Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 269464" data-attributes="member: 1645">The fantasy battlefield bears a close resemblence to our own modern battlefields, I suspect, because it's imaginary, and we tend (a) to imagine magic spells that mirror technologies we now have (e.g. fireball as light artillery), and (b) to see uses for magic spells that mirror uses for technologies we now have (e.g. magical med-evac unit with healing potions).It's much easier to come up with fantasy analogs to air support, armor, artillery, etc. than to imagine a magic system with no reference to anything modern, and then to figure out what tactics might slowly evolve, not at all parallel to our own history.As I said before, &quot;I think it's basically impossible to imagine how a high-magic war would play out. Given how we can never predict what the next war will look like -- with the relatively minor advances in technology from decade to decade -- I don't see how we're going to predict all the nuances of Wizards vs. Clerics vs. Druids, and so on. There are so many spells, so many possible magic items, so many ways to mix and match...&quot;As far as ancient tactics working in modern warfare, I think we need ask ourselves how abstract we have to get before ancient and modern tactics look alike.&nbsp; Obviously modern armies don't line up in a phalanx with shields overlapping.&nbsp; On the other hand, they do try to achieve surprise, flank, etc.&nbsp; On another thread, I mentioned that reading Sun Tzu's <a href="http://www.chinapage.com/philosophy/sunzi/sunzi-e.html" target="_blank">Art of War</a> can get a bit silly, because sometimes it's giving concrete advice about keeping your shield side to the enemy's archers, and other times it's giving abstract advice to &quot;be like water&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mmadsen, post: 269464, member: 1645"] The fantasy battlefield bears a close resemblence to our own modern battlefields, I suspect, because it's imaginary, and we tend (a) to imagine magic spells that mirror technologies we now have (e.g. fireball as light artillery), and (b) to see uses for magic spells that mirror uses for technologies we now have (e.g. magical med-evac unit with healing potions). It's much easier to come up with fantasy analogs to air support, armor, artillery, etc. than to imagine a magic system with no reference to anything modern, and then to figure out what tactics might slowly evolve, not at all parallel to our own history. As I said before, "I think it's basically impossible to imagine how a high-magic war would play out. Given how we can never predict what the next war will look like -- with the relatively minor advances in technology from decade to decade -- I don't see how we're going to predict all the nuances of Wizards vs. Clerics vs. Druids, and so on. There are so many spells, so many possible magic items, so many ways to mix and match..." As far as ancient tactics working in modern warfare, I think we need ask ourselves how abstract we have to get before ancient and modern tactics look alike. Obviously modern armies don't line up in a phalanx with shields overlapping. On the other hand, they do try to achieve surprise, flank, etc. On another thread, I mentioned that reading Sun Tzu's [url=http://www.chinapage.com/philosophy/sunzi/sunzi-e.html][i]Art of War[/i][/url] can get a bit silly, because sometimes it's giving concrete advice about keeping your shield side to the enemy's archers, and other times it's giving abstract advice to "be like water". [/QUOTE]

Verification