route?
The questions are vauge enough to be interperated in any way you want them to be. Like most charlatans and false profits the author give you just enough information to jump to whatever conclusion you want to jump to.
But, to me, the solution is obvious. Use a massive Renaming ritual to transform all metahumans into Horri and end this schism that has existed for far too long.
But, to me, the solution is obvious. Use a massive Renaming ritual to transform all metahumans into Horri and end this schism that has existed for far too long.
>>[Dawnshadow] A map has been given -- it's up to Metahumanity whether it should choose to follow it. But what is ritual sorcery but a joining of the magical essence of those who participate? Was it not the ritual sorcery of Howling Coyote, in the Great Ghost Dance, that was the single most powerful magical event of this age?
Does it not follow then, that should every being in this world join into a perfect ritual link, going beyond shaman and hermetic, awakened and mundane, metahuman and animal, adult and child, spirit and dragon, into to simply one who dwells in this world, that the Enemy could be halted, and cast out for all time? Would not even a drop of the power that is part of every living thing, from each, be a force of power that could accomplish such a task?
Does it not follow then, that should every being in this world join into a perfect ritual link, going beyond shaman and hermetic, awakened and mundane, metahuman and animal, adult and child, spirit and dragon, into to simply one who dwells in this world, that the Enemy could be halted, and cast out for all time? Would not even a drop of the power that is part of every living thing, from each, be a force of power that could accomplish such a task?
>>[LeaningBear]: The authenticity of the text can't be questioned, but one can certainly question if they are in truth the questions of Jsona Var. Alas, as so often the way in these matters, mysticism hides its true meaning behind a veil of ambiguity. But some of us are drawn to that!
EDIT:
>>[Llerron]: It is a wonderful dream Dawnshadow, but can it ever be a reality? And if so then I fear what means might be used to justify such an end.
EDIT:
>>[Llerron]: It is a wonderful dream Dawnshadow, but can it ever be a reality? And if so then I fear what means might be used to justify such an end.
>>[Shen]: What if there are beings that do not want to be joined into that whole? Does not such a solution in a very fundamental way discount the individual meaning of each and every life?
>>[Holmar The Dutiful]: Perhaps, Shen, that is the meaning of each and every life?
>>[Vescent]: "If one can remove all the salt from the ocean, yes". Hmmm..
>>[Vescent]: "If one can remove all the salt from the ocean, yes". Hmmm..
>>[Shen] The purpose of a life is to sustain all life? That seems circular at best, meaningless and tedious at worst. I should hope not. Life should be lived for the sake of life, but the greatest event of any single life should not be a sacrifice for the whole; if so, then why have individuation at all if one is going to negate it?
>>[Lothar] I do not know what removing the salt from the sea could mean; and if one could, would you choose the dominion of the tree, or the continued survival of those in the sea?
>>[Lothar] I do not know what removing the salt from the sea could mean; and if one could, would you choose the dominion of the tree, or the continued survival of those in the sea?
>>[Dawnshadow] Do not all things band together when facing extinction?
Rattlesnakes cluster in pipes, ladybugs huddle around a tuft of grass. Do not people band together in the face of foes?
To those who say that it is a violation of the meaning of each individual life, I say it is the fulfillment of that life-- to choose to join together with every other living thing, and survive, or to choose against such a joining, and perish to the Enemy. The meaning of individual life and the power of ritual magic are the same: to choose. A ritual circle that does not choose to be a circle, does not choose the same goal, has no more power than any one present within it. It is the embrace of individual choice that grants ritual magic such ability -- and that is the power alluded to by the Questions, that is capable of stopping the Enemy.
Rattlesnakes cluster in pipes, ladybugs huddle around a tuft of grass. Do not people band together in the face of foes?
To those who say that it is a violation of the meaning of each individual life, I say it is the fulfillment of that life-- to choose to join together with every other living thing, and survive, or to choose against such a joining, and perish to the Enemy. The meaning of individual life and the power of ritual magic are the same: to choose. A ritual circle that does not choose to be a circle, does not choose the same goal, has no more power than any one present within it. It is the embrace of individual choice that grants ritual magic such ability -- and that is the power alluded to by the Questions, that is capable of stopping the Enemy.
>>[Holmar The Dutiful]: I merely suggest that perhaps the purpose of all life is to one day come together as Dawnshadow suggests. As the molecules evolved towards the unity of the first cell. As the cells evolved towards the unity of the first body...
>>[Llerron]: I still maintain this is a dangerous line of thought. There are surely other interpretations.
>>[Llerron]: I still maintain this is a dangerous line of thought. There are surely other interpretations.
>>[Shen] The glory that is life does not rest in the clatter of massed swords, the clamor of the fanatics, the pride of the many; it rests in the joy and sorrow of the lover, the curiosity of the child, the individual blade of grass's wonder at its own miraculous growth.
>>[Dawnshadow] And how will the glory of life continue should the Enemy scour this world clean?
>>[Vescent]: To Lothar: that is indeed a dilly of a pickle, as they say. Perhaps the dilly of the pickle.
>>[LeaningBear]: The honorable Shen says it well. But in what does the horror of life dwell? What happens to these wonders when the Enemy gets its way? (EDIT: Dawnshadow beats me to the punch! Apologies.)
>>[LeaningBear]: The honorable Shen says it well. But in what does the horror of life dwell? What happens to these wonders when the Enemy gets its way? (EDIT: Dawnshadow beats me to the punch! Apologies.)
>>[Shen] And how do you justify life if it loses all meaning? What you propose is not fundamental purpose, it is mere survival; though a man may need to kill, his purpose it not to kill; though a child must eat, its purpose is not to eat. If individual life loses that which makes it unique, then its existence is no more significant than that of a rock.
And if all that is required is a single nonlethal blood ritual, then your solution is a practical, not spiritual, one and this debate need not continue.
And if all that is required is a single nonlethal blood ritual, then your solution is a practical, not spiritual, one and this debate need not continue.
>>[Spaceman]: I fail to see how creatures who breathe magic like we breath air can be defeated by putting even more magic into the world.
am i the only who hopes to never get ED? bad one...
Sorry eralston, but like I said at the top, this isn't going to be to everyone's taste.
Well, I have played Earthdawn before, but found the mechanics kind of poor. Of anything to preserve from ED, it would be its fiction. A d20 Earthdawn game might be better.
As far as Earthdawn in SR, it would be a fairly good high magic alternate campaign setting for post-comet SR.
[Falling Leaf] : What should I do if I spilled coffee on mine?
As far as Earthdawn in SR, it would be a fairly good high magic alternate campaign setting for post-comet SR.
[Falling Leaf] : What should I do if I spilled coffee on mine?
Yeah its the tantalizing conspiracy-theory-ish crossover-with-SR fluff I enjoy more than the Earthdawn system itself.
>>[Headmaster]: To return to the issue of the text... is such a unification the intent behind these questions? Or is there another reading of it?
>>[Headmaster]: To return to the issue of the text... is such a unification the intent behind these questions? Or is there another reading of it?
>>[stevebugge] Assuming this is some sort of treasure map....
A flawless meeting of the minds, sounds like a museum, maybe one containing works by Archimedes, Da Vinci, and some others. Smithsonian maybe? Or the Library of Alexandria?
All motives aligned. A world meeting place, like athe UN or a League of Nations. Possibly a John Birch society thing. If refering to the ancient times it might refer to a palace of a great unifying monarch, maybe the Forbidden City in Beijing?
A tapestry that never frays...Well if it was a mosaic maybe. MIght be a tomb decoration... Have to keep working on it.
Maybe the answer is to keep the flame from the moths, a remote geothermal vent or crater might work for this, maybe underwater, hmmm......
A self Sufficent Island, must be the land down under.
Mangroves can, now which mangrove swamp could they mean?????
A place where suffering lost it's sting......What was the name of those hills where the Jesus was crucified? Sounds like a trip to the middle east is coming, time to talk to the old "Travel Agent"
And then on to the Fertile Crescent to look for the "cradle of civilization", I wonder if they mean Babylon.....
A flawless meeting of the minds, sounds like a museum, maybe one containing works by Archimedes, Da Vinci, and some others. Smithsonian maybe? Or the Library of Alexandria?
All motives aligned. A world meeting place, like athe UN or a League of Nations. Possibly a John Birch society thing. If refering to the ancient times it might refer to a palace of a great unifying monarch, maybe the Forbidden City in Beijing?
A tapestry that never frays...Well if it was a mosaic maybe. MIght be a tomb decoration... Have to keep working on it.
Maybe the answer is to keep the flame from the moths, a remote geothermal vent or crater might work for this, maybe underwater, hmmm......
A self Sufficent Island, must be the land down under.
Mangroves can, now which mangrove swamp could they mean?????
A place where suffering lost it's sting......What was the name of those hills where the Jesus was crucified? Sounds like a trip to the middle east is coming, time to talk to the old "Travel Agent"
And then on to the Fertile Crescent to look for the "cradle of civilization", I wonder if they mean Babylon.....
>>[Vescent]: On the other hand, a flawed meeting of minds puts me in mind of the Matrix! But your approach is intriguing.
>>[Spaceman] Your allowing yourselves to fall into the trap that is the Historian's Fallacy. You are attempting to interperate the questions through what you know of the modern world. Remember that the author did not live in the modern world. The author has no way of knowing what you and I know and would not understand things in the same way that you and I understand them. We should put ourselves in his shoes rather than forcing him to fit into ours.
This raises another question. How accurate is that translation? What subtle double-meanings and tricks of lauguage were lost or added when it was converted to a format that we can read? It may not even be possible to understand the meaning of the questions without speaking the original language as a native.
This raises another question. How accurate is that translation? What subtle double-meanings and tricks of lauguage were lost or added when it was converted to a format that we can read? It may not even be possible to understand the meaning of the questions without speaking the original language as a native.
>>[Vescent]: Mine was a mere joke (perhaps)
>>[Headmaster]: It's a little difficult to establish the veracity of the translation- alas the original is being kept under wraps and we must make do with these scraps thrown to us by a source who wishes to remain nameless. I am given to understand that the 'original' from which this translation arose might itself be a copy, which muddies the waters still further. I shall consult the source and see what variant translations I can procure for us.
>>[Headmaster]: It's a little difficult to establish the veracity of the translation- alas the original is being kept under wraps and we must make do with these scraps thrown to us by a source who wishes to remain nameless. I am given to understand that the 'original' from which this translation arose might itself be a copy, which muddies the waters still further. I shall consult the source and see what variant translations I can procure for us.
| QUOTE (Witness) |
| >>[Vescent]: On the other hand, a flawed meeting of minds puts me in mind of the Matrix! But your approach is intriguing. |
>>[stevebugge] Are you suggesting perhaps the DARPA offices at the Pentagon, or the Library of Congress patents office may be a better place to start looking? Maybe DARPAnet wasn't an original invention after all.......
>>[Shen] If one believes in prophecy, then a modern interpretation may be correct.
>>[Vescent]: To stevebugge: I don't imagine that those places would hold any meaningful information, but you are catching some of my drift, I suspect.
>>[Headmaster]: Spaceman: my source, who has been lurking in this discussion and tells me he is watching it 'with great interest', has sent me the following notes on translation. He asks that you forgive him if they are still insufficient, but 'they will have to do':
Can any meeting of minds be flawless?
[Could be 'melding of minds', 'unified mind', or even just 'conversation'?]
Can all motives ever be aligned?
[Alternative reading: 'all compasses pointed in the same direction', but with an emphasis that suggests a more literal interpretation along the lines of 'can everyone be relied upon to agree/comply?']
Can a tapestry be woven that never frays at the edges?
[Apparently the term 'tapestry' is a closest-fit. There is deep reverence attached to the term, as evidenced by the encasing of the symbols within a cartouche of sorts. 'Frays at the edges' might also mean 'eaten away' or 'leaks']
Can the moth ever be kept from the flame?
[The 'moth' term is spelled out, more or less, in a set of individually descriptive symbols denoting: 'quiet invader of the home', 'flying night creature', 'shedding dust' etc]
Can one island ever be sufficient?
['sufficient' here carries the connotation of 'big enough' as well as 'long lived enough']
Can a tree ever spread its roots out through the sea?
['spread its roots' here carries an overtone of invasion, with 'sea' in its dark and tempestuous aspect]
Can suffering ever lose its sting?
[for 'suffering' one can read 'torture', physical or mental]
Can any beast be tamed?
[for 'any beast' one might substitute 'all beasts'. Beast here also carries the tone implicit in the modern usage of 'beastly']
The implication of 'can' varies slightly between the first four questions and the last four, but in what sense (if any) these two usages differ it is not possible to say at this time.
>>[Headmaster]: Spaceman: my source, who has been lurking in this discussion and tells me he is watching it 'with great interest', has sent me the following notes on translation. He asks that you forgive him if they are still insufficient, but 'they will have to do':
Can any meeting of minds be flawless?
[Could be 'melding of minds', 'unified mind', or even just 'conversation'?]
Can all motives ever be aligned?
[Alternative reading: 'all compasses pointed in the same direction', but with an emphasis that suggests a more literal interpretation along the lines of 'can everyone be relied upon to agree/comply?']
Can a tapestry be woven that never frays at the edges?
[Apparently the term 'tapestry' is a closest-fit. There is deep reverence attached to the term, as evidenced by the encasing of the symbols within a cartouche of sorts. 'Frays at the edges' might also mean 'eaten away' or 'leaks']
Can the moth ever be kept from the flame?
[The 'moth' term is spelled out, more or less, in a set of individually descriptive symbols denoting: 'quiet invader of the home', 'flying night creature', 'shedding dust' etc]
Can one island ever be sufficient?
['sufficient' here carries the connotation of 'big enough' as well as 'long lived enough']
Can a tree ever spread its roots out through the sea?
['spread its roots' here carries an overtone of invasion, with 'sea' in its dark and tempestuous aspect]
Can suffering ever lose its sting?
[for 'suffering' one can read 'torture', physical or mental]
Can any beast be tamed?
[for 'any beast' one might substitute 'all beasts'. Beast here also carries the tone implicit in the modern usage of 'beastly']
The implication of 'can' varies slightly between the first four questions and the last four, but in what sense (if any) these two usages differ it is not possible to say at this time.
>>[Exile]: Maybe the "sea" is space; it is definitely dark, if not tempestuous. What meanings does the word "island" carry? It seems meaningless to ask if any island can last forever; maybe the question asks if any single thing can last on its own and keep its identity forever.
>>[Llerron]: This 'island Earth' perhaps?
>>[Bluebell]: I'm skeptical about all of this. What the hell makes any of you think that some ancient guru really knew how to save the world, much less would make his 'instructions' so obscure.
>>[Headmaster]: We do not necessarily make such assumptions, Bluebell. Clearly the author of 'On Cosmology' thought the 8 questions important. The question is why, and in what sense? And, indeed, are these the 8 or are there other texts that might be better candidates?
>>[Bluebell]: I'm skeptical about all of this. What the hell makes any of you think that some ancient guru really knew how to save the world, much less would make his 'instructions' so obscure.
>>[Headmaster]: We do not necessarily make such assumptions, Bluebell. Clearly the author of 'On Cosmology' thought the 8 questions important. The question is why, and in what sense? And, indeed, are these the 8 or are there other texts that might be better candidates?
| QUOTE (Witness) |
| >>[Vescent]: On the other hand, a flawed meeting of minds puts me in mind of the Matrix! But your approach is intriguing. |
>>[Westwind]: Ask the Deep Resonance if a meeting of the minds can be flawless....
>>[Vescent]: Very much my point.
>>[Llerron]: A tree... As in the Great Tree?
>>[Llerron]: A tree... As in the Great Tree?
>>[stevebugge] Way out on the proverbial limb here, but crossing my treasure mao with the matrix, and mixing in a touch of Geomancy I get this: The Dragonlines are a communications network in addition to a power conduit of a mystic sort. They need to be harmonized to what, raise a Gaeasphere sized ward against the metaplanes? (see what taking your mage buddies out for tacos will get you?)
Maybe what my map is looking for are the "decks" and "jackpoints"
Maybe what my map is looking for are the "decks" and "jackpoints"
>>[Bluebell]: Yeah right, so Loci are jackpoints for the gaeasphere? That's absurd!
>>[Vescent]: Hack the planet y'all!
>>[Vescent]: Hack the planet y'all!
>>[stevebugge] So maybe we got a little carried away on the cerveza, but some of my best ideas come up that way 
But still there maybe something to this, Wuxing has spent some serious money on it's geomantic pursuits, more than is warranted by a CEO sized Feng Shui fetish.
But still there maybe something to this, Wuxing has spent some serious money on it's geomantic pursuits, more than is warranted by a CEO sized Feng Shui fetish.
>>[Pyro Dwarf] I like how he used the Great Ghost Dance as an example of how wonderful ritual magic is.
>>[Shen] While that is beside the point, I do concede that his argument could have been presented more... effectively.
>>[Paracelsus] Maybe you could make sure the tapestry is never moved; this would be a solution that comes from treatment, not weaving.
>>[Shen] While that is beside the point, I do concede that his argument could have been presented more... effectively.
>>[Paracelsus] Maybe you could make sure the tapestry is never moved; this would be a solution that comes from treatment, not weaving.
>>[Vescent]: Cerveza has a lot going for it.
>>[Llerron]: Certainly the Great Ghost Dance raised concerns, and from some powerful quarters by all accounts.
>>[LeaningBear]: Perhaps we should have asked politely to be freed from our cells?
>>[Llerron]: That is hardly the point. Or is it? No maybe it is? But which is worse, a dangerous ritual conducted by desperate people for justifiable reasons, or a ritual that some desperate people believe is justifiable and will go to dangerous lengths to achieve?
>>[Holmar The Dutiful]: Is there something you wish to share?
>>[Llerron]: Not here. Not yet. Not until I'm sure.
>>[Llerron]: Certainly the Great Ghost Dance raised concerns, and from some powerful quarters by all accounts.
>>[LeaningBear]: Perhaps we should have asked politely to be freed from our cells?
>>[Llerron]: That is hardly the point. Or is it? No maybe it is? But which is worse, a dangerous ritual conducted by desperate people for justifiable reasons, or a ritual that some desperate people believe is justifiable and will go to dangerous lengths to achieve?
>>[Holmar The Dutiful]: Is there something you wish to share?
>>[Llerron]: Not here. Not yet. Not until I'm sure.
>>[Shen] Perhaps this is an entirely mundane reference to the Blood Mage Gestalt, or any large magical meeting of minds. Or he could be rhetorically questioning the idea of minds forcibly meeting in the first place; all such examples to appear so far in our world have been harmful. The Matrix promotes addiction, and the Blood Mage Gestalt and Aleph Society require massive sacrifices of magical ability and human lives. The Universal Brotherhood promoted insect spirit infestation, and the towering bureaucracies throughout history have always had obscene flaws in their personnel.
| QUOTE (Witness) |
| >>[Vescent]: To stevebugge: I don't imagine that those places would hold any meaningful information, but you are catching some of my drift, I suspect. |
>>[stevebugge] Hold on, does anyone remember why DARPAnet was created? Are you sugestting that is what is more important than where?
| QUOTE |
| >>[Shen] ...all such examples to appear so far in our world have been harmful... |
>>[Jungle Cat]: All?
>>[stevebugge] All what?
Oh that, I wouldn't say all, but then I try to never deal in absolutes (absoluts on the other hand, I like with a little cranberry, triple sec and lime)
Oh that, I wouldn't say all, but then I try to never deal in absolutes (absoluts on the other hand, I like with a little cranberry, triple sec and lime)
| QUOTE |
| >>[stevebugge] Hold on, does anyone remember why DARPAnet was created? Are you sugestting that is what is more important than where? |
>>[Vescent]: I wouldn't dream of ever suggesting anything in these chaotic times. [whistles innocently] EDIT: But I'm more of a Blavod fan.
[OOC] Witness, do you have an actual answer in mind? Are your refutations and approvals manipulating us towards an end, or are you doing whatever it takes to push the discussion along? I MUST KNOW ARRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! 
| QUOTE |
| >>[Exile]: Maybe the "sea" is space; it is definitely dark, if not tempestuous. |
>>[Hubris]: A physicist friend of mine insists that even empty space is tempestuous! But maybe I'm nitpicking
To tell you the truth emo, I'm not really sure anymore! I have my own theories about all of this, but to declare them outright would spoil the fun! (After all how often does a sourcebook ever come out and say 'and this is how it is'- that's the genius of them!)
I guess I was trying to build up some momentum in the discussion, and should probably step back a bit, but basically I'm fascinated to hear (and encourage) all the theories.
And ultimately since this will tie into my own campaign in the end, I'm hoping to maybe throw the name Jsona Var to my players and encourage them to google it!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.