[GroupDesign] Schrodinger's war: Nailing HTT and GL

[Andrew Morris]

I don't think we need any sort of rationale or explanation. We figure out how it works, and that's just the way it is. I'd rather that the Archivists didn't use any material technology themselves, but that's just because it fits my concept better. Sure, an Archivist might have a host build a piece of advanced technology, but I just see the Archivists' powers as being somewhat beyond the limitations of machinery and physical devices. As to the faith angle, I'd rather it was ambiguous. That's why I like the concept of the elastic timestream. Sure, you can claim it has a scientific basis, but it's just as easy to say that it's due to a higher power.

So, I don't think we even need a pseudo-scientific explanation. Archivists have powers, here's how they work. Done.

[Sydney Freedberg]

I'm going to agree with Nate and Andrew that fruitfully ambiguous pseudoscientific handwaving is easier to work with than explicit religion: It's less likely to explode in your face, and it allows all the mysticism with half the calories, I mean dogma. (Personally I do think there's gonna be a Last Judgment and am a bit worried about where I'll be afterwards, but I don't feel like bringing that into this game...).

{EDIT: And like Andrew, (a) I don't see Archivists as using technology so much as being "some form of energy I've never seen before, Captain!" aka spiritual beings; and (b) I am happy to leave the mysticism:pseudoscience balance in the hands of each playgroup, offering a few alternative explanations in the game itself but generally handwaving the issue.}

And on the issue of urgency, I'll agree with Doug on the issues of urgency and Archivist vulnerability. At the very least, once an Archivist possesses a Host -- which means, in the most interesting interpretation I've seen, that the Archivist now exists in both the HTT and the ATT at once -- that Human time and Archivist time are in synch and pass at a 1 second:1 second ratio.

[daMoose_Neo]

Agreeing with Syndey on the 'energy beings' - I don't see the Archivists or even the Great Libary as having much of a physical presence so much as a mystic, spiritual or just disembodied energy feel to it. If I HAD to envision either, I myself picture like a grey/green wraith/mist like appearance set against a stary/cosmos-type background.

I'm going to lean on Polterguist (something to this effect was mentioned in the second one I think) and toss in this possibility: suppose these Archivists are
A) Beings of pure energy of whatever kind and
B) The GL is simply the accumulated knowledge shared among the Archivists, which is accessable to any Archivist in the GL (I had referred to it like a Network before). With all Archivists together it creates an energy field that 'surrounds' the universe and is everywhere, everywhen.

This energy field exists in such a manner that it is 'timeless' in that it always exists. New Archivists may come in to the GL Collective, but once in exist in the 'Now' of Archivist time. Because this field always exists and has always existed, it is present in all times, in all 'realities'. Jumping "back in time" is simply extending ones self in a specific direction of the field.
Time can still flow 1:1, no problem. The "timless" only means the field always exists, say in part a byproduct of energy existing all over.
Now:
While TOTALLY in the field, all of an Archivists knowledge is fair game.
While PARTIALLY in the field, the Archivist can 'choose' to take various pieces with it (Thus, Dark Archivists skipping along hosts aren't sharing their 'plans', but pieces can be glimpsed by the other Archivists still in the field.
IF the Archivist TOTALLY REMOVES itself from the Collective,
A) Its harder to re-enter of course
B) It takes all of its knowledge with it.

This allows for an interesting situation where say a PC learns something significant but is being closely watched by a DA. To 'flee', the PC can remove itself from the Collective and ride their host, trying to make contact with another operative in the era or find a way to re-enter the Collective and keep the knowledge hidden.

I still rather like the idea of each person having their own "view" of the Library. This concept would allow something like that, each Archivists mind catagorizing the knowledge in a way that is easier for them to comprehend (After all, that will be a LOT of information).

As to HOW Humans become Archivists:
Simply extend this energy field concept. All humans have a high amount of bio-electrical activity. Say a certain wavelength (fictional one, associated with extremely higher-order thinking skills such as Philosophy) at a certain point establishes a connection with the field. This can be as simple as a flash of insight of the future (momentarily connecting with the everpresent in Archivist time) to slipping into it (IE hits that point upon death and the 'spirit' of the person is translated to the energy wave and becomes apart of the field).
To look at my Death Row inmate, by himself he probably couldn't make the jump, especially reflecting on only the one event (thus might reflect on human greed, evil, lack of compasion etc). However, as he's strapped into the electric chair, his own bio-electricity kicks in of course (adrenaline) with a huge electrical pulse from the chair, sending the wavelength through the roof and into the proper levels to establish the connection.
In other examples, others could almost assist this accention. As Energy doesn't disipate, upon death a certain amount of energy would still remain (incorporeal/unbound or still contained within the body, I dunno). Mourners would be having their own 'spiritual' or deep thoughts, heightening their own levels of this wavelength. In an area where there is this high intensity, it might be possible for a connection to be established, the disembodied energies, with nowhere else to go, leaping to the field with the boost.
This also has the effect of 'explaining' sceances- multiple people, each slightly elevating the wavelength, collectively making a brief connection (reaching into the past, as that is the simplest for any person to connect with in their position in the 'carrot'- its already happened, so all they're doing is looking back along their own histories).

Ahkay, I better stop.
Tis an idea: keep it, scrap it, or part it out.

[Doug Ruff]

Re: "pseudoscientific" vs "mystical" explanation,

My main motivation for keeping the "fruitfully ambiguous pseudoscientific handwaving" (great phrase!) is that it avoids having an unambiguous verifiable explanation for why all of this can happen.

Which means that the Archivists can argue about it. I fully expect there to be Archivist (and Nemesis) "factions" whose main reason for existence is that they share a "mystical" explanation for all of this, which gives them a position of perceived moral superiority. So there will be dogma, but it will be on behalf of the characters, and not the players (or the designers!)

Re: Nate's last post,

I like this a lot, I won't quote as it's the very last post, but a couple of things I would like to highlight (OK, "steal" and "twist" are more accurate.)

Archivists as beings of pure energy: how about, beings of pure information? - my knowledge of thermodynamics is poor, but I believe there is a fundamental link between information and energy (it involves entropy and heat).

It gets more complicated (but more fun) if you consider that "shared information" could mean that the Archivists are somehow intertwined. How about, if an Archivist separates a part of themselves from the collective, and takes knowledge with them, they aren't just taking their own knowledge, they are taking a piece of everybody else's with them?

To take the analogy further,imagine a network of computers, with a central server. Information in the server is accessible to all the computers, but each computer has it's own hard drive, which can contain copies of information on the server, and backups of some of the server files.

OK, now imagine each Archivist is one of the PCs, and the server is the Great Library. When an Archivist possesses a Host, they can take information from their own self (the PC drive), and information from the Library (the server), and send this into a Host. If the connection is broken, both the Archivist and the Great Library are diminished.

It's an analogy only, but it may be useful.

As for Humans becoming Archivists: bio-electrical activity, wave functions etc - all good. My take (for this game) would be that the "soul" is simply that information that survives the destruction of the body. In most cases, this information is absorbed into the All, but in exceptional cases, it is projected somehow into the Archivist dimensions. How (and when) this happens may vary.

[daMoose_Neo]

It gets more complicated (but more fun) if you consider that "shared information" could mean that the Archivists are somehow intertwined. How about, if an Archivist separates a part of themselves from the collective, and takes knowledge with them, they aren't just taking their own knowledge, they are taking a piece of everybody else's with them?

Thats actually what I was going at with the "Collective" term. Each Archivist still retains certain portions of "themselves", but their knowledge is a shared/intertwined pool. I hadn't considered the taking others knowledge with them, however, which is a good point.
Other 'idea' for hooks to coincide with the retraction from the collective: Should that happen, it would be obvious to everyone else in the collective. Thus, thats one way to dicern Dark Archivists or a launch point for a 'mission'- an operative dropped out of the collective. The PCs must try to follow in the footsteps and figure out where/when their fellow Archivist is, why they pulled out, and what to do about it. Once out, the only way back 'in' might be to kill the host (*grins evilly*), thus releasing the pent up energy...or, similarly, offering the host the chance to join the Collective at the cost of their mortal life (death to the hosts body freeing the trapped Archivist but sufficiantly elevating the host to acend as well).

How (and when) this happens may vary.

That I agree with as well. I think we should avoid specifying what the exact conditions are, just that they happen.

[contracycle]

I would find it very unsatisfactory to fail to explain why and how this all works.  That seems to me to deny the players - and the GM - the ability to engage intelligently with the setting.  Thats fine if the setting is just backdrop - if for example play always started in one window and ended in that window.  But if the players are expected to make decisions about time travel, or what to do, on their own, then this will need to be established firmly so they know what is feasible, and so the GM can judge their decisions.  Or whoever fills that function, I don't think we have discussed that yet.

I'd prefer mysticism to pseudoscience becuase pseudoscience is so very unsatisfactory - its basically mysticism except without the moral significance.

[Andrew Morris]

pseudoscience [is] basically mysticism except without the moral significance.

That's a damn fine point. Personally, I agree with you. However, one of the very first concepts for the game was that it be modular, and the "explanation of how things work," if any, seems to fit the bill for a piece that can be altered without significantly affecting the game. Note that I don't feel the same way about the core themes -- that's an example of something I feel should stay the same.

But going back to your concern, contracycle, why would the lack of an explanation make setting exploration unsatisfactory? I look at it much like driving a car -- all I know about how cars work is some very vague understanding of the internal combustion engine. But I don't need to know how the car works in order to use it. Same deal with the powers in the game -- we give the players some vague explanation of how the powers work and what they do, then let them go off and use those powers as they will. Or am I missing your point?

[Doug Ruff]

... pseudoscience is so very unsatisfactory - its basically mysticism except without the moral significance.

Agreed, absolutely. And that's exactly why I'm proposing it. I believe that the "moral significance" of it all is something that the Archivists should be fighting over.

The game should give an explanation of what works, and (if such a thing is possible) a "morally neutral" theory as to how it works - hence the pseudoscience.

However, this is a theory only, and every Archivist is (or should be) encouraged to come up with their own cosmology to explain the "real" reason for the existence of the HTT, the Great Library and the Archivists themselves. In other words, why it works.

[daMoose_Neo]

Besides, if we, as designers, marry one explicit explanation and set of morals to the game,
1) We'll probably disagree on details ourselves and
2) Alienate a whole segment of players because, as illustrated by us disagreeing, not everyone shares the same ideas and beliefs.

By providing the "pseudoscience" behind how it works, we provide the players with a structure where they can say why it works.
Personally, that *is* a little of my own belief- that science is the how, religion/faith/belief the why.
The game is about exploration. Sure, the context is temporal exploration, but what we'll really have going on is human exploration, how and why we do what we do.
Thus, provide a vaugely plausable pseudoscience reasoning for all of this and allow each play group to determine the specifics of why they're going about these grandiouse, time stream hopping adventures. They get to answer their own questions about morality, causality and why things are as they are.

[Sydney Freedberg]

Agreeing with Nate & Doug here. Contracycle's "Eye of God" post-apocalyptic vision -- and I mean Apocalypse in the Saint John the Divine sense, not the Mad Max sense -- is a wicked cool campaign idea. I just wouldn't want to make it the only option, which means, as people have said, that the core (default) setting needs to be explained in terms that are if not morallly neutral at least capable of multiple moral interpretations.

Then, with that leeway allowed, let a particular GM work his or her PCs up to the realization that the Armeggedon actually happened and they are gathering evidence for the Last Judgment -- or that The Matrix Has You and they're all brains in bottles hooked up to a big historical simulation -- or that enviromental collapse ruined the earth and they're all uploaded personalities in a big multi-generational colony ship trying to find a new home -- or whatever wild spin on the core "Schrodinger's War" scenario they want.

[Andrew Morris]

Doug, Nate, Sydney -- yes. No disagreement here. Now, my only question is whether we have "nailed" enough info on the two timestreams (or as Doug has said, it's more accurately "the two spacetimes" -- using the classical definition) or not. So, here's my summation of the product of this thread thus far. Please add anything I've missed or correct any errors.

The Dual Spacetimes Model[/u]
In addition to the known world and history of humanity, there exists another spacetime that can only be accessed by humans who have evolved into Archivists [still don't have a generic name for this]. This second spacetime is referred to as the Great Library, wherein is kept all the accumulated knowledge of the Archivists. From the Great Library, an Archivist can access any point in the spacetime of humanity [need a name for this that's more accurate than "human time tunnel"] and possess a human host. Time passes in a 1:1 ratio between the Great Library and the human spacetime. Archivists can communicate with each other instantly across any amount of distance in spacetime. By controlling a host, Archivists can alter the timestream of the human spacetime. Major events in history are more difficult to change than minor ones. In order to change major elements of history, significant work is required beforehand, in order to "weaken" the event's inherent stability. Time travel in the Great Library is not possible.

Unanswered Questions
• Are the Archivists the first residents of the Great Library? My vote is no.
• Does the Great Library actually represent the extent of the physicality of the entire Archivist space? My vote is yes.
• Can Archivists travel any distance instantaneously within either spacetime? My vote is yes, only travel between the spacetimes is (slightly) limited.
• Is the dual spacetimes model described above a core element of the game, or is it open for customization? My vote is core.

[daMoose_Neo]

My 'Votes'
#1 Yes/No, vauge enough to let groups decide (or to throw a curve ball at 'em)
#2 Yes
#3 Yes
#4 Core. How exactly it came to be and why it exists can still be explained by the groups

[Andrew Morris]

Okay, the revised questions:

Unanswered Questions
1. Are the Archivists the first residents of the Great Library?
2. Do any other creatures reside in the Great Library?
3. Does the Great Library actually represent the extent of the physicality of the entire Archivist space?
4. Can Archivists travel any distance instantaneously within either spacetime?
5. Is the dual spacetimes model described above a core element of the game, or is it open for customization?

[Sydney Freedberg]

I'm with Nate on almost all of these.

1. Are the Archivists the first residents of the Great Library?

Yes -- as the core/default: Allowing pre-human intelligences in some options might be interesting.

2. Do any other creatures reside in the Great Library?

No -- as the core/default: But again leave room for optional powers and principalities as a given group/GM desires.

3. Does the Great Library actually represent the extent of the physicality of the entire Archivist space?

Yes.

4. Can Archivists travel any distance instantaneously within either spacetime?

Yes.

5. Is the dual spacetimes model described above a core element of the game, or is it open for customization?

Core -- with alternative technological/scientific vs. mystical/religious explanations for why it's like that being options.

[daMoose_Neo]

Rev. #2 - Agreed. 'Archivists' are the only creatures...*grins evily* Just to toss out a fun idea, what are the odds an animal of some kind attains Archivist-level enlightenment?