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

Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

351 to 355 of 355 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Senko wrote:

As for the chi, magic and psychic powers I tend to classify them as.. . .

Magic transforms the world.
Ki enhances it.
Psychic powers work with it.

There really isn't a unifying tradition that encompasses all three, because generally stories will contain only one of these types of arcana, or none. The first stems mainly from Western medieval and earlier lore, the second mainly from Eastern philosophy and modern wuxia material, and the third from pulp science fiction and bad movies and worse television, supplemented by additions from modern comic books.

Aelryinth wrote:
D&D is fairly unique in that psionics, ki, magic, rage, and alchemy are all different power sources, some of which interact, some of which do not.

That's been changed for 5e. Ki and those rage powers that are blatantly superhuman have all been redefined as magic. (Psionics doesn't exist in the system yet.)

See, this is not a problem for me. I have designed settings where magic and technology affected each other negatively, and settings where a kingdom used magically heated and animated engines to create airships, well, an airship. It's all flavor to me.

Icyshadow wrote:
So wait, how many people here actually like magitek / blending magic and science together?

I love Final Fantasy VII which is what I think of as magitek. I also like Eberron. That said I'm going more back to roots with arcane magic (besides the PCs) being rarer and not necessarily well understood. This, however is after more than a couple of apocalypses ensuring there's plenty of ruins with magical and technological artifacts (technology and psionics were created in an ancient Age that predates elves discovering how to manipulate arcane magic). I'd say I've inadvertently created a world similar to Numeria (I haven't read the setting), especially as there's a group called the Esoteric Order of the Forbidden Mountain (taking the place of the Technik League) who hide their science around enough mystery and ritual as to make it seem magical.

So it's not what I think of as magitek but it does allow science and magic to coexist without science overwhelming the magic (at least to begin with. If the Esoteric Order of the Forbidden Mountain loses their monopoly on advanced technology it could have a drastic effect on the world).

My highlights of the Golarion setting thus far? DMing a game set on Akiton, having mi-go as the villains of an entire adventure and exploring the ruins of Shory city as a player (in this version the Shory city was filled with science gadgets).

MagusJanus wrote:

Technically, through nuclear power, we did achieve the alchemist dream of being able to transmute materials.

We just figured out it comes with a bit of a higher cost than the alchemists wanted and involves some very nasty byproducts.

This is what stops a lot of alchemists in my setting from inventing more advanced technology. They're too busy chasing after the lead to gold dream. Thing is though, they're so close!

Aelryinth wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:
a 2.0 is inevitable at some point. The hardest point is going to be getting away from the 3.5 OGL, and truly making a game of their own. {. . .}

Getting away from the 3.5 OGL is not required for a Pathfinder 2.0/M&M 4.0, and unless they come up with a substitute for this that is better, it is probably better to stick with it.

There's a lot of legacy rules from 3.5 that they stuck with that they'd like to get rid of now that they feel more confident about the game. For instance, requiring deities for clerics, just for starters.

the new book about options will hopefully be talking about what they'd like to do different, that will still make the core decent.

Sorry, when you said 3.5 OGL, I thought you meant the Open Game License itself. With this clarification of what you are actually talking about, I can understand where you're coming from and could add some of my own to the mix (probably not a good idea right now since it's 02:05 here as I am typing this).

351 to 355 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.
Recent threads in General Discussion