Question Powers classification: Question for canon authors

I've been playing with creating a couple new characters, either for fan fic or perhaps to contribute for use by canon authors. It would be very useful to know whether the canon authors fully endorse the Powers classifications provided in the WIKI, or whether there might be a forthcoming WA Universe document on Powers Classification. A simple statement from the canon authors that the WIKI info is accurate (as far as it goes) would be most helpful.

Yeah, a new Powers. Doc. is set to come out whenever Kristin gets around to finishing/posting it. If it's not already in the Queue, that is.

I think that the Wiki info was compiled from several different canon sources, so it's likely to be *mostly* correct. There might be mistakes of interpretation of what the canon author actually meant in such-and-such passage, though, and also some confusion about apparent contradiction between different sources.

So yeah, while the wiki info is as good as we could make it, it's far from perfect (lacking an actual Canon POV), so an official document would be better.

On a different note... if you are concerned about power classification... well, in-universe there are a few different systems, which are based on different researchers' understanding of how the powers work. For the sake of argument, it's quite possible that Gadgeteering is classified as a specialization of Psi under one system, and as its own unique power under a different system.

And then there's the perennial discussion on whether Devising is Magic dressed up in a technological framework, or if they are two entirely different ways to achieve similar results -- a sort of convergent evolution if you will.

Sir Lee wrote: I think that the Wiki info was compiled from several different canon sources, so it's likely to be *mostly* correct. There might be mistakes of interpretation of what the canon author actually meant in such-and-such passage, though, and also some confusion about apparent contradiction between different sources.

So yeah, while the wiki info is as good as we could make it, it's far from perfect (lacking an actual Canon POV), so an official document would be better.

On a different note... if you are concerned about power classification... well, in-universe there are a few different systems, which are based on different researchers' understanding of how the powers work. For the sake of argument, it's quite possible that Gadgeteering is classified as a specialization of Psi under one system, and as its own unique power under a different system.

And then there's the perennial discussion on whether Devising is Magic dressed up in a technological framework, or if they are two entirely different ways to achieve similar results -- a sort of convergent evolution if you will.

On the Devising thing, I wouldn't be surprised if Clark's third law goes both ways.... Even if Cannonically that isn't determined.

Kristin Darken wrote: One of the best ways for getting a clear canon accurate power set determination and breakdown is to have a private chat with me and I'll give your character the working over that I give all canon potentials (which is mainly a process of evaluating what's core nature and absolutely necessary, what's practical technique for starting out and what's available in potential... finding ways to turn 'extra' powers into knacks or techniques instead of separate powers, and so on.

Thank you, Kristen. I'll work on doing write-ups for you on two characters I have in mind. I'll be in touch when I have them ready.

mhalpern wrote:
On the Devising thing, I wouldn't be surprised if Clark's third law goes both ways.... Even if Cannonically that isn't determined.

Don't forget Florence Ambrose's extension to Clarke's third law, "Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magick when you don't know how it works."