Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"There's no higher payment that can be made."

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Welcome, Senri! (From another newbie, but oh well.) Cool, somebody else is reviving old topics....

    I think everyone who's said that working for the Lone Power wouldn't make sense as a price is right -- that's hardly something that would give the energy for a major spellworking back to the universe or the Powers.

    Pouring in everything of yourself.... interesting. I'm a bit inclined to balk at the idea of any price going so far as to destroy the wizard completely -- but then, that could be a logical extension of a system where a wizardry important enough and big enough can be paid for with time off your life -- up to all of your life. (Which makes more sense than it first looks like, I think -- at least, the idea of yielding to death sooner gave me pause. But even aside from the assumption of an intrinsic power in sacrifice and/or the fact that you'd no longer be using up energy, in a system where entropy's constantly increasing there are, according to physics, always tradeoffs -- you can reduce it in one place by raising it in another, and balance it with energy... and I'd be making more sense if I had reviewed thermodynamics more recently and it weren't almost midnight, I hope. But at any rate, the wizard is accelerating her own death in exchange for delaying the universe's....)

    On the other hand -- "What's loved, survives." I'm not sure if it'd be possible or helpful to get rid of the effects of people loving you, and that might be the only way to get rid of yourself completely.

    I did think, initially, that the higher price might possibly be to use up all the energy you could *ever* have had for wizardry, and thus not be able to do it any more -- without actually losing it in the sense of having it withdrawn and losing all memory, and so on, maybe not even losing the Speech. You'd still, perhaps, be able to fight entropy by more common methods -- conserving energy, easing pain, talking to people -- just not do the magic. But it'd be easy to argue that that's not "higher," and as several people have pointed out, if the Powers are still investing energy in other people and counting it worthwhile, it doesn't seem that this would make sense. Then again... time doesn't work quite the same for them.... *frowns and tries to figure out how that would affect it*

    Losing someone you loved would be a high price indeed, but there are two problems -- while it might be harder, it doesn't seem as if it would pay back any more energy, and it does seem that if you've essentially borrowed energy that requires a life-payback, you'd be expected to pay it back yourself unless someone else actually volunteered.

    So what would be very high cost for the wizard, higher than dying and something a Senior doesn't want to talk about, but ultimately productive as far as the Powers and universe are concerned....

    ...I wonder if it could be something like what Ronan did with taking the sea in? Well, that isn't the best example -- this would be much more extreme, for one thing.... Not ceasing to exist, but binding yourself to exist in a way you weren't made for, becoming the spell you're paying for? This might be a variation on pouring your whole existence into it, actually. I don't know if it would work, or help, but it would probably seem very dramatic to those outside it and might be harder than just dying. You'd be stuck there at least as long as the spell had to work, for one thing. Possibly in combat with the Lone One, depending on what kind of spell it was -- a binding, or something? -- it seems like direct attack would be one of the few things that might require that much energy. (Then again, I would have guessed that stopping the universe from expanding would cost more than the Mobius spell! But no, that one was shared among a thousand plus young wizards, so perhaps that made it more affordable.) In that sense it might be a bit like... staying locked with the Lone One for a long time to keep part of It out of trouble -- but perhaps until 'you' ran out, or the end of the worlds, whichever came first.

    Just speculating.

    Edited to add: Alan reminded me of this -- given that wizards' power diminishes with age, fluctuates with hormones, and can be augmented by trading time off their lives, it might help to look at this in light of the idea that apparently it's the wizards providing the power from their own... being, in general. (It'd be possible that everyone has such energy and most simply don't use it because they intrinsically lack some tools or aren't offered/don't choose the rest of them.) A life-price spell is cashing in all of your life at once; if it's on a delay, the Powers essentially lend the energy. It's not that they stop giving it to you; it's that you always had a certain potential maximum amount to use, and you used it all.

    In that case, it actually could make sense to use up all of your wizardry present and future, at once, for one big thing -- and then not be given more, because it did come from you, after all. And it might be that this could be regarded as a higher payment from the wizard's side of things, especially if you do forget, even if it might technically involve less energy since you still keep enough to live. (If you remain the sort of person who would have been a wizard afterward, maybe your still being alive and trying to help things would work....)

    Though that wouldn't explain why Carl didn't want to talk about it, unless that it's too emotional to discuss someone who did do that voluntarily as opposed to the dangers of hypothetically losing it involuntarily for oathbreaking.

    [This message was edited by PK on 23 July 2003 at 22:38.]

    Comment


    • #47
      I agree with A Moonlighting X-File but for a diff reason: Anything a person fears more than death is the 'highest payment'. (Example: I fear the deaths of my family members more than my own death.) Doesn't that make sense?

      Jen26
      "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline

      Comment


      • #48
        Oooh... PK, I like the idea of being incorporated entirely into a spell. That's neat.

        Well, I dunno, Jen... I think the problem with a consequence like your family dying is that, um, whatever this price is, it's meant to be a payment, not a punishment. It seems like the powers wouldn't want to bring people who had nothing to do with the price you incurred into the equation; it just wouldn't be fair.

        There are three kinds of people in the world: those who see the glass as half full, those who see the glass as half empty, and those who will spit in the half-full glass to fill it all the way up.
        There are three kinds of people in the world: those who see the glass as half full, those who see the glass as half empty, and those who will spit in the half-full glass to fill it all the way up.

        Comment


        • #49
          Senri-

          Don't you think a particularly high payment can be as harsh as a punishment sometimes? After giving up your LIFE, for example, you end up in the same place (under ground) wheather it's the result of 'payment' or punishment.

          In addition, is there really so much of a difference between payments and punishments? The only difference I can see is that a punishment is meant to teach you not to repeat bad behavior and payment is the fulfillment of your side of an exchange; you put a dollar into the snack machine and a bag of M&Ms come out.

          Why does it matter which of the two it is? The result is identical. Sometimes the difference between the two is both indistinguishable and irrelevent. Example: You rent a movie from Blockbuster and return it a day late. You are told that you have to pay a late fee. This can be looked at as 'payment'; your paying for the extra time you had to watch the movie, or as 'punishment' for not returning the movie on time. It's all in the mind.

          I'm not sure if I make sence, but I hope you get where I'm headed.

          Jen26
          "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline

          Comment


          • #50
            Jen: The key difference, I think, is that a punishment is because you've done something wrong -- or at any rate that the people punishing you object to... and the idea of a payment is that you're giving something of value to the people from whom you got whatever you're exchanging it for. Sometimes this may be indistinguishable or irrelevant -- but sometimes it's not. With an energy-loan in this context, the Powers pretty much have to have approved, and the repayment you make has to accomplish something.

            It may be that what Carl is talking about is a "higher payment" in the sense of being harder for the wizard to give, true -- but it also has to make sense as a way of giving back energy; the point is unlikely to be making the wizard miserable, even if that's a consequence. Losing one's family might in fact be a consequence -- of either a failure, a very poor decision or a very difficult one where one's home might be sacrificed for other life elsewhere (though I think the latter would usually be avoided) -- but it seems improbable to me that a wizard would be able to borrow energy against other people's lives without their consent.

            I think becoming a spell could qualify as higher in both difficulty and energy, though it may be worth noting that repaying energy in the form of life-price may be implied to do more good if it's by playing the part of a sacrifice (especially a willing one).

            Wiping yourself entirely from existence... might work, though I'm not sure whether in the context of the "what's loved, survives" axiom in the YW universe it's fully possible. (If that's an axiom.) That may just be personal, though. Hm -- It reminds me, on further thought, of A Wind in the Door....

            I think, now I've been reminded that a wizard's available energy evidently comes from the wizard (one way or another) rather than being supplied by the Powers (except in special cases, such as loans -- repayed by life-time -- or getting in touch with one and getting Its direct help, or apparently 'sponsoring'), that it might be possible -- if rather difficult to calculate objectively! -- for voluntarily using up all of one's current and future wizardry at a go, whether one then remembered it or not, to be the higher payment.

            Higher cost: Possibly debatable -- but it seems many wizards would rather die than not be wizards any longer; if you remembered, you'd know what you couldn't do any more, and if you didn't, you might suffer some of the same unfulfilled something's-missing-here feeling as a wizard who's ceased to be a wizard by going wrong or not wanting to be one.

            Higher payment, in terms of an improved energy flow for the universe: Also debatable, but possible. The accounting would, of course, be difficult -- but. The energy you might in future have been able to use for wizardry isn't lost; it's just used up. Your life-time isn't, and yes you'd still be using energy at the necessary rate -- but then, there are hundreds of little ways mentioned or implied to slow down entropy that don't directly involve wizardry. Paying your bills on time, turning the lights out when you leave a room... and how a lot of wizardry is just talking, and some of that might not need the Speech. (Though considering you needn't be a wizard to know of wizardry OR know the Speech, it's entirely possible you could retain it and that the forgetting is primarily a... safeguard against someone who broke or edged away from their Oath finding a way to work against it.) Given that the "burned-out" wizard in this hypothetical should still have the appropriate attitude, there's the chance of being able to be more use, on balance, by living than dying.

            Counterpoints: Still, something seems a bit off about that; life-price might then be claimed only if a sacrifice were needed, or else the choice given, and at that point it seems it would be unlikely to choose to die -- which casts some doubt on this being more difficult. It also seems odd that Carl would be unwilling to talk about this when he explains how you might lose your wizardry as a consequence or penalty for oathbreaking. It may have to be something that, like death, is ordinarily seen as some sort of defeat.

            I still doubt it's just "anything the wizard fears more than death," though. Too many options for that, I think, would result in a net loss rather than a repayment, and too many (death of loved ones) seem to involve... stealing, I guess.

            I could, of course, be entirely wrong. We could try asking when the chat's rescheduled, but she might not answer. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if it's a plot point eventually.

            Comment


            • #51
              When I fisrt read it I always asumed that it meant the death of the person who was most important to you, or some such, but I've also thought that it could have been such a complete use of energy that it was not just the death of the wizard, but almost as if they had never existed in the first place.

              Comment


              • #52
                I had thought about the death of other people connected with you, but I agree with PK when s/he says it doesn't make sense: why take the lives of others?

                However, I have since thought a little more carefully: while I don't think it would be the death of your family, it might be the willing exchange of somebody else's life- probably your wizardry partner's, if you have one- for your own. I mean, the other person volunteers, in the way that Ed did. This would partially explain why Carl didn't want to talk about it: it's absolutely horrible to think about the death of your best friend (try it and see. Not good. Oh boy.) and furthermore, it's possible that if he had told Nita this, it might have subconsciously of consciously affected her decision in an undesireable way...

                Or, of course, it could be something else entirely. I really want to know, now...
                T

                Tuibird in Aotearoa
                Conservationist, Scientist, and proud of both!
                Chocolate lover extraordinaire...
                Ahahahaha, ahahahahaha, ahahahaha...
                My mission: Bringing Maori to the world!
                Spelling Freak and Typo Queen
                Go ahead! Panic! Do it now and avoid the June rush! Fear death by water!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Thanks for the thoughtful and thought-provoking posts, PK! Even though I don't agree with all of your conclusions, they sparked some cogitations on my part (which I would like to think proved fruitful):

                  First, I have philosophical problems with the idea that wizards are given a set amount of power to use over their entire life. This seems to contradict the notions (which I think is spelled out quite clearly) that younger wizards are more powerful because they don't know what's impossible, but older wizards compensate for this reduction in (naïve?) imagination through increased knowledge and cleverness in problem solving --in general it seems that wizardry is fueled mainly by imagination and ingenuity (and while there may be sizable amounts of 'raw power' involved I think that wizardry never provides a 'brute force' solution [cf. Herewiss' comment "Sorcery is an imposition on the environment, a forcing, a rape. The Power is a meshing, a cooperation, a love. ... I have no desire to be just a very talented rapist, when I have the potential to be a lover, even a clumsy one." in The Door into Fire (chapter 5, Herewiss' conversation with Segnbora)]). Thus, it seems that a wizard's power is extremely contingent upon higher-order thought processes and could not possibly be set from birth unless one wishes to posit (like Einstein *) total determinism (or, to use the theological term which is nearly analogous for these purposes, predestination --in this situation I am using these terms mostly to indicate an absence of true free will), neither of which seem to be congruent with the YW theology/cosmology. This, of course, leaves the question of where any necessary raw power for a spell comes from (as it can't all be deducted from a wizard's current personal energy supply or their lifetime [as wizards would all die extremely young, unless the conversion factor between time lived and energy is significantly higher than I imagine it being]), or simply be provided by 'imagination and ingenuity,' but this is a puzzle I do not feel prepared to speculate on the moment.

                  This brings me to my second point: without complete determinism (predestination), a life-price sacrifice doesn't necessarily make physical sense as a method of paying back energy (at least with the physics I know), because regardless of the amount of energy the wizard's life being cut short returned, there would always be the possibility that later in life she would have, through cleverness, performed some feat which would have slowed the increase of entropy even more (and while it is possible that one could argue that there is a vanishingly small probability of this occurring, I would prefer to think that the universe did not run itself like an insurance firm! I may also be exposing my mathematical bias by placing 'cleverness' far above 'raw power,' though I think that this is usually a fair ranking). I am more inclined to think that a life-price payment in the YW universe has more in common with the ritual self-sacrifices that are found in various cultures and religions (e.g., a ruler sacrificing themselves to ensure a fertile harvest) than it does with any 'strict' energy repayment measured by contemporary physics (in its current state). That said, though, it does seem (making broad analogies with very little physical basis here) that some sort of 'binding energy' might be associated with life (especially conscious life).

                  I find PK's hypothetical 'greater than life-price' scenario to be quite appealing (and actually conjectured much the same thing while thinking about the first third of PK's post [I was interrupted while reading it]), mainly because it allows the wizard's consciousness to be involved in the repayment of energy (which I feel to be important for the reasons detailed above) and also as it seems to be a very onerous method of repayment (as well as having non-physical [especially mythological and ritual] precedents, which fits my speculation in the previous paragraph).

                  Nathan

                  * Einstein's theory of the total field is completely deterministic, which is how he gets around 'God playing dice' and 'that spooky action at a distance.'

                  Ubi materia, ibi geometria. --Johannes Kepler

                  Non doctrinam, sed perspicuitatem quaero.
                  Omnia disce, videbis postea nihil esse superfluum.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Ooh, long post. And fair enough; considering I was forgetting key points until most of the way through, I'm not sure I agree with all the conclusions I might have expressed at some point.

                    Hm. I'd agree that absolute determinism does not appear to be the dynamic going on in the YW universe -- there are too many discussions of choices and alternate timelines and possibilities for that! -- but we do have beings that don't experience time linearly, and that may be key in the question of how, for example, time off one's life can be traded for energy.

                    Apparently it takes a year of Nita's life (at age... darn, what is it, thirteen?) to power a shield through a direct and fairly determined blow from the Lone Power in person, whatever THAT says about the exchange rate. Three or five, according to Kit's estimate, to shove It through a worldgate....

                    There seem to be some effects in either direction regarding the development of a wizard's power, energy levels, and influence, which I suspect are separate but interrelated things. Actually, a distinction in terminology at the least between energy itself and influence may be very useful here....

                    Younger wizards are said to be capable of more, in some ways, because of not knowing what's impossible -- or, according to the Transcendent Pig, it may also have to do with not having mastered certain aspects of the Speech. And yet knowing more of the Speech and more about how things work would seem to allow wizards to do more things -- perhaps to do things they wouldn't have thought of without the terminology, or things they couldn't have expressed before, or just communicate with more types of person or object.

                    There is also an implication, I think, that age simply wears down one's available energy levels, in the same way that (on a larger scale) matter is said to be "less itself" at this time than very early in the life of the universe. Doing wizardry is physically tiring; it seems to become more so later on, and inspires older wizards to take up exercising to keep fit and perhaps to do fewer casual spells. Hormonal fluctuations -- growth spurts, specifically -- are said to affect how available a wizard's power is. There's a definite physical component.

                    Now, not all the energy seems to come from the wizard sometimes -- the Book of Night with Moon, for instance, apparently carries a great deal of its own, though this may be a case of power through influence -- through being the definition, even more than the actual things described are their own definitions. And other objects -- Nita's gimbal, for instance, or the stuff they used for the first timeslide (which they apparently also fed sugar cubes, unless I'm wildly misremembering) -- can locally lower the activation energy of a spell. (Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks the reclaiming of broken... stuff and junk to use against the Power who apparently invented the concept of damage and obsolescence is really cool?)

                    And then there's the comment about why Seniors are "given so much power to work with," which either refers to authority or casts serious doubt on the idea that all or most energy is provided in some way by the wizard. Still, a significant portion of it seems like it has to be.

                    Most people, I think, could expend a good deal more personal energy on accomplishing things than they do. I know that's true of me. I think it's entirely possible that wizards have... essentially a way to access their own available energy and apply it that most people don't, whether because they lack the potential or because they don't choose to do such things with it. That might solve part of the question of raw energy. And perhaps there is a part of it that's provided by the Powers themselves; we do have this "sponsorship" business now, and I won't say any more because I don't think excerpt-spoilers are allowed in this forum.

                    A wizard's overall ability to influence the universe would not be set from birth, I agree with that. Their potential ultimate amount of energy that they could expend without either trading off life-time or shortening their lives through sheer exhaustion (if those aren't on some level or other the same thing), assuming optimal conditions of fitness and so forth -- that, I think, might at least be estimated, and perhaps it would be possible to borrow against it. (And most wizards, apparently, do die young -- though this seems to be more a case of getting killed in the line of duty than of actually wearing themselves out.)

                    Influence is different, of course. I think cleverness, as Nathan puts it, plays a very large role in that -- and "most of wizardry is just talking," as I think Tom or Carl says somewhere I can't remember right now. I would be unsurprised, just as an example, if the wizard who conducted a successful intervention by inviting a person inhabited by the Lone Power to dinner (inspiring Dairine to consider buying It a hot dog -- you know, I can just picture her dragging some manifestation off by the hand to do just that, even though it's rather absurd...) did so without doing any spellwork at all. (I'm also, in case I haven't said so before in this thread, convinced that "The Devil and Daniel Webster" ought to be entirely or largely true in the YW universe, with Webster as a wizard. ) Brute force, by contrast, is explicitly said to be pointless in at least some situations -- the sea won't respond to it; you're supposed to ASK molecules in a wall to get out of your way, not tell them -- persuasion is key. (Though threatening the Lone One's elevators seems to be surprisingly effective.) It seems pretty certain that where large amounts of energy are required, knowing where and how to direct them is even more important -- after all, it would be inefficient and thus contribute to entropy otherwise.

                    I rather like the idea of there being a binding energy associated with life. I suppose, then, that in other deaths that energy might be mostly lost, and in a willing sacrifice it would be caught and used... probably in a sort of physical/metaphysical parallel or merging? I agree that there's definitely a contribution, in terms of effectiveness, of the notion of sacrifice itself, and of real willingness (that's explicitly stated), and probably of the symbolism and ritual surrounding many such situations. (Although I'm only guessing that life-price payments would commonly be saved up for such cases, it seems logical, especially as I wouldn't be surprised if that does make a greater contribution than the exchange of remaining lifetime for energy.)

                    And aside from the fact that rereading A Wind in the Door and the idea of Xing oneself tends to make me more open to the idea of giving one's whole existence (not just life) away as the highest payment, I don't think I have any further ideas at the moment for what it might constitute.

                    If this post is a little scattered, please forgive me. I ramble when I'm feeling speculative.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      You guys are getting WAY too deep! Loosen up and please get your feet back on the ground where the rest of us simple folk are, please!

                      "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline
                      "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        You guys are getting WAY too deep!
                        But... but Jen. We are in the Deep Wizardry forum, you know.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Even the ocean isn't THAT deep. And that's what's being refered to here.

                          "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline
                          "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Well, it's no fun if we don't try to make sense of it and speculate.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              oh i sounded soooooooo cynical there - sorry

                              didn't mean it that way

                              if you like being deep.....go for it!

                              "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline
                              "Deceit shall have its reward." - Timeline

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                i agree with A Moonlighting X-Phile because when you lose someone your in love with you doomed for the rest of your life to think about it and think maybe i couldve done something. like in that greek tradegie where he puts his daughter to death and then the rest of their family kills themselves and its just him left to remember for the rest of his life what hes lost.

                                You're only young once but you can stay immature indefintly.

                                My givin name (from friends) is Psychotic Susan Hardhead. Psycho Susie for short

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X