I broke this out to a new thread from the "Stealing from Sorcerer for RoS magic" thread below, because I was interested in the discussion but didn't want to derail the primary topic, and also because I was intrigued by Rick McCann's explanations as to why the sorcery system of TROS was built the way it was, using scientific terminology and principles the players of the game would be familiar with. So I'd like to talk about that a little more.

To summarize Rick's points from the other post (and Rick, please correct me if this is wrong), the terminology was used for the following reasons:

1) To provide an underlying feel of logic and consistency to the system by relying on a proven model of logic and consistency: scientific reality.

2) To create a common agreement between Seneschal and players as to what was and was not possible through magic, thus preventing game-stopping arguments about something for which no reality check exists.

3) To provide an advantage to sorcerer-players who bring their own understanding of the scientific reality they're manipulating to the table, comparable to the advantage enjoyed by combat-players who know something of how martial arts and techniques are applied in real life.

The primary objections to this philosophy of magic design seem to be as follows:

1) Aesthetic discordance.

The use of terms like "atoms", "cells" and "molecules", and the accurate, 20th-century knowledge of the structure of matter or biological processes that those terms imply, is at odds with the quasi-mediaeval level of science and technology in the rest of Weyrth. While for some this is a feature emphasizing Weyrth's strange and fantastic nature, for others it is a bug that disrupts their suspension of disbelief in the imaginary world.

2) Inconsistent application, leading to a perception of arbitrary imbalance.

In practice, most of the "science speak" is used in the Temporal Vagaries (despite the fact that Conquer and Vision offer equal opportunity to use modern psychology and psychiatry, and Summoning, Banishing and Imprisonment can create a whole new metaphysics of mana, life-force and entities), and it seems to be used there primarily in order to forbid certain "classic" magics like Fireball (energy from nothing is not possible), or Resurrection, or to encourage the formulation of multi-Vagary spells by requiring Vision for many kinds of healing, transformation or transmutation magic.

While this is reasonable - we do, after all, know more about physical matter and energy than about the mind or the fate of our souls - the appearance of imbalance, combined with the fact that the effects of that imbalance are primarily restrictive, can create frustration.

3) Failure to provide either consistent resolution or significant advantage to metagame player skill.

Players still continue to argue over what is or is not possible with the system (as evidenced by the old "Can Movement 3 destroy the world?" threads), "scientific" backing notwithstanding. For myself, this doesn't surprise me -- I've read enough arguments here over swords and fighting technique that I know having a "reality check" or consistent platform of knowledge is no guarantee of providing useful resolutions for disagreements, and swords and combat are simple compared to high-level theoretical discussions of magically-distorted physics. In fact, the stronger the player's understanding of real physics, the less likely that understanding is to be of use, especially if the Seneschal doesn't know as much as the player does and can't argue on equal terms.

Now for myself, I don't think any of these objections are insurmountable -- I've certainly tinkered with alternatives myself, but they were all simply variants on Rick's central work and ideas. What I'd like to hear is people's ideas and reactions on how to address these objections, short of simply saying "Throw it out and rewrite it from the ground up".

How would you go into more detail on the Mental Vagaries, for example, to take advantage of what we know now about brain chemistry, psychiatry and mental illness?

Wow, well written.

The only comment that I'd make at this point is to say that the argument that says that if a character could "see atoms" and the like, that he'd be able to use them is flawed on a very basic level. It assumes that, in the world in question, that there are atoms. In a world where magic works, it seems a small thing to also assume that there are other cosmological differences, perhaps ones that match earlier assumptions by people on Earth. I'm not saying that it has to parallel Earth, but if flame was said to come from flogiston, and that flogiston was not manipulable by magic, it would have accomplished the same thing, and had a much more fantasy feel, IMO.

More to the point, no matter how scientific you get with this stuff, you always come back to something that contradicts science, anyhow. OK, I can't create energy from nowhere? Then where do I get the energy with which to rub molecules together to create heat? If there's some source that allows this, then why can't that same source create flame?

Basically magic, to be supernatural, defies the laws of physics - that's a tautology, in fact. So using them as a basis makes magic non-supernatural. While that's fine for some games, it makes this one less fantasy-ish, which seems against design. Yes, this is the point at which it becomes aesthetic. So all this means is that it's not for me.

Again, if you like the aesthetic created, then magic as another science is fine. But I think that one can accomplish all of Rick's goals without going to the length of having to use scientific descriptions. That is, as an "excuse" it doesn't stand up. TROS is well designed, and shouldn't lead in most cases to the problems that are noted, anyhow.

To achieve a workable version of the system that doesn't have the scientific feel, all one has to do is delete those phrases from the description. That is, even without them, the system stands up fine. I think the key is just to understand that it's not about what a sorcerer can do, but why he's doing it. That is, if it seems even remotely possible, I'd allow it. They're already super-powerful, why worry about them becoming super-super-powerful?

Mike

Actually the whole science thing falls apart on a very simple level. Assume for the moment that the whole moving atoms around (sculpture), seeing anything that small in the first place (vision 3), etc,.. all makes some scientific sense to you...I know it may not, but assume just for argument sake that it does. Now, HOW...HOW...I ask you, do you accomplish MOVING those atoms and SEEING those atoms? What scientific based explanation makes THAT possible. Sure, moving those atoms around would accomplish your goal in a scientifically logical method...but how do you accomplish the actual moving...hmm? The answer in the end is PFM (let me give the G rated expansion for those unfamiliar with PFM...Pure Freakin Magic). No matter HOW scientific your process sounds in the end, it STILL takes PFM to MOVE those atoms and it still takes PFM to SEE those atoms. Even assuming you say "well I alter the lenses in my eyes to see that small"...ok, HOW do you do that...how do you alter your lenses at the cellular or molecular or atomic level to enhance them that way.........PFM.

Don't get me wrong here...although I'm not thrilled about the concepts behind the magic system here, I think it DOES work ok as designed and fits well with the system, and I think the designer deserves a ton of credit for integrating it...I just don't buy into the whole "it's fully science based, trust me" premice....its fully PFM based, where PFM is used to manipulate your environment in a scientific fashion.

Added Edit:
Seeing some of the "use energy to move atoms" comment, ok HOW do you do that...how do you reach out and affect energy, move it around and harness it...what allows you to affect it...PFM.

Mike Holmes wrote: Wow, well written.

More to the point, no matter how scientific you get with this stuff, you always come back to something that contradicts science, anyhow. OK, I can't create energy from nowhere? Then where do I get the energy with which to rub molecules together to create heat? If there's some source that allows this, then why can't that same source create flame?

Basically magic, to be supernatural, defies the laws of physics - that's a tautology, in fact. So using them as a basis makes magic non-supernatural. While that's fine for some games, it makes this one less fantasy-ish, which seems against design. Yes, this is the point at which it becomes aesthetic. So all this means is that it's not for me.

Oh, and Heisenberg and Schroedinger have a few words to say about seeing AND moving atoms..... No need for magic if you have quantum mechanics... at least if you're not a quantum physicist, it all looks the same ;)

Hi,

Oh if only there were an easy way to split out tangential threads...

greyorm wrote: If one's goal is to make boundaries for sorcery which both gamemaster and player can grasp and agree to, it would be no better nor worse for use in a game as the use of the scientific understandings from the early 1800's would be, or the ancient Greek scientific understanding of the world. In fact, one would be no worse off basing it upon the Judaic Qabbalah, or modern Ceremonial tradition (such as the Golden Dawn), or worldwide shamanic technique, as all would form an acceptable basis for that purpose.

Ian.Plumb wrote: From my understanding of what Rick wrote I don't think this was the design goal. The magic system is based on scientific principles so that the resulting system is as free of referee interpretation as possible. For any player who has designed a strategy in a key scene that revolves around their understanding of what a particular spell does, only to have the referee say "It doesn't work like that." and thus railroad the scene in a different direction, such a design goal would seem quite noble.

Basing the magic system on modern scientific principles has many advantages. All the players (not just the referee) understand those principles independent of the rule text. It provides a commonly understood vocabulary for describing spells and their effects. It allows players to extrapolate new effects as easily as the referee, ensuring that the referee's role is to confirm understanding rather than interpret intent and effect. It allows the players to reverse-engineer effects they have seen NPCs perform in order to infer the strengths and weaknesses of those NPCs.

The same is not the case for the alternatives you mention.

Irmo wrote: Allow me as someone involved in natural sciences to disagree. I sincerely doubt that all players understand the principles. The implications of tinkering with mother nature, be it on the fields of biology, chemistry or physics are legion, and even a full-fledged scientist considers himself lucky if he fully understands the ins and outs of his field of specialization.

Letting someone with a Weyrth level of understanding of the world around him tinker with cell growth or even atoms is a surefire way to have whatever he's trying to do blow up in his face. A mystic explanation is in my opinion far preferable. It allows players to accept "Well, that's the way it is" rather than have the M.D. cringe here, the biologist cringe there and the physicist toppling over at the latest trick of the sorcerer.

You might argue "What if they understand nature better?" The answer is easy: If they did, they wouldn't be doing sorcery. They would be doing nuclear physics, biotechnology or chemistry. It doesn't bear the risk of aging.

Hi,

Ian.Plumb wrote: Any set of RPG mechanics that allows magic in any form cannot parallel our real world. It's not even a matter of whether you believe magic works in the real world. RPG rules ensure that magic works predictably, routinely, and repeatably. It is this that busts the parallel-Earth issue.

Irmo wrote: I disagree. The aging risk far from makes magic working routinely or predictably, and in historical periods comparable to the technical development of most of Weyrth, magic was very much considered an -even if occult- science.

Hi,

Dain wrote: Actually the whole science thing falls apart on a very simple level. Assume for the moment that the whole moving atoms around (sculpture), seeing anything that small in the first place (vision 3), etc,.. all makes some scientific sense to you...I know it may not, but assume just for argument sake that it does. Now, HOW...HOW...I ask you, do you accomplish MOVING those atoms and SEEING those atoms?

Ian.Plumb wrote:

I agree wholeheartedly that the players are unlikely to bring a professional academic's level of understanding of science to the table. If anyone builds a magic system that requires such knowledge to play, or provides a distinct advantage to the player with such knowledge, well, I'm sure they'll make a forum for it here on The Forge. ; ^ )

It depends how you define "routinely" and "predictably".

In TRoS, the sorceror is able to create magical effects with a known outcome (whether they age or not while creating the effect is irrelevant). Thus magical effects are predictable in Weyrth. The sorceror is able to perform such an effect on a monthly or perhaps weekly basis without risk. Thus magic is routine to the sorceror in Weyrth. If such a magic system was dumped into medieval Europe we would not be living in the world we are today. For me, that bursts the parallel-Earth thought and pushes it into fantasy.

Ian.Plumb wrote:
The science isn't there to explain how magic works. That's got to be an oxymoron. Rather, the science is there to provide structure for what magic does. Magic can't do anything. It has limits. These limits are science-based. Such limits are, perhaps, slightly less arbitrary than other systems that base the limits on -- say -- an understanding of the ancient Greek view of the elements of nature.

Cheers,

Irmo wrote:

If such a magic system was dumped into medieval Europe we would not be living in the world we are today. For me, that bursts the parallel-Earth thought and pushes it into fantasy.

If you asked an ordinary citizen of the time, he would very likely tell you that precisely that is a given. As such, you'd need ubiquitous sorcerers for the difference that you actually can encounter such stuff working to be relevant.

Stephen wrote:
While it is correct that the actual use of magic would be so minimal as to not necessarily have a significant effect -- sorcerers are rare, even in Gelure -- what disrupts my suspension of disbelief is that none of the knowledge sorcerers could discover (and have already discovered, from the implications of TROS sorcery's terminology) has made any impact.

Irmo wrote: Why risk aging, when you can easily construct a tool which can do the same thing, in the same time, sans the risk?

Stephen wrote:
But I think it's that "do the same thing in the same time" point which answers your question. Even if magic can't do anything well-applied science can't do, it can still do it much faster in most instances. And doing things using physics requires an energy source -- magic is its own energy source.

To reiterate my point, we all seem to agree, that at some point, magic does one of two things. Either it voids physics, or it is part of the physics of the world in question. One of these being the case, the world in question is different from ours in one of these ways. Either way, the question of how it is different is arbitrarily chosen. Meaning that saying that science applies X amount, or not at all are precisely equal decisions here.

Given that you can choose any point along the spectrum from fully scientific to not at all scientific, why have science in the equation? As I've said, it doesn't achieve the play balance, or ease of use sought, so how is it mechanically superior? If not mechanically superior, then it can only be an aesthetic consideration.

Mike

Ian.Plumb wrote: The science isn't there to explain how magic works. That's got to be an oxymoron. Rather, the science is there to provide structure for what magic does. Magic can't do anything. It has limits. These limits are science-based. Such limits are, perhaps, slightly less arbitrary than other systems that base the limits on -- say -- an understanding of the ancient Greek view of the elements of nature.

Dain wrote:
Exactly what I was saying...but what I also was saying is that some die-hards here DON'T view it that way...they take the "science based" phrase to mean "in every aspect" and argue it to death based on that premise. I'm just saying that if it takes PFM to make ANYTHING actually happen in this system (and make no mistake about it...it does) then claiming something can't happen because it isn't science based is in itself ridiculous. If it takes PFM to produce any effect whatsoever, and if PFM in itself has NO logical explanation (and it does not), then there is no logical reason why PFM couldn't produce other real world effects (flame or whatever).

I wasn't going anywhere near that far...not necessary...the situation is way more simple than that. No matter what effect you describe, it takes PFM to implement the science you describe. Chain reactions, cascading effects, etc,... existing or not, aren't where I was heading...just pointing out to the Science hounds that no matter what process they describe it still takes PFM to implement it.

As far as domino effects and such go, PFM contains that as well (describe it as magnetic bottle or what have you...don't care, not relevant). I.E. if the process is powered by PFM, it can be contained by PFM. All the caster really wants is to have his desired end result met....does he really need to know what quantum mechanics are going on or even care...no...he just wants his paycheck. There's a ton of people out there who can drive a car and don't know thing one about internal combustion, electrical systems, gear ratios, etc,...but they sure can drive the car anyhow.

Lot of rambling here, but basically my points are.
1. PFM exists in this system whether one wants to admit it or not...get over it.
2. If PFM exists, then any effect you desire is possible, rules be damned...get over it.
3. points 1 and 2 be damned because if you use science as a base, with sufficient thought you can produce any effects you want anyhow, rules be damned...get over it.
4. the magic system works as designed, even though many if not most don't care for the flavor...get over it.

*grin* ok, so I'm being a bit obnoxious here...sorry...power went out and I'm living on borrowed UPS time...so having to hurry to type this so I can shut down my computer before the UPS is drained and facing the prospect of being out of my computer the rest of the night kindof darkened my mood. Appologies.

Dain wrote:
As far as domino effects and such go, PFM contains that as well (describe it as magnetic bottle or what have you...don't care, not relevant). I.E. if the process is powered by PFM, it can be contained by PFM. All the caster really wants is to have his desired end result met....does he really need to know what quantum mechanics are going on or even care...no...he just wants his paycheck. There's a ton of people out there who can drive a car and don't know thing one about internal combustion, electrical systems, gear ratios, etc,...but they sure can drive the car anyhow.

The question that seems to be emerging here is:

Given that no matter how scientific and logical the consequences of an act of PFM may be, that first act of PFM still breaks the rules of science, is it a suspension-of-disbelief-destroying inconsistency to apply scientific consistency to the effects of a PFM act, but not the cause of the act itself?

For myself, I don't think it needs to be. In much of the best hard SF, after all, authors will permit themselves one or two deviations or trumps of known scientific fact (FTL drives, for example) and then riff as logically as they can on the consequences of that. It's the "What would happen if we could (fill in the blank)?" situation. And given that we are talking about a game which needs to have some form of consistent rules structure, I don't see that applying scientific consistency to magic's effects or structure is necessarily any more disruptive than noting that when a dragon breathes on you, your armour is ruined (it's PFM to suggest dragons could breathe actual fire, after all).

On the other hand, I can see Dain's point as well, in that the scientific rationale behind the system as it stands isn't used simply to require certain multi-Vagary effects (e.g. needing Vision for healing spells to see what you're doing) or to ensure logical scientific consequences of PFM (if you excavate an unstable tunnel it will collapse once the magic stops). The problem is that the principles of science seem to be applied, in the system as it stands, to forbid specific effects for no reason other than aesthetic, atmospheric preference.

There's no systemic principle preventing the creation of plasma bolts using Movement 3 and Vision 3 to accelerate air molecules, but a Seneschal who doesn't understand plasma physics can point to the explicit text that says, "Fire can't burn on nothing" and disallow it. Likewise, if dimensional barriers can be broken to allow entities from other universes to appear in this one (Summoning), which heavily implies you can manipulate the fabric of space, there's no scientific reason you can't manipulate time either, since space and time are (by most currently accepted theories) one continuum -- but a player who makes this case to a recalcitrant Seneschal can get hit with, "No time travel, no making things younger, it says so right there, end of story!"

So the problem seems to be not with attempting to use science and logic as a basis for magic's structure and consequences, but rather with putting what are essentially aesthetic restrictions on magic and claiming a scientific basis for those restrictions -- a basis which doesn't always hold up under actual scientific analysis, and which makes less sense because if science is used to limit magic, it should do so via effect, and not by arbitrary definition of cause (since PFM-as-cause is essentially arbitrary to begin with).

Hey Irmo,

Doesn't prove me wrong in the slightest. Just because I don't know the scientific details behind something doesn't mean it doesn't work. This isn't Whyle E. Coyotee where I run off the edge of a cliff and just hang there until I look down and figure out I'm in mid air...gravity works whether I understand it or not. Hand me a bottle of nitroglycerin and tell me it's a neat nik knack you picked up that changes color when you shake it...if I shake it it will still expload even though my understanding of it is to the contrary.

Now if you're saying that what I'm talking about contradicts the existing design system for creating a spell, you're exactly correct....I fully agree. I'm not suggesting a change to the system, nor that one is necessary...it works as designed and quite well I might add (even though I personally don't care for the flavor of it). All I'm implying is that PFM can do anything, by definition, so if a system incorporates it in any fashion then claiming ANYTHING certain thing is not possible is just kindof absurd. Throwing real world science into the mix pretty much opens all the doors even wider as there is no effect (save MAYBE time travel, faster than light travel, and teleportation) that I can think of off of the top of my head that I can't think of a legitimate science based method of reproducing.

At this point I think I'm dragging this thread way off topic...all I intended originally was to get the "all science in every aspect" hounds to chill out a bit...and it's now kindof dragging into a debate of "PFM can do anything without the science tweak so why bother with science in the first place" versus "no it can't, PFM without science is impossible"...which isn't really what I was shooting for and is really more of a flavor thing. There's nothing wrong with PFM implementing science, but there's nothing wrong with PFM just working "magically" either...ton of systems out there have mages not understanding the arcane runes, verbalizations, etc,....that they do every day to cast their spells...they don't know how it works and don't care (and don't need to care)...all they care about is that their fireball does go off and stop the charging hoard of monsters before they arive at his feet and kill him. Flavor call. PFM with science...we have that in the rule book and it works. PFM without science...we don't have that, and it would take a complete new magic system to implement it because that's obviously not compatible with the system in the book...and I am not suggesting anyone go that route anyway since the existing system can produce the same end results in almost every situation anyhow.

Well, like I said, I've unintentionally hijacked this thread enough...so I'm going to shut up now and let it get back on track unless someone really wants me to drone on some more and asks me to.

Appologies to the original threaders.

Added edit:
I personally find it vastly amusing that I am defending so strongly a magic system that I REALLY don't care for the flavor of...which is kindof a statement on the quality of the design...who'd have thought....

Dain wrote: Hey Irmo,

Doesn't prove me wrong in the slightest. Just because I don't know the scientific details behind something doesn't mean it doesn't work.

Throwing real world science into the mix pretty much opens all the doors even wider as there is no effect (save MAYBE time travel, faster than light travel, and teleportation) that I can think of off of the top of my head that I can't think of a legitimate science based method of reproducing.

Now you're blaming me for the shortcomings of science itself...*grin*...going to have to pass the buck there...I didn't set up the intricacies of the laws of time, physics, etc,.... That's the other shortcoming of incorporating science...flaws, mistakes, and missing any one or more of the limitless variables involved in the real world can wreak havoc with best intentions. All just another good reason why PFM on its own is not such a bad idea...it's PFM...it's flawless. Why? Because it's magic and that's the way it works, not because of any science or reasoning...it just works that way, period, no explanation necessary. But TROS is a realistic system...can't have both worlds...it's realistic or it isn't. If it's realistic then all those eventualities you're worried about exist...deal with it. If you choose realism, then you lose the right to complain about realistic problems you'd have in the real world too...and if that's the flavor you want in your game it's up to the seneshcal to give players cancer after being healed too much. Personally, I get screwed over enough in the real world...not really thinking getting bent daily in my game world too would be all that enjoyable.

*grin*...now you've gone and done it...you've made me reply when I was all ready to shut up.

Dain wrote: Now you're blaming me for the shortcomings of science itself...*grin*...going to have to pass the buck there...I didn't set up the intricacies of the laws of time, physics, etc,.... That's the other shortcoming of incorporating science...flaws, mistakes, and missing any one or more of the limitless variables involved in the real world can wreak havoc with best intentions. All just another good reason why PFM on its own is not such a bad idea...it's PFM...it's flawless. Why? Because it's magic and that's the way it works, not because of any science or reasoning...it just works that way, period, no explanation necessary. But TROS is a realistic system...can't have both worlds...it's realistic or it isn't. If it's realistic then all those eventualities you're worried about exist...deal with it. If you choose realism, then you lose the right to complain about realistic problems you'd have in the real world too...and if that's the flavor you want in your game it's up to the seneshcal to give players cancer after being healed too much. Personally, I get screwed over enough in the real world...not really thinking getting bent daily in my game world too would be all that enjoyable.

Nothing wrong with that at all...flavor call. Personally I lean that way myself, except more in the extreme. I prefer PFM where unbeknownst to the character there actually is real science behind it, but it is real science that the character will at best suspect is there but never really understand. As for the dominos and catastrophic casting failures, my read is kindof stolen from others when I was a baby gamer..."magic is all trial and error using known or discovered runes/chemicals/verbalizations/etc/... and the spells we have today were experiments by sorcerers that DIDN'T expload because they accidentally got all the t's crossed and the i's dotted...and all the spells we don't have today may still be possible but every sorcerer attempting so far blew it and may have died in the attempt". In other words, fireball may be common today, but several centuries ago hundreds and hundreds of sorcerers imploded (and we even buried some of the few pieces we found of them) while trying to get the spell right. The formula we use today is the one developed by the first sorcerer who DIDN'T expload.