On Apr 16, 2010, at 7:15 PM, Jay Carlisle wrote:
My apologies Miss T.
You can call me Meg because that's what everyone else calls me. Except Dad, of course :-P
At 19:36 -0400 4/15/10, Jay wrote:Is the friction twixt science and religion really there?I think they are not in conflict, but orthogonal.I see where she gets it from... straight-angles indeed...Spirituality should address the things that can't be experimented on, proven or disproven - by-definition matters of faith. Science gets the disprovable and provable matters.I'm with you here.Clearly, Earth history shows that matters *can* move from one sphere to the other ("and yet, it moves!"). I claim that means we have gotten neither our science nor our spirituality "right" yet.Nice point.I'd like to mention that in a campagin that allows research this situation is a good thing.Astrology becomes Astronomy, Alchemy becomes Chemistry, and so on.
Or they were completely different to start with. ITL rules treat Alchemy and Chemistry as two completely different fields, indicated by the fact that Chemists don't get any "discount" when learning Alchemy, like Physickers do when learning Vet.
A culture that has their main power source as campfires is only gonna get so much done in a day vs. a socieity that uses a coal- hydrogen hybrid power plant. Resources are a big limiting factor here, but there is still the "how many ways can one skin a cat?" question. Without the Hindenburg disaster we may well have gone a diffrent direction with air travel, see the militarys current dirgible transport projects for examples (or R.A.H.'s Job).
Not necessarily. If I remember right, the Wright brothers had their airplane off the ground years before the Hindenburg blew up. And dirigibles work fine, but you have to have a huge volume of helium (or hydrogen...) for the amount of weight you can lift. So, even without the Hindenburg disaster, I would bet good money that we'd still be using airplanes for at least some purposes (if only military ones). But I get your point. :)
Margaret's question is still a good one though, even if my orthogonality characterization applies. If in Cidri (or wherever), demons are unreliable, not subject to experiment, test, provable or disprovable - are they a "science"? If magic is reliable in that it always works the same, can it be a matter of spirituality? I suppose there *could* be overlap ... I guess I still have neither my (Cidri) "science" nor my (Cidri) "spirituality" worked out "right"...I think that alot of these problems become clearer with clearer imagination.What does it actually mean to "Teleport"? There's the tesseract, 4d fold idea.On the other hand, they might just be capable of moving really, really fast. Maybe the spell works one way and the demon ability works the other way.Choices like that make a big diffrence I'd think.
One "Teleport" allows movement into any open space reguardless of topography, the other dosen't for starters. It's fine to have just a generic teleport result for something like an arena combat, but waiting till the question comes up in the middle of a campaign to define it can cause real problems.
I would say (though there's absolutely no evidence) that demons use the plane from which they originated to teleport, by popping back into that plane and then out again in a different spot.
Oh, and there are two different Teleport spells (normal and long- distance), which may or may not work by the same mechanism.
===== Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com. Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body "unsubscribe tft"