| From: | jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Using Mudane Items while Percving [lomg] |
| Date: | Wed, 26 Jan 2005 07:38:50 -0800 (PST) |
> An astrally projecting mage is a whole different
> thing, and not
> really a point of contention in this thread. The
> point of contention
> is really whether or not a mage with a rifle gets
> the benefit of a
> scope on the rifle if he aims at someone while
> assensing them.
Non-assensing mages: can use "raw" (close causal
relationship to the object to be linked with) mundane
sensory input to create astral links between them and
an object (would a telesmatic wax phonograph recording
of someone's voice, suffice for a ritual sending?).
Assensing mages: must use "astral senses" to create
astral links between them and an object.
Assumption: "astral senses" provide the same (sensory)
experience of the world as astral projection does.
Thus, much like you have already said, a mage who is
assensing is in fact experiencing the physical plane
as if it were the astral.
In order to determine whether an assensing mage can
use a scope, the question then becomes: "how are
astral senses different from one's mundane senses?"
Let us assume that an astrally projecting mage would
not get the benefit of the non-astrally-primary
(mundane) properties of objects.
When assensing and using a scope, a mage would
therefore be attempting to perceive a mundane property
of an object (i.e.: magnification). Said property
would therefore not extend to the astral plane. One's
reasoning for this might vary, but it is the
distinction that is important.
On this account the debate about what assensing mages
can do with mundane objects mainly regards what the
astrally and mundanely (primary) properties of objects
are. I would suggest this is left to every GM's
discretion, but one could say that where the physical
properties of objects are concerned, the astral plane
is a world of pure appearance where the rules of our
normal sensory apparatus and interpretation do not
apply (*reads sentence again... nods approvingly at
vagueness* ;).
The above is unlikely to satisfy anyone on ShadowRN,
so here goes:
However, unlike when projecting, an assensing mage
retains a link to their mundane body; their mundane
perceptions could therefore potentially "bleed into"
their astral senses. In such a case, one might rule
that an assensing mage is able to perceive mundane
properties whilst assensing if they pass a WIL or INT
check against the Object Resistance of the item whose
mundane properties are to be perceived (or they could
just temporarily stop assensing and use their actual
mundane senses).
The loophole inherent in the above solution -as
presented- would be that a blind (or any) mage would
in fact be able to read when assensing. This would
imply a strange metaphysics where mundane properties
can somehow be "grasped" using astral senses alone. A
possible solution would be to allow assensing mages
this benefit only for those senses that their mundane
bodies in fact possess, but even then they would be
able to find out how soft a peach is without
physically touching it. This would in turn be
cancelled out by the notion that in order to sense the
softness of the peach, the mage will simply be at the
+2 penalty as described within the canon to perform a
physical/mundane action of touching the peach and
experiencing this touch. However, such a sensory bleed
will be problematic for reasons yet to be revealed.
This discussion attends us to the worry that the
astral plane might in fact appear totally different to
every perceiver if mundane properties can be perceived
when astrally sensing.
Generally, one should be able to say that the astral
and mundane plane are merely two reflections of a
single Reality (different ways of understanding the
same thing) and that "Xyz" in the astral consistently
translates to "Qxa" in the mundane; that their content
(Capital letter, two small letters) is in fact the
same. In such a case it's primarily a matter of which
plane a non-dual-natured being decides to perceive
that determines their sensory input in the form of
perceived properties. On the other hand, the astral
and physical plane might each contain mutually
unintelligible sense-data/properties, in which case we
are left with a quandary, as it becomes impossible to
find out the softness of the peach when assensing, as
"softness" might be untranslatable to the astral
senses. One alternative is to see either the mundane
or astral plane as a (causally) primary to the other,
but this would bring its own unique quandaries and
probably end up being dissimilar to canon
representation.
Consider that objects within the astral can have
emotions attached to them. Emotions which are usually
attached to them by non-awakened being on the mundane
plane due to various mundane sense data that they
induce. Thus, on the account provided above, emotion X
on the mundane plane should translate to emotion X on
the astral, as their content is the same. In order to
resolve this in an easy manner, we can assume a
tri-partite account (astral<-"Reality"->mundane),
wherein we can say that emotion X is and remains
emotion X regardless of the plane where it is
perceived as it actually resides within "Reality".
"Real" softness thereby translates to softness in the
astral, as well as mundane plane, though it's left
open to interpretation what "Real" softness would
consist of and how the astral/mundane senses come to
know it (and Know it they would; Real Softness would
be immediately apparent... washing detergent companies
would kill for the secret of Real Softness).
If the mundane senses of an assensing being would
somehow influence the properties their astral senses
pick up, a letter not written in braille could
legitimately feel emotionally "neutral" to a blind
mage, as they would have little feelings regarding
something generally outside the scope of their mundane
senses. Note that this is not a completely sufficient
counter-example (the mage could of course simply
directly read the emotions attached to the object),
but it's intended to demonstrate that the perception
of the astral plane should not be dependent on the
mundane senses and properties of an assensing mage.
For all we know the mage might be taking the same
emotion-deadening drug as a particular elf fixer in
one of the novels. Should this affect the mages'
capability to perceive astral emotional signatures? It
shouldn't on the account developed so far, as the mage
will perceive emotion X as yet another fact about an
object, just as we can notice a person reddening.
Differing with this account would result in different
mages having a (vastly) dissimilar experience of the
astral plane, which would seem in conflict with canon
(though the astral metaplanes are a wholly different
story).
Thus, by virtue of the quandaries inherent in allowing
mundane senses and properties to affect the perception
of the astral plane (or vice versa), the
mundanely/astrally-primary-property distinction
mentioned initially seems to be a viable base for
resolving the "scope quandary."
Whether magnification of visual input is a primary
property of an object in the astral plane can be
endlessly debated, but given that lighting conditions
aren't very meaningful on the astral plane we can
safely assume that magnification is trivial, too.
On the account here developed, assensing would be
entirely similar to astrally projecting, except
objects in the mundane Reality can be manipulated
(whereas those on the astral can not?) and the effects
of these manipulations is experienced within the
astral interpretation of Reality. The interaction with
the physical body is as if one were astrally
projecting; the changed interpretation of Reality
ought to be just as complete as when one is
projecting. Gravity might therefore not seem to exist
when assensing, making the +2 penalty seem relatively
mild (but then, being capable of not experiencing
gravity, i.e.: ignoring one's sense of balance, might
make some things a lot easier).
note: What happens when an astrally projecting mage's
body suddenly dies? I seem to recall they are left
dissipating in the astral without any penalties to
deal with, but my memory might be playing tricks on
me. If this is true, however, beings in shadowrun
might have a separate astral and mundane existence
(body/soul-type of distinction).
The fact that dual-naturedness would become a
triviality, a handicap even, is another argument
against non-dual-natured mages ever getting the
benefit of a scope when assensing. Since dual-natured
beings have evolved to cope with perceiving two planes
at once, they naturally get to use a scope to look at
an aura without any problem, whereas in the case of
the non-dual-natured it's a matter of either-or.
Dual-natured beings have a magi-mental faculty for
interpreting the magnification effect of a lens and
the auras it astrally senses at the same time, the
non-dual-natured do not. The limit of a dual-natured
being's capability to reinterpret its astral senses
using a mundane metaphor is left open for debate, as
even dual-natured beings oughtn't be able to target a
spell by virtue of seeing a trid display. One thing is
certain though, the interaction between their mundane
and astral senses is better developed than that of the
non-dual natured; therefore their superior potential
will allow them to do things humans will simply not be
able to (such as reading while assensing).
In fact I believe that the essence of dual-naturedness
would be a good start for comprehensively resolving
this matter of the scope, as the capability of being
dual-natured must involve the capability to synthesize
the content of the two planes into a single reality;
dual-natured beings would actually be perceiving and
living within the aforementioned "Reality", making
their position rather enviable. A sufficiently
explanatory account of dual-naturedness must be
capable of elucidating how this synthesis takes place
and what kind of properties are therefore primary to
these beings, as well as account for previously
mentioned problems (can a blind dual-natured being
read, or is reading impossible without mundane vision?
Reading might be a mundane activity, but perhaps a
dual-natured being can directly "Understand" the
content of a text if it is appropriately trained?).
Issues abound, hopefully providing some interesting
thoughts.
Cheers,
Jan Jaap
----Who would hate to be a philosopher in 2064----
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
