Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 2929739" data-attributes="member: 18280">Actually, I would contend that any analysis of a world that was going to be claimed to be &quot;logical&quot; must take into account why the demographics are as they are.&nbsp; The assumptions that the RAW are built upon are obviously pertainent to interpreting the RAW.&nbsp; While we might question how the factors described in RAW affect a world, it is equally important (if we want to claim that our result is &quot;more logical&quot;) that we examine how the world causes the factors described in the RAW.In other words, I contend that social factors in the game world would have to give rise to the demographics found in the RAW without using the RAW itself as the causitive if you are claiming that the end result is more logical.From this standpoin, WHY the peasants stay on the farm, WHY they don't take up adventuring, and WHY they don't simply take PC classes is very, very relevant.&nbsp; If the RAW, as the &quot;physics of the setting&quot; states that NPCs follow certain demographics but PCs do not, then there must be a &quot;physics&quot; distinction between NPCs and PCs.&nbsp; The minute you make that claim, you cannot claim that any behavior of NPCs has a real-world analogue or is more logical than any other claim.Others, of course, have argued (correctly, I believe) from the basis that the RAW includes both the &quot;physics&quot; of the setting and the visible effects of those physics.&nbsp; IMHO, RAW demographics is part of the latter, not the former.&nbsp; It is the effect of something not made explicit which is going on in the setting.In this case the aristocracy must be concerned about the casters growing in power, because rather than being &quot;physics&quot; the demographics are the effects of standard D&amp;D societies combined with the &quot;physics&quot; of the D&amp;D world.&nbsp; The characters in that world are well aware that making changes to what is occuring in the setting is changing the baseline (though not the physics).&nbsp; Otherwise, if no assumption within the RAW is malleable from within the game world, what is the point of the game?&nbsp; Or, to put it another way, the cost of a spell is based at least in part upon the rarity of the item.&nbsp; So, we can place a per-RAW price on those Continual Light stones.&nbsp; However, in a magitech world, the number of those stones can only increase (since they are permanent) which means, logically, that the price per stone should eventually decrease.&nbsp; But, by the &quot;logic&quot; that states that everything in the RAW is part of the physics of the setting the price will never decrease.&nbsp; Either that, or you find yourself claiming that the social baseline can be changed in some ways but not in others, which, again, is clearly illogical.But, since we now know that the price of magic items does not vary (so as to maintain our baseline), we also know that they cannot be produced in any large amounts.&nbsp; Therefore, going simply by the logic of the RAW, no magitech worlds exist.Unless you change the baseline.Which, as you say, is cheating, at least as far as this thought experiment is concerned, and therefore beyond the scope of my point.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 2929739, member: 18280"] Actually, I would contend that any analysis of a world that was going to be claimed to be "logical" must take into account why the demographics are as they are. The assumptions that the RAW are built upon are obviously pertainent to interpreting the RAW. While we might question how the factors described in RAW affect a world, it is equally important (if we want to claim that our result is "more logical") that we examine how the world causes the factors described in the RAW. In other words, I contend that social factors in the game world would have to give rise to the demographics found in the RAW without using the RAW itself as the causitive if you are claiming that the end result is more logical. From this standpoin, WHY the peasants stay on the farm, WHY they don't take up adventuring, and WHY they don't simply take PC classes is very, very relevant. If the RAW, as the "physics of the setting" states that NPCs follow certain demographics but PCs do not, then there must be a "physics" distinction between NPCs and PCs. The minute you make that claim, you cannot claim that any behavior of NPCs has a real-world analogue or is more logical than any other claim. Others, of course, have argued (correctly, I believe) from the basis that the RAW includes both the "physics" of the setting and the visible effects of those physics. IMHO, RAW demographics is part of the latter, not the former. It is the effect of something not made explicit which is going on in the setting. In this case the aristocracy must be concerned about the casters growing in power, because rather than being "physics" the demographics are the effects of standard D&D societies combined with the "physics" of the D&D world. The characters in that world are well aware that making changes to what is occuring in the setting is changing the baseline (though not the physics). Otherwise, if no assumption within the RAW is malleable from within the game world, what is the point of the game? Or, to put it another way, the cost of a spell is based at least in part upon the rarity of the item. So, we can place a per-RAW price on those Continual Light stones. However, in a magitech world, the number of those stones can only increase (since they are permanent) which means, logically, that the price per stone should eventually decrease. But, by the "logic" that states that everything in the RAW is part of the physics of the setting [i]the price will never decrease.[/i] Either that, or you find yourself claiming that the social baseline can be changed in some ways but not in others, which, again, is clearly illogical. But, since we now know that the price of magic items does not vary (so as to maintain our baseline), we also know that they cannot be produced in any large amounts. Therefore, going simply by the logic of the RAW, no magitech worlds exist. Unless you change the baseline. Which, as you say, is cheating, at least as far as this thought experiment is concerned, and therefore beyond the scope of my point. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification