Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 4325539" data-attributes="member: 7240">Isn't this setting-dependent? How long have 9th level spells been around? Were they always around or are they new tech.?As much as many cultural and philosophical traits in our society have changed in the past 3000 years, some have not.Some have and have reached different conclusions than you. Some have and have reached similar conclusions to yours. Some have not. And many have said, "Serious consideration!? This is D&D, right?"Actually, most of Africa was producing iron by the time Europeans developed an interest in the place. And copper-working was taking place on every continent but Australia by 1450.But much of our image of aboriginal cultures in America is not of them prior to their use of metal on a large scale but rather the kind of cultures they became when they started importing finished metal goods on a large scale.So, the question arises: in a trading environment, why would a hunter-gatherer culture or migratory pastoralist culture start producing metal goods itself when it could just trade for them? The cattle pastoralists of medieval East Africa are great examples of this. Why not just trade beef for iron?Wasn't per-capita firearm ownership higher amongst North American aboriginals in the 19th century than amongst colonists?This is a problematic and simplistic take on European colonialism.That's true. But you need to broaden your idea of "technology" -- social technologies like close-order drill, conscription, variolation and quarantining were more important than firearms in European conquest.While this argument might fly for a world with the physics of this world, you are really hitting upon the biggest problem with the fundamental premises underpinning your thread:Fantasy worlds run by different physical worlds than this one. You are reasoning from the viewpoint that fantasy worlds have the same physical rules as our world. People in D&D worlds can make giant exploding balls of fire out of words; they can cure terminal diseases by touch; it therefore seems impossible to posit a similar course of technological development in a world with different physics than our world based on how tech developed in this one. Digging up coal is way less efficient than summoning fire elementals; fossil fuels make no sense in a D&D world.So, leaving aside the idea that we could not have built the machines we have built powered by charcoal and ethanol instead of coal and gas, something I find dubious in the extreme, your theory still doesn't really hold together.But D&D worlds are worlds in which earth, air, fire and water are elements. If earth and fire are elements, how can sulphur also be an element?Way more of Europe's economy was focused on funding the creation and development of philosophy during the "Dark Ages" than today. And not to Godwin this thread but to posit the idea that scientific "progress" varies inversely with the savage barbarity of a civilization might be complicated by the experiences of a lot of Central Europeans during the twentieth century.I don't know. Perhaps they might build The Great Wall of China.This is a good point. But here's the thing: why would they view the non-humanity of a certain group as more problematic than humans have traditionally found linguistic, religious and/or cultural difference? Does "because he's a dwarf" necessarily trump "because he's a Muslim" as a reason for intractable, long-term conflict?This certainly seems pretty axiomatic: cultures that have tended to face repeated barbarian incursions have tended to be more despotic than those which have not. But again, I have to ask: would the relationship between humans and gnolls necessarily be more adversarial than the relationship between the Rus and the Pechenegs or the Christians and the Muslims?That sounds cool. But why did you pick Mayans and Aztecs in particular for this example?I hate to tell you this but much of our ideas of social contract come from Germanic barbarians: tort law and representative democracy leap immediately to mind.I find your halflings a good deal more interesting than other people's halflings. Good job.You might enjoy reading more about the relationships between agricultural and pastoral societies for other examples of real world cultural symbiosis along these lines.That's a cool idea with or without elves. The idea of Muhammad being all into the sacred groves sounds cool. The early medieval Abadi Muslims of the Maghrib were a bit like this.Anyway, a thought-provoking piece. Happy gaming!</blockquote>

Verification