Som med de vampyr-till-gräset-stolproblemet , involverade det Matter magick i Mage 1e. Ett av exemplen på "tillfälligt magick" för materia var "transmuting bullets into air" med slumpen "pistolen var aldrig laddad". Nu förutsåg tidigare exempel i boken av sammanfallande magick i boken att det var tillfälligt magick, att slumpen var något som kunde inträffa , även om det inte var osannolikt. Kulor blir inte i sig själva, så mycket tid och Internetbitar spenderades och försökte rationalisera dessa två ... ahem, paradoxala saker.
Det kanoniska exemplet blev "Kan du läka skadorna från en kula tillfälligt genom att dra en whisky-kolv ur fickan (som föreslås på sidan 248 i den 1: a upplagan Mage: The Ascension kärnregelregelboken) även om varken kolven eller fickan var där före ? " Trots allt är båda dessa saker rimliga. Sammanfattar samförståndet med dig för att få det att hända med något som materia eller till och med liv 2? Eller behöver du faktiskt begära en kolv med Matter och Prime för att det ska fungera.
Detta betraktades som ett hett diskussionsämne så långt tillbaka som, igen, 1994 . Online FAQ för Mage tillbaka 1999 behandlade problemet bara vagt, och Mage-spelare på Internet utvecklade HAP / HOP / [HYP] / RBD / PBD-systemet för att prata om Paradox för att täcka det. Stephen Lea Sheppard, Mage author (och före detta "Freaks and Geeks" skådespelare) förklarar :
HAP\HOP\HYP|RBD/PBD is a way of categorizing different approaches to running magic in oMage. HAP/HOP/HYP is one axis, and RBD/PBD is the other.
Axis The First
HAP/HOP/HYP is a method of determining whether effects are vulgar or coincidental. In its simplest form, it's a way of addressing the question "Can reality see into your pockets?"
Say you want a business card to hand to a guy you just met. You don't have one. You do have Matter 2 and Prime 2, though, which will let you create one from nothing. If you create a business card in your pocket and then hand it to him, with the coincidence "I just happened to have it in my pocket all along, really," is that coincidental, or vulgar?
According to the Hypothetical Average Perceiver theory, it's coincidental. This also lets you make a lucky whiskey flask, or do the "No, actually, I did remember to load my gun with silver bullets this morning" thing. It's supported in some places in the text of the game.
According to the Hypothetical Omniscient Perceiver theory, it's vulgar. Reality can see into your pockets. It's not possible to "coincidentally" create anything from nothing. The whiskey flask trick doesn't work unless you actually did have a whiskey flask, and just used whatever spell to make the bullet hit it and not you.
Harass Yonder Passerby is a joke. It's included in the HAP/HOP/HYP trinity because of tradition.
...
There are problems with both interpretations. On the one hand, if Hypothetical Average Perceiver works, then can I make money by summoning it into my wallet, even if there's nobody around to hear me when I say "Oh, look, I've got enough money to afford [whatever it is I'm trying to buy] after all!"? What about if I just summon the money into an empty room? Where does "Coincidental" end and "Vulgar without witnesses" begin under this model?
On the other hand, if you run Hypothetical Omniscient Perceiver too strictly, then suddenly no magic is coincidental at all. Reality saw the trajectory of that bullet, it saw your Entropy effect to adjust it, it knows you cast a spell, so that's vulgar. This applies equally to any spell you want to cast.
(I favor games that run under "loose" Hypothetical Omniscient Perceiver. My friend favors games that run on HAP.)
Axis The Second
RBD/PBD was created to explain the taxi.
So, I'm casting a Correspondence spell to move myself from one place to another. I want it to manifest as a convenient taxi that hits all the green lights and the driver forgets to charge me for the ride at the end of it. I could teleport, but that'd be vulgar, and I want coincidental. Can I do this, and if so, how?
According to Result-Based Determinism, the final result of the spell is all that matters. I can use Correspondence 3 to call up a useful taxi, as long as I'm willing to wait for however long it takes to show up (which is, usually, how long it takes for the spell to affect the nearest actual taxi and manipulate events so that it does what I want), as long as the only actual benefit I get from the spell, in the end, is that I get from point A to point B quickly and free.
According to Process-Based Determinism, I can't do this. Not with just Correspondence. Possibly with just Entropy, though, if I get enough successes, or, failing that, with Correspondence to locate the nearest taxi, Correspondence and Mind to ranged-mind-control the driver to me, Correspondence and Entropy together to plot a lucky course through traffic, Mind to mind-control the driver along the course, and Mind at the end to make him forget to charge me. Or, failing that, Prime and Matter to create the taxi, Prime and Life to create the driver, et cetera et cetera ad nauseum, and this last version ends up vulgar as hell.
...
I favor Result-Based Determinism, because it solves the Entropy Problem (which is, under PBD you can use just Entropy to do anything, because Entropy manipulates the chance of events to occur, and theoretically anything could occur), and because it goes nicely with "loose HOP."
The two most common types of oMage players on the Internet are Average/Process, and Omniscient/Result. They get into huge arguments. EDIT: Or they did, until we invented HAP\HOP\HYP|RBD/PBD on the Mage forum to stop them. Then they mostly got into arguments over which was official, until Malcolm Sheppard showed up and said "None. The writers don't think about this [stuff] nearly as hard as you all do. Christ." Or something to that effect.
Och det är berättelsen om whiskyflaskan: det är symbolen på Mage-spelare som försöker få mening utifrån dåliga förklaringar och motsägelsefulla speltext för att göra spelet de älskade spelbara.
[^ HYP]: "Harass Yonder Passerby" är förresten: Hitta någon på gatan utanför där du spelar och fråga dem om de tror att din föreslagna magiska effekt är trovärdig. Om så är fallet, tillfälligt. Om inte, vulgärt.