Monday, January 14, 2013

Is D&D magic not sufficiently advanced?

As Arthur C Clarke would point out "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".  So why the frack does my ranger travel on a horse through pouring rain, hungry and cold.

Shouldn't the statement "Magic is indistinguishable from any sufficiently advanced technology" be true too?  And if D&D has magic, why does the town smell so bad?

Why am I worried about the damage of a cross bow bolt?  Shouldn't crossbows have two settings kill or stun and automatically load bolts from a replicator device embedded right above the trigger?

Why is my fighter's magical sword made out of steel while Luke's is made out of light?  Potential Lukas lawsuits aside, wouldn't it make sense to have magical light swords in D&D?

Why worry about the obnoxious cleric when that little device Spock carries around is quite fit at saving anyone in the party?  Oh and find diseased items.  And traps.  And poisonous gas, and ah so many things.

Why is full plate armor so in fashion?  When full plate is less advanced than kevlar and kevlar is less advanced than Dune's personal shield?

How many of you play in such high magic settings that it is, for all practical purposes, indistinguishable from sci-fi?

What sets D&D apart from science fiction if in the end science fiction and magic can become intermingled.  At least according to Arthur C. Clarke.
Post a Comment