[Verces] What is the difference between the 'Remakers' and 'NextStep'?

[Metaphysician]

So, for the next adventure in my campaign, my PCs are going to be going to Verces, and investigating a number of terrorist groups. Why. . . is not important for this question. Rather, I'm curious about ideas or suggestions for differentiating the groups 'Remakers' and 'NextStep'.

Both are radical transhuman terrorists who believe in the creed "Evolution does not need consent", and so do various acts of involuntary transhuman alteration. However, what makes them two groups, rather than just one? Do they have any differences in their exact beliefs? Differences in their preferred tactics and strategy? Or are they essentially similar, but have internal political differences that keep them separate ( read: their leadership don't like rivals )?

I realize that there is no canon answer ( unless there is, in which case, please point the way! ). I am looking for ideas to harvest, so any thoughts or suggestions are good. Or even if they aren't, they might inspire other good thoughts or suggestions, ahem.

[Pantshandshake]

Preface: I don't have any knowledge about the Remakers or NextStep.

Well, you could keep it as 'simple' as some Earth countries that have had armed 'debates' over whether the Pope is cool or not. Perhaps NextStep only believes in biologic evolution, whereas the Remakers don't care if you've got metal parts, magic parts, parts made from magic metal aliens, etc.

Or, something to do with the tidally locked planet, they literally have the same agenda and views, but one side prefers the cold-dark and the other side likes the bright-hot, and God forbid the two mix? (Bonus points if you can work in a weird Romeo and Juliet thing.)

Maybe the Remakers are all about forcibly evolving everyone, everywhere in the universe, but NextStep is more of a 'Nah, being the best and newest is just for us' kind of business?

Ah... oh! NextStep wants the eventual removal of physical bodies so we can become sentient energy and, just maybe, our own god? Whereas the Remakers are more about the power of advancing a people by advancing the individual people?

[BigNorseWolf]

Not seeing anything in cannon in pact worlds.

Remakers: evolution does not need consent. You will join our cause or you will be eliminated and evolution will happen.

Next step: evolution does not need consent. Leave us alone with your stupid "laws" and "regulations" and "medical licenses" as we push the boundaries of SCIENCE further than anyone has before! MUAHAHAhhahahahHAAAH!

[Xenocrat]

Remakers could be involved in forcefully changing people by kidnapping and surgically altering them. They're the more physical, practical, and immediate threat, but ultimately limited in how much they can accomplish.

NextStep could be focused on genetic viruses to change the germ line and make your children "improved." They're more intellectual, philosophical, and pose a more nebulous and long-term but potentially much more wide ranging danger to current society.

[Ascalaphus]

Is it me or do most "radical evolution" mad science groups sound rather un-evolutionist? The whole point of evolution is that if you're less fit, you eventually just... disappear. Crowded out by others who were more fit. Getting all activist and making targeted improvements or selecting specific people to survive or die sounds a lot like they actually want to be intelligent designers. Promoting the survival of specific individuals is is actually frustrating natural selection; after all if they really were fit then they would survive anyway. But often the unaesthetic critter that just breeds and breeds is more 'fit' than your snowflake unicorn panda that can't be bothered to mate.

[Xenocrat]

Ascalaphus wrote:

Is it me or do most "radical evolution" mad science groups sound rather un-evolutionist? The whole point of evolution is that if you're less fit, you eventually just... disappear. Crowded out by others who were more fit. Getting all activist and making targeted improvements or selecting specific people to survive or die sounds a lot like they actually want to be intelligent designers. Promoting the survival of specific individuals is is actually frustrating natural selection; after all if they really were fit then they would survive anyway. But often the unaesthetic critter that just breeds and breeds is more 'fit' than your snowflake unicorn panda that can't be bothered to mate.

Choosing to make directed adaptations can itself be a form of fitness (if it leads to more offspring than the default). Evolution selected toolmaking and use over just doing think directwith your hands. It can select genetic manipulation and cyber enhancement the same way if it leads to better outcomes.

[FormerFiend]

Thing I'm getting caught up on as I consider this question is the names of the groups and the implications and inferences there of.

NextStep, to me, sounds like they accept the current "step" of evolution has been sufficient up until this point but that a change needs to happen to prepare us for what's coming next. To me this implies a (perhaps alarmist, twisted, and delusional, but perhaps not) forward thinking philosophy. And it would also imply that they have an idea of what's coming next and what the Next Step should be. Also implies that there will be a further next step after that, which in itself implies continuous progress.

Remakers, on the other hand, strikes me as implying the current state of vercites is unacceptable in some way, flawed, imperfect, and needs to be scrapped & started again from scratch. Something has gone wrong, what we are now is not what we were meant to be. Obviously they still think that they need to be technologically augmented, but that the current model just isn't good enough. It needs to be remade into a better, more perfect form. So, rather than continuous improvements meant to overcome an everchanging world, Remakers see it as a single project that must be destroyed & begun anew until perfection is achieved.

Now how, exactly, those two groups would differ in a practical way rather than a philosophical group, I don't know.

[Metaphysician]

On the matter of "what does evolution have to do with this?". . . well, okay, ultimately, my take is "Not much, its rhetoric". Insofar as there is a more nuanced belief, its basically "The force of evolution pushes towards greater and greater transhuman augmentation. Society is not embracing augmentation as much as it 'should'. Since evolution is never wrong, there must be some malign social forcing hindering the proper advancement of augmentation". Which still makes no actual scientific sense, but seems like the kind of conspiratorial mindset a terrorist group would embrace. "I'm not wrong, its the world that is wrong". Etc.

This does beg the question: If the problem is "People not augmenting themselves enough because of Malign Social Forces", how exactly is coercive augmentation supposed to advance the cause? Terrorism usually inspires fear and hatred of whatever cause the terrorists advocate, so how is this supposed to get more people embracing augmentation? Now, this is not actually a *problem*, because fanatics quite often use methods which are counterproductive to their goals. I can imagine a number of answers that make at least a little sense on a tactical level, though:

1. "Once people have been augmented, they will realize how awesome it is, and be thankful." The True Believing Proselyte methodology.

2. "In response to our small scale acts, the Enemy Establishment will counter with vast disproportionate actions against our cause, which will disillusion and anger the general populace." The Read-His-Mao methodology.

3. "Once we enact our full plans, there won't be anyone unaugmented to oppose or convince, making the point moot." The Supervillain Megalomanic methodology.