3rd Ed Does Magic Cause Medieval Stasis [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 03:13 PM

So recently I have been reading Harry Potter and the Natural 20, when I came across this part (scroll to middle):

https://www.fanfiction.net/s/8096183/36/Harry-Potter-and-the-Natural-20*

The trouble is, I genuinely don't see why magic, on its own, would cause Medieval Stasis on that level. If magic is insufficient to do everything, ie it can't cause items to rise higher than 1ft off the ground or it can't make light, then naturally technological advancements would follow. If magic is sufficient to do everything, like in a standard DnD world where spells are practically a science and new spells can more-or-less be easily (or at least predictably) made, then we would eventually have magepunk (ie instead of researching a better fuel for airships, we would be magically researching a better levitations spell).

Like, I could comprehend it if they were deliberately working to stop advancement (which, incidentally is exactly possible with tech as well) but that monologue would have it to mean that the existence of magic in and of itself is sufficient to totally retard progress forever with nothing else to help stop advancement.

Another example of progress might be powering innately nonmagical things. If a robot, from, say, Numeria crash landed in a fantasy world with "scientific" magic like in 3.X*, then I see no reason why some magical experts couldn't find a way to power it with magic.

All of this seems to run counter to the claims of "magic causes medieval stasis" that I have seen multiple RPGs and fantasy novels fling about. Could anybody help me shed some light on this issue?

*it should be noted that his world also functions totally by RAW, so trade is useless since everything is worth the same everywhere and he can actually convert earth salt to magical reagents since in his world it is worth gp. Yeah.

*note: for our purposes, 3.X is a system using any combo of rules from 3.0 to PF

gijoemike

2021-02-01, 03:29 PM

It doesn't. I point you to the D&D setting Eberron. Specifically the elevated train called the lighting rail. Also, airships and an entire economy built around them.

But do you know what most D&D settings have in common? A recent major apocalypse that screwed the world and made civilization(s) collapse.

Ebberon - The war that killed Cyre. Thousands of refugees are seeking a place in the world. Major deescalation of war effort in all nations.

Golarion - lookup how the inner sea was created. Sudden mysterious death of deities.

Dragonlance - Cataclysm, the deities decided HELL NO and rained destruction on the advanced civilization.

Forgotten Realms - The mythals in the cities of DR ~700 were tippy verse style bullshiz. Floating cities and immortal beings. Even commoners had ample access to dozens of spells and effects on a daily basis.

Greyhawk - the weakest example here. The council of 8 were betrayed by one of their own and Rary started a new empire.

OF NOTE: Greyhawk is an example of how magic slowly builds up a civilization even though Greyhawk is considered by many to be lower levels of magic. Especially compared to Eberron and FR.

In most examples D&D is set in a time when a rebuilding renaissance of magic and development is happening after the dark ages/massive conflict. Points of light campaigns are D&Ds norm. Which I grant you is very odd and cliché.

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 03:32 PM

Batcathat

2021-02-01, 03:37 PM

I don't really see any reason why it would. Non-magical science might be focused on different areas than in a non-magical world but as long as magic can't do everything for everyone, scientific progress would continue.

Even assuming non-magical research stopped entirely for whatever reason, I still don't think it'd be Medieval Stasis in the traditional sense since A) magic would presumable change and evolve, changing the world with it (it's odd how often magic doesn't really seem to change much in fantasy settings, even over millennia) and B) society would still change, so even if magic and technology was completely stagnant, it's unlikely the rest of society would be.

GeoffWatson

2021-02-01, 03:48 PM

It could be that all the smart people are becoming magic-users instead of working on technology.

Batcathat

2021-02-01, 03:58 PM

It could be that all the smart people are becoming magic-users instead of working on technology.

That seems unlikely. It's not like all the "smart people" in the real world are scientists, after all.

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 06:02 PM

That seems unlikely. It's not like all the "smart people" in the real world are scientists, after all.

Not only that, even if they did become magic-users, most would use their knowledge to help bring about greater innovations, like how scientists IRL are working together to build robots.

TBH, rereading that article, the VAST majority of the character's problem is less due to magic and more due to the ridiculous physical laws of his world which would collapse vs. a stiff breeze if you try to actually apply it to a world.

Luccan

2021-02-01, 06:09 PM

Maat Mons

2021-02-01, 06:22 PM

Every fantasy setting has one very powerful being working behind the scenes to prevent scientific progress. That being is the author. Anything else in the book that purports to explain the absence of science is just a red herring, deliberately planted to throw people off the trail.

Bugbear

2021-02-01, 06:38 PM

All most every D&D/Pathfinder setting....Greyhawk, Dragonlance, The Forgotten Realms, Ebberon, Dark Sun, Glorian and the nameless default setting "in the rules" is a Post Apocalypse Setting.

The basic vague idea is and has always been the setting is the Dark Ages after the Fall of Rome.

The basic D&D/Pathfinder setting idea is long ago there was one or several ultra high magic empire (A "Roman Empire").

And it fell (Again, just like Rome).

So the Current Day of the D&D/Pathfinder settings is the Dark Ages after the fall. 99% of knowledge, information, technology and most of all magic is lost and forgotten. The world once had 25th level arch-farmers that created food using Epic level conjuration creation Food seeds (!), but now after the fall all farms just have to dig in the dirt with a wooden plough pulled by a mule.

The whole reason the settings have ruins and dungeons full of treasure (and monsters) is that they are all from the Old Empire before the Fall.

So for magic in any D&D/Pathfinder setting it is not the "best of the best cutting edge newly discovered magic". The magic the world has it from a handful of spellbooks that were saved from the Fall of the Magic empire. All the magic in the setting is a shadow of what came before.

sktarq

2021-02-01, 06:55 PM

The whole reason the settings have ruins and dungeons full of treasure (and monsters) is that they are all from the Old Empire before the Fall.

THIS.

they even explicitly say this in part of the 2e DM's guide (the edition written with blue sections) for the "how to build your own setting" section.

It's why it makes more sense for the characters to be raiding a dungeon for powerful stuff rather than a research group or the guildhouse where new discoveries are being made.

I kinda like the Castle Perilous answer to the magic causing stasis. The ease of using magic in the world (which is directly linked to how much magic develops there) is inversely correlated to the strength of laws of science (and thus technological development).

So a world where use of magic is normal science doesn't work reliably and so higher stuff just doesn't work reliably. Then again worlds with really strong tech tend to be very very hard to alter via using magic (but if you can pull it can be exceptionally powerful-why our earth gets attention in the story)

When a healing spell basically can do whatever it needs to heal you (growth of cells, create blood, etc) the conservation of mass is out the window at level 1 spells....so the idea that when gunpowder doesn't work even if your PC's remake the formula it is fine. Hell there may not even be cells or atoms in DnD, germ theory may well be wrong too...and a world that looks like ours but has very different rules at the micro scale (which does allow magic) is probably just as good a reason to create medieval stasis as anything to do with magic as a cause.

Mechalich

2021-02-01, 07:30 PM

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 07:31 PM

I've never read a logical, in-universe reason for magic doing that. I said in the Magic vs Tech thread that the reason so many magical worlds are in medieval stasis is because that's one of the more popular settings for fantasy fiction. And I believe that is basically all there is to it.

So wait, are you saying that magic is not the reason for medieval stasis, it is the author? So basically medieval stasis exists for the same reason Alfred can beat Superman in a fist fight?

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 07:54 PM

D&D is post-apocalyptic, but beyond that, there are reasons for the existence of D&D style magic to limit scientific progress.

In D&D - and more broadly in most fantasy fiction with a magic system tied to intellectual achievement in anyway, the overwhelming focus on intellectual effort is being channeled towards magical achievement - not industrial needs, societal problems, commerce, or anything else directly aimed at advancing society. And magical achievement isn't cumulative in the same way scientific and technological achievement is. Every aspiring archmagi has to start at the beginning and learn from cantrips all over again. It's an art and has to be continually relearned from zero with each generation, limiting progress.

A scientist 'stands on the shoulders of giants' and can move forward using knowledge they barely understand and tools they cannot comprehend at all (basically every practicing scientist on the planet today relies heavily on a computerized statistics package and the vast majority of them have no idea what any of the math behind those tests actually is). A spellcaster can't do that; if you don't meet the requirements or don't have a high enough UMD score magical tools simply do not function. Wizards can learn something by studying the works of their peers, in the same fashion that artists can, and they can share broad techniques, but magic simply doesn't accumulate knowledge in the same way that science does, which means that it's cross-generational progress is nearly nil and even modest setbacks can drop society back many centuries.

Technological progress, and the similar but not actually related thaumatological progress of magic advancing society's capabilities through application of magic, should both happen in a D&D style world but they'll be slow because so much effort is spent by mages to relearn the lessons of their mentors. The Medieval period lasted about 1,000 years. If progress in a D&D world is only 10% of what is was in ours, then you could have a 10,000 year period of 'medieval stasis.'

Now, 3.X magic has the issue that it is so powerful that a single spellcaster can launch the magitech revolution all by themselves, but all the D&D settings except Eberron (which has the most magitech, so hey, right direction) were designed based on the rules of earlier editions when that absolutely wasn't possible.

The scientist issue still applies in the post-apocalyptic scenario if all the databases storing your info are wiped out by the cataclysm. A scientist in that era would be Chrome from Dr. Stone, and Senku is the equivalent of the aforementioned "single spellcaster."

"but magic simply doesn't accumulate knowledge in the same way that science does, which means that it's cross-generational progress is nearly nil and even modest setbacks can drop society back many centuries."

You have fallen into the assumption that XP and advancement equate to magic energy from killing monsters. Read this article for some info on this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/8or3v3/how_commoners_survive_and_level_up/

If the scientist were in DnD world, his knowledge would equate to skill ranks which are gained through experience studying the works of others. Not meeting the requirements is also easily shown IRL too; no amount of data will help a freshman physics student recreate CERN by himself, nor will the most advanced tools and data allow a street punk to construct a rocket.

Thus, we can see the parallels between magic and science, and how they are not as different as you assert.

Of course, if you take issue with my interpretation, remember that statting out *any* kind of advancement in DnD by necessity requires a ton of houseruling to fill in the gaps due to the fact that *nothing* in this game is meant to "realistically" stat out the intricacies of anything as complex as scientific research. I still assert that in this case, the study of 3.X magic is much more similar to science than anything else, otherwise there would be no mage-academies anywhere in game because there would be no point to them, going by your logic.

Destro2119

2021-02-01, 08:01 PM

THIS.

they even explicitly say this in part of the 2e DM's guide (the edition written with blue sections) for the "how to build your own setting" section.

It's why it makes more sense for the characters to be raiding a dungeon for powerful stuff rather than a research group or the guildhouse where new discoveries are being made.

I kinda like the Castle Perilous answer to the magic causing stasis. The ease of using magic in the world (which is directly linked to how much magic develops there) is inversely correlated to the strength of laws of science (and thus technological development).

So a world where use of magic is normal science doesn't work reliably and so higher stuff just doesn't work reliably. Then again worlds with really strong tech tend to be very very hard to alter via using magic (but if you can pull it can be exceptionally powerful-why our earth gets attention in the story)

When a healing spell basically can do whatever it needs to heal you (growth of cells, create blood, etc) the conservation of mass is out the window at level 1 spells....so the idea that when gunpowder doesn't work even if your PC's remake the formula it is fine. Hell there may not even be cells or atoms in DnD, germ theory may well be wrong too...and a world that looks like ours but has very different rules at the micro scale (which does allow magic) is probably just as good a reason to create medieval stasis as anything to do with magic as a cause.

Of course, Eberron existing basically means that magic breaking physics =/= equal no tech advancement ever.

For medieval stasis, I think Spelljammer even said that the meta-reason is because every planet is sealed off in its own little reality bubble where certain tech simply no longer functions. Otherwise see post-apocalypses.

Bugbear

2021-02-01, 08:53 PM

If the scientist were in DnD world, his knowledge would equate to skill ranks which are gained through experience studying the works of others. Not meeting the requirements is also easily shown IRL too; no amount of data will help a freshman physics student recreate CERN by himself, nor will the most advanced tools and data allow a street punk to construct a rocket.

A scientist in a D&D world...a D20 world..would use the D20 rules of modern/future. Have a character class, skill ranks and all that.

Note, this is also why D&D is "still stuck" in post apocalypse: no single spellcaster or group can just "fix" everything.

And...well....the group of international scientists is not exactly a happy group that is pure good and helps and supports each other. Not even close. Some, sure, sort of get along and put "science first"...sometimes. The rest disagree, at best, the same way you'd expect a group of international people would.

Dunsparce

2021-02-01, 09:29 PM

While it is 3.0. a Dragon Magazine issue and a companion Dungeon Magazine issue has a setting called Greyhawk 2000, which is the world of Greyhawk far enough into the future to have modern technology(by the standards of 2000 AD since that was when this was made). Magic and technology are used together, including new magic-powered firearms as the primary weapon of choice, known as DiM Weapons

NichG

2021-02-01, 09:52 PM

If I were to make an argument about why magic might cause medieval stasis, its that the things magic can do for an individual are limited to what that individual (along with the best results of mentorship and scholarship available at the time) can learn and master within their lifetime, whereas the proceeds of technology can be given to and used by people with no understanding of it. That means that technology lends itself towards improvements via creating social systems with complex division of labor that make good use of a growing population to do things that no one individual would have the time or energy to build themselves, whereas magic in the way it's interpreted by most tabletop RPGs at least lends itself towards creating very powerful individuals who can accomplish almost anything relevant to individual-scale living but who have very little inherent reason beyond altruism or sentimentality to scale those benefits beyond anything more than small local communities of people they personally know and care for. It's as if a CEO of a major car company had to personally place his hand on every car the company sold - it doesn't seem like much work to take 6 seconds to touch a car, but modern car companies sell ~10 million cars per year - that would take two 'high level caster' equivalents at 6 seconds a car nearly 24 hours a day for the entire year to maintain that output.

Magic items may blur the line here, and a lot of it depends on exactly how a given take on magic handles such items - are they one-off things or flexible tools, do they require or benefit from expertise, can they be incrementally refined or are there just particular kinds of enchantments that can exist? Also at issue, are there economies of scale with the way magic items work, or is scaling strictly linear? For example, the Lyre of Building is incredible in terms of increasing the efficiency of labor, but you need to make one Lyre per user. Whereas if you have something like an assembly line or machine forge or centralized power plant, you can often double production without doubling cost because having things centralized creates efficiencies in terms of not needing to replicate boilerplate structures that support the activity (doubling the capacity of a tank requires less than double the material, for example).

I think you can have magic systems that behave more like technology in terms of industrialization, but the trick to those is to that they have to have lots of things that work outside of the hands of individual practitioners, and which also interact autonomously so that more complex systems can be constructed out of those interactions without needing a magic user directly in the loop. You need stuff that handles logistics and fungibility of the fundamental driving forces of that magic - the ability to bottle or pump or transmit mana/spell level equivalents to where they're needed, the ability to take a magical effect and multiply its radius or intensity by 10 merely through increasing the power throughput and durability of the templates, without having something like D&D metamagic's 'to increase the radius of this spell, you must be a higher level character' issue, etc.

Edit: There is at least one spell in 3.5 that seems like you could build an industrial revolution on top of it. Energy Transformation Field. It lets you convert spell levels dumped into it into a bound spell, so you could have 1000 Lv1 Adepts dump spell levels into it to cast hundreds of Polymorph Any Object. Scale that to 10000 Adepts and the output scales too.

Saintheart

2021-02-01, 10:09 PM

Have we considered the possibility that the economics of the situation prefer magic over technology?

There are a couple of creative assumptions I have here:

(1) that magic can be accessed with (relative) impunity; and
(2) a society that, en masse, is not really that interested in optimising itself towards rich materialism, i.e. gods of various faiths are demonstrably extant, which therefore changes how people see their lives and what they're working towards.

If your choice is either
(a) create the concept of electricity and then engineer with sufficient precision and complexity to build a vacuum cleaner; or
(b) see the local low end mage to cast Prestidigitation for you to clear dust out of your warehouse

Then one would think you'd be much more inclined to go with the low end mage until technology hits some crucial tipping point at which it's cheaper to have tech do the job for you than the mage. The problem being that since the availability and (presumably) low cost of magic against the cost of developing technology disincentivises people to develop technology, the tipping point is going to be much further off than it otherwise would.

i.e.: it's more convenient if not possibly cheaper to use a cleric or mage to do the job for you rather than develop a technology to do it, so magic societies just don't bother developing technology to do the same thing. This is especially the case given magic can demonstrably create robots, or constructs if you will, to execute tasks. Yes, it offends the basic law of conservation of energy, but if you're going to assume magic is part of the setting and does violate that law, then I'd have thought the economics and incentives - and therefore the availability of technology - are going to be vastly different in a magic-based society.

That is, I'm arguing basically that unless applied knowledge, i.e. technology, is cheaper or more available than magic, then magic basically is going to win out as the preferred choice of solving a problem. And medieval life basically comes down to solving immediate problems of survival or subsistence life. Under D&D rules, Plant Growth basically wipes out even the need to develop crop rotation, especially if you take the non-explicit interpretation that it can be cast repeatedly on the same area and its effects are additive. Any fifth level cleric of Chauntea or a druid can cast it. Would the availability of the spell completely wipe out all research into the subject? Probably not, but it would heavily disincentivise research by definition, since those looking into the subject would be few and far between and there wouldn't be a critical mass of people exchanging ideas to make the research work.

That's all before you even touch on conscious interference with the advance of technology, i.e. mage and/or cleric cabals suppressing the research. Like it or not, once there's an oligopoly or a monopoly, those participants are going to act in defence of their own interests, and as the providers of the more available solution, they're well-resourced to suppress it as well. But I'd say it doesn't need conscious intervention to keep a magic society in relative stasis; that's delivered by the fact magic is more efficient - at that point in time - at providing solutions to the problems that technology would solve in its absence.

EDIT: Now, the gaping hole in this argument is wherever there's a god of invention in the pantheon of the setting, i.e. Gond Wonderbringer. But I think even the writers of gods like that start to appreciate how inconsistent the logic is of having a god of invention in medieval stasis worlds ... exemplified by the very weird dictum that Gond in the Forgotten Realms outright prohibits gunpowder from functioning. At all.

Luccan

2021-02-01, 10:32 PM

So wait, are you saying that magic is not the reason for medieval stasis, it is the author? So basically medieval stasis exists for the same reason Alfred can beat Superman in a fist fight?

In defense of Injustice, there was actually an in-universe reason for that (and not just the element of surprise and Supes not wanting to kill everyone who disagreed with him yet).

Fizban

2021-02-01, 10:50 PM

(ie instead of researching a better fuel for airships, we would be magically researching a better levitations spell).
Except you can't research a better levitation spell. Levitate is Levitate, and Suspend is Suspend. The only "research" rules are costs for a PC learning a DM approved spell- not even necessarily one the player designed, but if so, one the DM must approve.

Trying to build a setting from the ground up based on game mechanics means the setting is locked to whatever the game mechanics allow.

The only way you get advancement is if the DM decides that suddenly after X amount of research, you can make a spell objectively better than it already was (reduce the level to make it cheaper say), or do some thing that was arbitrarily not possible before (you are now allowed to make broken at-will items, which either were impossible before or everyone was idiots not to make them). In direct contradiction to the expected static game balance, where things work the way they work.

Unless you start with a specific set of people and resources and chart out exactly what they're doing with their time, with a record of why people didn't do X (because they were working on Y).

Aside from that, yeah you're right- where magic leaves off, physics and mundane engineering pick up. That's essentially the end/point of every magical industrialization thread: the game mechanics only do so much, see how much you can bend them to do and where you end up. There is the question of whether people would bother going that far if magic was already good enough, but if you assume that more is always desired, then yes eventually non-magical innovations will be added to what magic can do.

The catch is that without a certain amount of pressure or stimulation, most people will be content as long as their needs are met. If magic does enough and only a few people with limited resources are demanding more, then advancement is limited to what those few can manage.

Mechalich

2021-02-02, 12:19 AM

Then one would think you'd be much more inclined to go with the low end mage until technology hits some crucial tipping point at which it's cheaper to have tech do the job for you than the mage. The problem being that since the availability and (presumably) low cost of magic against the cost of developing technology disincentivises people to develop technology, the tipping point is going to be much further off than it otherwise would.

I think it's more that magic advances a society beyond it's technological capabilities such that technological advancement provides no benefit in terms of immediately available steps, which disincentives technological progress because it has no economically viable usage. For example, if magic in a setting allows for an 15th century standard of living using 5th century technologies, you'd have to produce a technology that's literally 1000 years ahead of its time for it to be useful on an industrial scale.

In such a setting standard of living will ultimately be dependent upon what magic is capable of achieving when applied to society as a whole. Importantly this doesn't count settings where magic is sufficiently rare that it cannot be applied at a society wide scale. Those societies will pursue technological solutions instead even if there are a handful of hidden magical wonderlands.

The problem with magic causing medieval stasis is that it's tricky to design a magic system that, when combined with High Middle Ages technology, actually remains medieval when expanded to an industrial scale. Assuming your magic system can do anything actually worth doing you're going to end up with a world whose society is mediated by the capabilities of magic, not technology and it's probably not going to look like any society that ever developed on earth.

Particle_Man

2021-02-02, 01:29 AM

Well the DMG has rules for gunpowder and laser weapons so presumably a futuristic setting with 3.5 magic is possible. It is just that few people have published such, relatively speaking.

Maybe go the other way. Start with a non-magic setting, make it the desired level of technological development, and then have people (the PCs!) discover magic for the first time. See what happens.

Saintheart

2021-02-02, 02:43 AM

The problem with magic causing medieval stasis is that it's tricky to design a magic system that, when combined with High Middle Ages technology, actually remains medieval when expanded to an industrial scale. Assuming your magic system can do anything actually worth doing you're going to end up with a world whose society is mediated by the capabilities of magic, not technology and it's probably not going to look like any society that ever developed on earth.

The easiest get-out for that situation is the magical disaster or, more likely, cataclysmic MAD war. I won't take analogues from our own world, but if one assumes development of magic at an industrial scale outstrips human nature, then the capacity of the society to handle its own increasing capacity to do near-anything quickly diminishes. Absent Star Trek, most fantasy settings are not post-scarcity, and accordingly, somebody is going to want to take something off someone else. Magic at an industrial scale magnifies the likelihood of war or some disaster in achieving that desire, and after all the fireballs have stopped, the world is back at 5th century tech levels ... but still with the low-end spellcasters around to restart the slow march back towards the 15th century. On that basis I actually don't mind the idea that the average D&D setting is in the aftermath of a cataclysm or era-ending war, because there is a certain logicality to the idea that human beings' capacity to understand and act being aware of the consequences of their power is far too easily outstripped.

Gruftzwerg

2021-02-02, 02:58 AM

...tippy verse style bullshiz...

Imho this is the real reason. Magic doesn't cause the stasis. The problem is, if you don't assume stasis, you'll end in Tippyverse (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?222007-The-Definitive-Guide-to-the-Tippyverse-By-Emperor-Tippy)

AvatarVecna

2021-02-02, 04:45 AM

The Watsonian explanation: D&D settings tend to be post-apocalyptic, and there are powerful forces (both the handful of remaining epic casters and a large chunk of actual full-blown deities) who benefit from the status quo, and are working to keep things from changing too much.

The Doylist explanation: if you don't write a D&D setting that's stuck in the Dark Ages due to specific interference by actual pantheons of gods, you have no real explanation for why the setting isn't evolving over the course of thousands of years. And if the setting is allowed to evolve, it won't look like LotR or Conan anymore.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 06:42 AM

A scientist in a D&D world...a D20 world..would use the D20 rules of modern/future. Have a character class, skill ranks and all that.

Note, this is also why D&D is "still stuck" in post apocalypse: no single spellcaster or group can just "fix" everything.

And...well....the group of international scientists is not exactly a happy group that is pure good and helps and supports each other. Not even close. Some, sure, sort of get along and put "science first"...sometimes. The rest disagree, at best, the same way you'd expect a group of international people would.

Exactly. Everyone here seems to think that science MUST equal advancement. IRL, science was the result of thousands of little steps being slowly added together. With a bunch of setbacks in between. I stand by that magic can act as acheat code to further advance things.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 06:47 AM

Except you can't research a better levitation spell. Levitate is Levitate, and Suspend is Suspend. The only "research" rules are costs for a PC learning a DM approved spell- not even necessarily one the player designed, but if so, one the DM must approve.

Trying to build a setting from the ground up based on game mechanics means the setting is locked to whatever the game mechanics allow.

The only way you get advancement is if the DM decides that suddenly after X amount of research, you can make a spell objectively better than it already was (reduce the level to make it cheaper say), or do some thing that was arbitrarily not possible before (you are now allowed to make broken at-will items, which either were impossible before or everyone was idiots not to make them). In direct contradiction to the expected static game balance, where things work the way they work.

Unless you start with a specific set of people and resources and chart out exactly what they're doing with their time, with a record of why people didn't do X (because they were working on Y).

Aside from that, yeah you're right- where magic leaves off, physics and mundane engineering pick up. That's essentially the end/point of every magical industrialization thread: the game mechanics only do so much, see how much you can bend them to do and where you end up. There is the question of whether people would bother going that far if magic was already good enough, but if you assume that more is always desired, then yes eventually non-magical innovations will be added to what magic can do.

The catch is that without a certain amount of pressure or stimulation, most people will be content as long as their needs are met. If magic does enough and only a few people with limited resources are demanding more, then advancement is limited to what those few can manage.

In counter to your point, I raise the example of Starfinder and Pathfiner 2e. Some spells have objectively improved, such as all the Ray of Frost/Acid Splash in SF being consolidated in one spell that does ALL types of energy damage. In P2E, spells DCs now scale by CL. I could list a few more, but I don't have the time to go in-depth to all the changes.

On the topic of research, I actually mean building magic items more effectively/efficiently. Spells are the building blocks, much like the same way we can't exactly build a better molecule, but we can build better engines. Essentially, what I am saying is magic could be harnessed more efficiently in this way.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 07:37 AM

ShurikVch

2021-02-02, 11:10 AM

Note: Dragonstar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonstar_(role-playing_game)) is a counter-example for this particular trope

Another Handle

2021-02-02, 12:22 PM

Medieval stasis doesn't need magic to drive it. Hero of Alexandria invented the coin operated vending machine and the aeolipile steam engine in the first century BC. It was 19 centuries before either one became common technology. There are arguments that what triggered the industrial revolution was a lack of labor from the plagues and the introduction of coffee and tea to Europe, providing non-alcoholic safe hydration. Society operates under inertia, stagnation leads to stagnation and change to change.

Batcathat

2021-02-02, 01:43 PM

NichG

2021-02-02, 01:53 PM

Actually, you can use magic to build an industrial revolution in such a way. All you need are a bunch of separate parts that have very low amounts of magic used in them to come together to build something greater. This is proven in Starfinder with UPBs which are implied to be hybrids of magic and tech and of course the hybridized property which replaces tech components with magical ones and can be mass-produced. So you clearly see how magic can improve as understanding of the "science" behind it improves.

EDIT: Remember, just because something isn't written in a rulebook doesn't mean it can't exist. SF is implied to have "practical magic" academies much like the Arcanamirium of PF that focus exclusively on teaching casters how to harness magic for manufacturing. Of course, just look at Eberron for an example of this "in game terms" and wonder what it would look like 50-150 years in the future.

Well isn't this basically what I was saying? You need magic to work in ways that are scalable and composable, rather than ways that concentrate in individuals and improve only with individual improvement of mastery and skill. If fundamental to the way you have magic work means that doubling the mass that a levitation effect can lift requires gaining class levels, rather than just providing twice as much magical energy, then it's not going to lead in the same kind of directions as mass production infrastructure development did. Or if you have magic items which can't get along or stack with themselves (which is often the case for game design reasons), then you're going to have problems increasing the scale of operations.

You can of course take things from any real or fictional example of technology and flavor them as magic, just as you can take things from any fictional example of magic and flavor it as technology. But generally a given implementation of magic in a given tabletop RPG has some thematic coherency, and those themes tend (for game design reasons as much or more than making magic feel magical) to resist ways in which low intensity power can aggregate and combine. Much the same way that tabletop games tend to focus on small squads of highly skilled individuals being central to the development of world events rather than large armies or nation-wide shifts in sentiment or habit at the level of the populace.

Martin Greywolf

2021-02-02, 01:59 PM

The coin operated vending machine could be fooled hell of a lot easier than any modern one can be, and the steam engine was only a curiosity because metallurgy that would allow you to consistently create boilers capable of storing pressure high enough to be industrially viable wasn't there in ancient times.

Frankly the whole idea of magic vs science is a false dichotomy. If a magic is part of a setting, then it is, by definition, part of that setting's science. We wouldn't see the same technological progress we see in our world, but we would see progress. And with how most magic systems allow rapid communication, we would likely see it hell of a lot faster.

The reason we see medieval stasis is that, well, Lord of the Rings kinda-sorta had it, and it was popular enough that people wanted to copy it, to have their millenia old Numenorean civilizations that also used swords. That doesn't even mean LotR necessarily had medieval stasis, for all we know everyone but some of the Valinor elves were in bronze age in Beleriand (sure, a guy has a mgic black sword that talks, but it could be a gladius as well as a longsword from the description), but people tend to interpret the world in stasis.

If you want a good example of non-stasis magic, look at Harry Potter - wizards there are explicitly Luddite-like in their approach to non-magic tech, but they still managed to invent TV (portraits), cellphones (Sirius' mirror), escalators (staircase to Dumbledore's office) and have some superior transportation tech on top of that (apparition, floo, portkeys, in some cases even brooms qualify). And still, they are pretty happy to adapt some of the standard tech inventions, like steam trains and radios.

Calthropstu

2021-02-02, 02:11 PM

There is an argument that can be made that would explain this.

Mages don't like competition.
Especially from non-mages.

Mages sabotaging tech advancement because it would compete with what they could do could be quite common.

Defeating such powerhouse mages would be difficult for our society. Advancing to a point where tech could compete in anything magic can do would be exceedingly difficult.

Mages have good reason to protect the status quo.

Alternatively, a prevailing mindset of "just leave it to the magefolk" could indeed stifle creativity. "There's already a spell to fly. Why bother researching airplanes?" means no airplanes which means no mass transit air options.

Remember, it took the industrial revolution and mass printing before things took off in our world. Without free and open idea exchange, change will be extremely slow. Doubly so if people are activrly opposing it.

Particle_Man

2021-02-02, 04:25 PM

There has been a (slow) evolution in magic (what with certain arcane spells being both invented by and named after wizards, and a few magic items also named after mortals).

I don’t know if that naming practice continued much after the ogl stripped those names out though. Too bad: “Evard’s Black Tentacles” just sounds more thematic than “Black Tentacles”, whoever Evard was.

Some of this is sounding a little like “Why doesn’t Reed Richards change the marvel comics earth beyond recognition?” conflict between Watsonian what-ifs and Doylist dramatic necessity. The real question is “what sorts of settings attract players and DMs to spend money to buy and play in them and it seems few game designers want to gamble on selling the Tippyverse setting.

Batcathat

2021-02-02, 04:33 PM

Some of this is sounding a little like “Why doesn’t Reed Richards change the marvel comics earth beyond recognition?” conflict between Watsonian what-ifs and Doylist dramatic necessity. The real question is “what sorts of settings attract players and DMs to spend money to buy and play in them and it seems few game designers want to gamble on selling the Tippyverse setting.

Well, they could have the settings pretty much exactly as they are and still avert medieval stasis. They would just have to avoid the notion that the world has been pretty much exactly as in the present for thousands of years. I feel like I just complained about this in some other thread recently, but what is it with fantasy authors and big numbers? Can't something have happened fifty or a hundred years ago instead of millenia ago? :smallconfused:

Calthropstu

2021-02-02, 05:14 PM

Well, they could have the settings pretty much exactly as they are and still avert medieval stasis. They would just have to avoid the notion that the world has been pretty much exactly as in the present for thousands of years. I feel like I just complained about this in some other thread recently, but what is it with fantasy authors and big numbers? Can't something have happened fifty or a hundred years ago instead of millenia ago? :smallconfused:

How much real progress was made between 5k bc and 500 ad? Sure, quite a bit by their standards. But people were swinging swords as late as 100 years ago. Cavalry was used as late as ww2. We are casting judgement from our lofty positions, but the reality is change was very slow for most of human history. And without mass paper production and printing, it still would be.

Batcathat

2021-02-02, 05:18 PM

How much real progress was made between 5k bc and 500 ad? Sure, quite a bit by their standards. But people were swinging swords as late as 100 years ago. Cavalry was used as late as ww2. We are casting judgement from our lofty positions, but the reality is change was very slow for most of human history. And without mass paper production and printing, it still would be.

Slow? Sure. But in a lot of fantasy worlds, it seems to be pretty much non-existant, technology seems to advance to the typical fantasy medieval-ish tech level and then stay there.

There are exceptions, of course, in both roleplaying settings and other fiction, but the above "rule" seems oddly common.

Calthropstu

2021-02-02, 05:35 PM

Slow? Sure. But in a lot of fantasy worlds, it seems to be pretty much non-existant, technology seems to advance to the typical fantasy medieval-ish tech level and then stay there.

There are exceptions, of course, in both roleplaying settings and other fiction, but the above "rule" seems oddly common.

Let's be honest. It's because that is what sells. It's easy to write about, it's easy to pull things from our history from that time period, and it's something people relate to from many walks of life. If they advanced the tech too much, it would cease being fantasy. It'd be more like steampunk, and that appeals to a much different crowd

Jay R

2021-02-02, 05:39 PM

The scientific method is rooted in universal laws, and therefore the idea that repeated experimentation will produce similar results.

Fireball and Lightning spells show that energy is not conserved.
Enlarge, Reduce, and Polymorph spells show that mass is not conserved.
If you can direct Lightning spells, then lightning is not electrostatic discharge of two locations equalizing electric potential.
Dragons and other large flying creatures violate the cube square law.
Flight, levitation, and feather fall spells violate the law of universal gravitation.
If Cold is a positive energy opposite from fire, not merely the absence of heat, then all heat-related science is untrue.
Sonic attacks that hit everything in a cone at full strength, and completely ignore anything barely outside that cone violate what we know about sound.
Griffons, hippogriffs, and many other creatures that have bird and mammal parts violate what we know of evolution and of biology.
And if gods created the universe, then cosmology is entirely wrong

Would it be possible to eventually find physical laws that exist in the absence of magic by controlling all these variables? Maybe, but it would be much, much harder, and would take many more centuries.

Also, if the gods don't want mortals having that knowledge, then the mortals will never learn that knowledge.

As Terry Pratchett wrote:

Rincewind began to feel really wretched. "I don't know," he said. "A better way of doing things, I suppose. Something with a bit of sense in it. Harnessing - harnessing the lightning, or something."

The imp gave him a kind but pitying look. "Lightning is the spears hurled by the thunder giants when they fight," it said gently. "Established meteorological fact. You can't harness it."

"I know," said Rincewind miserably, "That's the flaw in the argument, of course."

At least, that's the reason for it in my world. But I assume that our modern physics doesn't apply, even as an underlying system when no magic is around. In my most recent world, the earth is the unmoving center of the universe, and the planets (moon, Mercury, Venus, sun, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn) orbit it in cycles and epicycles, in paths not determinable by science, because they are in the control of gods.

I also assume that the casting of spells, and other supernatural actions, have minor, mostly imperceptible effects on the world, far beyond the practical range of the spell. So, for instance, it isn't true that there is a standard force of gravity. Two bodies might not fall at the same acceleration. Among other things, this justifies a maximum damage from falling regardless of height (at a level far below our worlds terminal velocity).

That's my DM decision, and other DMs are free to do otherwise. We will never all make our worlds the same, and that's fine.

The real answer to your question is a meta-reason. Magic impedes scientific development past the medieval level because we are trying to sorta kinda simulate a genre that assumes magic and medieval tech.

Morty

2021-02-02, 05:43 PM

The tricky part about magic replacing technology is that in most D&D settings, it doesn't actually do it. They (Eberron being a notable exception) tend to studiously avoid any notion of magic affecting society in any way beyond "a wizard blew up a city so there's no city there anymore". The most we get is the occasional magocracy. Otherwise it's a pseudo-Medieval mish-mash with everything fantastical off to the side. Bearing in mind that most settings' idea of the European Middle Ages resembles Monty Python and the Holy Grail or Age of Empires 2 more than anything else.

Mechalich

2021-02-02, 05:46 PM

Well, they could have the settings pretty much exactly as they are and still avert medieval stasis. They would just have to avoid the notion that the world has been pretty much exactly as in the present for thousands of years. I feel like I just complained about this in some other thread recently, but what is it with fantasy authors and big numbers? Can't something have happened fifty or a hundred years ago instead of millenia ago? :smallconfused:

Many fantasy settings - especially D&D ones - have very long-lived entities. This creates pressure to extend out the timeline to accommodate their much longer generation times. A human generation interval, in a pre-industrial state, is only around twenty years. In the same circumstances an elven generation is more like 120, or six times as much. A draconic generation is even worse. Elven living memory extends back almost 1,000 years. So for anything to be 'buried in the distant past' it has to have happened an awful long time ago.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 06:45 PM

Well isn't this basically what I was saying? You need magic to work in ways that are scalable and composable, rather than ways that concentrate in individuals and improve only with individual improvement of mastery and skill. If fundamental to the way you have magic work means that doubling the mass that a levitation effect can lift requires gaining class levels, rather than just providing twice as much magical energy, then it's not going to lead in the same kind of directions as mass production infrastructure development did. Or if you have magic items which can't get along or stack with themselves (which is often the case for game design reasons), then you're going to have problems increasing the scale of operations.

You can of course take things from any real or fictional example of technology and flavor them as magic, just as you can take things from any fictional example of magic and flavor it as technology. But generally a given implementation of magic in a given tabletop RPG has some thematic coherency, and those themes tend (for game design reasons as much or more than making magic feel magical) to resist ways in which low intensity power can aggregate and combine. Much the same way that tabletop games tend to focus on small squads of highly skilled individuals being central to the development of world events rather than large armies or nation-wide shifts in sentiment or habit at the level of the populace.

I continue to assert that magic is absolutely not conducive to medieval stasis, at least not because it mechanically must. As we see in Pathfinder, and eventually Starfinder (systems which use the 3.X magic system, mostly because they are offshoots of 3.X) magic can ABSOLUTELY industrialize and be industrialized. Magic, specifically 3.X magic, doesn't really conform to the conventional idea of "ordered tech vs chaotic magic" mostly because magic is pretty well ordered itself, a concept that is being explored in Eberron and almost fully conceptualized in Starfinder or Dragonstar. In effect, the study of magic and its applications to things like manufacturing is a science in and of itself, unlike say Westeros warging and greenseeing which is so difficult, chaotic and rare it is more a fluke in reality than any major society changing force or "profession."

In terms of societal development, then I assert that it won't be one super-powerful wizard stops all progress because otherwise we wouldn't have mage schools since there would be no point for them to exist. There are a lot more 3rd-5th level wizards than there are 17th-20th level essentially. And those wizards would probably work with the kingdom to find better ways to improve it. Because frankly, if mages really DID want to stop competition, there would probably be just one- three super epic level mages instead of a bunch of 13th level+ mages running about the world.

Fizban

2021-02-02, 06:47 PM

In counter to your point, I raise the example of Starfinder and Pathfiner 2e. Some spells have objectively improved, such as all the Ray of Frost/Acid Splash in SF being consolidated in one spell that does ALL types of energy damage. In P2E, spells DCs now scale by CL. I could list a few more, but I don't have the time to go in-depth to all the changes.
Both of which are different games than 3.5 or Pathfinder, not examples of a game with research rules that allow actual progress. If the DM (or publisher in this case) decides that their setting has evolved through multiple different rulesets, then sure, you can have examples of spells "getting better." Because the DM said so, that after some time period people arbitrarily figured it out. And it just means that the end point is Starfinder or 2e or whatever, at which point any further advancements remain DM fiat.

On the topic of research, I actually mean building magic items more effectively/efficiently. Spells are the building blocks, much like the same way we can't exactly build a better molecule, but we can build better engines. Essentially, what I am saying is magic could be harnessed more efficiently in this way.
Either you have a set of hard magitech rules, or you don't. Either the DM has fully explored the limits of those rules to form the foundation of the setting, or they haven't. If the DM has properly explored those rules (to ensure game balance and form a coherent setting), then starting the setting/players without that is an intentional setup, where any "progress" is just the players actually using the rules. If the DM has not properly explored the limits, adding players who do tends to break the setting- which is part of why systems that attempt hard magitech rules fail (the other possibility being that they failed to include enough elements to do anything with). If the rules include a soft magitech system where the DM must approve the results (3.x's item creation guidelines), then the situation remains the same: either the DM has fully explored what they're willing to allow, or they haven't, and anything they change their mind on is still DM fiat, even if disguised as research or expirimentation.

If the "progress" is just using hard rules the DM did not use as part of the setting (or to a more advantageous extent than they did), it's not progress- it's just things they could have been doing all along. True, you can say that that's what real science research is, but from a game perspective it's not. Unless the rules behind the presumed hard magitech system are obscured from the players, the players need not do any research, and any "discoveries" they make are simply things that the people of the setting apparently failed to try (which could be for legitimate reasons, as long as there are sufficiently limited people and resources), since when the players did it worked immediately.

A game where there actually *are* hard magitech rules that the players (and possibly even the DM) don't know the workings of and are only revealed over time through actual in-game research, would be a heck of a thing (though it would *still* have an endpoint). But focus on that kind of feature runs counter to 3.x style games where the focus is on multi-layered character builds and dungeoneering combat. And the moment someone reads the whole thing anyway, optimizing the research game would be a thing again.

The only way to have a setting with rules and multiple technology levels is based on what the available actors and resources have achieved, out of a larger allowed possibility, without DM/writer input, is by the DM/writer intentionally building the setting to not be at the peak of what is allowed by the rules.

EDIT: Remember, just because something isn't written in a rulebook doesn't mean it can't exist. SF is implied to have "practical magic" academies much like the Arcanamirium of PF that focus exclusively on teaching casters how to harness magic for manufacturing. Of course, just look at Eberron for an example of this "in game terms" and wonder what it would look like 50-150 years in the future.
So, if you write a setting and the fluff says technology advances, technology advances? Sure. And when you've fully explored what is available in the published rules, the DM will have to make something up. Which is what Eberron does- its "advancements" aren't even that effective, and things like how much it costs to builds the railways are completely unaddressed. Eberron is fluff and fiat, not an example of magical advancement.

The tricky part about magic replacing technology is that in most D&D settings, it doesn't actually do it. They (Eberron being a notable exception)
Except Eberron doesn't do it either- it just says it did.

I continue to assert that magic is absolutely not conducive to medieval stasis, at least not because it mechanically must. As we see in Pathfinder, and eventually Starfinder (systems which use the 3.X magic system, mostly because they are offshoots of 3.X) magic can ABSOLUTELY industrialize and be industrialized. Magic, specifically 3.X magic, doesn't really conform to the conventional idea of "ordered tech vs chaotic magic" mostly because magic is pretty well ordered itself, a concept that is being explored in Eberron and almost fully conceptualized in Starfinder or Dragonstar. In effect, the study of magic and its applications to things like manufacturing is a science in and of itself, unlike say Westeros warging and greenseeing which is so difficult, chaotic and rare it is more a fluke in reality than any major society changing force or "profession."
Once again, sure, if you change how magic works and say that it is allowed to progress, then it progresses. But that doesn't change how magic works in 3.x. It means you're writing a new setting/game where it works differently. But whether magic can go beyond the written rules is still separate from whether it causes medieval stasis.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 06:51 PM

Let's be honest. It's because that is what sells. It's easy to write about, it's easy to pull things from our history from that time period, and it's something people relate to from many walks of life. If they advanced the tech too much, it would cease being fantasy. It'd be more like steampunk, and that appeals to a much different crowd

Frankly, the weirdest thing is that most DnD worlds assume 99.998% literacy rate. Following your logic, this is because in a game world, from personal experience, it is BEYOND tedious to model actual illiteracy. So everyone is literate unless they have literally been sitting under a rock for millennia. Or how rapiers somehow coexist with full plate when guns predated both IRL, and rapiers only started to be used after the inventions of flintlocks.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 06:55 PM

Both of which are different games than 3.5 or Pathfinder, not examples of a game with research rules that allow actual progress. If the DM (or publisher in this case) decides that their setting has evolved through multiple different rulesets, then sure, you can have examples of spells "getting better." Because the DM said so, that after some time period people arbitrarily figured it out. And it just means that the end point is Starfinder or 2e or whatever, at which point any further advancements remain DM fiat.

Either you have a set of hard magitech rules, or you don't. Either the DM has fully explored the limits of those rules to form the foundation of the setting, or they haven't. If the DM has properly explored those rules (to ensure game balance and form a coherent setting), then starting the setting/players without that is an intentional setup, where any "progress" is just the players actually using the rules. If the DM has not properly explored the limits, adding players who do tends to break the setting- which is part of why systems that attempt hard magitech rules fail (the other possibility being that they failed to include enough elements to do anything with). If the rules include a soft magitech system where the DM must approve the results (3.x's item creation guidelines), then the situation remains the same: either the DM has fully explored what they're willing to allow, or they haven't, and anything they change their mind on is still DM fiat, even if disguised as research or expirimentation.

If the "progress" is just using hard rules the DM did not use as part of the setting (or to a more advantageous extent than they did), it's not progress- it's just things they could have been doing all along. True, you can say that that's what real science research is, but from a game perspective it's not. Unless the rules behind the presumed hard magitech system are obscured from the players, the players need not do any research, and any "discoveries" they make are simply things that the people of the setting apparently failed to try (which could be for legitimate reasons, as long as there are sufficiently limited people and resources), since when the players did it worked immediately.

A game where there actually *are* hard magitech rules that the players (and possibly even the DM) don't know the workings of and are only revealed over time through actual in-game research, would be a heck of a thing (though it would *still* have an endpoint). But focus on that kind of feature runs counter to 3.x style games where the focus is on multi-layered character builds and dungeoneering combat. And the moment someone reads the whole thing anyway, optimizing the research game would be a thing again.

The only way to have a setting with rules and multiple technology levels is based on what the available actors and resources have achieved, out of a larger allowed possibility, without DM/writer input, is by the DM/writer intentionally building the setting to not be at the peak of what is allowed by the rules.

So you admit that there is the possibility for advancement and that magic does not make it by definition impossible? Cool :smallcool:

BTW, stepping away from DM fiat for a minute (b/c if the DM wants he can literally say demons blow up the world so it is moot to argue about that), let's talk about the actual settings. It took about 10 years from 1e to 2e and in that time the changes I discussed have taken place. Thus proving advancement IS possible and pretty much answering the question of this thread.

Fizban

2021-02-02, 07:01 PM

So you admit that there is the possibility for advancement and that magic does not make it by definition impossible? Cool :smallcool:

BTW, stepping away from DM fiat for a minute (b/c if the DM wants he can literally say demons blow up the world so it is moot to argue about that), let's talk about the actual settings. It took about 10 years from 1e to 2e and in that time the changes I discussed have taken place. Thus proving advancement IS possible and pretty much answering the question of this thread.
See edits. And I already agreed that magic as written does not necessarily cause medieval stasis, simply through (the assumption of) mundane technology advancing where it leaves off- what I'm trying to tell you is that you can't claim a pre-written set of rules actually allows advancement without DM/writer input, at which point it's a narrative choice of the setting. It's pretty much a tautology: if the rules are written, the extent of the rules is already written. Other systems that state their magic is at a different level of advancement don't change that.

Frankly, the weirdest thing is that most DnD worlds assume 99.998% literacy rate. Following your logic, this is because in a game world, from personal experience, it is BEYOND tedious to model actual illiteracy. So everyone is literate unless they have literally been sitting under a rock for millennia. Or how rapiers somehow coexist with full plate when guns predated both IRL, and rapiers only started to be used after the inventions of flintlocks.
There are multiple factors behind all of those things, and it is eminently possible to write a set of circumstances that makes sense. If one takes the time to research all the history behind all the military and other technological advancements and the pressures involved in them throughought history. Most people aren't interested in that.

Tvtyrant

2021-02-02, 07:09 PM

In your original post I assume you mean stuff like the Harry Potter crew using antique technology and justifying it with tech either mixing badly with magic or just not developing the technology of more recent civilization.

We honestly can't answer that, because we don't have magic and magic means a whole bunch of different things. Is it reproducible, is there a reason to sell magic items or spell uses, it's all a bunch of setting assumptions that don't match from person to person.

Personally I think of fantasy as being typically identical for long periods of time because the author only has enough time to flesh out one time period, and making a developing world means doing thousands of times more effort. Reality has more detail in the development of Nutmeg then all fantasy ever written put together, a human only has so much time and interest to sit and write down how each spice, use of rope, and fashion of clothing developed. They might have enough time to do that one time a religious war between leather and wood shoes broke out, but probably not the 1000 mile trade route bringing the flax from one country to be woven in another to be sold in a third and then the ensuing trade conflict between house Flax and house Cotton. Saying "the fantasy world has some important mythic stuff going on and then a current setting" is basically what they mean.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 07:18 PM

See edits. And I already agreed that magic as written does not necessarily cause medieval stasis, simply through (the assumption of) mundane technology advancing where it leaves off- what I'm trying to tell you is that you can't claim a pre-written set of rules actually allows advancement without DM/writer input, at which point it's a narrative choice of the setting. It's pretty much a tautology: if the rules are written, the extent of the rules is already written. Other systems that state their magic is at a different level of advancement don't change that.

There are multiple factors behind all of those things, and it is eminently possible to write a set of circumstances that makes sense. If one takes the time to research all the history behind all the military and other technological advancements and the pressures involved in them throughought history. Most people aren't interested in that.

To the second point, those "multiple factors" are utterly ridiculous. For one, you need efficient enough farming AND transportation to allow people to spend not insignificant amounts of time to become literate on that scale. Both of these factors would quickly obsolete any idea of the "medieval setting." Note even during the Renaissance the literacy rate was only 40% for boys and men. Not to mention all the printing presses and literature that would need to be developed-- and I mean like movable type or better and chain bookstores because otherwise there would be no reason for people to be literate on that scale. IRL the Renaissance had only plate print presses b/c farmer on a distant countryside didn't NEED to read, but in the fantasy land you propose they HAVE to be literate because if the adventurers drop by in rural village 34, or if the plucky farm boy PC came from said village, them IRL being illiterate is a headache very very few writers want to deal with.

To the first point: I assert my interpretation is the most logical extrapolation, using the resources of Pathfinder because it has a lot of new rulesets dealing with things that approach what we are discussing (if you want to hear specifics, look back to my earlier posts or just ask and I'll write up a few.) Otherwise you have a world where trade is pointless because every trade good and heck, *normal* item is worth the same everywhere due to the established price lists in the PHB, and people use the salt water function of the decanter of endless water to create infinite salt which equals to infinite money because all trade goods are a fixed price.

Fizban

2021-02-02, 07:21 PM

In your original post I assume you mean stuff like the Harry Potter crew using antique technology and justifying it with tech either mixing badly with magic or just not developing the technology of more recent civilization.
The OP says they were inspired by Harry Potter and the Natural 20, which I've read. It's essentially a loophole abusing char-op wizard (claiming to be all RAW but including multiple glaring errors that were popular at the time of course*) dumped into the potterverse: the very mindset of the person is already counter to how normal people behave, to actively hunt and exploit anything they can for combat power. Combined with working in a different set of rules, giving them new loopholes (and new weaknesses, primarily being stuck on 6 second rounds vs. people who aren't). The character comes from a setting where like the Tippyverse, the characters know what's on their character sheet, how xp and WBL and encounters and item creation etc all work, and can read published instructions on how to be certain builds. This is barely explored, as there is only a brief jaunt back to this world to confront a single antagonist and then return to the potterverse, right before the series stopped. But essentially the person is, and comes from a culture where, rabid optimization is the norm.

So meeting the potterverse characters, who are normal laid-back kids from a culture where all that is not the norm, kinda drives Milo nuts (coming to terms with this and learning to live a little are character arcs of the story, and pretty good).

*Though there is also the concept of the DM and the knowledge that pushing too far can result in consequences, and possibly even an explicit retconning once IIRC.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 07:29 PM

The OP says they were inspired by Harry Potter and the Natural 20, which I've read. It's essentially a loophole abusing char-op wizard (claiming to be all RAW but including multiple glaring errors that were popular at the time of course*) dumped into the potterverse: the very mindset of the person is already counter to how normal people behave, to actively hunt and exploit anything they can for combat power. Combined with working in a different set of rules, giving them new loopholes (and new weaknesses, primarily being stuck on 6 second rounds vs. people who aren't). The character comes from a setting where like the Tippyverse, the characters know what's on their character sheet, how xp and WBL and encounters and item creation etc all work, and can read published instructions on how to be certain builds. This is barely explored, as there is only a brief jaunt back to this world to confront a single antagonist and then return to the potterverse, right before the series stopped. But essentially the person is, and comes from a culture where, rabid optimization is the norm.

So meeting the potterverse characters, who are normal laid-back kids from a culture where that is not the norm, kinda drives Milo nuts (coming to terms with this and learning to live a little are character arcs of the story, and pretty good).

*Though there is also the concept of the DM and the knowledge that pushing too far can result in consequences, and possibly even an explicit retconning once IIRC.

Please note that in his universe, industrialization would be impossible since EVERYTHING costs the same no matter what. Live on a literal mountain of salt? Salt is worth only 2 gp (correct me if wrong). Live in a desert wasteland? Salt is still worth only 2 gp. Heck, trade would be unable to exist in his world according to the RAW nature of it. I mean, in a section he literally buys bags of salt, which is made according to actual functional laws of Earth reality, to convert into 1000s of gp worth of crafting material because he exploits the RAW trade goods rules. It is a plot point. I mean, to get the absurdity of it into your brain, just know if he were locked in the vault of Fort Knox, he could use the solid bars of gold to craft a mini-Death Star and blow his way out. He could use the contents of the spice aisle of your local grocery store to craft a wand of fireball or a rocket launcher if he knew how (ok though, this is just badass. Seriously, how many fictional characters do you know can honestly say they can make WMDs out of kitchen supplies?)

Magic is the LEAST problem of his world (if it is even a problem), is what I'm saying.

Fizban

2021-02-02, 07:46 PM

To the second point, those "multiple factors" are utterly ridiculous. You need efficient enough farming AND transportation to allow people to spend not insignificant amounts of time to become literate on that scale. Both of these factors would quickly obsolete any idea of the "medieval setting." Note even during the Renaissance the literacy rate was only 40% for boys and men.
I don't know where you're pulling your stats from, but last I heard it's actually the opposite, that though popular opinion paints them all as illiterate, most people were. Part of the problem is almost certainly the standards, as a medieval peasant would learn to read what was available and write what was necessary, which is far less than we expect today, but also far from completely illiterate.

And no, they're really not. Simple compartmentalization can brute-force literally all of them, if you simply say that some factor that should prevent or allow X was limited to a certain region because of geopolitical whatever. Metallurgy is one of the main bottlenecks, preventing steam and guns and slowing the adoption of better armors due to low availability/more efficient uses. Restrict the availability of the new metalworking techniques, and you can advance whatever you want while the others stay wherever you want. Rapiers (specifically, hard thrusting swords) become a thing due to the prevalence of maille armor and a dueling culture in urban centres. mess with those if you don't like the rapier. Don't like guns? Make gunpowder components too hard to get. Like guns more? The existence of mithril and admantine suggest metallurgy is already super advanced, or at least replaceable by these better materials.

To the first point: I assert my interpretation is the most logical extrapolation,
Which point, and what is your interpretation? If you mean that the most logical extrapolation is that all written magic systems spontaneously get better over time, we'll have to disagree. The DM is not beholden to a written magic system, but conclusions based on a magic system have to come from the rules of that magic system.

Otherwise you have a world where trade is pointless because every trade good and heck, *normal* item is worth the same everywhere due to the established price lists in the PHB, and people use the salt water function of the decanter of endless water to create infinite salt which equals to infinite money because all trade goods are a fixed price.
You seem to be conflating lack of economic simulation with magic rules. There are zero economic simulation rules, and DM advice says that they should make stuff up if it seems important, so the expectation is that the setting responds to economic factors the same way it would physics: in a moderately realistic way. There are tons of magic rules and the DM is advised to compare any new rules or changes to the existing rules to maintain game balance, so the expectation is that a written magic system has limits. And one of the most obvious limits, such that it usually never needs to be stated, is that you can't just make "X thing but better."

If a player asks to research "Levitate, but better, so I can make better airships," the presumed response is "No, Levitate already exists." You seem to be assuming that the response should be "Yes," and thus no magic system cannot be advanced. That is a DM choice.

Magic is the LEAST problem of his world (if it is even a problem), is what I'm saying.
Presumably if that world were explored in detail, all high value mundane goods such as salt and spices would be controlled substances. The fact that Milo even knows salt can be used that way is, is in its own way, a plot hole of the world-building, though an inevitable one since they were clearly going to include some sort of gp exploit. Though he may have also questioned the consistency of his own world during that trip, allowing it to also be lampshaded and addressed by the DM conceit.

Destro2119

2021-02-02, 09:34 PM

I don't know where you're pulling your stats from, but last I heard it's actually the opposite, that though popular opinion paints them all as illiterate, most people were. Part of the problem is almost certainly the standards, as a medieval peasant would learn to read what was available and write what was necessary, which is far less than we expect today, but also far from completely illiterate.

And no, they're really not. Simple compartmentalization can brute-force literally all of them, if you simply say that some factor that should prevent or allow X was limited to a certain region because of geopolitical whatever. Metallurgy is one of the main bottlenecks, preventing steam and guns and slowing the adoption of better armors due to low availability/more efficient uses. Restrict the availability of the new metalworking techniques, and you can advance whatever you want while the others stay wherever you want. Rapiers (specifically, hard thrusting swords) become a thing due to the prevalence of maille armor and a dueling culture in urban centres. mess with those if you don't like the rapier. Don't like guns? Make gunpowder components too hard to get. Like guns more? The existence of mithril and admantine suggest metallurgy is already super advanced, or at least replaceable by these better materials.

Which point, and what is your interpretation? If you mean that the most logical extrapolation is that all written magic systems spontaneously get better over time, we'll have to disagree. The DM is not beholden to a written magic system, but conclusions based on a magic system have to come from the rules of that magic system.

You seem to be conflating lack of economic simulation with magic rules. There are zero economic simulation rules, and DM advice says that they should make stuff up if it seems important, so the expectation is that the setting responds to economic factors the same way it would physics: in a moderately realistic way. There are tons of magic rules and the DM is advised to compare any new rules or changes to the existing rules to maintain game balance, so the expectation is that a written magic system has limits. And one of the most obvious limits, such that it usually never needs to be stated, is that you can't just make "X thing but better."

If a player asks to research "Levitate, but better, so I can make better airships," the presumed response is "No, Levitate already exists." You seem to be assuming that the response should be "Yes," and thus no magic system cannot be advanced. That is a DM choice.

Presumably if that world were explored in detail, all high value mundane goods such as salt and spices would be controlled substances. The fact that Milo even knows salt can be used that way is, is in its own way, a plot hole of the world-building, though an inevitable one since they were clearly going to include some sort of gp exploit. Though he may have also questioned the consistency of his own world during that trip, allowing it to also be lampshaded and addressed by the DM conceit.

On the topic of literacy, I used this link: http://www.philiplaberge.com/FamilyHistory/LaBergeInfo/Literacy.pdf

You may note that if you define literacy by the extremely, extremely generous bounds of being able to sign your own name, then you get 62% literacy in the 1650s. Of course, this isn't exactly the assumed literacy level of fantasy worlds... at all.

On the topic of magical advancements, I will use Pathfinder's downtime rules for a example, you can literally set up a business to mass-make textiles or crops (which would translate out to Goods) and then use a magic item called the horn of plentiful magic to turn said goods into Magic supplies which can be used for magic crafting.

"X thing but better" Starfinder which uses the same magic system as 3.X and is nominally set in the same world as the fantasy game Pathfinder already shows how some spells have been improved.

But if you don't want to take this for evidence then on the topic of that I did not mean "lol all spells are cantrips now" but rather in-game advancements where some mage-scientist decides to tinker with the specific enchantments, perhaps combining the effects of levitate with a spell that increases wind velocity to make an airship go faster. A bit like how the rod of metal and mineral detection is essentially locate object but more finely tuned to detect precious metals.

According to your logic, if we are playing a game set in 1850s America, a scientist PC cannot create a lightbulb because "the DM decides he cannot artificially advance the tech level of the setting as there are no hard rules for electric light" Of course, we IRL KNOW that a lightbulb is something that can be made. Just like how in a setting with 3.X type magic, where magic basically IS a science to the point where it can be taught in schools and there can be (in-universe) magical treatises in those schools (once again, bucking the tradition of ordered tech vs chaotic magic) it is absolutely possible to imagine advancements being made in what magic can do for say, manufacturing to name one thing.

Finally, on the topic of Milo, his world just doesn't make sense. Period. I mean, when everything has a fixed price that can never be changed, how the hell did you even decide to use currency in the first place? Why aren't your cities collapsing because of the whole impossibility of trade in even mundane goods? I mean, in Milo's world you can dredge the oceans for infinite craft-anything material.

NichG

2021-02-02, 09:42 PM

I continue to assert that magic is absolutely not conducive to medieval stasis, at least not because it mechanically must. As we see in Pathfinder, and eventually Starfinder (systems which use the 3.X magic system, mostly because they are offshoots of 3.X) magic can ABSOLUTELY industrialize and be industrialized. Magic, specifically 3.X magic, doesn't really conform to the conventional idea of "ordered tech vs chaotic magic" mostly because magic is pretty well ordered itself, a concept that is being explored in Eberron and almost fully conceptualized in Starfinder or Dragonstar. In effect, the study of magic and its applications to things like manufacturing is a science in and of itself, unlike say Westeros warging and greenseeing which is so difficult, chaotic and rare it is more a fluke in reality than any major society changing force or "profession."

Nowhere am I claiming the issue has anything to do with magic being 'chaotic'. The issue is that magic, particularly in a system with spell levels and character levels and a connection between them, strongly encourages personal development of power rather than societal development of power. If a wizard wants to live a life of luxury, they hit the books (or the dungeons) for as long as it takes to learn Magnificent Mansion or if they're more ambitious, Genesis. Drop that wizard into their own setting 1000 years earlier and their sophisticated mastery of magic might make them a god-king in their own right. In the real world, give me PhD-level modern knowledge and drop me into the middle ages and I'm going to at best be mildly better off than your average peasant unless I enlist human help to turn that knowledge into production, construct infrastructure requiring hundreds or thousands of other people working to realize it, and do the whole 'tools to make the tools to make the tools' thing.

If you had a version of magic where mastering it did nothing for the wielding of power at a personal level, but allowed for the construction and refinement of sites of power, the design of magical tools which acted as the interface for quantities of magic billions of times greater than any individual caster could direct, etc, then that kind of magic is well-suited for a path towards industrialization.

The other kind need not be stagnant, but it develops in a different, more personal direction. An D&D-style archmage gains very little from having 10000 citizens following their instructions - there's not really anything they can do with those people that they couldn't do without. Even for a Lv7 mage, it might be useful to have 10000 people at their beck and call for reasons of personal comfort, but it won't actually help them cast an 8th level spell.

Fizban

2021-02-02, 10:50 PM

On the topic of literacy, I used this link: http://www.philiplaberge.com/FamilyHistory/LaBergeInfo/Literacy.pdf

You may note that if you define literacy by the extremely, extremely generous bounds of being able to sign your own name, then you get 62% literacy in the 1650s. Of course, this isn't exactly the assumed literacy level of fantasy worlds... at all.
Well I'm going based on mentions from medieval enthusiast youtubers for that detail, so I've nothing to counter with, fair enough. Still not hard to come up with reasons, but they're really not the point.

On the topic of magical advancements, I will use Pathfinder's downtime rules for a example, you can literally set up a business to mass-make textiles or crops (which would translate out to Goods) and then use a magic item called the horn of plentiful magic to turn said goods into Magic supplies which can be used for magic crafting.
That's not an advancement. That's "exploring the limits of the rules." A setting which has hard rules that have a particularly powerful method of generating wealth, and no one uses that method, is a setting where the DM has not incorporated the rules fully into the setting. And since no base roleplaying game has realistic economic rules as a base, well there you go. The added business rules in Pathfinder (or those in 3.x, etc) are rules added later, which essentially create a new game, which will unsurprisingly be full of inconsistencies.

In fact, the base games are already like that, the magic and item and levels systems all having been grafted on over time with varying amounts of care put into what they make possible. But 3.x makes no claim that its magic item creation guidelines are usable tech system on their own, putting those decisions in the hands of the DM, and presenting its default setting as-is. The difference is that business rules are taken as "yeah man, you can use this system exactly as written, I'm a published writer so my rules always work!" when in fact the creators have not fully explored the consequences, nor likely based them on anything at all.

"X thing but better" Starfinder which uses the same magic system as 3.X and is nominally set in the same world as the fantasy game Pathfinder already shows how some spells have been improved.
No, it uses the Starfinder magic system, rules, set of mechanics and list of spells. Which is based on 3.x, but they clearly changed a number of spells, and may (or may not?) have said that those spells happened to result from research, which involved recognizable 3.x spells at some point in the history of the setting.

I don't think I can make the point any clearer than I already have. Just because the Starfinder setting says that the present day uses Starfinder rules and past would use Pathfinder rules, does not make any greater statement about how magic systems "work." It says that Paizo wrote a game with a setting and rules that is meant to be their idea of a future version of their previous game.

You are focused on game products (combinations of rules and settings), where the rules include elements that have not been explored fully when creating the setting. This is not proof that "magic" "always" "advances." The fact that these products don't utilize their own rules to produce a consistent setting, does not change the fact that they have finite, written rules about how magic works in them.

There is always, an endpoint that can be reached by fully exploring the limits of optimization of a set of rules, because the rules are finite. The Tippyverse concept is one of these, applied to "3.x magic item creation, if it was hard rules rather than DM guidelines." Even if you randomized the rules themselves, the resulting system could still be analyzed and optimized. There is, by definition, some possible version of the Starfinder universe where people have actually used the rules to the fullest extent, at which point there is no more "magical advancement" without involving a DM/writer/etc to let them make "Levitate, but even better than the last printed version." There is nothing to argue about. That's the basic logical conclusion.

And because the written rules of magic are finite, and thus have a reachable endpoint of optimization, it can always be argued that there will be some sort of eventual societal stasis, when magic is the only form of advancement available. Again, there is nothing to argue about. There is no logic that allows a finite thing to be greater than finite. Either you add DM mediated non-magical advancement, or you add DM mediated magical advancement. A system with static rules will reach stasis, the words even come from the same root!

But if you don't want to take this for evidence then on the topic of that I did not mean "lol all spells are cantrips now" but rather in-game advancements where some mage-scientist decides to tinker with the specific enchantments, perhaps combining the effects of levitate with a spell that increases wind velocity to make an airship go faster. A bit like how the rod of metal and mineral detection is essentially locate object but more finely tuned to detect precious metals.
It doesn't matter how you fluff it, allowing something outside of the rules is allowing something outside of the rules. If it's not part of the written magic system, it is a change to the system. This is perfectly fine for worldbuilding, but it does not make any actual statement about how the magic system of a game would influence the development of an otherwise realistic society, without the writer or DM changing the system over time.

You are essentially trying to argue that analysis of a given magic system as written for worldbuilding is invalid, because the DM/writer should always make magic "advance" the way technology seems to in the real world. That's a personal preference, not a fundamental property.

Also: do feats "advance" over time? Does every setting automatically develop Martial Adepts, and their maneuvers get better because "research?" No, they're game mechanics. They're meant to work as-is without changing, and don't change unless the DM says they do (and do change as soon as the DM says they do).

According to your logic, if we are playing a game set in 1850s America,
What game are they playing? You haven't specified, which shows how you're missing my point-

a scientist PC cannot create a lightbulb because "the DM decides he cannot artificially advance the tech level of the setting as there are no hard rules for electric light"
Because I have also said, multiple times, that while magic rules are presumed static, the progress of technology based on the real world would naturally pick up wherever magic stops, because the rules of most systems presume that physics still works as the real world. As long as there are sufficient demands/pressures/etc, and the DM/writer has decided to take the setting in that direction.

Of course, we IRL KNOW that a lightbulb is something that can be made. Just like how in a setting with 3.X type magic, where magic basically IS a science to the point where it can be taught in schools and there can be (in-universe) magical treatises in those schools (once again, bucking the tradition of ordered tech vs chaotic magic) it is absolutely possible to imagine advancements being made in what magic can do for say, manufacturing to name one thing.
Possible to imagine, sure. Actually supported by the rules of magic in those game systems? No.

Somewhat supported by games with hard-magitech or spell creation rules that the designers didn't properly test, incorporate into the setting, or deliberately left open? Yes, until/unless a writer or DM actually does that, at which point the setting and rules are maxed out again.

Finally, on the topic of Milo, his world just doesn't make sense. Period. I mean, when everything has a fixed price that can never be changed, how the hell did you even decide to use currency in the first place? Why aren't your cities collapsing because of the whole impossibility of trade in even mundane goods? I mean, in Milo's world you can dredge the oceans for infinite craft-anything material.
Because his world isn't a real world. It's a DnD game. That's the whole point. Have you finished the story? Cause if you haven't-

Milo dies and finds himself in front of his god, who basically acknowledges that the DM and players exist, and that while Milo used to have a player, he doesn't now, and Dumbledore tells Milo to be his own player. He goes back to his world where his god is allowed to give him a second chance, fights a badguy, and gets back to the potterverse. The story acknowledges multiple universes, with gods and characters that can span multiple universes at varying levels of interaction, and that DMs and players exist and are part of/control some of them. Milo's world is all but explicitly, or possibly even explicitly, called out as not making sense and only working because the DM said so. It's not supposed to be a real world, though seeing some more exploration of that could have been interesting. It's not even that important for what happens, aside from excusing why Milo is being allowed one free rez and firmly establishing that Milo is his own character the fanfic story now.

sktarq

2021-02-03, 12:07 AM

Of course, Eberron existing basically means that magic breaking physics =/= equal no tech advancement ever.

Er....Eberron is a pretty bad example overall. It is a magitech system. Magic and technology basically mixed.
It also doesn't represent medieval stasis. Life is not like a medieval in many ways. And many of the non medieval traits have start dates (right there in history says when the fairhaven-to-flamekeep train started, first warforged, first airships etc.)
Plus it has strong forces are anti advancement (Dragons wanting to stop anyone who could interfere with the prophecy and the whole point of Quoii invasion of Sarlona s to create stasis in their own reflected plane. They both act as breaks to development in many ways but magic is tech in Eberron and it is advancing alright.

gijoemike

2021-02-03, 12:34 AM

Could you explain that last point (no pun intended)?

I think I can,

Most D&D settings are points of civilization and outside of those points of light exists dungeons of past civilizations, hordes of monsters, ruins and lairs of treasure. And that makes little sense.

Drangolance - it is difficult to physically travel to several of the main points of interest post cataclysm. Several major forts and towns were turned to ruins or extremely damaged. But there are powerful mages and there shouldn't be monster attacks and unsafe roads like this.

In FR look at CHULT - where the new version of the tomb of horrors is set. That place is horrible. There are many places in FR that aren't PoL. But FR is very large and bandit attacks, small towns, cults preying on them are everywhere.

Look at the classic module keep on the borderlands. The whole point is this is the very edge of civilization. Kill what lies beyond.

90% of Ravenloft is if you go in the woods you die. Dryads, werewolves, vampires, undead. Pick one. There are unspeakable horrors in the mists.

Nentir Vale - 4ed base settings was described as the following. Point of light was used as the informal name.

Most of the world is monster-haunted wilderness. The centers of civilization are few and far between, and the world isn't carved up between nation-states that jealously enforce their borders

Points of light campaign are settings where

Goblins, Trolls, and bandits block MANY of the tunnels, roads and bridges.
Travel between towns for basic mercantile business is very difficult
Monster laden ruins are everywhere
Sometimes these ruins are just a few miles from town but the town only knows basic rumors
Towns and small villages are not in close contact with each other. Cultists, werewolf, and orc attacks are common.
Sometimes when the party arrives at a new place it has been razed or the people ensorcelled.
There is never a heavy hand of law to protect the people. Any "Law" is tyranny for the PCs to rally against.

How many times have we played PC where this happens? How many times do our PCs have to rise up and become the justice for the people? Or perhaps we step on the throat of the people and become tyranny ourselves?

GeoffWatson

2021-02-03, 02:00 AM

Fizban

2021-02-03, 02:22 AM

I think the main problem is that authors like big numbers, with no more than a vague sense of history. The kingdom has lasted for 100,000 years! With hardly any changes as that's too much extra stuff to write.
The Forgotten Realms timeline is hilarious.

And yet, because it does incorporate some edition changes, it would have been a prime candidate for incorporating a 3.x magic item system based magitech revolution, arguably tries to do so a bit with all the "Red Wizards are selling items everywhere and getting good PR for it!" thing. But then 4e and 5e.

Batcathat

2021-02-03, 02:26 AM

I think the main problem is that authors like big numbers, with no more than a vague sense of history. The kingdom has lasted for 100,000 years! With hardly any changes as that's too much extra stuff to write.

Yeah, I suspect this as well. A lot of sci-fi writers are the same way, an interstellar empire just has to span thousands of worlds, even if the plot would works just as well for a dozen worlds.

Yahzi Coyote

2021-02-03, 06:59 AM

How I solved it:

As someone pointed out, science has to do quite a bit of jumping to be better than magic. That keeps it in check at first.

With small communities (tens of thousands instead of millions) science never really gets a chance to break out.

And when it does, something comes along and eats everyone.

The world is the way it is because that serves the purposes of several powerful factions. To realize that science can eventually supplant magic requires science to do a thousand little things like metallurgy and importing rubber from distant parts of the world and so on. None of this ever gets a chance to happen.

Finally, I double XP at every step, so while there are plenty of 9th levels in the world, there are hardly any 17th levels.

Check out the series Sword of the Bright Lady if you want to see it in action. :smallsmile:

Destro2119

2021-02-03, 07:32 AM

Er....Eberron is a pretty bad example overall. It is a magitech system. Magic and technology basically mixed.
It also doesn't represent medieval stasis. Life is not like a medieval in many ways. And many of the non medieval traits have start dates (right there in history says when the fairhaven-to-flamekeep train started, first warforged, first airships etc.)
Plus it has strong forces are anti advancement (Dragons wanting to stop anyone who could interfere with the prophecy and the whole point of Quoii invasion of Sarlona s to create stasis in their own reflected plane. They both act as breaks to development in many ways but magic is tech in Eberron and it is advancing alright.

I was actually using Eberron as a reason why magic DOESN'T stop advancement.

Destro2119

2021-02-03, 07:44 AM

Well I'm going based on mentions from medieval enthusiast youtubers for that detail, so I've nothing to counter with, fair enough. Still not hard to come up with reasons, but they're really not the point.

That's not an advancement. That's "exploring the limits of the rules." A setting which has hard rules that have a particularly powerful method of generating wealth, and no one uses that method, is a setting where the DM has not incorporated the rules fully into the setting. And since no base roleplaying game has realistic economic rules as a base, well there you go. The added business rules in Pathfinder (or those in 3.x, etc) are rules added later, which essentially create a new game, which will unsurprisingly be full of inconsistencies.

In fact, the base games are already like that, the magic and item and levels systems all having been grafted on over time with varying amounts of care put into what they make possible. But 3.x makes no claim that its magic item creation guidelines are usable tech system on their own, putting those decisions in the hands of the DM, and presenting its default setting as-is. The difference is that business rules are taken as "yeah man, you can use this system exactly as written, I'm a published writer so my rules always work!" when in fact the creators have not fully explored the consequences, nor likely based them on anything at all.

No, it uses the Starfinder magic system, rules, set of mechanics and list of spells. Which is based on 3.x, but they clearly changed a number of spells, and may (or may not?) have said that those spells happened to result from research, which involved recognizable 3.x spells at some point in the history of the setting.

I don't think I can make the point any clearer than I already have. Just because the Starfinder setting says that the present day uses Starfinder rules and past would use Pathfinder rules, does not make any greater statement about how magic systems "work." It says that Paizo wrote a game with a setting and rules that is meant to be their idea of a future version of their previous game.

You are focused on game products (combinations of rules and settings), where the rules include elements that have not been explored fully when creating the setting. This is not proof that "magic" "always" "advances." The fact that these products don't utilize their own rules to produce a consistent setting, does not change the fact that they have finite, written rules about how magic works in them.

There is always, an endpoint that can be reached by fully exploring the limits of optimization of a set of rules, because the rules are finite. The Tippyverse concept is one of these, applied to "3.x magic item creation, if it was hard rules rather than DM guidelines." Even if you randomized the rules themselves, the resulting system could still be analyzed and optimized. There is, by definition, some possible version of the Starfinder universe where people have actually used the rules to the fullest extent, at which point there is no more "magical advancement" without involving a DM/writer/etc to let them make "Levitate, but even better than the last printed version." There is nothing to argue about. That's the basic logical conclusion.

And because the written rules of magic are finite, and thus have a reachable endpoint of optimization, it can always be argued that there will be some sort of eventual societal stasis, when magic is the only form of advancement available. Again, there is nothing to argue about. There is no logic that allows a finite thing to be greater than finite. Either you add DM mediated non-magical advancement, or you add DM mediated magical advancement. A system with static rules will reach stasis, the words even come from the same root!

It doesn't matter how you fluff it, allowing something outside of the rules is allowing something outside of the rules. If it's not part of the written magic system, it is a change to the system. This is perfectly fine for worldbuilding, but it does not make any actual statement about how the magic system of a game would influence the development of an otherwise realistic society, without the writer or DM changing the system over time.

You are essentially trying to argue that analysis of a given magic system as written for worldbuilding is invalid, because the DM/writer should always make magic "advance" the way technology seems to in the real world. That's a personal preference, not a fundamental property.

Also: do feats "advance" over time? Does every setting automatically develop Martial Adepts, and their maneuvers get better because "research?" No, they're game mechanics. They're meant to work as-is without changing, and don't change unless the DM says they do (and do change as soon as the DM says they do).

What game are they playing? You haven't specified, which shows how you're missing my point-

Because I have also said, multiple times, that while magic rules are presumed static, the progress of technology based on the real world would naturally pick up wherever magic stops, because the rules of most systems presume that physics still works as the real world. As long as there are sufficient demands/pressures/etc, and the DM/writer has decided to take the setting in that direction.

Possible to imagine, sure. Actually supported by the rules of magic in those game systems? No.

Somewhat supported by games with hard-magitech or spell creation rules that the designers didn't properly test, incorporate into the setting, or deliberately left open? Yes, until/unless a writer or DM actually does that, at which point the setting and rules are maxed out again.

Because his world isn't a real world. It's a DnD game. That's the whole point. Have you finished the story? Cause if you haven't-

Milo dies and finds himself in front of his god, who basically acknowledges that the DM and players exist, and that while Milo used to have a player, he doesn't now, and Dumbledore tells Milo to be his own player. He goes back to his world where his god is allowed to give him a second chance, fights a badguy, and gets back to the potterverse. The story acknowledges multiple universes, with gods and characters that can span multiple universes at varying levels of interaction, and that DMs and players exist and are part of/control some of them. Milo's world is all but explicitly, or possibly even explicitly, called out as not making sense and only working because the DM said so. It's not supposed to be a real world, though seeing some more exploration of that could have been interesting. It's not even that important for what happens, aside from excusing why Milo is being allowed one free rez and firmly establishing that Milo is his own character the fanfic story now.

To your point on the lightbulb-- first off, I am assuming a d20 game system (d20 past for example), which coincidentally has NO rules governing tech advancement by players.

On the physics of the lightbulb-- you insist that it MUST be possible because "the progress of technology based on the real world would naturally pick up wherever magic stops, because the rules of most systems presume that physics still works as the real world". But why? For all we know, the world of d20 past the game is set in has no such law E=IR and therefore electricity cannot be reliably used. And before you say that the body runs on electric signals, that could very well not be the case because the DM says so. And because "the rules of d20 past do not support such advancement."

Essentially, in a magical world like 3.X, the magic IS the physics. You seem intent on misunderstanding my point to mean that advancement must mean all spells become cantrips and everyone gets all the feats. Now, apart from the fact that games like Eberron have proven new advancements can be made (in the form of the magewright class-- BTW you realize classes and prestige classes just represent special training right? Like training to become a CI A agent or a biologist, etc.) I am writing from an in-lore approach, which is the only one we can really reliably use at this point*, and in-lore, not only have there been magic civilizations like Azlant or Netheril (you yourself even admitted that advancement should come in FR at least in part because of the Red Wizards) but there have also been demonstrable advancement in magic and tech.

*I am speaking from in-lore because according to you, and objectively even, a GM can shut down any advancement the players want to make. The GM can do anything he wants. If he wants to disallow electricity in his game he can. If he wants to say the world blows up he can. It is futile to put anything up to GM fiat because the GM can always say no, which is why I am writing from an in-lore stance.

Destro2119

2021-02-03, 07:47 AM

Destro2119

2021-02-03, 07:51 AM

Look everyone, I think at this point the main question of the thread has pretty much been answered. The answer is no, because of multiple in lore demonstrations and also because of logical extrapolations of the magic system (I mean, just check out the book Magical Industrial Revolution for inspiration, Again, if you don't want to allow it that is fine, but remember that doing so in a world where magic is essentially a science and can be taught is like disallowing the lightbulb*) Plus, just because something has not been printed in a book does not mean it cannot happen ever. There could be ritual magic that allows for great effects. All sorts of little quality of life spells that aren't useful to adventurers that can advance society. Heck even inventing a self carding self spinning loom using an enchantment that works on a variant of mage hand/unseen servant will boost production immeasurably (unless your GM decides that it is too powerful and therefore takes 50000 gp to make one-- but I would recommend finding a new GM then)

*I use this example because the main argument against magic seems to be "it's not written in the rules or system so it can't happen but we know tech works so it must work." To counter this logic, electricity could exist, but it might be too weak to power things because of a universal law (ie not being written in the rules) and therefore no electric devices are invented. And if you are playing in a game set in say the early 1800s no one would ever know. See, what can be done to one can be done to the other.

*Heck it doesn't even need to be the light bulb. If the basics of particle physics are altered even slightly, almost all of our modern technology could be rendered useless (think transistors and microchips, much less a fission bomb).

EDIT: A final point-- on societal arguments on stasis, "oh all the wizards band together and will never help you" is kind of a poor argument since the logical endpoint of that is, over whatever ridiculous 1000s of years timespan, you end up with like 5 30th level wizards who all lock away all the world's wizardly magic to themselves since logically their only competitors would be other magic users, why would they bother with suppressing tech when they should really be suppressing other spellcasters? Finally, the very existence of arcane schools or colleges in ANY DnD setting is basically evidence that wizards aren't greedy on such a ridiculous scale.

Fizban

2021-02-03, 05:51 PM

Essentially, in a magical world like 3.X, the magic IS the physics.
Unless it's not. That's a writer's choice, and I've never seen any significant evidence that a writer said the laws of physics don't work as normal otherwise. They even need to make a specific note that gunpowder doesn't exist in FR, making it all the more plain that without that note, the expectation is that it would be possible. You can make your worlds function that way, but it is not the default expectation. Meanwhile, magic is a core part of the combat rules which are supposed to be respected, not change on a whim.

BTW you realize classes and prestige classes just represent special training right? Like training to become a CI A agent or a biologist, etc.
I literally just made that point at you, which you just referenced, so yes I think I do.

Plus, just because something has not been printed in a book does not mean it cannot happen ever.
But all your examples are from books, and just because someone else printed it in a book does not mean it's true for all other books.

Look everyone, I think at this point the main question of the thread has pretty much been answered. The answer is no, because of. . .
The answer is no because your question was flawed to begin with- you're basing the answer on assumptions not originally part of the question. If your question had been "Does a world where magic takes the place of physics automatically reach stasis?", then the answer would have been obvious: you've decided magical research should function like real-world science, and so that means it doesn't reach stasis any more than we do in the real-world.

Of course, there are almost certainly limits to what can be done with science, even if we don't think we've hit them yet. The real-world will not have infinitely advancing science: science itself assumes we're in a setting where there are finite rules, though they are not yet being fully utililized.

Whether the DM is aware of the limits of the system, whether they made sure to keep the limits balanced, or whether they just threw some rules together and have no idea some broken combo is around the corner, remains to be seen.

Destro2119

2021-02-03, 06:52 PM

Unless it's not. That's a writer's choice, and I've never seen any significant evidence that a writer said the laws of physics don't work as normal otherwise. They even need to make a specific note that gunpowder doesn't exist in FR, making it all the more plain that without that note, the expectation is that it would be possible. You can make your worlds function that way, but it is not the default expectation. Meanwhile, magic is a core part of the combat rules which are supposed to be respected, not change on a whim.

I literally just made that point at you, which you just referenced, so yes I think I do.

But all your examples are from books, and just because someone else printed it in a book does not mean it's true for all other books.

The answer is no because your question was flawed to begin with- you're basing the answer on assumptions not originally part of the question. If your question had been "Does a world where magic takes the place of physics automatically reach stasis?", then the answer would have been obvious: you've decided magical research should function like real-world science, and so that means it doesn't reach stasis any more than we do in the real-world.

Of course, there are almost certainly limits to what can be done with science, even if we don't think we've hit them yet. The real-world will not have infinitely advancing science: science itself assumes we're in a setting where there are finite rules, though they are not yet being fully utililized.

Whether the DM is aware of the limits of the system, whether they made sure to keep the limits balanced, or whether they just threw some rules together and have no idea some broken combo is around the corner, remains to be seen.

On the topic of my "flawed question" I should have perhaps clarified I was speaking from a 3.5 magic system, which, for lack of a better word, lends itself quite naturally to the sorts of advancements I have put down due to its overall ordered, "scientific" nature (demonstrated in every setting it is used in and exhaustively so in Eberron and Starfinder/later bits of Pathfinder) much like the "magic (motes)" system of Exalted 2e. Perhaps if I was asking if the magic of Westeros could drive advancement in any way this would have been a more complex discussion.

EDIT: BTW there have ABSOLUTELY been writers who say gunpowder et al doesn't work-- Ed Greenwood and FR is one of them, and so is ALL OF SPELLJAMMER.

Nifft

2021-02-03, 07:09 PM

D&D magic does not cause medieval stasis.

The earliest example is probably Greyhawk / Blackmoor, where you have space ships literally dropping out of the sky to kick off modules, and you have lost relics pulled from science fiction. That's not medieval stasis, it's Sword & Sorcery.

Also in Greyhawk you have an order of knights which use handguns. It's not a technologically static setting.

Greyhawk was more like "renaissance tumult".

If you want to regress a setting or lock it into medieval stasis, you could plausibly do that -- there are enough sneaky mind-influencing monsters around to justify a lot of things -- but D&D magic in itself will not justify stasis, medieval or otherwise.

Yahzi Coyote

2021-02-04, 06:40 AM

If so, how does your fantasy world even HAVE steel or metal? Why aren't they using obsidian clubs like the Aztecs if magic is so supplanting? Remember, you still need a LOT of trial and error to make steel.
That's true, but medieval societies mostly got by without steel.

That said, there are societies that only use clubs. But one of humanity's strengths is technology, so they (and goblins) generally achieve early Renaissance tech, both because that's easy enough to transport and preserve and because it's just kind of expected of them. The origin of the phrase "Renaissance man" came from the fact that a particularly clever person in the Renaissance could learn everything there was to know. A single person could be a doctor, physicist, lawyer, philosopher, and soldier, and have mastered everything their society knew about those disciplines.

Once you move beyond that, though, the knowledge base becomes too big to carry in one person's head. I have this thing where successful societies are eventually sacked and destroyed by monsters, and a handful of survivors flee and start over. So setting a limit based on what one person could know makes sense to me.

Destro2119

2021-02-04, 08:38 AM

That's true, but medieval societies mostly got by without steel.

That said, there are societies that only use clubs. But one of humanity's strengths is technology, so they (and goblins) generally achieve early Renaissance tech, both because that's easy enough to transport and preserve and because it's just kind of expected of them. The origin of the phrase "Renaissance man" came from the fact that a particularly clever person in the Renaissance could learn everything there was to know. A single person could be a doctor, physicist, lawyer, philosopher, and soldier, and have mastered everything their society knew about those disciplines.

Once you move beyond that, though, the knowledge base becomes too big to carry in one person's head. I have this thing where successful societies are eventually sacked and destroyed by monsters, and a handful of survivors flee and start over. So setting a limit based on what one person could know makes sense to me.

Medieval societies at least had iron. Plus, I thought we were talking about fantasy. If you want to make a truly medieval society, then all the familiar plot points of "farm boy leaves farm to adventure" would simply not exist-- how are you gonna have the calories? :smallbiggrin: Especially if monsters are so common*.

Plus, any such truly medieval setting would almost by necessity be so because of ingrained societal suppression and concentration of both magic AND tech to the upper classes-- se this video for some ideas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzB6mkDXQ-w. Which, by the way, also disproves the idea of magic causing medieval stasis since if you need to control it at all you indirectly admit it advances the setting.

But anyways, you do you.

*this is my biggest gripe about most DnD settings-- in a place where literally walking down the street may cause you to encounter a band of cockatrices or random undead, how the heck does the setting manage to conform to "pastoral feudal wonderland"?

Fizban

2021-02-04, 06:20 PM

Monsters are as common as the DM says. The only setting I'm aware of that *might* have provided fully populated random encounter lists for every region of the (also provided) map, would be Kingdoms of Kalamar. But I don't think even they went quite that far.

Some adventures say that you have a 50% of being attacked just for setting foot out of town. Others do not. Oftentimes an adventure takes place at a site specifically removed from the main path, where locals fear to tread, and thus the concentration of monsters can be high without necessarily impacting normal people. So, monsters are as common as the DM says.

The DMG does say that some 95-99% of the world are 1st level. Clearly, if there are so many monsters that a world of 1st level beings can't protect their farms and caravans, then the world must be in decline, population centers only held together by old fortifications and powerful individuals with famine an ever-present concern. If the DM wants a world that is not in decline, they should use appropriate encounter tables.

Bugbear

2021-02-04, 07:30 PM

*this is my biggest gripe about most DnD settings-- in a place where literally walking down the street may cause you to encounter a band of cockatrices or random undead, how the heck does the setting manage to conform to "pastoral feudal wonderland"?

Well, there is something here: No D&D has ever really been a Medieval era game, or even a Renaissance era game. And even more so has never been set in a "Europe" like setting.

Even by say 1100 or so such a setting would have:

*No monsters. No wild animals big enough to occasionally kill people living in "the wild'.

*Well...no wild. People, towns and farms where everywhere.

*No Inn or Taverns or really any 'fun' places to go.

*No gold...and sure no gold coins or sliver coins.

*No groups "tribes" of both friends or foes living in the 'wilderness'.

*The Feudal System

*Religion

*Near no literacy

*War, Poverty, Disease and Death.

Yet D&D settings have none of the above. A good kingdom with a town and keep on the borderlands? Yep. Monster filled wild unknown places? Yep. Massive interconnected roads with inns, taverns and trade? Yep. Tribes of elves and orcs and others living in the 'unknown wild lands'? Yep. Freedom of Religion? Yep.

When you look at it, D&D settings are 1700 or so America, not any place in any time in Europe.

Calthropstu

2021-02-04, 09:03 PM

Well, there is something here: No D&D has ever really been a Medieval era game, or even a Renaissance era game. And even more so has never been set in a "Europe" like setting.

Even by say 1100 or so such a setting would have:

*No monsters. No wild animals big enough to occasionally kill people living in "the wild'.

*Well...no wild. People, towns and farms where everywhere.

*No Inn or Taverns or really any 'fun' places to go.

*No gold...and sure no gold coins or sliver coins.

*No groups "tribes" of both friends or foes living in the 'wilderness'.

*The Feudal System

*Religion

*Near no literacy

*War, Poverty, Disease and Death.

Yet D&D settings have none of the above. A good kingdom with a town and keep on the borderlands? Yep. Monster filled wild unknown places? Yep. Massive interconnected roads with inns, taverns and trade? Yep. Tribes of elves and orcs and others living in the 'unknown wild lands'? Yep. Freedom of Religion? Yep.

When you look at it, D&D settings are 1700 or so America, not any place in any time in Europe.

There are plenty of wild places in Europe. Norway has vast areas untouched by humans. So does Romania. All of europe is dotted with large temperate forests where moose, deer, bears and other wild animals roam. As late as the 1900s travel was dangerous in many areas, and wolves are still a thing.

Mountainous regions in particular are to this day quite dangerous off the established roads, and even on modern roads rockfalls, mudslides and avalanches are not unheard of.

In short, this is pretty much false all the way around.

bean illus

2021-02-04, 09:08 PM

PairO'Dice Lost

2021-02-04, 09:41 PM

The DMG does say that some 95-99% of the world are 1st level. Clearly, if there are so many monsters that a world of 1st level beings can't protect their farms and caravans, then the world must be in decline, population centers only held together by old fortifications and powerful individuals with famine an ever-present concern. If the DM wants a world that is not in decline, they should use appropriate encounter tables.

That doesn't necessarily indicate a world in decline, it just indicates a world where the lower-level masses rely on powerful individuals to protect them from monsters and natural disasters, which is basically what we see. In AD&D, many small settlements would be ruled and protected by mid-level adventurers and their above-1st-level henchpersons...

When a fighter attains 9th level (Lord), he or she may opt to establish a freehold. This is done by building some type of castle and clearing the area in a radius of 20 to 50 miles around the stronghold, making it free from all sorts of hostile creatures. Whenever such a freehold is established and cleared, the fighter will:

1. Automatically attract a body of men-at-arms led by an above-average fighter. These men will serve as mercenaries so long as the fighter maintains his or her freehold and pays the men-at-arms; and

2. Collect a monthly revenue of 7 silver pieces for each and every inhabitant of the freehold due to trade, tariffs, and taxes.

[...]

It is possible for a magic-user of 12th or higher level to construct a stronghold and clear the countryside in a 10 or 20 mile radius of all monsters, thus ruling an area much as a noble. If this is accomplished, a revenue of 5 silver pieces per inhabitant per month is generated in the territory ruled.

...and settings like Greyhawk that inherited their demographics and settlement placement and such from AD&D have a similar setup in 3e.

In 3e, the demographics rules indicate that settlements have a number of mid-to-high-level characters (one or two at-least-8th-level druids and rangers in some Hamlets and Thorps, a bunch of at-least-7th-level members of all classes in Small Cities and larger settlements) that can be deployed to deal with monsters and other threats in the area--hence the prevalence of the stereotypical "hire a party of 3rd- to 5th-level PCs to guard a caravan" plot hook, one assumes.

Now, if for whatever reason something happened to all the mid-to-high-level folks keeping the frontiers secure, then yes, civilization would quickly fall into decline...which is also what we see, given that basically all settings are caught in a cycle of recurring apocalypses as several folks have mentioned upthread.

Well, there is something here: No D&D has ever really been a Medieval era game, or even a Renaissance era game. And even more so has never been set in a "Europe" like setting.

Even by say 1100 or so [...]

When you look at it, D&D settings are 1700 or so America, not any place in any time in Europe.

Well, firstly, remember that the Medieval period stretched over a period of around a thousand years, from the 5th to 15th centuries, so "even by 1100" actually puts you past the halfway point of the Medieval era and two radically different settings could both qualify as "Medieval" even if one is a barely-post-Rome barbarian-filled wasteland and the other is a nearly-Renaissance-Italy highly-civilized society.

Secondly, most of your examples are incorrect or incomplete. Even late-Medieval Europe had plenty of "monster-" (or rather wild animal-) filled wilderness, and still did up to and including the modern era as Calthropstu noted; inns and taverns were definitely a thing (http://www.godecookery.com/mtales/mtales13.htm); the coinage of the Byzantine Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_coinage) consisted of gold and silver coins until the mid-1300s, as well as mixed gold-and-silver coins, hence why electrum coins were a big thing in AD&D; there was plenty of freedom of religion until the Crusades kicked off; literacy rates were surprisingly high (https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1exdna/what_level_of_literacy_was_there_in_europe_during) starting in the 9th century, reaching 90% in the richer areas; and so on.

But your overall point that D&D isn't just "Medieval Europe plus magic" is correct...and it was never meant to be, as it's a deliberately anachronistic mix of time periods and inspirations (if the crashed spaceships and magic revolvers in 1e adventures didn't give that away already).

As I've noted before in previous threads, the implicit default setting of D&D is one part post-apocalypse (a sense of longing for an earlier Golden Age, lots of ancient ruins, dungeons full of schizo tech and magic items, etc.) plus one part Western (scattered settlements, distinct "borderlands" vs. "wilderness" division, adventurers as frontier justice, etc.) plus one part late Iron Age myth ("heroes" are deemed such for power rather than morality, anywhere too far outside of civilization is scary and full of monsters, mortals are subject to lots of divine meddling, etc.) plus one part colonial America (vast areas of unknown wilderness to be explored, meetings of civilizations with vastly differing cultures and tech levels, an assumption of loosely-affiliated local governments with distant and/or weak central governments, etc.), mixed with a pseudo-Medieval aesthetic and social roles, and overlaid with pseudo-Renaissance technology and social mores. D&D doesn't really fit into any single genre or time period box, whether that's Medieval fantasy or Western, which is why most attempts to do a more narrow "Medieval Europe, but D&D" or "Ancient Greece, but D&D" and so forth don't really work without significant changes to lots of mechanics and flavor.

Fizban

2021-02-04, 10:58 PM

In 3e, the demographics rules indicate that settlements have a number of mid-to-high-level characters (one or two at-least-8th-level druids and rangers in some Hamlets and Thorps, a bunch of at-least-7th-level members of all classes in Small Cities and larger settlements) that can be deployed to deal with monsters and other threats in the area--hence the prevalence of the stereotypical "hire a party of 3rd- to 5th-level PCs to guard a caravan" plot hook, one assumes.
Indeed, the number of higher level NPCs in a town is well-calibrated to both supply PCs of a certain level, and ensure that no threat the PCs are currently capable of handling can really threaten the town (if for no other reason than the town has at least one of every class, so two full parties). But if the random encounter chart says stepping out of town is so dangerous you can't step out of town, then farmers can't get to their farms (depending on where you define the limits of town and so on). With 90% of the population needed to do the farming, the small number of leveled NPCs can't be everywhere at once.*

Like I said, the vast majority of settings aren't actually detailed enough to level such an accusation against them. I'm just saying that if the expectation is that you can't leave town without being attacked, then a setting which does not reflect that does not make sense, and that's the writer's fault. But most settings don't actually say that. Some adventures, probably. Would be an interesting value to audit.

*I haven't actually been able to find whether the people inside the city walls included all the farmers for the city, or some of them, or next to none of them. I'm pretty sure the answer is "it depends." Based on area of land vs people fed, you can feed all the population of the given DnD city sizes up to like the second biggest from within what I'd call a reasonable distance, as long as the land is good in all directions, but I don't know if an hour or two "commute" is realistic. For a world with more significant threats, probably, in which case you could say they all depend on the walls/small number of elites. But the biggest cities it just gets too inefficient. Shipping in food of course requires other places with surpluses of food, so that only works if there are less dangerous places, in which case the setting obviously isn't saying monsters are so bad everywhere.

As I've noted before in previous threads, the implicit default setting of D&D is one part post-apocalypse (a sense of longing for an earlier Golden Age, lots of ancient ruins, dungeons full of schizo tech and magic items, etc.) plus one part Western (scattered settlements, distinct "borderlands" vs. "wilderness" division, adventurers as frontier justice, etc.) plus one part late Iron Age myth ("heroes" are deemed such for power rather than morality, anywhere too far outside of civilization is scary and full of monsters, mortals are subject to lots of divine meddling, etc.) plus one part colonial America (vast areas of unknown wilderness to be explored, meetings of civilizations with vastly differing cultures and tech levels, an assumption of loosely-affiliated local governments with distant and/or weak central governments, etc.), mixed with a pseudo-Medieval aesthetic and social roles, and overlaid with pseudo-Renaissance technology and social mores.
Good summary *thumbs up*.

Saintheart

2021-02-04, 11:22 PM

When i hear questions like the OP, I'm puzzled.

It's like some of y'all think that the only reason it took 5,000 years to get from the Great Pyramid to the light bulb is because everybody was either lazy, or it was a conspiracy.

The truth is, people really aren't nearly as smart as they think they are.

On reflection (and mea culpa, I dabbled in this thread too) what we had here is a serious case of what debating calls Category Error: where the problem is so badly defined that providing a meaningful answer to it is impossible. Saying 'does magic cause medieval stasis' is pretty much asking whether as some objective rule of reality something entirely fictional causes a common phenomenon observed in fictional works. The answer is entirely unknowable, because there's just no physical law of cause and effect that could ever possibly link the two. There is no set of rules that go out to fantasy writers which say Thou Shalt Cause Medieval Stasis for 1,500 Years, it's just something that crops up a lot. The reasons why it does are myriad, one of which being that it's a more convenient way to put a setting together. But the fact of the medieval stasis just isn't that important -- except to readers with overly refined tastes who failed to notice they're in the Fiction aisle of the bookstore.

But I do think there is a massive misconception - caused in part because of everyone wanting to convey information in the form of a narrative, or gods help us, a story -- that technological progress is linear and exponential. Plainly, it isn't. Technology moves forward only when you have the critical mass of people and ideas together in which leaps forward become more probable. This is a plank of Levitt and Dubner's ideas in Freakonomics which basically says that cities advance technological growth for the very pedestrian reason that they literally draw people into closer confines, thus allowing the exchange of ideas more freely and more quickly. This in turn fosters the right circumstances for advantageous, dare we say serendipitous, connections and contacts to be made, the chance meetings that cause great partnerships and collaborations; Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs didn't meet on a farm road in Iowa, they met in the heavily populated state of California.

But again, this is not 'cause'. It is just higher probability. Our history is full of missed meetings, opportunities, and societal movements that result in "advances" being held back hundreds, even thousands of years. Rome, for example: magnificent at civil engineering, absolute primary schoolers when it came to chemistry because, basically being seen as alchemy at the time, it wasn't viewed as a 'practical' study and thus didn't improve; didn't even invent the stirrup, which had been availlable over in Sarmatia if not China for hundreds of years. This gets down even to basic schools of thought; I think it's Dan Simmons who hypothesised that had Greek thought gone down one particular direction rather than another, we literally might well have been in starships hundreds of years ago with Greek lettering on the sides.

The advance of technology is a lot like creativity: every so often, it leaps forward, and being stupid people, we then invent a story for how it was 'inevitable' that the advance came about, as if university professors lecturing about the principles of aviation resulted in birds flying.

PhoenixPhyre

2021-02-05, 12:09 AM

Batcathat

2021-02-05, 02:22 AM

PairO'Dice Lost

2021-02-05, 04:50 AM

But if the random encounter chart says stepping out of town is so dangerous you can't step out of town, then farmers can't get to their farms (depending on where you define the limits of town and so on).

Ah, when you said "protect their farms and caravans" I thought you were talking, say, repelling an invading orc horde from over yonder, not having a dragon show up the moment you step out of the city gates. Yeah, if the people are in danger when just walking between their cottages and their fields, society is pretty much doomed.

I'm pretty sure that's not what's intended with the encounter tables, though. From the beginning, D&D has informally divided things into three general regions: the safe, urbanized city-/town-type areas; the dangerous, monster-infested dungeon-/underworld-type areas; and the moderately civilized and moderately dangerous borderlands-/wilderness-type areas in between. (Which has a strong mythological resonance, such as with the Norse innangarðr vs. útangarðr distinction: civilization and order within the garðr or walls/enclosure--whence we get Asgard, Midgard, and Jotunheim or Utgard--and wilderness and chaos outside of it.)

One can see this pattern in several places in OD&D and AD&D: the title and organization of the "Underworld and Wilderness Adventures" OD&D booklet, the prototypical "start in town -> travel to adventure area, facing survival and exploration challenges -> adventure in dungeon and/or wilderness, facing monster and trap challenges -> haul loot and injured PCs back to town, facing logistical and supply challenges -> hang around in town, rest up, sell loot, prep for next adventure" dungeoncrawl/hexcrawl loop structure that most early adventures followed (which was referenced in the 1e DMG worldbuilding section when it said "The game is not merely a meaningless dungeon and an urban base around which is plopped the dreaded wilderness."), the way name-level PCs in AD&D were expected to exist on the periphery between civilization and monsters with their frontier settlements, and so on.

Those NPCs who live in the small border towns, isolated elven villages, and similar are never presented as being in constant danger from monsters, just in danger from monsters venturing out from a specific nearby dungeon, a specific infiltrating/mind-controlling/etc. monster in the town, or the like, which cease to be a problem once the PCs clear things out. So while some settings may have tons of monsters being held back by lots of powerful individuals and others may have fewer monsters that largely avoid areas too close to civilization, I think it's clear that the end result in all cases is (or is at least intended to be) that civilization is chugging along more or less comfortably thanks to the constant but worthwhile efforts of its protectors, rather than that civilization is going down the tubes and PC types can only slow but not stop the decline.

*I haven't actually been able to find whether the people inside the city walls included all the farmers for the city, or some of them, or next to none of them. I'm pretty sure the answer is "it depends." Based on area of land vs people fed, you can feed all the population of the given DnD city sizes up to like the second biggest from within what I'd call a reasonable distance, as long as the land is good in all directions, but I don't know if an hour or two "commute" is realistic. For a world with more significant threats, probably, in which case you could say they all depend on the walls/small number of elites. But the biggest cities it just gets too inefficient. Shipping in food of course requires other places with surpluses of food, so that only works if there are less dangerous places, in which case the setting obviously isn't saying monsters are so bad everywhere.

The default 3e assumption seems to be that city population numbers include few to no farmers. According to the DMG:

In general, the number of people living in small towns and larger communities should be about 1/10 to 1/15 the number living in villages, hamlets, thorps, or outside a community at all. [...] People living in cities need food, so if no nearby sources of food (farms, plenty of wild animals, herds of livestock) are present, the community needs efficient transportation sources to ship food in. It needs some other renewable resource as well, such as nearby forests to harvest for timber or minerals to mine, to produce something to exchange for the imported food.

Small, agricultural-based communities are likely to surround a larger city and help to supply the city population with food. In such cases, the larger community is probably a source of defense (a
walled town, a castle, a community fielding a large number of deployable troops) that inhabitants of surrounding communities can seek refuge in or rely on to defend them in times of need.

Sometimes, a number of nearby small communities clump together with no large community at the center. These small villages and hamlets form a support network, and the local lord often boasts a centrally located castle or fortress used as a defensible place to which the villagers can flee when threatened.

So it's going for a fairly Medieval or American West "bunches of small towns near a central keep/fort" setup, without mandating that and thereby ruling out self-sufficient cities. Either way, if the locals can reasonably retreat to a fortified area or expect people to ride out to help them, the monsters can't be all that bad close to the towns.

But to expand in a different direction, another thing that "scientific" progress requires is an empirical mindset. The very idea that the universe is properly subject to quantification, repeated measurements, and systematic exploration is quite modern. And took a very long time to catch on, even once it did.

Indeed. This TED Talk (https://www.ted.com/talks/james_flynn_why_our_iq_levels_are_higher_than_our_ grandparents) gives some good examples of how abstract thinking and systematization has progressed in the population over time and how people in the past viewed some things very differently than we do in the modern era; the relevant part starts at 3:37, but the beginning of the video is good for background as well.

Destro2119

2021-02-05, 06:44 AM

While that is entirely true, in a lot of fantasy settings 5 000 years doesn't get you from a pyramid to a light bulb, it gets you from a pyramid to a slightly different pyramid. In human history change has often been slow and sometimes backwards but it has almost always happened, which isn't the case in some fictional settings.

This is exactly the point of the thread as I saw it. If you go back and read the fanfic excerpt, the character muses on how we have been advancing at what is basically lightspeed to him. And that is WITH "all the missed meetings and missed opportunities" and ""lack of empirical mindset" that could have lead our world to develop even sooner!

My problem isn't that it takes 5000 years to do something, it is why in a society that has access to "Renaissance tumult/schizo tech" levels of population density/tech, and where the demographics chart out that there will be an 14th-16th level wizard/spellcaster and a bunch of lesser ones in every large city/metropolis, and heck, even more experts and other skilled individuals of equal level or higher, going by class demographics, (and from what I gather from these recent posts, way less monsters attacking at random than I would have thought), why the setting doesn't budge even a little.

EDIT: To answer my own question a little, we can see that in most DnD settings where advancement is not present, like FR, it is because the Gods are actively blocking out advancement, In ones where there IS advancement, like Pathfinder, Greyhawk, or Eberron, it is because the gods are not doing such things, and in the case of the former two, because there are gods who actively HELP advancement (Murlynd in Greyhawk, and like 5 deities in Pathfinder at this point)

EDIT 2: I guess at this point the REAL question is "does magic in DnD work in such a way as to actively discourage empirical thought and thus encourage medieval stasis?"

NichG

2021-02-05, 03:10 PM

Nifft

2021-02-05, 04:11 PM

So here's a challenge - create a plausible path towards science and industrialization in D&D that includes magic, but where no one has levels in a magic-using class (all feats and skills are okay). Even better if it works without just being about the >Lv6 characters. That almost sounds like a sales pitch for Eberron.

Destro2119

2021-02-05, 04:20 PM

I think it's less whether D&D magic discourages empirical thought for magic-users, and more whether it encourages esotericism that creates different parallel lines of world knowledge depending on what kind of magic user you are (or if you aren't one at all). Every person uses physics even without being a physicist. In D&D, a person can't use 99% of wizardly magic, divine magic, sorcery, druidic magic, etc without the corresponding class levels. Imagine if chemists, physicists, biologists, mathematicians, economists, and engineers had fundamentally incompatible methodologies such that they could not even use apprentice-level things from each other's fields.

So here's a challenge - create a plausible path towards science and industrialization in D&D that includes magic, but where no one has levels in a magic-using class (all feats and skills are okay). Even better if it works without just being about the >Lv6 characters.

If that's not viable, it suggests to me that rather than suppressing empiricism, D&D magic would draw empirical thinkers into self-contained disciplines that advance within their walls as personal journies, but in exchange prevent that kind of advancement from being integrated into wider society. So basically a permanent system of guilds with a lock on knowledge not even through willful secrecy but because of class levels and the hard opportunity cost of interdisciplinarity (if you are 9th level, it's much harder to learn enough to dabble in cantrips in a parallel line of magic than if you're just starting out).

Well then, we have to take a step back and look at the abstractions DnD makes and how they apply to the greater world. First off, the idea that everyone is 1st level and the only way to level up is by killing monsters for magic xp juice is flat wrong. To use d20 modern as an example, a scientist is a 2nd-3rd level person with feats focused towards skills. In this vein, it is not too hard to see how perhaps the only difference between a wizard and a scientist is that one can use his knowledge of his "science" to directly affect the world rather than having to build a device for it. Thus, people *can* level up and become a wizard or whatever.

I mean, even in IRL you can argue that scientists are like a separate class of peoples who think empirically in their little enclaves-- could you suddenly create a smartphone or do rocket science without extensive training (read: class levels)? In such a case, a smartphone may as well be a wondrous item or something like it. Also, on everyone using physics-- making a pulley =/= making a rocket, even though they are both based on physics.

But to address your main question-- I simply raise up Pathfinder/Starfinder. In the former, there are numerous arcane colleges in the world, including basically a magical robotics school (Clockwork Cathedral) and the Arcanimirium, a school for practical magic (average level is 6 or less). In the latter, the merging of magic and tech has led to such advancements as the UPB, which allow anyone with even rudimentary training to craft anything from a gun to a magic potion (weirdly enough people tend to be higher level in SF, from what I have seen).

Of course, there is also Eberron, if you want an easy solution.*

So all of this goes to show that magic is not a cause of medieval stasis. In fact, if anything it is a cheat code for technological development, and in fact even enhances and merges with tech to form a greater whole. Which is why a world of magitech is very appropriate for a 3.X magic system, or even an Exalted 2e system (of course, if we were talking Westeros, this would be a very different situation).

*Again, I have just shown ways it happened in lore in a game world. If you want an actual rules systems extrapolating this, then we are going to need a different thread.

Fizban

2021-02-05, 04:33 PM

I'm pretty sure that's not what's intended with the encounter tables, though.
I agree.

The default 3e assumption seems to be that city population numbers include few to no farmers. According to the DMG:
Aha! That's what I was looking for! (Must have been looking too focused rather than reading fully). Excellent, combine that with Medieval Demographics Made Easy, and that's enough to actually build a map and fill it out. Or plot all the missing stuff on an existing one.

So here's a challenge - create a plausible path towards science and industrialization in D&D that includes magic, but where no one has levels in a magic-using class (all feats and skills are okay). Even better if it works without just being about the >Lv6 characters.
With the way Knowledge and Spellcraft are handled, it could just be lv6 Experts op'd for Knowledge and Spellcraft. They can't do experiments, but if the skills don't actually care about an existing knowledge pool and just give you the answer, no experimentation needed. Otherwise, they design experiments for the people that kill monsters and level up to do.

Jay R

2021-02-05, 04:37 PM

NichG

2021-02-05, 05:13 PM

Well then, we have to take a step back and look at the abstractions DnD makes and how they apply to the greater world. First off, the idea that everyone is 1st level and the only way to level up is by killing monsters for magic xp juice is flat wrong. To use d20 modern as an example, a scientist is a 2nd-3rd level person with feats focused towards skills. In this vein, it is not too hard to see how perhaps the only difference between a wizard and a scientist is that one can use his knowledge of his "science" to directly affect the world rather than having to build a device for it. Thus, people *can* level up and become a wizard or whatever.

I mean, even in IRL you can argue that scientists are like a separate class of peoples who think empirically in their little enclaves-- could you suddenly create a smartphone or do rocket science without extensive training (read: class levels)? In such a case, a smartphone may as well be a wondrous item or something like it. Also, on everyone using physics-- making a pulley =/= making a rocket, even though they are both based on physics.

I mean, I'm professionally a scientist IRL (a physicist by training, and in practice these days a computer scientist working in machine learning), and the degree to which I can personally turn that knowledge into something real in the world is very limited without a massive support system of infrastructure, engineers, businesses, etc. I know for example how a magnetohydrodynamic engine functions in theory and could write simulations of the governing equations to (generously) over a year maybe make an abstract design that could plausibly work. But I need metalworkers and electricians and engineers and so on if I wanted to actually build a functioning one, and it would take a few years to get a workable design including all of the control circuitry and so on. And then at the end of that, someone (a company) would build a factory to produce the things, and none of us who were involved in the design and prototyping process would ever be needed again by that company in order to make as many engines as they want. So what I gain from that extensive training is not personal power to make things happen, but (at the undergrad level) knowledge to direct power invested in existing infrastructure in potentially productive directions, and (at the grad level) a better instinct for making productive bets about new directions that could have payouts in more knowledge and understanding, and how to turn conceptual results into better decision-making over that power invested in existing infrastructure.

In machine learning, almost all of the real power to deploy things quickly these days comes from the development of frameworks rather than individual brilliance and depth of understanding about ML. Someone with no degree and no understanding of the fundamentals and deep theory who picks up Scikit-Learn or Tensorflow or Pytorch and uses structures built and refined and optimized by thousands of other practitioners is going to do a better job making a hot dog classifier or semantic segmentation system or something like that than someone who is well-versed in the ML and AI literature going back to the 50s, understands what the Vapnik-Chervonenkis Dimension of a model is, etc but who tries to roll their own system from scratch.

So really, at least in both fields I can claim any kind of professional experience with, actually getting stuff done in the world is about integrating the work of others in a highly non-personal way rather than leaning on one's personal expertise to master the entirety of a thing.

I maintain that's the main difference - in the real world most knowledge->power conversion comes flows through the activities of a team or company or society that is much bigger than a single person, whereas magic in D&D lets one person be the entire process that takes knowledge and turns it into power. Because of that, it makes other people unnecessary to that process, and discourages the formation of the complex operations and logistics networks that underlie modern industrialization. Why do all of that annoying stuff when being able to understand a thing directly means being able to control and use it? But if we didn't have to do all that annoying stuff to realize our dreams and ambitions, we wouldn't face the difficult problems of knowledge transfer, operations, prototype-to-market transitioning, etc. If being a physicist were like being a D&D wizard, I certainly would never bother to write papers or apply for grants or teach students or work with industry or anything like that.

D&D's style is much more compatible with a path of advancement via personal ascension to power than a path of advancement via societal progress.

But to address your main question-- I simply raise up Pathfinder/Starfinder. In the former, there are numerous arcane colleges in the world, including basically a magical robotics school (Clockwork Cathedral) and the Arcanimirium, a school for practical magic (average level is 6 or less). In the latter, the merging of magic and tech has led to such advancements as the UPB, which allow anyone with even rudimentary training to craft anything from a gun to a magic potion (weirdly enough people tend to be higher level in SF, from what I have seen).

Of course, there is also Eberron, if you want an easy solution.*

So all of this goes to show that magic is not a cause of medieval stasis. In fact, if anything it is a cheat code for technological development, and in fact even enhances and merges with tech to form a greater whole. Which is why a world of magitech is very appropriate for a 3.X magic system, or even an Exalted 2e system (of course, if we were talking Westeros, this would be a very different situation).

*Again, I have just shown ways it happened in lore in a game world. If you want an actual rules systems extrapolating this, then we are going to need a different thread.

Generally speaking setting lore isn't coherent with the game system it comes from, so I would be leery of taking these to really say anything. I won't maintain that the rules are the physics like some other posts in this thread, but I would say that as a bare minimum you should be able to write new rules that are simultaneously compatible with how D&D handles magic, but also enables magical industrialization to emerge from the interaction of people with those rules (as opposed to simply defining magitech in-place as a one-off). I think this is a lot easier in, say, 4ed or 5ed because of how ritual casting is separate from advancing as a caster class. But in 3ed I think you'll need to basically create a new subsystem from whole cloth that is going to be very hard to integrate with existing D&D magic.

And if you're creating a new subsystem, then that doesn't show that D&D magic is compatible with industrialization, it shows that the new kind of magic described by that new subsystem is compatible with industrialization. Which I think is absolutely possible, but it places certain constraints on how magic should look which I think are different than what you'd find in most tabletop RPGs.

I think probably the first mechanical question to answer is, can someone without spell slots execute a magical effect purely through the use of Spellcraft and Knowledge skills? Is that fully general (can they do all effects produced by spells with sufficient preparation and effort), or is it limited to a subset of the supernatural? With that line of thought, perhaps practical industrialization could begin with refinement of the ritual sacrifice mechanics rather than anything else - they have that 'anyone can do it with the right knowledge' characteristic, and they definitely benefit from scale...

Destro2119

2021-02-05, 06:23 PM

I mean, I'm professionally a scientist IRL (a physicist by training, and in practice these days a computer scientist working in machine learning), and the degree to which I can personally turn that knowledge into something real in the world is very limited without a massive support system of infrastructure, engineers, businesses, etc. I know for example how a magnetohydrodynamic engine functions in theory and could write simulations of the governing equations to (generously) over a year maybe make an abstract design that could plausibly work. But I need metalworkers and electricians and engineers and so on if I wanted to actually build a functioning one, and it would take a few years to get a workable design including all of the control circuitry and so on. And then at the end of that, someone (a company) would build a factory to produce the things, and none of us who were involved in the design and prototyping process would ever be needed again by that company in order to make as many engines as they want. So what I gain from that extensive training is not personal power to make things happen, but (at the undergrad level) knowledge to direct power invested in existing infrastructure in potentially productive directions, and (at the grad level) a better instinct for making productive bets about new directions that could have payouts in more knowledge and understanding, and how to turn conceptual results into better decision-making over that power invested in existing infrastructure.

In machine learning, almost all of the real power to deploy things quickly these days comes from the development of frameworks rather than individual brilliance and depth of understanding about ML. Someone with no degree and no understanding of the fundamentals and deep theory who picks up Scikit-Learn or Tensorflow or Pytorch and uses structures built and refined and optimized by thousands of other practitioners is going to do a better job making a hot dog classifier or semantic segmentation system or something like that than someone who is well-versed in the ML and AI literature going back to the 50s, understands what the Vapnik-Chervonenkis Dimension of a model is, etc but who tries to roll their own system from scratch.

So really, at least in both fields I can claim any kind of professional experience with, actually getting stuff done in the world is about integrating the work of others in a highly non-personal way rather than leaning on one's personal expertise to master the entirety of a thing.

I maintain that's the main difference - in the real world most knowledge->power conversion comes flows through the activities of a team or company or society that is much bigger than a single person, whereas magic in D&D lets one person be the entire process that takes knowledge and turns it into power. Because of that, it makes other people unnecessary to that process, and discourages the formation of the complex operations and logistics networks that underlie modern industrialization. Why do all of that annoying stuff when being able to understand a thing directly means being able to control and use it? But if we didn't have to do all that annoying stuff to realize our dreams and ambitions, we wouldn't face the difficult problems of knowledge transfer, operations, prototype-to-market transitioning, etc. If being a physicist were like being a D&D wizard, I certainly would never bother to write papers or apply for grants or teach students or work with industry or anything like that.

D&D's style is much more compatible with a path of advancement via personal ascension to power than a path of advancement via societal progress.

Generally speaking setting lore isn't coherent with the game system it comes from, so I would be leery of taking these to really say anything. I won't maintain that the rules are the physics like some other posts in this thread, but I would say that as a bare minimum you should be able to write new rules that are simultaneously compatible with how D&D handles magic, but also enables magical industrialization to emerge from the interaction of people with those rules (as opposed to simply defining magitech in-place as a one-off). I think this is a lot easier in, say, 4ed or 5ed because of how ritual casting is separate from advancing as a caster class. But in 3ed I think you'll need to basically create a new subsystem from whole cloth that is going to be very hard to integrate with existing D&D magic.

And if you're creating a new subsystem, then that doesn't show that D&D magic is compatible with industrialization, it shows that the new kind of magic described by that new subsystem is compatible with industrialization. Which I think is absolutely possible, but it places certain constraints on how magic should look which I think are different than what you'd find in most tabletop RPGs.

I think probably the first mechanical question to answer is, can someone without spell slots execute a magical effect purely through the use of Spellcraft and Knowledge skills? Is that fully general (can they do all effects produced by spells with sufficient preparation and effort), or is it limited to a subset of the supernatural? With that line of thought, perhaps practical industrialization could begin with refinement of the ritual sacrifice mechanics rather than anything else - they have that 'anyone can do it with the right knowledge' characteristic, and they definitely benefit from scale...

To the first point-- I once again retaliate with the point that the existence of arcane schools, and heck, as many wizards as there ARE in most settings is proof that such a thing does not happen. I mean, have you seen the nonsense a high level wizard can pull? In your world, we would have like 5-6 level 30+ level wizards who maintain a monopoly over everything, including magic lore, because why risk the competition?

To the second point, I actually once took this point to a game designer (reluctant to link b/c of possible copyright? IDK). He stated simply that the book is a rulebook, not a physics textbook. Just because something is written a certain way in the rules does not mean it is the only way it can be done (and heabvily implied to me that the game is not meant to simulate such things anyways). But if you want a RAW interpretation of industrialization I give this little theorycraft link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/hpljyg/automated_item_production_lines/ and this one too, for more lore reasons: https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/huvl8c/mass_production_of_magictechnomagical_items/

Now pile on a few hundred years of improvement and you'll get what AbadarCorp probably uses to make things. In fact, pile on a few hundred (and maybe less) years of asking god about tech/advancement and normal tech advancement and you'll *get* Starfinder.

Again, I stand by the point that the ordered nature of magic lends itself naturally to advancement, and thus not medieval stasis. Once again, if we were talking about Westeros magic, we would be having a very different conversation, but as it is, the system itself is essentially a science.

Plus, many of the objects that seem to be "incompatible with industrialization" are magic items anyways, which non-mages CAN craft in 3.X (Master Craftsman feat, and due to demographics there are even more of them than wizards)

On the topic of it "not being coherent to the magic system"-- I implore you to please read the Eberron sourcebook, specifically the magic chapter. They do a pretty good job extrapolating RAW to society.

Destro2119

2021-02-05, 06:52 PM

Nice point. Based on this, I offer the following as a world setup.

Magic neither slows nor speeds up technological advance. If your world is currently based more-or-less on the 1200s, then 100 years from now, it will have progressed -- to more-or-less the 1300s.

Your player characters can be part of this advancement, if they like. Maybe they can invent the wheelbarrow, the blast furnace, the paper mill, spectacles, or the treadmill crane.

They may even invent (or popularize) gunpowder, and create a way to put small explosions in battles for slightly more time and money than it takes to hire a wizard and craft a wand of Fireball. This would let them rise to the level of anonymous aide to some noble or crowned head.

But they will not revolutionize the world in one lifetime. And to do the above would take decades of work in libraries and labs, not having adventures, not getting rich, and not getting powerful. [And not knowing if they would even successfully invent something worthwhile. Most researchers don't.]

But please remind them that they won't advance society more then a few decades, and it will take a few decades to do even that.

Really -- put down the test tubes and go slay monsters. It's more fun, more profitable, and more interesting. And it's what the game is for.

Because the game world does not reflect everybody running off to be an adventurer. Adventurers are presumed to be a minority in most DnD worlds.

NichG

2021-02-05, 07:38 PM

To the first point-- I once again retaliate with the point that the existence of arcane schools, and heck, as many wizards as there ARE in most settings is proof that such a thing does not happen. I mean, have you seen the nonsense a high level wizard can pull? In your world, we would have like 5-6 level 30+ level wizards who maintain a monopoly over everything, including magic lore, because why risk the competition?

It's not really about a monopoly, its about what sort of ecosystem those wizards would need in order to practice. A Lv30 wizard doesn't need apprentices - if they take apprentices, its going to be a matter of ego or legacy or something. It'd be just as easy for them to not. So you might get some personal pet projects teaching a next generation or trying to keep a monopoly or things like that, but those would all be acts purely driven by the fact that the particular wizard thinks its an interesting thing to do.

If a wizard wants to know what the surface of the moon is like, they just need to study and progress until they can cast something like Greater Teleportation (and then maybe a panicked moment when they discover they need to care about vacuum and spells with verbal components, if thats how their setting works). But in the end, its a personal project. Giving them 1000 apprentices doesn't really make it easier for them.

If a physicist wants to know what the surface of the moon is like, they get another thousand people together, apply for grants, work with governments incorporating hundreds of millions of people, etc, and create an entire aerospace industry - just so they can even have a chance to build a rocket to send someone (and likely not them) to take a look.

The wizards could choose by their whims to involve other people in their ambitions or not. A physicist who has ambitions that involve the real world has no choice but to involve other people, to organize the labor of millions to express and make real what they can understand in theory.

To the second point, I actually once took this point to a game designer (reluctant to link b/c of possible copyright? IDK). He stated simply that the book is a rulebook, not a physics textbook. Just because something is written a certain way in the rules does not mean it is the only way it can be done (and heabvily implied to me that the game is not meant to simulate such things anyways). But if you want a RAW interpretation of industrialization I give this little theorycraft link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/hpljyg/automated_item_production_lines/ and this one too, for more lore reasons: https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/huvl8c/mass_production_of_magictechnomagical_items/

Now pile on a few hundred years of improvement and you'll get what AbadarCorp probably uses to make things. In fact, pile on a few hundred (and maybe less) years of asking god about tech/advancement and normal tech advancement and you'll *get* Starfinder.

Again, I stand by the point that the ordered nature of magic lends itself naturally to advancement, and thus not medieval stasis. Once again, if we were talking about Westeros magic, we would be having a very different conversation, but as it is, the system itself is essentially a science.

I mean, notice that this is something done by an individual by just creating/colonizing a demiplane, creating their own workforce directly through magic, etc. Why does this person need a society to do these things? Why bother selling goods at all? They can personally skip over the industrial revolution straight to a post-scarcity life for themselves - would their business really be improved by involving the pool of available commoners?

I think you can have both advancement and societal stasis, if that advancement is primarily personal rather than societal. Mages can each improve their spells and their general mastery and none of that matters if, at the end of the day, that improvement comes in a form that doesn't end up being institutionalized by society. If it's a succession of individual mages ascending towards personal godhood, that doesn't resolve the overall level of advancement of the setting and doesn't resolve medieval stasis at all.

Plus, many of the objects that seem to be "incompatible with industrialization" are magic items anyways, which non-mages CAN craft in 3.X (Master Craftsman feat, and due to demographics there are even more of them than wizards)

Master Craftsman looks like a way to go. So what you need next is a logic of how new magic items can be researched, what principles and constraints give rise to what effects are possible or not, and how magic item effects can be scaled. Making single massive-installation-type magic items seems like it would still require a character whose level scales with the size of the installation (since magic items are priced by finding the nearest equivalent spell, and for most parameters your only choice is to scale caster level = skill ranks of the user of Master Craftsman), so that'd be the next thing to resolve.

Destro2119

2021-02-05, 08:35 PM

It's not really about a monopoly, its about what sort of ecosystem those wizards would need in order to practice. A Lv30 wizard doesn't need apprentices - if they take apprentices, its going to be a matter of ego or legacy or something. It'd be just as easy for them to not. So you might get some personal pet projects teaching a next generation or trying to keep a monopoly or things like that, but those would all be acts purely driven by the fact that the particular wizard thinks its an interesting thing to do.

If a wizard wants to know what the surface of the moon is like, they just need to study and progress until they can cast something like Greater Teleportation (and then maybe a panicked moment when they discover they need to care about vacuum and spells with verbal components, if thats how their setting works). But in the end, its a personal project. Giving them 1000 apprentices doesn't really make it easier for them.

If a physicist wants to know what the surface of the moon is like, they get another thousand people together, apply for grants, work with governments incorporating hundreds of millions of people, etc, and create an entire aerospace industry - just so they can even have a chance to build a rocket to send someone (and likely not them) to take a look.

The wizards could choose by their whims to involve other people in their ambitions or not. A physicist who has ambitions that involve the real world has no choice but to involve other people, to organize the labor of millions to express and make real what they can understand in theory.

I mean, notice that this is something done by an individual by just creating/colonizing a demiplane, creating their own workforce directly through magic, etc. Why does this person need a society to do these things? Why bother selling goods at all? They can personally skip over the industrial revolution straight to a post-scarcity life for themselves - would their business really be improved by involving the pool of available commoners?

I think you can have both advancement and societal stasis, if that advancement is primarily personal rather than societal. Mages can each improve their spells and their general mastery and none of that matters if, at the end of the day, that improvement comes in a form that doesn't end up being institutionalized by society. If it's a succession of individual mages ascending towards personal godhood, that doesn't resolve the overall level of advancement of the setting and doesn't resolve medieval stasis at all.

Master Craftsman looks like a way to go. So what you need next is a logic of how new magic items can be researched, what principles and constraints give rise to what effects are possible or not, and how magic item effects can be scaled. Making single massive-installation-type magic items seems like it would still require a character whose level scales with the size of the installation (since magic items are priced by finding the nearest equivalent spell, and for most parameters your only choice is to scale caster level = skill ranks of the user of Master Craftsman), so that'd be the next thing to resolve.

Look man, at this rate I think you would be more interested with the Tippyverse* than any rational DnD setting.

I advise to reread those links particularly the second one. Note where they say that "what is in the book is not everything in the universe." Heck, the big industrial companies of SF might EASILY have advanced versions of the machines in that first link to make things. And this is with minimal extrapolation for a setting.

For your specific point about master craftsman-- get a bunch of them together to make Dedicated Wrights and have them all use aid another on each other too.

I want you to understand that I have brought the same ideas you have to a myriad of boards and threads, and the overall response is that "the rulebook is not the physics of the world" and "stop trying to force the game to do something it's not meant to do." I like debate over "wizardly motivations" as much as the next guy, but in the end I don't think all wizards are as blindly selfish as you make them out to be-- gaining xp needs people to study with, if nothing more, and how many wizards are former adventurers anyways?

*BTW I would totally buy a book that is basically Tippyverse in the future after the wizards decide to expand their dominions off the planet.

NichG

2021-02-05, 10:28 PM

Look man, at this rate I think you would be more interested with the Tippyverse* than any rational DnD setting.

I advise to reread those links particularly the second one. Note where they say that "what is in the book is not everything in the universe." Heck, the big industrial companies of SF might EASILY have advanced versions of the machines in that first link to make things. And this is with minimal extrapolation for a setting.

This has nothing to do with my arguments though. I'm not saying 'RAW doesn't let you do this', I'm saying that if we say we're talking about D&D magic in particular, then in order for that object to be a meaningful thing to discuss it has to come from somewhere and be extended in ways that are coherent with that source and where it's extended. Otherwise we're talking about 'could we get an industrial revolution using some other magic system that is almost, but not quite entirely unlike D&D magic' - to which the answer I've given is 'yes, sure, here are the properties it needs to have'.

My invitation is that you try to extend D&D's rules for magic in such a way as would model a society undergoing a transition from D&D's medievalism to an industrial society, in a way that you would actually have playable rules at every point along the way which would capture what a person in those societies could be capable of. That's not sticking with RAW, it's extending RAW to see if there's going to be a conflict between how D&D magic tries to feel and where it needs to go to feel like industrial technology.

I think that in order to do that, you're going to have to throw out or massively de-emphasize the connection between character class, level, and the availability of particular magical effects, because those things encourage stories about personally powerful heroes single-handedly writing their will upon the world, rather than stories about how a million people acting in subtly different ways creates a force for change so inexorable that powerful individuals are left either confused and isolated within the bastions of the past or have to ride the tiger and constantly push and embrace that shift in order to keep their heads above water.

Breaking medieval stasis isn't making a version of magic missile that has a higher range for the same spell level, or creating a walled city in which altruistic mage-lords and divine shepherds provide utopian living conditions for a specific group of 10000 people. It's really about how the systems of the world shift in such a way that the structures that make sense for how people organize themselves change, through technology creating opportunity in the restructuring of society and that restructuring in turn changing where opportunities exist for the people who make up that society.

Destro2119

2021-02-06, 07:39 PM

This has nothing to do with my arguments though. I'm not saying 'RAW doesn't let you do this', I'm saying that if we say we're talking about D&D magic in particular, then in order for that object to be a meaningful thing to discuss it has to come from somewhere and be extended in ways that are coherent with that source and where it's extended. Otherwise we're talking about 'could we get an industrial revolution using some other magic system that is almost, but not quite entirely unlike D&D magic' - to which the answer I've given is 'yes, sure, here are the properties it needs to have'.

My invitation is that you try to extend D&D's rules for magic in such a way as would model a society undergoing a transition from D&D's medievalism to an industrial society, in a way that you would actually have playable rules at every point along the way which would capture what a person in those societies could be capable of. That's not sticking with RAW, it's extending RAW to see if there's going to be a conflict between how D&D magic tries to feel and where it needs to go to feel like industrial technology.

I think that in order to do that, you're going to have to throw out or massively de-emphasize the connection between character class, level, and the availability of particular magical effects, because those things encourage stories about personally powerful heroes single-handedly writing their will upon the world, rather than stories about how a million people acting in subtly different ways creates a force for change so inexorable that powerful individuals are left either confused and isolated within the bastions of the past or have to ride the tiger and constantly push and embrace that shift in order to keep their heads above water.

Breaking medieval stasis isn't making a version of magic missile that has a higher range for the same spell level, or creating a walled city in which altruistic mage-lords and divine shepherds provide utopian living conditions for a specific group of 10000 people. It's really about how the systems of the world shift in such a way that the structures that make sense for how people organize themselves change, through technology creating opportunity in the restructuring of society and that restructuring in turn changing where opportunities exist for the people who make up that society.

"My invitation is that you try to extend D&D's rules for magic in such a way as would model a society undergoing a transition from D&D's medievalism to an industrial society, in a way that you would actually have playable rules at every point along the way which would capture what a person in those societies could be capable of. That's not sticking with RAW, it's extending RAW to see if there's going to be a conflict between how D&D magic tries to feel and where it needs to go to feel like industrial technology."

Eberron and the magewright and artificer classes. There, done. (Seriously if you doubt this, please just read the Eberron Campaign Setting or the book Magic of Eberron). Seriously though, the writers of that game setting went to great lengths to link every advancement in the world to the RAW of 3.5, and everything it has becomes easier in 3.X and the inclusion of Master Craftsman and the PF crafting rules.

"you're going to have to throw out or massively de-emphasize the connection between character class, level, and the availability of particular magical effects,"

I think you would like a different game then, because I will tell you straight out that neither PF 2e or heck, even SF has gotten any better at modeling this (you HAVE to be at the level of the item in order to craft it, even if it is something like mundane armor, and in PF2e* you need a feat to even try to craft alchemical objects. There is no in-game modeling for having hundreds of line workers work on disparate mass-produced parts using that fit into one set of armor because you are playing STARFINDER/PATHFINDER, not Offices and Occupations) Once again, I raise the point that feats and character advancement through xp is HOW games like DnD/3.X/SF portray things like learning something new or intensive training.

Look, I think that the question of "does magic inherently cause medieval stasis" has been solved and the answer is a resounding no. Wizards draw away to do their own things? That's fine, unless they se out to systematically oppress tech (something I don't think you are assuming) the experts and sages that outnumber them ten to one (and that can ALSO potentially craft magic) fill in the gap (unless you insist that they all must become wizards, at which point the world changes unrecognizably in a span of decades due to the sheer amount of wizards doing wizard things) . Then inevitably you get Eberron but (even) more magitech because of the inevitable blending between the two.

PS: I notice a lot of your arguments seem to be predicated upon the idea of "scientists need helpers, wizards don't." I mean, I hope you don't think that when a wizard is crafting something he is literally throwing gp onto a table and muttering over it and voila it becomes an item. I can point out right now that in PF downtime rules you can have workers mass-make Magic goods to aid in crafting. If your main point is that those line workers can't help in crafting, then enter Master Craftsman, or then you now have a problem that needs solving-- your wizard wants to have everybody help him to create items, but they don't have the expertise! How about he researches a component that allows everyone to craft... then two adventures later, he has created UPBs! Hooray! (See, "personally powerful heroes single-handedly writing their will upon the world" works this way too :smallsmile:)

*But PF2e ALSO has the Inventor class, which is literally, well, an inventor. I mean, due to game balance it boils down to basically a spellcaster but tech focused but it represents how the world of PF is definitively moving forwards.

Huzuhbazah

2021-02-06, 08:34 PM

Does magic cause medieval stasis? It can, but not necessarily.

The real question is, does magic cause prehistoric stasis? :smallbiggrin:

Mechalich

2021-02-06, 10:06 PM

Does magic cause medieval stasis? It can, but not necessarily.

The real question is, does magic cause prehistoric stasis? :smallbiggrin:

I'd actually broaden that question to 'does magic cause tech level stasis from the point it develops?'

It's quite possible to postulate technological minimums that must be overcome in order for magic to develop - writing, position-less numerals, certain mathematical equations, etc. - in order to allow technology to gear up to a preferred technological level before triggering subsequent stasis.

Admittedly D&D magic, in at least some forms (most forms of divine magic, sorcery, and several others), has no technological pre-requisites at all. So yeah, prehistoric stasis is certainly possible. In particular, druidic magic allows a hunter-gatherer band to live healthy and fulfilling lives more or less in perpetuity without having to bother with large societies at all.

Gruftzwerg

2021-02-06, 11:20 PM

I don't think that magic itself causes stasis. As I said earlier, if you don't assume stasis, you'll end up in a high magically technologized tippyverse. Imagine just the amount of defensive magic needed for each settlement to prevent magical thiefs and mind manipulation spells for the higher ups.

When i hear questions like the OP, I'm puzzled.

It's like some of y'all think that the only reason it took 5,000 years to get from the Great Pyramid to the light bulb is because everybody was either lazy, or it was a conspiracy.

The truth is, people really aren't nearly as smart as they think they are.

I guess you never heard of the Baghdad battery or the Baghdad light bulb?^^

NichG

2021-02-06, 11:24 PM

I think you would like a different game then, because I will tell you straight out that neither PF 2e or heck, even SF has gotten any better at modeling this (you HAVE to be at the level of the item in order to craft it, even if it is something like mundane armor, and in PF2e* you need a feat to even try to craft alchemical objects. There is no in-game modeling for having hundreds of line workers work on disparate mass-produced parts using that fit into one set of armor because you are playing STARFINDER/PATHFINDER, not Offices and Occupations) Once again, I raise the point that feats and character advancement through xp is HOW games like DnD/3.X/SF portray things like learning something new or intensive training.

I mean, this is why I'm arguing that D&D magic in particular doesn't lend itself towards the kind of modernizing transition. I'm not saying I don't like class levels, I'm saying that class levels and advancement through diminishing flexibility and gain of personal power lead to a very different kind of society than what happened in the real world. So to me the natural advancement of a D&D world just isn't going to be to 'modern Earth but with magic/magitech', it'll be to its own thing that is structured in fundamentally different ways, most notably a much stronger version of 'the rich get richer' when it comes to agency and personal power. Having long lines of factory workers, company miners, etc seems like an anachronism when you can just make golems to do the menial labor, so trying to force that post-scarcity society into the mold of an industrial revolution actually requires a bit of willful cruelty - making people work at something because you have the power to force them to, not because it's necessary or efficient or even helpful.

PS: I notice a lot of your arguments seem to be predicated upon the idea of "scientists need helpers, wizards don't." I mean, I hope you don't think that when a wizard is crafting something he is literally throwing gp onto a table and muttering over it and voila it becomes an item. I can point out right now that in PF downtime rules you can have workers mass-make Magic goods to aid in crafting. If your main point is that those line workers can't help in crafting, then enter Master Craftsman, or then you now have a problem that needs solving-- your wizard wants to have everybody help him to create items, but they don't have the expertise! How about he researches a component that allows everyone to craft... then two adventures later, he has created UPBs! Hooray! (See, "personally powerful heroes single-handedly writing their will upon the world" works this way too :smallsmile:)

I did agree earlier that Master Craftsman heads in the right direction for industrialization.

Nifft

2021-02-06, 11:54 PM

PairO'Dice Lost

2021-02-07, 12:28 AM

I mean, even in IRL you can argue that scientists are like a separate class of peoples who think empirically in their little enclaves

To the first point-- I once again retaliate with the point that the existence of arcane schools, and heck, as many wizards as there ARE in most settings is proof that such a thing does not happen. I mean, have you seen the nonsense a high level wizard can pull? In your world, we would have like 5-6 level 30+ level wizards who maintain a monopoly over everything, including magic lore, because why risk the competition?

I like debate over "wizardly motivations" as much as the next guy, but in the end I don't think all wizards are as blindly selfish as you make them out to be-- gaining xp needs people to study with, if nothing more,

Look, I think that the question of "does magic inherently cause medieval stasis" has been solved and the answer is a resounding no. Wizards draw away to do their own things? That's fine, unless they se out to systematically oppress tech (something I don't think you are assuming) the experts and sages that outnumber them ten to one (and that can ALSO potentially craft magic) fill in the gap

From these quotes, it's clear that you're assuming that smart people in D&D worlds are basically the same as smart people in the real world, with all of the same cultural associations and biases around the advancement of knowledge and pursuit of progress and all that. But just like how people in the modern world have a very different relationship with abstract thinking than people in the past did thanks to changing and improving education systems, people in the Medieval-through-Renaissance-like societies of D&D worlds would have a very different relationship to the sharing of knowledge than we do.

If some random guy or gal in Toril discovered a way to make an advanced steam engine, resilient enough to use for creating self-propelled vehicles and simple enough to be produced and maintained by teams of commoners, would they immediately pull a Henry Ford or an Elon Musk and start systematizing the process, breaking down the steps into manageable chunks, teaching lots of workers about it, and so forth so that their whole town/city/nation could start bootstrapping mass-produced steamcars and steamtanks and so forth?

Hells no! From early Medieval England to late Renaissance Florence, the guild framework of secret knowledge and monopolistic control is almost diametrically opposed to modern ideas on open-source knowledge and distributed supply chains and suchlike. That lucky genius would most likely assemble a small number of trusted compatriots, teach them the minimum necessary for them to help out, form the small and secretive Honorable Guild and Fraternal Order of Steam-Engine Smiths, charge an arm and a leg for the handful of artisanal steam engines they'd be able to produce every few months, only take on the most trustworthy apprentices, do everything in their power to prevent people from finding out their secrets--possibly to the point of never even writing anything down so the secret of steam engine construction dies with the guildmasters!--and punish anyone who tried to do anything remotely similar, because that's how elite craftsmen in those eras worked and thought.

So yes, Torillian scientists and engineers secluding themselves in literal enclaves (rather than the metaphorical ones of academia), never sharing anything with potential competitors, being more selfishly concerned with personal enrichment than the betterment of society, and suppressing any attempts at competition is totally a thing that could and would happen--and it's likely that they'd be even more protectionist than their historical real-world equivalents because they can point to magic-users and say "Hey, those guys aren't sharing their knowledge and techniques with anyone else, why should we?" so there would be little legal or societal pressure to disband the guild system as eventually happened in history.

PS: I notice a lot of your arguments seem to be predicated upon the idea of "scientists need helpers, wizards don't." I mean, I hope you don't think that when a wizard is crafting something he is literally throwing gp onto a table and muttering over it and voila it becomes an item. I can point out right now that in PF downtime rules you can have workers mass-make Magic goods to aid in crafting. If your main point is that those line workers can't help in crafting, then enter Master Craftsman, or then you now have a problem that needs solving-- your wizard wants to have everybody help him to create items, but they don't have the expertise! How about he researches a component that allows everyone to craft... then two adventures later, he has created UPBs! Hooray!

The difference between engineering and magic is that both can benefit from supply lines and bunches of helpers and such, but that engineers need that kind of support structure while magic-users don't.

Let's say you want to make a very accurate time-keeping item, and you can either ask an engineer for a fancy-dancy pocketwatch or a wizard for a magic wristband that speaks the current time on command. The engineer needs specialized knowledge of clockwork mechanisms that's very different from (and not transferable to or from) knowledge of woodworking or blacksmithing or whatever; any wizard can combine a bunch of already-known spells or research new ones to fit, unless the necessary spells are among his prohibited schools, because there are no hard boundaries between schools. The engineer needs specific and finely-machined tools to work with clockwork, for which he requires a supporting base of and for fellow engineers; the wizard can choose to make the bracelet out of leather or metal or whatever else he's comfortable working with without needing to work with the components all that much. The engineer needs to spend lots of time refining the physical parts of the pocketwatch, which he may require the help of several apprentices to accomplish; the wizard can use raw gems and uncured leather and such, or if he does want a fancy-looking item he can use fabricate to do it quickly by himself (either personally, if he's of sufficiently-high level, or via spell trigger items that a non-wizard couldn't use). The engineer relies on a trade network to obtain rare materials from faraway locales; the wizard can teleport or plane shift (again, either on his own or via items) to those places to pick up the needed materials. And so on and so forth.

Now, based on the setting you're working with there may certainly be constraints that magic-users are subject to that engineers aren't, like in Eberron where lots of magic items specifically require dragonshards, but even then these are usually constraints that a magic-user can address individually or in small groups. A single wizard who really really needs a ten-pound Khyber dragonshard in order to make a fancy new prototype flying boat can get together with a handful of buddies, head down into Khyber, grab a Khyber 'shard out of the cave wall while his buddies fight off all the demons, and head back to his workshop to work on his boat. A single engineer who really really needs a kilogram of chromium in order to create a specific alloy he needs can't exactly grab a handful of friends and open a chromium mine to extract, refine, collect, purify, and deliver the chromium all on their lonesome.

So while engineering universities and magic schools both have similar benefits of scale, cooperation, and resource sharing, wizards have a strong bootstrapping advantage at smaller scales and with less time and money to work with. And when roaming monsters and Banite-ruled cities and similar make reliable supply lines, extensive trade, and other factors that engineers need but wizards can do without much harder to come by, it's no wonder that magic would have the advantage at the civic or societal scale.

NichG

2021-02-07, 01:02 AM

Just as an aside, it seems like powerful people in D&D are not really less flexible in trade for power.

A level 20 Wizard has a much higher BAB than a level 1 Warrior, and probably a lot of skill checks higher than a level 1 Rogue. (That's before items & spell effects, of course.)

A Lv9 Warrior will have a harder time learning to cast Light than a Lv1 Commoner though. And a Lv13 Wizard would have a harder time understanding the basics of how to actually execute Clerical magic (or Druidic, or Truenaming, or ...) than that Lv1 Commoner with no basis in magic. Opportunity costs are quadratic or worse in D&D (quadratic from the XP cost, worse because in order to gain XP you explicitly need something that poses a credible challenge to you as a gestalt character). Opportunity costs in the real world are linear or sub-linear (sub-linear since if e.g. I understand Physics, I'll at least have some of the mathematical basis to learn Computer Science or Statistics or some of the parts of chemistry like PChem that chemists tend to find challenging when they're first learning).

The other important thing is the degree to which complicated and high-skill things can be automated so that they don't require high skill to actually do. With an assembly line, you've got the equivalent of Lv1 characters using a template perhaps created by a Lv5 character that lets the Lv1 characters basically accomplish things that without that formalization would require them to understand everything the Lv5 guy does.

An industrial revolution version of D&D magic would have something like: to cast a spell you need to make a Spellcraft check and you get (big) bonuses from class levels in casting classes. If you have a properly set up work area, you can get similar bonuses to that Spellcraft check by taking longer, by using the tools provided, etc. Perhaps someone can prepare a set of instructions for casting the spell in a very controlled context which lowers the DC significantly. Perhaps the spell can be broken down into parts such that a number of lower-level people can each contribute part of the casting in exchange for the DC being lower. So a citizen of the modernized D&D world with no caster levels might use the high degree of tooling provided by their society to use Fabricate or similar effects in the home as if they're nothing (but with a total lack of comprehension about how and why the spell actually works), and would look back at medieval wizards who actually had to do the spell calculations on the fly in their mind in real-time and shake their head wondering why people actually found it so hard in the past. Much like someone relatively unskilled could just go and cook something using tools like a food processor, high-quality knives, non-stick pans, precisely controllable heat sources, refrigerated ingredients and the like, and make something beyond what a medieval professional cook might imagine possible.

Nifft

2021-02-07, 02:31 AM

A Lv9 Warrior will have a harder time learning to cast Light than a Lv1 Commoner though. And a Lv13 Wizard would have a harder time understanding the basics of how to actually execute Clerical magic (or Druidic, or Truenaming, or ...) than that Lv1 Commoner with no basis in magic. Opportunity costs are quadratic or worse in D&D (quadratic from the XP cost, worse because in order to gain XP you explicitly need something that poses a credible challenge to you as a gestalt character). Opportunity costs in the real world are linear or sub-linear (sub-linear since if e.g. I understand Physics, I'll at least have some of the mathematical basis to learn Computer Science or Statistics or some of the parts of chemistry like PChem that chemists tend to find challenging when they're first learning).

Okay, it seems like you're talking about what I'd call potential, and not what I'd consider versatility.

IMHO "versatility" would refer to what you can do right now, not what you are capable of learning in the future.

Fizban

2021-02-07, 03:07 AM

An industrial revolution version of D&D magic would have something like: to cast a spell you need to make a Spellcraft check and you get (big) bonuses from class levels in casting classes. If you have a properly set up work area, you can get similar bonuses to that Spellcraft check by taking longer, by using the tools provided, etc. Perhaps someone can prepare a set of instructions for casting the spell in a very controlled context which lowers the DC significantly. Perhaps the spell can be broken down into parts such that a number of lower-level people can each contribute part of the casting in exchange for the DC being lower. So a citizen of the modernized D&D world with no caster levels might use the high degree of tooling provided by their society to use Fabricate or similar effects in the home as if they're nothing (but with a total lack of comprehension about how and why the spell actually works), and would look back at medieval wizards who actually had to do the spell calculations on the fly in their mind in real-time and shake their head wondering why people actually found it so hard in the past. Much like someone relatively unskilled could just go and cook something using tools like a food processor, high-quality knives, non-stick pans, precisely controllable heat sources, refrigerated ingredients and the like, and make something beyond what a medieval professional cook might imagine possible.
The Incantation system could be worked into something like this: "spells" which anyone can cast with the right skill checks which can themselves be boosted with items, which are supposed to be narrower and more specific for the privelage, and have an array of mitigating factors. Especially if you remove the expectation of 6th level minimum, allow faster casting factors, and most importantly, add a mechanic for actually creating them.

'Cause the given mechanics assume you're discovering things that already exist, and that the DM who wants Incantations to be a thing will have created them already, choosing what effects they actually want to be available to anyone with the skill check.

Destro2119

2021-02-07, 11:55 AM

I mean, this is why I'm arguing that D&D magic in particular doesn't lend itself towards the kind of modernizing transition. I'm not saying I don't like class levels, I'm saying that class levels and advancement through diminishing flexibility and gain of personal power lead to a very different kind of society than what happened in the real world. So to me the natural advancement of a D&D world just isn't going to be to 'modern Earth but with magic/magitech', it'll be to its own thing that is structured in fundamentally different ways, most notably a much stronger version of 'the rich get richer' when it comes to agency and personal power. Having long lines of factory workers, company miners, etc seems like an anachronism when you can just make golems to do the menial labor, so trying to force that post-scarcity society into the mold of an industrial revolution actually requires a bit of willful cruelty - making people work at something because you have the power to force them to, not because it's necessary or efficient or even helpful.

I did agree earlier that Master Craftsman heads in the right direction for industrialization.

I mean, to extrapolate from your requirements for industrialization/advancement, I think we can safely say that NO RPG, from d20 Modern to Traveller to Exalted to GURPS, is really meant for anything you want.

Heck, even Exalted 2e, one of the most magitech focused games, that even has an entire campaign setting geared around magitech (First Age), has anything more mechanically solid than the skill Craft Magitech to its name. It doesn't stat out how many line workers you need to make a hyperion key, it doesn't stat out the exact frequencies/parts/alchemical reactions and the hundreds of components that go into a warstrider, a robot, or a skyship. All that literally happens in the background. Likewise, GURPS has worlds with different tech levels, but **** me if there are hard-set GURPS* rules for bootstrapping a TL 1 civ to TL 8 beyond whatever you have in terms of skills.

Once again, the problem you have with DnD is 1000% not exclusive to DnD. It is a problem for RPGs as a whole (ie the whole abstractions of levels/skill dots/xp/whatever). But at least as I have demonstrated (and you have conceded) the logical extrapolations of the magic system in games like DnD or Exalted allow for potential industrialization (as demonstrated multiple times in the lore, the potential development of UPBs as I have stated, and with Eberron even tying it to RAW, and the whole incantations system). Unlike the magic system of Westeros, where magic has no real practical use (other than a MacGuffin) due to it being too personalized and rare.

Essentially, if you want to start an industrial revolution in a DnD world (or ANY rpg world), play to the system's strengths and get ready for an adventure.

*Note that GURPS actually HAS a magitech civilization in the form of GURPS Technomancer. Also note that they had to make up a ton of new stuff in that book to allow for the industrialization of magic, as the baseline system didn't allow it.

Destro2119

2021-02-07, 12:08 PM

From these quotes, it's clear that you're assuming that smart people in D&D worlds are basically the same as smart people in the real world, with all of the same cultural associations and biases around the advancement of knowledge and pursuit of progress and all that. But just like how people in the modern world have a very different relationship with abstract thinking than people in the past did thanks to changing and improving education systems, people in the Medieval-through-Renaissance-like societies of D&D worlds would have a very different relationship to the sharing of knowledge than we do.

If some random guy or gal in Toril discovered a way to make an advanced steam engine, resilient enough to use for creating self-propelled vehicles and simple enough to be produced and maintained by teams of commoners, would they immediately pull a Henry Ford or an Elon Musk and start systematizing the process, breaking down the steps into manageable chunks, teaching lots of workers about it, and so forth so that their whole town/city/nation could start bootstrapping mass-produced steamcars and steamtanks and so forth?

Hells no! From early Medieval England to late Renaissance Florence, the guild framework of secret knowledge and monopolistic control is almost diametrically opposed to modern ideas on open-source knowledge and distributed supply chains and suchlike. That lucky genius would most likely assemble a small number of trusted compatriots, teach them the minimum necessary for them to help out, form the small and secretive Honorable Guild and Fraternal Order of Steam-Engine Smiths, charge an arm and a leg for the handful of artisanal steam engines they'd be able to produce every few months, only take on the most trustworthy apprentices, do everything in their power to prevent people from finding out their secrets--possibly to the point of never even writing anything down so the secret of steam engine construction dies with the guildmasters!--and punish anyone who tried to do anything remotely similar, because that's how elite craftsmen in those eras worked and thought.

So yes, Torillian scientists and engineers secluding themselves in literal enclaves (rather than the metaphorical ones of academia), never sharing anything with potential competitors, being more selfishly concerned with personal enrichment than the betterment of society, and suppressing any attempts at competition is totally a thing that could and would happen--and it's likely that they'd be even more protectionist than their historical real-world equivalents because they can point to magic-users and say "Hey, those guys aren't sharing their knowledge and techniques with anyone else, why should we?" so there would be little legal or societal pressure to disband the guild system as eventually happened in history.

The difference between engineering and magic is that both can benefit from supply lines and bunches of helpers and such, but that engineers need that kind of support structure while magic-users don't.

Let's say you want to make a very accurate time-keeping item, and you can either ask an engineer for a fancy-dancy pocketwatch or a wizard for a magic wristband that speaks the current time on command. The engineer needs specialized knowledge of clockwork mechanisms that's very different from (and not transferable to or from) knowledge of woodworking or blacksmithing or whatever; any wizard can combine a bunch of already-known spells or research new ones to fit, unless the necessary spells are among his prohibited schools, because there are no hard boundaries between schools. The engineer needs specific and finely-machined tools to work with clockwork, for which he requires a supporting base of and for fellow engineers; the wizard can choose to make the bracelet out of leather or metal or whatever else he's comfortable working with without needing to work with the components all that much. The engineer needs to spend lots of time refining the physical parts of the pocketwatch, which he may require the help of several apprentices to accomplish; the wizard can use raw gems and uncured leather and such, or if he does want a fancy-looking item he can use fabricate to do it quickly by himself (either personally, if he's of sufficiently-high level, or via spell trigger items that a non-wizard couldn't use). The engineer relies on a trade network to obtain rare materials from faraway locales; the wizard can teleport or plane shift (again, either on his own or via items) to those places to pick up the needed materials. And so on and so forth.

Now, based on the setting you're working with there may certainly be constraints that magic-users are subject to that engineers aren't, like in Eberron where lots of magic items specifically require dragonshards, but even then these are usually constraints that a magic-user can address individually or in small groups. A single wizard who really really needs a ten-pound Khyber dragonshard in order to make a fancy new prototype flying boat can get together with a handful of buddies, head down into Khyber, grab a Khyber 'shard out of the cave wall while his buddies fight off all the demons, and head back to his workshop to work on his boat. A single engineer who really really needs a kilogram of chromium in order to create a specific alloy he needs can't exactly grab a handful of friends and open a chromium mine to extract, refine, collect, purify, and deliver the chromium all on their lonesome.

So while engineering universities and magic schools both have similar benefits of scale, cooperation, and resource sharing, wizards have a strong bootstrapping advantage at smaller scales and with less time and money to work with. And when roaming monsters and Banite-ruled cities and similar make reliable supply lines, extensive trade, and other factors that engineers need but wizards can do without much harder to come by, it's no wonder that magic would have the advantage at the civic or societal scale.

To the first point: first off it could never happen since Gond blocks all tech more advanced than smokepowder*. Secondly, the points you raise in your second point about the inherent complexity of the support system essentially precludes your assertion that they can keep it 100% secret anyway. Thirdly, what is to keep the king from nationalizing it? Also, if things are that secretive back then IRL, then how did we eventually advance to where we are? Once again, paraphrasing another poster, in 5000 years human advancement has gone back, sometimes stagnated, sometimes slowed, but it has always happened. Why is science so inherently different in a fantasy world that it won't happen?

To the second point: I think you are reading far, FAR too much into system abstractions. By your logic, a wizard can craft a magical death star laser if he were locked up inside the royal treasury. The system abstracts all the little magic processes and items that the wizard needs to make a magic item in the same way it abstracts the refining and heating of steel when you roll to craft a sword. As I have already mentioned, PF actually even HAS Magic goods in the downtime system to represent the magic supplies a wizard needs-- incidentally, this is not just piles of gold and gems and uncured leather. For the pocketwatch example, all of it is abstracted by Craft: Watchmaking or Craft: Clockwork, and by your GM deciding whether or not you have the stuff (At least, I hope your GM doesn't say that the wizard can craft such a thing by upending the contents of his coin pouch and getting to work.)

*Seriously, FR is a TERRIBLE example for industrialization. Beyond this, the entire world is basically one planet sized chess game to the ridiculous amounts of super-casters that live there. Paranoia like you say isn't common in Faerun because of it being a "fantasy world," it is common because it is basically a planetary testing ground for unknowably intelligent beings who command power greater than any force in the galaxy (not counting the actual eldritch abominations). Also the Harpers (minions of Elminster) would have killed any such order in the first week.

Nifft

2021-02-07, 01:09 PM

*Seriously, FR is a TERRIBLE example for industrialization. Beyond this, the entire world is basically one planet sized chess game to the ridiculous amounts of super-casters that live there. Paranoia like you say isn't common in Faerun because of it being a "fantasy world," it is common because it is basically a planetary testing ground for unknowably intelligent beings who command power greater than any force in the galaxy (not counting the actual eldritch abominations). Also the Harpers (minions of Elminster) would have killed any such order in the first week.

Yeah I think a setting which is effectively a planet-sized plot-railroad should be excluded from any discussions about the natural consequences of ... anything, really.

There might be no natural consequences on Faerun.

Jay R

2021-02-07, 01:38 PM

Destro2119

2021-02-07, 02:05 PM

Having thought about the underlying question, I have concluded that there is no way to answer it.

We, as a science-based society, answer such questions by the scientific method. But we cannot run the experiment. We can't start the world over with magic to determine if it would develop at a similar rate.

So there cannot be a definitive answer.

In fact, we all seem to be making the assumption that a medieval society without magic will inherently develop into a Renaissance one, and then an industrialized one, at about the rate that Euro-Asian societies did. We have no way to validate this assumption. We cannot start the world over without magic, either, to experiment and determine if there is an established rate of development.

But while we cannot experiment, we can observe. And one crucial observation is that not all societies developed at the same rate, as is shown by the fact that industrialized societies often met non-industrialized ones.

In the book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, Jared Diamond tried to answer the question of why Euro-Asian societies in general developed faster than other societies. He came up with several potential answers, but for the purposes of this thread, the crucial observation is that we have solid evidence that the societal growth of the Euro-Asian peoples was unusually fast -- significantly faster than any other.

Why? I’m impressed with Diamond’s conclusions, but many of them are sufficiently tied to issues we can’t discuss here that I’m not going to bring them up. Besides, they aren’t crucial to the question.

Conclusions:
1. We have no evidence for how fast societies will change with magic.
2. Assuming magic had an effect, it would obviously matter how much magic affected the world. Even within the 3.5e/PF/ d20 system, various games and various campaigns have wildly different levels of magic. So any answer we had for one game would not necessarily apply to the other.
3. Even without magic as a variable, we have no evidence that there is a standard base rate of societal progress, and a fair amount of evidence that there is not.
4. There are other potential complicating issues -- Gods, different sentient races, other planes, etc.
5. Without knowing how and why each Earth society developed at the rate it did, we have no way to predict how quickly wildly different ones would develop.

So GMs should make the answers that fit their individual campaigns, secure in the knowledge that nobody can prove them false.

---

This leads me to an idea for a campaign world I may create some time. There are many societies at many different levels of scientific advancement, and many different levels of magical advancement. Perhaps the elves have the highest level of magical development, but little technology, while the dwarves have an early industrial society with not much magical development.

What spells would each idea have developed? A society that researched measurement and observation spells more than attack spells might be the first high-magic, high-tech society in the world.

For that matter, a druidic society might be far behind in arcane magic, or even non-druidic divine magic. A peaceful society might never have developed evocation spells, but have a far greater variety of abjuration or divine spells.

Perhaps gods can be killed with nuclear weapons, but nothing else. Obviously, they would see to it that nobody developed a periodic table. The PCs might eventually realize that all the ruins that they explore have one thing in common. Somewhere in them there is always a chemistry lab.

If I create this world, it will take a long time to do so, because there is so much to develop. There are so many new possibilities in a world of cultures with wildly different levels of technological progress and magical progress.

And one crucial question -- what level of technology, and arcane magic, and divine magic, should the PCs' society have?

So let's try to theorycraft what the world would look like with "average" PHB amounts of magic-- say, Greyhawk or Golarion (since they are pretty good "blank slate" settings).

Gods exist and have stats, technically, but they are so above mortals that you can't even think of trying to even affect them unless you have Divine Ranks yourself.

Monsters exist, but there is enough organized effort to keep the situation well under control unless some great change take place (ie suddenly all the dire wolves destroy entire kingdoms is not a concern, but all orc warbands banding together might be).

People are influenced by their environments and upbringing, but also their nature (if for different races). So orcs might focus solely on shamanic battle magic, while elves would seek to merge nature, magic and tech. Dwarves might specialize in use of detection magic/techniques for gold/minerals, and develop devices to get at them. Humans being humans are a hodgepodge as always.

There is no overt incentive to suppress either magic or tech for the most part, at least not because of the Gods/planes (because in general outer planes are strong enough that anything short of another outer plane attacking is not enough to really affect them.)

In this way, the best manifestation of the world I can think of is that maybe elves never undergo "industrialization" per se, rather just seeking ways to create objects in the artisanal way better. They would probably live in the stereotypical elf cities, but you might see things like magical moving sidewalks. Dwarves could live in massive excavated underground cities. Humans could do anything.

In any case however, I don't see magic causing medieval stasis by itself. If there is too little of it for any reason, you get Onward. If there is a glut of it, you get super-Eberron.

NichG

2021-02-07, 04:29 PM

I mean, to extrapolate from your requirements for industrialization/advancement, I think we can safely say that NO RPG, from d20 Modern to Traveller to Exalted to GURPS, is really meant for anything you want.

Heck, even Exalted 2e, one of the most magitech focused games, that even has an entire campaign setting geared around magitech (First Age), has anything more mechanically solid than the skill Craft Magitech to its name. It doesn't stat out how many line workers you need to make a hyperion key, it doesn't stat out the exact frequencies/parts/alchemical reactions and the hundreds of components that go into a warstrider, a robot, or a skyship. All that literally happens in the background. Likewise, GURPS has worlds with different tech levels, but **** me if there are hard-set GURPS* rules for bootstrapping a TL 1 civ to TL 8 beyond whatever you have in terms of skills.

Once again, the problem you have with DnD is 1000% not exclusive to DnD. It is a problem for RPGs as a whole (ie the whole abstractions of levels/skill dots/xp/whatever). But at least as I have demonstrated (and you have conceded) the logical extrapolations of the magic system in games like DnD or Exalted allow for potential industrialization (as demonstrated multiple times in the lore, the potential development of UPBs as I have stated, and with Eberron even tying it to RAW, and the whole incantations system). Unlike the magic system of Westeros, where magic has no real practical use (other than a MacGuffin) due to it being too personalized and rare.

Essentially, if you want to start an industrial revolution in a DnD world (or ANY rpg world), play to the system's strengths and get ready for an adventure.

*Note that GURPS actually HAS a magitech civilization in the form of GURPS Technomancer. Also note that they had to make up a ton of new stuff in that book to allow for the industrialization of magic, as the baseline system didn't allow it.

So perhaps the thesis should be that when principles of game design drive setting elements to be convenient to the conceit of a small group of individuals changing the world, they also drive setting elements away from those things that made industrialization so powerful on Earth. And 'magic' happens to be a very convenient element for placing personal power into the hands of an individual, so that often the expression of magic in tabletop systems is intentionally designed to enable personal power fantasies, and thereby encourages social stasis with outlying heroic elements who can break those static norms and express a lot of agency in deciding how the society should develop based on their desires rather than based on any kind of inevitability or necessity. That said, I think this might be more of an issue with more modern systems than older ones or ones that aren't directly in the D&D-inspired lineage.

I would say that AD&D was closer to suggesting the possibility of an industrial revolution than D&D 3.5, in that characters beyond a certain point hit 'name level', and their further increases in power happen through the development of organizations of lower-level characters surrounding that character. It's not moving towards a magitech industrial revolution, but at least it creates the precedent for the idea in-setting that the natural paths to further power and advancement for some lead through others. Things like Stronghold Builder's Guide in D&D do make attempts at specifying the creation of infrastructure and the value it gives. However, those things are usually designed to be gold sinks and little ego projects on the side rather than something that takes over play. I'm less concerned with the existence of rules of 'how to start an industrial revolution' and more concerned with the rules that do exist not suggesting that the way that setting or world is ordered strongly discourages doing such a thing.

In this sense, systems with more explicit rules I think are more likely to explicitly say 'we're not about having industrial revolutions or major societal shifts'. Something like WoD doesn't give rules for how much work it is to construct a tank, but it doesn't specify the way that people build things in such a fashion that if you tried to work out from those rules 'can I build a tank with 1000 workers?' you still get the answer that it would take over a century, or that no one but the first give craftsmen would give any benefit, or things like that. If D&D said of its magic 'there's a force in the world that responds to will and evoked symbolism, decide on the effect you want to accomplish and the DM will set a DC that can be further modified by circumstances' then that would be a lot closer to enabling an industrial revolution than the much more detailed rules that D&D does give. Because once D&D says e.g. 'to cast a 9th level spell, you must be 17th level, and you can't make a magic item whose effects are based on a spell without being able to cast the spell' then you need a lot more exceptions before you can have 1000 Lv3 workers build a teleportation circle or interplanar gate from a set of blueprints, and many of those exceptions will make the system look like something very alien to how D&D has used its rules to present itself.

Incidentally, stuff like the Incantations variant system Fizban mentioned don't say 'this is explicitly how to bootstrap an industrial revolution from D&D magic', but they're actually what I was asking for earlier in the thread, much more than any of the Eberron stuff.

Destro2119

2021-02-07, 07:46 PM

So perhaps the thesis should be that when principles of game design drive setting elements to be convenient to the conceit of a small group of individuals changing the world, they also drive setting elements away from those things that made industrialization so powerful on Earth. And 'magic' happens to be a very convenient element for placing personal power into the hands of an individual, so that often the expression of magic in tabletop systems is intentionally designed to enable personal power fantasies, and thereby encourages social stasis with outlying heroic elements who can break those static norms and express a lot of agency in deciding how the society should develop based on their desires rather than based on any kind of inevitability or necessity. That said, I think this might be more of an issue with more modern systems than older ones or ones that aren't directly in the D&D-inspired lineage.

I would say that AD&D was closer to suggesting the possibility of an industrial revolution than D&D 3.5, in that characters beyond a certain point hit 'name level', and their further increases in power happen through the development of organizations of lower-level characters surrounding that character. It's not moving towards a magitech industrial revolution, but at least it creates the precedent for the idea in-setting that the natural paths to further power and advancement for some lead through others. Things like Stronghold Builder's Guide in D&D do make attempts at specifying the creation of infrastructure and the value it gives. However, those things are usually designed to be gold sinks and little ego projects on the side rather than something that takes over play. I'm less concerned with the existence of rules of 'how to start an industrial revolution' and more concerned with the rules that do exist not suggesting that the way that setting or world is ordered strongly discourages doing such a thing.

In this sense, systems with more explicit rules I think are more likely to explicitly say 'we're not about having industrial revolutions or major societal shifts'. Something like WoD doesn't give rules for how much work it is to construct a tank, but it doesn't specify the way that people build things in such a fashion that if you tried to work out from those rules 'can I build a tank with 1000 workers?' you still get the answer that it would take over a century, or that no one but the first give craftsmen would give any benefit, or things like that. If D&D said of its magic 'there's a force in the world that responds to will and evoked symbolism, decide on the effect you want to accomplish and the DM will set a DC that can be further modified by circumstances' then that would be a lot closer to enabling an industrial revolution than the much more detailed rules that D&D does give. Because once D&D says e.g. 'to cast a 9th level spell, you must be 17th level, and you can't make a magic item whose effects are based on a spell without being able to cast the spell' then you need a lot more exceptions before you can have 1000 Lv3 workers build a teleportation circle or interplanar gate from a set of blueprints, and many of those exceptions will make the system look like something very alien to how D&D has used its rules to present itself.

Incidentally, stuff like the Incantations variant system Fizban mentioned don't say 'this is explicitly how to bootstrap an industrial revolution from D&D magic', but they're actually what I was asking for earlier in the thread, much more than any of the Eberron stuff.

Well, to the third paragraph, ALL games end up needing extrapolations/new stuff like what GURPS Technomancer had to do, because inherently all RPGs are built on abstractions. In fact, WoD/the Storyteller system often has multiple times when you need [x] number of skill dots to get [x] ability; the base concept behind "to cast a 9th level spell, you must be 17th level" is 100% not exclusive to DnD. In fact, leveling up or gaining the xp needed to get more skill dots is the abstraction of what IRL we would call learning things, as portrayed in d20 modern or WoD.

On Eberron-- yeah, we're gonna have to disagree. Eberron actually does a very good job on portraying the low level training that most people would have in life through the magewright class, which doesn't take intensive study, to the point where many magewrights are multiclassed commoners. But I digress.

In any case I still maintain that the answer to "does magic cause medieval stasis" is no, because of Incantations, the possibility of widespread education, Master Craftsman, and most importantly, the ability to easily extrapolate the possibility of more advanced systems from the preexisting state of magic, such as inventing UPBs or ritual incantations or the industrial magic production facilities of or Starfinder/GURPS Technomancer (like how steel was developed from iron, and plastics from shellac). As contrasted to, say, Westeros magic, which would require MASSIVE changes to how magic even works in that universe to get it to even baseline 3.X standards, and even more wild changes to get to anything resembling practical use in a society (a process more like turning lead to gold or getting blood from a stone).

EDIT: Also, remember rule 0 :smallsmile:. I am pretty sure that's printed in most every 3.X/PF core book.

PS: BTW, you don't need to be level 17 to do something that needs a 9th level spell in 3.X. You just increase the DC by 5 for every requirement you ignore (you can also increase it by 5 to double crafting speed). In 3.X, you could literally have 20-30 fifth level experts w/ Master Craftsman do it. Or else just tell your GM you are researching UPBs and are contracting clerics to ask the gods of invention how to do it :smallbiggrin:

Mechalich

2021-02-07, 08:24 PM

In the book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, Jared Diamond tried to answer the question of why Euro-Asian societies in general developed faster than other societies. He came up with several potential answers, but for the purposes of this thread, the crucial observation is that we have solid evidence that the societal growth of the Euro-Asian peoples was unusually fast -- significantly faster than any other.

Why? I’m impressed with Diamond’s conclusions, but many of them are sufficiently tied to issues we can’t discuss here that I’m not going to bring them up. Besides, they aren’t crucial to the question.

Many of Diamond's conclusions were based around changes in basic environmental conditions, such as available grain types and domestic animals, and we can discuss those. It's very important to acknowledge that a D&D style fantasy world is not like Earth on fundamental ecological levels. It has fantastical flora and fauna, multiple sapient species competing for resources (well actually Earth had that too, but the D&D version is several standard deviations more substantial), fictional materials with no Earth-like analogue, and more.

If go back in time on Earth to the end of the last Ice Age (~10,000 BCE) and ran the course of history again, many things would be very different, yes, but many things would be very similar. You'd get development of agriculture and animal domestication in many of the same places. Cities would develop in similar locations to where they developed historically (and in many cases where they are still located if water sources haven't moved), and similar broad-scale patterns such as the raiding of settled societies by semi-nomadic pastoralists would probably reoccur. Rates of development would obviously vary a lot, since sharp historical turns - the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of Rome, the early Islamic Conquests, etc. - obviously matter immensely and you can definitely run through highly plausible alternative history options where the medieval period was both drastically shorter, drastically longer, or never really happened at all, but you'd still eventually hit a period where a roughly medieval tech level was the dominant technological point achievement for all parts of the world actively in contact with each other (technological diffusion among humans is actually pre-high, if geographic barriers can be overcome).

But a fantasy world? That's going to be very different.

Unfortunately, attempting to go back to the end of the Last Ice age and run things forward with a kitchen sink fantasy world is highly unlikely to produce anything comprehensible, much less playable, especially when you consider some of the truly bizarre aspects of D&D - dragons, for example, just get 9th level spells after 1200 years pass from whatever start date you pick without having to research anything at all.

A kitchen sink is simply too complex, with too many changes, and those changes being far too pervasive, to run as any sort of alternative Earth experiment.

NichG

2021-02-07, 09:35 PM

Well, to the third paragraph, ALL games end up needing extrapolations/new stuff like what GURPS Technomancer had to do, because inherently all RPGs are built on abstractions. In fact, WoD/the Storyteller system often has multiple times when you need [x] number of skill dots to get [x] ability; the base concept behind "to cast a 9th level spell, you must be 17th level" is 100% not exclusive to DnD. In fact, leveling up or gaining the xp needed to get more skill dots is the abstraction of what IRL we would call learning things, as portrayed in d20 modern or WoD.

On Eberron-- yeah, we're gonna have to disagree. Eberron actually does a very good job on portraying the low level training that most people would have in life through the magewright class, which doesn't take intensive study, to the point where many magewrights are multiclassed commoners. But I digress.

In any case I still maintain that the answer to "does magic cause medieval stasis" is no, because of Incantations, the possibility of widespread education, Master Craftsman, and most importantly, the ability to easily extrapolate the possibility of more advanced systems from the preexisting state of magic, such as inventing UPBs or ritual incantations or the industrial magic production facilities of or Starfinder/GURPS Technomancer (like how steel was developed from iron, and plastics from shellac). As contrasted to, say, Westeros magic, which would require MASSIVE changes to how magic even works in that universe to get it to even baseline 3.X standards, and even more wild changes to get to anything resembling practical use in a society (a process more like turning lead to gold or getting blood from a stone).

EDIT: Also, remember rule 0 :smallsmile:. I am pretty sure that's printed in most every 3.X/PF core book.

Again, its not about 'RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed', nor is it about 'you have to extrapolate, that's bad!' or something like that. Whatever rules are written suggest something about how a world is structured. When you extrapolate, you should do so in a manner consistent with what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works.

To that end, I'd say that Westeros magic looks a lot more industrializable than D&D in some ways. Sure, the greensight, skinchanging, and dragon dream stuff is a bit too uncontrollable and personal to really create technological infrastructure around, but the connection between 'have more dragons in the world = random practitioners become more powerful in what they can do' is a really good example of the sort of collective structuring that can be exploited to change the world and society. In Westeros, you could imagine enclaves raising and keeping dragons as a means to basically create a public utility - high ambient levels of magic. So by virtue of someone starting a zoo somewhere, everyone else's standard of magic rises automatically. That's a good example of how development of infrastructure can have synergistic effects that are greater than what you put into it. The things with the alchemists, with how old Valyrian practice is described (with magic being regularly used to construct buildings), etc seem perfectly fine to become widespread practice. And the absence of an obvious road to personal power through personal mastery rather than things like large-scale rituals, cabals, etc is good too (just basing from the wiki information, things like 'the flesh pits of Gogossos' suggest large-scale endeavors and imbuing of power into others than the mage themselves.

Mechalich

2021-02-07, 10:02 PM

So perhaps the thesis should be that when principles of game design drive setting elements to be convenient to the conceit of a small group of individuals changing the world, they also drive setting elements away from those things that made industrialization so powerful on Earth. And 'magic' happens to be a very convenient element for placing personal power into the hands of an individual, so that often the expression of magic in tabletop systems is intentionally designed to enable personal power fantasies, and thereby encourages social stasis with outlying heroic elements who can break those static norms and express a lot of agency in deciding how the society should develop based on their desires rather than based on any kind of inevitability or necessity. That said, I think this might be more of an issue with more modern systems than older ones or ones that aren't directly in the D&D-inspired lineage.

I think there's definitely an argument that magic, as presented in 3.X D&D will indeed lead to stasis (assuming you somehow reach a start point from which standard D&D adventuring can even take place at all, but we can leave that to the deities). However, that stasis won't be anything even remotely medieval. It'll be stasis as determined by the whims of the immortal god-tier casters who control all the territory and everything that doesn't have such a protector will be a blighted and inconsequential wasteland if it even exists at all. In fact the individual pocket realities ruled by the god-casters may be practically unrecognizable to each other in every way, down to the point of having dramatically variant fundamental physics because they were all programmed to taste.

I would say that AD&D was closer to suggesting the possibility of an industrial revolution than D&D 3.5, in that characters beyond a certain point hit 'name level', and their further increases in power happen through the development of organizations of lower-level characters surrounding that character. It's not moving towards a magitech industrial revolution, but at least it creates the precedent for the idea in-setting that the natural paths to further power and advancement for some lead through others. Things like Stronghold Builder's Guide in D&D do make attempts at specifying the creation of infrastructure and the value it gives. However, those things are usually designed to be gold sinks and little ego projects on the side rather than something that takes over play. I'm less concerned with the existence of rules of 'how to start an industrial revolution' and more concerned with the rules that do exist not suggesting that the way that setting or world is ordered strongly discourages doing such a thing.

AD&D also just flat out capped magic at a lower power level. Even leaving aside questions of epic magic, a 40th level wizard (and yes they existed, Myth Drannor had one named Ulair the Silent or something) differed from a 20th in simply having a bigger collection of spell lots. Magic topped out at Wish and that was it. There was no metamagic you couldn't chain together bizarre collections of SLAs and pretty much all the funky optimization tricks that quadratically boost 3.X caster power didn't exist, you couldn't planar bind whole armies of Glabrezus, and because MR was just a flat percentage certain things could just outright ignore spellcasting no matter what you did or how high your stats were (which anyone who ever parked a skeleton warrior next to Irenicus in BGII learned). Even when a 2e setting introduced actual 'Wizard-Kings' in the context of Dark Sun their power to reshape the world around them was vastly more restrained compared to 3e counterparts (also, Dark Sun locks down the power level further by preventing casters from drawing upon the nigh-infinite resources of the multiverse). And, of course, perhaps most importantly, 2e had only 1 class that got access to 9th level spells.

So the much lower power level of 2e made it actually reasonable to discuss what happens to a 2e setting with magic unleashed. You could still get a static world, very much like Dark Sun minus the environmental death spiral, but you could get a more innovative one if the right conditions arose within any given magocracy such as alliance with a suitably development-focused religion like a deity of agriculture or smithing or something.

Elbeyon

2021-02-07, 10:03 PM

I believe the crystal spheres in dnd had limited magic and tech, but every sphere was different. In some spheres technology didn't work, and only magic worked. In others, magic didn't work, and only technology worked. Plus, every mix in-between. It wasn't so much that magic interfered with technology, but each sphere was its own reality with a hard cap on magic or tech levels. There was a point where technology or magic above a certain level would not work, and if brought in from a different sphere didn't work at all.

If there isn't some artificial handwavy limitation, magic would cause technology to develop a lot quicker than without magic. Magic can fill in a lot of gaps in technology and leap frog it super quick compared to developing tech without magic. Imagine how much easier research would be if there was a magic spell for asking yes/no questions to the universe. Does the Higgs boson exist? "Yes." Cool. that's 50 years of research completed in an afternoon. Humans would not look at magic and be satisfied or say "good enough." Humans would abuse and use every single magic at their despise to gain as much as they could gain.

Hurnn

2021-02-08, 02:03 AM

Short answer, no it doesn't.

Long answer most D&D worlds don't even make sense with how abundant magic is.

As per the Dmg in a city of 20,000 people there should be roughly:
32: 1st, 8: 2nd, 8: 3rd, 4: 4th, 2: 5th, 2: 6th, 2: 7th, 1: 10th, 1: 12th, 1: 14th levels bards clerics and druids, the numbers are the same for adept except there would be 100 1st levels.
16: 1st, 8: 3rd, 2:5th, 4: 6th, 1: 10th, 1: 11th, 1: 12th levels paladins, rangers, sorcerers and wizards.

That means 2% of the cities population can cast at least 1st level spells; magic should be every where all the time. Yet most settings treat it as rare, and no one has ever thought to use magic to solve mundane issues. Eberron is the exception and when you look at what D&D magic would actually allow IE: Tippyverese it looks like what a low magic D&D setting should be.

Destro2119

2021-02-08, 06:37 PM

Again, its not about 'RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed', nor is it about 'you have to extrapolate, that's bad!' or something like that. Whatever rules are written suggest something about how a world is structured. When you extrapolate, you should do so in a manner consistent with what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works.

To that end, I'd say that Westeros magic looks a lot more industrializable than D&D in some ways. Sure, the greensight, skinchanging, and dragon dream stuff is a bit too uncontrollable and personal to really create technological infrastructure around, but the connection between 'have more dragons in the world = random practitioners become more powerful in what they can do' is a really good example of the sort of collective structuring that can be exploited to change the world and society. In Westeros, you could imagine enclaves raising and keeping dragons as a means to basically create a public utility - high ambient levels of magic. So by virtue of someone starting a zoo somewhere, everyone else's standard of magic rises automatically. That's a good example of how development of infrastructure can have synergistic effects that are greater than what you put into it. The things with the alchemists, with how old Valyrian practice is described (with magic being regularly used to construct buildings), etc seem perfectly fine to become widespread practice. And the absence of an obvious road to personal power through personal mastery rather than things like large-scale rituals, cabals, etc is good too (just basing from the wiki information, things like 'the flesh pits of Gogossos' suggest large-scale endeavors and imbuing of power into others than the mage themselves.

"when you extrapolate you should do so in a manner consistent with what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works. "

My extrapolations ARE consistent with "what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works." ESPECIALLY if you concede that it's not about "RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed."

For the many reasons I have already put forth in previous posts, and that you even have agreed with, a 3.X world is absolutely not going to be in stasis "naturally." And all that is just from RAW ie what the designers have decided to write into rulebooks, so they don't even violate "RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed" just in case someone complains about that. More specifically, all that doesn't even take into account the logical extrapolation of say, UPBs or industrial magic items from the very fluid (in terms of what you are allowed to make) crafting systems/spell creation system. Or the ability to ask literal gods about things.

On your point about Westeros, read ANY article about why Westeros is stuck in medieval stasis, like this one: https://www.tor.com/2017/07/07/is-magic-the-cause-of-westeros-problems/

Westeros is the LAST place the "empirical habit of thought" that previous posters mentioned that is necessary to do ANYTHING you suggest will appear. Not only because of the ridiculously chaotic magic (seriously your first line consigns 95% of all "easily" (very loose term) accessible magic and magic users in Westeros to the dumpster fire) but because of the nonsense weather that kills massive amounts of the pop each year. Meaning that there is even less incentive than IRL to educate the lower classes when 90% of them die each year or are otherwise too occupied by dirt farming to do anything else.

On your assertion of dragon zoos-- really? You are REALLY going to center a society around attempting to keep flying murder machines tame and calm? Please refer yourself to the Dragon entry on the wiki where a major point is made of the fact that THEY CAN'T BE TRULY TAMED. In addition to the fact that they are RIDICULOUSLY rare creatures everyone would fight over. You think Daenerys is just going to let you take dragon eggs? Or she won't try to organize some sort of resistance team to kill you? Please explain to me how this is a less massive undertaking than simply teaching everyone the rudiments of magic like in Eberron.

Valyerian magic is so different from the current state of magic that it is effectively a different system. And those rituals and cabals are usually all magic users themselves who are doing the changing (I know for one that the Flesh Pits was actually more of a demonic breeding program overseen by bloodmages than anything else). Alchemy is less magic and more using stuff in "scientific" processes that happens to be supernatural in origin. I do admit that the Alchemist's Guild is the biggest chance Westeros has, but they don't do anything an equivalent 3.X organization couldn't surpass and their processes are kept under such lock and key (due to Westeros being, you know, Westeros) that it is hard to see them even doing anything voluntarily on the scale needed for anybody.

Destro2119

2021-02-08, 06:48 PM

I think there's definitely an argument that magic, as presented in 3.X D&D will indeed lead to stasis (assuming you somehow reach a start point from which standard D&D adventuring can even take place at all, but we can leave that to the deities). However, that stasis won't be anything even remotely medieval. It'll be stasis as determined by the whims of the immortal god-tier casters who control all the territory and everything that doesn't have such a protector will be a blighted and inconsequential wasteland if it even exists at all. In fact the individual pocket realities ruled by the god-casters may be practically unrecognizable to each other in every way, down to the point of having dramatically variant fundamental physics because they were all programmed to taste.

AD&D also just flat out capped magic at a lower power level. Even leaving aside questions of epic magic, a 40th level wizard (and yes they existed, Myth Drannor had one named Ulair the Silent or something) differed from a 20th in simply having a bigger collection of spell lots. Magic topped out at Wish and that was it. There was no metamagic you couldn't chain together bizarre collections of SLAs and pretty much all the funky optimization tricks that quadratically boost 3.X caster power didn't exist, you couldn't planar bind whole armies of Glabrezus, and because MR was just a flat percentage certain things could just outright ignore spellcasting no matter what you did or how high your stats were (which anyone who ever parked a skeleton warrior next to Irenicus in BGII learned). Even when a 2e setting introduced actual 'Wizard-Kings' in the context of Dark Sun their power to reshape the world around them was vastly more restrained compared to 3e counterparts (also, Dark Sun locks down the power level further by preventing casters from drawing upon the nigh-infinite resources of the multiverse). And, of course, perhaps most importantly, 2e had only 1 class that got access to 9th level spells.

So the much lower power level of 2e made it actually reasonable to discuss what happens to a 2e setting with magic unleashed. You could still get a static world, very much like Dark Sun minus the environmental death spiral, but you could get a more innovative one if the right conditions arose within any given magocracy such as alliance with a suitably development-focused religion like a deity of agriculture or smithing or something.

To the first point: so if a GATE (like in the anime) opened from one of those "pocket realities" to Earth, could we conquer them?

To the second point: leaving out optimization cheese (like Sarrukhs/djinn infinite wishes/painter wizard et al) and just going by options as intended by the designers (ie epic feats/spell slots/other feats/spells printed in splatbooks) how exactly does a 3.X wizard "quadratically" increase in strength at high levels and beyond that, to epic levels?

NichG

2021-02-08, 07:27 PM

"when you extrapolate you should do so in a manner consistent with what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works. "

My extrapolations ARE consistent with "what the rules and details you have suggest about how the world works." ESPECIALLY if you concede that it's not about "RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed."

For the many reasons I have already put forth in previous posts, and that you even have agreed with, a 3.X world is absolutely not going to be in stasis "naturally." And all that is just from RAW ie what the designers have decided to write into rulebooks, so they don't even violate "RAW is physics, only RAW is allowed" just in case someone complains about that. More specifically, all that doesn't even take into account the logical extrapolation of say, UPBs or industrial magic items from the very fluid (in terms of what you are allowed to make) crafting systems/spell creation system. Or the ability to ask literal gods about things.

On your point about Westeros, read ANY article about why Westeros is stuck in medieval stasis, like this one: https://www.tor.com/2017/07/07/is-magic-the-cause-of-westeros-problems/

Westeros is the LAST place the "empirical habit of thought" that previous posters mentioned that is necessary to do ANYTHING you suggest will appear. Not only because of the ridiculously chaotic magic (seriously your first line consigns 95% of all "easily" (very loose term) accessible magic and magic users in Westeros to the dumpster fire) but because of the nonsense weather that kills massive amounts of the pop each year. Meaning that there is even less incentive than IRL to educate the lower classes when 90% of them die each year or are otherwise too occupied by dirt farming to do anything else.

On your assertion of dragon zoos-- really? You are REALLY going to center a society around attempting to keep flying murder machines tame and calm? Please refer yourself to the Dragon entry on the wiki where a major point is made of the fact that THEY CAN'T BE TRULY TAMED. In addition to the fact that they are RIDICULOUSLY rare creatures everyone would fight over. You think Daenerys is just going to let you take dragon eggs? Or she won't try to organize some sort of resistance team to kill you? Please explain to me how this is a less massive undertaking than simply teaching everyone the rudiments of magic like in Eberron.

First, abandon the idea that progress is caused by some individual hero who goes and uses their abilities to create change by fiat. Anything that requires an individual to say, without the support of a movement, 'I want there to be dragon zoos' or 'I want there to be factories with mass production lines' or whatever and then personally fight off the current state of things is a non-starter. If you're getting industrialization of dragon-induced magic, it'll be from people 5 or 10 generations removed from the events of the series and will happen through gradual adaptation to a world in which dragons are back and in which that fact has consequences that nations either need to adapt to or be conquered. So 'Daenerys not wanting to give away dragon eggs' is irrelevant - her raising dragons to importance is doing more for developing a society built around coexistence and utilization of dragons than some random person coming in with an idea to immediately jump-start industry according to their vision. But, without pressure to make those dragon-boons essential for survival, it might just become a national cult or another guild, something reserved only for royals. So take that position of recent rise to power, but now apply constant pressure of other forces in the world where you either get good at the dragon thing or you die, and that might be a viable path.

As far as difficulty goes, difficult but increasingly profitable things are going to be much better drivers of industrialization than things which are easy or just dump a lot of power in someone's lap. We do much crazier things than keep around dangerous animals (something done successfully by Valyria in the lore anyhow) to support the modern world. We tame self-replicating nuclear chain reactions that are a hairs-breadth away from running out of control and melting or blowing up their containment in order to provide energy for ourselves. We ride around on machines that use confined explosions happening 50+ times per second just in order to get around two or three times faster than we could using a horse. We process great vats of compounds dangerous enough that if and when those vats leak, they threaten the entire population of towns miles away. All of these things depend on refinements in manufacturing, materials science, etc - the demands placed on logistics and methods is what creates an overall drive to progress. If you were just handed a supply of infinite energy generators you wouldn't have a drive to modernize society, you'd just have one guy with a monopoly on energy.

Endarire

2021-02-09, 12:06 AM

Magic alone doesn't cause medieval statis. People wanting to play in medieval fantasyish worlds may cause medieval stasis in those worlds.

Destro2119

2021-02-09, 12:32 PM

First, abandon the idea that progress is caused by some individual hero who goes and uses their abilities to create change by fiat. Anything that requires an individual to say, without the support of a movement, 'I want there to be dragon zoos' or 'I want there to be factories with mass production lines' or whatever and then personally fight off the current state of things is a non-starter. If you're getting industrialization of dragon-induced magic, it'll be from people 5 or 10 generations removed from the events of the series and will happen through gradual adaptation to a world in which dragons are back and in which that fact has consequences that nations either need to adapt to or be conquered. So 'Daenerys not wanting to give away dragon eggs' is irrelevant - her raising dragons to importance is doing more for developing a society built around coexistence and utilization of dragons than some random person coming in with an idea to immediately jump-start industry according to their vision. But, without pressure to make those dragon-boons essential for survival, it might just become a national cult or another guild, something reserved only for royals. So take that position of recent rise to power, but now apply constant pressure of other forces in the world where you either get good at the dragon thing or you die, and that might be a viable path.

As far as difficulty goes, difficult but increasingly profitable things are going to be much better drivers of industrialization than things which are easy or just dump a lot of power in someone's lap. We do much crazier things than keep around dangerous animals (something done successfully by Valyria in the lore anyhow) to support the modern world. We tame self-replicating nuclear chain reactions that are a hairs-breadth away from running out of control and melting or blowing up their containment in order to provide energy for ourselves. We ride around on machines that use confined explosions happening 50+ times per second just in order to get around two or three times faster than we could using a horse. We process great vats of compounds dangerous enough that if and when those vats leak, they threaten the entire population of towns miles away. All of these things depend on refinements in manufacturing, materials science, etc - the demands placed on logistics and methods is what creates an overall drive to progress. If you were just handed a supply of infinite energy generators you wouldn't have a drive to modernize society, you'd just have one guy with a monopoly on energy.

First off, we need to separate the IRL from the ingame abstractions, much like how we solved the problem of "watchmaking needs so many processes compared to magic!" by saying that "Craft: Clockwork completely subsumes that." So "the demands placed on logistics and methods" would play just as much into magic, especially if you need some rare component to craft like some metal or mineral (which is HEAVILY IMPLIED TO BE THE CASE) that would require a mining system which would in turn require better methods of mining leading to progress in that field, for one example (assuming you don't think crafting magic isn't throwing gp on a table and muttering over it.)

Secondly, you seem to asset that industrialization and progress will only happen if thousands of people can work together to develop processes that can be replicated by base line workers, and that their accumulated knowledge base can be passed on instantaneously to others who wish to learn, while in 3.X (or any RPG really) it is impossible b/c you need to have [x] level or [x] skill dots to learn it.

This ties into the accumulated knowledge base, in how we must go back to the idea that RPGs must by necessity abstract, and realize that it depicts scientific advancement of the personal character by gaining the xp and leveling up so you get more skill ranks/skill points. Plus, just because there IS a huge base of knowledge doesn't mean the average scientist can just instantaneously understand that stuff-- otherwise there would be no need to study in school, we could just buy books or search the web and just know all about science and do anything the best scientists can do. In this light, you could very well abstract that gaining xp just means you go back and understand some concept you didn't understand fully, whether because you got tutoring or else because you experienced some other thing to make you understand it.

Through this way, we can see how the existence of a organization or organizations of wizards sharing knowledge, much like our IRL scientific organizations, is ABSOLUTELY not impossible because magic "focuses on personal power only". Once again, in a fantasy/magical world with 3.X magic, magic is a science.

For the second part of your requirements for industrialization, I agree that the "base line workers" and semi-artisanal processes that endured up until the 1940s would probably not appear. But is that a bad thing? In place of such base drudgery, you would have people educated in the basics of magic like magewrights from Eberron working with each other. You might even have eventual automation through golems/modified dedicated wrights. Your wizard-scientists would then come up with new spells and magic items and upgrades to those constructs, these processes requiring more advanced methods of getting base components leading to advancements in mining/farming etc., leading to advancement of society for an overall more utopian society than the sweatshops we have on earth right now.

PS: On the specific Westeros example, you really cannot compare chemical substances/inanimate reactions that can be guarded against to chaotic, sentient dragons. Also, "5-10 generations later" in Westeros will not have "thousands rise up and sweep away the elites." Those thousands would NEED to have been smallfolk-- the smallfolk whom the highborn don't really care about and who die each year in droves because of nonsense weather, illness and wars. So the only way for change would to be for a small group of elites (effectively the "random person coming in with an idea to immediately jump-start industry according to their vision") from, say, the Alchemist's Guild to spread such ideas among the smallfolk so that they can be literate and educated enough to even try to make any change in the world, let alone getting dragons to breed in zoos.

NichG

2021-02-09, 02:17 PM

First off, we need to separate the IRL from the ingame abstractions, much like how we solved the problem of "watchmaking needs so many processes compared to magic!" by saying that "Craft: Clockwork completely subsumes that." So "the demands placed on logistics and methods" would play just as much into magic, especially if you need some rare component to craft like some metal or mineral (which is HEAVILY IMPLIED TO BE THE CASE) that would require a mining system which would in turn require better methods of mining leading to progress in that field, for one example (assuming you don't think crafting magic isn't throwing gp on a table and muttering over it.)

With the Westeros dragon thing you have a really nice economy of scale waiting to happen. Each dragon added, an O(1) effort, increases everyone's magical abilities, an O(N) consequence. Presumably there are diminishing returns at some point (or magical saturation triggers events like the Doom to spontaneously occur with some frequency), but its still pretty nice as a way for understanding of things like externalities and economy of scale to give hard-to-beat advantages to organizations or nations in that world.

As far as crafting in D&D, if we're talking about a world in which Master Craftsmen types are driving things, I've already said that can work with the constraints that need to be fulfilled to drive industrialization. If we're talking full casters though, they have a lot of carrots encouraging going tall rather than wide - if they can personally reach the level of being able to cast Planeshift, just hop over to the Plane of Mineral when you need metals and gemstones; once you can cast Planar Binding, you can compel the cosmos' infinite demons and angels to serve you by bringing you that rare basilisk tongue you need for a craft; and once you can cast Lv7+ spells, things like Limited Wish, Wish, Polymorph Any Object, even True Creation for particular divine casters enter the game.

Secondly, you seem to asset that industrialization and progress will only happen if thousands of people can work together to develop processes that can be replicated by base line workers, and that their accumulated knowledge base can be passed on instantaneously to others who wish to learn, while in 3.X (or any RPG really) it is impossible b/c you need to have [x] level or [x] skill dots to learn it.

This ties into the accumulated knowledge base, in how we must go back to the idea that RPGs must by necessity abstract, and realize that it depicts scientific advancement of the personal character by gaining the xp and leveling up so you get more skill ranks/skill points. Plus, just because there IS a huge base of knowledge doesn't mean the average scientist can just instantaneously understand that stuff-- otherwise there would be no need to study in school, we could just buy books or search the web and just know all about science and do anything the best scientists can do. In this light, you could very well abstract that gaining xp just means you go back and understand some concept you didn't understand fully, whether because you got tutoring or else because you experienced some other thing to make you understand it.

It's a bit of a stronger point, that in the modern day you don't actually need to understand things in order to use them or work with them at a level that would have required much higher degrees of understanding in the past. In a world before standardized parts and measures, if you wanted to make a piece of metalwork with 0.1mm tolerances you would basically need every component to be made by the same master craftsman, and there would be a very skill-intensive process of ensuring that the parts fit each-others' shapes. A modern-day factory worker or machine shop user doesn't have to understand or be able to execute those kinds of methods, because you can just read numbers off of one document, enter them into the appropriate places on a tool, and then if you follow those numbers you're going to find that your parts fit together with not just 0.1mm tolerance but 0.01mm tolerance or better. But the person doing that doesn't need to understand how to build a CNC milling device or a 3d positioning system or even a basic gear-chain, nor do they need to understand bluing or coining or oxidizing vs reducing environments for metal forging or bellows-work or filing to shape or so on.

That's because the knowledge and process have been made interchangeable, with less actual input from the skill and knowledge of the worker. In general the things needed to do tasks become disentangled, to the extent that there are things that would have required a multi-year apprenticeship in the past that now you could take anyone off the street and teach them to do it (with modern equipment) in an hour.

I'm really focusing less on science and more on society here. A move towards scientific methodology and rational advance of knowledge was certainly important, but without a payout that doesn't require everyone to be a scientist then those things stay as hobbies for the wealthy. Knowing that the Earth is round or that the Earth isn't at the center of the universe doesn't really convey any kind of practical benefits that would punish nations or cultures that failed to attain that knowledge or render them uncompetitive. It's where those scientific discoveries have a method by which they can be rolled out to organize an industry or an army or a country that things really start to get going, because then there's a real cost involved in being the organization that chooses to bet against change.

It's like, if knowing the mathematics of curves lets you forge the metal parts where there's abundant local access to coal and craft the wooden parts in a far-away forested region, then carry them to a city that has neither but has a cheap workforce for assembly and get a completed carriage or plow or grain mill or galleon or whatever, then you're really going to feel some tension between 'my traditions/guild system/etc say that this isn't the way to do things' and 'this way of doing things would let me triple my profit margins'. Or like tensions between material-backed currencies and fiat currencies - ledger systems and internal accounts that let virtual transactions take place without actually moving goods from one place to another just give too much of an advantage to people who buy into the system, so even if they're losing the personal control of having wealth in a form that's independently valuable, that gets paid for by the massive decrease in friction of actually deploying that wealth and as a result induces the people with power to change their habits.

PS: On the specific Westeros example, you really cannot compare chemical substances/inanimate reactions that can be guarded against to chaotic, sentient dragons. Also, "5-10 generations later" in Westeros will not have "thousands rise up and sweep away the elites." Those thousands would NEED to have been smallfolk-- the smallfolk whom the highborn don't really care about and who die each year in droves because of nonsense weather, illness and wars. So the only way for change would to be for a small group of elites (effectively the "random person coming in with an idea to immediately jump-start industry according to their vision") from, say, the Alchemist's Guild to spread such ideas among the smallfolk so that they can be literate and educated enough to even try to make any change in the world, let alone getting dragons to breed in zoos.

Not 'thousands rise up and sweep away the elites', but rather 'the elites fight against each-other all the time, and the elites which really have a way of efficiently tapping into the potential of their population base are the ones that more often than not win, motivating each generation of elite to question: 'is it more important that I hold on to traditions, or that I win this war/conflict/competition?''. Like bows to guns, if you can take something that used to be the province of craftsmen or masters trained for decades and put it into the hands of every peasant, then that's an available force that's hard to say no to in a moment of desperate need even though you can see a future in which every peasant having a weapon might mean an uprising you can't actually beat (but by then it'll be your grandkids' problem, and today's enemy is already banging at the door).

Nifft

2021-02-09, 02:27 PM

Each dragon added, an O(1) effort ... plus a rather hefty constant in terms of the blood magic sacrifice quality.

Plus a limited-supply object.

Plus a series of unknown factors (e.g. can anyone even do this or is it Targaryen-only).

NichG

2021-02-09, 03:21 PM

... plus a rather hefty constant in terms of the blood magic sacrifice quality.

Plus a limited-supply object.

Plus a series of unknown factors (e.g. can anyone even do this or is it Targaryen-only).

Hey, I never said transitions from medieval to industrial societies would be utopian! In the real world, how many died to work-related hazards in industrialization, much less the externalities arising through pollution? Some things get worse, some things get better, and if you're lucky you're in a position to leverage the things that get worse to negotiate for those things that make things better so that the combined effect is a net improvement - but that position of being able to negotiate is also something that takes time and pressure to emerge.

Destro2119

2021-02-09, 05:52 PM

Hey, I never said transitions from medieval to industrial societies would be utopian! In the real world, how many died to work-related hazards in industrialization, much less the externalities arising through pollution? Some things get worse, some things get better, and if you're lucky you're in a position to leverage the things that get worse to negotiate for those things that make things better so that the combined effect is a net improvement - but that position of being able to negotiate is also something that takes time and pressure to emerge.

The difference in your extremely flawed "industrialize dragon" plan is massive from normal accidents.

Normal accidents are MUNDANE and can be prevented by mundane means-- radiation shielding, chemical shielding, staying away from big gears, reinforced structures.

"Industrialize dragons" accidents are a MITE more on the "entire workforce goes screaming mad from horribly botched magic surge" and "dragons escape and torch the countryside in an orgy of destruction."

Destro2119

2021-02-09, 06:02 PM

With the Westeros dragon thing you have a really nice economy of scale waiting to happen. Each dragon added, an O(1) effort, increases everyone's magical abilities, an O(N) consequence. Presumably there are diminishing returns at some point (or magical saturation triggers events like the Doom to spontaneously occur with some frequency), but its still pretty nice as a way for understanding of things like externalities and economy of scale to give hard-to-beat advantages to organizations or nations in that world.

As far as crafting in D&D, if we're talking about a world in which Master Craftsmen types are driving things, I've already said that can work with the constraints that need to be fulfilled to drive industrialization. If we're talking full casters though, they have a lot of carrots encouraging going tall rather than wide - if they can personally reach the level of being able to cast Planeshift, just hop over to the Plane of Mineral when you need metals and gemstones; once you can cast Planar Binding, you can compel the cosmos' infinite demons and angels to serve you by bringing you that rare basilisk tongue you need for a craft; and once you can cast Lv7+ spells, things like Limited Wish, Wish, Polymorph Any Object, even True Creation for particular divine casters enter the game.

It's a bit of a stronger point, that in the modern day you don't actually need to understand things in order to use them or work with them at a level that would have required much higher degrees of understanding in the past. In a world before standardized parts and measures, if you wanted to make a piece of metalwork with 0.1mm tolerances you would basically need every component to be made by the same master craftsman, and there would be a very skill-intensive process of ensuring that the parts fit each-others' shapes. A modern-day factory worker or machine shop user doesn't have to understand or be able to execute those kinds of methods, because you can just read numbers off of one document, enter them into the appropriate places on a tool, and then if you follow those numbers you're going to find that your parts fit together with not just 0.1mm tolerance but 0.01mm tolerance or better. But the person doing that doesn't need to understand how to build a CNC milling device or a 3d positioning system or even a basic gear-chain, nor do they need to understand bluing or coining or oxidizing vs reducing environments for metal forging or bellows-work or filing to shape or so on.

That's because the knowledge and process have been made interchangeable, with less actual input from the skill and knowledge of the worker. In general the things needed to do tasks become disentangled, to the extent that there are things that would have required a multi-year apprenticeship in the past that now you could take anyone off the street and teach them to do it (with modern equipment) in an hour.

I'm really focusing less on science and more on society here. A move towards scientific methodology and rational advance of knowledge was certainly important, but without a payout that doesn't require everyone to be a scientist then those things stay as hobbies for the wealthy. Knowing that the Earth is round or that the Earth isn't at the center of the universe doesn't really convey any kind of practical benefits that would punish nations or cultures that failed to attain that knowledge or render them uncompetitive. It's where those scientific discoveries have a method by which they can be rolled out to organize an industry or an army or a country that things really start to get going, because then there's a real cost involved in being the organization that chooses to bet against change.

It's like, if knowing the mathematics of curves lets you forge the metal parts where there's abundant local access to coal and craft the wooden parts in a far-away forested region, then carry them to a city that has neither but has a cheap workforce for assembly and get a completed carriage or plow or grain mill or galleon or whatever, then you're really going to feel some tension between 'my traditions/guild system/etc say that this isn't the way to do things' and 'this way of doing things would let me triple my profit margins'. Or like tensions between material-backed currencies and fiat currencies - ledger systems and internal accounts that let virtual transactions take place without actually moving goods from one place to another just give too much of an advantage to people who buy into the system, so even if they're losing the personal control of having wealth in a form that's independently valuable, that gets paid for by the massive decrease in friction of actually deploying that wealth and as a result induces the people with power to change their habits.

Not 'thousands rise up and sweep away the elites', but rather 'the elites fight against each-other all the time, and the elites which really have a way of efficiently tapping into the potential of their population base are the ones that more often than not win, motivating each generation of elite to question: 'is it more important that I hold on to traditions, or that I win this war/conflict/competition?''. Like bows to guns, if you can take something that used to be the province of craftsmen or masters trained for decades and put it into the hands of every peasant, then that's an available force that's hard to say no to in a moment of desperate need even though you can see a future in which every peasant having a weapon might mean an uprising you can't actually beat (but by then it'll be your grandkids' problem, and today's enemy is already banging at the door).

To the first point: you do realize that not EVERYBODY can just cast planar binding at will? And that they might request some tedious favor from you? Like, I have REPEATEDLY demonstrated how in the RAW downtime system you can set up a system to create Magic goods for crafting items, which would easily be the supply chain that science needs too, and lead to advancement from there.

To the second point-- read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/lgcfot/why_cant_my_scientist_character_get_a_automatic/ At a certain point, there is simply nothing you can do to allow someone with no training to do jobs that would actually advance society.

My point on society is why you would want a bunch of drunk minimally trained line workers when you can educate people in minor magics and have them work reasonable hours, and then supplement them with constructs or something to have them do basically many times what the line workers could have done.

On the point of why this would happen at all, I simply assert that the fact that any arcane schools/guilds exist at all mean that wizards are not as singlemindedly focused on themselves as you assert with all the planar binding stuff. Because naturally the ones subsidized by the king would be made to do something like this, especially considering the demographics of casters. Also Eberron.

NichG

2021-02-09, 07:46 PM

The difference in your extremely flawed "industrialize dragon" plan is massive from normal accidents.

Normal accidents are MUNDANE and can be prevented by mundane means-- radiation shielding, chemical shielding, staying away from big gears, reinforced structures.

"Industrialize dragons" accidents are a MITE more on the "entire workforce goes screaming mad from horribly botched magic surge" and "dragons escape and torch the countryside in an orgy of destruction."

Look up the 'demon core', and the general history of criticality accidents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident#Known_incidents). Lean over a device to inspect it? Well unfortunately, your body is a neutron reflector and you just made it go critical. Have a leak or some condensation cause water to pool in a box or tank near the core? Might reflect neutrons, cause it to go critical. Accidentally drop a brick while moving it into place? Criticality excursion for a few seconds, lethal dose of radiation. They even called working with critical fissile materials 'tickling the dragon's tail'.

And as for the chemical side of things, you can look at stuff like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster (though its an outlier) where a gas leak killed from 2k to 10k people and exposed 500k to toxins. Here, a pump failure basically made it so there were 42 tons of a really nasty compound that couldn't be moved into or out of its storage tank, so the tank just had to sit there. And in other industrialization, things like coal mine explosions for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benxihu_Colliery and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monongah_mining_disaster killing tens to about a thousand at the high end, or mishandling of mining waste products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Baia_Mare_cyanide_spill which didn't directly kill anyone but basically rendered a river unlivable.

Even without those particularly dramatic disasters, there are things like the Great Smog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London when the usual scale of industrial pollutants produced, combined with stagnant air, led to an estimated 6000 deaths.

Something being dangerous isn't really that much of a barrier to people incorporating it into industry, as long as its utility (real or perceived) pays for that danger.

To the first point: you do realize that not EVERYBODY can just cast planar binding at will? And that they might request some tedious favor from you? Like, I have REPEATEDLY demonstrated how in the RAW downtime system you can set up a system to create Magic goods for crafting items, which would easily be the supply chain that science needs too, and lead to advancement from there.

To the second point-- read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/lgcfot/why_cant_my_scientist_character_get_a_automatic/ At a certain point, there is simply nothing you can do to allow someone with no training to do jobs that would actually advance society.

If the OP in that thread were asking 'why can't my Lv1 character in this futuristic setting accomplish science and technology checks that are DC 40 in this stoneage roleplay setting book?' I'd side with the OP on it. If you go and learn enough HTML to make yourself a web-page, congratulations, you're casually doing something with very little thought that was a career-defining struggle for people like Babbage. It's not because you're smarter than Babbage or 'higher level' than Babbage or anything like that, it's because a lot of smart people built things like standardized processors, then a lot of other smart people designed assembly language as a more human-readable interface to processors than punch cards or relay signals, while in parallel a lot of people were thinking about mathematical theories of computation, universality of programs, etc, and all of that got put together to result in compiler theory, along with smart programmers who built those compilers and improved them in practice, along with people who worked out all the stuff about how to automate graphical layout and rendering and font-handling, and others figured out parsers, and all of that got bundled into operating systems and browsers and text editing programs and so on all so that at the end of the day you can produce something that does something incredibly complicated with about the effort it would take to learn how to write haikus or how to rhyme.

You could have approached all of that like a comic book mad scientist, building every element of everything with your own understanding. But that's doing as a DC 80 check what a modern teenager can do as a DC 10 check because all of the hard stuff has been successfully compartmentalized away so that you don't actually need to understand it anymore.

My point on society is why you would want a bunch of drunk minimally trained line workers when you can educate people in minor magics and have them work reasonable hours, and then supplement them with constructs or something to have them do basically many times what the line workers could have done.

Sure, you can do this, but it moves you further from the long-term stuff. In the real world I'm sitting here and typing on a device hooked up to another device which does the equivalent work of casting 128000 Sending spells (a 5th level spell) per second, and such devices are commonplace and cheap and the actual cost of that communication is so low once you've paid a cost of entry to the infrastructure that I could be running a video in the background by mistake without watching it and the cost would be smaller than the cost of the calories we'd go through passing that time. You're not going to get to that kind of thing by relying on any idea that looks like 'individuals with levels casting spells from their slots, training to make that a bit more potent or efficient or have more sustain'. That idea looks more like medieval guilds than industrialized society to me.

I also really don't get why you like Magewright as an example of doing industrialization right (since in every regard that I can tell, it's worse at solving these problems than if you just stuck with wizard - you need more levels to get to the same effects rather than less, you get less flexibility to learn a wide variety of utility or workforce-mandated effects since you're locked in with the spells you know via the Spell Mastery mechanic rather than having a spellbook, etc). That makes me suspect that any argument about particular settings is futile because we disagree on some more fundamental point perhaps about what it actually means to escape medievalism or to be industrialized.

Escaping medievalism doesn't mean going from D&D to Star Wars. It doesn't mean that you use trains powered by bound elementals instead of carriages pulled by Dominated dragons. Those are all the same things to me, just wearing different clothing. Saying 'its a Magewright not a Wizard, so according to the fluff that's industrial rather than medieval and so we've escaped stasis!' is equally hollow.

Destro2119

2021-02-10, 07:55 AM

Look up the 'demon core', and the general history of criticality accidents (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident#Known_incidents). Lean over a device to inspect it? Well unfortunately, your body is a neutron reflector and you just made it go critical. Have a leak or some condensation cause water to pool in a box or tank near the core? Might reflect neutrons, cause it to go critical. Accidentally drop a brick while moving it into place? Criticality excursion for a few seconds, lethal dose of radiation. They even called working with critical fissile materials 'tickling the dragon's tail'.

And as for the chemical side of things, you can look at stuff like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster (though its an outlier) where a gas leak killed from 2k to 10k people and exposed 500k to toxins. Here, a pump failure basically made it so there were 42 tons of a really nasty compound that couldn't be moved into or out of its storage tank, so the tank just had to sit there. And in other industrialization, things like coal mine explosions for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benxihu_Colliery and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monongah_mining_disaster killing tens to about a thousand at the high end, or mishandling of mining waste products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Baia_Mare_cyanide_spill which didn't directly kill anyone but basically rendered a river unlivable.

Even without those particularly dramatic disasters, there are things like the Great Smog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London when the usual scale of industrial pollutants produced, combined with stagnant air, led to an estimated 6000 deaths.

Something being dangerous isn't really that much of a barrier to people incorporating it into industry, as long as its utility (real or perceived) pays for that danger.

If the OP in that thread were asking 'why can't my Lv1 character in this futuristic setting accomplish science and technology checks that are DC 40 in this stoneage roleplay setting book?' I'd side with the OP on it. If you go and learn enough HTML to make yourself a web-page, congratulations, you're casually doing something with very little thought that was a career-defining struggle for people like Babbage. It's not because you're smarter than Babbage or 'higher level' than Babbage or anything like that, it's because a lot of smart people built things like standardized processors, then a lot of other smart people designed assembly language as a more human-readable interface to processors than punch cards or relay signals, while in parallel a lot of people were thinking about mathematical theories of computation, universality of programs, etc, and all of that got put together to result in compiler theory, along with smart programmers who built those compilers and improved them in practice, along with people who worked out all the stuff about how to automate graphical layout and rendering and font-handling, and others figured out parsers, and all of that got bundled into operating systems and browsers and text editing programs and so on all so that at the end of the day you can produce something that does something incredibly complicated with about the effort it would take to learn how to write haikus or how to rhyme.

You could have approached all of that like a comic book mad scientist, building every element of everything with your own understanding. But that's doing as a DC 80 check what a modern teenager can do as a DC 10 check because all of the hard stuff has been successfully compartmentalized away so that you don't actually need to understand it anymore.

Sure, you can do this, but it moves you further from the long-term stuff. In the real world I'm sitting here and typing on a device hooked up to another device which does the equivalent work of casting 128000 Sending spells (a 5th level spell) per second, and such devices are commonplace and cheap and the actual cost of that communication is so low once you've paid a cost of entry to the infrastructure that I could be running a video in the background by mistake without watching it and the cost would be smaller than the cost of the calories we'd go through passing that time. You're not going to get to that kind of thing by relying on any idea that looks like 'individuals with levels casting spells from their slots, training to make that a bit more potent or efficient or have more sustain'. That idea looks more like medieval guilds than industrialized society to me.

I also really don't get why you like Magewright as an example of doing industrialization right (since in every regard that I can tell, it's worse at solving these problems than if you just stuck with wizard - you need more levels to get to the same effects rather than less, you get less flexibility to learn a wide variety of utility or workforce-mandated effects since you're locked in with the spells you know via the Spell Mastery mechanic rather than having a spellbook, etc). That makes me suspect that any argument about particular settings is futile because we disagree on some more fundamental point perhaps about what it actually means to escape medievalism or to be industrialized.

Escaping medievalism doesn't mean going from D&D to Star Wars. It doesn't mean that you use trains powered by bound elementals instead of carriages pulled by Dominated dragons. Those are all the same things to me, just wearing different clothing. Saying 'its a Magewright not a Wizard, so according to the fluff that's industrial rather than medieval and so we've escaped stasis!' is equally hollow.

And around this point is when I learn you will never listen to logic. I mean, please reread the post. Your logic would have the entire school system be obsolete since any student can just use tools and become equivalent to the world's best scientist.

On the point of magewrights-- look, it is what they MAKE with magic items that drive industry. They can MAKE the infrastructure to have an internet and stuff; I wouldn't be surprised if someone had created a spell called Create Infosphere or something that does exactly that. And before you go whining that "oh noes this promotes INDIVIDUAL POWER!" know that spells can be collaborated on to be created and that you can just create a single use item of that spell.

On the entire magewright argument, it is because magewrights are easier to train for one. But also go back to the abstraction argument and realize that if you accept that RAW is NOT physics, RAW is NOT everything those magewrights/wizards can collaborate in teams to use their knowledge of the science of magic to create better things or educate more people.

On the scientist argument-- it's not because he can hit a DC 40 on knowledge, it's just that he has more advanced information. But teaching that advanced info to others? Paraphrasing: A teacher cannot hope to simply explain something to a student in one evening and expect the student to suddenly be at the same level of knowledge and understanding as they are. Even with all the resources in the universe you can't teach someone astrophysics in an evening. Not to a level that would represent a +20. Using premade code is not you succeeding on a check to advance the world, it is abstracted by you using a tool. Like using a crowbar made by another-- at one point the crowbar was new tech.

On dragons-- you're a special kind of stupid, aren't you? I mean, setting aside all the variables about dragons you simply don't know about (that you mostly DO know about with 3.X magic), like may be the ambient magic causes all the corpses to rise up, or it creates magical dangers or something, the whole thing is inherently different when working with essentially trapped, angry sentient beings. Especially ones that necessitate human sacrifice. Ones that opponents can kill or steal, or just let loose to rampage, or that disgruntled employees can run off with. Comparatively, a corporate spy can run off with a chemical formula, but you do not stop the company from making more of it. unlike a dragon. Which is VERY limited supply. Plus, all of those arguments you listed can be guarded against by MUNDANE means. Sealing away a dragons as tightly? You are inviting some deranged activist to set it loose. In any case, this whole argument was a nonsensical and pedantic nitpick of a facet of my argument and bears very little relation to the topic.

Look, I don't know what we're arguing about at this point. I raised very many points that you even agreed with, and yet you always seek to claim that my ideas are invalid because of reasons I have explained already? And then you claim that dragon zoos are safer/more efficient? Like, from previous posts, are you actually complaining that if RPGs cannot model advancement in RAW ("RAW is physics, RAW is god") then they should never be able to advance from the printed setting? So GURPS or Exalted or d20 modern or Pathfinder can never advance even though lore shows they can?

I mean, we don't have much to say anymore.

Bugbear

2021-02-10, 11:16 AM

To the first point: you do realize that not EVERYBODY can just cast planar binding at will?

It is possible to have a setting of high level spellcasters that can all cast this spell. Just FYI.

To the second point-- read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/starfinder_rpg/comments/lgcfot/why_cant_my_scientist_character_get_a_automatic/ At a certain point, there is simply nothing you can do to allow someone with no training to do jobs that would actually advance society.

A person with no training....or really even a person with training...can only go so far. Each person has a limit. In the rules this is represented by skills, feats, abilities and items. You can optimize, but often only along one path.

Destro2119

2021-02-10, 11:47 AM

It is possible to have a setting of high level spellcasters that can all cast this spell. Just FYI.

A person with no training....or really even a person with training...can only go so far. Each person has a limit. In the rules this is represented by skills, feats, abilities and items. You can optimize, but often only along one path.

So you do agree that you need actually trained people in order to do something and the accumulation of knowledge does not mean you just instantly understand all of it (like Mr. Nich asserts)?

To the first point-- yeah, that's a bit on the cheese side of things.

NichG

2021-02-10, 05:23 PM

And around this point is when I learn you will never listen to logic. I mean, please reread the post. Your logic would have the entire school system be obsolete since any student can just use tools and become equivalent to the world's best scientist.

On the point of magewrights-- look, it is what they MAKE with magic items that drive industry. They can MAKE the infrastructure to have an internet and stuff; I wouldn't be surprised if someone had created a spell called Create Infosphere or something that does exactly that. And before you go whining that "oh noes this promotes INDIVIDUAL POWER!" know that spells can be collaborated on to be created and that you can just create a single use item of that spell.

On the entire magewright argument, it is because magewrights are easier to train for one. But also go back to the abstraction argument and realize that if you accept that RAW is NOT physics, RAW is NOT everything those magewrights/wizards can collaborate in teams to use their knowledge of the science of magic to create better things or educate more people.

On the scientist argument-- it's not because he can hit a DC 40 on knowledge, it's just that he has more advanced information. But teaching that advanced info to others? Paraphrasing: A teacher cannot hope to simply explain something to a student in one evening and expect the student to suddenly be at the same level of knowledge and understanding as they are. Even with all the resources in the universe you can't teach someone astrophysics in an evening. Not to a level that would represent a +20. Using premade code is not you succeeding on a check to advance the world, it is abstracted by you using a tool. Like using a crowbar made by another-- at one point the crowbar was new tech.

The power in industrialization isn't that every person is doing things to advance the world. That's not a necessary criterion to hit. What is necessary is that people now are doing things that were impossible for them to do 100 years before. Standardization, modularization, infrastructure, and tooling accomplish this by making the tasks easier rather than making the people more brilliant. That doesn't mean that education or schooling is useless - those things give you small but multiplicative gains on everything else, so of course you want to take advantage of that. But education alone isn't going to do it. If you had a great education system, but every machine shop and smithy and carpentry studio and so on was making their own internal standards, you wouldn't have an industrial revolution (and wouldn't be able to compete with an industrial revolution that lacked the broader education access but had the standardization).

On dragons-- you're a special kind of stupid, aren't you? I mean, setting aside all the variables about dragons you simply don't know about (that you mostly DO know about with 3.X magic), like may be the ambient magic causes all the corpses to rise up, or it creates magical dangers or something, the whole thing is inherently different when working with essentially trapped, angry sentient beings. Especially ones that necessitate human sacrifice. Ones that opponents can kill or steal, or just let loose to rampage, or that disgruntled employees can run off with. Comparatively, a corporate spy can run off with a chemical formula, but you do not stop the company from making more of it. unlike a dragon. Which is VERY limited supply. Plus, all of those arguments you listed can be guarded against by MUNDANE means. Sealing away a dragons as tightly? You are inviting some deranged activist to set it loose. In any case, this whole argument was a nonsensical and pedantic nitpick of a facet of my argument and bears very little relation to the topic.

It bears relation in that it's trying to get at why you think what you do, which I think you still haven't explicitly said or defended. You've thrown around examples of what you think are stasis-promoting and stasis-defeating magic systems and said what amounts to 'if you just look at the source material I'm referring, surely you'll agree with me!'. I've looked at the source material you're referring to, I don't draw the conclusions you draw - in fact, I draw the opposite conclusions. That's relevant, because it means you at some level believe that we share some kind of framework of interpretation such that if you show me examples then that's all it would take to click for me in that framework, but when what's really going on in the argument is that we likely disagree about that fundamental framework.

My guess would be that your argument is something like: 'magic being predictable and reproducible makes it behave just like science, science led society out of medieval stasis, so predictable and orderly magic would break medieval stasis, and D&D has a magic system where spells always work the same way with consistent parameters, so D&D magic should suffice for science'

My argument is that orderliness and predictability and being science-like isn't enough - what enables a phase transition between different ways of organizing society is that the scaling laws associated with the things science uncovers have to point in ways that lead towards economies of scale and division of labor, rather than in ways that lead to better generalists.

Look, I don't know what we're arguing about at this point. I raised very many points that you even agreed with, and yet you always seek to claim that my ideas are invalid because of reasons I have explained already? And then you claim that dragon zoos are safer/more efficient? Like, from previous posts, are you actually complaining that if RPGs cannot model advancement in RAW ("RAW is physics, RAW is god") then they should never be able to advance from the printed setting? So GURPS or Exalted or d20 modern or Pathfinder can never advance even though lore shows they can?

I mean, we don't have much to say anymore.

No, I'm not and have never been arguing that RPGs cannot model advancement in RAW. That was another poster. I have never stated that the problem with magic is that it's chaotic - if anyone has said that in this thread, it's not me. I have also never stated that in order to be a good system, it must be capable of industrialization - this isn't value judgement about whether D&D is a good game or something, its an evaluation about whether the path that a D&D society would naturally take within the thematics established by D&D as a system would be, metaphorically, to the east or to the west. Being able to modernize in a way that parallels the real world is not an inherently good thing, its just a thing, and so there is no imperative to conclude that a system must go that way for us to be able to enjoy that system.

I am arguing that the essence of modernization doesn't have to do with the populace receiving access to cool effects, but it has to do with a change in the directions that the underlying pressures shaping society's actions point in, triggered by some set of discoveries or changes that demonstrate an imperative to move in some direction or die even though it goes against long-standing interests and traditions. Things that matter at a system level are economies of scale, the ability to extract value or different value from resources that were readily available and had low valuation before-hand, etc.

Starting from that point, the question is then: does a given system (or a given element of a system) paint a picture of opportunities for that kind of change in pressure, or do those things have to be edited in post-hoc (e.g. do you have to change the thematics of the system to make it happen). Furthermore, are there elements suggested by the system that would interfere with such a change in the direction of pressure or give people 'outs' that they can use to remain competitive without industrializing?

The reference to D&D's rules as they are is to keep the conversation focused. Because of course the answer to 'is there a world we can design in which magic would lead to modernization?' is obviously 'yes'. But that's different than the question of whether D&D, as presented, depicts such a system. If we use what we know about D&D magic (and not, say, how we would like it to be), what does that suggest about the natural extensions that make sense, versus things that will just be added post-hoc in order to force an industrial or space opera setting? That doesn't mean adhering strictly to RAW, but it does mean that things we add should be added in a way that is compatible with what is already there. If the system presents a magic that works via spell slots and Int scores and levels, we have to take that as a meaningful abstraction of something that is intended to be 'how D&D magic works' and not just an inconvenient accidental detail. Otherwise the conclusion is 'the question about D&D magic cannot be answered because D&D magic is not an identifiable thing about which any statement could be made'. That doesn't mean a strict RAW-only limit, but it does mean using things and variations that exist within the rules to extrapolate as to what kinds of extensions are coherent and what kind of extensions aren't.

That's why I accept e.g. the Incantations variant system or Master Craftsmen as potential ways out of stasis, whereas 'just ask a deity to help invent this new kind of magic item from a different setting book/rule system' isn't persuasive to me.

Jay R

2021-02-10, 05:56 PM

Magic alone doesn't cause medieval statis. People wanting to play in medieval fantasyish worlds may cause medieval stasis in those worlds.

Very true. Now, is that the meta-answer, talking about designers, DMs, and players, or the in-world answer, talking about gods and epic characters?

Destro2119

2021-02-10, 06:53 PM

The power in industrialization isn't that every person is doing things to advance the world. That's not a necessary criterion to hit. What is necessary is that people now are doing things that were impossible for them to do 100 years before. Standardization, modularization, infrastructure, and tooling accomplish this by making the tasks easier rather than making the people more brilliant. That doesn't mean that education or schooling is useless - those things give you small but multiplicative gains on everything else, so of course you want to take advantage of that. But education alone isn't going to do it. If you had a great education system, but every machine shop and smithy and carpentry studio and so on was making their own internal standards, you wouldn't have an industrial revolution (and wouldn't be able to compete with an industrial revolution that lacked the broader education access but had the standardization).

It bears relation in that it's trying to get at why you think what you do, which I think you still haven't explicitly said or defended. You've thrown around examples of what you think are stasis-promoting and stasis-defeating magic systems and said what amounts to 'if you just look at the source material I'm referring, surely you'll agree with me!'. I've looked at the source material you're referring to, I don't draw the conclusions you draw - in fact, I draw the opposite conclusions. That's relevant, because it means you at some level believe that we share some kind of framework of interpretation such that if you show me examples then that's all it would take to click for me in that framework, but when what's really going on in the argument is that we likely disagree about that fundamental framework.

My guess would be that your argument is something like: 'magic being predictable and reproducible makes it behave just like science, science led society out of medieval stasis, so predictable and orderly magic would break medieval stasis, and D&D has a magic system where spells always work the same way with consistent parameters, so D&D magic should suffice for science'

My argument is that orderliness and predictability and being science-like isn't enough - what enables a phase transition between different ways of organizing society is that the scaling laws associated with the things science uncovers have to point in ways that lead towards economies of scale and division of labor, rather than in ways that lead to better generalists.

No, I'm not and have never been arguing that RPGs cannot model advancement in RAW. That was another poster. I have never stated that the problem with magic is that it's chaotic - if anyone has said that in this thread, it's not me. I have also never stated that in order to be a good system, it must be capable of industrialization - this isn't value judgement about whether D&D is a good game or something, its an evaluation about whether the path that a D&D society would naturally take within the thematics established by D&D as a system would be, metaphorically, to the east or to the west. Being able to modernize in a way that parallels the real world is not an inherently good thing, its just a thing, and so there is no imperative to conclude that a system must go that way for us to be able to enjoy that system.

I am arguing that the essence of modernization doesn't have to do with the populace receiving access to cool effects, but it has to do with a change in the directions that the underlying pressures shaping society's actions point in, triggered by some set of discoveries or changes that demonstrate an imperative to move in some direction or die even though it goes against long-standing interests and traditions. Things that matter at a system level are economies of scale, the ability to extract value or different value from resources that were readily available and had low valuation before-hand, etc.

Starting from that point, the question is then: does a given system (or a given element of a system) paint a picture of opportunities for that kind of change in pressure, or do those things have to be edited in post-hoc (e.g. do you have to change the thematics of the system to make it happen). Furthermore, are there elements suggested by the system that would interfere with such a change in the direction of pressure or give people 'outs' that they can use to remain competitive without industrializing?

The reference to D&D's rules as they are is to keep the conversation focused. Because of course the answer to 'is there a world we can design in which magic would lead to modernization?' is obviously 'yes'. But that's different than the question of whether D&D, as presented, depicts such a system. If we use what we know about D&D magic (and not, say, how we would like it to be), what does that suggest about the natural extensions that make sense, versus things that will just be added post-hoc in order to force an industrial or space opera setting? That doesn't mean adhering strictly to RAW, but it does mean that things we add should be added in a way that is compatible with what is already there. If the system presents a magic that works via spell slots and Int scores and levels, we have to take that as a meaningful abstraction of something that is intended to be 'how D&D magic works' and not just an inconvenient accidental detail. Otherwise the conclusion is 'the question about D&D magic cannot be answered because D&D magic is not an identifiable thing about which any statement could be made'. That doesn't mean a strict RAW-only limit, but it does mean using things and variations that exist within the rules to extrapolate as to what kinds of extensions are coherent and what kind of extensions aren't.

That's why I accept e.g. the Incantations variant system or Master Craftsmen as potential ways out of stasis, whereas 'just ask a deity to help invent this new kind of magic item from a different setting book/rule system' isn't persuasive to me.

"My argument is that orderliness and predictability and being science-like isn't enough - what enables a phase transition between different ways of organizing society is that the scaling laws associated with the things science uncovers have to point in ways that lead towards economies of scale and division of labor, rather than in ways that lead to better generalists."

That can happen in DnD games. Perhaps it's some new magical effect discovered by a team of wizards that can be attached to a location. Perhaps it's a set of standardized tools that allow those who can use them to craft magic. The possibilities are endless.

In any case, we have established that it is 100% possible to establish such an infrastructure mechanically. However, it is the "why would they do this at all" you seem to have hang-ups on.

Your main assertion seems to be that the very idea that a magic user can get more spells as he advances in knowledge is antithetical to the idea of advancement because of it's focus on personal improvement. I should remind you again that levels and skill ranks are abstractions-- thus, a physics professor is arguably higher in level than a freshman student. Also that xp does not equate to fighting monsters, in fact it often does not, it can equate to studying with others, thus fostering a sense of camaraderie and teamwork. Another assertion you bring up is how a magic user is totally self sufficient and therefore is much more narrowminded than a scientist who needs an infrastructure. I have already repeatedly stated that all crafting costs are abstractions-- a wizard probably needs just as good an infrastructure as a scientist, naturally leading to advancement in those associated fields, like agriculture or mining for example (RAW example is the Pathfinder downtime rules being able to generate Magic goods).

In this way, we can see eventual programs for mass education in classes such as the magewright to overall contribute to the empirical habit of thought.

In any case, the main question of the thread has been answered.

NichG

2021-02-10, 07:58 PM

In any case, we have established that it is 100% possible to establish such an infrastructure mechanically. However, it is the "why would they do this at all" you seem to have hang-ups on.

Your main assertion seems to be that the very idea that a magic user can get more spells as he advances in knowledge is antithetical to the idea of advancement because of it's focus on personal improvement. I should remind you again that levels and skill ranks are abstractions-- thus, a physics professor is arguably higher in level than a freshman student. Also that xp does not equate to fighting monsters, in fact it often does not, it can equate to studying with others, thus fostering a sense of camaraderie and teamwork. Another assertion you bring up is how a magic user is totally self sufficient and therefore is much more narrowminded than a scientist who needs an infrastructure. I have already repeatedly stated that all crafting costs are abstractions-- a wizard probably needs just as good an infrastructure as a scientist, naturally leading to advancement in those associated fields, like agriculture or mining for example (RAW example is the Pathfinder downtime rules being able to generate Magic goods).

If I could become incredibly wealthy or physically powerful or conquer a nation and carve out a kingdom by studying Physics, then I'd argue that Physics would be something that would encourage social stasis (whereas generally speaking in the real world if you go and get a degree in Physics, you're choosing to prioritize other things over wealth, agency, and power, because you could make more an order of magnitude more money, more quickly, by becoming a lawyer or a doctor or investor or by starting a business). If a technology required people to get a degree in physics in order to use it, I'd argue that the technology would be an industrial failure - a curiosity at best, not ready for actual deployment.

Nifft

2021-02-10, 08:03 PM

In any case, the main question of the thread has been answered.

Indeed.

D&D has never been strictly medieval, and D&D as a whole has never been particularly static.

Morty_Jhones

2021-02-10, 08:16 PM

in responce to the OP, harry poters magic is delibratly seperated from the magic world.

one of the things that is made clear is that magic and technoligy do not react in predicatable ways.

thus the charmmed car dumping harry and Ron in the grass after it got wompped by the willow and then comming back for them to resque them from the spiders.

in one of the books harry talks to homminy about briinnging a gun into hogwarts so a have somthing to defend himself with, other than just his wand, and homminy exsplanse thay the magic field would cause it to missfire or worse annimate and go on a killing spree.

Destro2119

2021-02-11, 10:17 AM

If I could become incredibly wealthy or physically powerful or conquer a nation and carve out a kingdom by studying Physics, then I'd argue that Physics would be something that would encourage social stasis (whereas generally speaking in the real world if you go and get a degree in Physics, you're choosing to prioritize other things over wealth, agency, and power, because you could make more an order of magnitude more money, more quickly, by becoming a lawyer or a doctor or investor or by starting a business). If a technology required people to get a degree in physics in order to use it, I'd argue that the technology would be an industrial failure - a curiosity at best, not ready for actual deployment.

The whole argument is split up between two main facets:

First off, the mechanical. I think we can all agree that due to RAW and logical extrapolations (ie a wizard wants to store his spells easier, so he researches a datapad and figures out how to transfer the spells to it so he can store a library's worth of spells in one item) it is not mechanically impossible to set up industrialization/magitech, such as by making/upgrading a construct that can craft items like the Dedicated Wright.

"If a technology required people to get a degree in physics in order to use it, I'd argue that the technology would be an industrial failure - a curiosity at best, not ready for actual deployment."

You do not NEED a degree in physics to use a wondrous item, which is what essentially all our modern tech translates to. You also do not need special training to use tech created or influenced by magical means. So this point is invalid.

Now, the mental. Yes, leveling up and becoming more powerful IS an incentive for stasis. But just because YOU are like that does not mean everyone is like that. There could easily be national organizations of wizards governmentally funded and governmentally funded wizard schools too. Plus, the magewright class is not powerful enough to do what you say either, so that is exempt. So you could train up most people in that and you would have no problem. So magewright is effectively equal to the Master Craftsman that you do agree with.

NichG

2021-02-11, 04:18 PM

Now, the mental. Yes, leveling up and becoming more powerful IS an incentive for stasis. But just because YOU are like that does not mean everyone is like that. There could easily be national organizations of wizards governmentally funded and governmentally funded wizard schools too. Plus, the magewright class is not powerful enough to do what you say either, so that is exempt. So you could train up most people in that and you would have no problem. So magewright is effectively equal to the Master Craftsman that you do agree with.

Again, the question is where the incentives lie. If you're a medieval king and you can put money into something, do you hire a high level wizard advisor who can personally build indefatigable soldiers of clay and stone and bone, create vast quantities of economically valuable resources such as iron and salt from thin air, travel the breadth of an empire in seconds with teleport, press powerful natural creatures into servitude, bombard armies invisibly from above their weapons range, and in a pinch can treat with the cohorts of heaven or hell. Or do you pay for broad educational programs that teach everyone in your populace to cast Mending? If the well-meaning, egalitarian, enlightened monarch chooses the second and as a result gets steamrolled by the nations led by those monarchs who do the first, then nothing changes.

And I'd really advise you stop flogging Magewright, because its pretty much the opposite of convincing to me even if you like it for whatever reason. Wizard and Cleric and Druid and Sorceror all exist in D&D, adding a class that is worse in every way does not make those things go away. It just represents an option that is worse in every way.

Destro2119

2021-02-11, 06:51 PM

Again, the question is where the incentives lie. If you're a medieval king and you can put money into something, do you hire a high level wizard advisor who can personally build indefatigable soldiers of clay and stone and bone, create vast quantities of economically valuable resources such as iron and salt from thin air, travel the breadth of an empire in seconds with teleport, press powerful natural creatures into servitude, bombard armies invisibly from above their weapons range, and in a pinch can treat with the cohorts of heaven or hell. Or do you pay for broad educational programs that teach everyone in your populace to cast Mending? If the well-meaning, egalitarian, enlightened monarch chooses the second and as a result gets steamrolled by the nations led by those monarchs who do the first, then nothing changes.

And I'd really advise you stop flogging Magewright, because its pretty much the opposite of convincing to me even if you like it for whatever reason. Wizard and Cleric and Druid and Sorceror all exist in D&D, adding a class that is worse in every way does not make those things go away. It just represents an option that is worse in every way.

I will continue to use magewright as an example because it is a good example of what could represent basic training in magical ways for a society based on it. I also stand by how my logic of the abstractions of RPGs solves many of your supposed problems.

But in any case, even under your example, you still prove that there will be no stasis in the world, no matter how it happens. So I consider this thread's main topic answered.

Nifft

2021-02-11, 08:09 PM

But in any case, even under your example, you still prove that there will be no stasis in the world, no matter how it happens. So I consider this thread's main topic answered.
If you want another confirmation of this, you could look at how various eras of gunpowder weapons are included in the DMG -- the world isn't intended to be static, and you can see this in how you're given tools to develop it.

Destro2119

2021-02-12, 09:17 PM

If you want another confirmation of this, you could look at how various eras of gunpowder weapons are included in the DMG -- the world isn't intended to be static, and you can see this in how you're given tools to develop it.

Those rules are more for outlier/one shot situations, but the point still stands. Even with only 11th or lower magic casters, society will still progress, because of magic doing one thing, tech filling in the gaps, and the two eventually becoming closer together (like pretty much every RPG writer assumes is the logical endpoint anyways, ex Starfinder/Pathfinder/Exalted 2e).

Calthropstu

2021-02-13, 01:39 PM

I think the ultimate answer to the thread's original question is "it can, but doesn't have to."
Most of the issue lies in people WANTING to play in settings of that sort.

Destro2119

2021-02-13, 03:24 PM

I think the ultimate answer to the thread's original question is "it can, but doesn't have to."
Most of the issue lies in people WANTING to play in settings of that sort.

Yeah. I mean, if magic is too low, then we get Onward, or at least if tech doesn't advance it's not BECAUSE of magic. If magic is at the "normal level" it gets pretty silly to assume that stasis will happen too.

Nifft

2021-02-13, 03:32 PM

Those rules are more for outlier/one shot situations, but the point still stands. Even with only 11th or lower magic casters, society will still progress, because of magic doing one thing, tech filling in the gaps, and the two eventually becoming closer together (like pretty much every RPG writer assumes is the logical endpoint anyways, ex Starfinder/Pathfinder/Exalted 2e).

I'm honestly not sure how common guns are in homebrew settings.

My point is just that the RAW includes provisions for settings with more (or less!) tech development, and settings which develop new tech over the course of a campaign.

The second part of that feels like a substantive contradiction to the idea that D&D settings are always in some kind of enforced medieval stasis, which is why I brought them up -- they're certainly not commonly found here on the forums, but forums and home games are not strongly correlated.

Elbeyon

2021-02-13, 03:53 PM

Magic is technology. Magic is practiced and predicable. A mage that casts Knock will get Knock the same way they did every other time they cast the spell. It's not going to randomly summon demons or something.

The only real way I see magic causing non-magic technology to not develop is if magic is better than non-magic technology in every single way. That's probably not true, so magic and non-magic technology will develop together. It could be argued technology development will be slowed, but overall as long as humans exist there will not be a stasis. I would argue that magic will speed up the development of technology. Magic is another tool for development and is available early in many timelines. A single druid would raise people out of subsistence farming much quicker and hasten development.

Calthropstu

2021-02-13, 05:40 PM

Elbeyon

2021-02-13, 05:53 PM

Enter wild magic...It exists, but it's an exception, not the normal.

Calthropstu

2021-02-13, 05:58 PM

It exists, but it's an exception, not the normal.

Except when it becomes the norm inexplicably.

Elbeyon

2021-02-13, 05:59 PM

Except when it becomes the norm inexplicably.Like when?

Calthropstu

2021-02-13, 06:04 PM

Like when?

Like during the time of troubles? Like when a random wild mage casts an epic wild magic spell to make an area permanently wild magic? Like when some wierd area suddenly becomes wild magic? Like whenever Mystra dies? Lots of areas in chaos planes, wild magic really is always the norm. Or "when the GM says so."

Elbeyon

2021-02-13, 06:12 PM

Like during the time of troubles? Like when a random wild mage casts an epic wild magic spell to make an area permanently wild magic? Like when some wierd area suddenly becomes wild magic? Like whenever Mystra dies? Lots of areas in chaos planes, wild magic really is always the norm. Or "when the GM says so."Yes, the dm can change the rules and change the setting. What's your point? The default assumption is that magic is technology. The dm changing the rules or setting doesn't only apply to magic. In fact, that applies to everything. The dm can make gravity subjective. The dm can make drowning a person heal them. The dm can make it were atoms don't exist.

Calthropstu

2021-02-13, 06:41 PM

Yes, the dm can change the rules and change the setting. What's your point? The default assumption is that magic is technology. The dm changing the rules or setting doesn't only apply to magic. In fact, that applies to everything. The dm can make gravity subjective. The dm can make drowning a person heal them. The dm can make it were atoms don't exist.

That's exacly why d&d is the way it is. My "enter wild magic" statement may be a joke, but is a valid point nonetheless. Wild magic is literally in the rules, and not explained. So the statement I quoted claiming magic was science, and a fireball would always be a fireball was not fully accurate. Areas of wild magic and dead magic exist, and as more of them show up over time it seems, magic could literally die anywhere. "The GM says so" is quite literally the ultimate answer to the thread itself. Does magic cause stasis? If the GM says so.

Elbeyon

2021-02-13, 07:03 PM

Destro2119

2021-02-13, 07:09 PM

That's exacly why d&d is the way it is. My "enter wild magic" statement may be a joke, but is a valid point nonetheless. Wild magic is literally in the rules, and not explained. So the statement I quoted claiming magic was science, and a fireball would always be a fireball was not fully accurate. Areas of wild magic and dead magic exist, and as more of them show up over time it seems, magic could literally die anywhere. "The GM says so" is quite literally the ultimate answer to the thread itself. Does magic cause stasis? If the GM says so.

Once again, it's not the default assumption. Also, on this particular point, widespread "system-level" wild magic/dead magic zones are 100% not the assumption. Typically, permanent ones only happen when there is some event that happens that is so horribly disruptive it is a plot device (ex Gods fighting/Spellplague/two level 40+ wizards deciding to wage war) and therefore should be treated on the same level as a nuclear apocalypse.

Also, I can't find canon citations for "as more of them show up over time it seems", but if you reference FR, well, FR has always had the highest apocalypse potential of all the worlds and really is just kind of a bad example due to being, quote, "a planet sized plot railroad."

In any case, "the GM rules all" is 1000% a valid assertion, but since a GM can also say particle physics is different so therefore electronic/digital devices can never be developed, or any other combo of universal changes that result in *technological* stasis too, I'm going to stick with Elbeyon's assertions.

Bugbear

2021-02-13, 08:00 PM

Also, I can't find canon citations for "as more of them show up over time it seems",.

Mystara has an artifact that permanently drained magic from a world.....

Destro2119

2021-02-13, 08:18 PM

Mystara has an artifact that permanently drained magic from a world.....

Which falls under the auspice of "plot device" ie not the norm for the world.

Nifft

2021-02-13, 11:50 PM

Mystara has an artifact that permanently drained magic from a world.....

When you're looking at a continent-sized plot railroad, the effect of magic or anything else is going to be negligible.

That setting is in stasis because the authors like it that way; nothing more, nothing less.

Calthropstu

2021-02-14, 10:55 AM

When you're looking at a continent-sized plot railroad, the effect of magic or anything else is going to be negligible.

That setting isAll settings in stasis are in stasis because the authors like it that way; nothing more, nothing less.

Fixed it for you.

hamishspence

2021-02-14, 11:00 AM

Some novels suggest a degree of innovation. Galleons instead of Carracks. Galleasses instead of Galleys. And so forth.

Nifft

2021-02-14, 01:55 PM

Fixed it for you.

But that's wrong.

Greyhawk did advance in technology over time.

Eberron's recent tech advancement is central to the setting, and you're shown how to advance it more.

FR is the outlier for being a setting where time is canonically passing -- sometimes a lot of time -- and technology is present (thanks to Gond), but advancements never change the setting.

TridentOfMirth

2021-02-14, 02:13 PM

Destro2119

2021-02-14, 07:21 PM

I think the real question is one of culture. If your culture does not place a large emphasis on learning and subsidizes those who wish to learn, then stasis is definitely possible (or at the very least very slow, gradual progress). This is definitely compounded by many settings having an "apocalypse" (wide spread societal collapse) in the recent-ish past.

The real problem is that most cultures, in game worlds, are never shown to be averse to advancements, and moreover it's not like everything is stable enough for there to be any stagnation a la the Aztecs. Not even FR is this way outwardly, it's more like groups like the Harpers and Moonstars headed by uber high level people are keeping things stagnant from the shadows.

Destro2119

2021-02-14, 09:06 PM

But that's wrong.

Greyhawk did advance in technology over time.

Eberron's recent tech advancement is central to the setting, and you're shown how to advance it more.

FR is the outlier for being a setting where time is canonically passing -- sometimes a lot of time -- and technology is present (thanks to Gond), but advancements never change the setting.

"Eberron's recent tech advancement is central to the setting, and you're shown how to advance it more"

Which book is this?

Nifft

2021-02-14, 09:30 PM

"Eberron's recent tech advancement is central to the setting, and you're shown how to advance it more"

Which book is this?

The recent tech advancement is present in pretty much all the books. Warforged are a relatively new technology, for example, and the continent's issues in dealing with integrating them into peaceful society is quite central.

At the default 998 start year, Elemental-bound skyships are almost 10 years old as a technology. Again, new and quite central.

Calthropstu

2021-02-14, 09:43 PM

The recent tech advancement is present in pretty much all the books. Warforged are a relatively new technology, for example, and the continent's issues in dealing with integrating them into peaceful society is quite central.

At the default 998 start year, Elemental-bound skyships are almost 10 years old as a technology. Again, new and quite central.

... I will now state "settings NOT in stasis are that way because the authors want it that way."

Ravenloft is in stasis. Forgotten Realms is in stasis. Dragonlance is in stasis. Because the authors wrote them that way. The reverse is also true.
If you want to play in a realm not in stasis, play in one not in stasis. If you don't like the setting you are in, change it. Or make one and BECOME the author.

In any and all established settings, we are at the whim of the author(s). Or not because we can ignore it as GMs. "You awaken in the dwarven fortress in Mithril Hall. Things have become much easier with the advent of electricity. Giant machines now comb through the deep mines, able to defeat all but the most ferocious of monsters, and even does the mining. Ore is brought to the forges using self driving carts, so deaths in the mines have virtually ceased. It's been 100 years since anyone has died in the mines..."

RedMage125

2021-02-15, 04:53 AM

Destro2119

2021-02-15, 10:46 AM

Don't know if this has been addressed or not, but I can see how Magic can cause some societal stasis.

Magic, for example, especially wizardry, if it requires a great deal of (probably expensive) training, would reinforce the "aristocrat-commoner" divide. Social mobility might be possible, but harder.

If one looks to the Xcrawl setting, which is basically our world if D&D rules and magic had always been real, you see an example of this. After the Revolutionary War, instead of a Republic, we got the North American Empire, with Emperor George Augustus I.

Aristocrats who could wield magic would be able to keep magic limited to the aristocracy. The appearance of sorcerers could be an opportunity for upward advancement, as society benefits from those individuals getting trained, as opposed to letting their power go uncontrolled.

Yeah, but XCrawl isn't in *technological* stasis either. The book even states that they are ahead of us in agriculture and metallurgy. Arcane Video Screens are as common as televisions, and a big deal is made of the fact that basically everyone has them, so obviously it is possible to mass produce them. Plus, there was even going to be a cultural revolution to a republic, and the whole *point* of XCrawl as a game show is that it was meant to distract from that. And from that we can extrapolate that eventually someone is going to develop smartphones or some kind of more advanced/widespread broadcasting technology, since that is the logical way to hook more people on it (just for a potential plot point). Or that eventually XCrawl is revealed for what it is and that the Republic government rises up. So it's not medieval stasis, far from it.

EDIT: Yeah, magic can cause societal stasis, but I feel as if it is the exception rather than the norm, as the book even hints at when it talks about the absurdity of the world. Otherwise, very many of, say, Starfinder's institutions would make no sense. Plus, keeping a lid on *technological* advancements is also a historically accurate way for societal stasis as you say.

EDIT 2: See Dragonstar too. You can have an oppressive empire *and* be technologically advanced, just as much as you can have democracy in the Bronze Age.

RedMage125

2021-02-16, 03:04 AM

Yeah, but XCrawl isn't in *technological* stasis either. The book even states that they are ahead of us in agriculture and metallurgy. Arcane Video Screens are as common as televisions, and a big deal is made of the fact that basically everyone has them, so obviously it is possible to mass produce them. Plus, there was even going to be a cultural revolution to a republic, and the whole *point* of XCrawl as a game show is that it was meant to distract from that. And from that we can extrapolate that eventually someone is going to develop smartphones or some kind of more advanced/widespread broadcasting technology, since that is the logical way to hook more people on it (just for a potential plot point). Or that eventually XCrawl is revealed for what it is and that the Republic government rises up. So it's not medieval stasis, far from it.

EDIT: Yeah, magic can cause societal stasis, but I feel as if it is the exception rather than the norm, as the book even hints at when it talks about the absurdity of the world. Otherwise, very many of, say, Starfinder's institutions would make no sense. Plus, keeping a lid on *technological* advancements is also a historically accurate way for societal stasis as you say.

EDIT 2: See Dragonstar too. You can have an oppressive empire *and* be technologically advanced, just as much as you can have democracy in the Bronze Age.

Nothing about this contests anything I said.

I only mentioned societal stasis, vis a vis the Aristocracy-Commoner divide. Which you agree with.

That was it.

Destro2119

2021-02-16, 10:18 AM

Nothing about this contests anything I said.

I only mentioned societal stasis, vis a vis the Aristocracy-Commoner divide. Which you agree with.

That was it.

I said it was a possibility, not an inevitability.

Bugbear

2021-02-16, 12:53 PM

EDIT: Yeah, magic can cause societal stasis

In general magic or technology or more vaguely advancement. It does happen, but mostly in isolated spots.

Stasis is a lot more social or even more so political. Take nearly any society, all too often you get people in power that want to stay in power and have control over everything. The Empire from Star Wars is a classic example, but there are plenty of others.

Nearly all D&D settings are a post apocalypse. Once there was a massive advanced empire ...but it fell. And now everyone is just scrambling to survive in the aftermath. So there is a lot of focus on just staying alive. Though this is also the perfect spot for tyrants to grow. People will give up a lot to live. But a tyrant needs to keep the people down, so that means no advancement.

At the best, even the "good" places are struggling just to have basic living. So they have little time for advancement. The "bad" places actively slowing down, blocking or even stopping any advancement. And even places in-between good and bad have problems.

Destro2119

2021-02-16, 06:14 PM

In general magic or technology or more vaguely advancement. It does happen, but mostly in isolated spots.

Stasis is a lot more social or even more so political. Take nearly any society, all too often you get people in power that want to stay in power and have control over everything. The Empire from Star Wars is a classic example, but there are plenty of others.

Nearly all D&D settings are a post apocalypse. Once there was a massive advanced empire ...but it fell. And now everyone is just scrambling to survive in the aftermath. So there is a lot of focus on just staying alive. Though this is also the perfect spot for tyrants to grow. People will give up a lot to live. But a tyrant needs to keep the people down, so that means no advancement.

At the best, even the "good" places are struggling just to have basic living. So they have little time for advancement. The "bad" places actively slowing down, blocking or even stopping any advancement. And even places in-between good and bad have problems.

I mean... the same could be said for tech too. Progress slowing down massively after some apocalypse is pretty much the norm no matter what. My problem was how that most settings ARN'T as desperate as you say ie Fallout game level; they just seem to be theme park medieval land forever.

Which is something that has been disproved on this thread as being only b/c of author choice and not b/c of magic being "innately stagnating" or something.

Bugbear

2021-02-16, 09:04 PM

I mean... the same could be said for tech too. Progress slowing down massively after some apocalypse is pretty much the norm no matter what. My problem was how that most settings ARN'T as desperate as you say ie Fallout game level; they just seem to be theme park medieval land forever.

Guess it depends on what your thinking "desperate". The settings are not dystopias, they are just After the Fall. It's not the "mad max" wasteland world where everyone only has a few scraps of clothing. The example you want is: The Walking Dead.

So at the first season of TWD civilization is gone. We see a hundred or so survivors that are a random mixed bunch. We see an immediate loss of scientists, engineers, doctors and such people. For the first five or so years of the show people use guns and cars.....but then bullets and gas start running out. After the time jump, you see a lot less guns and almost no cars. And the same is true for a lot of things made by 21st century technology: chemicals, drugs, plastic and more.

So after just 25 years....there is a good chance nearly all the stuff left over from before the fall will fail. And society simply can not advance quick enough to stop it. The vast, vast majority of books (or computers) only tell you things in the most vague ways. Even if you have some of the FEMA manuals that tell you how to make things like gasoline (sort of), it would still be beyond most people...oh, and explosively dangerous.

Some things will stay, for example running water and sewers. Water towers are simple enough, or even a simple solar powered water pump(for as long as you can keep the solar panels working).

THIS is your D&D setting world.

PhoenixPhyre

2021-02-16, 09:56 PM

Guess it depends on what your thinking "desperate". The settings are not dystopias, they are just After the Fall. It's not the "mad max" wasteland world where everyone only has a few scraps of clothing. The example you want is: The Walking Dead.

So at the first season of TWD civilization is gone. We see a hundred or so survivors that are a random mixed bunch. We see an immediate loss of scientists, engineers, doctors and such people. For the first five or so years of the show people use guns and cars.....but then bullets and gas start running out. After the time jump, you see a lot less guns and almost no cars. And the same is true for a lot of things made by 21st century technology: chemicals, drugs, plastic and more.

So after just 25 years....there is a good chance nearly all the stuff left over from before the fall will fail. And society simply can not advance quick enough to stop it. The vast, vast majority of books (or computers) only tell you things in the most vague ways. Even if you have some of the FEMA manuals that tell you how to make things like gasoline (sort of), it would still be beyond most people...oh, and explosively dangerous.

Some things will stay, for example running water and sewers. Water towers are simple enough, or even a simple solar powered water pump(for as long as you can keep the solar panels working).

THIS is your D&D setting world.

One thing (not sure which way it cuts) is that while tech requires constant upkeep, magic items (at least by default) don't. Your great grandfather had a magic plow? Great. So do you, unless it got stolen. Your great grandfather had a tractor? Well, it's highly unlikely that it made it this long, and if it did, you have to hand-craft parts to keep it running. And that's with a fully-functional tech base.

Would this push toward stasis (because there's less need to innovate, as you've already got all this stuff from the past)? Or make it easier to progress (because you don't lose as much)? Dunno.

Bugbear

2021-02-16, 10:51 PM

One thing (not sure which way it cuts) is that while tech requires constant upkeep, magic items (at least by default) don't. Your great grandfather had a magic plow? Great. So do you, unless it got stolen. Your great grandfather had a tractor? Well, it's highly unlikely that it made it this long, and if it did, you have to hand-craft parts to keep it running. And that's with a fully-functional tech base.

Would this push toward stasis (because there's less need to innovate, as you've already got all this stuff from the past)? Or make it easier to progress (because you don't lose as much)? Dunno.

Well...it goes both ways.

Lots of magic needs a command word...and once that is lost the magic item is useless. And while it's possible to find a lost command word...not everyone can do it.

Magic items don't 'decay' by the rules but they can be lost and destroyed. This is even more true for the large in place magic items. And once lost they can't be replaced. Plus lots of magic items will run out of charges too. Then you have the general loss of the ability to fix or recharge magic items...even more so the cheap and easy ways.

And you have the general loss of knowledge too. The spells that call outsiders loose a lot of use if you don't know named outsiders to call for any needed thing.

Destro2119

2021-02-17, 09:44 AM

Guess it depends on what your thinking "desperate". The settings are not dystopias, they are just After the Fall. It's not the "mad max" wasteland world where everyone only has a few scraps of clothing. The example you want is: The Walking Dead.

So at the first season of TWD civilization is gone. We see a hundred or so survivors that are a random mixed bunch. We see an immediate loss of scientists, engineers, doctors and such people. For the first five or so years of the show people use guns and cars.....but then bullets and gas start running out. After the time jump, you see a lot less guns and almost no cars. And the same is true for a lot of things made by 21st century technology: chemicals, drugs, plastic and more.

So after just 25 years....there is a good chance nearly all the stuff left over from before the fall will fail. And society simply can not advance quick enough to stop it. The vast, vast majority of books (or computers) only tell you things in the most vague ways. Even if you have some of the FEMA manuals that tell you how to make things like gasoline (sort of), it would still be beyond most people...oh, and explosively dangerous.

Some things will stay, for example running water and sewers. Water towers are simple enough, or even a simple solar powered water pump(for as long as you can keep the solar panels working).

THIS is your D&D setting world.

No it's not. Look at Golarion. It has MULTIPLE empires who have easily built up the infrastructure for such knowledge again, ie academies, universities, etc, especially considering how it has been some thousands of years after, not decades.

Yet the setting doesn't advance. Once again, there has been no reason for stasis, and people are actively learning about the world and not just surviving. Replace Golarion with Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms (an even more blatant example)and you see the same thing. The world is stagnant only because the author wills it to be.

Thus, I conclude that the logical conclusion is that worlds with magic will advance.

EDIT: Also, you cite technological stasis too, meaning that magic is not inherently conducive to stasis, further reinforcing that the answer to the main question of the thread is no.