[dataweaver]

Originally Posted by lugaid

I suppose that's what I get for not really following the oWoD closely. There's a lot that they worked into their background that I wouldn't have, and had no idea that they had. I suppose, then, that what I'm really asking about is MWoD, which operates from the assumptions that I probably haven't made clear because I didn't even know that they needed to be.

“MWoD”?

Originally Posted by lugaid

So, the argument that the people writing MtA were making is that there is a core One True Reality that is singular, but everyone gets it wrong until they have the Secret Knowledge.

Umm, no; that’s the nWoD’s Mage: the Awakening.

Originally Posted by lugaid

How disappointing. I prefer the "there is no True Reality other than what you experience" interpretation, where different experience sets interface with each other in interesting and chaotic ways.

“There is no True Reality other than what you experience” is a declaration of there being “One True Reality” — namely, the One True Reality is that reality is subjective. This has the drawback that it declares that Technocrats aren’t just morally wrong, but also objectively delusional about the true nature of reality. Granted, the “subjective reality” line is the most common theory voiced by the Traditions; but it’s exactly that: a theory. The underlying truth that I referred to isn’t so much that there’s a singular One True Reality as it is that every form of magic featured in Mage: the Ascension shares the common feature that magic is based on some sort of inherently human quality. What that quality is and how it manifests varies by Tradition, so (in theory at least) you still get interesting and chaotic interactions between them. I’ll agree that Mage: the Ascension didn’t go as far as it could have in featuring the practical distinctions among the Traditions, which is why my proposal goes further; but I’d be leery about going as far as to give each one a wholly distinct and largely incompatible magic system of its own.

If you’re looking for a setting that features a large number of fundamentally different magic systems coexisting, you don’t need Mage: the Ascension to do so. Eden Studio’s Witchcraft and Conspiracy X both feature multiple systems of supernatural powers; Deadlands features at least four such systems (gambler card magic, preachers wielding holy power, Native American shamans, and literally mad scientists).

Originally Posted by lugaid

I could see that, perhaps, but it leaves out the "sex" and "drugs" parts of the CoX in favor of just the "rock 'n' roll". (Heck, throw in the Enthrallment skills, and you've got something going!) Anyway, I think that I'm starting to get a handle on how to handle the CoX, at least.

Well, I did say that it’s not a particularly good fit. But it’s as good a fit as your approach to the VAs; and if you’re comfortable with grossly oversimplifying the VAs as Machine Telepaths, then you shouldn’t have a problem with similarly grossly oversimplifying Cultists of Ecstasy as bards.

Originally Posted by lugaid

The thing is, we are presented, in the basic rule book, with a view of the Traditions that is pretty straightforward (excepting the CoX and Euthanatos): Akashics are Shaolin Monks, Celestials are dedicated to a vision of God, Dreamweavers are Shamans, Etherites are Mad Scientists in the Tesla or Steampunk (though the term wasn't yet current, the idea was) mold, etc. The individual Tradition splatbooks may have altered that basic, straightforward approach, but I don't know that, in most cases, it's really needed or warranted.

Not just individual splatbooks; later editions of the game expand the scope of each Tradition so that it’s less of a rigid stereotype. For instance: even in the second edition, Etherites are no longer just mad scientists in the Tesla or Steampunk mold: they’re the guys responsible for Quantum Mechanics; and it’s entirely possible and appropriate to play an Etherite who’s Science is straight out of bleeding edge sci-fi.

Basically, every Tradition had its philosophical roots deepened as of the second edition; and while every Tradition has room for the stereotype that the first edition of the game pushed, none is restricted to it. My single biggest issue with your approach is that it narrows the Traditions back down to shallow stereotypes — sometimes very shallow.

Originally Posted by lugaid

I should also add that you are using terminology that is unknown to me. Keep in mind that I left WW games behind before they ran out the oWoD clock, so a lot of the later concepts (Disparate?) are unknown to me. I'm supposing that Disparates are factions that are minorities in the Reality game, like the Traditions, but which have not got the alliance thing of the Traditions down?

“Disparate” isn’t a later concept; it’s a more recent name for what the game originally called Crafts. So yes, that’s exactly it: they’re Ascension War minorities who never forged any alliances, and thus suffered for the lack thereof.