Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GreatLemur" data-source="post: 3300098" data-attributes="member: 28553">Welllll, just how much of D&amp;D's explicit and implied weirdness you have to accept is pretty optional.&nbsp; I think it's pretty fair and reasonable to say that things like normal thermodynamics and such hold true until magic or extraplanar influences intervene.&nbsp; Magic pretty much has to be a separate system from natural law, or else things like anti-magic fields would do quite a lot more than suppressing spellcasters.I don't think we have to go so far as to say that because D&amp;D defines fire as an &quot;element&quot;, we have to accept a world where there are such things as &quot;fire atoms&quot;.&nbsp; Fire is still a chemical reaction.&nbsp; It's just that it's also something with a distinct and fundamental identity in magical systems and planar cosmology.&nbsp; &quot;Elemental&quot; fire might even be somewhat different from natural (or prime material) fire, an idea which I believe has some precedent in classical alchemy.Similarly, when the PHB calls acid a type of &quot;energy&quot;, all they're really saying is that chemical burns are a damage type specifically covered by the game's rules something different from regular physical damage.&nbsp; We don't have to look at their choice of terminology and infer that acid is part of some fantasy electromagnetic spectrum.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GreatLemur, post: 3300098, member: 28553"] Welllll, just how much of D&D's explicit and implied weirdness you have to accept is pretty optional. I think it's pretty fair and reasonable to say that things like normal thermodynamics and such hold true until magic or extraplanar influences intervene. Magic pretty much has to be a separate system from natural law, or else things like anti-magic fields would do quite a lot more than suppressing spellcasters. I don't think we have to go so far as to say that because D&D defines fire as an "element", we have to accept a world where there are such things as "fire atoms". Fire is still a chemical reaction. It's just that it's also something with a distinct and fundamental identity in magical systems and planar cosmology. "Elemental" fire might even be somewhat different from natural (or prime material) fire, an idea which I believe has some precedent in classical alchemy. Similarly, when the PHB calls acid a type of "energy", all they're really saying is that chemical burns are a damage type specifically covered by the game's rules something different from regular physical damage. We don't have to look at their choice of terminology and infer that acid is part of some fantasy electromagnetic spectrum. [/QUOTE]

Verification