Re: Re: Illusion

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Thu Sep 16 11:42:17 2010

> We haven't discussed difficulties for particular tasks at all yet,
> but I don't imagine creating an accurate-to-the-point-of-breeding
> cow is going to be very easy.

Well, we seemed to be drifting in that direction, and this _is_ the rules list, so what the heck. ;-)

> True, it's a specifica case of a hypothetical 'Create Illusion
> of Anything' ability, which ought to have truly cripling
> difficulty modifiers in pretty much all circumstances. However,
> The Great Trickster In The Sky probably has it.

i.e. the Illusion Rune, pretty much. (The concept of one of these 'mysticism lite' religions seeking union with the Illusion Rune springs to mind, though one rather wishes it didn't... I suppose that's Gebkeran, in Vithelan terms, and thus all "Antigod" religious practices, in some sense.) I'm not sure I'd even rule this out as a PC ability, though admittedly it does sound more sorcerous than any likely theistic feat or affinity -- those would tend to be "create illusion of thing I have a mythic rationale for", as opposed to "assemble from illusionary recipe".

> I think TGTITS can create breedable 'fake' cows, presumably you don't,
> and therefore there can be no myths in which he does. Is that fair
> to say?

Never mind TGTITS, I think it's not unreasonable or unlikely[*] that _Eurmal_ can do this, given some mythic precedent. I think the mythic precedent is pretty key, though. (Granted in practice if I saw the feat by such a name, I'd pretty much assume _some_ sort of mythic connection, though that leaves entirely open-ended how 'deep' it would be.)

[*] Beyond the unreasonable and unlikely norm for Tricksters...

> > ...If you have an ability which can
> > create things which can or can't reproduce, and may or may not
> actually
> > exist (the "bestiary cow", which your reply does _not_ address),
> I'd say it's a marginal success cow, or the result of a
> successful ability roll, but which can be easily determined to
> be fake by a very pedestrian 'Knows About Cows' ability roll.
> i.e. What I'd expect from a streight reading of the HW rules.

Well the point is, the case was of someone who has no idea of what a cow even looks like, trying to create one from a description, and thus has no (reasonable) chance of creating something 'connected to' the Otherside Cow (i.e. Uralda, for Heortlings) in any real way. (I assume it'd have no o/s connection, or a hotch-potch of different, partial connections all 'jumbled up'.)

If this is (reasonably) possibly, then it seems to me to follow that it ought to be (reasonably) possible to create something that does actually look like a cow, and have substance, for example (the Trickster having a good idea about these things), but with an equally void/shallow connection to the other side (i.e. having little or nothing to do with 'Uralda'). And in the typical case that sounds like exactly what a Heortling Trickster would be _trying_ to do. (Who cares whether it can breed or not? By the time Carl Djialls finds this out I'll have had my revenge/gotten to a safe distance away/drank the profits/had a damn good larf.) But as we seem now to be largely agreeing (or eliminating certain aspects of Illusory Disagreement, at least...) I'll forebear from thrashing this example any further. ;-)

> However it
> seems pretty clear that what you are saying is that no illusory
> cow, no matter how created or at what level of extraordinary
> sucess, can ever procreate. Is that correct?

No, absolutely not -- I thought I'd said the reverse out-and-out some time again. A sufficiently good (or sufficiently lucky) cow-illusion _would_ be able to breed. To put it in terms of the RQ3 approach (and maybe the actual Gloranthan sorcerous one) you'd just add the "Illusory Fertility" lego brick to the mix. (For a theist presumably it's more like "I have to steal some _really good_ ju-ju from Uralda for this particular Trick (tee-hee!)".) A "sufficiently advanced" illusion would 'tend toward' _any_ given cow-attribute, to the point of being (to coin a phrase) indistinguishable. At least, if it were make "permanent" (i.e. of duration > bovine life span), etc, then the only remaining way to distinguish it would be via 'historical' magic, which would indeed be an interesting -- if hopelessly difficult and over-engineered! -- way of giving a Lhankor Mhy and her 'Truth' magic a philosophical issue or two to chew over. (Or at least make 'em spend some HPs either on 'Illumination' or on 'Rationalise Furiously'...)

What happens to the progeny of a "duration expired" mother or father (the two may not necessarily even be symmetrical...) is certainly another headache-maker. I could see just about every permutation of this, depending on the nature, "quality" and intent of the illusory creation, and the "mythic natural history" of the creature in question. For example, could you see a troll or an insect being much worried if his father turned out to be am illusion? Sounds like a mild social embarrassment, not a major existential crisis!

Powered by hypermail