awiiya

This post is a little long, so here is an overview for those that want a summary: In short, I think all forces work together at one time to produce our actions. Actions cannot be categorized as one type of response. Although usually a person follows one more than others, they are all present. I view actions more as a blurring of the categories. I consider emotional and rational (usually) before continuing. My first response is almost always emotional and instinctive (whether a strong disgust, or a love, or something of the sort) but then my rational side takes over and tries to determine whether my first response was accurate or not. If you have ever read the book Blink, the author talks about how the first reaction is unusually accurate, and that subconsciously we think a lot about the thing and that thought process (although we don't know it) provides us with instinct and sometimes emotion. For example let's analyze an action: I meet a person and this happens: 1. Instinct: Instant dislike 2. Emotional: Repulsion 3. Rational: I think to myself that this person has a sloppy appearance. Now that's just the first reaction. All three are acting at once to provide a strong sense of disgust with the person. First came my instinct which is mostly subconscious, and the first reaction is dislike. The emotional came second, but almost at the same time as the first. This emotion usually controls the facial expression, as well as body language. The third is the rational, which is when my conscious thoughts begin and I make observations about the person I am meeting. I believe that some of these thoughts have already happened unconsciously, but the thoughts that happen consciously along with the feelings will be put to memory. Of course these categories are really arbitrary and an oversimplification, and are used only for clarification. I'm a little bit unsure of what actually happens, but I believe that the brain takes in signals from both the nerves and other parts of the brain and assembles an opinion and from that opinion an action is made.

Sign me up. ID: 95773

Yes, you're right there are five. My mistake. I would agree with Burns. Also, is it possible that the order in which the constellations come depends on their location in the sky? Orion is in the bottom left, Aries is at the top, and so on... Awi

The riddle speaks of four constellations, which is what the indentations are: stars. You can find each of the constellations in the indentations. The four constellations (in order) are: Orion (the hunter) Lupus (the wolf) Aries (the Ram) Cetus (the Sea Monster) If you notice the letters on the keys can also spell out these four constellations. I would suggest to bootes turning the key in such a way that each letter corresponds to the correct location, which my guess would be up. Taking the example of orion. It needs to be spelt backwords, and so... (note: after each letter, we reset the key to the correct position) 1. Have the key upside down. This gives the letter n 2. Turn the key left. This gives the letter o. 3. Turn the key right. This gives the letter i. 4. Turn the key right. This gives the letter r. 5. Turn the key upside down. This gives the letter o. The same can be done for all four constellations. Awi

For me a principle that I believe in but is not listed is: the Principle of Connection -Almost everything is connected in some way, all of our actions affect others. -People and things are all connected through time, and we are all made up at the simplest level of the same thing. -Everything is effectively one, just different shapes, sizes, and masks. and the opposite: the Principle of Solitude -Even though we are all connected, we are all alone. -No one can ever fully understand the way our mind works, and therefore two people can never be fully one. We will always be alone, destined to live seperately. -Through it all, one of the few things that remain constant in life is ourselves. Awi

Thank you for informing me of this. I was not aware. If you have any more history lessons, I'm always willing to learn. Consider my prior comment void. I'm a little mystified to the nature of the weapon. Is it pure magical, is it a shield, does it take the form of projectiles, or is it all of the above? Awi

Well, seeing as the weapon is at the Path Keeper, then it would make sense that the weapon was created to guard against Marind Bell from crossing their borders. Just as the Passage of War is protecting Marind Bell from Necrovion, the Loreroot Land Weapon was designed to protect. It is also curious that it is no longer activated, implying that the protection is no longer needed. Awi

The puzzle is a picture of the House of Tainted Times. That's where Bored is, right?

This is part of a longer conversation. The theory referred to in this post are that there are three ways to deal with anything once you have first realized that it exists. The three things are: 1. To attack it 2. To ignore it and 3. To help it. You asked me about creatures and how they relate to my theory about recognition the other day. First we must collect some information. We know that creatures are like an extension of our souls, and that we can make them stronger temporarily by feeding them our energy. I believe that we can summon creatures by attaching our energy to a natural energy of the land. This is why certain creatures can only be summoned in certain places. For instance, the natural energy of Loreroot allows for the summoning of Trees, Knators, etc. Now, if creatures are not just a representation of our soul, and an actual outside being, then we can apply the theory to them. First and foremost, if you ignore them they grow weak and frail. Second, if you send them into battles foolishly, they will die and become weaker. The best way to increase their strength and power is to send them wisely into battle against other creatures. While it may seem counter-intuitive, because we said that attacking strengthens the other side, it actually is not. The combat world of MD is based off of attacking each other, because in this way we actually help each other grow stronger. I attack someone with my creatures, and I help them become stronger (either their creatures gain exp, or they can learn a better ritual and understand why I won). Because I have helped them, and not just blindly obliterated them, we both grow in strength. Helping others is the middle choice, and the one most beneficial, so while it may seem like we are attacking, we are actually helping. Back to creatures. Another question arose in my mind... Why do we sacrifice creatures? I thought of the answer to this as well. If we capture creatures, and help them to become stronger, then naturally we must have a reward too. Besides gaining stats along the way, the creatures also eventually give us Vitality, Value Points, Principle Points, and other rewards when we release them from our service. As we have helped them become stronger, they help us become stronger. Awi

I agree with sand. Also, sand is one of the erosive forces in nature. The wind picks it up and then erodes rock formations (including buildings) by scraping the sand it has suspended in the air against the rock.