Jump to content

Talk:Mage: The Ascension

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Metaplot attribution

[edit]

This article has suffered from slight vandalism based on fan factions for much of its existence, and I've just corrected a minor example of that. From what I understand the push to demonize Jess Heinig has taken a new tactic of attributing changes some fans didn't like to him even though they were put in place before he had anything to do with the line.

The balance of Mage's drastic metaplot changes, from the death of the Masters to the destruction of both Horizon and Doissetep, were done under Phil Brucato's developership and with his approval. These changes began in 1997: a few months after Mage 2nd came out.

Since I have a great deal of respect for everyone involved in the line and wish respective eforts to be properly attributed, I will be monitoring this article for further isues like this.

I'd like to explain a few things pertaining to my last edit.

First, I'd like to comment 64.231.132.127 on good job. Especially edits at metaphysics (as really good wording) and contemporary setting on (as really needed) are appreciated.

However I felt compelled to revert to old wording in few cases (especially in history section) as I think that it better explains the topic to average, uninitiated reader. However, I was careful to integrate the old and new content. Also I increased amount of linkage to existing articles on non-WoD topics. This is an attempt to better cross-reference the article with the vast content of Wikipedia.

Second thing is a more delicate matter: I've decided to cut down the number of links pertaining to Mage universe like Order of Reason or Rogue Council. In my (and not only mine) opinion, a Wikipedia is universal encyclopedia not the one on WoD. Besides, why create article on Order of Reason or Rogue Council if there are no article on Technocracy or Traditions and different Traditions' and Conventions' articles are barely more than stubs? Yes, you can write that specific articles but you risk that they will be voted for deletion as insignificant trivia (as Bone gnawers almost were). So if you are really going to write sizeable article in near future - be bold and make an edit re-creating your links. If not, it's better to reduce the amount of red links and encourage fellow Wikipedians to focus on things that are really important to the topic. As you can see from my edit, I think that Order of Reason can be included in Technocracy (Mage: The Ascension) article.
Just remember you can come later and re-enable link if you are ready with article it points to.

BTW: I found out that FreeMind can be a very good tool for remembering your plans for Wikipedia. Feel free to see an example of its use for Wikipedia. Hope it will be useful :)

  • Not bad... It's a plausible idea... however if the articles are properly written and gneral enough they will pass VfD without problems... my list of separate articles for the Crafts was quite too much (i made it long ago, before i actually knew more on wikipedia) and i think they should simpl go in a single article with information partaining to them. I think the current article is pretty good and that i'll be able to have soem free time to rectify some of the current red links... sign next time Forseti ;) --Asmodai 22:12, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

On factions list

[edit]

I noticed that listing all the Traditions, conventions and other detailed subdivisions in Mage is increasingly popular. However, later such lists haunt with lots of red links. Ie: what is the sense of Listing the Pharmacopoeists if there is even no article on Technocracy? Sorry, but even main Traditions have inadequate articles and links to them exist since 11 Oct 2003. Also, please check the target of links - Zaibatsu and Secret Societies probably don't point where they were meant to.

As I said before, I think that article on Tradition/Convention-level faction are OK but beyond that they are probably best suited as subsections of their respective Tradition/Convention. This is Wikipedia not encyclopedia on WoD only and thus minor items that have no chance to expand beyond the stub are likely to be voted for deletion. -- Forseti 09:33, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • I killed them, but here's a paste for future reference... Next time feel free to edit it and just explain here. The current VFD's could at any time lead to a Reddy hunt and that wouldn't shed nice light on Mage... --Asmodai 21:19, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

The pasted List:

The above link to the Cult of Ecstacy needs to be fixed - at present it merely redirects to a general information page about the rest of the traditions.--Crais459 09:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spirituality and Society sections

[edit]

Much to my astonishment I've recently discovered that the article on Mage: the Ascension doesn't mention Ascencion at all! While we are at it, it doesn't elaborate on Awakening, Epiphanies, Gilgul and other "development work" thingies. Perhaps Spirituality section would be needed but I'm not sure how much detail should be put there - what do you think?

Also I suspect that reader knowing nothing on Mage would be thrown at deep water on History section - perhaps we should do some introduction on factions, chantries, mastery-apprenticeship and other social things. This could also include information on nature of Ascension War, namely that it is silent war not overt. Else the reader could imagine it as sort of heavy-militaristic manga bent on mysticism.

I'd have rather busy weekend but from monday I plan to develop the article somewhat so please give your thoughts. -- Forseti 23:52, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Paradigm and Ascension Details

[edit]

Mage's approach to what paradigm is and how it figures into the setting, on the one hand, and how it was sometimes appropriated (clumsily) as a game mechanic to put further and unintended limits on what a player's character in the setting is practically capable of, with magic (< what the player can describe in a way that the Storyteller approves of because it is sufficiently entertaining, sufficiently internally coherent, sufficiently scientifically plausible, or sufficiently accompanied by bribes, usually in the form of Pizza and Mountain Dew), are very, very different influences on how "paradigm" came to be understood by players of the game.

The books published for Mage: the Ascension have been woefully but intentionally (in my opinion) ambiguous about defining paradigm. I note the article body describes paradigm as something that is involved in *justifying* the use of magic, but this is very contrary to the real concept of paradigm as presented in the *setting*. (It's consistent with the misappropriation of paradigm as a character-limiting game mechanic). Paradigm is like (canonically, it's compared to) a natural language the Mage works in. In this sense, paradigm is no more involved in "justifying" acts of Magic than correct Latin grammar is necessary to justify a logical argument.

On a related note, Ascension, as a concept in the setting, has been intentionally obscured by the late Mage: the Ascension Revised line. Revisionist history in the Mage Revised line painted the recent past in the game setting, and by implication, the rules and ideas of the previous edition of the game, in different ways than the 2nd edition (unrevised) presented itself. Ascension, the efforts to achieve which were often described as "the Ascension War" was, in the 2nd edition of the game, a broad term describing Mages' efforts to enlighten humanity, work to better the lot of individuals and humanity in practical terms, and fight 'cold' and 'hot' wars (mostly cold) with other paradigmatic groups of Mages. The Revised line, in this round-about way, muddled the definition of "Ascension War," to mean, "Mages who used to shoot fireballs at each other from dragonback, downtown."

Resonance, Nature of

[edit]

The section on metaphysics discusses types of resonance-- dynamic, entropic, static, which is IMO inappropriate. These are very late inclusions in the game, and very unsubtle reversals of what resonance had been in previous editions of the game-- previously, it did not attach to people except in extraordinary circumstances. Rather, it was a kind of tension that existed between specific acts of magic and the ambient environment. This is how resonance was construed through the predominant history of the game-- an innate tension between specific acts of magic and other factors, and it is not how resonance is construed in most popular play of Mage.

The simplification, furthermore, of resonance into three categories, is an oversimplification of resonance that was instituted solely so that players' characters could have another cruchy game mechanic, at the expense of an interesting and non-pigeonholed means for the Storyteller to adjust magic's function in particular circumstances. (Point being, it's not only unpopular and misrepresentative of the game as a whole, it's also simply bad for the setting and gameplay).

Finally, all disputes about the popularity of Mage Revised's resonance aside, developers repeatedly stated, and the canon shows, that the Garou Triat and Mage essences are not equivalent, and they definitely should not be presented as such.

At minimum, a discussion of resonance types does not belong in an introduction of Mage metaphysics, and no reference to W:tA should be made.

Planning an Edit

[edit]

I'm not a regular Wikipedia user, and don't understand the conventions entirely, but am planning to look into the request for peer review for this article, and if possible do a significant edit of it. I haven't any better way to transmit the edit I've worked on than to include it here in draft form:

-Intro-

Mage: The Ascension is a role-playing game based in the World of Darkness, and is published by White Wolf Game Studio. The characters portrayed in the game are broadly referred to as Mages, and are able to perform subtle or outlandish acts of magic. The idea of magic in the game is broadly inclusive of real and imaginary mystical practices and other belief systems as well, so that many Mages do not precisely resemble modern fantasy wizards. Indeed, science itself is taken to ultimately be a form of magic. In 1996, Mage: The Ascension won the Origins Award for Best Roleplaying Rules 1995.

-Metaphysics-

The basic premise of Mage: The Ascension is that everyone has the ability, at some level, to shape reality. This capacity is dormant in most humans, who are known as sleepers. A mage is a character in whom the portion that shapes reality (commonly called the Avatar) is 'Awakened,' leading to the mage having the ability to change reality via willpower, beliefs, and specific magical techniques.

The beliefs and techniques of Mages vary enormously, and the ability to alter reality can only exist in the context of a coherent system of belief and technique, called a paradigm. Such a paradigm provides an explanation for how the universe works and the underpinnings of the understanding of how to change it. For example, an alchemical paradigm might describe the act of wood burning as the wood "releasing its essence of elemental Fire," while modern science would describe fire as "combustion resulting from a complex chemical reaction." Paradigms tend to be nuanced per the individual Mage, but the vast majority belong to broad categories of paradigm, e.g., Shamanism, Medieval Sorcery, religious miracle working, and superscience.


The majority of paradigms differ substantially from the consensus, or the accepted view of reality. Consensus is determined by the Sleepers who (though unawakened) through sheer numbers impart to reality its general rules. When a mage performs an act of magic that does not seriously violate this commonsense version of reality, in game terms this is called coincidental magic. Magic that deviates wildly from consensus is called vulgar magic. When it is performed ineptly, or is vulgar, and especially if it is vulgar and witnessed by sleepers, magic can cause Paradox, a phenomenon in which reality tries to resolve the apparent contradiction. Paradox is difficult to predict and almost always bad for the mage. The most common consequences of paradox include physical damage directly to the Mage's body or 'paradox flaws,' magic-like effects which can for example turn the mage's hair green, make him mute, make him incapable of leaving a certain location, and so on. In more extreme cases paradox can cause Quiet (forms of madness that afflicts mages and may leak into reality), Paradox Spirits (nebulous, often powerful beings which purposively set about resolving the contradiction, usually by direclty punishing the mage), or even the removal of the Mage to a paradox 'realm,' a pocket dimension from which it may be difficult to escape.

In Mage, there is an underlying framework to reality called the Tapestry. This Tapestry, or rudimentary fabric of existence, is constituted by distinctive divisions into different realms, such as the material world and various areas of the spirt world, as well as some of the fundamental rules of reality, including the essence of magic/what is real, in game terms 'quintessence.' Quintessence can have distinctive character, called resonance, including but not limited to dynamic, static, entropic, and other kinds of resonance.

Mage divides mechanics for magic into a system of nine Spheres (which are sometimes construed as in-character ideas as well, more on this later), with which a player can describe thier character's ability to do magic in a structured but relatively open-ended fashion. Their ranking with each Sphere determines how sophisticated their acts of magic in that area can be. For example, changing a sound into another sound is much easier that changing a sound into light, or (even more drastically) changing a sound into a rabbit. Because different mages study different spheres, their abilities have enormous variety. The general power a mage has to change reality (called Arete) also varies from mage to mage, and the process of slowly but steadily increasing that power through a process of personal enlightenment.

-History-

that the mystical beliefs of the common people were not only backward, but dangerous, and that they should be replaced by cold, measurable and predictable laws of nature and respect for human genius. They replaced long-held theologies, pantheons, and mystical traditions with ideas like rational thought and the scientific method. As more and more sleepers began to use the Order's discoveries in their everyday lives, Reason and rationality came to govern their beliefs, and the old ways came to be regarded as misguided superstition. However, The Order of Reason became less and less focused on improving the daily lives of sleepers and more concerned with eliminating any resistance to their chokehold on the minds of humanity.Knighterrant81 18:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tenth Sphere: Telos?

[edit]

From what I heard (as I followed the idea VERY closely), "Telos", not "Ascension", was the tenth sphere, and even had a rulebook associated with it. I had long thought, on my own, that the tenth sphere was 'Connection', and saw a Virtual Adept site with it's own interpretation (something about data manipulation). In fact, the sourcebook named "Ascension" mentions Telos, avidly, as the name of this elusive sphere. --Ayelis 17:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the final book, there were three possible interpretations of the 10th sphere. However, since its use was stated, in the same book, to be entirely optional, coupled with the fact that every Tradition had their own interpretation of the 10th sphere(before the Red Star even appeared), there are infinite solutions, or none at all, depending on the Storyteller. As a Storyteller myself, while I haven't gotten to this part of the metastory(if I ever do), I don't think I'll implement it other than possibly having factions continue to war over this 'new' topic. Urbandale (talk) 10:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was involved with Mage during the original run. At that time the belief was that each Tradition had it's own tenth sphere (via talk/e-mail with Phil Brucato). Looking at it as Ascension related powers would seem logical to me based on the information I had available to me from editors and the books that had been published for the WoD (World of Darkness released by White Wolf Game Studios which encompasses all the RPGs products and the seperate but related LARP products) at the time. I worked my theory of the tenth sphere related to the tradition that I was working on into that tradtion's book and related works. If there was a final decision on what that Ten Sphere was to be, it would be to take away a final mystery that, which at the time I was working on the game, was to be one that was never to be revealed to the gaming public. This gives the author of works a secret to be left for others to find in their works that is open to interperation. The goal being to pass along the spark of creativity to make other think into existance their own thoughts thus provoking changes in thinking aka a paradigm shift. Minor as our writing abilities might be, some of us did struggle to add a core truth within our writings as a stealth learning tool as related to us by other line developers (ie. Andrew Greenberg, line developer for Vampire :: The Masquearde). The goal being to open up a world of possibilities by laying out a web of interactivity where having the ability to modify the world with our minds is constrained by the willpower of the masses. WereTech (talk) 07:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, since I keep seeing everyone thinking that I misspelled Dharma in the first edition Akashic Brotherhood works by spelling it Drahma, let me set the record strait. I knew about the whole 10th Sphere concept while I was working on the Book of Shadows. By the time I was writing the Akashic Brotherhood Tradition Book, I had already thought out my version of the Akashic Brotherhoods vision of the 10th Sphere and wrote it into the book. Yes, Drahma. Drahma is not Dharma. Drahma is not misspelled. It is spelled Drahma intentionally to play off Dharma, but, as I just said, Drahma is not Dharma. Drahma is the character realizing that they are in a story that is being created and having the ability to more directly control the flow of the story that is unfolding around them. It is the character realizing that they are being played by a player and that the world is controlled by a Storyteller, and through the use of Drahma having the ability to even affect the Storyteller's actions. And, yes, I worked out how this would work and the repercussion for utilizing these magicks. Why wasn't this ever brought up in the books? I stopped working for White Wolf for personal reasons that had nothing to do with White Wolf, and I need to spend more time elsewhere. I kind of wish that I should have continue to write for them, but I had stopped. I never told Phil Brucato that I had written the 10th sphere into my work. If you go back and reread the first edition Akashic Brotherhood Tradition Book and you look for it, you can see hints of it in there. Seriously. It doesn't seem that the writers after me knew. I think some people seriously thought that I had misspelled Dharma which is not the case at all. The information isn't erroneous. Read between the lines. I wrote over the word count and then was told to convert all the information into a story which means large amounts of information were compressed or had to be omitted. Since I essentially created an in depth world view for the Akashic Brotherhood; it is really those that came after that altered it into something else. This is a fictional group of mystics that cover the entire range of Eastern philosophy and religion from parts of Persia, India, Tibet, China, South Asia, Japan, and the Pacific Islands. The work was a merging of many cultural ideas. I swear I have read reviews that the reviewer seemed to be a religious zealots that had a predetermined view and didn't like what was presented before them - probably because the main characters in the "story" were women.WereTech (talk) 03:25, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sphere Sigils

[edit]

The Sphere Sigils section is of little use without a diagram, I think. --Mike

Verbena

[edit]

Here is the infromation from Verbena for later merging.

The Verbenae, more colloquially known as the Verbena, are a fictional group of witches and neopagans. They are a tradition of mages in Mage: the Ascension, a role-playing game created by the White Wolf game studios.

They are known for their knowledge of herbs and the use of blood magic.

Speciality Sphere: Life.

The Verbenae believe Life is sacred, and to be prized above all things. That being said, these primal sorcerers work magic the way they embrace life- with determination and raw passion. They embrace suffering as readily as comfort and enlightenment, and aren't afraid to make difficult choices.

The tradition traces its path from a group of primordial Awakened known as the Wyck, whom they believe carried the knowledge of magick across the globe.During the late Middle Ages many of these were burned at the stake as satanic witches, hunted tortured and burned.Over the centuries it took for witch-craze to die down, the Wyck came to practice their arts in secrecy and became known for dealing with their foes harshly. Thus the Verbena were born.

On the whole, the Verbena tend to be more passionate, honest and forthright than many other mages. Unlike their Hermetic and Celestial rivals, the tradition balances strong male and female aspects, rather than favoring a patriarchal ideal. They are most at home with the Dreamspeakers of all the other mage groups, and most hostile towards the Technocracy's Technomagicks and bully tactics, though Nephandi also rank among their top priorities. Web Warlock (talk) 13:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are still active, would you be able to cite a couple references on that? I'm making it my mission to put together a page for each Tradition and Technocrat house, one for the Hollow Ones, the Ahl-i-Batin, and the Crafts. If you were able to slap some on(from any core/splat book, it doesn't matter), it would lighten my load considerably. Thanks!Urbandale (talk) 10:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mage: The Ascension Wikia

[edit]

These entries are all beautiful, but they seem to go very deep into the game and its mythos. Why not give the game a Wiki of its own and links here to that? All this great material would go from borderline "fancruft" here to Featured Content on its own Wiki! --65.37.105.102 (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much anyone can go make a Wikia and add whatever they want to it so... usually if someone feels a need they should get the ball rolling rather than ask others to. 184.145.18.50 (talk) 10:46, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in agreement with 65.37.105.102. I'm a new editor, but this article seems bloated in terms of plot and rules summaries. It's clear that a lot of work went into these sections, but they're largely too in-depth for an encyclopedia. --That334 (talk) 16:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Craft faction

[edit]

One of the faction that is often listed in many pages of this wiki regarding Mage is "Crafts". I have no idea who or what theses peoples are, but whenever I try to access "Crafts (Mages:_The_Ascension)", it redirects me directly to Mage's main page, on which the only reference toward what the "Crafts" are is a link.. that leads me to the very same page.

Either remove any reference toward "Crafts", or expand in the same page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.154.254 (talk) 17:58, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mage Revised

[edit]

Should we mention that fans often abbreviated the revised edition under this names? I'm reading it is significantly different from 1st/2nd ed in terms of character power, limiting spirit magic and stuff. Not sure what the 20th anniversary is like. 184.145.18.50 (talk) 10:45, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews section & how to trim down on hyper-specific information

[edit]

Pardon my uncertainty here, new to editing and this is one of my copyedits - is the "reviews" section as listed in the article up to style standards? A bullet point list with external hyperlinks feels out of place. Are these reviews not already referenced in the "reception" section?

Additionally, the article is difficult to read as someone unfamiliar with the series. What can be trimmed down from, or condensed within the article? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 01:15, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Board game articles seem to be hit-or-miss as to whether they include a Reviews section. I agree that it would be better to incorporate the reviews into the Reception section.
As for what to trim down, there's a lot of unsourced content, and the article's been tagged since 2009 for this problem. If you're uncomfortable with outright deleting material, I would say you're at least at liberty to move it over to this page until proper sourcing can be provided...and if the only sourcing is primary sourcing, then perhaps it's cruft that isn't needed for a reader's basic understanding of the game.
Hope this is helpful! DonIago (talk) 15:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sleepers?

[edit]

Hi sorry I was just doing a copy edit and I kept seeing the use of the word sleepers over and over again, but I don't think it was ever mentioned in the article? If it is in there somewhere it would probably be helpful to put it before the first mention of it being used.
Hope this helped! Jillfantastica (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mage:_The_Ascension&oldid=1200269556"