Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
Think of it as lies to children. Maybe Teclis would have gotten around to the massively complex array of interactions and edge cases and shit the elves flat out don't know after the War was over if he wasn't recalled, but in the immediate lead up to the climactic battles which somehow took long enough for him to run his training montages, he needed to focus on the precocious chisel handed molten iron throwers staying on task with what they could reasonably manage to do in the time he had.

Maybe he wouldn't, because the Colleges were good enough as is to serve as sustainably replenishing meatshields, and he is in fact kind of a dick.
 
(The Runefang for the other lost province, Solland's, in-canon is used by the Reiksmarshal Kurt Helborg- Kurt's probably not Reiksmarshal here, but it might be in-use by the current holder of the office)
It is in fact in use by the Reiksmarshal:
The Ulrican receives a blade that clearly draws inspiration from the ceremonial blade of the Reiksmarshal, from before Solland was destroyed and its Runefang became the symbol of office.
 
Kurt Helborg and Ludwig Schwartzhelm are probably 20 year old guys at the moment, so I'd guess they're in the army serving with distinction. I've got a vague idea of where all the Empire's Heroes and Lords from canon are at the moment, and most of them are nowhere near their canon status. Just part of being human. 40 years is a very long time for us.
 
It is interesting that despite claims that Teclisian theory is wrong collages have not debunked it in the last 180 years. They are acting like academia for the most part (altough I don't know when that started) so there should be people who want to make a name for themselves by creating a better framework but it didn't happen.

So Teclis was probably right in most things. Pity we gave up Divine Vitae printing tough. That would have given a lot clues to that argument. Hopefully our current research to Vitae shows us something as well.
 
It is interesting that despite claims that Teclisian theory is wrong collages have not debunked it in the last 180 years. They are acting like academia for the most part (altough I don't know when that started) so there should be people who want to make a name for themselves by creating a better framework but it didn't happen.

So Teclis was probably right in most things. Pity we gave up Divine Vitae printing tough. That would have given a lot clues to that argument. Hopefully our current research to Vitae shows us something as well.
It's probably because they're more concerned about fighting the enemies of the Empire than disproving Teclis' theory and working on Academics. The Colleges are a military institution first and foremost, not an academic one. If it doesn't directly contribute to advancing the military goals of the Empire, then it's of a very low priority.
 
It is interesting that despite claims that Teclisian theory is wrong collages have not debunked it in the last 180 years. They are acting like academia for the most part (altough I don't know when that started) so there should be people who want to make a name for themselves by creating a better framework but it didn't happen.

So Teclis was probably right in most things. Pity we gave up Divine Vitae printing tough. That would have given a lot clues to that argument. Hopefully our current research to Vitae shows us something as well.

Teclisean theory (or at least the theory that Teclis thought which might very well be a very simplified version of Hoeth theory) has been debunked in the sense of being observationally proven false (or at least incomplete).

What the Colleges have been unable to do is create an unifying theory that explains observed reality better than Teclis; which is not entirely unsurprising considering how skewed towards practical applications the Colleges are.
 
It is interesting that despite claims that Teclisian theory is wrong collages have not debunked it in the last 180 years. They are acting like academia for the most part (altough I don't know when that started) so there should be people who want to make a name for themselves by creating a better framework but it didn't happen.

So Teclis was probably right in most things. Pity we gave up Divine Vitae printing tough. That would have given a lot clues to that argument. Hopefully our current research to Vitae shows us something as well.
It is not that the theory is wrong, but that it fails to explain large number of things.
It works within its own confines, but stops working once you hit things like elementalism, or divine magic.
And even if the colleges recognice that Teclision framework is not perfect, does not mean they can just come up with a new one at ease, especially when almost everything they have is built on Teclision framework.

edit-
Teclisean theory (or at least the theory that Teclis thought which might very well be a very simplified version of Hoeth theory) has been debunked in the sense of being observationally proven false (or at least incomplete).

What the Colleges have been unable to do is create an unifying theory that explains observed reality better than Teclis; which is not entirely unsurprising considering how skewed towards practical applications the Colleges are.
Colleges are also each operating on 1/8th of the winds, making it even harder to come up with unifying theory of magic.
And cults are not exactly eager to share their divine secrets.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the reason that Teclisian theory hasn't been debunked is that everyone knows it has blindspots, however the
  • nature of the empires witch hating,
  • the danger of black magisters,
  • foreign magisters with their own magical theories being needed in their own country,
  • the nature of collegiate magic making it impossible to branch out and try others after you have your first arcane mark.
and so on and so forth make it extremely difficult to get insights into those blindspots.
Meanwhile Teclisian theory works perfectly well for the magic they do know and practice, so throwing it out because it is imperfect is a massive step backwards for the colleges and really goes against the progress of moving from one functional scientific theory to a new one with slightly more explanative power.
 
Meanwhile Teclisian theory works perfectly well for the magic they do know and practice
Just a note that Mathilde personally knows and is practicing something that is considered impossible under Teclisean theory: Windherding
I don't think that it's unreasonable that you can't neatly chart a course in advance through something that is completely unprecedented and in fact considered impossible under Teclisean theory. It's rather grating that for 2500 pages I've had people look at the price-tag of one AP to get a better idea of what it would allow and decide to complain that their lack of knowledge is a fault of implementation instead of a result of thread priorities.
This quote is something I found as a funny little explanation of why Teclisean theory fails to account for Hedge and Elemental magic:
Winds are magical energy in what can be considered its 'natural' form - one of eight flavours and acting according to its nature. That magical energy when used in a spell is no longer a Wind, because it's now acting according to the will of the person using it instead of according to its own nature, but it's still magical energy, and it still has the potential to revert back to Wind if the Wizard mishandles it. It can also revert back to its original form as a manifestation of the realm of Chaos if things go really wrong, and that's when you get the really nasty miscasts. Or it can be scattered so widely that it no longer has the nature of one of the Winds, and it becomes largely inert magic, sometimes known as 'earthbound' magic.

This is the energy that Runecraft uses, and one of the fundamental secrets of Runecraft is how you can have large amounts of this inert energy in one place with it remaining inert and not remanifesting one of its other natures. It's also the magic that is theorized to be behind the non-Teclisean magics like Hedgecraft and Elementalism and the like, using this inert magic to fuel lesser spells that can take just about any form because they don't have a fundamental nature that one has to work around. That these non-Teclisean traditions are often able to perform feats that Teclisean theory says are impossible using only earthbound magic is a bit of a sticking point in that whole theoretical framework.

Teclisean theory: "Well, technically if you use only tiny amounts of magic then you can shape it into any framework you imagine, but if you get too much magic together it will reassert an identity so you could only cast the most petty and minor of spells..."
Elementalists: "Haha fire golem goes brrr."
The Colleges basic teachings follow Teclisean theory, but Mathilde has come up against something that defies that theory and I somehow doubt that she's the only wizard in the 180 years of its history to have come across something that breaks it.

It's still useful, but I don't think it's accurate to say that it applies to everything the Colleges do. They likely came across multiple roadblocks and had to deal with it in their history, because I doubt Mathilde is the first.
 
Just a note that Mathilde personally knows and is practicing something that is considered impossible under Teclisean theory: Windherding
Why would that be impossible?

Using two or more Winds to create a greater whole is the basic idea of Elven High Magic.
Of course she can't just do it directly or alone, due to being a human, but weaving enchantments of different Winds into the same item does not look at all opposed to Teclesian Theory.
 
Last edited:
It's probably because they're more concerned about fighting the enemies of the Empire than disproving Teclis' theory and working on Academics. The Colleges are a military institution first and foremost, not an academic one. If it doesn't directly contribute to advancing the military goals of the Empire, then it's of a very low priority.
Collages have started as military instutiton but looking what they are like today they are as much as academia as military. And I noted I don't know when that started but it is both far enough back that favors for papers to become normal and important enough to give large enough favors to even niche papers. In comparasion you don't really get collage favor for pure military work except as a Battlemage track.
 
Wh would that be impossible?

Using two or more Winds to create a greater whole is the basic idea of Elven High Magic.
Of course she can't just do it directly or alone, due to being a human, but weaving enchantments of different Winds into the same item does not look at all opposed to Teclesian Theory.
Ask Boney. I literally quoted him. Am I supposed to be the Boney interpreter now? I brought evidence of the QM saying something. I didn't psychically mind read him.
 
something that is considered impossible under Teclisean theory: Windherding
It is not? Since when Winds working together started to contradict theory created by ones who use Qhaysh?
Ask Boney. I literally quoted him. Am I supposed to be the Boney interpreter now? I brought evidence of the QM saying something.
That quote doesn't even touch Windherding, it only speaks about non-Wind magical energy (turns out Colleges know about it more than I speculated, huh).
 
Last edited:
Ask Boney. I literally quoted him. Am I supposed to be the Boney interpreter now? I brought evidence of the QM saying something. I didn't psychically mind read him.

That quote does not seem to be about windherding from my read, more about elementalists and other strangeness. Windherding is more doing about what we did with the Eye of Gazul but with tighter tolerances.
 
It is not? Since when Winds working together started to contradict theory created by ones who use Qhaysh?

That quote doesn't even touch Windherding, it only speaks about non-Wind magical energy (turns out Colleges know about it more than I speculated, huh).
That quote does not seem to be about windherding from my read, more about elementalists and other strangeness. Windherding is more doing about what we did with the Eye of Gazul but with tighter tolerances.
In that post, Boney is replying to Jyn who is complaining about Windherding being unintuitive, and Boney responsds by saying that it's unreasonable to expect the ability to chart in advance something that is considered impossible under Teclisean theory. Where in that do you not see Windherding. It is literally what he is responding to.
 
In that post, Boney is replying to Jyn who is complaining about Windherding being unintuitive, and Boney responsds by saying that it's unreasonable to expect the ability to chart in advance something that is considered impossible under Teclisean theory. Where in that do you not see Windherding. It is literally what he is responding to.

As far as I can see he is replying to this post which is not about windherding. At the very least that is what it being quoted. I did not read the whole page, if I missed something obvious I apologize.
 
As far as I can see he is replying to this post which is not about windherding. At the very least that is what it being quoted. I did not read the whole page, if I missed something obvious I apologize.
What? He's replying to this post:
@chocolote12 I cant do it. I'm trying to think out what is interesting but not broken but there isn't any information to work with,

Windherder is not well explained, not intuitive, and boney refuses to explain how they would see the general interactions behaving. (we didn't even know that it wasn't Skyrim style until wayyyyy later.)

the only way would be to literally vote to bash two winds together in an enchantment to see what boney says it does. because there is no way of knowing what they are thinking about it.

you know what, I'm just not going to mention windherder again unless we are actually doing something with it. the way it has been implemented just annoys me.
 
Last edited:
Boney has been a bit ambiguous on Windherding, that quote leans pretty far in one direction, but this one

Mathilde's Towers have multi-wind enchantments - the Blue Tower and the Red Tower are connected to the firing mechanism of the Eye of Gazul. Windherder allows it to be done on a much smaller scale, where you can't use physical distance to prevent the Winds from clashing. It'd certainly be impressive, but it's a miniaturization of something that's already done, not an entirely new frontier.

Leans pretty far in the other.

I think there was an even more recent quote about it after we made the saddle as well...

Ah here it is.

It's somewhere in that nebulous middle ground between 'completely banal' and 'completely revolutionary'. At this scale, it's a neat trick. If it can be scaled up to more potent enchantments, then it would start getting attention.
 
What? He's replying to this post:
Dumbed out, I didn't even notice the first quote. Guess I would have to bother Boney why exactly he thinks Windherding contradicts Teclisean theory (or not, he's got many better things to do).
Boney has been a bit ambiguous on Windherding
Or perhaps there is some reason in settling the debate, perhaps in update itself when it comes to Windherding again.
 
Last edited:
Do keep in mind that the Colleges have a lot to lose by calling Teclisean models into question publicly. Theres no doubt a bunch of papers carefully prodding at the fringes, but most of those wouldn't be written, as no collegiate wizard can safely claim to be familiar with the mechanics of non-Teclisean spellcasting without putting themslves under heavy scrutiny from all sides.
 
Boney has been a bit ambiguous on Windherding, that quote leans pretty far in one direction, but this one



Leans pretty far in the other.

I think there was an even more recent quote about it after we made the saddle as well...

Ah here it is.
That's less about breaking or not breaking Teclisean theory and more about "oh sure you broke Teclisean theory, but that's a minor trick. Not worth it". It's only impressive when it's useful to the Empire, not when it's a new academic finding. Everyone knows Teclisean theory is full of holes, proving that you broke it isn't impressive. Showing a new technique that has amazing effects is impressive.
 
That's less about breaking or not breaking Teclisean theory and more about "oh sure you broke Teclisean theory, but that's a minor trick. Not worth it". It's only impressive when it's useful to the Empire, not when it's a new academic finding. Everyone knows Teclisean theory is full of holes, proving that you broke it isn't impressive. Showing a new technique that has amazing effects is impressive.

"Not an entirely new frontier" to me is pretty indicative that it then falls under the old frontier, basically Teclisian.
 
"Not an entirely new frontier" to me is pretty indicative that it then falls under the old frontier, basically Teclisian.
180 years of experimentation does mean that the Colleges can find non-Teclisean methods to do things. Their entire method of casting magic isn't even that compatible with Elven methods anyway. I seriously doubt that every "old frontier" is Teclisean. Power Stones were invented not by Teclis (he gave Orbs of Sorcery but they were Qhaysh or something). The guy who invented Power Stones was Theodor Habermas, the third Magister Patriarch of the Gold Order, and from there the Colleges all invented their own personal Power Stones, something that Elves don't do. Because their Power Stones are almost certainly not Wind Specific.
 
Voting is open
Back
Top