Why Do So Many People View Science and Magic As Incompatible?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

151 to 200 of 355 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

Actually 40 yards being the same as point blank for purposes of aiming is pretty good. Military rifles have a 'max range' for aiming of about 300 yards, tops. It's nigh impossible for a human with unaided vision to hit something at that distance, however.

The range rules are for ease of hitting, not effectiveness. Just because a rifle bullet can go for a mile doesn't mean you're going to hit something that far away without at least a very, very good scope. Rifles that can do that have much, much higher range increments and maximum range, too.

==Aelryinth

When I was in the U.S. military we had to be able to reliably hit a human-sized target at 400 meters just to be considered minimally qualified. That wasn't using a scope; just the regular sights built into the rifle.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

gamer-printer wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

I'd also like to point out on the armor argument...PF severely undervalues the usefulness of armor in real fights, too. If you do have armor that can shrug off bullets (like, enchanted armor) you are going to be TERRIFYING in melee because your opponents aren't going to be able to fight you effectively there.

If you can reach them, they die.

I thought there was a magic armor that made you bulletproof, but I can't locate the name of it.

==Aelryinth

Well PF gun rules defy reality in this way. Since the phrase "bullet proof" literally comes from the act of shooting armor with a gun and not penetrating, would suggest you don't need to enchant armor to make it bullet proof, well made mundane armor already is bullet proof. (Of course that's not how guns work in PF...)

Well made metal armor is not bullet proof...its why metal armor went away when firearms came out.

You have to have flexibility, raw tensile strength, and the ability to absorb and channel kinetic energy out laterally to stop a bullet...it's more akin to 'catching the bullet' then 'stopping the bullet'. And catching it is like getting hit by a bowling ball, from all reports.

Metal armor is too brittle and can't spread out the impact. It doesn't flex, it breaks.

On the other side, Kevlar is not very good at stopping slashing and especially piercing damage. A Kevlar vest can stop a bullet, but an arrow will cut right through it, where a steel breastplate would bounce it.

==Aelryinth


thejeff wrote:

Still doesn't match the wizard mechanics.

If I want to cast a single spell multiple times without anything else in between, I should be able to using your paradigm. If I have to wipe the program from RAM and load a different one from the hard drive every time I want to do something else, then I can load from the hard drive. Which means, unless there's some unknown reason programs have to be wiped from the hard drive when loaded to RAM, I can use any of the programs on my hard drive as many times as I want.
You've just pushed the objection from RAM back down to the hard drive. There's still arbitrary deletion going on for no purpose other than "I want this to work like the wizard".

Which is fine. Hand wave it and don't try to explain it so much if that's what you want, because it just keeps breaking down.

Well the design exercise is not intended to match wizard, only to emulate it close enough to work in game.

Change the paradigm then, let's say battery power can only accommodate X number of programs (the number of spell slots you have) before its depleted of power. While you may be able to load a program from your harddrive repeatedly, (if you're using spell points type of system you can), once you've repeated loading your program the amount of times that you have slots for, you are now out of battery power.

However, more than likely, the battery is a part of the unit and not separatable - you can't pull a dead battery and load a new one, you'd have to replace the entire PPU, and that is impractical - it probably costs your entire allotment of GP per 1st level just to buy one.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
gamer-printer wrote:
However, more than likely, the battery is a part of the unit and not separatable - you can't pull a dead battery and load a new one, you'd have to replace the entire PPU, and that is impractical - it probably costs your entire allotment of GP per 1st level just to buy one.

So we're assuming that all the tech was made by Apple?


gamer-printer wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Still doesn't match the wizard mechanics.

If I want to cast a single spell multiple times without anything else in between, I should be able to using your paradigm. If I have to wipe the program from RAM and load a different one from the hard drive every time I want to do something else, then I can load from the hard drive. Which means, unless there's some unknown reason programs have to be wiped from the hard drive when loaded to RAM, I can use any of the programs on my hard drive as many times as I want.
You've just pushed the objection from RAM back down to the hard drive. There's still arbitrary deletion going on for no purpose other than "I want this to work like the wizard".

Which is fine. Hand wave it and don't try to explain it so much if that's what you want, because it just keeps breaking down.

Well the design exercise is not intended to match wizard, only to emulate it close enough to work in game.

Change the paradigm then, let's say battery power can only accommodate X number of programs (the number of spell slots you have) before its depleted of power. While you may be able to load a program from your harddrive repeatedly, (if you're using spell points type of system you can), once you've repeated loading your program the amount of times that you have slots for, you are now out of battery power.

However, more than likely, the battery is a part of the unit and not separatable - you can't pull a dead battery and load a new one, you'd have to replace the entire PPU, and that is impractical - it probably costs your entire allotment of GP per 1st level just to buy one.

I think you've just gotten to Arcanist, so we're getting closer. :)


Aelryinth wrote:

Well made metal armor is not bullet proof...its why metal armor went away when firearms came out.

You have to have flexibility, raw tensile strength, and the ability to absorb and channel kinetic energy out laterally to stop a bullet...it's more akin to 'catching the bullet' then 'stopping the bullet'. And catching it is like getting hit by a bowling ball, from all reports.

Metal armor is too brittle and can't spread out the impact. It doesn't flex, it breaks.

On the other side, Kevlar is not very good at stopping slashing and especially piercing damage. A Kevlar vest can stop a bullet, but an arrow will cut right through it, where a steel breastplate would bounce it.

==Aelryinth

It did work for the gun tech at the time, once gun tech improved so that it didn't work anymore, armor went away, but that doesn't change the fact the bullet proofed armor did exist, and what I described is how it worked and where the phrase came from - is true.

Once gunpowder improved enough that the bullet gained enough speed, no amount of metal armor was effective, however, with early guns and early gun powder well made armor could stop it.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

JoeJ wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Actually 40 yards being the same as point blank for purposes of aiming is pretty good. Military rifles have a 'max range' for aiming of about 300 yards, tops. It's nigh impossible for a human with unaided vision to hit something at that distance, however.

The range rules are for ease of hitting, not effectiveness. Just because a rifle bullet can go for a mile doesn't mean you're going to hit something that far away without at least a very, very good scope. Rifles that can do that have much, much higher range increments and maximum range, too.

==Aelryinth

When I was in the U.S. military we had to be able to reliably hit a human-sized target at 400 meters just to be considered minimally qualified. That wasn't using a scope; just the regular sights built into the rifle.

what is 'reliably hit?' And does that mean 'kill shot' or just 'hit anywhere?'

Because it's really hard to see someone clearly at 400 yards, and actually aiming and making a kill shot is nigh impossible. Sure, you might wing someone, but a kill shot would be almost completely luck.

To actually reliably land a kill shot you're going to be a good hunter and get a scope and actually be able to see and aim the thing at that distance. Which, in game terms, is decreasing the effective range, lowering the range modifiers, and allowing you to use Deadly Aim. A x5 scope might ignore five range increments, or effectively +10 to hit over someone just using iron sights. Maybe it ignores eight range increments, since it would cut range to 1/5th, 400 yards down to 80, so only two range penalties...with a scope, you can hit the target at 400 yards EVERY SHOT.

And 400 yards, if you have a weapon with a 40 yard increment, is -20 to hit against an AC 10 target, with maybe a +5 to +8 mod...you're going to hit it 2 in 5 to 1 in 4 times even then. But I doubt you're going to hit the heart or head more then 1 in 10 times, right?

The game system isn't perfect for these things, but it is still at least somewhat realistic.

And I agree with the opinions above that most of the firearms in PAthfinder are later 19th century, not the things found in the age of sail or earlier, with long reload times. In a 'real' fantasy setting, you should only be getting off one shot with a firearm, and then going on to other weapons because the reload times would be a killer.

The Scottish Highlanders in later years would carry two rifles, a musket, and two pistols when they charged into battle. They'd shoot the rifles first at range, drop them for the men behind to pick up and reload, fire the musket at closer range, draw both pistols and unload them to force an opening in the enemy lines, then finally equip targ, knife and claymore to charge into melee. That's pretty much how a gunfighter should work in PF, and I'm kind of annoyed it doesn't.

But, meh.

==Aelryinth


An M-16 target folds down when hit, so any hit, kill shot or not is a successful hit.

Although its also true that its better to wound your opponent than to kill him, since wounding him requires soldiers to get the wounded guy (and risk getting shot themselves), then a team of medics and a physician is required to fix him, not to mention the ambulance or chopper needed to recover him from the battlefield and take him to the hospital. Wounding enemy soldiers is more efficient and effective than to actually kill them. If you kill them, only one person is affected by the act, whereas wounding forces a lot more involvement to resolve.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
JoeJ wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

Actually 40 yards being the same as point blank for purposes of aiming is pretty good. Military rifles have a 'max range' for aiming of about 300 yards, tops. It's nigh impossible for a human with unaided vision to hit something at that distance, however.

The range rules are for ease of hitting, not effectiveness. Just because a rifle bullet can go for a mile doesn't mean you're going to hit something that far away without at least a very, very good scope. Rifles that can do that have much, much higher range increments and maximum range, too.

==Aelryinth

When I was in the U.S. military we had to be able to reliably hit a human-sized target at 400 meters just to be considered minimally qualified. That wasn't using a scope; just the regular sights built into the rifle.

what is 'reliably hit?' And does that mean 'kill shot' or just 'hit anywhere?'

Because it's really hard to see someone clearly at 400 yards, and actually aiming and making a kill shot is nigh impossible. Sure, you might wing someone, but a kill shot would be almost completely luck.

To actually reliably land a kill shot you're going to be a good hunter and get a scope and actually be able to see and aim the thing at that distance. Which, in game terms, is decreasing the effective range, lowering the range modifiers, and allowing you to use Deadly Aim. A x5 scope might ignore five range increments, or effectively +10 to hit over someone just using iron sights. Maybe it ignores eight range increments, since it would cut range to 1/5th, 400 yards down to 80, so only two range penalties...with a scope, you can hit the target at 400 yards EVERY SHOT.

And 400 yards, if you have a weapon with a 40 yard increment, is -20 to hit against an AC 10 target, with maybe a +5 to +8 mod...you're going to hit it 2 in 5 to 1 in 4 times even then. But I doubt you're going to hit the heart or head more then 1 in 10 times, right?

The game system isn't perfect for these things, but it is still at...

You are completely incorrect about how tough it is to see or hit a target at that range. It is much easier than you think. With just a few hours of training most people in good enough health for military service can make an incapacitating shot 80%+ of the time at 400 meters, using the somewhat underpowered M-16 series rifle. With a top quality hunting rifle they'd do considerably better.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
gamer-printer wrote:


But if the batteries you currently have are the maximum size available holding the maximum amount of power, and there are no additional slots for extra batteries - buying more batteries serves nothing.

Except that it is literally a three minute fix with a roll of duct tape and some wires to add additional battery slots to any electrically powered device if the batteries are accessible in the first place. [That's actually how the first iPod made it into space -- the standard iPod battery was not certified for flight, so they rigged up something to use AA batteries, which are flight-certified.]

And there's always the option of swapping batteries between spells to give me a much higher number of spells per day than would otherwise be possible -- burn my entire spell allowance during the first encounter, then swap batteries and burn them during the next one. Repeat until silliness.

Even adding more RAM to a system or a second motherboard is fairly simple if you know what you're doing. (A multi-motherboard system is just another form of a cluster.)

Quote:


he only way to get more options out of the existing hardware is by the kind of coding/software you use,
You keep repeating this, and it continues to be utterly false. In fact, it's your major misunderstanding. It is always possible to get more options simply by spending money on whatever currently limits your options.

If we're talking about a personal computer, you've got room for multi-boards, etc., but if you're working on something the size of credit card or smaller thing like a tiny smartphone. The circuit board is a one unit motherboard, harddrive, RAM, power cell, as unremoveable parts, and the housing is barely bigger than that circuit board for display screen or keypad. There is no room for added tech, it is all tech in one tiny unit. Let's also imagine that the cost of these items are comparable to pistol in standard PF.

And as JoeJ suggests, what if this PPU is manufactured by a company like Apple. Useful products that are really expensive and you can't replace the battery without breaking the device. If you want to upgrade, you need to buy the next product release in 2 years and will cost twice as much.

I don't want to make a class that as a 1st level PC can purchase a 9th level spell/program because I have a nice bank account and use it.

I want limited access that gets improved with levels of experience. Since being a computer programmer is an ongoing learning experience, as new code variants are created to stay current, I want to limit what a programmer is able to programs like varying spell levels. You cannot learn to program a Heat Burst (fireball), until you learn code required 2 levels from now. Your hands are full now learning and creating the code to operate 1st level programs.

If enabling even a pre-existing program requires you to enter additional lines of code, and not just pushing a button, then that too makes sense that you can purchase, but cannot use such a program beyond your level, since the you don't yet know the code necessary for those necessary additional lines you have to enter.

PF isn't simulationist, so I don't need to be simulationist in my representation of tech, only emulation. And much of the argument is regarding 21st century programming and computer concepts which might be nothing like 24th century programming, especially being able to emulate teleport, resurrection, time stop, wish, etc. I would think those program would be really complex and until you have the code knowledge and math skills that you'll learn as you level up, you'll have to wait for higher levels to use those procedures.

Maybe someday the tech will get advanced enough that you could do this and totally break the class, but the tech is not there yet...


thejeff wrote:
It's not "just randomness". But it can be more akin to art than science.

Which means there is still science. Rules which can be tracked, precision that can be engineered. Our most precise measuring devices ever made still can't tell exactly where an electron is, but we know that electrons exist and a general idea where they are. We can't construct a perfect vacuum, but we can create enough of a vacuum to show how a perfect vacuum would generally work. We can't predict with perfect knowledge the action/reaction of firing a cannon at a certain angle, but we can still use where the shell lands to figure out the mathematics behind trajectory.

You don't have to isolate every single variable, or even most of them, to figure out that nearly every time you use dried bat guano instead of fresh bat guano you get a bigger fireball, or that using mithral instead of silver filigree folded into the steel makes for a "smarter" construct.

Lots of variables makes the science fuzzier, it doesn't remove the science entirely.


boring7 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It's not "just randomness". But it can be more akin to art than science.

Which means there is still science. Rules which can be tracked, precision that can be engineered. Our most precise measuring devices ever made still can't tell exactly where an electron is, but we know that electrons exist and a general idea where they are. We can't construct a perfect vacuum, but we can create enough of a vacuum to show how a perfect vacuum would generally work. We can't predict with perfect knowledge the action/reaction of firing a cannon at a certain angle, but we can still use where the shell lands to figure out the mathematics behind trajectory.

You don't have to isolate every single variable, or even most of them, to figure out that nearly every time you use dried bat guano instead of fresh bat guano you get a bigger fireball, or that using mithral instead of silver filigree folded into the steel makes for a "smarter" construct.

Lots of variables makes the science fuzzier, it doesn't remove the science entirely.

Yeah, Pathfinder magic works more like science. Not arguing there.

It is however, simply not true of fantasy magic in general.


thejeff wrote:
boring7 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It's not "just randomness". But it can be more akin to art than science.

Which means there is still science. Rules which can be tracked, precision that can be engineered. Our most precise measuring devices ever made still can't tell exactly where an electron is, but we know that electrons exist and a general idea where they are. We can't construct a perfect vacuum, but we can create enough of a vacuum to show how a perfect vacuum would generally work. We can't predict with perfect knowledge the action/reaction of firing a cannon at a certain angle, but we can still use where the shell lands to figure out the mathematics behind trajectory.

You don't have to isolate every single variable, or even most of them, to figure out that nearly every time you use dried bat guano instead of fresh bat guano you get a bigger fireball, or that using mithral instead of silver filigree folded into the steel makes for a "smarter" construct.

Lots of variables makes the science fuzzier, it doesn't remove the science entirely.

Yeah, Pathfinder magic works more like science. Not arguing there.

It is however, simply not true of fantasy magic in general.

and it has to because it's part of a game with rules where the rules have to work the same way every time.

Many of use prefer to pretend that it doesn't and works the way that it does in more traditional fantasy.

It's not perfect but neither is any system I've ever seen that tries to inject randomness into magic.

- Torger


if you look at the concept of things like material components and things like rune circles, enhancing items, brewing potions, and even resource management, magic can definitely be considered a science. an unorthodox science, but still a science.


I'm surprised that after the thread has gone on this long that nobody has brought up White Wolf's Mage: The Ascension (from their Old World of Darkness). Magic vs Science (actually Magic Users vs the Technocratic Union) was the big thing there.

To build upon some ideas that were posted earlier by others (and tie in with Mage: The Ascension), technology can be mass-produced and used by a wide swath of people, whereas magic depends upon individual powers, thus precluding true mass production and inherently reserving it to an elite; magic is also flaky and tends to dump its Paradoxes back on the user, whereas technology is often more reliable, and when it does have Paradox, it often dumps it on somebody else (often as pollution); on the other hand, advanced technology requires a lot of infrastructure support for both making it and using it, and much of it also requires a LOT of energy.

As for the computer mage analogy, instead of thinking of conventional computers, where programs can be copied and run freely (making the increasingly hazardous assumption that they haven't been DRM-locked or something like that), think of quantum computing. Quantum information can be transferred but not copied, if I understand current scientific understanding correctly. So once you've used a quantum program (assuming that the actual program is in quantum form, rather than just the data as in current quantum computing experiments), it's gone until you make it again.

And actually, for the Pathfinder Wizard, extra batteries do exist, although they're quite expensive. They're called Pearls of Power. They even self-recharge, slowly. Staves also act as quasi-batteries (they partly use your power), but have to be recharged manually and painstakingly (10 days to go from 0 to full).

I have some ideas about changing the properties of the world so that technology is harder to advance even though the laws of physics remain the same -- here's a preview. Consider a world (with Golarion names borrowed in some cases to indicate analogs) that has a thicker atmosphere, but with the oxygen content not proportionally increased -- still breathable(*), but fires don't burn as hot, thus making metallurgy more difficult and expensive (you have to at least partially purify oxygen before you can work the good stuff) and making both steam engines and internal combustion engines less efficient, and conveniently also making it easier for things like Dragons to fly (especially if you have Mars-like instead of Earth-like gravity, thus also helping Giants). As a bonus anti-technology property. really bad solar flares are frequent, and wreck any early attempts at electrical or telegraph grids. To deal with Firearms, just remove the assumption that only macroscopic organisms are able to use Magic -- now certain nasty mold species are able to send their spores Ethereal to get into your ammunition cartridges, consume what they can to grow until moisture or some other limiting ingredient runs out, and then make more spores, and finally detonate the remainder to spread themselves around to repeat the cycle -- now firearms are even more dangerous to the user than on our world, and using them safely requires staying in a really dry area like the desert that includes Alkenstar and the Mana Wastes, or paying a premium for cartridges that are actually sealed reliably against such Ethereal spores (nobles, pirates, and wealthy merchants -- preferably with overlap between the groups -- might be some of the main character types that would be able to afford this). Furthermore, anything like the Mana Wastes that interferes with Magic also plays havoc with anything beyond the simplest technology, so Alkenstar's foray into technology, after the initial spurt of developing Firearms and primitive mechanical technology, is just as impaired as everybody else's. Put all of this together, and add the usual mix of religion and superstition and plain stuppdity, and then add Magic on top of that, and I wouldn't be surprised if technological development were slowed to the glacial pace found on Golarion.

(*)I think you can go up to around 6 atmospheres before nitrogen narcosis starts to become a problem; if you give some time for acclimation and/or adaptation (like introduce Humans/Humanoids in the mountains), you might be able to get to higher pressures.

So while Magic might be bad for technology and vice versa, science doesn't have to be bad for fantasy.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

to inhibit technology, the only things you need to do are change two base physical laws.

1) electricity doesn't always follow the path of least resistance. being an elemental force, it's partly alive and prone to going off in wild directions. The inevitable fires that start would utterly preclude development of electrical tech.

2) Spontaneous combustion is most likely in things that are most combustible. In other words, gunpowder tends to spontaneously blow up. Alchemical fire is sealed in vials specifically to prevent this from happening randomly, but actually takes advantage of it when being formulated.
So, carrying an ammo belt or a keg of gunpowder is a death sentence, and chemical bombs are right out.

You can add a corollary:

3) Natural items treated through unnatural processes are unstable and break down quickly.

This is basically CHEMISTRY. Alchemy works with magic and natural processes. With this rule in place, all our chemistry that makes plastics and the like will utterly fail. You're back to using old, natural processes and alchemy, which don't scale well and are much slower and inefficient.

As an addendum, if you go to a place without magic, such as a massive dead magic zone or anti-magic shell, none of this applies and tech works perfectly well, clearly illustrating the fact that the prescence of natural magic is the reason for all of this.

If you can tote a gatling gun and its ammo around inside an A-M Shell, it'll actually work!

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

JoeJ wrote:
You are completely incorrect about how tough it is to see or hit a target at that range. It is much easier than you think. With just a few hours of training most people in good enough health for military service can make an incapacitating shot 80%+ of the time at 400 meters, using the somewhat underpowered M-16 series rifle. With a top quality hunting rifle they'd do considerably better.

Really? Mmm. Well, I thought 400 yards was a bit at the long range for a steady shot and good visibility.

On the other hand, a Human size unmoving target at that range is AC 5 (AC 10 w 0 Dex). So, someone with a +4 to hit would indeed strike the target 80% of the time. :P

If that's true, I applaud the average person's marksmanship. Sometimes I think I can't hit the broadside of a barn, but I'm not a habitual shooter, either.

I should ask my uncle. He's a gun nut and would have all the stats.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

to inhibit technology, the only things you need to do are change two base physical laws.

1) electricity doesn't always follow the path of least resistance. being an elemental force, it's partly alive and prone to going off in wild directions. The inevitable fires that start would utterly preclude development of electrical tech.

2) Spontaneous combustion is most likely in things that are most combustible. In other words, gunpowder tends to spontaneously blow up. Alchemical fire is sealed in vials specifically to prevent this from happening randomly, but actually takes advantage of it when being formulated.
So, carrying an ammo belt or a keg of gunpowder is a death sentence, and chemical bombs are right out.

You can add a corollary:

3) Natural items treated through unnatural processes are unstable and break down quickly.

This is basically CHEMISTRY. Alchemy works with magic and natural processes. With this rule in place, all our chemistry that makes plastics and the like will utterly fail. You're back to using old, natural processes and alchemy, which don't scale well and are much slower and inefficient.

As an addendum, if you go to a place without magic, such as a massive dead magic zone or anti-magic shell, none of this applies and tech works perfectly well, clearly illustrating the fact that the prescence of natural magic is the reason for all of this.

If you can tote a gatling gun and its ammo around inside an A-M Shell, it'll actually work!

I'd really argue against taking this kind of approach, unless you're playing around with a cross-genre "Scientists in a magic world" kind of thing.

It just prompts people to poke for holes in the rules.
You're in a certain setting. That setting has certain tech. Would other tech that they haven't developed work? Maybe. Maybe not. Who cares? It hasn't been invented. Slap your players if they want to use out of character knowledge to do so, otherwise it won't come up.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

well, the fun part is, it's magic. If they start poking, blow something up.

Note that none of the above precludes gearsmithing, clockwork or steamwork. So you can have tech, it's just got a big, steaming, unwieldy cap on it. ANd you can make magitech, but it keeps magic as the power source.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

well, the fun part is, it's magic. If they start poking, blow something up.

Note that none of the above precludes gearsmithing, clockwork or steamwork. So you can have tech, it's just got a big, steaming, unwieldy cap on it. ANd you can make magitech, but it keeps magic as the power source.

More like players poking holes in the theory, if you let them know what it is. Not characters. If you're just keeping it in your head, fine, but I don't really see much advantage to it.

Holes like the electrical impulses in your body.

If you want clockwork and steamwork, fine. Have them. If you don't, then don't.

Unless your game is specifically about characters trying to figure out the laws of physics, bootstrap an industrial revolution or something similar, it doesn't really matter why the setting has the tech level it does.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Would we have scientifically progressed to phones if telepathy was available? To airplanes if there were magic items of overland flight/air walk/teleportation (circles)?

That's my answer to the base question. I don't have any problems with guns in fantasy which seemed to be the sub-question, but "necessity is the mother of invention", and magic is another more established route in fantasy.


Petty Alchemy wrote:

Would we have scientifically progressed to phones if telepathy was available? To airplanes if there were magic items of overland flight/air walk/teleportation (circles)?

That's my answer to the base question. I don't have any problems with guns in fantasy which seemed to be the sub-question, but "necessity is the mother of invention", and magic is another more established route in fantasy.

With Pathfinder magic? Yes. Overland Flight is sloooooooow, as are most other means of magical flight. The Wright brothers probably would have used a magical engine for their powered glider, but that's another story.

Phones? Depends on the pricetag. Effective long-distance communication is mad expensive with magic, but if you have magewrights who can be powerful enough to kill with a stare but subservient enough to spend their days in a dark room cranking out the same magical object over and over and over again (and they never degrade or break) then it would work.

Also, necessity isn't the only mother of invention, sometimes we invent crap because we see something weird and keep looking at it and discover something new and interesting. We never really NEEDED to know what an electron was, until after we figured it out and found ways to use it.


boring7 wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:

Would we have scientifically progressed to phones if telepathy was available? To airplanes if there were magic items of overland flight/air walk/teleportation (circles)?

That's my answer to the base question. I don't have any problems with guns in fantasy which seemed to be the sub-question, but "necessity is the mother of invention", and magic is another more established route in fantasy.

With Pathfinder magic? Yes. Overland Flight is sloooooooow, as are most other means of magical flight. The Wright brothers probably would have used a magical engine for their powered glider, but that's another story.

Phones? Depends on the pricetag. Effective long-distance communication is mad expensive with magic, but if you have magewrights who can be powerful enough to kill with a stare but subservient enough to spend their days in a dark room cranking out the same magical object over and over and over again (and they never degrade or break) then it would work.

Also, necessity isn't the only mother of invention, sometimes we invent crap because we see something weird and keep looking at it and discover something new and interesting. We never really NEEDED to know what an electron was, until after we figured it out and found ways to use it.

Sure, the modern versions would be better than magic - though teleportation still beats modern planes.

But would all the poor quality intermediate steps be good enough to justify the time and effort put into them.

If the rich and powerful people can afford to use the magical version, is anyone going to finance telegraph invention, not to mention laying the long distance cable?

Edit: The answer of course depends on what the setting creator wants. If you want tech along with your magic, you can justify that. If you don't, you can justify that. If you want your magic to work like tech, you can justify that.
None of them are inevitable. None of them are impossible. Pick what kind of world you want to play in, based on the aesthetics of what you want to play.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Teleportation Circles have modern air travel beat though.

Anyone with the resources to become an academic would probably want to study magic. I would've dropped Economics like a sack of bricks if I could get a degree in Conjuration instead.

And if the best academics are wizards, why not research a new spell to rewrite reality to achieve the results you want?


Aelryinth wrote:

to inhibit technology, the only things you need to do are change two base physical laws.

{. . .}
If you can tote a gatling gun and its ammo around inside an A-M Shell, it'll actually work!

What I'm saying is, you don't even need to change base physical laws, just environmental conditions. If you go to Golarion (with modified environmental conditions as I posted above) in a starship, everything works until the next super solar flare fries much of the electronics in your starship, and the remaining AI goes insane and thinks it's now divine and no longer obeys any of your commands. Now your CNC mills are useless, so the ammunition you've got on hand for your gatling gun at the moment is all you've got, and when that runs out, it's useless, because the locals can't craft more unless you go to someone who is REALLY expensive and likely unfriendly. Some of your robots might still work because their combination of smaller size and better electronic shielding was enough to keep them sort of working, but they're kind of flaky now, and between everything going haywire and the treachery of the more powerful of the locals, you're hosed before you can get things running again. The treacherous locals take over whatever of your stuff they can find and figure out how to use (including stuff they use to corrupt the local ruler), and continue to work on figuring out those things that they find but can't figure out how to use. A great many years might pass before some band of do-gooders comes along and tries to figure out something better to do with this stuff . . . .

Petty Alchemy wrote:

{. . .}

Anyone with the resources to become an academic would probably want to study magic. I would've dropped Economics like a sack of bricks if I could get a degree in Conjuration instead.
{. . .}

According to the Theory of Sin Magic, if you got a degree in Transmutation, you wouldn't even need to drop Economics. Although it is a bit weird that they seem to have a thing against advertising (Illusion and Enchantment) . . . .


thejeff wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:

well, the fun part is, it's magic. If they start poking, blow something up.

Note that none of the above precludes gearsmithing, clockwork or steamwork. So you can have tech, it's just got a big, steaming, unwieldy cap on it. ANd you can make magitech, but it keeps magic as the power source.

More like players poking holes in the theory, if you let them know what it is. Not characters. If you're just keeping it in your head, fine, but I don't really see much advantage to it.

Holes like the electrical impulses in your body.

If you want clockwork and steamwork, fine. Have them. If you don't, then don't.

Unless your game is specifically about characters trying to figure out the laws of physics, bootstrap an industrial revolution or something similar, it doesn't really matter why the setting has the tech level it does.

Yeah. I would rather play in a setting where the GM just goes "This is the highest tech level available, and I am trying to run a campaign with this feel" Rather than "this fundamental universal property doesn't exist solely to prevent technology at level x from working". If only because I have a science background, and tweaking little things like how electricity works is bound to produce side effects you didn't picture.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ill make a case for myself liking tech/science separate from magic. My gaming group tends to rotate games. We play Call of Cthulhu, D&D/PF, Traveller,etc. When we switch between systems we are looking for a particular experience. When I want science and space I plat Traveller. When I wat mysticism and horror I play call of cthulhu. When I want fantasy I play PF. I like each system being specific so that when we rotate the games feel different and fresh. I understand this is completely subjective.

Now where I think folks often butt heads is when it comes to system rotators and system exclusive folk. Some people have one system and one game so that one needs to be kitchen sink so they can mod it to fit any story. As a rotator I simply dont need this or desire it. I can see where many folks want a swiss army system though and know why its desirable for them. I wont neglect the guy that simply wants a magic-science mishmash either that's perfectly valid too.

I have a system for science and a system for fantasy. I like keeping them clean of one another so that the feel is kept contained. Completely subjective but thats how I am livin.


Pan wrote:

Ill make a case for myself liking tech/science separate from magic. My gaming group tends to rotate games. We play Call of Cthulhu, D&D/PF, Traveller,etc. When we switch between systems we are looking for a particular experience. When I want science and space I plat Traveller. When I wat mysticism and horror I play call of cthulhu. When I want fantasy I play PF. I like each system being specific so that when we rotate the games feel different and fresh. I understand this is completely subjective.

Now where I think folks often butt heads is when it comes to system rotators and system exclusive folk. Some people have one system and one game so that one needs to be kitchen sink so they can mod it to fit any story. As a rotator I simply dont need this or desire it. I can see where many folks want a swiss army system though and know why its desirable for them. I wont neglect the guy that simply wants a magic-science mishmash either that's perfectly valid too.

I have a system for science and a system for fantasy. I like keeping them clean of one another so that the feel is kept contained. Completely subjective but thats how I am livin.

But not even an actual generic system like Hero or GURPS. With those you can play one system and rotate (or mix and match) genres as you please.


Petty Alchemy wrote:

Would we have scientifically progressed to phones if telepathy was available? To airplanes if there were magic items of overland flight/air walk/teleportation (circles)?

That's my answer to the base question. I don't have any problems with guns in fantasy which seemed to be the sub-question, but "necessity is the mother of invention", and magic is another more established route in fantasy.

Pretty much that. Genre-crossing for the sake of it is, IMO, lame.

Since anyone who knows my posts is expecting it I'll not disappoint:
Eberron mixes the two in a way that I find exceedingly unimaginative. In that campaign setting magic is technology. Magic is used just like technology is ITRW. Of all the things one might conceive that magic can do, in Eberron they gimp it up to mimic Earth tech circa 1915. Ughh...


Another point to ponder: If you can make teleportation circles that replace the airplane, you can weaponize and mass-produce Anti-magic Fields about as easily.

Scarab Sages

thejeff wrote:
boring7 wrote:
Petty Alchemy wrote:

Would we have scientifically progressed to phones if telepathy was available? To airplanes if there were magic items of overland flight/air walk/teleportation (circles)?

That's my answer to the base question. I don't have any problems with guns in fantasy which seemed to be the sub-question, but "necessity is the mother of invention", and magic is another more established route in fantasy.

With Pathfinder magic? Yes. Overland Flight is sloooooooow, as are most other means of magical flight. The Wright brothers probably would have used a magical engine for their powered glider, but that's another story.

Phones? Depends on the pricetag. Effective long-distance communication is mad expensive with magic, but if you have magewrights who can be powerful enough to kill with a stare but subservient enough to spend their days in a dark room cranking out the same magical object over and over and over again (and they never degrade or break) then it would work.

Also, necessity isn't the only mother of invention, sometimes we invent crap because we see something weird and keep looking at it and discover something new and interesting. We never really NEEDED to know what an electron was, until after we figured it out and found ways to use it.

Sure, the modern versions would be better than magic - though teleportation still beats modern planes.

But would all the poor quality intermediate steps be good enough to justify the time and effort put into them.

If the rich and powerful people can afford to use the magical version, is anyone going to finance telegraph invention, not to mention laying the long distance cable?

Edit: The answer of course depends on what the setting creator wants. If you want tech along with your magic, you can justify that. If you don't, you can justify that. If you want your magic to work like tech, you can justify that.
None of them are inevitable. None of them are impossible. Pick what kind of world you...

Well there's what the rich and powerful have as opposed to what they need. Sure you can spend a fortune to build teleport circles in the major cities (if allowed) but if your looking for a new market you need faster travel that's able to bypass natural obstacles in order to find a new place to build that circle. Sure you can equip all your major factors with crystal balls for fast secure communication but if someone came with the idea of telegraph cables as a means of guaranteed communication to anywhere they're run regardless of magical talent or factors in place you may feel its worth it to finance them so you can receive regular updates of conditions without the expense of sending a magical factor to check on things for you. Particualrly if your talking a governmeent that is going to want to know whats going on to track general kingdom conditions e.g. public unrest.

As for going through the intermediate steps that's the same as technology there have been a lot of issues in the develop and production of it.

Personally long term unless you find a way to do Eberron's mass production or you have all academics learning magic at the imperial university (I prefer magic is only useable by a small group myself so unless you have inherrent magic sorcerers/arcanists or its being granted by an external power demonists/clerics magic puts a huge strain on the body that isn't genetically able to handle it. Wizards use first ed rules for side effects so they can kill themselves casting) eventually tech is going to develop simply because it can be used by anyone. You can train a mage for years to wield their arcane powers and then they launch a fireaball at the opposing armour assuming they're not countered or you can spend a few months training a commoner to point and fire the grenade.

I can easily see a "modern world" in those circumstances where the rich elite have all sorts of magical advantages e.g. healing of otherwise incurable diseases, holidays to the bottom of the sea or the like and government funded projects e.g. a colony on the moon are supported by magic. If your a normal person you can still get these things but they would tend to be either expensive or have long waiting lists since for the vast majority of the world they rely on technology as it can be mass produced easily and quickly in large quantities. Sure a teleportation circle gets you from New York to LA in a few seconds but not only do you have government concerns about invading armies limiting where and how they are placed but its not worth placing them everywhere so you have planes still. Those few who can use magic are highly paid professionals and vary from secure government positions through highly paid corporate mages to those who use their powers in hospitals and other public service sectors.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

The whole 'lightning' thing is if you're trying to get it to flow through unnatural processes, like long copper wires, repeatedly. Natural ores, nervous systems, alchemy and magic would naturally avoid the whole debacle.

AI's that are disrupted by malfunctioning electrical circuits, then spontaneously 'reset' by a magical surge in the wrong way makes for a great reason for spontaneous free will and craziness, too.

==Aelryinth


Aelryinth wrote:

The whole 'lightning' thing is if you're trying to get it to flow through unnatural processes, like long copper wires, repeatedly. Natural ores, nervous systems, alchemy and magic would naturally avoid the whole debacle.

AI's that are disrupted by malfunctioning electrical circuits, then spontaneously 'reset' by a magical surge in the wrong way makes for a great reason for spontaneous free will and craziness, too.

==Aelryinth

That's the thing...my group would be like "why are copper wires (a natural element) not natural, but electricity through unprocessed ores works? Why isn't the nervous system effected?"

So no doubt it works for you, but my group would probably just get into a giant philosophical debate over natural vs unnatural, or try to nitpick holes in the situation


The presence of magic will tend to stunt the development of science unless it's either susceptible to it or so hazardous it's ignored until people forget it's anything more than myth or it goes away long enough to be relegated to myth long enough for scientific thinking to solidly take hold before returning.

So long as magic is accepted as inexplicable it can be used to explain anything and most defined systems of magic really are nonsensible.

We can discard the peasant railgun as a degeneration of the readied action abstraction. We cannot so easily discard spell levels, for example, as a bad abstraction because they effect clear in game things like the price of a scroll, but spell levels are determined by the combat effect of a spell, not the energy is requires. Any explanation of magic is going to come with predictions about how it should work and game systems never fit unless deliberately designed to match a system of metaphysics rather than game balance.

With a gamey magic system not susceptible to sufficient analysis the only way to mix magic and technology is for magic to either be new (or newly returning after a long absence) or magic users marginalized to the extent that mainstream society doesn't know they exist.

You also can't have divine magic at all. Science requires either no creator or a creator that likes systems that operate on consistent laws without intervention and no significantly interventionist gods. If divine capriciousness can be used as an explanation for anything there's no reason to look for patterns and science is stillborn.


I never found anything wrong with adding high tech into the game. What I like the most about the game is how versatile the game is. If I want a futuristic setting where giant animals are equipped with integrated rocket launchers and force fields; I can do that. If I want a zombie apocalypse setting with people using laser rifles and plasma grenades; I can do that. How about a setting with cybernetic vampires vs titanic sized insects? I can do that, too. I don't have to look for another game for these settings, because it's all right here. Pathfinder is much more than just sword and sorcery, which is what I really like about the game.


Atarlost wrote:
With a gamey magic system not susceptible to sufficient analysis the only way to mix magic and technology is for magic to either be new (or newly returning after a long absence) or magic users marginalized to the extent that mainstream society doesn't know they exist.

So how to explain Eberron then? Magic is tech there. Or at least there is no functional distinction.

Atarlost wrote:
You also can't have divine magic at all. Science requires either no creator or a creator that likes systems that operate on consistent laws without intervention and no significantly interventionist gods. If divine capriciousness can be used as an explanation for anything there's no reason to look for patterns and science is stillborn.

Again Eberron fails this standard, so there must be a distinction between tech and "science" (as you use it) that I'm not picking up on.


Quark Blast wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
With a gamey magic system not susceptible to sufficient analysis the only way to mix magic and technology is for magic to either be new (or newly returning after a long absence) or magic users marginalized to the extent that mainstream society doesn't know they exist.

So how to explain Eberron then? Magic is tech there. Or at least there is no functional distinction.

Atarlost wrote:
You also can't have divine magic at all. Science requires either no creator or a creator that likes systems that operate on consistent laws without intervention and no significantly interventionist gods. If divine capriciousness can be used as an explanation for anything there's no reason to look for patterns and science is stillborn.
Again Eberron fails this standard, so there must be a distinction between tech and "science" (as you use it) that I'm not picking up on.

Eberron is a stupid setting that violates everything we know about societal development. It is not alone in this, but that doesn't make it not stupid. Most game designers aren't even amateurs when it comes to history and it shows.


Atarlost wrote:
Eberron is a stupid setting that violates everything we know about societal development. It is not alone in this, but that doesn't make it not stupid. Most game designers aren't even amateurs when it comes to history and it shows.

Wow! That dances along the line of the "don't be a jerk" rule but... I won't be disagreeing with you. :D


actually, i see some limited form of logic in Eberron, if you have powerful spellcasters, no matter how limited in variety, people will actually find ways to use science to cheaply replicate some of the important obvious forms of convenience from magic. such as high range area damage such as fireball and stuff like food purification, fast acting medicine, or even cheap long term lighting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:
Quark Blast wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
With a gamey magic system not susceptible to sufficient analysis the only way to mix magic and technology is for magic to either be new (or newly returning after a long absence) or magic users marginalized to the extent that mainstream society doesn't know they exist.

So how to explain Eberron then? Magic is tech there. Or at least there is no functional distinction.

Atarlost wrote:
You also can't have divine magic at all. Science requires either no creator or a creator that likes systems that operate on consistent laws without intervention and no significantly interventionist gods. If divine capriciousness can be used as an explanation for anything there's no reason to look for patterns and science is stillborn.
Again Eberron fails this standard, so there must be a distinction between tech and "science" (as you use it) that I'm not picking up on.
Eberron is a stupid setting that violates everything we know about societal development. It is not alone in this, but that doesn't make it not stupid. Most game designers aren't even amateurs when it comes to history and it shows.

Oddly enough game settings aren't generally created based on a deep study of history and societal development. They're based on ideas that seem like they'd be fun to play in.

If you want a justification, just assume all our ideas about societal development go out the window when different species with different psychologies and development patterns get involved. That's enough to leave you open to set up whatever societies you want to play in.


thejeff wrote:

Oddly enough game settings aren't generally created based on a deep study of history and societal development. They're based on ideas that seem like they'd be fun to play in.

If you want a justification, just assume all our ideas about societal development go out the window when different species with different psychologies and development patterns get involved. That's enough to leave you open to set up whatever societies you want to play in.

Oddly enough Baker's justification for Eberron was all the "logic holes" in the standard game settings/rules. Logic holes that only he could see apparently, given his justifications on his blog and other Eberron-related Q&A sessions.

And speaking of "different psychologies and development patterns":
Eberron is a place where basically all species are human. Albeit some have quirky little traits like darkvision or scaled skin but essentially everyone gets the same ethical choices growing up and one's species has next to no impact on that. Less impact than the differing human societies have among us IRL for example.


Atarlost wrote:
Eberron is a stupid setting that violates everything we know about societal development. It is not alone in this, but that doesn't make it not stupid. Most game designers aren't even amateurs when it comes to history and it shows.

Can you be more specific about what we "know about societal development" that Eberron violates? I know next to nothing about the setting except that it treats magic like modern technology in some ways.

Silver Crusade

Atarlost wrote:


Eberron is a stupid setting that violates everything we know about societal development. It is not alone in this, but that doesn't make it not stupid. Most game designers aren't even amateurs when it comes to history and it shows.

Oh? Please explain...

Unless you've actually got solid reasons to back up your opinion that are either particular to Eberron and not to any other setting, or where Eberron is so egregious an offender above and beyond other setting's errors that it merits being called out as such, all you're saying by calling Eberron "stupid" is "Eberron is a setting I don't like, so I'll insult it and by extension the people who created it and the people who like playing in it".

So-- got explainable, verifiable reasons? Or-- maybe you should step back and think before arbitrarily throwing insults around.

Silver Crusade

gamer-printer wrote:


If we're talking about a personal computer, you've got room for multi-boards, etc., but if you're working on something the size of credit card or smaller thing like a tiny smartphone. The circuit board is a one unit motherboard, harddrive, RAM, power cell, as unremoveable parts, and the housing is barely bigger than that circuit board for display screen or keypad. There is no room for added tech, it is all tech in one tiny unit. Let's also imagine that the cost of these items are comparable to pistol in standard PF.

And as JoeJ...

Everything you've said so far makes it sound to me like what you want to run isn't a science-fiction game, it's a fantasy game using some of the language and imagery of tech rather than magic-- perhaps a science fantasy game? Either that, or the PCs are actually characters inside a total-immersion VR game and have to live, function, exist, etc, according to the rules programmed into the world (maybe sort of like "Sword Art Online" as an RPG-- except the technical language and trappings are more obviously part of the game rather than hidden behind a wall of sword-and-sorcery graphics)...

Not sure if this is the game you're trying to run, but that's what I'd get from it if I were trying to play in such a campaign.


Its just the basic concept as magic as tech as described in the free EN Publishing Santiago setting guide for sci-fi PF. I like hard sci-fi non-D&D games too, its just that while there might be some holes, its a lot easier to work with, without having to learn a entirely new system to describe technology versus magic - since I have some system mastery of PF (why work with a different system?) In such a setting all spells are renamed to sound more sci-fi and are called technical procedures, but mechanically works identical to the spells they represent (Dispell Magic is now EMP Burst). Since magic is tech, there is no magic per se, unless you add psionics to represent a non-tech way to replicate extraordinary activities.

Santiago doesn't have a close approximation of the wizard, they have an engineer which is based off alchemist, and other caster conversions, so I wanted to try a make something that works like a wizard, but looks like a computer programmer/hacker with some hi-tech toys.

I've never been a fan of psionics, but in a sci-fi setting it fits.


gamer-printer wrote:

Its just the basic concept as magic as tech as described in the free EN Publishing Santiago setting guide for sci-fi PF. I like hard sci-fi non-D&D games too, its just that while there might be some holes, its a lot easier to work with, without having to learn a entirely new system to describe technology versus magic - since I have some system mastery of PF (why work with a different system). In such a setting all spells are renamed to sound more sci-fi are called technical procedures, but mechanically works identical to the spells they represent (Dispell Magic is now EMP Burst). Since magic is tech, there is no magic per se, unless you add psionics to represent a non-tech way to replicate extraordinary activities.

Santiago doesn't have a close approximation of the wizard, they have an engineer which is based off alchemist, and other caster conversions, so I wanted to try a make something that works like a wizard, but looks like a computer programmer/hacker with some hi-tech toys.

I've never been a fan of psionics, but in a sci-fi setting it fits.

Psionics fits most fantasy settings (that aren't D&D or based on it) *better* than D&D Wizards.


I've been D&Dified for 30+ years - its burned into my monitor screen, so to speak. Mechanically psionics work fine as magic. If you use a spell point system instead of spell slots, magic works a lot more like psionics. I know that class flavor is only fluff, but I'm sold on that fluff. To me, magic is magic, and psionics is something else - I don't care for the flavor of a psionics for my fantasy games. Flavor means a lot to me, and perhaps unduly so, but it is what it is. In a sci-fi PF game, psionics fits into my suspension of disbelief better than it does in fantasy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's just it though, (D&D) magic *isn't* Magic, even if you insist on calling it that. It's just a bunch of mechanics that don't fit well with most fantasy settings. Psionics however, *does* mechanically fit most fantasy settings. You're idea of "flavor" is akin to saying that only Rogues can be thieves who steal from people or that only Fighters can serve in the army or that only Cavaliers can be knights. I'd quote Shakespeare at this point, but I'm guessing everyone already knows what a certain variety of flower smells like. Even though it's called "Psionics" it still smells like the kind of Magic in most fantasy settings.


Anzyr wrote:
That's just it though. Magic *isn't* magic, unless you insist on calling it that. It's just a bunch of mechanics that don't fit well with most fantasy settings. Psionics however, *does* mechanically fit most fantasy settings. You're idea of "flavor" is akin to saying that only Rogues can be thieves who steal from people or that only fighters can serve in the army and only cavaliers can be knights. I'd quote Shakespeare at this point, but I'm guessing everyone already knows what a certain variety of flower smells like.

I don't disagree, you're completely right. My prejudice regarding flavor is completely unreasonable in the face of how anything can be reflavored as something else, but I'm fine with my prejudice and it helps define how I design my home games.

Just to slightly counter your point in your examples about how my idea is akin only rogues being thieves, etc., I've run a crime syndicate game where only one multi-class rogue/caster existed, everyone else were casters and not a straight rogue was played.

In a commando homebrew I'm working on, it is the army, but there isn't a fighter in the lineup, rather untouchable rager, sniper slayer, a custom gun magus archetype called Shootist, an "oradin" and inquisitor.

I don't really care for the cavalier class - too much dependance on mounts, especially its charge abilities, so in games I want to represent knight, I use the samurai class but dress them as European knights, because I prefer that alternates abilities to fit my concept of knight, better than the cavalier.

I think cavalier, samurai, and the hybrid classes are new enough not to have burned the flavor into me yet, so I'm more open to altering their flavor.

Sovereign Court

thejeff wrote:
Pan wrote:

Ill make a case for myself liking tech/science separate from magic. My gaming group tends to rotate games. We play Call of Cthulhu, D&D/PF, Traveller,etc. When we switch between systems we are looking for a particular experience. When I want science and space I plat Traveller. When I wat mysticism and horror I play call of cthulhu. When I want fantasy I play PF. I like each system being specific so that when we rotate the games feel different and fresh. I understand this is completely subjective.

Now where I think folks often butt heads is when it comes to system rotators and system exclusive folk. Some people have one system and one game so that one needs to be kitchen sink so they can mod it to fit any story. As a rotator I simply dont need this or desire it. I can see where many folks want a swiss army system though and know why its desirable for them. I wont neglect the guy that simply wants a magic-science mishmash either that's perfectly valid too.

I have a system for science and a system for fantasy. I like keeping them clean of one another so that the feel is kept contained. Completely subjective but thats how I am livin.

But not even an actual generic system like Hero or GURPS. With those you can play one system and rotate (or mix and match) genres as you please.

Yeah I'm weird I like different systems along with different genres. For the longest time I didnt know why I had no love for Hero, Gurps, or savage worlds. Now I think I get it. I like the genre and the mechanics to change. A generic one size fits all system just wont work for me because its generic.

I will say that I am open to supplements adding new genres into existing systems. I dont mind that because its optional. I know im probably in the minority but I find adding features to a system easier than subtracting them.

151 to 200 of 355 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why Do So Many People View Science and Magic As Incompatible? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.