Results 11 to 20 of 23
Thread: Technological Progression of Ce
-
01-09-1999, 01:12 PM #11Pieter SleijpenGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Jim Cooper wrote:
>
> One Lister spake:
> > I really think magic stops all advancements in the feild of weapondry. This is not "the time of enlightenment." I think rifle development would be a surperflous thing, since it would be ages before anything good came from them (I mean look how long it took us without magic).<
>
> Except for the VAST majority of unblooded, unwashed people even early
> firearms would be a HUGE improvement over anything they have had before.
> 10000 musketeers vs. 1 fire-ball shooting wizard - who is going to win
> this stand off? Not only that, but its such a great improvement within
> their simple daily lives, if only that it makes hunting much easier!
> Which would a peasant choose - a wizard's fireball scroll, or a musket?
>
Except when that one wizard casts a battle spell like "rain of magic
missiles" or changes the ground under the musketeers in mud or summons
thousend ogres behind the musketeers or transports them all into the
Shadow World. I know I am talking about some powerfull wizards in these
cases, but there are a lot of powerful wizards in positions that place
them in battles. Currently I am DM'ing a PBEM in the Western Reaches of
Brechtur. Here we have Erik Danig, the Fae and the Gorgon. All three are
wizards who by them selves can replace complete units!
-
01-09-1999, 05:58 PM #12Kenneth GauckGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Technological progress occurs during peace time. The advances which occur
during peace are applied to wartime situations once war comes. War itself
retards technological development with the exception of unusual niches where
there are no peace time equivalents. To take medicine (because someone
mentioned it earlier) only catastrophic repair has benifited from war time
experience. Many of the more important advances were peace time advances
(notably germ theory) made war time better, but not because war itself aided
advancement.
What makes war time *appear* to create technological advances is 1) the
application of recently developed technology to the latest war, and 2)
spending of all sorts increases dramatically (creating a huge debt). If
number two is the effect your looking for, you don't need a war to raise
your taxes to "severe" and spend 5 GB on a single research action every
season. Measured in "science per dollar" dollars spend during war time are
less effecient than dollars spent in peace time. Part of this has to do
with the security which war time reasearch requires, while normal (peace
time) science benefits from the free distribution of science.
That war is good for progress or the ecnonomy (another similar thesis) have
been disproved. War creates artificial re-direction of resources and large
increases in spending. You can redirect those resources without war, and
you can spend the GB's without war.
Kenneth Gauck
c558382@earthlink.net
-
01-09-1999, 07:29 PM #13Kenneth GauckGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
On Saterday, January 09, Jim Cooper wrote:
>When somebody is on your doorstep thirsting for your blood, are you going
to sit
>around dreaming about new ways to make money (hoping that a mountain of
gold
>will bore your bloodthirsty-ready-to-invade-neighbour, or are you going to
find
>some way of defending yourself? I don't know about the rest of you, but
>I would first do the latter so that eventually I will be able to do the
>former when no one can threaten me any longer.
>
Actually that is what the winningest regents do do. Money is the sinews of
war. The history of successful wars is actually the history of successful
finance. Gary demonstrated a profound insite by quoting Clauswitz as he
did. While war does not (directly) advance technology, it does clearly
advance administration, whose purpose is to collect more taxes from a
broader portion of the population, and to manage those resources it does
have better. As far as I am concerned, administrative development, not
technological, is the real drama of BR. I am probably not in a crowd on
that point, but our period (the Rennaisance) saw the shift from Medieval
government (originating in so many of its essentail features with
Charlemagne) to Modern government (which in its essentials lives today
throught the "western" world).
Kenneth Gauck
c558382@earthlink.net
-
01-09-1999, 08:57 PM #14Jim CooperGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Pieter Sleijpen wrote:
>Here we have Erik Danig, the Fae and the Gorgon. All three are wizards who by them selves can replace complete units!<
Good point. However, inventors wouldn't be making these advances in
technology solely for these three alone - its the other 99.9% of the
population who they make them for ...
Cheers,
Darren
-
01-09-1999, 10:36 PM #15Gary V. FossGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Jim Cooper wrote:
> Pieter Sleijpen wrote:
> >Here we have Erik Danig, the Fae and the Gorgon. All three are wizards who by them selves can replace complete units!<
>
> Good point. However, inventors wouldn't be making these advances in
> technology solely for these three alone - its the other 99.9% of the
> population who they make them for ...
Magic and technology are usually viewed as opposing forces. Technology is seen as a response to magic, or something that
non-magical people will employ to allow them to compete with wizards on a more equal basis. There are a couple of reason
for this that I can see. Because we live in mundane world we view magic as the antithesis of technology. If it wasn't how
can we explain its absence from our world? Some people feel that technology "kills" magic because it has been demonstrated
to work that way in so many sci fi/fantasy novels. Writers who do that in their work are (thematically speaking) almost
always describing technology as a dehumanizing force, however. It's a literary convention in the sci-fi/fantasy genre that
often trickles into AD&D.
In RPGs, however, I'm not sure it needs to work that way. There are a couple of options that are really up to the DM on
how magic and technology function and interact.
1. The most common way magic and technology are viewed is that the AD&D world is technologically somewhere in the middle
ages with magic is a static force in the universe. Technology can progress from there. Magic remainst a constant. (New
spells might be added but they obey rules and require abilities that do not change.)
2. Magic and technology could be competing forces, a la the sci-fi/fantasy genre. I've never actually heard someone
turning the tables on this competition to make magic the dominating force. It's happening now in literature a little bit
with the rise of what has been called "magical realism" but that's a pretty new thing.
There are a couple of other options. There are "no magic" worlds in a lot of RPG's, where technology replaces magic for
all intents and purposes. "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Sometimes magic is a
redefined as an individual power and almost completely internalized, making technology an external thing, blah, blah,
blah. #1 & #2, however, are the most common ways magic is viewed.
What's point? Well, I think that most people are looking at an AD&D world where magic and technology are not competitive
forces but exist side by side as in #1, and assume that they are actually opposing forces as in #2. In a traditional AD&D
world, I think technology and magic would progress together. Often one would use magic to advance technology and vice
versa. If steam engines ever were invented there would probably be a spell "Stoke the Fire" that was a mage spell or one
invented by a priest of Laerme that would power the engine. Maybe disgruntled fire mephits would be the source of heat in
a steam engine?
You'd end up with sort of a quasi-spelljammer type situation with mechanical steam engines built of dwarven steel were
powered by summoned fire elementals and ran on tracks that were conjured up by a vesion of the Wall of Iron spell....
Gary
-
01-10-1999, 02:09 AM #16JulesMrshn@aol.coGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
In a message dated 1/9/99 6:05:51 AM Central Standard Time,
Jim_Cooper@bc.sympatico.ca writes:
>
I like gunpowder in AD&D. (love Boothill too : ) ) I have arbeques allowed in
all my games of non BR. I am just saying I don't see the regents going for
something like that, or even imagining that. I think spells are powerful
enough to in utilization to be deadly enough to quell any Regents desire for
more. Remember, put a powerful weapon in a peasents hand and he is more
powerful when he rebels. Keep them having swords and you having magic and any
regent will sleep a lot sounder.
-
01-10-1999, 09:52 AM #17Jim CooperGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
JulesMrshn@aol.com wrote:
> I like gunpowder in AD&D. (love Boothill too : ) ) I have arbeques allowed in all my games of non BR. I am just saying I don't see the regents going for something like that, or even imagining that. I think spells are powerful enough to in utilization to be deadly enough to quell any Regents desire for more. Remember, put a powerful weapon in a peasents hand and he is more powerful when he rebels. Keep them having swords and you having magic and any regent will sleep a lot sounder.<
Hmmm ... but the regent doesn't have the power in his hand in the latter
case either - its in the resident wizard's hand. Wouldn't a spell in
one wizard's hand be more of a threat to a regent than one peasant with
a musket. We can't assume every wizard regent is going to be friendly
to the regent who controls the land they live on. In fact, they are in
direct competition for the resources of that land. If I was Regent in
Cerilia seeing a person chuck a fireball would scare the socks off of
me. If he didn't swear fealty to me, I would consider him a threat.
Moreover there are but a handful of people in all of Cerilia who have
access to power of magic - this just begs exploitation. Hasn't history
in Cerilia taught regents (of Anuire at least) that that kind of power
is too much for too few to wield? The Old CoS was destroyed because of
this situation I thought. If anything, if I was an Anuirean regent I
would be very leary of letting any wizard have that kind of power again.
In fact, I would sanction them until they proved that each and every one
of them would work for the benefit of the land. If I was really nasty,
I would form a witch hunt and persecute them so that they could never
hold that kind of power over me or anyone else every again.
Interesting. Which side would win out in the end? ~150 wizzies to
thousands upon thousands of unwashed ...? But this situation in Anuire
doesn't exist does it? Well, maybe it does ... I'll have to figure out
which wizzies are loner's and how many are actually under the thumb of
prov. regents in Anuire ...
Note, priests are alright, I can't see Cerilian people having (too many)
problems with priests, so they of course would be brought on board. And
since we already have seen demonstrated that wizard power is little
match for godly magic (elven holocaust), I don't think wizards are in
much of a bargaining position ... right?
Yea - I can't see how the human priests beat the elven wizards! How did
they win? What battle spells did the priests use against the elves to
have kicked their butts so soundly?
Cheers,
Darren
-
01-10-1999, 12:09 PM #18BinagranGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Jim Cooper wrote:
> Yea - I can't see how the human priests beat the elven wizards! How did
> they win? What battle spells did the priests use against the elves to
> have kicked their butts so soundly?
>
> Cheers,
> Darren
Doesn't have to be anything too impressive. Just consider that there were probably a whole lot more human priests of the five(?) faiths and almost all of them had access to the healing sphere. What can an elven army do against a human army which is constantly being healed.
Remember most priestly magic deals with protection or enhancement (few directly do damage, at least they shouldn't). Pit that against wizards (mainly offensive arsenals) and you have elven wizards attempting to fry the priests but hitting protection spells, all the while the human army (enhanced in #hits, attack values, etc and the ability to be healed) is decimating the elves.
Any one have any problems with this argument.
Binagran
-
01-10-1999, 12:39 PM #19Pieter SleijpenGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Binagran wrote:
>
> Jim Cooper wrote:
>
> > Yea - I can't see how the human priests beat the elven wizards! How did
> > they win? What battle spells did the priests use against the elves to
> > have kicked their butts so soundly?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Darren
>
> Doesn't have to be anything too impressive. Just consider that there were probably a whole lot more human priests of the five(?) faiths and almost all of them had access to the healing sphere. What can an elven army do against a human army which is constantly being healed.
>
> Remember most priestly magic deals with protection or enhancement (few directly do damage, at least they shouldn't). Pit that against wizards (mainly offensive arsenals) and you have elven wizards attempting to fry the priests but hitting protection spells, all the while the human army (enhanced in #hits, attack values, etc and the ability to be healed) is decimating the elves.
>
> Any one have any problems with this argument.
>
> Binagran
Do not forget that nice sanctuary spell which effectively negates the
archers.
-
01-10-1999, 02:14 PM #20Sindre BergGuest
Technological Progression of Ce
Binagran wrote:
> Jim Cooper wrote:
>
> > Yea - I can't see how the human priests beat the elven wizards! How
> did
> > they win? What battle spells did the priests use against the elves
> to
> > have kicked their butts so soundly?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Darren
>
> Doesn't have to be anything too impressive. Just consider that there
> were probably a whole lot more human priests of the five(?) faiths and
> almost all of them had access to the healing sphere. What can an
> elven army do against a human army which is constantly being healed.
>
> Remember most priestly magic deals with protection or enhancement (few
> directly do damage, at least they shouldn't). Pit that against
> wizards (mainly offensive arsenals) and you have elven wizards
> attempting to fry the priests but hitting protection spells, all the
> while the human army (enhanced in #hits, attack values, etc and the
> ability to be healed) is decimating the elves.
>
> Any one have any problems with this argument.
>
> Binagran
>
> ********
> ************************************************** ****************
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the
> line
> I think it is a lot simpler than that...The Elves weren't enough...It's
exactly the same thing you see in the Baruk-Azhik PS book about the
dwarfs vs orog conflict. The orogs are winning because they can a lot
easier stomach heavy losses. For every elf that died...let us just for
the sake of the argument assume that he took with him 4 humans....Then
the humans would spend some time killing elves but after all the humans
had "endless" numbers while the elves couldn't get reinforcements
through new warriors...After all the first to join in the war on the
elven side was in many cases the same that died in the end... The elves
couldn't win...time was agaisnt them..
- --
Sindre
Take a look at my homepage and Birthright PBMG at:
www.uio.no/~sindrejb
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Cultural Progression of Cerilia
By Daniel McSorley in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 6Last Post: 12-30-1998, 06:11 PM
Bookmarks