White Wolf's World of Darkness

[ChineseDrone]

It's not meaningless. It's extremely important. It doesn't take a single Palpatine or Stalin or Nephandus to turn something into an evil empire. An evil empire also requires between thousands and millions of various Commissars willing to shoot anyone who disagrees, soldiers who are willing to participate in conquests, overseers who guard the gulags, upstanding citizens who yell "Yay!" on parades dedicated to the glorious leader, and last but not least, informers willing to report anyone not agreeing about the party line to the local alphabet soup. The latter is very important: citizens willing to throw their neighbours under the boot. Citizens willing to evil stuff due to thinking either "this is for the greater good" or "if not me, somebody else would do it, so it's okay for me to do it".

Yes, bad organisations can still do good stuff from time to time. But a murderer who gives billions of dollars to charity is still a murderer. Doing good stuff occasionally does not wash away the blood. (No, the Traditions aren't innocent either, I know. Still, in terms of successfully performed bad stuff, Technocracy seems to be a 'winner' against them.)

Click to shrink...

OK, again, have you actually read 1984? The Outer Party aren't commissars, they're not soldiers, and they're not guards. They're low-level bureaucratic functionaries, the cogs in the machine that keeps the party running. They do sometimes rebel just like Winston did--this is why they're under such heavy surveillance, and the Inner Party and the Thought Police dedicate their efforts to weeding out dissent within them. They are not in power and they are not well-intentioned extremists doing things for the greater good, they follow the Inner Party's orders because of some combination of propaganda, incentives, and surveillance. In some prospective analogy with Mage, they're the Technocracy's constructs and their oblivious sleeper associates, not the Technocrats who are actually calling the shots.

The people who actually run Oceania are the Inner Party, and they are our Technocrat analogy, the shadowy people behind the curtain who control the world. Except the Inner Party is not well-intentioned and not ideological in nature--it's after power just for power's sake. Like, the speech where O'Brian explains this is the single most important part of the book, and I can't believe that you're talking about 1984 without knowing it.

The Inner Party are totalitarian bastards because the whole purpose of their existence is totalitarianism--they'll adopt whatever visage they need to to hold on to that power. It's entirely possible to envision them as simultaneously fundamentalists, Nazis, and Stalinists because what matters to them is not the beliefs of each of those respective ideologies, but simply that they gain power. The WoD faction they're most directly comparable to is the Seers of the Throne from nMage, unless I'm totally misinterpreting how that works (I know almost nothing about nMage, so there's a fair chance I am). The Technocracy is not like this--they're not after power for power's sake, they're after power because they want to implement an ideology. So, no, the Technocracy will not support reactionaries and fundamentalists just because they're authoritarian, because they run counter to the very ideas the Technocracy espouses. Elements of reactionary thought like racism may be institutionally present in the Technocracy as ES described earlier, in the same sense that elements of reactionary thought are found in literally every organization in the US today through institutional racism, but the Technocracy does not embrace them.

That's what I'm getting at with the Soviet Union example. Even if we assume that the Technocracy and its end goal is wrong, that doesn't mean that it will become an endless pit of evil that embodies every single authoritarian ideology that existed, because just like the Soviet Union, while the Technocracy may be authoritarian, authoritarianism is not the end of the Technocracy. It's end is utilitarian rationalism, and the things it does--good or bad--will be to support that end. Since embracing reaction does not, it will not embrace reaction.

Make the Technocracy as villainous as you want, but they're not supposed to be cartoon villains strutting around in their mobile oppression palaces worshiping despotism for despotism's sake. That's what the Inner Party was supposed to be--1984 was written as a giant "fuck you" to the authoritarian Socialists and the USSR who the Party was supposed to be a representation of--and if you're idea of a good villain for the sort of game that Mage is supposed to be is quite literally that of a political hit piece (1984 is a very good hit piece that explores the nature of authoritarianism, but it's a hit piece all the same), then you might want to reevaluate your idea of what Mage is. Or drop all pretensions of philosophy and just make the Technocracy the Commie-Nazis from that one episode of the Simpsons or something

 

[vicky_molokh]

OK, again, have you actually read 1984? The Outer Party aren't commissars, they're not soldiers, and they're not guards. They're low-level bureaucratic functionaries, the cogs in the machine that keeps the party running. They do sometimes rebel just like Winston did--this is why they're under such heavy surveillance, and the Inner Party and the Thought Police dedicate their efforts to weeding out dissent within them. They are not in power and they are not well-intentioned extremists doing things for the greater good, they follow the Inner Party's orders because of some combination of propaganda, incentives, and surveillance. In some prospective analogy with Mage, they're the Technocracy's constructs and their oblivious sleeper associates, not the Technocrats who are actually calling the shots.

The people who actually run Oceania are the Inner Party, and they are our Technocrat analogy, the shadowy people behind the curtain who control the world. Except the Inner Party is not well-intentioned and not ideological in nature--it's after power just for power's sake. Like, the speech where O'Brian explains this is literally the single most important part of the book, and I can't believe that you're talking about 1984 without knowing it.

The Inner Party are totalitarian bastards because the whole purpose of their existence is totalitarianism--they'll adopt whatever visage they need to to hold on to that power. It's entirely possible to envision them as simultaneously fundamentalists, Nazis, and Stalinists because what matters to them is not the beliefs of each of those respective ideologies, but simply that they gain power. The Technocracy is not like this--they're not after power for power's sake, they're after power because they want to implement an ideology. So, no, the Technocracy will not support reactionaries and fundamentalists just because they're authoritarian, because they run counter to the very ideas the Technocracy espouses. Elements of reactionary thought like racism may be institutionally present in the Technocracy as ES described earlier, but the Technocracy does not embrace them.

That's what I'm getting at with the Soviet Union example. Even if we assume that the Technocracy and its end goal is wrong, that doesn't mean that it will become an endless pit of evil that embodies every single authoritarian ideology that existed, because just like the Soviet Union, while the Technocracy may be authoritarian, authoritarianism is not the end of the Technocracy. It's end is utilitarian rationalism, and the things it does--good or bad--will be to support that end. Since embracing reaction does not, it will not embrace reaction.

Click to shrink...

First, I must be honest: I did not.
However, nothing of the things you write invalidates the argument that they're part of what makes such a state possible. They're still helping maintain the infrastructure of the state. They pay taxes that are spent perpetuating the tyranny. And being affected by a mix of propaganda and incentives pretty much indicates that they've made a choice to continue doing it. Was this choice influenced by external factors? Yes, but so are all choices.
This actually seems to have a neat parallel with the Matrix (which, in turn, is very much thematically linked to Mage).

Also, you seem to be disregarding Thought Police themselves. It takes an enormous task force to maintain a totalitarian state. So it's unfair not to count the cops among the masses. And if you ask cops and soldiers in a corrupt and/or totalitarian state why they're doing what they're doing, they're gonna give some sort of answer that justifies it, whether it's "this is for the greater good" or "hey, the world is unfair, so I'm only doing what I need to in order to help out myself (and maybe my family), because this is all that counts". Nobody of those will answer that they're committing evil for evil's sake (okay, maybe not literally zero, but perhaps a handful at most in a big state, the true maniacs that evaded notice).

Support of reactionaries and fundamentalists wouldn't be for the sake of them being authoritarian, but rather because these are things tools that help reduce liberties and unpredictability / strengthen control of the society, and gaining control seems to be a goal that the Technocracy considers worthy enough to commit lots and lots of evil over. Yes, the Nephandic leadership are the ones who are in it for the sake of evil; but the rest of the Techs are still what makes these big plans possible.

 

[AkatsukiL13]

Does the observation that the Guide to Technocracy is written with a pro-Technocracy stance as a satire stop applying to M20? Are they now (as of M20) above quietly eliminating dissenters and otherwise acting Gestapoish?
(Genuine question, since your reading of M20 was surely deeper than mine. But I had the impression that no matter what they tell you, they're still the total-control-freaks with brutal, totalitarian methods. Or perhaps such organisations with such methods and agendas are not considered 1984ish enough.)

Click to shrink...

M20 largely put the Technocracy in the middle road, talking honestly about the Union's good and bad sides, painting them in an ambiguous light. There are sideboxes that describe the options of having them as the Big Bad they once were portrayed as or the more nuanced version that's been around since the late 2E.

Also when was Guide to the Technocracy considered satire? And why for that matter? Because it was from the Technocracy's PoV and more bias towards them while most other MtAs books are in the Traditions' PoV and more bias towards the Traditions. What does that make the Revised Edition Convention Books? Or the upcoming M20 Technocracy Reloaded?

That's what I'm getting at with the Soviet Union example. Even if we assume that the Technocracy and its end goal is wrong, that doesn't mean that it will become an endless pit of evil that embodies every single authoritarian ideology that existed, because just like the Soviet Union, while the Technocracy may be authoritarian, authoritarianism is not the end of the Technocracy. It's end is utilitarian rationalism, and the things it does--good or bad--will be to support that end. Since embracing reaction does not, it will not embrace reaction.

Click to shrink...

Indeed. And the funny thing is, while many of the upper echelons of the Techncracy have control freaks or corrupt or otherwise assholes, there are plenty of Technocrats that are good and decent people. And there are a number of conspiracies within the Union that advocates the ideals of the original Order of Reason but are actively striving to clear out the rot within the Union. In the only Technocracy-focused Ascension scenario which revolved around a civil war between the pro-control freaks that wanted to reinstate the Pogrom and wipe out all Reality Deviants and those that hold to the OoR's ideals with the focus on uplifting and protecting the Masses rather than outright extermination of Deviants, the Union central leadership was revealed to in fact be the original founders of OoR and they supported the latter, those that held to the noble goals of the OoR.

And honestly, I much prefer the morally grey Union of the later Editions than the Big Bad of the First because it makes them much more compelling regardless of whether or not they are being used as protagonists or antagonists. Yeah sometimes it is fun to battle straight up bad guys but other times it is far more interesting to be dealing with enemies that aren't necessarily evil.

The first, and at the moment only, M20 game I played featured a Seattle that in the immediate aftermath of the Avatar Storm saw the local Traditionalists and Technocrats made peace with each other other as they were picking up the pieces and that peace had continued on to today. And it was spreading across the West Coast. There were some small clashes between individuals but overall the peace in the city was being maintained. Until a conspiracy of members of both sides tried to shatter it because they believed it was inevitable and that it was better to break it that let the other side get the upper hand first.

None of those conspirators were outright evil or Nephandi in disguise or otherwise corrupt, they were simply people with opposing beliefs. Hell some of the characters, before we learned they were involved, were good people, not kind we would thought would be involved in starting a war.

 

[ganonso]

Wow, I'm agreeing with Technocracy apologist. That's a change I didn't expect.

But yeah, even someone as I who portrays the Technocracy as villainous as it can get, do not portray them as openly embracing scientific racism and homophobia as an organization now.

However, unlike it's spelled in their official propaganda, they totally embraced these ideas (with exceptions for Mages because Enlightnement trumps many factors) when they were the scientific consensus.

Also they have open bigots among their ranks, not because they're evil but when you read Dawkins and Hitchens by instance, you realize being an atheist scientific doesn' t make you immune to racism or privilege.


ALSO
nothing to do with the ongoing discussion but V20 Ghouls is out and make Puella Madoka Magica as an inspiration.

Magical Girls Ghouls, anyone? Or Tzimisce or Tremere Kyubey?

 

[ChineseDrone]

First, I must be honest: I did not.
However, nothing of the things you write invalidates the argument that they're part of what makes such a state possible. They're still helping maintain the infrastructure of the state. They pay taxes that are spent perpetuating the tyranny. And being affected by a mix of propaganda and incentives pretty much indicates that they've made a choice to continue doing it. Was this choice influenced by external factors? Yes, but so are all choices.
This actually seems to have a neat parallel with the Matrix (which, in turn, is very much thematically linked to Mage).

Also, you seem to be disregarding Thought Police themselves. It takes an enormous task force to maintain a totalitarian state. So it's unfair not to count the cops among the masses. And if you ask cops and soldiers in a corrupt and/or totalitarian state why they're doing what they're doing, they're gonna give some sort of answer that justifies it, whether it's "this is for the greater good" or "hey, the world is unfair, so I'm only doing what I need to in order to help out myself (and maybe my family), because this is all that counts". Nobody of those will answer that they're committing evil for evil's sake (okay, maybe not literally zero, but perhaps a handful at most in a big state, the true maniacs that evaded notice).

Support of reactionaries and fundamentalists wouldn't be for the sake of them being authoritarian, but rather because these are things tools that help reduce liberties and unpredictability / strengthen control of the society, and gaining control seems to be a goal that the Technocracy considers worthy enough to commit lots and lots of evil over. Yes, the Nephandic leadership are the ones who are in it for the sake of evil; but the rest of the Techs are still what makes these big plans possible.

Click to shrink...

Wait... are you trying to say that every citizen of a state is morally culpable in all of its atrocities unless they flat-out rebel? Seriously? I mean, if that's the stance you want to take, then sure the Technocracy and all of its members are badwrong, but so is literally every single person on Earth.

If you were to have actually read 1984, you would realize that... we know nothing about how the Thought Police operates. We don't ever meet a named character who's actually in the Thought Police, we don't know how they're organized, and we don't even know all the things they do. They're more of a plot device than an actual section of society. 1984 is an allegory, not a hyperrealistic depiction of a totalitarian society--the fact that the Party is somehow capable of watching the lives of all of their citizens with 1940s technology should tell you that. Thus, bringing up the Thought Police at all is pretty worthless in this discussion.

So, in regards to you bringing up 1984 at all, I really just have to say--"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".

Again, the Technocracy's end goal is not to reduce liberty and gain control--that's exactly what I mean when I say that the Technocracy's end goal is not authoritarianism (AKA gaining control and reducing liberties). Gaining control and reducing liberty, if it does happen, is a means for the Technocracy's goal of implementing scientific rationalism. If they're embracing reaction, pretty much the opposite of scientific rationalism, to do so, that's cutting off the nose to spite the face, and because the Technocracy is not, in fact, made of lobotomized imbeciles, they're not going to do that.

 

[vicky_molokh]

Wait... are you trying to say that every citizen of a state is morally culpable in all of its atrocities unless they flat-out rebel? Seriously? I mean, if that's the stance you want to take, then sure the Technocracy and all of its members are badwrong, but so is literally every single person on Earth.

Click to shrink...

There are degrees of guilt, but yes, it's generally safe to assume that nobody or nearly nobody on the planet is a saint.
Tell me, in a democracy, does every citizen of voting age a wielder of a part of the power of The People? If yes, then it immediately follows that wherever a citizen makes a contribution to a bad deed, the citizen carries part of the guilt.

Have you by any chance read The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas? It illustrate the same point from a different approach.

Again, the Technocracy's end goal is not to reduce liberty and gain control--that's exactly what I mean when I say that the Technocracy's end goal is not authoritarianism (AKA gaining control and reducing liberties). Gaining control and reducing liberty, if it does happen, is a means for the Technocracy's goal of implementing scientific rationalism. If they're embracing reaction, pretty much the opposite of scientific rationalism, to do so, that's cutting off the nose to spite the face, and because the Technocracy is not, in fact, made of lobotomized imbeciles, they're not going to do that.

Click to shrink...

It's an objective they embraced, even if they embraced it in order to achieve another objective. It's not a side effect, it's an objective, even if an indirect one.

Consider the following two situations:

1. Primary Objective: defeat and conquer Nation X in the war. Means: cripple their military infrastructure in City Y. Actions: start firebombing City Y. Fires kill citizens of City Y as a side effect; avoiding this side effect is considered acceptable yet not a priority.
2. Primary Objective: defeat and conquer Nation X in the war. Means: cripple their will to fight by terrorizing the citizens, starting with City Y. Actions: start firebombing City Y. Fires kill citizens of City Y as a a necessary objective that (the strategists reason) will lead to achieving the primary objective; avoiding this effect is considered harmful to one's chances to victory.

Both situations are evil, but the second is worse. But the Technocracy seems to be Type 2 when it comes to the reduction of liberties. (And yes, scientific rationalism can support reactionary stuff, even without intending to; this is, for example, why research pertaining to correlation between IQ and various ethnic/racial/other genetic groups is seen as controversial even if the scientists are well intentioned - because many people fear that the results might show that there is indeed some link, and that the results may be published for everyone to read.)

M20 largely put the Technocracy in the middle road, talking honestly about the Union's good and bad sides, painting them in an ambiguous light. There are sideboxes that describe the options of having them as the Big Bad they once were portrayed as or the more nuanced version that's been around since the late 2E.

Also when was Guide to the Technocracy considered satire? And why for that matter? Because it was from the Technocracy's PoV and more bias towards them while most other MtAs books are in the Traditions' PoV and more bias towards the Traditions. What does that make the Revised Edition Convention Books? Or the upcoming M20 Technocracy Reloaded?

Click to shrink...

One of the creators working for White Wolf mentioned it. I can only conclude that he knew the internals of the company.

It should be noted that while the Guide to the Technocracy presents the Union in a positive light, it is quite purposefully written as satire. Look closely and you'll notice the passages that mention stuff like Technocratic agents all requiring regular brainwashing sessions to stay loyal.

Click to shrink...

Because the Technocratic policy towards individuals is that they don't matter. The Technocracy leadership believes that it's perfectly okay to supress opposing views and covertly shoot dissenters or just make them dissapear.

They're absolutely convinced they're correct and they have no tolerance or patience for people who disagree with them. They believe regular humans completely lack the ability or right to make decisions for themselves.

In other words, they're the Gestapo.

Click to shrink...

M20 page 66 (on Technocratic Spheres) points out the satire in everyone doing the same thing but calling it different things. If you look at M20 page 375, apparently Mage is satirical by default, not just the Technocracy. Also, p. 552: "Mage is set in a satirical version of the world we know". Technomancy being a satire of conspiracy theories actually seems something rather on the surface, especially with the over-the-top stereotypes in play.

 

[Mutton]

I prefer that the Technocracy be on the black side of grey but also somewhat utilitarian. Why keep with scientific racism when it means that you have less people with the ability to suppress the proles? Having all men be baseline rather than a permanent underclass is Pareto improving after all. Same with homophobia; it doesn't benefit them at all. The technocracy doesn't care what color or gender you are, just that you fulfill your role in their greater plans. Everyone gets dehumanized equally because discrimination is inefficient.

 

[ChineseDrone]

There are degrees of guilt, but yes, it's generally safe to assume that nobody or nearly nobody on the planet is a saint.
Tell me, in a democracy, does every citizen of voting age a wielder of a part of the power of The People? If yes, then it immediately follows that wherever a citizen makes a contribution to a bad deed, the citizen carries part of the guilt.

Have you by any chance read The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas? It illustrate the same point from a different approach.

Click to shrink...

Oceania is... not a democracy. The Technocracy is... not a democracy. We aren't discussing democratic systems here at all. What you're suggesting is that the very act of living in any state that has committed any sort of sin (AKA all of them) makes you culpable for that sin unless you're in active rebellion against it, regardless of whether you had anything to do with the perpetration of the sin itself or not. By your logic, yes the citizens of Oceania are "well-intentioned extremists" by paying their taxes, but so is every person on Earth. Under your moral theory the only acceptable mode of governance that could possibly exist would be some sort of hyper-individualist Anarchism. I mean, it's the moral theory you hold, but if we're working under that logic, not only the Technocracy, but also the Traditions and every other society that exists in Mage is evil.

(And even in a democracy, since when to people vote on the perpetration of every single sin the government commits? You're assuming some sort of perfect information on the party of every citizen that does not exist)

No, I haven't read the book, although from the brief summary I just looked up I'd question it's moral premise--it's presenting a fundamentally unrealistic situation in an effort to get you to find Utilitarianism revolting. If we're allowed to engage in such fantasizing, however, I can just as equally come up with examples that do the opposite. If you let me put my thumb on the Utilitarian scales I can convince you that torturing an innocent child is a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

It's an objective they embraced, even if they embraced it in order to achieve another objective. It's not a side effect, it's an objective, even if an indirect one.

Consider the following two situations:

1. Primary Objective: defeat and conquer Nation X in the war. Means: cripple their military infrastructure in City Y. Actions: start firebombing City Y. Fires kill citizens of City Y as a side effect; avoiding this side effect is considered acceptable yet not a priority.
2. Primary Objective: defeat and conquer Nation X in the war. Means: cripple their will to fight by terrorizing the citizens, starting with City Y. Actions: start firebombing City Y. Fires kill citizens of City Y as a a necessary objective that (the strategists reason) will lead to achieving the primary objective; avoiding this effect is considered harmful to one's chances to victory.

Both situations are evil, but the second is worse. But the Technocracy seems to be Type 2 when it comes to the reduction of liberties. (And yes, scientific rationalism can support reactionary stuff, even without intending to; this is, for example, why research pertaining to correlation between IQ and various ethnic/racial/other genetic groups is seen as controversial even if the scientists are well intentioned - because many people fear that the results might show that there is indeed some link, and that the results may be published for everyone to read.)

Click to shrink...

Again, we currently, in the modern day, generally know that racism is scientifically incorrect. The people who try to use science to justify racism are pseudoscientists--AKA exactly the sort of people that the Technocracy tries to kill. The whole purpose of the Technocracy is to make sure that people believe in what is considered scientifically correct by modern day standards, which includes "racism is incorrect". Ergo, the Technocracy will oppose racism.

By and large, Reactionary thought is heterodox, and Reactionaries are explicitly opposed to mainstream science precisely because it contradicts their beliefs. The Technocrats represent mainstream science. They are not reactionaries.

For the Technocracy, the reduction of liberty is a step along the path to the end goal of "rational mainstream-scientific utopia". While it may be willing to do horrendous things to bring about such reduction of liberty, it will not go "fuck our rational mainstream-scientific utopia" to do so, because that is counter to the whole reason why they want to reduce liberty in the first place. To use your example, it'd be like the nation in question going "We will firebomb City Y to achieve our goal of conquering Country X! To firebomb City Y, we will let Country X's military forces conquer our entire nation so that they are distracted and we can slip our planes through to destroy this one city! Surely this will help us conquer Country X!"

Like I said, cutting off the nose to spite the face. Even if you want the Technocracy to be evil, they shouldn't be imbeciles.

One of the creators working for White Wolf mentioned it. I can only conclude that he knew the internals of the company.


M20 page 66 (on Technocratic Spheres) points out the satire in everyone doing the same thing but calling it different things. If you look at M20 page 375, apparently Mage is satirical by default, not just the Technocracy. Also, p. 552: "Mage is set in a satirical version of the world we know". Technomancy being a satire of conspiracy theories actually seems something rather on the surface, especially with the over-the-top stereotypes in play.

Click to shrink...

Notice that, again, even here he's not saying "The Technocracy wants despotism for despotism's sake". He's saying "The Techncoracy wants despotism because they think they know what's best for you". And, from the books, they believe "what's best for you" is their rational mainstream-scientific utopia.

 

[Chloe Sullivan]

Ever since I began to explore MtSC, I've held the view that Order's core the Cabal of Pure Thought, the High Guild and the Craftmasons. They were the strongest and largest of the groups that created the Order and embody the trinity of Body (Cabal), Mind (Guild) and Soul (Craft). And while all the Conventions had their representatives on the Inner Council of the Order, they were the three big groups controlling and fighting over policy. Of the three, the Craftmasons were most focused on elevating Humanity and were much more... well socialist and democratic for a lack of better word. And in the end, they were destroyed by the Cabal and the High Guild, breaking the 'Soul' of the Order. With their increasing control and success over the Masses, the Order became increasing decadent and corrupt until the Grand Organization into the Technocracy in the Victorian Era which in and of itself further points to how and why they became more European-centric. When the Order was founded, the Craftmasons reached out to philosopher-scientists from across the globe, including the Middle East and Far East, though the Pro-Christian Cabal scared off many from the former. It was founded as an brotherhood of like-minded Enlightened Minds from around the civilized world of the time. The Union was forged in Europe at a time when Europe and European ideas dominated much of the world so the Union reflected those ideas. Namely European ideas focusing on Imperialism and pro-White Man. And even though they've grown past such ideas, you can still see their roots in them.

Click to shrink...

Wait, the Cabal of Pure Thought is Body?

What.

 

[Eukie]

One of the creators working for White Wolf mentioned it. I can only conclude that he knew the internals of the company.


M20 page 66 (on Technocratic Spheres) points out the satire in everyone doing the same thing but calling it different things. If you look at M20 page 375, apparently Mage is satirical by default, not just the Technocracy. Also, p. 552: "Mage is set in a satirical version of the world we know". Technomancy being a satire of conspiracy theories actually seems something rather on the surface, especially with the over-the-top stereotypes in play.

Click to shrink...

As far as I can tell, SLS started working with White Wolf long after GttT was published. Brucato will claim that GttT was satire, but he also claims that the entire MTAs line was always satire, so I'd take any claims he makes with a pinch of salt. This is the guy who rails against eating pizza during roleplaying games and kept descriptions of how to cast spells out of MTAs 2e for fear that someone might actually cast one in real life.

(Besides, death of the author. If it's intended to be satire, it's incredibly poor satire, as evidence by the number of people who read it straight up. This is not helped by the book itself, which uses the third-person narrator voice to tell you it is right and all the really bad descriptions of the Technocracy are all wrong. As a reader we only have the text to work with, and communicating badly and then being smug about it is a hand-cut-off-able offence. This thing was co-written by Brian Campbell and frankly Campbell's writing seems pretty serious. It was also co-developed by Jesse Heinig, and Heinig's work on Revised is of the Technocracy-not-all-that-bad tone.)

 

[linkhyrule5]

On a side note, @ChineseDrone - is there anything salvageable from Dragons of the East? Unfortunately I just don't know enough history beyond the broad strokes to really judge. From the fact that you rewrote the Wu Long I imagine that their bit on China at least needs work?

 

[AkatsukiL13]

Wait, the Cabal of Pure Thought is Body?

What.

Click to shrink...

First off their name comes from the name of the text that their founder wrote which served as the backbone of their beliefs, Revelation of the Pure Thought of God, as Revealed by the Archangel Gabriel, His Messenger.

As for why I consider them the Body, it is because while they did have scholars and thinkers among their ranks, much of their ranks were made up of pious knights and monster-hunting crusaders, healers and ministers that tended to the sick and poor. As a result many of their members were more hands. Plus with their zealous Christian beliefs, they were chief among those Daedaleans most likely to attack mages and other supernaturals because... well supernatural. And they overacted towards philosopher-scientists that were Muslim and/or from the Middle East, despite the fact that they shared many of the beliefs and ideals as those that would create the Order of Reason. Which in turn hurt the OoR's influence over the Middle East. But that didn't matter to the Cabal as they were right and everyone else was wrong.

Such was the beliefs of many Gabrielites.

So yeah, despite their name they are Body.

 

[ChineseDrone]

On a side note, @ChineseDrone - is there anything salvageable from Dragons of the East? Unfortunately I just don't know enough history beyond the broad strokes to really judge. From the fact that you rewrote the Wu Long I imagine that their bit on China at least needs work?

Click to shrink...

Hmm... in terms of the actual magical societies, my rewrite covered both the Wu Lung and the Five Elemental Dragons--I did throw out much the existing organization of the ELemental Dragons because most of it sucked, but the Zaibustu society is not all bad and refluffable into a purely Japanese branch of the Syndicate. The other two major ones dealt with in Dragons of the East were the Akashics, who aren't really changed in any significant way from the way they appear in other Mage supplements, and the Wu Keng, who aren't really supposed to be drawn from real mythology in all but the loosest sense and thus aren't exactly racist... but make up for this by being incredibly transphobic. So, yeah, all in all, not to impressed by anything there.

(Also, besides the Wu Keng, all other 3 focus entirely on China despite this book being supposedly for all of East and Southeast Asia.)

There's some interesting stuff in the later chapter that details Asia's smaller secret societies, basically equivalent to individual cabals. The one that stuck out to me, at least, was a group of cliche ninjas... who are explicitly not actually ninja but exploiting the cinematic imagine of ninjas, sort of like how MJ12 from Deus Ex uses Men in Black, which was a fairly interesting twist on the idea. They're also cyborgs and do contract work for the Elemental Dragons and the Yakuza--pretty good for a cyberpunkish feel. Some parts of their history are a bit wonky, but overall they're usable. Along with them there's a Cambodian group, a Vietnamese group, and a Mongol group, but I am sadly not really well-versed in SE Asian or Mongol history/culture so I can't really evaluate how salvageable they are. However, given that White Wolf tended to mess up China, and these other nations tend to be a lot more obscure than that, I suspect the answer is "not very".

The problems with the Kue-jin, who are discussed next in the book, have been pretty extensively detailed elsewhere and I don't have much to add beyond the fact that they really don't feel like Jiangshi, and that I also don't understand why they appear outside of China at all given that Jiangshi are a purely Chinese myth. Their societies outside China just don't gel with local beliefs at all--for example in Japan they're conflated with the Gaki, which obviously you're not using in our RP. Along with the Kue-jin the non-Mages section also has some brief blurbs on werewolves and other changing breeds in Asia that doesn't really give much info at all (I assume there's more in Werewolf books). The manner in which they're dealt with ranges from shallow (understandable given that this isn't a Werewolf book) to culturally mislocated (The werewolves mentioned are Japanese, Chinese, and Tibetan despite werewolves in Asia coming largely from Mongol/Central Asian myth) to made up out of whole cloth (What the fuck is a goblin spider?). The Wraith stuff is workable-ish, but bound by having to be associated with W:tO's setting which makes it hard to explore stuff like ancestor spirits--there's not all that much info on what the Jade Kingdom is so I'll reserve judgement since I haven't seen the Wraith supplement about it. One thing I do really like is that there's actually a mention of a ghost zone thanks to the Rape of Nanjing--that event doesn't get nearly as much exposure in the West as it should (My family is from Nanjing, this is kind of a touchy thing for me).

The beasts section is usable outside of the Yama Kings, which misinterpret the Chinese afterlife in a way pretty common in the West (It got mistranslated into "hell" which gave people all sorts of wrong impressions).

Some bits of the objects and places are also salvageable, although there are bits of stupidity as well (They gave Hong Xiquan's palace to...the Euthanatos. For some reason).

With those, and DotE in general, my rule of thumb is that the accuracy of what White Wolf writes is pretty strongly associated with where they're writing about. In general, Japan>Hong Kong>The rest of China>Everywhere else. The Japan stuff is mostly salvageable as far as I know, although my knowledge of Japanese folklore isn't that great. Everything else needs major reworking at best.

(Also, just in general, the terminology used in DotE is horrible. Some of it is just blatantly mistranslated--for one, it uses "Middle Kingdom" to refer to East Asia when Middle Kingdom is literally the Chinese word for China. The rest of it is romanized wierdly--it ranges from archaic (Wu Lung is Wade-Giles, in Pinyin it should be Wu Long) to just bizarre (What the fuck is a Chi'n Ta?). Avoid it if you can.)

 

[linkhyrule5]

@ChineseDrone: Oh, don't worry about the terminology bit - to my parents' everlasting regret I may not be fluent in Chinese, but I've got a solid two dots and can at least recognize bizarre pinyin when I see it.

Also, what the hell do jiangshi have to do with hungry ghosts?! Who came up with that idea?

Huh. I had always thought that the Chinese underworld was more akin to Hell than, say, the Fields of Asphodel. The Yellow Springs do not seem like pleasant places to be, for the most part. (The Japanese Yomi seems more Asphodel-ish, in that it's less "horrible agony" and more "incredibly boring.")

Anyway, thanks, that helps a lot, that's a great place to start!

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

(What the fuck is a goblin spider?)

Click to shrink...

Jorōgumo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tsuchigumo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AKuz]

in all but the loosest sense and thus aren't exactly racist... but make up for this by being incredibly transphobic

Click to shrink...

I remember running into this when I was creating Jen Blackwell, Transgender Technocratic Operative, and I pretty much sighed and looked over at my GDoc and went "I guess she really hates the Traditions now"

 

[ChineseDrone]

@ChineseDrone: Oh, don't worry about the terminology bit - to my parents' everlasting regret I may not be fluent in Chinese, but I've got a solid two dots and can at least recognize bizarre pinyin when I see it.

Also, what the hell do jiangshi have to do with hungry ghosts?! Who came up with that idea?

Huh. I had always thought that the Chinese underworld was more akin to Hell than, say, the Fields of Asphodel. The Yellow Springs do not seem like pleasant places to be, for the most part. (The Japanese Yomi seems more Asphodel-ish, in that it's less "horrible agony" and more "incredibly boring.")

Anyway, thanks, that helps a lot, that's a great place to start!

Click to shrink...

Sweet--just knowing how Chinese words should sound helps a lot, I'm not exactly a stellar Chinese speaker either.

I'm guessing it was an attempt to shoehorn concepts together so White Wolf didn't have to invent dozens of new splats. Still poorly done, though.

Oh, yeah, Diyu is supposed to be horrible, but it's more of a "purgatory", whereas the impression I'm getting from the Wraith section is that it's being treated as a "Hell" of eternal punishment. The latter is a pretty distinctively Abrahamic thing. (There is a Hell Hell in the lowest layer according to some interpretations, granted).

No problem--always happy to help!

Jorōgumo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tsuchigumo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to shrink...

Oh, wow, I have never heard of those before--that's fascinating, my bad on that one. Are wererats a Japanese thing too? That's the other one that struck me as purely made-up.

I remember running into this when I was creating Jen Blackwell, Transgender Technocratic Operative, and I pretty much sighed and looked over at my GDoc and went "I guess she really hates the Traditions now"

Click to shrink...

Yeah, the Wu Keng manage to be the most horrible part of a book, which is a fairly impressive feat, and are the main thing that crosses the line from "Culturally insensitive" to "Horribly offensive".

 

[linkhyrule5]

Oh, and also the bit I just got to where the Yama are apparently doing the old Lucifer thing and rebelling against the rest of the Bureaucracy. I get the impression these guys have never read, say, Journey to the West, have they...

The wererats might be a variation on tanuki, which are technically shapeshifting raccoon-dogs. Neither raccoons nor tanuki are technically rodents, but they look generally ratlike and are often referred to as such by Western sources, so with a few pounds of salt you could make it work.

 

[ChineseDrone]

Oh, and also the bit I just got to where the Yama are apparently doing the old Lucifer thing and rebelling against the rest of the Bureaucracy. I get the impression these guys have never read, say, Journey to the West, have they...

The wererats might be a variation on tanuki, which are technically shapeshifting raccoon-dogs. Neither raccoons nor tanuki are technically rodents, but they look generally ratlike and are often referred to as such by Western sources, so with a few pounds of salt you could make it work.

Click to shrink...

Eh, while the Yama Kings are a misinterpretation of the normal myth I'm inclined to excuse that one as the sort of thing that happens to underworld deities in general rather than a case of cultural insensitivity. The same thing tends to happen to Hades all the time, for instance.

I suppose that could fit--for the life of me I'll never understand why White Wolf decided to rename all the Asian supernaturals from the names that people would actually know them by, like calling the Jiangshi "Kuei-Jin" (the two myths don't exactly match, but neither do oVamps with traditional Vampire mythology). It's not like they ever gave random new names to European Vampires and Werewolves.

 

[linkhyrule5]

... Huh. Where'd they get the impression that mahoutsukai were evil spirits? The entire concept of a mahoutsukai is mostly imported from Western sensibilities in the first place, if you look at the Japanese Wikipedia page on mahou the page is almost completely about "the different ways Westerners use 'magic'". About the closest you get are madoushi, and those are mostly humans.

Bleck. Yeah, if I were doing it - and oh hey, I am - about the only evil "users of magic," as opposed to "innately divine/spiritual/supernatural," would be necromancy and dead spirits, thanks to all the Shinto beliefs in that regard.

 

[Creticus]

Huh. I had always thought that the Chinese underworld was more akin to Hell than, say, the Fields of Asphodel. The Yellow Springs do not seem like pleasant places to be, for the most part. (The Japanese Yomi seems more Asphodel-ish, in that it's less "horrible agony" and more "incredibly boring.")

Click to shrink...

The punishment for sinners in the Chinese afterlife is supposed to be finite. Once the sinner has served their sentence, they can reincarnate, though some of the stories suggest that their sentences can extend into their future reincarnations as well. Furthermore, the family of the deceased can provide them with burned offerings, which are not just useful for making their stay more bearable but also for shortening their sentences.

That said, I'm not sure if that last part is supposed to reflect the usual Chinese cynicism towards officialdom or an extension of the idea that if someone cares enough to burn offerings for them, the deceased must not have been that bad.

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

Are wererats a Japanese thing too? That's the other one that struck me as purely made-up.

Click to shrink...

The Yokai Files – Raigo/Tesso: The Iron Rat

... Huh. Where'd they get the impression that mahoutsukai were evil spirits?

Click to shrink...

Probably from something like this.
Maho-tsukai
Maho
Kansen

Furthermore, the family of the deceased can provide them with burned offerings, which are not just useful for making their stay more bearable but also for shortening their sentences.

That said, I'm not sure if that last part is supposed to reflect the usual Chinese cynicism towards officialdom or an extension of the idea that if someone cares enough to burn offerings for them, the deceased must not have been that bad.

Click to shrink...

You talking about Hell Money?

 

[linkhyrule5]

The punishment for sinners in the Chinese afterlife is supposed to be finite. Once the sinner has served their sentence, they can reincarnate, though some of the stories suggest that their sentences can extend into their future reincarnations as well. Furthermore, the family of the deceased can provide them with burned offerings, which are not just useful for making their stay more bearable but also for shortening their sentences.

That said, I'm not sure if that last part is supposed to reflect the usual Chinese cynicism towards officialdom or an extension of the idea that if someone cares enough to burn offerings for them, the deceased must not have been that bad.

Click to shrink...

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Among other things, taking on and literally paying for the sins of your ancestors is absolutely the sort of thing Chinese philosophy would encourage.

Also mein gott the Wu Keng are messed up, what the hell.

 

[Creticus]

Probably from something like this.
Maho-tsukai

Click to shrink...

Citing L5R is perhaps not the best counter-example.

You talking about Hell Money?

Click to shrink...

Not just paper replicas of money, but also paper replicas of bullion, carriages, houses, food, servants, and so on and so forth. In modern times, there are also paper replicas of cars, computers, and the like.

They're substitutes for the real thing. Kind of like how the statues buried in ancient Qin dynasty and Han dynasty tombs were probably substitutes for retainer sacrifice in even more ancient times.

 

[SinisterPorpoise]

Citing L5R is perhaps not the best counter-example.

Click to shrink...

That was my point actually.

Not just paper replicas of money, but also paper replicas of bullion, carriages, houses, food, servants, and so on and so forth. In modern times, there are also paper replicas of cars, computers, and the like.
They're substitutes for the real thing. Kind of like how the statues buried in ancient Qin dynasty and Han dynasty tombs were probably substitutes for retainer sacrifice in even more ancient times.

Click to shrink...

Basically the same thing as Egyptian Grave Goods?