Archived Discussion TabletopGame / GeniusTheTransgression

Exploding Frogs: Regarding the dispute over the Catalysts and their descriptions: My position on the matter is that the point of the entry is to show how those archetypes fit into mad scientist stereotypes. The one-word descriptions from the sourcebook simply do not do as good a job as a more detailed explanation. The potholes do help to clarify them, but my opinion is that if a given description isn't capable of standing on its own, with or without potholing, something needs to change. Saying that Neid is the Catalyst of Banishment, or Hoffnung is the Catalyst of Vision, will only be meaningful to someone who has already read the sourcebook. Even the statement that Klagen is the Catalyst of Loss can be misleading, since there are many reactions to loss, and sorrow and regret is only one. (Two related responses, if you want to nitpick, but the point stands...) The sourcebook itself points out that a Genius who blames others for their loss, or who seeks to make the world better so that nothing like it will never happen again, could easily Catalyze as Grimm, Hoffnung, or Neid instead. Saying that Neids are characterized by jealousy and bitterness, and Hoffnungs by ambition and hope for the future, gives a much clearer picture even to someone who hasn't yet read Genius, and demonstrates even to a reader unfamiliar with the material why they fit into the tropes in question.

Won Sab: And so we characterize them by the stereotypes, not by semi-random strings of emotions. For example, Hoffnungs are most reminiscent of the genius with the Evil Plan, Klagens are, as their nickname suggests, doomsayers, (Incidentally, it's My Greatest Failure, which is why the sourcebook also points out that Klagens' losses are quite often their own fault. And no, the sourcebook says nothing about them being more likely to become Hoffnungs — wanting to change the world to bring it in line with your grand vision is very different from wanting to make sure something horrible never happens again. You probably wouldn't have found many Klagens helping the Third Reich, but some Hoffnungs were quite notable in their encouragement of the spread of Nazism) and Neids are untrusting, outcast madmen. I'm thinking we may as well ditch the [Catalyst] ([parenthetical]) "[quote]" format; it's not very helpful. Suppose we could do what they've done on the VtR page and just put a slightly extended section in the main article?

Exploding Frogs: Again, you're incorrect on several points. Those aren't "semi random strings of emotions", those are the sentiments and states of mind that are burned into the Genius's psyche at a fundamental level upon Catalyzation, and that stay with him or her throughout his or her life. They're also more detailed and more understandable and meaningful to someone who hasn't read the sourcebook than one-word blurbs like "Banishment", "Vision", or "Loss". Also, the sourcebook does, in fact, say that a potential Klagen may instead Catalyze as Hoffnung, Grimm, or Neid. Page 47, first paragraph:

"Klagens are in fact slightly rarer than other catalysts, since the quiet contemplation necessary to catalyze as a Klagen makes a poor match for the frantic Mania coursing through a new genius' brain. A Klagen's tragedy and her transformation must align just right: an aerospace engineer whose secret love gets dragged screaming into an air intake might instead catalyze as a Grimm (someone else is at fault), a Hoffnung (I can make sure this sort of thing never happens again), a Neid (someone planned this to ruin me), or, in all likelihood, not catalyze at all. The genius' tragedy must occur at the very cusp of a conceptual breakthrough. Perhaps the secret love feared the Klagen's growing obsession with the new technology, and foolishly snuck in to run her own tests. Betrayed, but not vengeful, the aerospace engineer catalyzes in sorrow and regret, but also sudden understanding: a way to perfect the engine, to give the tragedy meaning."

I do, however, agree that putting a detailed profile of the splats up in the main article would be a good compromise. Among other things, one wouldn't have to scroll down to the examples to see what kinds of character archetypes are involved in this game. Could we keep the quotes, though? I always thought that they were a big part of the fun...

Won Sab: Yes, hence semi-random; Grimms aren't always vengeful, for instance. The potholes were meant to add context to the one-word blurbs.

The quotes are indeed a big part of the fun. Should we compose the propositions here or just try and hack it out on the main page?

Exploding Frogs: Compose it here, I think. It'll be a lot less messy to do the constant editing and re-editing here and put the finished product on the main page.

Potholes can help in that regard, yes, but my feeling is that if something can't stand on its own with or without potholing, something has to change. Your Mileage May Vary. Of course, given that we've just agreed to discard that entire format, it's a moot point.

Won Sab: Okay, so, lessee… Shall we start going through the individual Catalysts in order or figure out a particular format first?

Exploding Frogs: I made up these preliminary profiles for the Catalysts. Mostly I just took what was in the examples and went into more detail, but in a format closer to the Vampire page (with the addition of quotes.) I tried to cover the emotions and mindsets that define them, their favored Axioms, and their initial derangements. Feel free to edit whatever you feel needs tweaking:

Each of the five Catalysts is defined by certain emotions and mindsets, which in turn cause them to act out various mad scientist stereotypes that can be summed up in one of the stock mad scientist quotes.

Grimm: Defined by anger and a need for vengeance, justice, and/or the need to just plain vent. Naturally, they’re the best at building weapons of every kind. They’re also prone to being irrational and generally flying off the handle.

"You will pay. You will all pay!”

Hoffnung: Defined by hope and ambition, Hoffnungs seek to improve the world. While this may seem like a good thing on the surface, many of them have a definite Utopia Justifies the Means mentality. Very skilled at transformation. They also have a marked tendency to be extremely arrogant.

“We won't have any of these problems when I… RULE THE WORLD!”

Klagen: Defined by sorrow, loss and regret at some personal tragedy, Klagens are often called Cassandras for their tendency to see further tragedy in the offing and seek to prevent it. Sadly, having all the credibility of MAD scientists, they often live up to the name. They make excellent doctors and repairmen, but perhaps understandably have a tendency towards depression.

"No, you fools, you'll doom us all!"

Neid: Defined by jealousy and bitterness, Neids are driven by the need to “show them all!” When a developing Genius feels rejected by his peers, when he blames his failures on “the man” keeping him down, that’s when a Neid is born. They’re good at mind control and apparently “psychic” powers—the more “out there” fields of mad science in terms of credibility and morality, in other words—and have a frankly unsurprising tendency to be paranoid and untrusting.

"Scoff at me, will you? I'll make them pay! I'll make them all pay!"

Staunen: Defined by curiosity, wonder, and awe, Staunens simply love learning about the universe. They want to know more, they NEED to know more…even about those things that no sane person wants to think about, much less meet in person. As one might expect, they are very good at building scanners and communicators, and prone to fixation and obsession.

"For Science!!"

Also, how do you feel about putting up Foundations and Baramins? They also have a significant impact on characters, and are rather Troperiffic in themselves.

Won Sab: Looking good, though I can't help but feel that if we're going to use some of the pagequotes from the book we may as well use all of them, and I really do think that at least mentioning the "official" terms for the Catalysts (Fury, Vision, Loss, Banishment, Curiosity). A couple little tweaks:

Hoffnung: Defined by hope and ambition, Hoffnungs seek to change the world. While this may seem like a good thing on the surface, many of them have a definite consequentialist mentality. Good at change. They also have a marked tendency to be extremely arrogant.

Go for it.

Exploding Frogs: 'Kay, how's this?:

Grimm, the Catalyst of Fury: Defined by anger and a need for vengeance, justice, and/or the need to just plain vent. Naturally, they’re the best at building weapons of every kind. They’re also prone to being irrational and generally flying off the handle. As one might expect, they tend to take a very...direct approach to problem-solving.

"You will pay. You will all pay!”

Hoffnung, the Catalyst of Vision: Defined by hope and ambition, Hoffnungs seek to change the world. While this may seem like a good thing on the surface, many of them have a definite consequentialist mentality. Good at change and transformation. They also have a marked tendency to be extremely arrogant. Since they frequently have more contact with Muggles than the other Catalysts, they know better than anyone else what effects mere mortals fiddling with their inventions can have.

“We won't have any of these problems when I… RULE THE WORLD!”

Klagen, the Catalyst of Loss: Defined by sorrow, loss and regret at some personal tragedy, Klagens are often called Cassandras for their tendency to see further tragedy in the offing and seek to prevent it. Sadly, having all the credibility of MAD scientists, they often live up to the name. They make excellent doctors and repairmen, but perhaps understandably have a tendency towards depression. They also tend to be the most down to earth and sensible of the Catalysts (at least, insofar as the term "sensible" applies to mad scientists), and often serve as the voice of reason in the collaberatives they join. This makes it all the more unfortunate that they are the least common Catalyst.

"No, you fools, you'll doom us all!"

Neid, the Catalyst of Banishment: Defined by jealousy and bitterness, Neids are driven by the need to "show them all!" When a developing Genius feels rejected by his peers, when he blames his failures on "the man" keeping him down, that’s when a Neid is born. They’re good at mind control and apparently "psychic" powers—the more "out there" fields of mad science in terms of credibility and morality, in other words—and have a frankly unsurprising tendency to be paranoid and untrusting. Not without good reason, of course; some of them seem like magnets for mockery.

"They scoffed at my theories, they laughed at me, they called me mad...Well, we'll see who's laughing now!"

Staunen, the Catalyst of Curiosity: Defined by curiosity, wonder, and awe, Staunens simply love learning about the universe. They want to know more, they NEED to know more…even about those things that no sane person wants to think about, much less meet in person. As one might expect, they are very good at building scanners and communicators, and prone to fixation and obsession. Of all the catalysts, they're the most interested in occult matters.

"For Science!!"

Personally, I think that the current Staunen and Grimm quotes are a bit better than the originals. YMMV, of course. As for the Foundations and Baramins, I don't think they'll require as much editing—it might be possible to just put what's already listed in the examples in a similar format and leave at that. Your thoughts, please?:

The five Foundations, the organisations of non-Lemurian Geniuses, represent various branches and kinds of mad science.

The International Union of Artifice: Known mainly for their Mad Engineering program. The Artificers are the poorest Foundation, with everyone from crazy old tinkerers to creative punk kids, and malcontents in the middle who've started unionising to try and make things easier.

The Fellowship for Manifest Direction: Known mainly for their Mad Psychology program. The Directors are the folks who get together in dark halls and plot how they're going to Take Over the World. They're mostly talk, though they are the most socially capable geniuses, and often assume leadership.

The Center for Circumferential Navigation: Known mainly for their Mad Physics program. The Navigators are fearless daredevils who travel far horizons, fight crime and test the experimental devices. The most recent group to join the Peers, originally the underclass of Lemuria but they've since earned their respect.

The Reformed Society of Progenitors: Known mainly for their Mad Biology program. The Progenitors, mostly composed of transhumanists, monster-makers and "creative" surgeons, are considered a bit crazy even by other Geniuses, and they're recovering from a recent bloody purge when a lot of them turned out to have gone off the deep end. But that totally won't happen again.

The College of Scholastic Theory: Known mainly for their Mad Philosophy program. The Scholastics are the oldest Foundation and the most introspective; they're more interested in figuring out the nature of Mania and other mysteries of the world. They range from librarians and archivists to Adventurer Archaeologists seeking ancient secrets of mad science.

There's also unaffiliated Rogues, Programs that act as minor Foundations (the most prominent being the Asia-based Ten Thousand Fans), and of course, Lemuria.

Lemuria’s Baramins are, by default, the antagonist faction. They haven’t got the memo that yes, they’re MAD, and their theories and inventions only work by cheating reality. They believe that something went wrong with the human race’s scientific and technological development, and they are hellbent on correcting the problem. Each Baramin is defined by where they think humanity went wrong and what must be done to correct the issue.

Atomists believe that all problems are inherently solvable with technology alone. That some of these applications are vastly unethical or flatly impossible does not seem to deter them.

Etherites believe in a grand unified theory of science, one that neatly explains all phenomena and anomalies. Y'know, the sorts of theories scientists had before all that confusing "relativity" and "quantum mechanics". They ignore, explain away, or destroy contradictory evidence, and tend to get a bit… twitchy if someone argues against their theories. They're also the ones with the ray guns.

Mechanists believe in a "clockwork universe", one that is not greater than the sum of its parts, and can be reduced to a few simple natural laws. They also take fatalism to its logical conclusion, refusing to take responsibility for their actions — it's the fault of Their Upbringing. Or The Genetic Lottery. Or The Times. It's no wonder so many of them end up schizophrenic.

Oracles believe they know the moral order of the world, and see everything in absolutes, with predictable results. That their morality is often so outdated as to be unrecognizable does not help.

Phenomenologists believe that reality is subjective, and constantly "redefine their reality" to suit themselves. At its worst, they could honestly believe that no one ought to mind if they rummage around the orphanage for parts. It really doesn't help matters that their Grant makes it nearly impossible to tell when they're lying.

It's not yet certain what the Fatal Flaw of the Numericals, a bunch of disaffected nerds upset that the internet became overrun by... normal people, can be defined as, but it's certainly only a matter of time. They're not a true Baramin yet, but they regularly form and fade away with the times.

Do you think the Foundations and Baramins need quotes, or are they not archetypal enough for that?

Won Sab: The "current" Staunen quote is a little too general to actually work for just them — all of the Geniuses can use that one, technically speaking. As for the Grimm quote… It just doesn't seem right; it seems too "yelly" compared to the original.

I don't think the factions need quotes, but I do think that it should be noted that their various mad science specialties are just what they're known for, e.g. "known for their mad philosophy program."

Also, because I wasn't quite done with the tweaks (was a little rushed last night due to various factors):

Neid, the Catalyst of Banishment: Defined by jealousy and bitterness, Neids are driven by the need to "show them all!" When a developing Genius feels rejected by his peers, when he blames his failures on "the man" keeping him down, that’s when a Neid is born. They’re good at mind control and apparently "psychic" powers — the more "out there" fields of mad science in terms of credibility and morality, in other words — and have a frankly unsurprising tendency to be paranoid and untrusting. Not without good reason, of course; some of them seem like magnets for mockery.

Stuff like that, y'know?

Exploding Frogs: What's wrong with yelly mad scientists? Especially rage-powered mad scientists? It's an inherently hammy archetype, after all. As for the Staunen quote, my reasoning for that is twofold: first, the line saying that each splat "acts out various mad scientists stereotypes that can be summed up in one of the stock mad scientist quotes." "Oh, the things I have seen..." is not one of these stock quotes. "For Science!!" most emphatically is, and fits the Staunen outlook very nicely. Secondly, the other splats aren't as interested in doing science, as such, as Staunens are. Grimms are pissed off at the world, Hoffnungs want to change it, Klagens want to prevent tragedy, and Neids want to "show them all!" It's only the Staunens who are interested in knowledge and inquiry for their own sake, regardless of the consequences, which fits the spirit of the quote best.

As for the mad scientist specialties...is that really necessary? It seems a bit wordy, and doesn't flow quite as well. Though maybe that's just me... These are only brief summaries of the Foundations, after all. Maybe a small note to the effect that Foundations accept Geniuses outside of their specialty, instead?

Since repeated copying the revised versions of the profiles would eat up space fast, I added your Neid tweaks to the second set of profiles. Is there anything else, or will we be just about done once we've come to some sort of agreement about the quotes and Foundation specialties?

Won Sab: The "stock quotes" bit is part of what irritates me — "We won't have these problems[…]" isn't a stock-quote either, but it's been kept for some reason, and neither does the Neid quote (another reason I'm not fond of the "improv'd" Grimm quote is because it's far too similar to the Neid's) — in fact, the only one that seems remotely close to a stock quote is "No you fools, you'll doom us all!"

Well, you don't typically think of Bond villains as mad psychologists, nor do you typically think of drifters as mad physicists. It scans a little better, logic-wise, to say they're known for those programs rather than that they are those practitioners. Noting that they accept Geniuses outside their specialties seems like an afterthought and a phrasing nightmare besides.

Apart from the quotes and the specialties, I do feel that the other notes could use "stuff like that" — like how Staunens tend to be the most interested in the occult, Grimms often speak of their Breakthroughs in religious terms, Hoffnungs tend to know a lot about Havoc… "Stuff Like That."

Exploding Frogs: I see your point about the Grimm quote being similar to the Neid's. Actually, the Neid quote was original a bit different as well; I didn't change it back because the overall sentiment was roughly the same. Hows this?: "They scoffed at my theories, they laughed at me, they called me mad...Well, we'll see who's laughing now!"

On the other hand, I honestly don't see your point about the Hoffnung quote. Maybe we just have different reference pools, but when I think "mad scientist stock quotes", the Well-Intentioned Extremist ranting about why he's going to take over the world (OF COURSE!) definitely comes to mind.

I added the Hoffnung and Staunen trivia you suggested—take a look. However, I'm not sure about the Grimms speaking of their breakthroughs in religious terms—that seemed like a relatively minor note in the sourcebook to me.

"A Grimm's Breakthrough is not simply revenge, however. A Grimm's Catalyst shows her that her act of vengeance was not merely about her and her enemies were not just the ones in front of her. She sees a larger world, one dictated by strength and weakness, power and helplessness, honor and injustice, and chooses to embrace that vision. Many Grimms describe religious-like transformations, as if an Angel of the Lord descended from On High and set itself up within, or instead of, the frail and fallible human soul. Those Grimms who come from scientific fields describe a falling away of the world's vagaries, a severed Gordian Knot that frees the Genius to act with clarity, certainty, and purpose."

I always thought that the emphasis in that paragraph wasn't on religious imagery, but on a fundamental shift in perspective. The line about religious imagery also a single sentence within the entire book that is never brought up again, so it's obviously not a major Grimm theme in the same way that the Staunens' focus on revealing the unknown or the Hoffnungs' need to bring wonders to the masses is.

As for the Foundation specialties...I honestly don't know what to say to that, other than that we clearly see things differently. Since we won't get anywhere unless one of us concedes, though, I made the change. (Oddly, it doesn't seem so bad now that I've actually typed it out. Apparently I was worrying over nothing.)

Won Sab: Personally I'd prefer changing the Grimm quote to changing the Neid quote; something about "you will all pay" seems to suggest a little more of a personal incident than a concern with justice-slash-vengeance-slash-retribution.

I think I may be using a different definition of "stock quotes" — the greater part of "taking over the world" quotes (as in the common thread for all of them, rather than just the well-intentioned ones) are a little more to do with how they're taking over the world than how we "won't have these problems." I'm thinking the bit about stock-quotes might be better off removed in favor of sticking with the implications that the quotes provide about their respective Catalysts.

Yeah, perhaps the Grimm example wasn't the best one to suggest. Perhaps a mention of their very… direct approach?

Exploding Frogs: My definition of a "stock quote" is a stereotyped, archetypal phrase that people tend to automatically associate with certain character types and ideas. For mad scientists, this would be things such as:
"You will pay. You will all pay!" (The vengeance obsessed psycho. Granted, this isn't exclusive to mad science, but these sorts of archetypes have lots of overlap.)
"My God, What Have I Done??!" (The repentant unleasher of horror and tragedy. Possibly something a Klagen might utter during Breakthrough.)
"No, you fools, you'll doom us all!" (Such dramatic phrases as "You Fool!" and "doom us all" are pretty much inherent to mad science.)
"For Science!!!" (Do I really need to explain this one?)
"[Insert monologue here] We won't have any of the problems when I TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!" (If this doesn't pop into your head when you hear "mad scientist" and "Well-Intentioned Extremist" {alongside visions of experiments Gone Horribly Wrong, of course}, I can only say that we clearly have different reference pools.)
"They Called Me Mad!!" (Really, the trope page tells you all you need to know.)

Added the Grimm trivia. Any suggestions for Klagens?

Won Sab: Yes, but as the "Stereotypes" page for Grimms says…

…Which is why I've got a problem with it being too similar to the Neid quote. "You will all pay!" seems more of a "you have fucked with the wrong person today" than "you're not getting away with [insert objectionable thing here]."

Well, Klagens seem (in role and temperament) like the Straight Men of the Catalysts, insofar as one can be both sensible and a mad scientist.

Exploding Frogs: Added the Klagen trivia, as well as a comment that it is therefore unfortunate that they are the least common Catalyst.

The thing about Grimms is that, at the time of their Breakthrough and for some time after, it often is a specific offense they're obsessed with. The thing is, the process of becoming a Genius makes it impossible for them to, on some level, ever stop being angry. That's the point at which it ceases to be about vengeance against one specific thing and starts to be about vengeance against every wrong that ever has been or ever will be committed. And not all Grimms are even about that; whenever the sourcebook mentions Grimms as righteous avengers or seekers of universal justices, it's with qualifiers like "many" or "often", the implication being that their are many Grimms who merely take Disproportionate Retribution for anything that pisses them off. The chief difference between this sort of Grimm and a Neid is that a Neid wants to "Show them all". He wants to prove that he was right and they were wrong, and while he won't be particularly fussed if people get maimed or killed in the process, that's not his primary goal. The Grimm just wants bloody (or fiery, or electric, or acidic) revenge.

Won Sab: Yes. I think I may be being a little unclear on what the distinction I'm trying to make is. Basically, I guess one could say (in a way that is both easily understandable and completely wrong in every way) that a Grimm's ranting is generally situational, whereas a Neid's is typically more specific, and the less-yelly quote seems to lend itself more to the Grimm concept at base than the other one.

Exploding Frogs: Hm. I can't say I see the distinction between the two quotes, myself. I mean, I get what you're saying, but the yelly quote and non-yelly quote seem to differ, to me, only in volume and hamminess. Saying "You will all pay!" is fairly non-specific, after all. If it's really that much of an issue, though, I suppose it can be changed. If that's it, shall we move the profiles to the main article?

Won Sab: To explain, as someone who's regularly irritated by various things; staying at "ham-it-up"-level angriness isn't usually sustainable for long periods of time — it's a waste of breath and a terse word or gesture typically gets the point across that I am angry. It's the Catalyst of Fury, not the Catalyst of Extended Yelling Rants, if you catch my drift. It's a bit of a difficult thing to explain, but the distinction is there.

On that note, yeah, feel free.

Exploding Frogs: Ah. Ahhhhhh. Now I get it. Of course, one would imagine that there are still some things that could push them over the edge into ranting and raving, but that's another matter entirely.

Won Sab: Yep. Like I said, staying at that level's usually not something you can keep going, but, like with anyone else, it remains an option. (This has been, overall, an awesome conversation. Nice to have met you, as it were.)

Exploding Frogs: Mwahahahahaha! It's alive! IT'S ALIVE!!

Yeah, same here.

Won Sab: Wondering if reverting to the old Neid quote was the best idea; it's a bit long and the trope it's potholed to is mentioned in the line itself, while the book's quote gets the point across while retaining brevity. Also, I felt that Sabre_Justice's alteration to the Staunen quote was a legitimate compromise. I mentioned this earlier, but I really do think we should ditch the "stock quotes" part of the preceding paragraph.

Exploding Frogs: I disagree, on both counts. The Neid quote isn't really that long, and the book's Staunen quote isn't especially iconic of mad scientists of any stripe. I'm open to rephrasing the stock quotes thing, but the idea behind it—that each Catalyst can be summed up by stereotypical mad scientist dialogue—is very true and should be kept.

Won Sab: The "new" Neid quote is nineteen words long (and, as mentioned before, mildly redundant given the pothole) and roughly twice the physical length of the other lines. It's admittedly also the longest quote in the book's version, but that's fourteen words in comparison to the Hoffnung's book quote (second-longest) length of ten words. Using "For Science!!" as the Staunen quote, meanwhile, runs into the opposite problem; it's a less than third of the length of the second-shortest book quotes. (Grimm and Klagen, tied at seven words) As with Neid, Staunen's book quote matches up with this to a lesser extent — six words. The book quotes fall within a less extreme length-range, they get the point across about their respective Catalysts, and we're already using three of them in any case. On the one hand we don't want to rehash the sourcebook, but on the other hand these are mostly-one-liners that did (and do) the job and if we can resolve the issue discreetly by changing one line in a paragraph rather than five stand-alone lines then so much the better.

Exploding Frogs: I really don't see your point about the length of the quotes. The Neid quote is still short enough to be only one line, which is the only length-based objection I might felt carried any weight, and I don't see what difference how many words the quotes are makes. It doesn't really make the article significantly more or less readable, and it's not like we have a limited wordcount budget.

My other reason for favoring the non-book quotes, apart from the archetype factor, is simple—they're more fun. The original Staunen quote is much less...what's the word...emphatic? emotional? dramatic?...You get the idea. It's much less "mad sciency", in my mind. It could be the words of any scientist, mad or otherwise, (or, for that matter, any person, mad or otherwise), reminiscing on the many amazing sights they have seen. "For Science!!" actually sounds distinctive of a mad scientist. Similarly, I found the book quotes for the other Catalysts , with the exception of Klagen and Hoffnung, to be rather bland for the archetypes they were supposed to be representing, and spiced them up accordingly.

Won Sab: The current Neid quote is nearly twice the length of the second-longest quote, which I consider problematic mostly for aesthetic reasons. It is also, as mentioned before, redundantly potholed. And since the disparities in formatting stick out more with one-line quotes than with multi-line paragraphs…

You can say the same about any other quote in existence if it doesn't mention specific items — mad scientists aren't the only ones who think the world would be a better place with them in charge, nor do they have a monopoly on furious ranting or ostracism or painful losses. And I do feel I should point out that hammier isn't always better. The majority of the page, in fact, is not all that hammy, even in the examples, which means that going only just-noticeably hammier results in it falling flat. Part of the fun of a Large Ham in an otherwise relatively normal work (or page, as the case may be) is how much it sticks out. A two-word trope title that can apply to any other Catalyst doesn't work as a summary and, thanks to it being a Wiki Word, it suffers from the same problem as the Neid quote.

Exploding Frogs: The exact number of words in a quote and "redundant" potholing are aesthetic issues, however, and thus by their very nature rather subjective. (And in this instance, in my opinion, rather OCD.)

I've mentioned before that For Science! doesn't really apply to the other Catalysts. Neids, Klagens, Grimms, and Hoffnungs all use science (or, more accurately, the fruits thereof) for their own ends; only Staunens are really interested in knowledge and experimentation for its own sake and damn the consequences, which is what really defines the trope.

Mad scientists may not have a monopoly on those things (in fact, when it comes down to it, there are very few tropes mad scientists have a monopoly on), but those quotes are instantly identifiable, in context, as being iconic mad scientist dialogue. The book quotes are not. That is the essential point I am making. The whole point of having the quotes in the first place was to demonstrate how closely the Catalysts adhered to various mad science stereotypes. If the quotes aren't recognizable as those stereotypes, we may as well not have them at all.

Won Sab: Yes. I said they were aesthetic concerns. Yes, it's a tad obsessive-compulsive. However, this does not mean that consistency is not something to be appreciated and aimed for; if we're using three of the five book quotes and the other two that we're using are noticeably different, then this jars. If the tone of the article is understated, then going halfway with a more energetic approach in part of it jars. Subjective or not, aesthetics matter; if they didn't we wouldn't have things like formatting. As-is the quotes are like a color-wheel that goes red-orange-yellow-green-purple-blue, or a scale that goes do-re-mi-fa-so-ti-la-do. It's not-so-subtly off.

The current Neid quote also has other problems. First, we've got the questionable prosaic decision of including two words with the root "laugh" in very close proximity to each other. Second, we've got "they scoffed at my theories" and "they laughed at me" in the same sentence when the implication and tone of the line suggests that mentioning one of these takes the other as a given. Thirdly, we've got the paragraph above the quote, the implications of the quote and the trope the quote is potholed to all telling us already that "they called me mad." This is massively redundant, regardless of whether or not you think I know what the word means. Even if for whatever reason you take issue with the book's Neid quote, the fact remains that the current quote is repetitive, unnecessarily long, and awkward.

Looking at the various aspects of For Science!, the trope seems to be answering the question of "Why do this?" more with "Why the hell not?" than "To learn things." Staunens fixate, remember; contrast that with this:

Staunens have been found rotting in their seats because they spent too much time staring at the same bit of spacetime. This is generally circumvented by collaboration, but the stereotype of a mad scientist is typically solitary or accompanied by a handful of minions, and so this information is important; plenty of Staunens find it difficult to move on to another subject or question. For Science! is taking the question of motivation and providing no answer, not "for money," not "for revenge," not even "for its own sake." For Science! is a "who cares?" not a "because it's there."

In other words, it's far too short, what you're assuming it means fits the Catalyst inconsistently, and what it actually means doesn't have anything to do with the Catalyst itself. "Excitingness" does not take precedence over brevity or accuracy.

Except that you asked if we could keep the quotes in, citing them as "part of the fun." This was back when four of the five quotes from the book were in use on the examples-section profiles, with the fifth quote mostly going uncontested for long periods of time before someone or other switched it back and forth and back again. I am ambivalent about the quotes being used at all; my concern is primarily with consistency. You don't read an informational brochure and expect it to turn into a sensationalist sales pitch.

Exploding Frogs: I don't really want to respond with a Let's See YOU Do Better!...but in all honesty, that's more or less what my counterargument is, albeit in a less antagonistic spirit. I'll readily agree that my replacement quotes are probably inadequate to the task, and I haven't been defending them so much as opposing the quotes from the sourcebook. Let's compromise: you (or anyone but me, really) come up with some alternative quotes that are neither excessively hammy and out-of-theme nor excessively bland and out-of-archetype,and we'll call it a day. Is this acceptable?

Won Sab: It is. Composition still go on here?

Exploding Frogs: Sure. Go ahead.

Incidentally, I recently reread the For Science! page myself, and I think that you're putting too much emphasis on that one line about "losing interest in documenting what can be done with those methods." It's not that the mad scientist is doing it for the lulz; it's that he doesn't care about the long-term consequences of his research. Imagine a Staunen who becomes obsessed with documenting the interactions of our universe with some kind of Lovecraftian alternate reality, heedless of the possible benefits and dangers of such an undertaking. He'll document his methods obsessively—and do absolutely nothing outside of that, including researching the practicality or potential applicability of his discoveries. This is what I regard as the key idea in that article:

This is one of the classic motivations for many a Science Is Bad movie, the researcher will seek knowledge for its own sake rather than to better the world; usually this simple curiosity will evolve into "ambition" and "hubris" before long, as caution and restraint are thrown out the steel-barred window.

This seems to me to be a very Staunen sentiment. That's not to say "keep the 'For Science!' quote"—we've already agreed upon formulating alternate quotes, after all. I just wanted to explain my reasoning, and I thought it might be something to keep in mind.

Won Sab: But, on the other hand, ambition and hubris are more of a Hoffnung conceit. Ah, well.

Think we should go for a theme other than "mad scientist stock quotes"?

The Kings Raven: Sorry, I didn't know there was discussion here. Anyway Won Sab asked for details so here's the list:

weapons of every kind. as four different links strikes me as unnecessary, its enough to say they build weapons without a long list and especially such an incomplete list.

Neid: The focus on "psychic" powers and the mention of being more out there in terms of morality (aside from the fact Grimms with their Katastrofi are just as bad) misses the important part: its about Control, "If they wont stop laughing and respect my Genius I'll MAKE them". I'm also not too keen on the way Butt-Monkey is used, it says in the trope the But Monkey "generally doesn't do anything to earn all the crap that happens to him", the point with Neids is that by seeking out attention and respect against good sense they do earn what happens to them.

I really think we should be sticking to the quotes from the sourcebook.

Staunen: Go Mad From The Relivation is usually the cause of a Staunen's catalyst, its position in the paragraph implies differently. Again I really think we should be sticking to the quotes from the sourcebook.

Atomists: Um, where dose it say they're Determinators?

Etherites: We probably shouldn't imply they're against relativity and quantum mechanics. Firstly a quantum mechanic Etherite is a perfectly valid character and secondly its the Mechanists who hate the confusing new science and want things to be simple, like it used to be. Etherite theories can be as complex as any particle physics.

Numericals: Wouldn't their fatal flaw be a mixture of elitism and tunnel vision? Only the Elite are worthy and to be Elite you must be an ubergeek, "sorry Motzart we don't value "your" kind of intelligence"

Won Sab: That's why you check. You think that kind of overhaul was done without discussion?

1. Weapons: Three of the four are common technological weapons. The fourth was to fit thrown weapons in there. Those four are the categories of weapon offered by Katastrofi. They are a complete abridged list, unless you can find a better thrown-weapon trope.
2. Neid: Except that not every Neid uses Epikrato for those purposes and… ugh. Look, rehashing the sourcebook isn't necessary; the page is for basic notes and your change resulted in a sentence that made little sense. Hedge Trimming is an art — you can't just stick stuff in and expect it to scan. As for Butt-Monkey, The Chew Toy doesn't fit either (nor does any other trope for unfortunate people that I can find) and their misfortunes aren't stated to be due to their search for acceptance. (Which, again, not all of them have. Some just want to prove "them" wrong — that's not so much an acceptance-quest as a show-them-all-motivation. Some of them might just want to be right.)
3. Atomists: Bonus to Havoc dice equal to Resolve. Also the fact that they're still doing what they do despite the mentioned problems.
4. Etherites: Do I need to point out where they get their name from? Or how some of those theories boil down to "Jews did it"? Mechanists may prefer "let God sort it out" to anything complex, but remember that Etherites are the ones with the unified theories.
5. Numericals: We don't know enough about them to say.
6. Breaking up by mini-paragraph clutters the page. Spelling things incorrectly drives some people up the wall. Making sure that neither of these things persists would be greatly appreciated.

Exploding Frogs: Since Won Sab already said most of what I was going to say (and a few things I wasn't) I have only a couple additional points to make: We do not need to keep the quotes from the sourcebook, especially when there are other quotes that fit even better for our purposes. A significant portion of the discussion above is devoted to this topic; please look there for details. In summary, we're using steretypical, archetypal mad scientist quotes; the "official" Staunen and Neid quotes didn't quite make the cut in that capacity. And, as Won Sab so eloquently put it, rehashing the sourcebook isn't necessary.

The way I see it, it's no coincidence that Epikrato's Wonders are the most questionable by mortal science. The entire concept of the Neid is a scientist whose insane theories lead to him being ostracized by his former peers and his quest to "show them all"; that his favored Axiom involves the creation of things things like weather control machines, telekinesis, mind control rays, and other "out there" devices only furthers this image. The idea of control and making them listen is really a secondary theme, especially considering that, to a properly educated Genius, you have to be Unmada to think that it's even possible to convince normals of your theories in the first place.

Seconding the request for grammar and punctuation clean-up. Aside from being very irritating to certain kinds of people (myself included), it severely undermines your credibility when otherwise intelligent suggestions are riddled with errors that a grade-school English teacher would never tolerate.

The Kings Raven:

Actually I wouldn't be surprised to see this sort of edit done without discussion, the previous rehashes of the splats were done by you (Won Sab not Exploding Frog) without any discussion.

1. Weapons: But why have any links for Weapons? Its offtopic and as I previously said its hardly an accurate list.
2. Neid: A LOT more Neids use Epikrato for control than for "Psychics". Mental Domination can be done with nanotech, "Telekinesis" is as easily an application of magnetics or gravatonics as an enhanced human brain. Saying its about control may be rehashing the sourcebook but saying Neids are into psychic powers has no evidence beyond Epikrato being their favoured Axiom. For Butt-Monkey if you can't find a Trope that fits use none at all; no trope is better than a wrong trope. Finally while its not explicitly stated their misfortunes are due to their personality, personality is the only thing separating the Catalysts. They literally are a personality type, what else could it be?
3. Atomists may get more bonus from Resolve but they're still more likely to favour Intelligence over Resolve. To qualify as a Determinator you need literally superhuman Resolve and I assure you its a rare Atomist with 5 dots until you get to power levels like Those Fools At The Institute (Speaking of Seattle, the Atomist has a Resolve of 2, joint lowest in Seattle). Still doing what they do applies equally to all Geniuses. In short aside from the fact their grant uses Resolve there just isn't anything in the sourcebook to say they have notably more resolve than other Geniuses and even less to say they reach the explicitly superhuman levels of a Determinator
4. Etherites: That doesn't address my point at all, there is nothing in the Etherites writeup that says they favour simple theories, some might ignore subatomic particles or relativity but just as many explain how the Luminiferous Aether is responsible for both. Arturo Banger's theory is not in any way shape or form "Jews did it": His Theory (capital T) is described thus "he developed a unified theory of medicine involving structuralism, force field physics, and Lamarckian biology." He also has a theory explaining why no one else knows the truth and that's where the conspiracy comes in.
5. Mini-Paragraphs. Layout is subjective, I myself find whitespace makes reading easier.

Epikrato wonders are not the most questionable by mortal science in either sense (I'm not sure if you meant morally or scientifically). Morally they're edged out by Katastrofi: Epikrato at its worst is an Obligation 2. Simply firing a doom cannon at a city is an Obligation 1 Transgression. Scientifically Epikrato is as plausible as you make it, a "happy ray" is pretty far out but a "happy pill" is not, mundane science has created anti-depressants and recreational drugs. It would take a real expert to realise a Wonderous equivalent (especially one with the In Pill Form variable) is impossible.

Won Sab: Five lines as compared to converting an entire section. And need I remind you what a bad idea it was when you went and locked up the page for three hours because you wanted to address each individual point on the Baramins? In the "edit reason" field?

1. Thing is, your concerns with accuracy don't scan. Your insistence upon the article being absolutely correct robs the article of brevity and makes it look rambling and unplanned. And off-topic? It's what they can make. Make of that what you will.
2. Cite or gtfo. And personality is not the same thing as behavior, which is what the "search for acceptance" that you're insisting is a universal Neid concept happens to be.
3. Existence of the Peerage ("You can't go back, and you certainly can't go back and help.") and the fact that they're the ones that are focused on the all-solving technology.
4. "The Luminiferous Aether did it" does not counter the point that they're unified theories, nor does it take into account the state of distress some of them go into upon contact with information contradictory to their worldview-slash-theory.
5. Your own preferences do not excuse rapidly rendering the page unreadable to everyone else. Know why we got so few people using this page before? Part of it, I suspect, is because it was really fucking long.

Finally, "Hideous experiments on unwilling human beings" and "Scientific torture" can involve literally any Axiom with a creative Genius — even Apokalypsi can be put to cruel uses. ("Now, I'm going to stab you every time you think of pink elephants… So don't think of pink elephants, okay? Because I'll know if you think of pink elephants.") Epikrato can, with enough talent, be used to force mass suicides among other things. And the funny thing about mad science is that it's mad science. There's a thing called the FDA. Or, if you prefer, the EMEA. You can address these points when you've stopped failing the scientific method.

Exploding Frogs: "Scientifically Epikrato is as plausible as you can make it"? Haha. Ahahaha. Because weather machines, quantum probability manipulators and psychic powers are all so much more credible than genetic engineering, super scanners, and advanced AI. All of the latter? Things that we can reasonably expect to have in some form at some point in the future. The products of Epikrato? Not so much. And as for morality, Epikrato has the most morally dubious Wonders that you can easily get away with. Sure, the aforementioned doom cannon will drop your Obligation in a hurry, but if word that you're building it gets out (and good luck trying to conceal such a vast undertaking), the entire Inspired community will be jumping down your throat. Mind-control devices, on the other hand, are unobtrusive and widely accepted, if of mildly ill repute, and thus are an easy path to slowly eroding your Karma Meter. And quite apart from that, Katastrofi produces weapons, which are morally neutral in of themselves. You can justify using a Ray Gun in self-defense; it's a lot harder to justify using a Mind Control device to rob someone else of their free will. (Also, you say "Obligation-2 transgression" like that's a mild thing. This is on the same level as rape, serial killing, and deliberately spreading plagues.)

A single isolated case does not dictate the entire Baramin. There are always exceptions to the rule, and that particular Atomist is thoroughly depressed, demoralized, and without any real purpose in life. And who can blame her, really? The Atomists taken as a whole do fit the Determinator trope very well.

From page 307 of Genius:

"The Lumeniferous Ether was the best idea of the 19th century, and it’s a shame that it turned out to be wrong. The Ether explained the transmission of light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation, it provided an absolute frame of reference for cosmology, and it was demolished over the course of about twenty years, leaving humanity with a much stranger universe than we had ever expected. The Etherites cannot let go. It is usually the Ether itself that they see as both true and necessary, an absolute reference frame that nonetheless provides limitless possibility for discovery, but different Etherites seize on different self-evident physical absolutes, from baffling subatomic particles to all-explaining biopsychic fields. They see a great explanation for everything lurking just around the corner of sight, and despair of those lesser minds who cannot see how far they have strayed from the truth."

It was Einstein's theory of relativity that demolished the theory of the Lumeniferous Ether, and it has never yet been succeeded by a theory capable of resolving the various inconsistencies and anomalies science has since discovered. Indeed, quantum mechanics has introduced far more questions than it answers. These two systems of thought, more than any other, represent what Etherites hate most in the world.

The problem here is that the examples you cite are all very specific, very extreme exceptions to the general rule. Since these profiles are brief summaries of the splats and organizations taken as a whole, that makes these examples interesting but largely irrelevant. Epikrato Mind Control in pill form? Yeah, it's possible, but for every Neid who researches super-happy-pills, there are going to be ten more with weather machines, telekinesis gauntlets, and probability drives. Demoralized, weak-willed Atomists? They're out there, but if they were more common than the fanatical techno-fascists, the Baramin wouldn't have come into being in the first place. City-frying doom cannons? If those were anything but vanishingly rare, even for masters of Katastrofi, there would be no Masquerade, and quite possibly no Earth. You're getting far too hung up on specific examples when what we're going for is a general overview.

Won Sab: I'd like to take this line of thought a step further and point out something I've noticed over the months of corresponding with the guy; Raven, you seem to be having immense difficulties separating the possibility of someone doing something with the likelihood of them doing something. The nature of the Axioms means that being able to build an energy sword also enables the creation of a Death Ray, a bio-bomb, or a woodcutting axe. That does not mean that everyone with Katastrofi is going to build a Doomsday Device the minute they get a chance. As I pointed out on the RPG.net thread, if you have to contrive situations where you're right, you're not proving anything in a general sense. All you've proven is that those circumstances can come about, which is not the same as them being common or likely.

The Kings Raven:

1. Then find a way to be both accurate and brief, accuracy is more important than brevity.
2. Which of the several points raised do you want citations for?
3. Where as Lemuria on the other hand is “you can go back, its your duty to help” even the Peers don't all get the message.
4. That they're unified theories doesn't counter the point that they're not simple or old fashioned. The state of distress is covered a sentence after the one we're debating.

Any Axiom can be used for an Obligation 1 Transgression, but its the Genius's sick mind that's behind it using Wonders as a tool, only a Katastrofi doomsday device in of itself is an Obligation 1 Transgression.

Exploding Frogs: Here are a couple of counter examples: Faster than light travel (Skafoi 4), creating mass from nothing (Metaptropi 3+). Epikrato 4 is out their but it is not the least plausible of all the Axioms. Your point about weapons being morally neutral while mind control isn't makes no sense, it is exactly as easy to justify using mind control as it is to justify using a weapon: self defence. Arguably if someone is attacking you using mind control to make them turn themselves in to the proper authorities is better than shooting them.

There is nothing in the source-book saying they're more determined than the other Lemurians or the Peers who never got the message that you can't go back and help. That one example is literally the only time Atomist's resolve ever came up.

You've completely misread the Etherites, they don't hate “the various inconsistencies and anomalies science has since discovered” because it opposes their Unified Theory. For the most part they think they have succeeded in creating a theory capable of resolving all the inconsistencies and confusing phenomena. The catatonia or crazy fanaticism only comes later when someone tries to make them see they haven't.

Examples are supposed to be specific, and there is no general rule saying Epikrato is by default psychic. Nanotechnology, gas grenades, psychological profiling, sonic triggers are all possible “sciency” Epikrato wonders. There is also no stated “general rule” that Atomists are notably more resolved than other Lemurains. Sure they're trying to build a techno-utopia but the Etherites are trying to make their theories accepted science and we all know how stupid that is, Oracles are trying to build a moral utopia, Phenomenologists started off trying to change the history text books and are now trying to change worldwide perceptions of reality. P.S. Rank 3 wonders are way more common than Rank 4 wonders. Weather machines and probability manipulators are going to be rare.

This stuff would be a lot easier to talk about if you linked it to actual examples (and that RPG.net thread is huge). Given the mention of doomsday devices I presume your referring to my comparison of Epikrato and Katastrofi's effects of Obligation. That was a deliberate choice to compare the worst of both, using your own words just because sexual mind control can come about doesn't mean its likely but I included that too. So its not a “contrived example where I'm right” but putting both Axioms through the exact same question “what is the worst transgression you can commit with this Axiom and no external factors”. Without that bit all Axioms can be Obligation 1 transgressions and bizarrely the worst of the worst is Apokolypsi 1 to launch nuclear missiles.

Won Sab: Actually, I was referring to your bizarre assumption back in October that because someone specialized in explosives for demolition purposes that somehow meant they were more likely to go crazy and kill everyone than if they specialized in, say, cosmetics, just because they'd be able to build those Wonders better. (The Fellowship debate.) "No external factors" would be nothing else around, which would mean just about the worst you could do with any of your Wonders is implant them in yourself. People are an external factor. Your Wonders are an external factor. The universe is not that predictable, especially in a fiction setting where things are often determined by dice rolls. (Apokalypsi 1, I am fairly certain, does not work that way. You think everyone who set up the nuclear launch systems hasn't seen the movies and read the books where that very thing happens? a) It makes no sense to hook up access to the most destructive weapons known to mankind to the network that literally anyone can access, and b) As with so many of your other points, if it's so easy, why the fuck hasn't somebody done it before?)

1. We have the sourcebook for cases of high accuracy. We are making Cliff's Notes, not Dissecting Genius.
2. "A LOT more Neids use Epikrato for control[…]" And since it is physically impossible for you to actually cite accurate information on this due to the nature of a role-playing setting…
3. My bringing up the Peerage was meant to counter your "every Genius still does what the Atomists do" statement.
4. A point which all of nobody actually brought up. (You are not debating. You are arguing and losing. Badly.)

…I'm sorry, what? What? In what way is owning a Devastator Cannon a sin against Obligation? Hell, you can make people kill themselves or torture themselves with Epikrato 2 and beyond, and you're bitching about a little potential destruction? Again, possibility and likelihood. Pay attention to what people say. (Also, the only things we have guarantees are common are Rank-1 Wonders. It's a wide world.)

Hyper-specific examples prove nothing about the general state of a group. They are what we call contrived. You're committing the sharpshooter fallacy. You committed the No True Scotsman fallacy several times in the thread in regard to scientists. You've affirmed the consequent (referred to by myself elsewhere as committing the 'square-rectangle fallacy') a number of times. You have repeatedly accused me of ad hominem for saying an idea of yours was stupid or bad. If this were an isolated incident I'd be wary of committing the fallacy fallacy, but in this case six months of evidence piles up to show you just don't seem to have a complete grasp of how logic works.

The Kings Raven: Care to link to that? No external factors means that you're committing the Transgression by using the Wonder, rather than using the Wonder to make it possible to do something else and that something else being the Transgression. I know we frequently misunderstand each other but that one was obviously not what I meant just from context. Apokolypsi dose not need a network “anyone can access”: Scan the Nuclear Football when its outdoors. Or wait until a nuclear submarine comes to dock, those things have radio communication to the outside world which gives the cunning Genius a way in. The reason no one's done this before is because its a fault in the rules. Just like the fact that for Railgun/Orbital style weapons Skafoi is far more dangerous than Katastrofi.

1. On the country, I can cite two separate passages that when taken together don't prove “beyond reasonable doubt” but do suggest “on the balance of probabilities” Neids are into “Control” not “Psychic Powers”. The first is on the Neid section itself, page 50: “At the end of the day, if they will not listen, the Neid will make them listen.” that says a lot about motive but little about the pseudo-scientific method used. The second is from the Perfected Vision Institute the Fellowship that's all about psychic powers, on page 390 it lists the common member Catalysts as Hoffnung and Staunen not Neids. I also point out that there's no citations for suggesting Neids are into psychic powers in the first place.
2. And then I replied by pointing out that while the Peerage as an organisation is against what Atomists do, not all members got the message while Lemuria as an organisation is all about what the Atomists do. Atomists are not unique because they try to change the world.
3. Actually the point that Etherite Theories are not simple and old fashioned was the one I brought up at the very start: “secondly its the Mechanists who hate the confusing new science and want things to be simple, like it used to be. Etherite theories can be as complex as any particle physics.”. Losing was a inevitability, as a latecomer to the debate the burden of convincing is on me and neither of us ever convince the other.

Again you misinterpreted my argument in a way that borders on the implausible. Its using a Doom Cannon as designed (against a population centre) that's the Obligation 1 Transgression. And actually its stated in the sourcebook that the bulk of the population makes rank 1-3 wonders (p116 under Scholastic Organisation, unless you have evidence to suggest Scholastics are atypical)

Specific examples are used to reinforce general points about a group, I brought Argentine up in parenthesis alongside more general points about the Atomist group: Intelligence is still prioritised above Resolve (which under Wo D character creation rules means not that much Resolve) and they're not the only group trying to build a Utopia.

I committed the Scotsman fallacy in the same sense as I would by hanging an argument on the assumption that medical doctors know how to heal the sick. Its true that the formal definition of a medical doctor doesn't include competence but no one gets kicked out of the debating society for assuming it. I didn't call ad hominem for you attacking my ideas, I called it for what your doing now, a whole paragraph about my debating skills without a single mention of the actual argument.

Won Sab: Clearly that's what "external factors" means. How are external factors important to this? Hell, what is the point of this line of thought? (You still haven't answered the question of "if it's so easy, why hasn't it been done?") (No. Skafoi has a maximum speed and rolls to hit and to damage separately and involves ramming. Katastrofi, on the other hand, is built for damaging things. You can disintegrate things with Katastrofi and it doesn't need a running start to do it.)

1. That's flavor text explaining why it's their favored Axiom; that's roughly like saying that Grimms can build weapons because they're angry.
2. Cite. And if it involves any permutation of the phrase "they're still doing mad science" it will go poorly for you.
3. And your claim that the Mechanists want things to be "like it used to be" can be applied to any of the Baramins, for varying values of "like it used to be." Your arguments rapidly become meaningless when you refuse to provide concrete evidence that is not either so general or so specific as to be rendered useless for the purposes of general statements about specific groups. "These polygons have angles" is no more useful than "This triangle is blue, isosceles and right."
4. Spelling. Grammar. Correct word choice. Use them. "Contrary" is not spelled with a "u."

Except that "doom cannon" in this scenario is a rough approximation of "Wave-Motion Gun." It can be applied to anything. (The only evidence from the paragraph in question is the fact that Scholastics who can build Rank-4 and Rank-5 Wonders are given special titles. That's not proof of the commonality of any particular type of Wonder.)

And so far you've only provided too-far-out and too-close-up examples to actually say anything.

No, you committed the fallacy in refusing to accept any definition of "scientist" that includes "will not accept the fact that a box moved in an unmonitored room as proof of telekinesis," "will not be convinced of the scientific validity of a process that is not and cannot be explained or reproduced satisfactorily," or "does not follow 'safety procedures' such as 'only I and my assistants are allowed to touch it' without suspicion of fraud" in any way. And the funny thing about ad hominem is that it's allowed. I addressed your other points in the other paragraphs; the existence of the paragraph doesn't invalidate any of my other statements, and so my points remain valid. I've seen you do this for six months.

Exploding Frogs: ...Okay, both of you really need to relax. Differences of opinion and abuses of logic, no matter how flagrant, do not warrant active abuse of the dissenter. That applies to both of you. Won Sab, I may agree with your points overall, but is it really too much to ask for you to express them civilly? Raven, same to you, minus the agreement with your side of the argument. (On that note, YMMV, but I believe that Genius was written under the assumption that the reader would read between the lines, rather than taking everything set down in the book completely literally. Our differing interpretations of the Neid's reasons for favoring Epikrato are a prime example of this.)

You know, looking back, this whole thing is reaching epic levels of ridiculousness. At this point we've nearly doubled the length of the discussion page in an argument over the composition of four sentences.

Won Sab: Apologies. Six months of this tends to wear on the nerves. (Oh, this is nothing. There've been two other threads like this one since the creation of the discussion page. They were even longer. It suggests a certain deficiency in both of the regular participants.)

The Kings Raven: Actually my deficiency is that I enjoy debating, six months hasn't really began to wear on me. Exploding Frog of course is the voice of sanity, on a thread about Mad Scientists this means you are hear-by excommunicated ;)

Well if you want to use the Exact Words definition of "External Factors" you're right, but given how obviously pointless the exact words definition makes that sentence is it so much to ask for you to either ask for clarification or use a common sense first approach? If you check this thread you'll notice I've been asking for clarification or if its not to much trouble posting a response to both possible interpretations.

Skafoi: An Inspiration 1, Skafoi 3 Areospace vehicle baring speed modifications has a maximum speed of 7500 mph. That's 3352.8 meters per second according to google calculator. To convert that into Acceleration you take the initial speed (3352.8mps) – the final speed (0mps) divided by the time taken to decelerate (nearly instant since you're ramming the ground, so lets say 1 second). Acceleration is equal to 3352.8mps per second. Finally lets give it a (tiny) weight of 100kg. Add this all into Newton's classic F=MA and you get F = 100 * 3352.8. A force of 335280 Newtons. Slightly more than a Little Boy Nuclear bomb.

As for the car crash rules you refer to, you get an extra die for every 10 mph, so this 75000 mph jet is rolling above 750 dice, that's both ludicrously underpowered for reality and far more powerful than anything else a Genius can build. (I actually asked Moochava about this a while back, he agreed it was a problem but didn't have a solution on hand, maybe something will turn up in 1.1)

1. Which was my point, saying Neids are into Control rather than physic powers is like saying Grimm's are into Weapons not mining equipment.
2. On page 316 it says outright that Lemuria is as an entire organisation dedicated to getting mankind back on the “right path”, I quote: “And the idea that Lemuria represented, that humanity had Not all the Lemurians died during the last Invisible War. And the idea that Lemuria represented, that humanity had gone wrong and needed to be led back to the right path, hadn’t been killed by killing a bunch of old conspirators and mechanical serpent-gods.”
3. That's because there is no concrete general evidence to suggest that Etherites have complicated theories that include or at least explain the data behind Relativity & Quantum Mechanics. There is also no evidence to suggest that they don't include Relativity & Quantum Mechanics in their theories. The only concrete evidence we have is that these are unified theories and that gives no information on what they actually include. I have provided what evidence there is be it very general or very specific to say they include Relativity & Quantum Mechanics, you haven't provided anything at all to argue that they don't include then.

With Doom Cannon I'm referring to the sample wonder or similar devices, and it specifically says that reviewers make up the bulk of the population.

And I told you at the time, that room was designed specifically to ensure that the only possible explanation for the box moving was telekinesis. Its locked, sealed and the researchers stand guard outside the door. Please come up with an alternative for how that box might move.

Exploding Frogs, may I ask what lines you read between to come to the idea that Neid's Epikrato Wonders are based on psychic powers, rather than chemical drugs, nanotechnology or any other possibility.

Exploding Frogs: The point I was making wasn't that they were based on psychic powers or anything like that. (Incidentally, you seem to have seized on that one phrase, when really the scientific implausiblity of Epikrato encompasses a number of other concepts.) It's that Epikrato's Wonders, collectively, have the least basis in non-mad science, and that this is more central to the Neid's theme than a need for control. That "collectively" is a very important distinction to make. As you've demonstrated, an individual Wonder of Epikrato could well be fairly plausible, and Wonders of other Axioms can be blatantly impossible. (The same, naturally, applies to the moral dimension.) However, as I've been trying to stress, in making these profiles, we're making general overview of what the Catalysts and organizations are like, and what the Axioms they employ are capable of. The overall picture is much more important, in this case, than a few outliers. You can post the exceptions to the rule in the examples, if you like, (the above example with the Skafoi 3 aerospace vehicle sounds like it would be a particularly entertaining example of Ramming Always Works) but the profiles themselves, for the sake of clarity and readability, ought to stay as they are.

Also, it's you who are missing the point about Etherites, relativity, and quantum mechanics. It's not that they hate those theories and refuse to incorporate them into their grand unified theories of How Everything Works, it's that those two theories demolished the unified theories that already existed, and no fully consistent theory has yet been formulated that is capable of taking their place. The exact phrasing—"the kinds of theories scientists had before relativity and quantum mechanics—refers not to any feelings Etherites may or may not have on those two theories (though many Etherites do favor outdated models of how the universe works and blame vast conspiracies and misunderstandings for why they are no longer accepted, they are not necessarily representative of the Baramin) but rather that they favor the kinds of theories that quantum mechanics and relativity have, thus far, invalidated, and seek to make new unified theories of science—regardless of whether or not the data actually supports these theories.

Regarding your locked and sealed room telekinesis "experiment": Any lapse in observation introduces innumerable unknown variables into the equation, thus invalidating any data that can be gleaned from such an undertaking. Only if the researchers were actually observing the box the entire time would it be considered a valid experiment, under the modern scientific method. Mad scientists can accept such an experiment, because their Wonders can have such strange requirements as "does not function if observed." In mundane science, however, there is no rational explanation for why the box cannot be telekinetically moved just as easily with observers as without, and removing observers allows the experiment to become tainted by unknown, and thus non-repeatable, phenomena.

Won Sab: Context matters for everything, Raven, and so unless a Wonder has some bizarre fault like "can only be used on a population center" there is no guaranteed "as intended" use for Wonders that goes beyond what the Wonder does. That doom cannon could as easily be mounted on a space center and used to blow up asteroids. As Exploding Frogs said, morally neutral. (You still haven't answered the question, by the way.)

Except that those same rules call for two rolls; there's the damage roll, (750 dice is borderline infinite as far as the system is concerned; assuming law-of-large-numbers that's an average of 225 points of Structure or Health in a single hit before Durability or Armor, even without 10-Again) and then there's the roll that you have to aim with. And that is limited to twenty-five dice tops without situational modifiers, assuming Dexterity, Drive and Handling of 10. And that's assuming your target has no Defense or Dodge value to speak of; if you're trying to accurately hit something while moving at over 7500 mph, you'd better hope it doesn't move. (Also, the real-world calculations are vastly unnecessary for the purposes of this conversation; game mechanics are what we're talking about and so game mechanics are what we use.)

1. Except that "implements of destruction" is typically taken to mean "weapons," where as "implements of control" does not usually translate to "I'm going to make people listen to me" enough for a meaningful association to be made.
2. Yes. What does this have to do with my corresponding previous point?
3. See Exploding Frogs's points.

Except that this is, again, a pointlessly general statement. If we assume even distribution then Rank 1-3 Wonders make up 60% of the Wonder population. If we assume the distribution is skewed towards the earlier Ranks (a reasonable assumption) then that number becomes greater. The actuality is that there's a lot of Geniuses and plenty of them dismantle their old Wonders to make "space" for the Mania requirements of higher-Ranked ones or otherwise upgrade their lower-Rank ones. (See Automata, Katastrofi, Prostasia.) In other words, apart from "there are probably a lot of Rank-1 Wonders out there" we can't really make any assuredly accurate statements on how common different Ranks of Wonders are.

Fairies. Cthulhu. Random fluctuations in the space-time continuum. A gust of wind. As I said in the thread, just because the box is in a different place doesn't mean the guy in the next room moved it with his mind.

Frogs: What's even sadder is that this example isn't even involving mad science; it's involving a psychic from the Second Sight splat, which happens to include rules for using your more obvious powers under skeptical observation. Just being in an environment where people strive to think in a rational manner (like a laboratory or a college classroom or, in fact, just about any controlled conditions) incurs a -3 penalty to attempts to use powers. Despite this, Raven insists that consistent replicable results can be achieved within a controlled environment, thereby "proving" the psychic powers exist.

Exploding Frogs: That might be possible in our universe (assuming psychic powers and the supernatural actually do exist in some form) or in whatever homebrew setting you might come up with, but canon WoD materials are quite clear about the fact that modern science is incapable of explaining or even acknowledging the paranormal as it manifests in the World of Darkness. That's a big part of the central theme of the setting—the idea that no matter how much you learn or how many mysteries you uncover, there will always be more unanswered questions. It's one reason why it's called the World of Darkness.

(On a more humorous note, I was not aware that there was a meaningful difference between fairies and Cthulhu.)

Won Sab: On a related note, funny thing about Wonders; they start at "pretty damn awesome" and work their way up. With nothing but "blank," "average" Rank-1 Wonders you can hack the Pentagon, automate almost any process, remote-control devices, cure AIDS, deal Bashing damage with a damage bonus about twice the average amount, disguise anything within reason, provide a crapload of security, and/or move rather fast.

Speaking of which; Raven, the nuclear football doesn't work that way. It provides information like where the launch sites are and what numbers to call. Actually launching nukes with the football would require you to somehow impersonate both the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense; like just about everything else that involves nuclear weapons, it's a two-man system. As for nuclear submarines… I'm fairly certain that at least most of those have been decomm'd and they can reload on supplies in the middle of the ocean in any case. Radio communications also wouldn't give you a way to control the launch mechanisms for the missiles that are contained onboard the submarine. You need Epikrato for that. And then there's the matter of concealment penalties; every quarter-inch of heavy metal — which includes transition metals like iron — reduces effective range by one step and nulls one success. And since these are submarines, which have to be built to withstand ocean-level pressures, you can bet on getting at least four steps of reduction and an effective Durability of 4 against scanning. (This goes for the satellite-crashing thing you mentioned sometime last year, too; the Axiom Rank is subtitled "reveal data," not "remote-control everything.")

(Puff The Magic Dragon is also a possible cause.)

Exploding Frogs: (Alternatively, the experiment could be taking place in Springfield.)

Won Sab: (Ah, yes, in the lab built by famed architect H.P. Escher?)

Exploding Frogs: (There are rumors that Bloody Stupid Johnson was also involved in construction.)

Won Sab: (The man's a Genius!)

The Kings Raven: I siezed onto the phrase “apparently "psychic" powers—the more "out there" fields of mad science in terms of credibility and morality” because the entire point was I was arguing for it to he rephrased. BTW Its actually Metaptropi IMO that has the least basis in Sane Science: Your breaking fundamental laws at Metaptropi 2 to the level that its outright impossible to build a transmutatior (moving from one material to one of a different density is creating or destroying matter) but back to topic. As a general outline I've not seen anything to suggest that Epikrato is either more “out there” or “psychic”. It can be either sure but I don't see the general rule.

Also, it's you who are missing the point about Etherites, relativity, and quantum mechanics. It's not that they hate those theories and refuse to incorporate them into their grand unified theories of How Everything Works, it's that those two theories demolished the unified theories that already existed, and no fully consistent theory has yet been formulated that is capable of taking their place. The exact phrasing—"the kinds of theories scientists had before relativity and quantum mechanics—refers not to any feelings Etherites may or may not have on those two theories (though many Etherites do favor outdated models of how the universe works and blame vast conspiracies and misunderstandings for why they are no longer accepted, they are not necessarily representative of the Baramin) but rather that they favor the kinds of theories that quantum mechanics and relativity have, thus far, invalidated, and seek to make new unified theories of science—regardless of whether or not the data actually supports these theories.

If you read my original post you'll see that I'm saying the wording as it currently is implies they are against R&QM. I'm glad we agree that there's no rule saying they have to be.

That's not how it looked when I was doing my AS in Psychology, we had whole classes that started along the lines of “you can never have perfect observations, so for the next hour here are ways to do a study despite that”. Its actually the minority of sciences where you can get complete observation, If you lack context then ask, don't just jump to a conclusion. And what question have I not answered. And doesn't the name Doom Cannon imply weapon rather than large scale engineering tool to you? It sure dose to me.

Despite what the rules say no one can dodge something at 7500 miles per hour. Two: At those speeds you can plot a course from standing still to impact as soon as you spot someone standing still some form of “aiming” makes sense, especially with Extreme Acceleration. Three: the previous two points don't matter because its still the best weapon imaginable for taking down the Volcano Fortress in one shot.

1. Actually “implements of destruction” isn't typically taken to mean weapons, there's so much civilian uses for explosives or otherwise destroying stuff (like scrapping cars) that would in theory fall under Katastrofi. That its 99% used for weapons says more about Mad Scientists than it dose about Katastrofi.
2. You asked for citations that all the Barhams get involved with mundane society, I cited the source-book explicitly stating that Lemuria's mission is to change society. Want make a counter citation that they don't?

Its a general statement but its not pointless, it tells us that at least 60%+ of the Scholastic population has no Axiom greater than 3 dots. An interesting nugget of information.

Do you really think Faeries coming from nowhere to move a box, the exact time you're testing a possible telekentic (and every time you repeat the experiment with the same guy or other real telekinetic) is going to be raised as plausible objection? Its on the same level as saying that God personally moves every single atom so the universe can exist: it explains all the data but its not going to get far. And you were right about the Laboratory rule, so I changed track to Low Mages who actually don't have such a limitation. (BTW just noticed that the sheep goat effect was proposed by scientists)

Actually Exploding Frogs Cannon (so much as the nWod has cannon) explicitly states that science can acknowledge and somewhat explain the supernatural in the Hunter line. VALKYRIE uses science to build effective anti-supernatural weapons, Cheiron uses science to successfully implant supernatural body parts into people. For the more theoretical side we have Null Myseries who's final endowment makes them one of if not the most clued in mortal group there is. (They also seem to be the most noticeable case of Depending on the Writer I've seen in regards to their belief in the supernatural, at the most favourable, their section in Spirit Slayers they've come to the scientific conclusion that werewolf shapeshifting is outside known Physics Biology and Chemistry and are possibly on the verge of a revolutionary breakthrough in regards to spirit technology)

Impersonating the president and the security of defence is Metaptropi 1, I'm pretty sure it dose voices too or you'd be failing all those super-disguise checks as soon as you talk. If not its Metaptropi 2, sound “holograms”. And Apokolypsi being better at control than Epikrato is a flaw in the rules (just like the Skafoi). Apokolypsi is used for hacking and remote controls, it also says you can hack into another Genius's wonder and remote control it. So why would a satilight or a missile be any different? Both are remote controlled and their security is flimsy against a Wonder. With the submarine I was using the “piggyback on mundane communications” rule, piggyback on the transmitter outside the hull and ride that to the inside.

Won Sab: I'm not asking you for context. I'm pointing out the fact that as a rule, context matters. How you are using a given Wonder matters. This is, naturally, important when it comes to things like Transgressions. (You stated earlier, apropos of nothing, that a Doom Cannon in and of itself is a Transgression. That is what my earlier What? was about.)

It could be called the "Love Blossom" if you prefer.

-5 penalty to Handling. Drive checks. The fact that you're crashing your mode of transport into something. Katastrofi is simply better-equipped for dealing damage — you can't give a vehicle the "exploding" variable, for example. In addition, I'm no expert, but I think it's safe to assume that crashing into something at full speed is going to cause some damage. Further cite:
The ramming vehicle smashes through the target, but could also suffer some damage of its own. Compare the successes achieved on your Size roll to the Durability of your character’s vehicle. If successes exceed its Durability, your character’s vehicle suffers half (rounding down) those excess successes as Structure damage. Damage to your character’s vehicle is halved to account for his effort to minimize harm by hitting the target just right.
A person inside a crashing vehicle can suffer damage, too. Determine the number of Structure points lost by the vehicle. A passenger automatically suffers half that amount (rounded down) in bashing damage. Taking safety precautions such as wearing seat belts or activating an air bag can reduce damage by another one to three. Armor worn also automatically reduces damage incurred in a crash (it does not reduce dice pools).
Enjoy your vaporized skull and chassis. (By the way, I worked it out; going faster in miles per hour than [50*Size+90*Durability] gives a law-of-averages-guarantee of total destruction of the vehicle. Depending on Size, the damage threshold could be lower still for getting killed or knocked unconscious. I've actually worked out a chart showing the thresholds for vehicular annihilation and lethality — the formula for the speed at which lethal backlash occurs is [240*Health+30*Durability-10*Size] mph. Shall I post it to the RPG.net thread?)

1. What is the point of telling me this?
2. They're a Vestigial Empire and former Ancient Conspiracy. That they're trying to change society is practically a given. How does this disprove anything?

It is mildly interesting, but pointless for the purposes of this discussion.

And telekinesis is no more credible than any of those, which is what I'm pointing out. Magic has the very same problems.

Except that you then have to worry about coming up with a reason why they need to launch the nuke, you have to impersonate two people at the same time, and any of these can be thwarted by someone else with clearance not corroborating your claim. "Hacking" here means "getting access to information you're not supposed to have." You can remote-control your own Wonders that you have built to receive signals or instructions from your Apokalypsi device. And having a transmitter outside the hull offers a completely different problem; these are submarines designed to go so deep underwater as to be undetectable. Clear radio transmitters don't work at that depth. And again, I point to concealment penalties — water's got to count as physical screen at the very least. And finally, sourcebook-citation:

A basic understanding of Apokalypsi allows a genius to communicate with other artifacts of technology. Passive scanning lets a genius patch into a source of information, such as a cell phone or computer. Active scanning allows the wonder to function as a communicator.
No remote-controlling anything you please mentioned there.

Success: The genius makes progress toward accessing the source. Upon reaching the required number of successes, the genius has full access to the audio and video information and data of the source and can freely analyze any accessible information for the rest of the scene. Download speeds are arbitrarily fast.
Still no remote-control.

In its active mode, a rank-1 Apokalypsi wonder can communicate with any type of receptive technology in range, including computers, radios, cell phones, and other Apokalypsi wonders. Communicators can send data, sound, and video, so long as the target can receive that sort of information. (Note that piggybacking on a cell phone network transmits only audio data and text, while WiFi allows a much larger range of data to be transmitted.) Upload speeds are arbitrarily fast from this sort of communicator, which can, outside the limits of mundane transmission sources, display and transmit audio, visual, or holographic data, as well as pure text and executable programs.
I assume the bolded part is the thing you're thinking gives you remote-control nukes. Here's the problem: a random program is not automatically a Wonder or a part of one. You would need to actually make the program, and getting it to actually do what you're claiming is possible would call for Epikrato or Free-Roaming Automata. The former would call for a ridiculously long range or getting onboard the armed submarine in the first place — tricky to do when you come off as crazy or untrustworthy as Geniuses often do. The latter could be thwarted by shutting down the Automaton's current home or the entire computer system. Either one renders the idea that Apokalypsi 1 alone allows you to do those things frivolous. Besides which, I'm fairly certain a radio can't transmit computer programs.

In this modern age, a genius is not limited simply to the range of his wonder. A communicator that is also a scanner (most are, excepting the application of certain Variables) can patch into a land line, an area of WiFi connectivity, or some other communication system, and communicate with another device, mundane or wondrous, that is connected to the same system. A wonder connected to the Internet, for example, could communicate with a computer also connected to the Internet no matter how far away it is.
And this bolded portion renders the idea impossible altogether. Hooking the control panel for the nukes to the radio transmitter would be tremendously insecure and a questionable design decision in the first place, but I'm also fairly certain that switches don't count as data storage.

Seriously, this is explosive-healing-ray-on-the-moon-level impractical. And, as with that one, a more personal touch is both more effective and more interesting as a chronicle or story idea: Try to acquire a nuclear submarine so you can hold the cities of the world hostage, cope with regular attempts at mutiny once you've taken over the sub… Seriously, Raven, trying to find an easy "I win" method for large-scale concerns like these misses the point of RP Gs and one of the unspoken rules of the setting.

Exploding Frogs: Of course, as much as scientifically-minded Hunters have discovered, they're still a long way from uncovering the entire truth. Remember all that misinformation about the other splats in the Hunter corebook? That's what Hunters actually believe, and the scientists among them have yet to clear up most of those misconceptions...mainly because they have yet to disprove them themselves. Also, by your own logic, one of the greatest breakthroughs of supernaturally aware Hunters is that science is as yet incapable of explaining a fundamental part of a werewolf's being—in other words, their greatest discovery is how little they really know. This is very much in keeping with the themes of the World of Darkness.

The Kings Raven: The inevitable destruction of your wonder is why you control it through remote control or build an autopilot. And you can remove that -5 by travelling at safe speed (for 500 dice so still incredibly powerful) or common sense it away: you carefully line everything up before firing up the jets. Drive is for high pressure situations. There's not much pressure if you've mathematically calculated and preprogrammed everything.

And Katastrofi is certainly not better at building orbital guns, if you need to destroy the Volcano Fortress a remote controlled Skafoi is much better than bounding it with an Orbital gun. Other situations depend on more maths than I feel like doing right now.

1. The point is that how Axioms are generally used is affected by catalyst.
2. Your argument for why the Atomists are Determinators is that they're trying change society. You've just agreed that all the Baramins do that. So are all Lemrians determinators now?

Except that telekinesis is repeatable and occurs reliably every time this guy is in the room, and the box moves to the exact spot you asked him to move it. It might not be enough to prove Telekinesis but its solid data.

Actually I'm saying Apokolypsi can remote control anything because as far as modern technology is concerned “communication” and “sending commands” are functionally identical. Sending an E-mail is TCP/IP, so is using SSH to remote control a computer. In theory if you can find a buffer overflow sending an E-mail could take over the server. Or take NASA's sailights they control those by sending messages from ground control; if you can send the same messages as NASA dose (and with Apokolypsi you can) you could order it to perform a re-entry.

And where did you get the idea I actually use these hacks? That they're their and I point them out doesn't mean I'd use them in a game.

@Exploding Frogs: A discovery about how little they know is a very accurate way to describe it, but remember I was responding to you saying this: “canon Wo D materials are quite clear about the fact that modern science is incapable of explaining or even acknowledging the paranormal”. I think we can now agree that in Wo D cannon Science certainly can acknowledge the supernatural. As for explaining. Not yet but they're making progress.

Won Sab: Doesn't work that way. Would you like to see the chart? The Safe Speed of a Wonder could very well (and very easily) be more than the speed at which it would be annihilated. Automating it or remote-controlling it does nothing about the fact that the Wonder is going to break. The average non-annihilative maximum speed of a Wonder is a matter of how big it is, and after you've gotten into the 26+ range it stops getting bonus speed from the Base Durability shifts. (Also: wind. If you can calculate the wind well enough to predict and adjust the Wonder's course, then good on you. If not, Drive checks. You need them to operate a regular airplane, why wouldn't you need them to crash a supersonic jet into something?)

And seriously? If you crash your jet into a Volcano Fortress and you don't hit absolutely everything, you just undid a week's Wonder-working. You wasted a jet. That jet does not explode or deal automatic Successes or bypass Durability. A Katastrofi Orbital Gun, meanwhile, does at least 40 Successes automatically (more if you put on an Explosive radius) and can potentially deal Aggravated damage, pierce Armor, and (and this part is important), survive its own attacks. And this doesn't call for assistance from other Axioms unless you make it an Artillery weapon, which uses the same Axiom you'd need for Remote Controlling that jet. The jet, meanwhile, in order to be safely and consistently re-usable in its weaponized capacity, needs Durability-boosting Prostasia. You're claiming that a laser cannon is less effective at blowing stuff up than crashing your supercar into it.

1. Yes. It's also affected by circumstance, context, and a bunch of other stuff that isn't the Catalyst. In the meantime, Grimms being what they are makes "they're good at building weapons of all kinds" good enough for government work.
2. That wasn't my argument. Deferring this one to Frogs, as he's better at explaining it than I am.

And so you cannot prove that it's telekinesis. You can prove that it's something that he claims is telekinesis, but that doesn't prove that it's telekinesis. Maybe he made a deal with Fairythulhu. Maybe he's manipulating the fabric of spacetime by controlled breathing. The researchers will be unable to determine what it actually is unless they can observe.

…Okay, maybe a metaphor will be enough for you to get this. You have a pair of boxes with shaped holes in them. You know, like the children's toys that teach kids how things fit together? You've got Box A, which has a one-inch wide hole on either end. Box A is glued end-to-end with Box B, which has a one-inch hole on one end, connected to one of the holes in Box A, but is otherwise completely closed. Box B contains several one-inch and two-inch blocks. There are likewise several one- and two-inch blocks outside the boxes. You can get a one-inch block into Box A from outside or from Box B because it will fit through the one-inch hole. You can get a one-inch block from outside to Box A to Box B because it will fit in the one-inch holes. You cannot get a two-inch block from the outside to Box A to Box B because the two-inch block won't fit into the one-inch holes. (All of this works in the opposite direction as well.) You can get audio data to the radio. You can get audio data from the radio to the sub. You cannot get executable data to the sub because you cannot get executable data to the radio. It's a choke point. (Also: satellites can't survive re-entry. They burn up. Further, "modern technology" is not the same thing as "Wonders." It won't be for at least another hundred years.)

Yes, they're there. Which is why Operation AIDS Moon is still possible under the known rules.

Oh wait.

Exploding Frogs: Right, then. IIRC, Won Sab's argument for Atomists being Determinators is twofold: firstly, their quest for technological solutions to the world's troubles in spite of their blatant impossibility, even without accounting for Havoc, and their Grant that uses their Resolve to supress the effects of Havoc in Wonders they build. For the former, the important part isn't their quest for changing the world (as you noted, all Lemurians do that), but that, well...I think the profile we've got puts it best:

"That some of these applications are vastly unethical or flatly impossible does not seem to deter them."

For the latter, you counterargument was that other attributes were prioritized over Resolve in Atomists, so even with their Grant, their Resolve scores are lackluster. To which I say: Prove it! The only statted-up example of an Atomist anywhere in the sourcebook is highly atypical of her Baramin, as previously noted, and the profile of the Baramin itself gives no indication of what stats the Atomists do or do not favor. Baramins and Foundations grow out of the ideology and methods of their members, so it stands to reason that the Atomists would have a Grant that the average Atomist would be able to make very effective use of—meaning a high Resolve.

Regarding the telekinesis experiment: Two other possibilities are that the "psychic" has a way of perpetrating a ruse even under the listed conditions, or that it is a series of freak coincidences. The only thing that experiment establishes is the the box moves to a specific point, and it only does so when the "psychic" is present. Without direct observation, this is not sufficient to confirm that telekinesis is the cause of this phenomenon; correlation does not equate to causation. Also, though I have not read Second Sight myself, I suspect you may be being excessively literal with the rules. Might it not be possible that the process of the experiment itself, of using one's powers when one knows that the results will be analyzed by a skeptical third party, would be enough to cause the penalty?

On another note, what is this "Operation AIDS Moon" of which you speak? It sounds vaguely like an over-the-top comic book villain's scheme, and for this reason, I wish to learn more...

Won Sab: Okay, you know how one of the examples on the main page mentions a wide-area orbital healing ray? Well, last July-August Raven proposed, as a way a Genius could change the world, putting an orbital healing ray on the moon to cure AIDS. He proposed tacking on a ten-mile radius (technically twenty, but that's the secondary radius) and healing huge swathes of people. Recent clarification indicates that multi-targeting things (like with explosive non-Katastrofi ray-type Wonders) requires paying the cost for every affected target. Curing everyone with AIDS in a given blast radius would be no more effective than asking those people to form an orderly line. In response to this, I pointed out that it would be much simpler and more interesting to make a Concealed Collapsible Sarcophagus — disguised as a tent — and travel around the area posing as a mobile clinic. Or a faith healer. Either way, it can be done with a starting character, as opposed to Operation AIDS Moon, which, even if the rules did allow it, requires at least ten dots of Axioms  ^*

in addition to requiring that you be on the moon yourself while you're launching a giant (healing, but the populace doesn't know that) exploding laser beam at some of the least fortunate areas of the planet. Or, if you don't care to put in the time, you can add another pair of Axioms.  ^**

^{Automata 1 to automate it and Apokalypsi 1 to control it.}

The former can have an entire chronicle built around it with relative ease, while the latter would take the better part of a chronicle to get the skill to build and can't even work under the current knowledge of the rules.

Exploding Frogs: Huh. From the name, I thought it might be something along the lines of a device that infected anything within its range with AIDS, thus leading to the extinction of humanity in short order. (Come to think of it, wouldn't that be slightly easier to accomplish? AIDS is communicable; its absence is not.  ^*

The idea could use some tweaking, I'm sure, but it would make a decent plot for an Inspired villain.)

Won Sab: Funnily enough, proper use of a Rank-2 or -3 Factory's Science 5 capabilities might allow you to custom-grow plagues if you stuck to purely mundane effects — you could make a cross between rhinovirus and Ebola, or a fungal growth that gets into people's brains. You can go run the townsfolk ragged if you can generate some mildly-intelligent rabid animals — if it gets Orphaned you'd have a creepy cargo cult of devoted mutant labradors.

Exploding Frogs: According to the sourcebook, even the non-Wondrous products of an Automata factory are subject to Havoc. If you'll read the description of the Factory usages of Automata, there's always a note to the effect of "the products of the factory are mundane objects/animals/people in every way; they are not Wonders. However, they are Manes, and thus are still subject to Havoc."

Granted, if you're out to cause mass devastation, Havoc isn't necassarily a bad thing...Just point 'em in the right direction, stay out of the way (perhaps on some other continent, or maybe you'd prefer to go the comic book villain route and retire to your moon base?), and watch the show.

Won Sab: Funny thing about Havoc; it's flexible. You can give someone Mane food you made with a Automata-1 Medicine-based Factory and watch the fun as Havoc causes the food to burn their stomach or strangle their pancreas or hold their liver hostage and demand a helicopter to Syria and a briefcase full of billiard balls. Besides which, Havoc calls for mortal-to-Mane interaction. (Regardless, checking with Moochava about whether or not this is possible.) (Note from the future: it's possible, but you'd almost certainly be limited to attacking non-mere-mortals. Rebuilding the "plague" Katastrofi variable from one of the earlier drafts is a possible circumvention, though.)

Raven, a further note from Moochava's Twitter: ""Certain questions about the rules of a tabletop RPG do not indicate problems with the rules, but problems with the questioner." Wish I could carve that into some skulls."