Threads Of Destiny(Eastern Fantasy, Sequel to Forge of Destiny)

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
(I reversed the order of the options because it was easier for me to write out them this way. the top option is option 2, the bottom option is option 1)

Option 2
[ ] Truth and lies are merely notes within the human register, from them is born perception, from perception descends reality, an orator must wield words as carefully as a master wields their blade.
-this insight leans toward idealism. It is more concerned with the formation of ideals than directly affecting 'facts' on the ground, with a slightly cautious edge toward the danger of the tool you're wielding
This one is thematically really cool.
It has similarities to Bai Suzhen, we saw in her interlude how she frames an argument to a sword fight.
Shenhua also weilds Truth as a weapon, so it's funny that people say this is the 'more hui' insight, since half of it is anti-hui.

That said, this insight slightly hui.
In this insight, the first step is creating an ideal, then you convince people of it.
Unifying people by creating an Ideal and convincing people to follow it is very Palace of One, and so very Hui. However, it's also very Shenhua (or very Linqin), it's literally how they won the revolution.

Linqin also once mentioend that the Hui weilded apathy, affection, and cruelty as weapons, not lies or truth.
It might be a stretch, but it pushes this insight to be slightly less hui.
(idk the quest chapter, Threads 228-Pronouncement 2 - Forge of Destiny )

Option 1
[ ] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
-this insight is meant to lean more toward materialism as was correctly speculated. It is concerned primarily with the intersection where understanding allows and pushes the alteration of material reality

This one, I'm on the fence on, mainly because I am not sure how Ideals fit into it.
We just had a chapter explaining how an Ideal was the only thing strong enough to defeat primal nightmares.
And this insight seems to not contain anything about ideals.

Perhaps that's fine.
If we need Ideals, then another insight or concept can incorperate it.
I also doubt we'll be fighting primal nightmares any time soon, so maybe it's not needed at all.

Lastly, maybe this is just a surface level observation, but this insight (option 1) also seems, slower.
We start with how reality is right now, and carve away at it, chip by chip.
If we want to change something NOW, then, this insight seems less effective.
For example, if we wanted to start a revolution, showing our ideal, and gathering allies who agree with us is the way to go (aka, option 2). The reality that your own families will turn you in if your support of the rebellion becomes known is, hidden, ignored, and, with option 2, done so easily.
If that reality is our starting point, convincing people to join you becomes very hard. For those you do convince, their loyalty will likely be stronger, so slower does not mean weaker, but the point still stands.

But we're not starting a rebellion against the hui, we're rebelling agains Shenhua, so perhaps, this too is fine.

Shu Yue's quote comes back to me as I write this.
"The Young Miss and her shadow were born of the world which had come after, and so they were less hard, less violent. Softer. Many called this weakness, that the youth, unknowing of hardship, would bring ruin.

The child born in the dark knew better. That was the secret they had been given at the feet of the star. It was not enough to destroy the wicked for they, too, were wicked in their way.

Their replacements would be better."
www.royalroad.com

Threads Interlude: Faceless - Forge of Destiny

Once, there was a child who lived in the roots of the great World Tree. In the wondrous city of dreams, ruled by the Lord of Heavenly Lies, they lived (...)

So yeah, the top option (option 2) feels more effective, more useful, to me. It feels like, mechanically, the stronger choice.
Option 1 I'm undecided how I feel about.
I don't think it's safer, or 'less hui'. If you're 'carving' reality, you can't really 'uncarve' it.
In that way, option 2 at least incorperates the potential dangers in the insight.
I'm just really not sure how Option 1 would be used.
 
Last edited:
Something else occured to me-

Both Communication and Community are artifacts of perception, not truth or material reality. If reality is downstream from perception, then they are real.

But if the future is at the intersection of reality and perception, then things that are only perception aren't part of the future.

And I don't want to undermine our core like that.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
 
I do not see anything that would state this in Ling Qi's insights tbh. Could you please point me to it?

Sure. Insights related to those concepts are extracted below.

Truth and lies are the weft and warp of communication. Clarity, understanding, these determine the quality of words. (Clarity, Communication, Community.)

Here, communication is a thing that is both truth and lies, but neither causes nor detracts from the quality of it. Clarity and understanding come from how the words are perceived by the listener and the speaker.

No reference to a material world, no need for communication to be true to be high quality.

Even walking alone, footfalls echo beyond your hearing. (Community, Causality, Expression)

Metaphorical, but 'echoes' can be read as the perceptions of actions having consequences regardless of the actions really were. (Walking alone would mean no one else knows what really happened, but are backfilling guesses based on consequences.)

A good neighbor listens without spying, speaks without demanding, takes without dominating, gives without submitting. Respect is the foundation of community.

These are all about how social actions are perceived, and how a good neighbour takes actions that are not perceived as demanding, dominating, or disrespecting. Given people can disagree if any given action was disrespectful or not, there's no ground truth or material reality to decide who is right.

One person's desires cannot, alone make a home nor a family. (Community, Power, Want)

The difference between a home with a family and a house with a bunch of bodies in it isn't a material one. Nor is it based on truth, because of you percieve it not to be a home then it's not- there's no deeper truth where it actually is despite perception.

And desires aren't things of material reality or truth either- if you have a desire, it is because you percieve you desire a thing. Not because you know if you truthfully desire it or not.
 
And desires aren't things of material reality or truth either- if you have a desire, it is because you percieve you desire a thing. Not because you know if you truthfully desire it or not.
Right but that's the point of the insight. That the world we live in is the product of both physical reality and our perceptions of the world. Both matter. It's not about saying that only the physical world matters.
 
[X] Truth lies at the intersection between reality and perception. Communication is the method by which the Truth is changed, inch by inch, and year by year.

The ideal is the future that we carved towards inch by inch. How do we get there? By understanding the present but from a particular standpoint & communicating that to people so they see our Truth which encapsulates their own.

I think anything else is just ink on a page or breath in the wind. A pretty argument but in reality just a lie.
 
Right but that's the point of the insight. That the world we live in is the product of both physical reality and our perceptions of the world. Both matter. It's not about saying that only the physical world matters.

I think we mostly agree?

But I don't think you need material reality at all. You can desire things that are not real and have no chance of being real.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
 
Something else occured to me-

Both Communication and Community are artifacts of perception, not truth or material reality. If reality is downstream from perception, then they are real.

But if the future is at the intersection of reality and perception, then things that are only perception aren't part of the future.

And I don't want to undermine our core like that.

Right but that's the point of the insight. That the world we live in is the product of both physical reality and our perceptions of the world. Both matter. It's not about saying that only the physical world matters.
I agree with Erebeal, even if something only exists in our mind, it still matters.

But, let's assume the opposite for a second
[ ] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
-this insight is meant to lean more toward materialism as was correctly speculated. It is concerned primarily with the intersection where understanding allows and pushes the alteration of material reality

Let's hyperfocus on that last phrase there.
Let's assume that the untimate goal of communication is to alter matetial reality.
Therefore, if, using communication, you want to make a family. Then simply saying that you are a family is insufficient, even if everyone agrees, bacause it's all immaterial.
However, carving a family tree tablet, is matetial.
And when Qingge showed Qi those tablets, it left her very content.

Ling Qingge, who had been silent until now, stepped forward, and pulled open the cabinet doors. Inside were velvet lined shelves, and a small number of wooden tablets, each intricately carved with artistic patterns and a single name in bold characters extending from top to bottom.

There were not many of them. Ling Qi, Ling Qingge, Ling Biyu, Ling Zhengui, Ling Hanyi. Five tablets, but one other had been added, its face blank of a name.

She didn't know precisely when mother had commissioned a set of ancestral tablets, but she had been pleased to see it. There was something… good and solid about it, that left her qi feeling settled.

As mentioned, I agree with Erebeal. Immaterial things do matter. But seeking material proof of those immaterial connections is very... sweet, cute, nice.
I wouldn't mind more of it.
 
Last edited:
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.

One of Ling Qi's most valuable features to CRX and the Emerald Seas is her perspective as a former street rat, and her familiarity with mortal needs. Even as she chooses to personally ignore them, the experience of needs unmet is enshrined in her way.
 
And desires aren't things of material reality or truth either- if you have a desire, it is because you percieve you desire a thing. Not because you know if you truthfully desire it or not.

(bold mine)

...yes they are? Sure, the desire of "happiness" is non-tangible, but all definitions ultimately derive from comparisons to things found in reality, or qualia arising from interactions with reality. Your first form of "desire" was to sate hunger or thirst. Same with ideas--say "Pi" isn't real and I'll point you to a circle.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.

I will say, it amuses me a little how the one who sees everything in numbers and triplicate filed paperwork is the idealist, while the songstress who weaves grand illusions with her song is the realist.
 
But I don't think you need material reality at all. You can desire things that are not real and have no chance of being real.

But where do those desires spring forth from? Why does a starving child dream of feasts? Not just because they are starving, but because they have a stomach. If humans didn't need to eat, would we dream of food? The Primal Nightmares we were told about constantly spring up because they are part of the human condition so it is impossible to completely defeat them, but they only spring up when certain conditions are met and a well-spoken argument can never fill an empty belly.

Let's hyperfocus on that last phrase there.
Let's assume that the untimate goal of communication is to alter matetial reality.
Therefore, if, using communication, you want to make a family. Then simply saying that you are a family is insufficient, even if everyone agrees, bacause it's all immaterial.
However, carving a family tree tablet, is matetial.
And when Qingge showed Qi those tablets, it left her very content.

I disagree with your interpretation here. If "the future lies at the intersection of reality and perception" then people agreeing to be a family (perception) is a necessary but insufficient component of that future. Take our relationship with our mother & Zhengui for example. The reality was that we still had familial bonds with our mother even when we denied them & a bond with Zhengui even when we ignored it. But our future changed when we acknowledged reality and our perception of reality shifted and our future became one with a Family.

I think the second option (in its double-edged nature) would allow someone to lie about having a Family even when the material bonds to really sustain one wasn't present.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.

I'd say we need to keep in mind the multiplicity of things, like Uncle Skelly is trying to teach LQ. Less of the ideal words and communication, because its an art. Translators are artists, novelists are artists, and no matter one's intention with their words, people can always misinterpret, misread, or even twist deliberately. Chip by Chip seems more grounded, which might be ridiculous in one sense for an Immortal to be going for, but still.

LQ came from the streets, from survival with less, and that perspective is invaluable for serving as the 'Immortal of Communication' she's set herself up to be. Unique perspectives, beget Unique ideas, and LQ is most certainly not boring. She is, in point of fact, so popular that she already has three young suitors vying for her hand... before anyone else even knew it was an option.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.

I want to still pick the Ideals option, but I no longer think it outweighs the safety/benefits of this one with the reword.

I AM now interested in a What If though. If the next generation of CRX's cadre is pushed to their currently ideal forms, what would their "next generation" look like? Assuming that the Throne doesn't start activating their meddling tendrils of course.
 
Last edited:
The vote options look cleaner now. Still room for healthy friction with other elements of Ling Qi's philosophy, or the world's for that matter, but no big nasty burrs to stick in things.

[X] Truth and lies are merely notes within the human register, from them is born perception, from perception descends reality, an orator must wield words as carefully as a master wields their blade.

I lean towards the view that human perception shapes reality. But specifically the reality which is the lived human world. To borrow the metaphor that's been used, a post is a post is a post, and that's fine. But absent a human context, the post's status is just kind of irrelevant... to humans, anyway. I'm not ruling the physical/real/whateveryouwanttocallit out, there is something which humans are applying their perception to after all, but I just don't find separating from the element which is perception necessary. It's enough to view things through the lens of the audience, whatever it is being viewed.

So I'm on board with orienting our attention more towards the elements of perception's makeup. With the understanding that between these two options, it really is mainly a shift in focus. There's a healthy degree of overlap between the two.

Note, I say "human" but that's me talking in irl terms. Obviously spirits and so on are also observers of relevance in-setting.
 
Last edited:
The Primal Nightmares we were told about constantly spring up because they are part of the human condition so it is impossible to completely defeat them, but they only spring up when certain conditions are met and a well-spoken argument can never fill an empty belly.

Would you consider the primal nightmares things of material reality? Because they arise directly from it?

I guess my PoV is that they arise from the experience of being human, as an immaterial thing, rather than the human condition, considered as material reality.

The distinction between needing to eat and feeling hungry, to boil it down.
 
Where is 'material' specified in the above insight? All it talks about is 'reality'. The Primal Nightmares are not material, but they are certainly very real.

This seemed to be making that point. I'm not sure if you have a different interpretation.

But where do those desires spring forth from? Why does a starving child dream of feasts? Not just because they are starving, but because they have a stomach.
 
[X] The future lies at the intersection between reality and perception. By Communication, perception is changed; by perception, reality shape is carved, chip by chip.

Still voting for option one, for the same reasons. In addition, I feel working with material reality towards something better is more in line with prior choices.

After all, it wasn't ideals that pushed Ling Qi to carry The Crucible into the Liminal, but the material reality of what failure at the Summit would mean.
 
Would you consider the primal nightmares things of material reality? Because they arise directly from it?

I guess my PoV is that they arise from the experience of being human, as an immaterial thing, rather than the human condition, considered as material reality.

The distinction between needing to eat and feeling hungry, to boil it down.

It depends on what you mean "material reality". It seems like they're part of the Liminal, which is certainly real, but not material in the same way the base part of the setting is. (Though given its ability to interact with the setting at all it has to be material at some level).

I think experience is a material thing. Its time, and space, and sensory input, interpreted by perception. Needing to eat (as a general condition of being an entity with that requirement) & feeling hungry (a particular condition) aren't the same thing but they're both material. We experience hunger pangs because of our bodies are formatted in particular ways to produce that sensation under certain conditions but if our bodies developed differently (or we were a different species) we might not have that experience.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top