Revision as of 08:07, 5 April 2010

Bedlam

By passing through the gateway Nirakara, a raksha puts a thin veneer of shape over his true existence as a formless whorl of chaotic Essence. Sometimes, though, the chaos breaks through, infecting and subverting the raksha's perceptions. This eruption of purposeless, undirected behavior is called bedlam, and it may occur when a raksha's Graces are destroyed or mystically severed from him, or when he depletes the Virtues that anchor his pretense of coherent selfhood.

At first glance, some of the rules for bedlam expressed on pp. 112-113 of E:tFF might seem arbitrary. Why does running out of Conviction, the Virtue that drives one to overcome hardships, result in the Curse of Namelessness rather than the Curse of Meekness? What is the difference between the Curses of Hubris and Alienation? This essay attempts to answer these questions by clarifying the canonical rules, and to offer a possible scenario for the bedlam that arises when a raksha who has tamed Nirupadhika by forging a Way Grace for herself is stripped of her connection to the shinma of location and dimension.

The Four-Fold Cycle of Virtues and Graces

Anyone who has studied Taoism will be familiar with the five-element theory and the cycles of creation and destruction. The Virtues and Graces of the raksha display a similar cyclic pattern, as shown in the descriptions of the Graces on pp. 106-108 of E:tFF.

http://www.pobox.com/~sethb/Exalted/Virtues_and_Graces.png

Each of the four Graces, Cup, Ring, Sword and Staff, feeds on one of the four Virtues and controls a different Virtue. These relationships form a cycle. Each of the four Bedlam Curses occurs when a particular Virtue or its controlling Grace (not the Grace that feeds on it) is reduced to zero.

Conviction and the Curse of Namelessness

Why does running out of Conviction cause one to suffer the Curse of Namelessness? The arbitrary, mechanical answer is that the Sword Grace controls (overwhelms) the Virtue of Conviction, and losing one's Sword Grace also results in the Curse of Namelessness. This answer, however, fails to satisfy. Perhaps we can go deeper, and arrive at a justification based on the concepts involved, not just on the four-fold cycle.

As described on p. 165, a character with Conviction 0 "has no stability." More specifically, any hardship causes him to give up immediately; he cannot apply his will to overcome obstacles presented by the world around him. He is so easily defeated by any opposition that, psychologically speaking, he effectively becomes an extra, a bit player in the stories of others, lacking any name or identity. This is very similar to the description of Sword 0 on p. 108 ("Your identity is not important, even to yourself"). Both of these conditions result in the Curse of Namelessness.

Hubris vs. Alienation

As described on p. 113, there is no particular difference between the Curse of Hubris and the Curse of Alienation. Both inflict a +2 difficulty on all Cup- and Staff-shaping rolls, and on any attempt to influence other beings; the Curse of Hubris (provoked by Compassion 0 or Staff 0) also impedes attempts to understand others, while the Curse of Alienation (due to Temperance 0 or Cup 0) makes attempts to serve others more challenging. What distinction, if any, exists between these two states?

I feel that the names of these two Curses are reversed: that derived from Staff 0 should be called "the Curse of Alienation," and that from Cup 0 "Hubris." The function of the Staff Grace is to mediate and form connections between the raksha and other beings. When one's Staff is shattered, or one's facility for empathy (Compassion) depleted, every creature but oneself becomes a thing rather than a person. The words of others are a meaningless "bar bar bar," the gist of which can be gathered only with effort, and every act of volition performed by someone else becomes an unpleasant surprise. One must discipline these unruly objects, make them behave--make them stay where they're put and do as they're told--or else crush them out of existence. This is more accurately labeled "alienation" than "hubris."

When the Cup is destroyed, on the other hand, or the psychic faculty of balance and restraint (Temperance) exhausted, one can no longer modify one's behavior in response to the needs of others. Custom, duty, justice--these concepts mean nothing. One's every whim becomes unquestionable law; anyone who opposes one's desires must be smashed aside, to preserve one's absolute freedom of action. The overweening egoism that says "My desires of the moment are more important than your most desperate needs for survival" is hubris, not alienation.

Both of these conditions present serious obstacles to social interaction, but the (renamed) Curse of Alienation also derails any effort to understand the motivations of others, while the (renamed) Curse of Hubris allows one to perceive the desires of others, but forbids any change in one's behavior aimed at satisfying those desires.

The Way Grace and the Curse of Compulsion

According to p. 211 of E:tFF, "The Curse associated with [the reduction of a raksha's Way Grace to 0] is left to the Storyteller to determine." This is not outstandingly helpful. What kind of bedlam might result from such a severance?

In my view, the Way allows a raksha to manipulate not only her own physical location, but the pacing and narrative of the stories in which she is involved. Distance in the Wyld, after all, is judged in terms of journeys and scenes, not miles and days. If one has rendered one's personal teleology vulnerable through the forging of a Way Grace, the loss of that quality means that the destination of one's voyaging is no longer under one's own control. Rules for the mechanical effects of such an event can be found at MetalFatigueMetalFatigue/Bedlam/WayGrace.