Re: [HoE] Junkman Cometh and Mad Science

["Steve Crow" <crow_steve@hotmail.com>]

>    Okay, everyone knows that mad scientists are people who get inspired by
>the manitou.  No problem so far.  In the main Hell on Earth rulesbook, the
>manitou were showing them future technology, and stopped showing them when
>all the preparation for doomsday came.  Admittedly, a slight problem there.
>If the manitous were showing the mad scientists future tech, then how come
>there doesn't seem to be a limit to what a mad scientist could create?  
>Mind

Depends on which "future" the manitous were drawing their knowledge from.  
Unless you believe in predestination, perhaps they were drawing knowledge 
from a future with even higher tech that, for one reason or another didn't 
come to pass.

One could theorize that as 2063 got closer, less super-"future tech" of that 
nature was built because the chances of it occurring became less and less.  
In 1863 you've got two hundred years of alternate futures where someone 
comes up with a time machine.  By 2061, the odds of that happening are a lot 
slimmer and thus, harder for the manitous to find a reality where that 
occurs.

>control helmets, freeze guns, time machines, the mad scientists could 
>create
>technology that every indication says didn't exist (or at least wasn't 
>known)
>before the bombs fell, although admittedly it is possible the manitou 
>weren't
>limited to the hell on earth time when it came to reverse engineering.

Well, here's the catch.  Let's say the manitou gave a mad scientist 
knowledge of a device that was actually technologically conveivable or 
whatever in 2062.  If they could draw on _that_ kind of knowledge, why 
couldn't they (or the Reckoners themselves) draw on knowledge of what was 
going to defeat them, and bypass it?

The "alternature futures" accounts for that because there were too many 
variables for a manitou or Reckoner to know what would defeat them in _this_ 
timeline and account for it.

>    And then there is the great Junkman Cometh retconn.  In which there is 
>a
>division between mad and "normal" science, and no mad scientist understood
>anything about the least mad science invention once the manitou stopped
>playing.  Previously, it looked like the only reason mad science technology
>was so prone to unreliability was that mad scientists truly didn't 
>understand
>the technology, never mind that I find that slightly insulting to humanity.
>If the likes of Newton, Einstein, Tesla, or Edison were inspired by 
>manitou,

Newton lived and died well before 1863 - I don't believe anyone has ever 
claimed he was inspired by manitous, or that all technology and scientific 
development was inspired by manitous.  Edison creating the light bulb had 
nothing to do with weird science that I recall.  I don't have the book here 
in front of me - does it say that?

As for other Mads...in general, I suspect they were lazy.  You might be 
interested in mechanics, but if someone gives you a car for your birthday, 
you don't go out and learn how to build one from scratch.  The mads bypassed 
"learning" and just built to the specifications the manitous put in their 
heads.

When you can do that kind of stuff, why bother furthering your knowledge of 
"real" science?  Is it insulting that someone who is handy with a wrench and 
can fix a bicycle didn't go out and learn how to build a car because someone 
bought them one as a present?

>they wouldn't have any chance of truly understanding the technology they 
>were
>working with?  Somehow I don't think so. But now Pinnacle seems to be 
>saying
>that no mad scientist, no matter how intelligent or knowledgeable, couldn't
>invent a paper clip without a manitou whispering in their head, or at least
>that is what the division between mad and pure science says to me.

A paper clip would be "pure science" so I'm not sure I understand the 
division you are referring to.  But yes, as I understand it, that's what 
Pinnacle is saying.  "Real science" and their ability to use it had 
atrophied in the minds of mad scientists.

Even in Deadlands, I seem to recall mad scientists putting weird science 
stuff together in fever dreams and what-not. I guess I don't have a problem 
with them building something without understanding it.

>Furthermore, junkman cometh pretty blatantly implied that nobody could
>understand even previously invented mad tech when the manitou stopped 
>playing
>muse.  And that I don't understand at all.  Hellstrome couldn't even 
>remember
>how to put together a flame thrower because his muse went away?  Doesn't 
>that
>seem wrong somehow to anybody else?  The manitou gave the mad scientists 
>the
>knowledge, which the mad scientist gets to play with afterward.  I don't 
>see

I don't believe the manitous gave the mads the knowledge as much as 
blueprints directly into their minds.  If the mads truly had the "knowledge" 
and understood the theories, wouldn't they have then been able to mass 
produce?  Instead, each item they built had to be pretty much built from 
scratch, with no modifiers or benefits based on how many similar or 
identical devices they had built in the past.


>why the manitou would be in the least bit important after giving the mad
>scientist the knowledge, or vision, or dream, or however it works.

That's why the manitous did _not_ give the mads the knowledge itself.  A mad 
wouldn't have had to keep drawing on the manitous (and risking insanity) for 
more mental plans  if the manitou simply dropped the knowledge and theories 
into his head and left.  Assuming they could implant knowledge/theory.  I 
could buy you a car.  I might even be able to buy you all the parts of a car 
and give you the "put together" manual.  That doesn't mean I can give you 
the knowledge to understand internal combustion, catalytic conversion, etc.  
Even if I were so inclined...and the manitous weren't.

>    I admit, it is possible that I just don't understand the cosmology and
>theory of how mad science works, in which case could someone explain it to
>me?

I'm not sure I understand the whole "bring knowledge back from the future" 
bit myself (see above for my personal explanation of it).  However, my 
understanding, as noted above, is that the manitous gave scientists the 
mental equivalent of a car, or the understanding of how to assemble one, 
rather than the knowledge and theories behind how a car works.

Folks came up with "normal" science on their own.  Manitous provided mental 
blueprints and "how to build" instructions for only the most esoteric stuff 
in the future timelines they could find.  Not too many folks are going to go 
insane by being shown how to build a paper clip.  :)

Einstein presumably came up with the theory of relativity, but manitous 
probably gave certain mads direct mental "blueprints" of how to build an 
atomic bomb.  But just because they could build it doesn't mean a mad 
understood the theory which Einstein came up with on his own.

---

Steve Crow

"Worm Can Opener Extraordinare"

Check out my website at:  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/4991/

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com