emo samurai
Jul 7 2006, 06:57 PM
If magic came back to the world, what ratio of the population would you think should get ultrapower?
Any logical answer requires at least 1 person get Awakened, and that person is me.
James McMurray
Jul 7 2006, 07:07 PM
It wouldn't matter what the percetage was as long as I got to be awakened.
Platinum
Jul 7 2006, 07:09 PM
How would you even expect us to guess at such a number? That's like saying in 100 years how many people will like blue as their favorite colour.
deek
Jul 7 2006, 07:12 PM
What, there are 6,000,000,000 in the world, approximately? I chose 1%, which ends up being 60,000,000...that's quite a bit of people being awakened...and quite enough, really...
emo samurai
Jul 7 2006, 07:13 PM
I meant as in a social perspective; which ratio would be best for humanity? Or for yourself?
deek
Jul 7 2006, 07:17 PM
Well, I still say 1%. If I was awakened, that would be really cool, but if I wasn't...well, 1% would likely mean I would hardly even notice...well, I would notice, but it wouldn't really effect my everyday life.
They would be on par with athletes and actors and the like...sure, you see them all the time, but its not like I would be bumping shoulders with them or relaly be all that affected...
emo samurai
Jul 7 2006, 07:20 PM
Dude, if you live in a big city, each side of any block has, like, 200 people walking on it. That means at least 2 mages walking on the sidewalk with you. That's still a lot, and I'm assuming mages will be a lot more obvious than any other demographic that makes up 1% of the world population.
Shrike30
Jul 7 2006, 08:14 PM
Hey, I'm all for everyone having the potential to do magic, with enough effort directed towards it. That's always a lot more interesting than being one of the majority of people who can't do something.
Telion
Jul 7 2006, 08:42 PM
I see it as, what chance do I have of being active. 100% chance all the way, everyone else is just along for the ride.
deek
Jul 7 2006, 08:59 PM
QUOTE (emo samurai) |
Dude, if you live in a big city, each side of any block has, like, 200 people walking on it. That means at least 2 mages walking on the sidewalk with you. That's still a lot, and I'm assuming mages will be a lot more obvious than any other demographic that makes up 1% of the world population. |
But you are assuming equal distribution...which I don't think can be assumed. A city with a million people could have more or less than the 1%...and while I grant you some would be more obvious, others would likely not want to draw attention to themselves...I just don't think it would be all that "in your face" in today's world.
stevebugge
Jul 7 2006, 09:08 PM
I vote NOBODY! CHANGE IS BAD! Drastic magical changes are very bad!
JesterX
Jul 7 2006, 09:15 PM
I voted everybody awakened...
Because it really depends on the level of magic. Just look at Earthdawn where cooks uses magic to make food taste better.
I really like the concept of "adepts" where you can enhance your everyday tasks.
Birdy
Jul 7 2006, 09:31 PM
I'd prefer the same ratio that my friends over at Humanis would promote. Something around ZERO sounds nice.
emo samurai
Jul 7 2006, 10:15 PM
Tell me where they live and I'll make sure they're nice and warm for the night.
FanGirl
Jul 7 2006, 11:11 PM
Emo, I hope that you realize that magical powers wouldn't give you impunity, not even if you were the only person in the world who had them.
emo samurai
Jul 7 2006, 11:18 PM
Dude, if I were the only mage in the world with initiate grade 4, I could just quicken a Trid Phantasm spell, permanently bind a few elementals, and walk everywhere completely undetected. I wouldn't even have to eat, if he had Nutrition and Fast. If I wanted to kill the president, all I'd have to do is accident his chopper with a great form concealed air spirit. I would be unstoppable, because nobody could find my spells and nobody could dispel them. Of course it would give me impunity.
And in the 6th world, assuming those magic-hating Humanis didn't have wards and stuck to their "principles," then a fireball with erased signatures would solve my little ideological dispute.
FanGirl
Jul 8 2006, 12:01 AM
QUOTE (emo samurai @ Jul 7 2006, 06:18 PM) |
Dude, if I were the only mage in the world with initiate grade 4, I could just quicken a Trid Phantasm spell, permanently bind a few elementals, and walk everywhere completely undetected. I wouldn't even have to eat, if he had Nutrition and Fast. If I wanted to kill the president, all I'd have to do is accident his chopper with a great form concealed air spirit. I would be unstoppable, because nobody could find my spells and nobody could dispel them. Of course it would give me impunity. |
And then one of two things will happen:
1) You'll get complacent, slip up, and end up paying for it.
2) You'll realize that how dangerous complacency would be and spend the rest of your days wandering the earth in a perpetual state of paranoia, with nobody to confide in or rely on, until the day comes when you can't take the loneliness and fear any longer and decide to put yourself out of your misery. Sounds awesome.
QUOTE |
And in the 6th world, assuming those magic-hating Humanis didn't have wards and stuck to their "principles," then a fireball with erased signatures would solve my little ideological dispute. |
Have you ever heard of these things called "motive and opportunity" and "circumstantial evidence?" You'd need an iron-clad alibi if you wanted to escape justice, and if the Star couldn't pin the crimes on you, they'd most likely find some poor patsy to take the heat for you.
toturi
Jul 8 2006, 01:13 AM
I am canon. 1%. Heh.
Demon_Bob
Jul 8 2006, 01:40 AM
It would be much more interesting if you could chose to become awakened.
Join a group and they teach you to see, or take enough theoretical classes and eventually it all clicks and then you see the world with new eyes.
Now if magic and technology somehow interfered with each other. (Gremlins, reduced magic with implants, reduced implant efficiency for those with magic, ect.) Then how many would chose to or not to?
Not to mention the whole "Burn the witch," groups that might arise.
Herald of Verjigorm
Jul 8 2006, 01:47 AM
QUOTE (Demon_Bob) |
Not to mention the whole "Burn the witch," groups that might arise. |
"Powerbolt the nerd!!!"
Demon_Bob
Jul 8 2006, 02:03 AM
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
QUOTE (Demon_Bob @ Jul 7 2006, 08:40 PM) | Not to mention the whole "Burn the witch," groups that might arise. |
"Powerbolt the nerd!!!"
|
Is that supposed to be a flame or a magical group.
Why would you want to Powerbolt those odd little candies.
You have to spell it out for some of us.
Herald of Verjigorm
Jul 8 2006, 02:27 AM
QUOTE (Demon_Bob) |
You have to spell it out for some of us. |
What, you think anti-tech groups wouldn't come along as people see that "the corruption that is technology even silences and blinds the souls of those who rely on it"?
It would be a massive war, techies on one side, mages on the other, and people who don't follow either path distrusted and trampled upon by both.
Kagetenshi
Jul 8 2006, 04:30 AM
Canon 1% absolute maximum. I like my magic rare and bloody.
~J
BookWyrm
Jul 8 2006, 04:37 AM
I agree with the 1% canon setting. It makes more sense, with more people being born every day, the variations are near-limitless. Also, you have to factor in location, political & religeous reactions, mortality rates, ect.
Birdy
Jul 9 2006, 10:25 AM
QUOTE (Kagetenshi) |
Canon 1% absolute maximum. I like my magic rare and bloody.
~J |
Hey, that's almost my opinion: I like my Mage rare and bloddy.
Birdy
Jul 9 2006, 10:29 AM
QUOTE (emo samurai) |
I meant as in a social perspective; which ratio would be best for humanity? Or for yourself? |
Yokes aside:
From a social perspective anything greater 0 is a catastrophe! You either get witch-hunts since the people fear magic that escalate into civil wars when the mages strike back and end with certain "high background count" camp-areas being re-used for processing
Or you end up with a magic-using "elite"(1) that uses magic to control/oppress the masses, disguising it behind soft words and slogans.
(1) Claiming "superior" status is a shooting offence in my book
Nidhogg
Jul 9 2006, 10:51 AM
QUOTE (Birdy) |
Claiming "superior" status is a shooting offence in my book |
No offence, but when you can fly, summon all-powerful super-loyal spirits, and throw around fireballs through will alone, I would call that pretty superior.
emo samurai
Jul 9 2006, 03:10 PM
Who would win in a war between the 1% and the 99% mundanes? I'd imagine that spirits and invisibility spells would pretty much even things out, to say the least.
FanGirl
Jul 9 2006, 04:14 PM
A sufficiently powerful weapon can destroy a spirit, while you can find an invisible opponent just by throwing some paint around. In other words, I'm pretty sure that the mundies could geek most, if not all, of the mages if they all made the effort. Sure, some of them might die, but that's the price you'd pay in any war.
Birdy
Jul 9 2006, 05:46 PM
QUOTE (emo samurai) |
Who would win in a war between the 1% and the 99% mundanes? I'd imagine that spirits and invisibility spells would pretty much even things out, to say the least. |
Given that not all Awakened are spellcasters and that the good guys have things like Magic Resistance and Background count on their side, the balance shifts back to Humanity. And in case of a real war: A 20cm piece of jagged iron travelling at Mach-2 does not care about "invisibility" neither do DNS-chechs care about Masking.
Dawnshadow
Jul 9 2006, 05:49 PM
Depends on the element of surprise FanGirl...
Those damned mages, they worked their way to the point they got hold of all the landbased nukes, air traffic has ground to a standstill with freak tornados and storms and these things that drive pilots insane, and we've lost contact with most of the boomers.. We've still got the army, but every time we send them to the field, the officers get shot in the back, and the person who authorized it doesn't live out the month.
Herald of Verjigorm
Jul 9 2006, 05:53 PM
QUOTE (Birdy) |
and that the good guys have things like Magic Resistance and Background count on their side, |
When exactly did the morality aspect get defined?
Looking at history, it is far more likely that the mundanes will try to exterminate the mages (using much the same reasoning you seem to favor as justification) before any mages actually getting into positions of oppression. The real irony is that the subtle mages who betray their own will easily manipulate this crowd and then become the oppressors.Birdy's a witch, burn him.
hyzmarca
Jul 9 2006, 08:14 PM
The Mages - The Mundanes, Bah.
Your looking at this with far too much simplicity.It'll be the believers vs. the infidels.
"Hello, my name is David Koresh" I am the physical embodiment of God. Look what I can do."
And, of course, every two bit despot and aspiring megacorp will have their on mages.
emo samurai
Jul 9 2006, 09:38 PM
So... 1% bad.
I don't like how magical power is treated like an X-Men mutation rather than something you can learn and devote yourself to...
Nidhogg
Jul 9 2006, 09:45 PM
If you can learn magic, then everyone and thier dog will do so. Shadowrun is supposed to be a low magic setting, so it wouldn't make much sense if there wasn't really any reason for everyone to know at least a few tricks of the trade.
emo samurai
Jul 9 2006, 09:47 PM
FanGirl seems very opposed to the rule of badass mages. Why are you opposed to badass mages, FanGirl?
And as for the war of magic, I assume that the mages will constantly hide themselves and send spirits to assassinate leaders of man. With about 100% success, since they won't have wards, and grenading a spirit is not a good way to save the dude it's engulfing.
FanGirl
Jul 10 2006, 01:37 AM
QUOTE (emo samurai) |
FanGirl seems very opposed to the rule of badass mages. Why are you opposed to badass mages, FanGirl? |
If by "badass," you mean "one who acts in violation of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," then I would say that I am opposed to anyone who is a badass. This is because I strongly believe that human dignity must be protected above all else, and those who seek to violate it cannot truly be said to be acting morally - no matter how good or noble their intentions may be.
I feel the need to point out that I know Emo's character, Shen, to have acted in violation of at least 12 of the Declaration's 30 articles, which are spoiler'd below. Before you point out that the bad guys also violate some of these, please read Article 30.
[ Spoiler ]
Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 21
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
James McMurray
Jul 10 2006, 02:47 AM
IF a war between mundanes and mages happened there would probably be mages on both sides, as I doubt it would be an outright "us vs. them" war. More likely it would start because of abuses of magical power (such as those performed by Shen) leading to hatred and fear. Many awakened types would not want that war to happen and would spend their energies hunting the offenders. For instance, I could not see someone like Daniel Howling Coyote sitting idly by while some upstart mage decides he wants to lord it over the Native Americans.
Also, never discount man's engenuity when it comes to extermination. Shadowrun has ways of getting around hiding mages with summoned spirits, I expect real life would as well, but given our history it would be more along the lines of an Astral H-bomb then wards.
hyzmarca
Jul 10 2006, 04:02 AM
QUOTE (FanGirl) |
QUOTE (emo samurai) | FanGirl seems very opposed to the rule of badass mages. Why are you opposed to badass mages, FanGirl? |
If by "badass," you mean "one who acts in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," then I would say that I am opposed to anyone who is a badass. This is because I strongly believe that human dignity must be protected above all else, and those who seek to violate it cannot truly be said to be acting morally - no matter how good or noble their intentions may be. I feel the need to point out that I know Emo's character, Shen, to have acted in violation of at least 12 of the Declaration's 30 articles, which are spoiler'd below. Before you point out that the bad guys also violate some of these, please read Article 30. [ Spoiler ] Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11 (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 21 (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. |
Rights are obligations of the State. They do not aply to individuals acting on their own or as part of any group that is not the government of a State.
There is also the small matter of the definition of "human." Since human rights are, by definition, limited to human beings a State can easily circumvent them without violating them by choosing a definition of 'human' that does not include the oppressed group.
Derek
Jul 10 2006, 04:24 AM
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
What, you think anti-tech groups wouldn't come along as people see that "the corruption that is technology even silences and blinds the souls of those who rely on it"?
It would be a massive war, techies on one side, mages on the other, and people who don't follow either path distrusted and trampled upon by both. |
I believe that setting is called Mage: The Ascension......
FanGirl
Jul 10 2006, 04:39 AM
QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
Rights are obligations of the State. They do not aply to individuals acting on their own or as part of any group that is not the government of a State. |
Funny, that's not what Article 30 says:
QUOTE |
Article 30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein (emphasis mine). |
QUOTE |
There is also the small matter of the definition of "human." Since human rights are, by definition, limited to human beings a State can easily circumvent them without violating them by choosing a definition of 'human' that does not include the oppressed group. |
And I suppose that makes it okay to violate the rights of that oppressed group?
Kyoto Kid
Jul 10 2006, 05:03 AM
QUOTE (FanGirl) |
QUOTE (emo samurai) | FanGirl seems very opposed to the rule of badass mages. Why are you opposed to badass mages, FanGirl? |
If by "badass," you mean "one who acts in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," then I would say that I am opposed to anyone who is a badass. This is because I strongly believe that human dignity must be protected above all else, and those who seek to violate it cannot truly be said to be acting morally - no matter how good or noble their intentions may be. I feel the need to point out that I know Emo's character, Shen, to have acted in violation of at least 12 of the Declaration's 30 articles, which are spoiler'd below. Before you point out that the bad guys also violate some of these, please read Article 30. [ Spoiler ] Article 1 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11 (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 21 (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. |
...Excellent points. It's sad that the TT ascribes to none of these articles. "Elf Uber Alles" is their credo which really ticks me off since in RL Portland is one of the most laid back and cool cities I've lived in since being in the "Big Easy" back in the mid 70s.
For one, the RL motto here is "Keep Portland Weird"
hyzmarca
Jul 10 2006, 05:53 AM
QUOTE (FanGirl @ Jul 9 2006, 11:39 PM) |
QUOTE (hyzmarca) | Rights are obligations of the State. They do not aply to individuals acting on their own or as part of any group that is not the government of a State. |
Funny, that's not what Article 30 says:
QUOTE | Article 30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein (emphasis mine). |
|
The UN never really understood the concept of Rights very well. Take, for example, Article 26 section 1.
QUOTE |
Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. |
That isn't a right. A right is something that an individual is free to exercise or waive by choice. There is no such thing as a compulsery right. Any document that mandates that people who refuse to go to school must be killed has completely missed the boat on the concept of rights.
There is also Article 29 section 3 which, in a rather sneaky fashion, exempts the UN from these rights.
QUOTE |
These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. |
So, the UN can torture you if your exercising of your right not to be tortured would be in violation of the US's purposes. Nice. Now, you may think that Article 30 prevents this, but no. Article 30 prohibits individuals from taking actions 'Aimed at the destruction of' these rights. Torturing someone for information does not have the aim of destroying any rights. It has the aim of getting imformation. Therefore, UN troops torturing a 'Freedom Fighter' who attcked UN forces wouldn't be in violation of section 30.
QUOTE |
QUOTE | There is also the small matter of the definition of "human." Since human rights are, by definition, limited to human beings a State can easily circumvent them without violating them by choosing a definition of 'human' that does not include the oppressed group. |
And I suppose that makes it okay to violate the rights of that oppressed group?
|
If they are not human then they don't have these rights in the first place. One cannot violate rights which do not exist. In SR, there are many things that are obviously not human. Satyrs, centaurs, shapeshifters, spirits, and dragons all have legal difficulties for this reason. Likewise, there are some things that push the boundres of the common definition of 'human' such as ghouls, vampires, and drakes. The former two are almost never aforded the 'human' status.
In the Asimov short story that I am so fond of because it can be used to demonstrate how universal rights and imparitives are naturally flawed, the two George robots decide that they are the only real humans alive not out of malice and a desire to subjugate the inferior flesh people, it was simply a matter that was self-evident from their perspective.
Any arbitrary set of 'universal human rights' are doomed to failure because they are too limiting.
I prefer the much broader philosphy of live and let live except when you can't.
Birdy
Jul 10 2006, 10:08 AM
QUOTE (Herald of Verjigorm) |
QUOTE (Birdy) | and that the good guys have things like Magic Resistance and Background count on their side, |
When exactly did the morality aspect get defined?
Looking at history, it is far more likely that the mundanes will try to exterminate the mages (using much the same reasoning you seem to favor as justification) before any mages actually getting into positions of oppression. The real irony is that the subtle mages who betray their own will easily manipulate this crowd and then become the oppressors.Birdy's a witch, burn her.
|
A warlock please. Burn HIM!
I can assure you that both me and the character my nick is based on are male.
Herald of Verjigorm
Jul 10 2006, 10:36 AM
QUOTE (Birdy) |
A warlock please. |
Warlock is too many syllables for the lynch mob. But I did fix the pronoun.
emo samurai
Jul 10 2006, 01:36 PM
Personally, I think it's okay to nuke lynch mobs of any kind.
Anyway, FanGirl, you were wondering about Shen and the code of human rights. I've spoilered my rebuttal.
[ Spoiler ]
Article 1 I don't think the "spirit of brotherhood" means letting a bunch of people kick little kids for wearing gang colors.
Article 2 Shen interfered despite them not having anything to do with them, despite them coming from and living in a completely different nation and environment.
Article 3 Who interfered with that right more? Gangsters who demand protection, or the dude who nuked them?
Article 5 So hanging people by the back of their jacket on a lamppost for a day is more abusive than putting them in prison and opening them up to gang rape in the shower for a year?
Article 6 If anything, Shen was BRINGING law to the Barrens.
Article 7 You said it yourself; gangs tend to try to make themselves legitimate in the eyes of the community. This did not matter, however, when he saw them beating up little kids. He did not discriminate based on whatever territorial rights they proclaimed themselves to have.
Article 10 Admittedly, he did not give those people a trial, but then again, the institution necessary does not exist in the Barrens.
Article 11 He let them go free afterwards; again, being watched while you're in a public place for signs that you're going to mug somebody is much less harsh than prison is.
Article 18 Shen's taking over had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with secular violations of human rights on the part of others.
Article 19 Unlike the gangsters, Shen didn't care about people disrespecting him, or flashing the wrong colors, or mouthing off, or any one of the myriad other petty infractions that would convince a gang to kill you. In fact, he created a way for people to complain to him about pretty much anything.
Article 21 He should do that; in fact, he will be doing that.
Article 30 He so far hasn't made any alliances with outside legal authorities, simply because he doesn't trust them any more than most residents of the Barrens. He will, however, judge private security organizations based on their trustworthiness and a majority vote.
This is all assuming that you understand that sometimes, inaction IS action, especiall if it allows for baser, self-serving action on the parts of others. I doubt a rational person could really argue that he was worse than a gang that demands respect and protection money.
Merlyn
Jul 22 2006, 03:06 PM
I have a problem with the whole 'mages will be obvious and cause resentment' thing. An awakened person is only obvious to someone with Astral Sight (assuming they are not masking) unless they do something that is magical and visible.
So how does having them live in your neighbourhood cause fractions? Who is the more obvious minority, a white man in a predominantly black neighbourhood, or a black man in the same neighbourhood who is also a mage (notice how I picked a RL example and one that isn't even at the 1% ratio)?
And if the mages and mundane line up for a fight, just how do the mundanes know who to attack? As with the witch trails in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, thousands of innocent people will be killed and you will never be able to be certain that you got all, if any, mages.
NightmareX
Jul 22 2006, 03:18 PM
QUOTE (Merlyn) |
And if the mages and mundane line up for a fight, just how do the mundanes know who to attack? As with the witch trails in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, thousands of innocent people will be killed and you will never be able to be certain that you got all, if any, mages. |
Precisely, but that wouldn't stop the killing from starting in the first place. Or stop some groups from wanting said killing to start. After all, "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
Deamon_Knight
Jul 22 2006, 11:26 PM
How did the UN declaraction of Human Rights become the be all, end of of morality?
Also remember that the 1% usually includes adepts and those who don't know they are mages or aren't skilled magicians. The "Spirit summoning/Fireball throwing/Flying battle mage" is an even smaller segement of Magical Population.
emo samurai
Jul 23 2006, 01:44 AM
Again, I'm assuming perfect guerilla warfare; invisibility, summoning spirits from astral, blah blah blah. These people could wipe out the upper echelon of society within a week, and nobody would know what the fuck happened.
And would there even be an inquisition to begin with?