Re: (TFT) unfinished Bendwyn (2nd try)

["Jay Carlisle" <Maou_Tsaou@charter.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Tapley"

> > Clarke said that at a certain point, advanced technology is
> > indistinguishable from magic.
>
> His Third Law.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws
>
> But I'm not sure the converse is true - Magic is, I think,
> distinguishable from any sufficiently advanced technology. Clarke
> didn't say one way or the other, I don't think (and the Wikipedia
> article doesn't say he did). On the other hand, Niven, Pratchett, and
> Lackey *did* state the converse, according to the article. But I
> think that's a technologist's view of "magic". See below.
>
> Regarding "magic", "industrial magic", technology, etc.: I
> think if magic is sufficiently advanced that it *always works*, or at
> least when it doesn't work there is a known cause for that, then it
> has become technology (and the converse of Clarke's law applies). I'm
> typing this on a machine which uses transistors to switch voltages
> something over 64,000,000,000 times each second - and *all* of them
> work. That's technology. In ITL, even a DX-18 wizard will miss his
> spell 5% of the time (when he rolls a 16, 17, or 18). That's magic.
> If a clever wizard figures out how to hit a spell 64,000,000,000
> times in a row - it will have become technology.
> I think this sort of captures the emotional impact of "magic"
> - it's the things you can't depend on, that give the world interest
> and suspense. It's the random ingredient in a story. As a
> technologist myself, "magic" in a story can make me uncomfortable for
> that reason, but I think that adds to tension needed to make a story
> riveting to me.
> This seems to fit reasonably well with the "random" nature of
> the energy source as quoted from J. Mnoren's paper...

Very well put.
I agree that a technologist is likely to try and describe magic in technical 
terms.
I'd be tempted to allow automatic function for spells 10 or more IQ less 
than the Wizards IQ...

> > Silicon or germanium doped with arsenic, antimony, bismuth or phosphorous 
> > is
> > Yin; doped with aluminum, indium, gallium or boron is Yang.
>
> Actually, Gallium Arsenide devices don't (necessarily) have
> *any* silicon in them, except possibly as a dopant. Alternating
> Gallium and Arsenic atoms (ions?) form the crystalline structure.
> Maybe the extreme case of Yin/Yang balance?

hee hee hee, I LIKE this line...

Of note, Yin/Yang are also the cardnal directions of the fourth dimension 
through which the magical force propagates at right angles to the 
electromagnetic force at the speed of light... although, thinking about the 
Maxwell's for THAT hurt my head a little bit.
Before I start talking about exceeding the Lorentz Force singularity to 
create an A.E. let me mention the point of all this.

Summon Gargoyle IQ 13 ST 4 + 1
These are "real" beings summoned temporarily from another plane to do the 
Wizards bidding...
A Controll spell can be used to take over a summoned being.
Controll Person IQ 13 ST 3 + 1

Now... poping out a gargoyle sized virtual particle is one thing, but the 
above seems to imply that this is actually a "compound" spell.
It almost looks like it's a Controll Person @ IQ 13 ST 3 + 1 and one 
additional ST to pull out a gargoyle...
Of course, that requires some adjustments... Summon Small Dragon would cost 
ST 7 + 1, 3 ST + 1 for the Controll spell and 4 ST to pull out a 4 hex 
creature...
"pull out"...
What exactally is going on with THAT?
I see two ready possabilities on the spell table.
Teleport spells or perhaps Gates.
Gates may be a little steep... except for the weight limits on Teleport.
Whichever, with the current Teleport a Wizard couldn't start on one goalline 
and Teleport to the other for the same 20 ST that lets the Wizard Long 
Distance Teleport.

One more thing about Gargoyles... the last sentence of Summoned Creatures 
reads; "NO summoned being can cast a spell or use any kind of magic". This 
is a bit confusing because the discription of Gargoyle says; "(Actually, 
they have a limited ability to levitate)".
I don't see a Levitate spell... I do see a Telekinesis but it's IQ 13 and 
Gargoyles can't get a better IQ than 10.
So can summoned Gargoyles fly?
I know the spell says MA 16 in air, but to imply that their "limited ability 
to levitate" is NOT magical is a heck'uv a can of worms IMO.
Perhaps they are a kind of living magic item?
They DO have a silicon metabolism...
If so, that would explain how a summoned Gargoyle could still use a magical 
effect, but it implies some odd anatomy (obviously involving the 
gallbladder).
I suspose it's time to do some research on compairative anatomy... Gargoyles 
and silicon, Dragons poop sulfur, Trolls regenerate except fire.
Looks like I'm gonna have to invent some new organ types.

Anyway, the way I see this type of magic (I call this style Soccery) Wizards 
learn asspects or effects rather than "spells".
Let's take fire as an example.

Now my deffinition of 1pt of ST @ 5.5 foot pounds works out to about 7.5 
joules or watts per 1pt ST.
That's enough to light the LED on my pencil flashlight.
For one second?
hummmm
Wikipedia says;
"A person having a mass of 100 kilograms who climbs a 3 meter high (almost 3 
hexes) ladder in 5 seconds (1 turn) is doing work at a rate of about 600 
watts. Mass W acceleration due to gravity W height w the time it takes to 
lift the mass to the given height gives the rate of doing work or power. A 
laborer over the course of an 8-hour day can sustain an average output of 
about 75 watts; higher power levels can be achieved for short intervals and 
by athletes."
Well will you look at that... Joe Average @ ST 10 exerts about 75 watts and 
I could call that a sustained average.
Joe exerts 75 watts w/o expending fST.
Running Joe up the ladder in 1 turn is about 80 ST of work / 5 seconds is 16 
ST a second which exceeds Joes ST 10 meaning Joe is spending fST to go up 
the ladder.
Statistical efforts are quantized meaning that fST can't be spent 
fractionally, ergo 1pt of ST spent as fST equals 15 joules of energy.
Joe @ 75 watts w/o fST gets 150 watts of work per fST spent meaning 4 fST to 
go up the ladder in a single turn.
So we've now got Joe Average Wizard lighting a 150 watt light bulb for 1 fST 
(per Turn) instead of 2 LED's (my Energizer Hard Case Tactical uses 4 LEDs 
for standard white light).
150 watts is 110 foot pounds. That's about the average work done by a 
bicyclest moving along flat ground with no wind @ 16 to 17mph burning around 
600 calories (ergo my concern w/food production).
100 foot pounds can hurt you pretty good... Tyson bit off Holleyfield's ear 
with about 100 foot pounds of force.
Can I get heat...
1 BTU lifts a one-pound weight to a height of 778 feet so... 5.5 lbs raised 
to 141.45 feet or about 33 and a quarter hexes in height.
A BTU is about 1000 joules which is about 7 times Joe Average Wizards 150 
joules @ 1 fST...
Joe Wiz spends 7 fST to burn a match?
How hot is that?
Fuel and Oxidizer type Temperature (Celsius)
Fluorescent light 60-80
Incandescent light 100-300
Cigarettes - unventilated conditions 288
Cigarettes - ventilated 400-780
Cigarettes - insulated and smoldering 510-621
Stove element >550
Match 600-800
Tungsten halogen light 600-900
Candle flame 600-1,400
Electrical spark 1,316
Bunsen burner 1,570
Methanol/air 1,910
Methane/air 1,920-1,949
Butane/air 1,977
Propane/air 1,977
Wood/air
(most organics are about here)) ~1977
MAPP Gas/air
Hydrogen/air 2,210
Carbon monoxide/air 2,468
Acetylene/air 2,632
Acetylene/Oxygen 3,300
Hydrogen/Oxygen
Electrical arcing <3,750
Plasma torch ~4,700
Lightning 30,000

700 C is about 1300 fahrenheit...
150 C can cause 2nd degree burns...
Fire has a time factor to its effects but for now this seems to be in the 
ballpark as far as damage is concerned.
The idea is that a Wizard can crank up the volume so to speak and create 
hotter flames via larger expendatures of fST.
That's not their only options for fST spending.
Wanna move that flame further away than the adjecent hex? It's gonna cost 
fST.
Ditto if the Wizard wants to shape or otherwise control the flames.
And so on.
By replacing specific spells with more general forms or effects I get a more 
flexable system which is nice but even better players actually have to 
describe what they want their spell to do which leads too MUCH better shared 
visuals for all players.
As an example of what I'm talking about here I'd like to ask a question.
When I cast a fireball in your TFT campaign how do you "visualize" it?
I wonder if we're imagining roughly the same thing.
LOTS more... material components can reduce fST, while large fST 
expendatures add dice to the success check...
I've even heard rumors of Mnoren resurfacing that haven't been seen since 
the abdication.
Lord knows what THEY'VE learned...

Whatchya think?

> > Gandalf doesn't strike me as being an apple geek.
>
> http://www2.nkfust.edu.tw/~smguo/hivi/Mac/Gandalf_1280x1024.jpg
>
> Clearly, not everyone feels that way. :-)

ROTFLMAO!
I stand corrected!
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"