Page 190 replies:
No, but I would claim to believe such to be true.
...So you have a fairly high but not certain confidence that it is (?objectively/subjectively?) true?
Something that the subject believes to be true, through logically valid justification.
...I'd give you an Element of 'Logical Beliefs' if you really wanted.
Though, wow, I agree: that should have a better Name than the best I can think of. (I'm still not willing to make Truth subjective, though.)
...Anybody know a word that means precisely that, from English or another language? "Something you believe, through logically valid justification"? If worst comes to worst, I'll make up one in-universe; I bet the Elves had one...
Of course, it's possible that my definition of Reality is how the setting and magic define Truth but there's nothing I can do about that other than ponder the implications of magical elements being influenced by perception in general but not by the perception of the wielder specifically.
I think it would be closer to, "A statement is True insofar as it accurately describes Reality." But yeah.
And - for the record - the wielder's perception can push the limits for
where an Element can be applied to an extent, but it can't generally alter their core essence, their definition or central concept.
For example, you can't shift the core essence of Truth, but you can totally take someone who is stating a falsehood-that-they-believe and detect (or otherwise work with) that. Because it's not
quite Truth, exactly - but it's very close. (...Mitochondria are arguably not Fire
exactly, but then again they sort-of are.)
The thing is that magic here appears to operate at a conceptual level. Truth magic doesn't care one bit what you believe to be true, only what is actually True. If it could be deterred so easily as by mind-magicking yourself into believing something, it wouldn't be any good in a lot of cases anyway. If you teach someone that 2+2=5, and then use Truth magic, it will absolutely tell them that they are wrong, as 2+2=4 is the Truth, and you can't be subjective about math.
And anyplace where things are subjective, Truth just doesn't care and simply tells you straight up 'this person believes X' without having any opinion on X whatsoever, unless X is a real physical or metaphysical thing that can be confirmed or denied.
Honesty is its own thing.
Yep.
One additional note: Using Truth Magic as an Oracle requires a ton of power, a ton of skill, or a Truth that Magic can easily confirm/deny.
"Person XYZ believes/doesn't believe what they're saying," is the classic example of the third. Though, something like, "behind XYZ ward that I can't see through, there is/isn't a Vampire" would also be a good example of the third - depending on said ward, of course.
If you want to ask random Ants to start reciting procedurally-generated phrases about Laws of the Setting, and detecting which ones are True, you'd best have a
lot of Truth Skill and a
lot of Resources, or you're going to run out of power long before you get anywhere.
I have to be honest and say I have zero clue on what I want to do towards the Talanburg slash spynet stuff. Like most things are "oh yeah, that's my vote" but on that, no clue. Absolutely no clue.
I haven't given the Forest any choices that are obviously-stupid.
...Indeed, I'll say one better: This time, as far as I've thought ahead through the options and their probable effects, all options are good and do what they say they'll do. It's just a trade-off of what good-result you'd prefer.
Oh. Damn. This just gave me a really weird, extremely cool and all too possible idea for a Quad-Negacion.
Truth/Lies/Illusion/Void.
Void is the Truth of Absence, Illusion is the Lie of Presence. Truth is the Illusion of Certainty, Lies are the Void of Doubt. When they are meet, the Reality of Existence is woven.
...Probably doesn't
quite work, but I agree that it's a
cool description!
So are we doing a full disclosure or are we doing finding perfect proof, and can we use our individual dice to help whichever we choose? Because I am willing to stall my research if only to help either option.
EDIT: or are we further infiltrating the network to collapse the system in greater effect?
Especially if you're doing a write-in - and even if you aren't, really - you could always write in "If we choose A, then I'll do X. If we choose B, then I'll do Y. If we choose C, then I'll do Z." Or something in roughly that format.
Yay, I'm a grown up now!
Are the number of dice for (Magic Elements) still determined by my Research dice or was that changed?
Regardless I'd like to be a
[] [Etree] Research Tree
Elder Tree chosen. Front post updated.
Anything listed as (Magic Elements) is almost guaranteed to be a Research action. So, yes.
@Robinton is the "[] Write-in: Focus our efforts on tracking and subverting our known out-of-town contacts. Any actions against the Talanburg cell's interference should be strictly deniable or beneath notice. Walk away if we have to." obsolete with the changes to the Talanburg options? Would the Spynet Focus still be activated if it win?
Honestly, I think I'd treat that as a "Stall one turn and do as much against non-Talanburg spies as possible; if perfect proof also lands in your lap, great!" vote. So, yeah, it is its own thing.
Also, if you have a number of close contenders and I can find a way to combine them or build a compromise between them, I probably will.
