[Torg] Sometimes you use the tool...

[Phil Dack]

----- Original Message ----
> From: Michael Jason Teegarden <mjteegarden at yahoo.com>
> To: torg at justintimeadventures.com
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 July, 2008 7:36:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [Torg] Sometimes you use the tool...
> 
> For "tool use," I would say it is when a character attempts to change something 
> by using some kind of technology in a physical way.  Listening to the radio = 
> not tool use, unless the character touches the radio, turns the off switch to 
> on, dials the stations, and adjusts the volume control.  Or inserts a CD.  Or 
> plugs in an MP3 player.  Intention, I think, is half, and touching something for 
> controlling technology is the other half.  My thoughts.  :)
I'm trying to avoid sounding all didactic here, but touching is not really relevant in any sense. I'd suggest that it's entirely down to intent.
If you are broadcasting a radio into the Living Land, there are a number of processes as far as the metaphysics go, and contradictions can occur at multiple points:
1. Broadcasting the radio - radio waves, I would suggest, are not inherently contradictory, so if you're outside the LL the radio waves can happily fly through the border storms (lets ignore the likely storm-interference here)
2. Radio set - you have two options here. If the person broadcasting the radio waves was really determined to get their message out, you might allow them to make a long-range contradiction on the radio they're communicating to. However, there might be issues with selectivity (you might require that they many-on-one LRC for every radio in receiving range), and you might deem that the connection between transmission and receiver via radio waves is too intangible for an LRC to take effect. In current Torg terms, at least, this might not be a difficult LRC depending on what the message is, as the difficult is based on effect value. 
The second option is that the listener exercises a contradiction to turn the radio on. Again, likely to be an LRC but with a difficulty of 0 (ie succeed or disconnect).
3. Communicating a contradictory message - having got the technical difficulty out of the way, the next problem is the potential social axiom violation. If you're trying to exercise a social tool such as Persuasion through the radio, the LRC difficulty would presumably be the effect value of the tool, i.e. the skill level. This is a slightly peverse ruling IMHO - it reflects a clumsiness in the LRC rules where it's the effect that's important not the degree of contradiction. If you aren't trying to persuade (a difficult call really, as any conversation may have an element of passive persuasion) then communicating a contradictory social concept would be a Difficult 0 LRC, subject to disconnection. 
However, with social tools this is going a step too far. It's not the theoretical concept or the vocalised description of the social tool that's contradictory, it's exercising it. You can explain time to an Edeinos all you want, but unless they take that concept and try and use it, there's no contradiction. In describing the concept to them, the communicator is using that Social tool and as such *is* subject to disconnection. But the listener is not using that social tool - in the same way that they wouldn't disconnect if you tried to explain Quantum Theory or True Knowledge to them.

> As for applying technologies which do not use physical touching, such as 
> psychological therapy (ie, group therapy sessions, etc) or studying a written 
> text in a foreign language in an attempt to translate it ... I'd say these are 
> also instances of tool use, but my argument might be harder.  
No, definitely tool use. Psychological therapy is a social tool, written language is a technical tool (IIRC) - although reading is a social tool :)
> > Woulda magical illusion of Godzilla rampaging through Tokyo 
> > cause massive contradiction
No, because it's the creation of the magical effect that is contradictory. Once the illusion is in place, it is real - in the same way that summoning a ball of fire is contradictory, but once it's summoned, that's a real ball of fire and unless there is a World Law that says fire doesn't exist, you better duck....
> > Similar question with passive contradiction with carrying tools. If I start wandering around 
> > Aysle passing out coins made of space-age alloys, what's going to happen?
This is a slightly thornier one. Using the examples of weapons, a steel sword made in NT is made more efficiently but is still just a steel sword and thus non-contradictory. My view would be that if the material is stable, such that you can pass it out, it is only the creation of the item that is contradictory not the existence of the item. If that item has some other characteristics that are contradictory and you try to use those characteristics, then disconnection could happen. Eg that alloy is superstrong, and you try to bend the coin. Your now testing one of its properties and the risk of disconnection returns.
However, I think all of this is non-canonical. It's like wearing armour while not being attacked, its still a passive contradiction. So handing out those coins would cause disconnection. 

> > So how many checks would you need for all the stuff you're carrying
> > on you? My personal view is that the Everlaw of One isn't that picky.
> > You're either contradictory or you're not. It doesn't matter to
> > the Everlaw if you're carrying a single Tech 30 tool or if you're 
> > festooned with biotech, magic items, etc. You're contradictory so 
> > you make a single check at the beginning of the scene.
For passive checks that's correct. When you start actively using something, such as checking your watch, then you're talking about active checks.

> > Back to the tool using you: Let's say you hypnotize an
> > Eidenos (yeah, I use them alot in these examples... what can I say? They have a
> > lot of low Axioms.) Give him some post-hypnotic suggestions, then cut
> > him loose. What happens once one of them is triggered? Long-range
> > contradiction for the mesmerist? Is it a passive contradiction for the Eidenos
> > while he's walking around? 
I think you'd need to make your own judgement on this, but the received view is that hypnotism is merely taking advantage of the way the brain is wired to behave. As such, the tool of hypnotism to plant the suggestion is contradictory, but once planted the suggestion is non-contradictory. It's just a particularly compelling memory (you suddenly remember, the moment you see that cliff, that you've always wanted to jump off cliffs and you have an overwhelming urge now to go and do so). 
Phil


      __________________________________________________________
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html