The BioMechanics trace their ideological roots to the Artificers that aided Sun Tzu, Hegesistatus and Marcus Sergius in replacing their lost limbs. Such acts were always tainted with mysticism, and only during the 16th century did one of the Artificers, Ambroise Paré, discover how to create clockwork prosthetics that could truly be said to have been the result of scientific work.
The BioMechanics continued to rise in importance within their Convention and were recognized as a distinct Methodology of their own. While the Consensus is slow to accept their works, the 20th century proved to be extremly fertile for them, allowing for even more sophisticated prosthetics as well as artificial organs. Detractors claim that these implants are merely a way to control those that accept them, using the ever present threat of "implant rejection" to keep the patient subservient.
With the begin of the 21st century and the end of the Ascension War, the methodology was freed to focus on other work than building cyborgs for battle, much to the relief of many who had questioned the ethics of such works in secret.
The BioMechanics cooperate closely with the Progenitors for poineering their work, even sharing the basic tenets of the Hippocratic Oath. This resulted in the construction of HIT Mark IV, and even with the HIT Mark project now frozen, both sides work together in other areas. At times, their shared focus can turn to friction and competitiveness.
Within the Methodology, a similar competition takes place. Ego-fueled feuds come and go, with an inticrate web of human relations that resembles soap operas being omnipresent in facilities tended by BioMechanics. All compete also for funding and resources, making the BioMechanics a fractious lot.
The BioMechanics do not work only on mechanical implants. Those with a focus on the physics and calculus of motion, students of joint flexion, statistical trials, even those who specialize in the advantages and disadvantages of modifying the immediate environment can find a place within the methodology.
- , p.103,134
- , p.29
- , p.58-59