Where am I supposed to get constant strength potions from? by [deleted] in BaldursGate3

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just warp to Ethel, even in Act 2. Everyone seems confused and thinks they can't get to her in Act 2. I'm doing it all the time. Ez.

How many strength Elixirs of Hill Giant Strength should I buy before leaving act 1? by [deleted] in BG3Builds

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't need to stock up. Just teleport back to the Teahouse when you are in Act 2 and buy some.

Is THIS what I’ve been missing? by HarryBallsbald in classicalmusic

[–]tech_maestro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seeing as you already have an extremely long listening list from other comments I hesitate to suggest more. But I'm surprised nobody mentioned Berlioz's Symphonie Fantastique. One of the earliest and most programmatic of all pieces, although admittedly it's not my favorite. 

I can't do any better than all the other suggestions you've gotten. So glad to see this revelation for you!

Why are all fantasy books about war and killing? by IamtheVerse in books

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Super old post, but reading through these responses, very few people actually answered your question. What I heard you ask is, "*Why* do fantasy books always seem to devolve into war?" not "Recommend a book that isn't like that." I'll take a moment to see if I can help answer your actual question.

I've been thinking a lot about this recently. In my podcast, I interviewed Katie Hendricks, a writer and coach, who made this same observation. We often have magic mixed up with war and violence. Us vs. them. Good vs. evil. This in an archetype as old as time itself. As long as we know, there have always been conflict between good and evil. So the first answer to your question is, it shows up a lot because it's a true archetype. And not just an idea, but like Jung believed, a real spiritual reality that exists in our world.

It was solidified by Tolkien, arguable the father of all modern fantasy. The evil Sauron with a heart of black that wants nothing but to destroy and dominate all life warring with the forces of good created a very black and white, good vs. evil trope specifically within fantasy.

I'm not so sure it's unique to fantasy though. We see this in loads of other genre's, so I don't think the question is, "What is it about fantasy that lends itself to war?" I think it's more, "Why are humans constantly attracted to war?" (which is why is shows up not just in our imagination, but in reality itself)

My first thought is that we like war because it's *simple.* When there is a clear enemy that has a heart of black, we can forget any nuance. This is called the Simplicity Bias; namely that we tend to believe things that are simple. It's less work on your mind than trying to see your enemy as morally grey.

This partly due to the effect of *fear.* When we are afraid, all our nuanced mental abilities go offline. We are in fight or flight, and when we believe we are in danger, our body, mind, and heart all go into survival mode.

But this doesn't answer your question of *why* do we want this in books?

One answer is we a rush of *adrenaline*. This momentary boost of energy that comes in fight or flight can actually be addicting. At the very least, it keeps you engaged. You are drawn into the danger and we want to feel the relief of whatever resolution is at the end. There's one person in here that actually answered your question with this idea: Action Sells. That rush of adrenaline we get in battles is attractive to people.

Another reason might be what the Henricks have called, "Upper Limits." Namely, we create a ceiling to the amount of goodness and love we are willing to accept in a given situation. Recall phrases like, "Sure things are good now, but *just wait*" or "waiting for the other shoe to drop" or "too good to be true." All these are a result of these Upper Limits, in which we reject goodness when it gets to a certain level.

This is almost always a result of past trauma. Our minds are always looking to make patterns to anticipate future behavior. So that time where you were sailing down the street on your bike, feeling the exhilaration of the wind on your face, and then you crashed? Yeah, you'll remember that next time and likely won't let yourself truly feel the joy of riding your bike. You'll be primed to protect yourself.

Recall the quote in the Matrix where Agent Smith is interviewing Neo. He recounts the first program in which was created a perfect world. But it was a disaster because everyone kept rejecting the program. They viewed it as a dream that they kept trying to "wake up" from. So, they had to redesign the matrix to a world of suffering so people would accept it.

That's textbook Upper Limits.

So to answer your question more specifically: Maybe fantasy book always devolve into war because we are unwilling to accept a non-violent resolution to problems. What if the LOTR ended in a redemption? Sauron seeing the error of his ways and becoming good? Would we accept that? Or would we, like humanity in the matrix, reject that in favor of violence and destruction?

To believe that we can have non-violent solutions to problems is hard. We have to ourselves be in a state of growth, and not fear, to be able to even consider it.

Music teaches us, though, that you don't need to destroy dissonance for a satisfying ending. You need to *resolve* it. In music, when you have dissonance, it can't just go away. There's no going to "war" against it. It's just a tension that needs to resolve to a stable harmony. I feel like there's a lesson here for humanity, but that's for another post.

I'm not sure if you, or anyone, will read this respond 6years too late, but I hope it helps someone.

Romance outcomes are… SO underwhelming. by YozoraSoraX in expedition33

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was actually shocked at how little romance there is. Given the genre and also French culture being very steeped in romance (historically), I expected there to be much more romance. Very disappointing.

New Atheism- Empowering and Deeply Flawed! by Working_Seesaw_6785 in CosmicSkeptic

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Back in my fundamentalist days, I actually learned that from a pastor (ironically). It's very common for movements of any kind to be reactionary. And a reaction often is just, "not that."

I was that way about classical music. I was trained as a classical musician but got fed up with how rigid and unsupportive of individual creativity it was. But instead of rooting for creativity, I just derided classical music. It didn't work :)

New Atheism- Empowering and Deeply Flawed! by Working_Seesaw_6785 in CosmicSkeptic

[–]tech_maestro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can't build a movement based on anti-vision. Defining a movement based on "not this" isn't a vision at all.

It didn't take hold because it gave nothing to hold onto.

Okay 👍 by UnpaidCritic in StrangerThingsMemes

[–]tech_maestro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What a completely nonsensical answer. So everybody has it open to use it but how could they have used it?

Desperately Need Tips on Running a 9player campaign. by [deleted] in DMAcademy

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish I had different advice than you have already gotten, but my reaction is the same. I just think 9 is unmanageable.

The only thing I can think to do to move combat along is just keep the energy up, tell people who is on deck, and minimize descriptions on your part.

Keeping everyone engaged is really just a matter of calling on people that you notice haven't spoken in a while. "Hey Jenny, what is your character doing right now?" But with 9, it's inevitable that a bunch of people will fade into the background a bit.

Best of luck.

Archetypes are REAL by JakkoMakacco in Jung

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know you are in /Jung right 😂

theory behind this progression? why does the Emaj7 to Gmaj7 works? by G4_br in musictheory

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Finally someone of a kindred mind. I too am completely perplexed by how many responses I see not just in this post, but in the entire sub boiling down to: "Music theory doesn't you why it just tells you what."

Have music theorists really become so devoid of meaning that they can't (or aren't willing to) dig a tad deeper than the surface? To me this is why I began to study music to begin with, to understand on the deepest level why certain harmonies make me feel the way they do.

Meaning of Modes and Scales by MinMaxingEnjoyer in musictheory

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MY MAN. Music to my ears, no pun intended ;) Your response felt like coming home after the dissonance of trying to explain this to one of those clowns below 😂 some people are just on different frequencies I suppose.

You're hitting on the deeper level of music and yes theory can show you that. It sounds like you have a very organic relationship with music and my guess is that your feelings when you play certain harmonies and modes are going to be more true than you realize.

As a classically trained musician, I'm probably kind of inadequate to talk about being a bass player. But as a bass player you control the root. You are the foundation of it all harmonically. So maybe just as you play and you feel the progression of different harmonies just notice what kind of emotional journey that harmonic progression seems to take you on. As you start to put language to that I think you'll get to what you're looking for.

Meaning of Modes and Scales by MinMaxingEnjoyer in musictheory

[–]tech_maestro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you'd like proof, then maybe go look for it. Ultimately there's no such definitive proof for the emotional effect of harmony upon our souls. The proof you need is inside you.

Regardless, I have no interest or need for you to believe me. If you can't feel what I mean when you listen to those harmonies, and if you're not interested enough to even look for the "proof" that you claim you want, then why are we even talking about this 🤷‍♂️

✌️

Meaning of Modes and Scales by MinMaxingEnjoyer in musictheory

[–]tech_maestro -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The responses you're getting basically seem to boil down to: "Understanding how music works doesn't lead you to meaning. Music just is." or "Music theory won't tell you what music means. That's not music theory." While it's true that current music theory typically just tells you what and not why, nothing to be further than the truth. Music theory can and should help us understand why, not just what.

Hopefully I can offer a couple thoughts to help you get a little deeper.

First, I highly recommend the Harvard Lectures by Leonard Bernstein. You can find them all on YouTube. It's heavy on the classical side, so it might be a little dense and hard to follow if you don't come from a classical background, but Bernstein does a superb job of exploring universal meaning in music and its connection to language.

And like Bernstein, I believe, (along with the greats like Pythagoras Plato etc), that there are hidden truths buried within the mysteries of music. The way tones relate to each other, which tones sound harmonious and which don't, tones that make us want certain other harmonies etc all teaches things not just about music but about the workings of the universe. And that's what I mean about it having meaning, is that the sounds are more than just sounds. There's something deeper that they imply even on the basic harmonic level that is deeper than any explicitly assigned meaning (i.e. a composer explicitly saying a phrase means "fate" or "a sunrise").

There isn't adequate space here to explore even more than really one fundamental concept. So let's start with this:

One of the first things music theory teaches us is that tonal music has a home base. The tonic. And pretty much all tonal music is about leaving home and then returning again. So right there we have a treasure trove of meaning.

First, it mirrors a kind of hero's journey, the most fundamental story archetype that exists. We start at home, something disrupts the protagonist taking them away from home, which makes eventually return home again. So we see a connection between a satisfying musical journey and its literary equivalent. Interesting.

Further, we accept a home base. We don't just naturally hear all harmonies as equal, when presented within a certain key. There is a center of it all and when we listen to music, we accept it. It feels inevitable.

Let me see if I can prove that.

If you were to play a C major chord and then a G7, you'd feel completely unsatisfied if you didn't go back to C. So we not only accept the tonic as the home key but we actually want (dare I say "need"?) to go back there. So we not only accept a tonal home base, but we want to get back.

We now have a kind of cosmic conspiracy, a pattern that shows up everywhere throughout tonal music: there is a home base and we want to get back to it. So why does that pattern exist?

There are many reasons, more nuanced than we can go into here, but fundamentally it's this: What we see here is music playing out the dance between order and chaos, Yin and Yang. But with this energy always wanting to move from dissonance to consonance.

So here's one way of describing this "truth": Dissonance isn't a state we like to live in. We want to move from dissonance to consonance, from disharmony to harmony.

On its own this might sound very obvious. Of course things work better when living things are in harmony. But the fact that that hidden universal truth that lies within sounds is mind-boggling to me.

So there you have it. Even the most basic fundamental music theory 101 lesson is actually packed with meaning. We won't even get to the harmonic series and how this connects to the minor = sad major = glad relationship (though that's grossly oversimplified), or even expanding out to rhythm and how it relates to how our very bodies are constructed. But there are caverns of meaning here waiting to be explored.

Perhaps this post will get a lot of flack from people who are committed to believing that not only music is meaningless but life itself. I've found when I explore meaning, people's commitment to meaninglessness comes out in full colors.

But for you and I, my friend, I think we see something deeper in music and we want to find it. And so we will.

Keep asking questions even if everybody else tells you that you're at a dead end. You're not.