Mixing
Simplest explanation for societies to know about only one kind of magic of the two existing ones?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Premise
In my story, magic operates through a mana field that can be tapped in to cast spells. Mana comes in two kinds: blue and orange. Flows of mana of either kind are subject to elemental influences: mana streams are naturally found along water or wind streams, trapped into some geological sediments and expelled with lava flows.
Humans, like most living species, are not normally able to perceive the presence of mana (no more than we can feel, say, magnetic fields).
However some druidic society, living in forest areas, has discovered a special berry. When consumed it temporarily modifies the vision, allowing to see flows of blue mana. The way this works is by making blue cones sensitive to blue mana rather than normal blue light, hence dense concentrations of mana appear blue to those who consumed the berry.
They have prospered thank to the use of magic, but never discovered the existence of orange mana, even far into medieval times, long after the existence and usage of magic has been well established, studied and theorized.
On the contrary, a society of nomads living in an arid desert has discovered independently the use of orange mana, by consuming the venom of some snake. The effect on vision is similar but affects orange cones, which among humans only some women possess. The venom also affects green cones but to a lesser extent. Therefore this society has mostly female mages and has grown to be matriarchal as a result. For the purpose of the question, let's say that around 30% of women are born with this additional cone.
As some point, descendants of these nomads became sedentary and established cities in the desert. They also theorized magic and have a good grasp of it, though not aware of the advances of the druidic societies.
For my story, it is very important that at some point in history, a cultural clash between these two civilizations be rooted in their completely different handling of magic.
Last but not least, both societies have been in contact with dragons, which are among the rare creatures naturally sensitive to mana. Although this vary with breed, most dragons can see and manipulate both kinds of mana. They are far more intelligent than humans but do not normally bother with learning how to communicate with their delicious preys.
Question
What is simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements) that each society would have independently discovered and studied only one sort of magic, without ever accidentally stumbling upon the other kind?
Some elements I'd like to emphasis:
- In this universe, magic can in principle be learned and used by (nearly) anyone, (nearly) anywhere. (i.e. your answer can't be "blue mana is only available in region X, orange mana in region Y"). In the future the two societies will reach peace and the use of both types of mana will spread.
- While your answer may involve some genetic predispositions, no human is born with magic abilities, as mana can not be detected by the human body alone.
- It's perfectly OK that (some) magical creatures would be sensitive to both mana types, but no human group has ever discovered both, some have discovered neither.
- Although both the berry and the snake are endemic of the said forest and desert, respectively, they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region.
The question could therefore be reformulated as
Given that both societies have studied magic and the fauna and flora of their surroundings, what is the simplest explanation as to why they never had to hypothesized the existence of two types of mana, even though they intervene in various natural processes?
Your answer may or may not involve the existence of other ways to become sensitive to mana, but keep in mind that the only two discovered by druids and nomads are those above-mentionned.
- The nomads and druids descendants have lived fairly separately before the above-mentioned clash. They know of each others through tales of itinerant merchants, but they never suspected that their magics were so deeply different.
More Background Info
The following is not necessary to answer the question, but provides background for the curious.
- Mana in itself is actually colorless, the names only refer to their effect on human vision.
- In my world, the discovery of the berry is the root of druidism, as druids maintained their privileges in early human groups by consuming the berry and using mana to become valuable members of the group, including communicating with other beasts that consume the berry.
- The reason the berry has this effect is a dissemination strategy: the berry traps mana so that crows, who consume the berry in their normal diet, can spot the berry easily and spread seeds throughout the forest.
- The reason the snake's venom has this effect is part of their mating behavior: males harbour beautiful patterns obtained by fixing orange mana to their scales. The pattern only reveals to females that they have bitten as part of the courtship ritual, but not to potential predators, insensitive to orange mana.
magic
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Premise
In my story, magic operates through a mana field that can be tapped in to cast spells. Mana comes in two kinds: blue and orange. Flows of mana of either kind are subject to elemental influences: mana streams are naturally found along water or wind streams, trapped into some geological sediments and expelled with lava flows.
Humans, like most living species, are not normally able to perceive the presence of mana (no more than we can feel, say, magnetic fields).
However some druidic society, living in forest areas, has discovered a special berry. When consumed it temporarily modifies the vision, allowing to see flows of blue mana. The way this works is by making blue cones sensitive to blue mana rather than normal blue light, hence dense concentrations of mana appear blue to those who consumed the berry.
They have prospered thank to the use of magic, but never discovered the existence of orange mana, even far into medieval times, long after the existence and usage of magic has been well established, studied and theorized.
On the contrary, a society of nomads living in an arid desert has discovered independently the use of orange mana, by consuming the venom of some snake. The effect on vision is similar but affects orange cones, which among humans only some women possess. The venom also affects green cones but to a lesser extent. Therefore this society has mostly female mages and has grown to be matriarchal as a result. For the purpose of the question, let's say that around 30% of women are born with this additional cone.
As some point, descendants of these nomads became sedentary and established cities in the desert. They also theorized magic and have a good grasp of it, though not aware of the advances of the druidic societies.
For my story, it is very important that at some point in history, a cultural clash between these two civilizations be rooted in their completely different handling of magic.
Last but not least, both societies have been in contact with dragons, which are among the rare creatures naturally sensitive to mana. Although this vary with breed, most dragons can see and manipulate both kinds of mana. They are far more intelligent than humans but do not normally bother with learning how to communicate with their delicious preys.
Question
What is simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements) that each society would have independently discovered and studied only one sort of magic, without ever accidentally stumbling upon the other kind?
Some elements I'd like to emphasis:
- In this universe, magic can in principle be learned and used by (nearly) anyone, (nearly) anywhere. (i.e. your answer can't be "blue mana is only available in region X, orange mana in region Y"). In the future the two societies will reach peace and the use of both types of mana will spread.
- While your answer may involve some genetic predispositions, no human is born with magic abilities, as mana can not be detected by the human body alone.
- It's perfectly OK that (some) magical creatures would be sensitive to both mana types, but no human group has ever discovered both, some have discovered neither.
- Although both the berry and the snake are endemic of the said forest and desert, respectively, they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region.
The question could therefore be reformulated as
Given that both societies have studied magic and the fauna and flora of their surroundings, what is the simplest explanation as to why they never had to hypothesized the existence of two types of mana, even though they intervene in various natural processes?
Your answer may or may not involve the existence of other ways to become sensitive to mana, but keep in mind that the only two discovered by druids and nomads are those above-mentionned.
- The nomads and druids descendants have lived fairly separately before the above-mentioned clash. They know of each others through tales of itinerant merchants, but they never suspected that their magics were so deeply different.
More Background Info
The following is not necessary to answer the question, but provides background for the curious.
- Mana in itself is actually colorless, the names only refer to their effect on human vision.
- In my world, the discovery of the berry is the root of druidism, as druids maintained their privileges in early human groups by consuming the berry and using mana to become valuable members of the group, including communicating with other beasts that consume the berry.
- The reason the berry has this effect is a dissemination strategy: the berry traps mana so that crows, who consume the berry in their normal diet, can spot the berry easily and spread seeds throughout the forest.
- The reason the snake's venom has this effect is part of their mating behavior: males harbour beautiful patterns obtained by fixing orange mana to their scales. The pattern only reveals to females that they have bitten as part of the courtship ritual, but not to potential predators, insensitive to orange mana.
magic
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Premise
In my story, magic operates through a mana field that can be tapped in to cast spells. Mana comes in two kinds: blue and orange. Flows of mana of either kind are subject to elemental influences: mana streams are naturally found along water or wind streams, trapped into some geological sediments and expelled with lava flows.
Humans, like most living species, are not normally able to perceive the presence of mana (no more than we can feel, say, magnetic fields).
However some druidic society, living in forest areas, has discovered a special berry. When consumed it temporarily modifies the vision, allowing to see flows of blue mana. The way this works is by making blue cones sensitive to blue mana rather than normal blue light, hence dense concentrations of mana appear blue to those who consumed the berry.
They have prospered thank to the use of magic, but never discovered the existence of orange mana, even far into medieval times, long after the existence and usage of magic has been well established, studied and theorized.
On the contrary, a society of nomads living in an arid desert has discovered independently the use of orange mana, by consuming the venom of some snake. The effect on vision is similar but affects orange cones, which among humans only some women possess. The venom also affects green cones but to a lesser extent. Therefore this society has mostly female mages and has grown to be matriarchal as a result. For the purpose of the question, let's say that around 30% of women are born with this additional cone.
As some point, descendants of these nomads became sedentary and established cities in the desert. They also theorized magic and have a good grasp of it, though not aware of the advances of the druidic societies.
For my story, it is very important that at some point in history, a cultural clash between these two civilizations be rooted in their completely different handling of magic.
Last but not least, both societies have been in contact with dragons, which are among the rare creatures naturally sensitive to mana. Although this vary with breed, most dragons can see and manipulate both kinds of mana. They are far more intelligent than humans but do not normally bother with learning how to communicate with their delicious preys.
Question
What is simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements) that each society would have independently discovered and studied only one sort of magic, without ever accidentally stumbling upon the other kind?
Some elements I'd like to emphasis:
- In this universe, magic can in principle be learned and used by (nearly) anyone, (nearly) anywhere. (i.e. your answer can't be "blue mana is only available in region X, orange mana in region Y"). In the future the two societies will reach peace and the use of both types of mana will spread.
- While your answer may involve some genetic predispositions, no human is born with magic abilities, as mana can not be detected by the human body alone.
- It's perfectly OK that (some) magical creatures would be sensitive to both mana types, but no human group has ever discovered both, some have discovered neither.
- Although both the berry and the snake are endemic of the said forest and desert, respectively, they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region.
The question could therefore be reformulated as
Given that both societies have studied magic and the fauna and flora of their surroundings, what is the simplest explanation as to why they never had to hypothesized the existence of two types of mana, even though they intervene in various natural processes?
Your answer may or may not involve the existence of other ways to become sensitive to mana, but keep in mind that the only two discovered by druids and nomads are those above-mentionned.
- The nomads and druids descendants have lived fairly separately before the above-mentioned clash. They know of each others through tales of itinerant merchants, but they never suspected that their magics were so deeply different.
More Background Info
The following is not necessary to answer the question, but provides background for the curious.
- Mana in itself is actually colorless, the names only refer to their effect on human vision.
- In my world, the discovery of the berry is the root of druidism, as druids maintained their privileges in early human groups by consuming the berry and using mana to become valuable members of the group, including communicating with other beasts that consume the berry.
- The reason the berry has this effect is a dissemination strategy: the berry traps mana so that crows, who consume the berry in their normal diet, can spot the berry easily and spread seeds throughout the forest.
- The reason the snake's venom has this effect is part of their mating behavior: males harbour beautiful patterns obtained by fixing orange mana to their scales. The pattern only reveals to females that they have bitten as part of the courtship ritual, but not to potential predators, insensitive to orange mana.
magic
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
Premise
In my story, magic operates through a mana field that can be tapped in to cast spells. Mana comes in two kinds: blue and orange. Flows of mana of either kind are subject to elemental influences: mana streams are naturally found along water or wind streams, trapped into some geological sediments and expelled with lava flows.
Humans, like most living species, are not normally able to perceive the presence of mana (no more than we can feel, say, magnetic fields).
However some druidic society, living in forest areas, has discovered a special berry. When consumed it temporarily modifies the vision, allowing to see flows of blue mana. The way this works is by making blue cones sensitive to blue mana rather than normal blue light, hence dense concentrations of mana appear blue to those who consumed the berry.
They have prospered thank to the use of magic, but never discovered the existence of orange mana, even far into medieval times, long after the existence and usage of magic has been well established, studied and theorized.
On the contrary, a society of nomads living in an arid desert has discovered independently the use of orange mana, by consuming the venom of some snake. The effect on vision is similar but affects orange cones, which among humans only some women possess. The venom also affects green cones but to a lesser extent. Therefore this society has mostly female mages and has grown to be matriarchal as a result. For the purpose of the question, let's say that around 30% of women are born with this additional cone.
As some point, descendants of these nomads became sedentary and established cities in the desert. They also theorized magic and have a good grasp of it, though not aware of the advances of the druidic societies.
For my story, it is very important that at some point in history, a cultural clash between these two civilizations be rooted in their completely different handling of magic.
Last but not least, both societies have been in contact with dragons, which are among the rare creatures naturally sensitive to mana. Although this vary with breed, most dragons can see and manipulate both kinds of mana. They are far more intelligent than humans but do not normally bother with learning how to communicate with their delicious preys.
Question
What is simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements) that each society would have independently discovered and studied only one sort of magic, without ever accidentally stumbling upon the other kind?
Some elements I'd like to emphasis:
- In this universe, magic can in principle be learned and used by (nearly) anyone, (nearly) anywhere. (i.e. your answer can't be "blue mana is only available in region X, orange mana in region Y"). In the future the two societies will reach peace and the use of both types of mana will spread.
- While your answer may involve some genetic predispositions, no human is born with magic abilities, as mana can not be detected by the human body alone.
- It's perfectly OK that (some) magical creatures would be sensitive to both mana types, but no human group has ever discovered both, some have discovered neither.
- Although both the berry and the snake are endemic of the said forest and desert, respectively, they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region.
The question could therefore be reformulated as
Given that both societies have studied magic and the fauna and flora of their surroundings, what is the simplest explanation as to why they never had to hypothesized the existence of two types of mana, even though they intervene in various natural processes?
Your answer may or may not involve the existence of other ways to become sensitive to mana, but keep in mind that the only two discovered by druids and nomads are those above-mentionned.
- The nomads and druids descendants have lived fairly separately before the above-mentioned clash. They know of each others through tales of itinerant merchants, but they never suspected that their magics were so deeply different.
More Background Info
The following is not necessary to answer the question, but provides background for the curious.
- Mana in itself is actually colorless, the names only refer to their effect on human vision.
- In my world, the discovery of the berry is the root of druidism, as druids maintained their privileges in early human groups by consuming the berry and using mana to become valuable members of the group, including communicating with other beasts that consume the berry.
- The reason the berry has this effect is a dissemination strategy: the berry traps mana so that crows, who consume the berry in their normal diet, can spot the berry easily and spread seeds throughout the forest.
- The reason the snake's venom has this effect is part of their mating behavior: males harbour beautiful patterns obtained by fixing orange mana to their scales. The pattern only reveals to females that they have bitten as part of the courtship ritual, but not to potential predators, insensitive to orange mana.
magic
magic
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
edited 11 mins ago
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
asked 2 hours ago
Alexis
726216
726216
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It's simple. The snake that induces the ability to see the orange mana only exists in the land of the nomads. The berries that induces the ability to see blue mana only exists in the land of the civilization.
Though, eventually, there will be wanderers that go into these lands and discover the oranga mana inducing snake or the blue mana inducing berry. But, the nomads had built up through many generations a tolerance to the snake venom. So, if a wanderer is to consume the venom, she might be able to see orange mana, but only for a little while before collapsing and dying. Same thing with the berries, they're poisonous, and the blue mana users have through generations become tolerant to it, but the nomads haven't.
Also, just to take note of; venom only affects people when injected into the blood. Nothing will happen if you drink venom. Though poison on the other hand, affects one both through blood injection and consumption. Just have that in mind when writing on.
Good luck, I really like the concept.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Your "Blue cones" in the eye are sensitive to ultraviolet light, "orange cones" are sensitive to infrared. They are just outside are both just outside the spectrum of frequencies visible to human eye, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. So ability to see one of them has nothing to do with ability seeing the other.
In fact, you can make it so that ability to see ultraviolet could come at the cost of ability to see some deeper reds that are visible to to normal humans. And vice versa, seeing infrared costs you ability to see blue. Finally, you could make it that taking both blue berry and snake venom will pull visual range in opposite directions, leaving a person blind.
Also: some birds can see ultraviolet; some snakes can see infrared.
Edit: Biology.SE tells us that humans have some biologic mechanisms that could let them see either ultraviolet or infrared, but they are different mechanisms.
So your blue berries weaken or destroy the eye lens (creating aphakia), or make it transparent to UV rays. The venom mutates eye proteins and shifts the range that "red" eye cone can detect.
Edit 2: If you want somebody to do both kinds of magic, you can assume that ability to see UV and IR can happen in the same person, i.e. the two different mechanisms do not affect each other (my statement above against this is a hypothesis, not a fact).
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. Berries are particles. Snake venom is a fluid, so it has wave like behaviors. I swear to god, holy wars have been raise in the science class room whether light is a particle or a wave, despite the best efforts of the teacher to teach that they're two sides of the same coin. Why should your manna be any different?
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. In order to learn how to use something you need to see it to study it.
The Druids have only ever seen blue mana and been able to manipulate it while under the effects of the berry. This has allowed them to craft spells around using blue and its limitations.
The nomads likewise have only ever seen orange due to the lack of the berry and have only learned the properties of orange mana.
Skilled practitioners could likely have learned to use magic by feel after using it so frequently with the berry/venom much in the same way as you can navigate your house in the dark. It is something that anyone could do with study but it is night impossible without the "training wheels" of the "sight".
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Given OP's updates in comments (which they should edit into their question, as it changes everything), there is no answer that we can provide except by guessing and speculation.
Example:
OP says there are other objects as well in each area that also provide access to both forms of mana. So why haven't they taken advantage of those?
A: The orange berry in the forest is shaped like your peoples' symbol for "fart cloud", so nobody has ever tried to eat it.
Technically, that answer is just as correct as any other. And if OP is writing a humorous story, then I ask you to please use this answer, and combine it with the following: The nomads do not try to use the blue snake because it commonly curls up to sleep in the pattern of their language symbol for 'one who sneezes just before everyone runs at the hunting prey' and nobody wants to be that guy.
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
 |Â
show 1 more comment
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It's simple. The snake that induces the ability to see the orange mana only exists in the land of the nomads. The berries that induces the ability to see blue mana only exists in the land of the civilization.
Though, eventually, there will be wanderers that go into these lands and discover the oranga mana inducing snake or the blue mana inducing berry. But, the nomads had built up through many generations a tolerance to the snake venom. So, if a wanderer is to consume the venom, she might be able to see orange mana, but only for a little while before collapsing and dying. Same thing with the berries, they're poisonous, and the blue mana users have through generations become tolerant to it, but the nomads haven't.
Also, just to take note of; venom only affects people when injected into the blood. Nothing will happen if you drink venom. Though poison on the other hand, affects one both through blood injection and consumption. Just have that in mind when writing on.
Good luck, I really like the concept.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
It's simple. The snake that induces the ability to see the orange mana only exists in the land of the nomads. The berries that induces the ability to see blue mana only exists in the land of the civilization.
Though, eventually, there will be wanderers that go into these lands and discover the oranga mana inducing snake or the blue mana inducing berry. But, the nomads had built up through many generations a tolerance to the snake venom. So, if a wanderer is to consume the venom, she might be able to see orange mana, but only for a little while before collapsing and dying. Same thing with the berries, they're poisonous, and the blue mana users have through generations become tolerant to it, but the nomads haven't.
Also, just to take note of; venom only affects people when injected into the blood. Nothing will happen if you drink venom. Though poison on the other hand, affects one both through blood injection and consumption. Just have that in mind when writing on.
Good luck, I really like the concept.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
It's simple. The snake that induces the ability to see the orange mana only exists in the land of the nomads. The berries that induces the ability to see blue mana only exists in the land of the civilization.
Though, eventually, there will be wanderers that go into these lands and discover the oranga mana inducing snake or the blue mana inducing berry. But, the nomads had built up through many generations a tolerance to the snake venom. So, if a wanderer is to consume the venom, she might be able to see orange mana, but only for a little while before collapsing and dying. Same thing with the berries, they're poisonous, and the blue mana users have through generations become tolerant to it, but the nomads haven't.
Also, just to take note of; venom only affects people when injected into the blood. Nothing will happen if you drink venom. Though poison on the other hand, affects one both through blood injection and consumption. Just have that in mind when writing on.
Good luck, I really like the concept.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It's simple. The snake that induces the ability to see the orange mana only exists in the land of the nomads. The berries that induces the ability to see blue mana only exists in the land of the civilization.
Though, eventually, there will be wanderers that go into these lands and discover the oranga mana inducing snake or the blue mana inducing berry. But, the nomads had built up through many generations a tolerance to the snake venom. So, if a wanderer is to consume the venom, she might be able to see orange mana, but only for a little while before collapsing and dying. Same thing with the berries, they're poisonous, and the blue mana users have through generations become tolerant to it, but the nomads haven't.
Also, just to take note of; venom only affects people when injected into the blood. Nothing will happen if you drink venom. Though poison on the other hand, affects one both through blood injection and consumption. Just have that in mind when writing on.
Good luck, I really like the concept.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
answered 52 mins ago
A. Kvåle
1415
1415
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
A. Kvåle is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
I did not know this distinction between poison and venom! Useful plot device actually ...
– Alexis
50 mins ago
1
1
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
Yeah, it's quite interesting actually. Very few snakes are poisonous, almost all are venomous. Frogs on the other hand, are more often poisonous, sometimes dispersing this poison through the skin on their back, meaning that only a mere touch can poison you.
– A. Kvåle
48 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
As for your main point, as for the answer from IT Alex: yes the berry and snake helped finding out, but there are many other species that should have lead to the same discovery, in both environments.
– Alexis
47 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
So the snake and the berry are not the only sources of blue and orange mana respectively?
– A. Kvåle
45 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
no, both kinds of mana are naturally present and conserved quantities. They can only be displaced, not consumed nor created. Snake and berry are only two examples of species which developed sensitivity to the mana for evolutionary purposes. These abilities have then been exploited by humans.
– Alexis
43 mins ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
Your "Blue cones" in the eye are sensitive to ultraviolet light, "orange cones" are sensitive to infrared. They are just outside are both just outside the spectrum of frequencies visible to human eye, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. So ability to see one of them has nothing to do with ability seeing the other.
In fact, you can make it so that ability to see ultraviolet could come at the cost of ability to see some deeper reds that are visible to to normal humans. And vice versa, seeing infrared costs you ability to see blue. Finally, you could make it that taking both blue berry and snake venom will pull visual range in opposite directions, leaving a person blind.
Also: some birds can see ultraviolet; some snakes can see infrared.
Edit: Biology.SE tells us that humans have some biologic mechanisms that could let them see either ultraviolet or infrared, but they are different mechanisms.
So your blue berries weaken or destroy the eye lens (creating aphakia), or make it transparent to UV rays. The venom mutates eye proteins and shifts the range that "red" eye cone can detect.
Edit 2: If you want somebody to do both kinds of magic, you can assume that ability to see UV and IR can happen in the same person, i.e. the two different mechanisms do not affect each other (my statement above against this is a hypothesis, not a fact).
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Your "Blue cones" in the eye are sensitive to ultraviolet light, "orange cones" are sensitive to infrared. They are just outside are both just outside the spectrum of frequencies visible to human eye, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. So ability to see one of them has nothing to do with ability seeing the other.
In fact, you can make it so that ability to see ultraviolet could come at the cost of ability to see some deeper reds that are visible to to normal humans. And vice versa, seeing infrared costs you ability to see blue. Finally, you could make it that taking both blue berry and snake venom will pull visual range in opposite directions, leaving a person blind.
Also: some birds can see ultraviolet; some snakes can see infrared.
Edit: Biology.SE tells us that humans have some biologic mechanisms that could let them see either ultraviolet or infrared, but they are different mechanisms.
So your blue berries weaken or destroy the eye lens (creating aphakia), or make it transparent to UV rays. The venom mutates eye proteins and shifts the range that "red" eye cone can detect.
Edit 2: If you want somebody to do both kinds of magic, you can assume that ability to see UV and IR can happen in the same person, i.e. the two different mechanisms do not affect each other (my statement above against this is a hypothesis, not a fact).
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Your "Blue cones" in the eye are sensitive to ultraviolet light, "orange cones" are sensitive to infrared. They are just outside are both just outside the spectrum of frequencies visible to human eye, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. So ability to see one of them has nothing to do with ability seeing the other.
In fact, you can make it so that ability to see ultraviolet could come at the cost of ability to see some deeper reds that are visible to to normal humans. And vice versa, seeing infrared costs you ability to see blue. Finally, you could make it that taking both blue berry and snake venom will pull visual range in opposite directions, leaving a person blind.
Also: some birds can see ultraviolet; some snakes can see infrared.
Edit: Biology.SE tells us that humans have some biologic mechanisms that could let them see either ultraviolet or infrared, but they are different mechanisms.
So your blue berries weaken or destroy the eye lens (creating aphakia), or make it transparent to UV rays. The venom mutates eye proteins and shifts the range that "red" eye cone can detect.
Edit 2: If you want somebody to do both kinds of magic, you can assume that ability to see UV and IR can happen in the same person, i.e. the two different mechanisms do not affect each other (my statement above against this is a hypothesis, not a fact).
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
Your "Blue cones" in the eye are sensitive to ultraviolet light, "orange cones" are sensitive to infrared. They are just outside are both just outside the spectrum of frequencies visible to human eye, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. So ability to see one of them has nothing to do with ability seeing the other.
In fact, you can make it so that ability to see ultraviolet could come at the cost of ability to see some deeper reds that are visible to to normal humans. And vice versa, seeing infrared costs you ability to see blue. Finally, you could make it that taking both blue berry and snake venom will pull visual range in opposite directions, leaving a person blind.
Also: some birds can see ultraviolet; some snakes can see infrared.
Edit: Biology.SE tells us that humans have some biologic mechanisms that could let them see either ultraviolet or infrared, but they are different mechanisms.
So your blue berries weaken or destroy the eye lens (creating aphakia), or make it transparent to UV rays. The venom mutates eye proteins and shifts the range that "red" eye cone can detect.
Edit 2: If you want somebody to do both kinds of magic, you can assume that ability to see UV and IR can happen in the same person, i.e. the two different mechanisms do not affect each other (my statement above against this is a hypothesis, not a fact).
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
edited 2 hours ago
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
answered 2 hours ago
Bald Bear
6,250824
6,250824
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
Can you elaborate? How does that explain why each society discovers only one type?
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I like your answer because I find it simple and elegant that one ability hinders the access to the other, but that prevents the existence in the future of mages that can manipulate both kind of manas. I'd rather avoid that if possible (it violates the 1st bullet point, which I reformulated to make it clearer).
– Alexis
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. Berries are particles. Snake venom is a fluid, so it has wave like behaviors. I swear to god, holy wars have been raise in the science class room whether light is a particle or a wave, despite the best efforts of the teacher to teach that they're two sides of the same coin. Why should your manna be any different?
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. Berries are particles. Snake venom is a fluid, so it has wave like behaviors. I swear to god, holy wars have been raise in the science class room whether light is a particle or a wave, despite the best efforts of the teacher to teach that they're two sides of the same coin. Why should your manna be any different?
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. Berries are particles. Snake venom is a fluid, so it has wave like behaviors. I swear to god, holy wars have been raise in the science class room whether light is a particle or a wave, despite the best efforts of the teacher to teach that they're two sides of the same coin. Why should your manna be any different?
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
Simple. Berries are particles. Snake venom is a fluid, so it has wave like behaviors. I swear to god, holy wars have been raise in the science class room whether light is a particle or a wave, despite the best efforts of the teacher to teach that they're two sides of the same coin. Why should your manna be any different?
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
answered 2 hours ago
Cort Ammon
104k15180367
104k15180367
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
I think the particle/wave analogy a bit far-fetched, but the idea that both mana are of nature so different that orange mana is not conceivable in the druidic scientific system and vice versa is quite nice!
– Alexis
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
@Alexis I draw the analogy because it has the same duality. Light isn't a particle and it isn't a wave. It's how we look at it. Its how we chose to simplify it.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
1
1
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
And if you start to think that light is a particle. How you treat light and how you experiment on light will lend itself to cementing your belief that it is a particle. Same goes for waves. It's only when you put it in really abusrd situations, like the single-photon double slit that you realize that neither belief was right.
– Cort Ammon
2 hours ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
Ok but historically, light has been alternatively considered as wave or particle, with good arguments on both sides. How come the druids never considered that mana could be wave like and the nomads never considered it could be particle like, which would have led to experiments demonstrating the existence of the other type of mana?
– Alexis
1 hour ago
1
1
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
They didn't need to, and they had the tiniest of inclination to not want to. For example, the tiniest bit of religious influence would be more than sufficient to convince you one way or the other, as long as your practical experimentations don't yield conflicting results (silence the heretic!)
– Cort Ammon
1 hour ago
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. In order to learn how to use something you need to see it to study it.
The Druids have only ever seen blue mana and been able to manipulate it while under the effects of the berry. This has allowed them to craft spells around using blue and its limitations.
The nomads likewise have only ever seen orange due to the lack of the berry and have only learned the properties of orange mana.
Skilled practitioners could likely have learned to use magic by feel after using it so frequently with the berry/venom much in the same way as you can navigate your house in the dark. It is something that anyone could do with study but it is night impossible without the "training wheels" of the "sight".
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. In order to learn how to use something you need to see it to study it.
The Druids have only ever seen blue mana and been able to manipulate it while under the effects of the berry. This has allowed them to craft spells around using blue and its limitations.
The nomads likewise have only ever seen orange due to the lack of the berry and have only learned the properties of orange mana.
Skilled practitioners could likely have learned to use magic by feel after using it so frequently with the berry/venom much in the same way as you can navigate your house in the dark. It is something that anyone could do with study but it is night impossible without the "training wheels" of the "sight".
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Simple. In order to learn how to use something you need to see it to study it.
The Druids have only ever seen blue mana and been able to manipulate it while under the effects of the berry. This has allowed them to craft spells around using blue and its limitations.
The nomads likewise have only ever seen orange due to the lack of the berry and have only learned the properties of orange mana.
Skilled practitioners could likely have learned to use magic by feel after using it so frequently with the berry/venom much in the same way as you can navigate your house in the dark. It is something that anyone could do with study but it is night impossible without the "training wheels" of the "sight".
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
Simple. In order to learn how to use something you need to see it to study it.
The Druids have only ever seen blue mana and been able to manipulate it while under the effects of the berry. This has allowed them to craft spells around using blue and its limitations.
The nomads likewise have only ever seen orange due to the lack of the berry and have only learned the properties of orange mana.
Skilled practitioners could likely have learned to use magic by feel after using it so frequently with the berry/venom much in the same way as you can navigate your house in the dark. It is something that anyone could do with study but it is night impossible without the "training wheels" of the "sight".
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
answered 1 hour ago
IT Alex
5987
5987
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
I believe I see your point but it remains that the forest (resp. the desert) is inhabited by other species whose metabolism is based on orange (resp blue) mana. Why did the druids (resp. nomads) never studied these creatures enough to discover that there was a discrepancy between their understanding and the facts?
– Alexis
59 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Given OP's updates in comments (which they should edit into their question, as it changes everything), there is no answer that we can provide except by guessing and speculation.
Example:
OP says there are other objects as well in each area that also provide access to both forms of mana. So why haven't they taken advantage of those?
A: The orange berry in the forest is shaped like your peoples' symbol for "fart cloud", so nobody has ever tried to eat it.
Technically, that answer is just as correct as any other. And if OP is writing a humorous story, then I ask you to please use this answer, and combine it with the following: The nomads do not try to use the blue snake because it commonly curls up to sleep in the pattern of their language symbol for 'one who sneezes just before everyone runs at the hunting prey' and nobody wants to be that guy.
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
Given OP's updates in comments (which they should edit into their question, as it changes everything), there is no answer that we can provide except by guessing and speculation.
Example:
OP says there are other objects as well in each area that also provide access to both forms of mana. So why haven't they taken advantage of those?
A: The orange berry in the forest is shaped like your peoples' symbol for "fart cloud", so nobody has ever tried to eat it.
Technically, that answer is just as correct as any other. And if OP is writing a humorous story, then I ask you to please use this answer, and combine it with the following: The nomads do not try to use the blue snake because it commonly curls up to sleep in the pattern of their language symbol for 'one who sneezes just before everyone runs at the hunting prey' and nobody wants to be that guy.
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Given OP's updates in comments (which they should edit into their question, as it changes everything), there is no answer that we can provide except by guessing and speculation.
Example:
OP says there are other objects as well in each area that also provide access to both forms of mana. So why haven't they taken advantage of those?
A: The orange berry in the forest is shaped like your peoples' symbol for "fart cloud", so nobody has ever tried to eat it.
Technically, that answer is just as correct as any other. And if OP is writing a humorous story, then I ask you to please use this answer, and combine it with the following: The nomads do not try to use the blue snake because it commonly curls up to sleep in the pattern of their language symbol for 'one who sneezes just before everyone runs at the hunting prey' and nobody wants to be that guy.
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
Given OP's updates in comments (which they should edit into their question, as it changes everything), there is no answer that we can provide except by guessing and speculation.
Example:
OP says there are other objects as well in each area that also provide access to both forms of mana. So why haven't they taken advantage of those?
A: The orange berry in the forest is shaped like your peoples' symbol for "fart cloud", so nobody has ever tried to eat it.
Technically, that answer is just as correct as any other. And if OP is writing a humorous story, then I ask you to please use this answer, and combine it with the following: The nomads do not try to use the blue snake because it commonly curls up to sleep in the pattern of their language symbol for 'one who sneezes just before everyone runs at the hunting prey' and nobody wants to be that guy.
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
answered 29 mins ago
Aaron
2,331518
2,331518
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
 |Â
show 1 more comment
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
1
1
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
Oh, and to Alexis: I mean no harm, so please don't take it personally. Most people who make a claim I did would rather down-vote your question and try to get it closed; I thought this humorous answer was a more polite way to handle it.
– Aaron
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
I believe this was part of the question, if not, help is appreciated as to how to reformulate. My question also emphasizes the parcimony criterion, which your answer does not fulfill
– Alexis
26 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
To elaborate about parsimony: I believe this does set an objective evaluation method that 1) eliminates most otherwise imaginable answers ; 2) makes the valid answer more likely to be re-usable by others in their own WB process
– Alexis
22 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
@Alexis I just read the question again. Which part are you referring to as parcimony? And parcimony in what regard? What are they unwilling to spend or do?
– Aaron
14 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
parsimony as in Occam's razor (hence the link to WP). Specifically I'm referring to "[...] simplest possible explanation (i.e. involves the smallest amount of additional elements)"
– Alexis
9 mins ago
 |Â
show 1 more comment
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f129626%2fsimplest-explanation-for-societies-to-know-about-only-one-kind-of-magic-of-the-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Special thank to @JohnWDailey for letting me know that tetrachromacy is actually a thing. This was just what I needed to justify my matriarchal society.
– Alexis
2 hours ago
You seem to have dismissed the two simplest and most straightforward answers with some information that is not in your question. I would have provided the same answer if they had not already done so, as it is the correct answer given what you've provided. If there are other sources of mana sight besides this berry and this snake, especially including orange sources in the forest and blue in the desert, then that should be mentioned in the question, as that changes everything.
– Aaron
39 mins ago
Also, if you do add to your question that the berry and snake are not the only sources of mana sight, that there are other orange sources near the druids and blue ones near the nomads, then essentially you are asking "If this was sitting next to them all along, why didn't they know it?" Your question ceases to be something that can be reasonably answered, and suddenly anyone can throw out whatever answer they want... eg: 1) it is 95% subjective 2) it's one of those "You should tell us why they haven't figured it out." things, as it is essentially creating part of your story.
– Aaron
36 mins ago
That's what I meant by this point "they are many other species that use either kind of mana as part of their metabolism. Some common minerals tend to trap high concentration of mana and are not specific to a given region. neither the snake nor the berry are necessary conditions for the discovery." In other words, the mana is an integrant part of both environments and therefore any society which tries to understand it's surrounding should stumble on it. That does NOT imply there are other ways to see mana.
– Alexis
34 mins ago
I am open to suggestions as to how to make that particular point clearer
– Alexis
33 mins ago