Dwarves don't sell novels

[Infernal Teddy]

Heroes in my game walk... ( We're in a city you know...)

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Two broad questions for those of you who believe that D&D should be turned into a sci-fi game replete with robots and spaceships:

1. In the presence of science, how do you explain magic?

The problem is that you are proceeding from false premises.

If by "robots" you mean warforged, for instance, well . . . warforged are intelligent golems, magically constructed from stone, live wood, and metal by ancient artifacts of a long-dead civilisation, endowed with true life in a way that is not understood by their creators. The creation forges that gave them form, animation, and eventually life were energised by the inherent power wielded by a bloodline of humans who bear a magical mark upon their flesh, which may or may not have something to do with a prophecy encoded in the earth, sea, and sky of the world.

There's no science there, man.

Are "spaceships" spelljammers? Magically-altered ships propelled by the sacrifice of the magical energies of spellcasters sitting in enchanted chairs through the empty internal space of unimaginably enormous crystal spheres floating in an even more incredibly vast sea of some highly-flammable, rainbow-coloured medium, those spheres lit by stars which are massive portals to the Plane of Radiance or to some even stranger destination?

There's no science there.

Or are "spaceships" the elemental skyships of Eberron? Fantastic magic vessels built largely from the lighter-than-air wood of a rare variety of tree, given their rapid means of propulsion by an enslaved elemental bound using techniques which date back thousands of years to the same ancient empire whose arcane might provided the pattern for the creation forges which birthed warforged, controlled in their flight by yet another dynasty bearing marks of power, this one members of a true-breeding hybrid race of elves and men?

There's no science there.

I can't think of a setting which has truly incorporated into itself honest-to-goodness technnology in the science fiction sense except, ironically, the original pseudo-medieval swords-and-sorcery or Tolkienesque settings like Greyhawk and Blackmoor. Every modern example of "science fiction" in D&D turns out to be nothing more than an extrapolation of the long-standing implications of the level and scope of magic that has been present in any given setting, or some altered variation of the same (such as Eberron, which presumes that there is more widespread low-level magic making for everburning lanterns as streetlights and the like, but much less high-level magic).

 

[Goken100]

Funnily enough, dwarves sell rather well here in germany...

That's strange. They don't look anything like David Hasselhoff...

 

[Turjan]

Two broad questions for those of you who believe that D&D should be turned into a sci-fi game replete with robots and spaceships:

1. In the presence of science, how do you explain magic? How do dragons fly? How do pegasi preen their wings?

Once you let the genie of scientific reason out of the bottle, there is nothing to stop it being applied to everything in your setting. Everything then has to be justifiable by scientific (or at least pseudo-scientific) principles and the fantasy unravels.

Your question is based on the assumption that there is some kind of automatism in the relation of scientific elements and magic. There is no such thing. Shadowrun or the whole genre of modern fantasy (Buffy, WoD) live with the coexistence of science and magic. If your assumption were true, religion as it exists today would be long dead, and magic in D&D has even the advantage that it visibly works.

2. Do heroes in your campaign ride around on bicycles?

If the imagery of fantasy isn't important to you, are you happy to have your heroes ride around on proto-BMXs? Heroes in my campaigns ride horses.

No, they don't ride bicycles. The imagery of fantasy is important to me. In most examples of science fantasy, science is as fantastic as magic. It's either a remnant of a distant time (like in the Dying Earth stories, where the protagonist can use products of science, but don't understand them) or in the hands of NPCs (like in my M&M or illithid examples).

 

[Turjan]

That's strange. They don't look anything like David Hasselhoff...

But a bit like Tasselhoff. It's probably a simple mix-up.

 

[Infernal Teddy]

That's strange. They don't look anything like David Hasselhoff...

Hey, we didn't produce Baywatch, and it's an american company that wants to do Knight Rider: the Movie...

Actually, most of us think he's pretty disgusting. It has more to do with "Morbid Fascination" than anything else. I know I'd rather listen to the Spice Girls or the Backstreet Boys (And this is coming from an old school Grin-Core Metalhead)...

 

[Zander]

The problem is that you are proceeding from false premises.

If by "robots" you mean warforged... There's no science there, man.

Are "spaceships" spelljammers?... There's no science there.

Or are "spaceships" the elemental skyships of Eberron?... There's no science there.

The trouble with attributing science to magic argument lies in the answer to my second question, not my first, which you haven't addressed. Perhaps the image of heroes riding horses doesn't fit your view of fantasy. In your conception, they ride magic-powered motorbikes. You can use that as your fantasy setting if you like (you certainly don't need my permission). It's just not for me or, I suspect, the majority of D&D players.

 

[Zander]

Your question is based on the assumption that there is some kind of automatism in the relation of scientific elements and magic... If your assumption were true, religion as it exists today would be long dead...

I don't want to bring religion into this debate unnecessarily due to the boards' rules. However, there has been a decline in religiosity over the centuries as science has increasingly provided explanations for phenomena that were previously thought as divine in origin.

 

[Infernal Teddy]

I don't want to bring religion into this debate unnecessarily due to the boards' rules. However, there has been a decline in religiosity over the centuries as science has increasingly provided explanations for phenomena that were previously thought as divine in origin.

Funny you mention that. According to a recent study, almost 60% of all physicists are religious. The percentage amongst mathematicans is even higher.

But that isn't the point.

Look, we don't mind the fact that you love classical tolkienesque fantasy. Hey, same here. But I also love classical Moorcockian, Howardian, Lovecraftian fantasy, and I love modern science-fantasy. And I love the fact that D&D offers me the tools to build both one AND the other. If D&D was JUST one or JUST the other, one of us two wouldn't be playing, right? However, we both play - me one way, you the other. Neither of us is wrong.

So if you let me play the way I want, I'll let you play the way you want, and we're all happy. Hey, it's just a hobby, man

 

[Zander]

Funny you mention that. According to a recent study, almost 60% of all physicists are religious. The percentage amongst mathematicans is even higher.

If you take a nominally Christian country in Europe, such as yours or mine, and look at the church attendance rates since the 12th century to the present day, you'll see a marked decline. Unfortunately, the records from that far back are sketchy but even if you only go back as far as the 19th century when figures are more reliable, you can see the trend. And nowadays, the people who are least likely to go to church are also those who are most educated.

But that isn't the point.

It is partly. You can't draw a line in your fantasy world that scientific enquiry isn't permitted to cross. In the real world, the Church tried that in Galileo's time and failed.

Look, we don't mind the fact that you love classical tolkienesque fantasy. Hey, same here. But I also love classical Moorcockian, Howardian, Lovecraftian fantasy, and I love modern science-fantasy. And I love the fact that D&D offers me the tools to build both one AND the other. If D&D was JUST one or JUST the other, one of us two wouldn't be playing, right? However, we both play - me one way, you the other. Neither of us is wrong.

So if you let me play the way I want, I'll let you play the way you want, and we're all happy. Hey, it's just a hobby, man

As I've already mentioned in this thread and in Dragon Magazine, if some people want that in their fantasy, I'm perfectly happy. I'm certainly not some authority to manage your fun and I don't want to be. My dispute is with WotC. Because they lack creativity, they can't see the myriad ways in which fantasy can still grow apart from following a sci-fi course. And I don't want D&D to become a purely sci-fi game. It squeezes genuine fantasy fans like me out.