Ok I understand!
So Aetherys has Dynamis and Aether. However there is so much aether that dynamis interactions can almost not happen. Entelechies, which are themselves aetherial beings, not made of dynamis, are an exception, they, through some sort of interaction with ambient dynamis change their aetherial composition.
So:
Elpis flower >>>(change in ambient dynamis by way of change in ambient emotion)>>> Color change.
So the change in dynamis is the same wherever you go, it's just that in aether-rich environments that usually doesn't affect anything did I get that right? It's not that Dynamis is less volatile on Etheirys or that the beings on Etheirys are less capable of influencing it or anything, it simply doesn't get to itself then influence anything outside of entelechies.
And it doesn't matter how aetherially dense we are right? Ultima Thule will react the same way even if we were Unsundered.
The same is true for Meteion as well. As an entelechy, she experiences others' emotions as if they were her own (refer to the candied apples example). She is so influenced by the negative ambiance of Ultima Thule that she speaks on behalf of the dead ('We have suffered.') Our fight with her is not really about wielding Dynamis as a weapon the same way we would Aether. We simply alter the emotional state of Ultima Thule by introducing our hope, our beliefs, and our resilience. And slowly, Ultima Thule itself changes as a result through the power of Dynamis. This is more of a subconscious act than a conscious one.
Oh, ok I didn't understand it then. So my new understanding that would follow from this is then that the emotions that influence ambient dynamis are still there, but in aetherially dense people they get blocked by their aether kinda. So that the Dynamis doesn't get affected.
Dynamis effects themselves are less obvious in very aetherically dense regions, and very aetherically dense beings are less likely to affect or be affected by Dynamis (much like how a planet's movement is more likely to be influenced by Gravity than the Strong Nuclear Force).
I so don't understand this. Every time I think I got it something comes up that throws me off again. So Hermes can't influence Dynamis, but didn't the Elpis flowers change color for him? He must have influenced dynamis with his emotions. Subconsciously, sure, but he could do it! Just like us, no?
But as the aetheric density lessens in the outer expanses of space, Dynamis comes to dominate. Hermes is not able to influence Dynamis directly.
Makes sense, but just being low in aether doesn't make you an entelechy am I right?
However, by creating a being of suitable aetheric density, he can observe Dynamis-related effects manifest themselves, similar to how the Hannish scholars did by observing Elpis blooms (or similar to how humans use accelerators to create subatomic particles and observe Strong Nuclear effects).
That would be cool! I kinda don't wanna see Dynamis dropped tbh.
On the subject of whether there's a connection between Faith and Dynamis, that's hard to say at this point. If you take everything that the Amaurotines put forward as truth, then Summoning is merely a derivative and inferior form of their own Creation magic. But they didn't really know about Dynamis in the first place. It's possible that, unconsciously, modern summoners have produced something with even more potential power than the Amaurotines previously envisioned, by linking Aether and Dynamis. Perhaps we'll learn more in Meracydia.
I have a hard time with a concept that is deliberately designed to be vague, it seems like it's an asspull tool tbh and that's why it doesn't have clear rules and limitations.
As to why some people are so reluctant to accept the discussion about Dynamis/Akasha, it really depends on the person. Dogma is always difficult to overcome, and if you introduce something as a 'rule' initially, some people can't move past the possibility that it could be wrong. Science perpetually requires you to have the flexibility to reject old theories. Personally, I really like the 'thought/feeling' dichotomy that it presents. It's also interesting seeing a clash of values between the traditional classical thinking that has dominated Western philosophy and Vedic mysticism/spiritualism.
I like characters and themes and emotions, those are all allowed to be contradictory and confusing if they resonate well. But a fictional energy form with massive and very obvious effects I'd like to be more clearly defined personally.



Reply With Quote


