Sandbox Discussions

[DanielH]

Some technical detail, if you don't mind - I've never dealt in scoot manufacture, though, so you will likely have to explain it using small words.

That does seem to make sense here; I doubt that finding all the semantic information attached to the jargon would be that easy. In an earlier sandbox, though (one of the League ones?), the words were only one or two conceptual steps away and somebody said that reversing this common advice might be better. I wonder what the optimal amount of jargon actually is, in the general case of explaining something to Draconic-speakers.

[Lambda]

In this case they were both native Draconic speakers, so there was less need for Avet's statement to be informatively accurate. I read it as mostly a joke.

[Aestrix]

Avet was indeed making a joke.

[Ezra]

"If I had to guess, I would say that my reading this is destroying the magical Estate in it. Are you very sure that I should keep going?"

Oh dear, it sounds like she could be accidentally destroying the entire class of Read Magic spellbooks!

[Eva]

A find I made today in Nobilis' rules (emphasis mine):

Difficulty 5:
“Legendary Mastery”
At this level you become like a great legendary master. Your body becomes light, and you have total conscious control over it — every muscle, every system, every portion. You’re more sinuous than a snake. You can run on top of grass or balance on a thread. You can leap thirty, forty, fifty yards if you have to, and land easily from practically any fall. Your mind’s the same way — light, meaning that thinking is always fun and easy and you never have to be sad, and controlled, meaning that you can reorganize your memories, actively practice rationality, decide how you want to feel about things, build and model independent perspectives in your head, and think coherently about many things at once.

In other words, it's an Aspect-5 Gift of Rationality to be as Luminous as a Bell. For comparison, Aspect 3 lets you jump off of spinning helicopter blades.

[DanielH]

I think that’s more luminous than a Bell. Bells cannot actually decide how they want to feel about things that easily; otherwise, Lexi wouldn’t have had any trouble with the idea of non-monogamy.

[Lambda]

Lexi's not a Bell, I think?

[Alicorn]

Lexi is an Alex, not a Bell. Some Bells do have trouble with the idea of non-monogamy but this is mostly a problem with the motivation step, not the execution.

[DanielH]

That was a mistake on my part. I meant Lexi’s twin, whose nickname I am unable to remember. She had more trouble with Brilliance being a Joker than any other Effulgence Bells seem to have had with their respective SOs not necessarily wanting monogamy.

[Alicorn]

Lexi's twin has the peal nickname Aurora.