Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mephistophelian

[✓] Mental Magic Rewrite

Recommended Posts

Just now, ski_king3 said:

Just drop mental magic and learn cog instead, if you want it that badly, it's way more fun anyways!

Alternatively, one could smoke a few grams of cactus green and produce similar effects to that of Cognatism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ski_king3 said:

This lore rewrite would make sense because it would change the lore, of course cognatism could have been written many different ways. But we have folks who have been using it as far back as the Fringe who feel pretty strongly about how it ought to be used, who don't want to see a change.

 

And yes, Jistuma's lore leaves no room for OOC approved long term memory wipes. It's important to write lore in such a way that it cannot easily be abused, and allowing long term memory wiping in any capacity absolutely leaves room for abuse. You can't write lore that you know will inevitably be powergamed and then just ignore that when weighing whether or not it should be accepted. That's the most important part of assessing and reviewing lore, whether or not it is likely to be abused.

 

But to go back to the merge, look dude, you've proposed this twice. It looks a lot like you want to have cognatism. Just drop mental magic and learn cog instead, if you want it that badly, it's way more fun anyways!

 

How do you feel it will be abused? If OOC consent is required, where do you see it being abused? Also, what part do you believe will be powergamed?

If you continue mentioning these things, I will need examples or direct references so I may fix them, instead of baseless opinions.

 

Also, I'm mildly insulted you insinuate I have written this lore simply because I want to use Cognatism, despite the support from others in the community. Are you going to be throwing around accusations of bias, now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mephistophelian said:

 

How do you feel it will be abused? If OOC consent is required, where do you see it being abused? Also, what part do you believe will be powergamed?

If you continue mentioning these things, I will need examples or direct references so I may fix them, instead of baseless opinions.

 

Also, I'm mildly insulted you insinuate I have written this lore simply because I want to use Cognatism, despite the support from others in the community. Are you going to be throwing around accusations of bias, now?

 

I mean, ImCookiie routinely heavily wiped and altered memories of other characters without telling them that it wasn't typically within the capabilities of a mental mage and that it required their consent. Crazed and Tahmas will confirm this, though the former left the server. This is the one example I have, though if I remember correctly, we dealt with a couple similar situations on the LT not long after Jistuma's lore was initially passed.

 

As for the latter, that was admittedly uncool of me. It's what it looks like to several of us, but it's unfair to level accusations like that.

 

That being said, it's frustrating that you know a majority of cognatism users disagree with this change (which means that it can't be passed per rules for magic lore removal), yet it seems like you're holding off on removing the merge from the lore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, ski_king3 said:

 

I mean, ImCookiie routinely heavily wiped and altered memories of other characters without telling them that it wasn't typically within the capabilities of a mental mage and that it required their consent. Crazed and Tahmas will confirm this, though the former left the server. This is the one example I have, though if I remember correctly, we dealt with a couple similar situations on the LT not long after Jistuma's lore was initially passed.

 

As for the latter, that was admittedly uncool of me. It's what it looks like to several of us, but it's unfair to level accusations like that.

 

That being said, it's frustrating that you know a majority of cognatism users disagree with this change (which means that it can't be passed per rules for magic lore removal), yet it seems like you're holding off on removing the merge from the lore.

 

In that case, ImCookiie was powergaming and should have been blacklisted. I understand your issues, though I can't understand why you believe this does not fit under the same powergaming rule that all magics must adhere to.

 

As for the majority of cognatism users disagreeing: Might I bring to your attention that the last time I brought this topic up, the (then seven or more) active cognatism users said they would promise to teach more people and make the magic spread. So far, it has reduced to four active users. Need I say more?

 

I wrote this lore to continue the existence of a neat magic whilst being as unobstrusive as possible with how it works. It also serves as an explanation for mental magic enchanting and is a clarification on the abilities of mental magic and cognatism (I have been told by multiple people that they finally understand cognatism after having read my rewrite).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to an agreement with the four current users of cognatism. When this lore is accepted, the cognatism part will not be implemented. Expect a cognatism rewrite, soon. If that cognatism rewrite fails it's lore trial, my merge lore will be implemented.

 

I'm sorry to the many that were looking forward to this rewrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the memory erasing thing, the biggest problem with that is that normal players (those most affected by the magic) don't know the limitation of the magic. "1 hour memory erasing" is already a lot to know about the magic, but you're adding "1 hour memory erasing doesn't require permission, but anything more and anything of other memories can be removed if the player agrees OOC'ly". It's a lot to know. There is also the problem of OOC concent not making much sense. The mage has to first access the memory he wants to remove, and doing that is already hard as heck and would take most of the rp, then he would have to start removing it, and then the player says "no" to having it removed. After 30 mins of rp or more, plus all the time it took to get to the situation to actually be able to use mind magic on the player, probably for ONE specific reason, now the player decided that he doesn't want that to happen. It's both **** IC and OOC'ly. All that RP gone to waste, and it making no sense IC.

 

There are two alternatives to that, one, asking OOC'ly before the rp even starts happening (which may lead to metagaming, powergaming, and scripted roleplay), or the character that is having the memories removed accepts that IC and wants it to happen. The first one is needed because the amount of times that a player will say no will be a lot, the mind mage will want to know if all the roleplay he's doing is for nothing (it gets annoying after the second or third time it happens). Sometimes the mages simply stop doing that spell, other times the players get annoyed at the other players, both of these are bad. The second could actually work better in practice and in lore.

 

I advise that if you really want to add that, that you change it so that only if the character wants the memories removed does it work. This would give more rp to mental mages in treating people with very awful memories, like torture, seeing someone they love die, being safer because they know something very important and don't want to, and things like that. Heck, could even be used with threats ("You know this, and I'll hurt you a lot for it. There is one alternative. I know a friend that can remove your memories, but only if you want them gone. Do you WANT me to continue coming after you? Or do you want to forget?")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jistuma said:

About the memory erasing thing, the biggest problem with that is that normal players (those most affected by the magic) don't know the limitation of the magic. "1 hour memory erasing" is already a lot to know about the magic, but you're adding "1 hour memory erasing doesn't require permission, but anything more and anything of other memories can be removed if the player agrees OOC'ly". It's a lot to know. There is also the problem of OOC concent not making much sense. The mage has to first access the memory he wants to remove, and doing that is already hard as heck and would take most of the rp, then he would have to start removing it, and then the player says "no" to having it removed. After 30 mins of rp or more, plus all the time it took to get to the situation to actually be able to use mind magic on the player, probably for ONE specific reason, now the player decided that he doesn't want that to happen. It's both **** IC and OOC'ly. All that RP gone to waste, and it making no sense IC.

 

There are two alternatives to that, one, asking OOC'ly before the rp even starts happening (which may lead to metagaming, powergaming, and scripted roleplay), or the character that is having the memories removed accepts that IC and wants it to happen. The first one is needed because the amount of times that a player will say no will be a lot, the mind mage will want to know if all the roleplay he's doing is for nothing (it gets annoying after the second or third time it happens). Sometimes the mages simply stop doing that spell, other times the players get annoyed at the other players, both of these are bad. The second could actually work better in practice and in lore.

 

I advise that if you really want to add that, that you change it so that only if the character wants the memories removed does it work. This would give more rp to mental mages in treating people with very awful memories, like torture, seeing someone they love die, being safer because they know something very important and don't want to, and things like that. Heck, could even be used with threats ("You know this, and I'll hurt you a lot for it. There is one alternative. I know a friend that can remove your memories, but only if you want them gone. Do you WANT me to continue coming after you? Or do you want to forget?")

 

Or one can simply say ((I will likely be removing old memories in this RP, do you mind?)) and continuing from there. Once they say they are alright with it, the RP can go on, where the person RPing the Mental Mage says ((ok, I'm about to remove X memory. Let's discuss that)) and whatnot. What do you do if the person refuses? Well then you RP the consequences, and RP the Mental Mage character being unable to remove the memories. Perhaps it's because they cannot properly locate them, or perhaps the Mental Mage becomes too exhausted. When I say OOC permission is required, I mean that the Mental Mage and target work together on the whole process. In other words, they agree on things beforehand to ensure that the RP leads to that agreement (which isn't hard to do).

 

I feel you are mistaking IC agreement with OOC agreement. I will use an example, so that I may explain what I mean:

 What if an OOC friend of mine has a character that has certain, traumatic memories about someone that they do not want to lose for fear of being subject to the same experiences again? OOCly, this friend of mine may think that removing the memories is a swell idea, and would greatly add to the RP between our characters. So we can discuss it beforehand and sort out the finer details of the memory removal so that, when RP occurs, we don't need to discuss or limit what exactly is RPed, since we know the end result of the memory removal and can RP with that. All the while, the character ICly does not want their memories removed, so they struggle and fight and maybe cause some damage to my character; fuel for future RP ("how did you get that scar?")! Now they have memories of fighting back before passing out... but they can't remember why. Even more fuel for RP ("why do I remember fighting you?")! Do you want to restrict this sort of RP due to your own personal opinion and preference? Or, perhaps, do you not understand what is meant by 'OOC Consent is required'? If so, I'd like to clarify that it requires the full consent of the player before the memory removal RP occurs, so that no confusions or anything of the sort may occur. In essence, the process is exactly the same to your 'IC approval required' Idea, but it has the extra, juicy part where the character doesn't exactly need to approve and thus the players can create more RP from that.

 

If this is due to a simple misunderstanding, then I understand your concerns and hope I settled them. If not, please clarify further. Either way, thank you for your input; I will be clarifying the 'OOC approval' section with this in mind!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mephistophelian said:

Do you want to restrict this sort of RP due to your own personal opinion and preference? Or, perhaps, do you not understand what is meant by 'OOC Consent is required'?

I don't think you understand what 'OOC consent' means. the problem with OOC consent is not when two players are friends and want some rp to happen, it's when two players that aren't friends or when they are friends and DON'T script the rp. Your example has this:

 

2 hours ago, Mephistophelian said:

this friend of mine may think that removing the memories is a swell idea, and would greatly add to the RP between our characters.

The problem is when the situation is more of:

"A character has memories that my character doesn't want him to have. Sending a tell to someone I don't actually talk OOC'ly normally is pretty weird but oh well." "/t player hey, could I have your permission to remove some of your character memories?"

Possible bad answers:

"No" "Well ****."

"Which ones?" "The ones about what happened between our character." "Oh, not those ones."

"Find out in RP." "What do you mean? I need OOC aproval before doing it." "You also need to do the rp, and you'll know when it happens."
"If you can." -> Could metagame after.

"Sure" -> rp is starting to happen -> "Wait, no I change my mind."

 

You don't seem to understand the problem I'm mentioning is that OOC permission, in most cases that isn't between friends, doesn't work. If  a player wants to do something, and the other player doesn't, OOC consent will get in the way (of course) and ruin the rp progress. In some cases, OOC consent is required even for something to exist (anything that drastically changes a character needs OOC consent, so any eternal transformation of a body part or making someone a monster needs OOC concent), but that means that unscripted rp on those cases hardly ever happens. The cases where someone is changed to a Frost Witch, Lich, DarkStalker, etc. without previous OOC talking, is very rare. You allow memory removal, but it's not something a mind mage can use unless when the rp is scripted, when the players already know what will happen, and are (in most cases) rp'ing between friends.

 

My sugestion is that it can only happen if the character that is having the memories removed wants it, meaning the player wants it to. This would remove the problems of the mind mage wanting something in rp, which he has the power to do, and the other player oposing it and that way stopping the rp. Since the whole chance of success in rp is relient on the other character (and player), the problem of "I will use my spell to do something and have a random chance of it not working based on nothing 'random' in rp" (it's random in rp, because even with 10 explanations as to why it doesn't work, it's BS. It doesn't work because the other player doesn't want it to work, not because of something in RP)

 

If a player says no, the rp doesn't happen, or gets wasted. I'm saying to remove the chance of the player saying no affecting the rp, by making the magic work only when the character wants it to happen. Being in rp and the other player going "No stop, that's not going to happen, I won't let it." is one of the most annoying things that can happen. In most situations a rule states if a player can and can't do something, in this case, it would be a player, which means it's highly subjective to the player, mood, character, opinions, and OOC proximity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Jistuma said:

- Snip -

 

I gave an explanation as to why it is far more difficult to remove long term memories. This explains why the chance of failure is utterly impossible. Also, what prevents someone from ICly and OOCly allowing memory removal, then deciding against it (as you used in your example)? This makes the same situation. I believe you are needlessly complicating something that isn't complicated. If you continue to use examples, there will always be possible things that could and couldn't happen, and it detracts from the main point, anyway.

Regardless, I see we will not come to a mutual understanding on this point, so I respectfully disagree with your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mephistophelian said:

I gave an explanation as to why it is far more difficult to remove long term memories. This explains why the chance of failure is utterly impossible.

 

33 minutes ago, Jistuma said:

(it's random in rp, because even with 10 explanations as to why it doesn't work, it's BS. It doesn't work because the other player doesn't want it to work, not because of something in RP)

RP is saying what's happening in OOC. That's not an explanation. An explanation would be saying that it works only 50% of the time, and then the player would be forced to roll. Saying it might fail, and that failure is based on the choice of a player that isn't even the one rp'ing the magic, is just a BS explanation.

 

 

Just now, Mephistophelian said:

Also, what prevents someone from ICly and OOCly allowing memory removal, then deciding against it (as you used in your example)?

1 of the examples I used, out of 4? Someone changing their mind midway the rp has far less chance of happening than just saying no and being done with it. Also, saying no before the rp happens (because most players won't really try to make the rp before knowing if it'll work) stops the rp from ever happening, saying no after saying yes before, while the rp is happening, at least the rp is happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy to say this Lore has been Accepted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Lore has been accepted. Moved to Implemented Lore, it will be sorted to it's appropriate category soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify, the merge is not officially accepted. Cognitism will be undergoing a re-write under the helm of Tahmas and Hugo to produce a more purposeful and interactive magic; should it be approved it will then officially go through a two month trial.

 

Depending on whether the newfound magic passes under the necessary requirements will determine whether the 'merge' is or is not canon.

 

The mental magic re-write is, however,  accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...