Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hand of Evil" data-source="post: 1653537" data-attributes="member: 371">While magic could increase population, population is comparative to the means of death.&nbsp; What this means is that if X number of population is killed in war, and from illiness, that birth rate will basicly cover those loses.&nbsp; If you add magic and monsters same thing happens, population is a constant with booms after conflicts.&nbsp; A real world example of this was the boom after WW2, the population expanded but there was a new form of death, the nuke.&nbsp; If used population were have been reduced back to levels prior to WW2.&nbsp; We also started to remove forms of death with better health care.&nbsp; We are now faced with over population issues and the increase of illinesses.&nbsp; Population levels were constant until the industral revolution.&nbsp; While magic could increase population, simple pasteurization did.&nbsp; The question really is how magic would provide the same results?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hand of Evil, post: 1653537, member: 371"] While magic could increase population, population is comparative to the means of death. What this means is that if X number of population is killed in war, and from illiness, that birth rate will basicly cover those loses. If you add magic and monsters same thing happens, population is a constant with booms after conflicts. A real world example of this was the boom after WW2, the population expanded but there was a new form of death, the nuke. If used population were have been reduced back to levels prior to WW2. We also started to remove forms of death with better health care. We are now faced with over population issues and the increase of illinesses. Population levels were constant until the industral revolution. While magic could increase population, simple pasteurization did. The question really is how magic would provide the same results? [/QUOTE]

Verification