Quote Originally Posted by BenjCano View Post
Brandon Sanderson, Howard Taylor, and Dan Wells would disagree with you on that. One of the very first episodes of their Writing Excuses podcast was exclusively about costs and ramifications of magic in a fantasy setting. The way it was described is that if the energy you're getting out of a magic spell is cheaper than getting the same amount of energy you'd get from a donkey, than your medieval economy just fell apart, and you have to deal with that.
With due respect to Brandon and Howard (both of whom I consider friends), that otherwise very good advice is only applicable if you are actually creating your world from scratch and expecting it to be approached solely on its own terms. That's not what I'm doing; I took an existing setting—one with inherent flaws—off the shelf and spruced it up a bit, originally for the purpose of commenting on it. It's not required that I fix the flaws with the setting in order to write a story in it, any more than someone writing a new Oz story needs to justify how the Tin Man works. This is what D&D settings look like; do you see the sort of hard analytical justifications you're looking for in the official Forgotten Realms novels? No, they just mumble some stuff about the Weave and move on.

In fact, that comment about the donkey is, itself, largely a reaction to the whole of fantasy literature, especially D&D. D&D destroys that medieval economy model, over and over in a hundred ways (permanent Walls of Iron, diamonds from the Plane of Earth) and then just handwaves the consequences with a shrug. And it works fine. They wouldn't feel the need to make that statement if it were not violated by almost every fantasy story ever written. It's a valid perspective, but it's hardly indicative of the sole way to write about magic.

Quote Originally Posted by BenjCano View Post
You also are kind of implying that someone CAN'T think about these kinds of consequences and ramifications and tell a good story. Maybe not your intent, but I want to emphatically say that this isn't the case. Anyone who's read a Sanderson novel knows that the limits and consequences and impacts and ramifications of magic becomes elements of the story, not tedious treatises on how the magic system works.
As jere7my says, this is literally Brandon's modus operandi; one of the things he is best known for. Therefore, he is covered under my clause, "Maybe if that sort exploration is the point of the work."

Quote Originally Posted by BenjCano View Post
When it comes right down to it, in this system, with a real and verifiable afterlife of the kind described in the comic, the argument that one should prevent the gods from destroying the world and moving everyone to the afterlife is a harder one to make.
You are welcome to feel however you want about that, but I'm not spending any more time on the subject. I don't feel the need to address it any further in-comic than that one speech balloon I already devoted to it.