Magical utopias
Bill Westfield
Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
space travel, education, etc, etc.) Magic-powered Gentle Giants would
be OK, Magic-powered Moties even better. The conflict can be the usual
"nasty group gets surprised" common to techy utopias, I guess. Or a
sort of history of said world might be interesting. Niven's model of
magic would presumably work OK if the wizards discover the renewable
mana sources, or the mana equivilent of fossil fuels and/or nuclear
power...
Thanks
Bill W
ized...@hotmail.com
The midlands: http://themidlands.net/cgi-bin/autokeenlite.cgi are the
best fit I can think of right now. High tech and high magic coupled
with a extremely liberal society founded on the smoking wreckage of a
fairly standard fantasy setting. As in "We had ourselves a jolly good
revolution backed by kyokanan* intervention and hung all the nobles.
Democracy rocks, and we're gonna spread the good news!"
Its heavy on the politics, but it is rather unusual, and entertaining,
politics. For good history-of-the-settting reasons the "hawk" party is
on the left and is very hawkish indeed. Having a gazillion refugees
from places still stuck under feudal rule in the electorate is part of
it, as is the fact that female emanicpation, modernisation, and
democratisation all happened in one fell swoop, and lots of the people
who were part of that revolution are still around. (Being elves. And
having lifespans of about a 1000 years.)
*Roughly: Magical Meeji Japan on stereoids with the liberals coming out
on top.
Charlie Stross
as <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> declared:
Not a utopia, but Walter Jon Williams' METROPOLITAN and sequel CITY ON
FIRE describe a magic-powered high tech civilization that bears little
or no resemblance to the standard mediaeval tropes. Highly recommended
(subject to standard wish about some publisher buying the books and
paying Walter to write the third one).
You probably aren't looking for THE LIGHT AGES by Iain MacLeod or
PERDIDO STREET STATION/THE SCAR/THE IRON COUNCIL by China Mieville, as
they're both rather grim and Victorian -- but again, they revolve around
the industrialization of magic and the social effects arising therefrom.
One problem in finding what you're after (magic-powered utopia) is that
utopia is an essentially boring setting for fiction -- it defuses
motivational tensions, so when a utopia does appear in fiction it tends
to be either the subject of an earnest political tub-thumping session by
the author, or a prop.
Another problem is that when we start speculating about advanced,
far-future civilizations with capabilities beyond our own we are, in a
very real way, invoking magic: Clarke's law applies ('any sufficiently
advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'). For reasons of
plausibility writers wanting to play with such settings tend to justify
them in terms of science rather than magic, so there are relatively few
high-tech magical settings out there.
(Which gives me an idea for a story, but first I've gotta go round up
the elves that just sneaked out the tape loading door of my VCR again.)
-- Charlie
how...@brazee.net
On 27-Dec-2004, Bill Westfield <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> wrote:
> People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
>
> Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
> a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
> to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
Most pure fantasy is written in medieval environments. The fantasies are
different for people wanting to be a long lost king or princess than for
people who want to explore space.
David E. Siegel
There are a number of works in which "Industial Magic" has lead to a
tech level more or less equal to the current one, based either
primariluy on magic or on a mix of magic and technology. None that I
can think of are "utopias" in the classical sense. I'm not sure if you
meant to limit your question to "utopias" wher all problems are solved,
everyone has a wonderful life, etc etc.
That said, more or less "industirial" magic occurs in:
"Magic Incorporated" by RAH
_Operation Chaos_ and _Operation Luna_ by Poul Anderson
The "Lord Darcy" stories by Randall Garrett
_The Case of the Toxic Spell Dump_ by Harry Turtledove
_The Iron Dragon's Daughter_ (This has a more victorian and grim
feeling than any of the previous books).
_Stealing the Elf-king's Roses_ by Diane Duane (This has a higher
magic/tech-level than any of the above, and seems to have a rather
higher level than OTL circa 2004).
Is this the sort of think you are looking for? Would anyone else care
to add to the above list of works in which magic, more or less
industiilaized, either replaces or mixes with non-magical tech to
create a society (possibly non-utopian) of an industirial or
post-industiral level?
-DES
David Mitchell
> People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
> Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
> is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
> result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
> population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
> space travel, education, etc, etc.)
"Too Many Magicians" by Randall Garrett, is about half-way there.
--
=======================================================================
= David --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get
= Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.
=======================================================================
Konrad Gaertner
Just looking at the subject, I was going to respond with Lackey's
Valdemar, since that's at the top of my Fantasy Worlds I Wouldn't
Mind Living In list (Dean's Dubious Hills are at the bottom of that
list). But that's not what you're asking for.
> People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
>
> Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
> a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
> to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
>
> Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
> is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
> result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
> population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
> space travel, education, etc, etc.)
Except most people don't consider *this* world to be a utopia. And
would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
have fireballs?
The backstory of Jordan's Wheel of Time might fit, but I don't
think he'll write any books set then.
-Common magic in a world that looks like ours:
Piers Anthony, Incarnations of Immortality series
Starts decently, but declines rapidly, though book 6 wasn't bad
(book 7, however, was dire even for Anthony).
Harry Turtledove, _Case of the Toxic Spell Dump_
I threw it against the wall at the comment about how a world
without magic where mechanical devices worked reliably would be
perfect, with no pollution or war. Yes, he's poking fun at what
you mention above, but it's done so crudely, and from a character
who *has* to know better.
Robert Asprin, _Myth-Nomers and Im-Pervections_
Late in the series, and isn't really worth the effort.
-Magic used as technology:
Randall Garrett, _Lord Darcy_
Good fantasy mysteries, has a very Victorian feel to the tech and
culture.
Steven Brust, Vlad Taltos series
Magic is roughly as common as learning a musical instrument; every
citizen can learn, but training takes time, effort, and money.
The setting doesn't have gunpowder or mass production, but does
have petroleum refining and modern financial institutions.
Jim Butcher, _Furies of Calderon_ (and future sequels)
Everyone (except the hero) is bonded to one or two elemental
spirits, which can be commanded to do all sorts of useful
things. Tech level seems medieval, but this book is mainly set
in a frontier area, so it's hard to tell.
-Early 20th century tech with magic restricted to the few:
Martha Wells, Fall of Ile-Rien trilogy
Jonathan Stroud, Bartimaeus trilogy
Both of those 2/3 finished and well worth reading.
--KG
Nancy Lebovitz
Charlie Stross <cha...@antipope.org> wrote:
>Stoned koala bears drooled eucalyptus spittle in awe
>as <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> declared:
>
>> People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
>>
>> Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
>> a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
>> to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
>>
>> Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
>> is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
>> result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
>> population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
>> space travel, education, etc, etc.) Magic-powered Gentle Giants would
>> be OK, Magic-powered Moties even better. The conflict can be the usual
>> "nasty group gets surprised" common to techy utopias, I guess. Or a
>> sort of history of said world might be interesting. Niven's model of
>> magic would presumably work OK if the wizards discover the renewable
>> mana sources, or the mana equivilent of fossil fuels and/or nuclear
>> power...
>
>Not a utopia, but Walter Jon Williams' METROPOLITAN and sequel CITY ON
>FIRE describe a magic-powered high tech civilization that bears little
>or no resemblance to the standard mediaeval tropes. Highly recommended
>(subject to standard wish about some publisher buying the books and
>paying Walter to write the third one).
Offhand, I'd say it probably isn't a worse place to live than most
of the modern world.
>You probably aren't looking for THE LIGHT AGES by Iain MacLeod or
>PERDIDO STREET STATION/THE SCAR/THE IRON COUNCIL by China Mieville, as
>they're both rather grim and Victorian -- but again, they revolve around
>the industrialization of magic and the social effects arising therefrom.
>
>One problem in finding what you're after (magic-powered utopia) is that
>utopia is an essentially boring setting for fiction -- it defuses
>motivational tensions, so when a utopia does appear in fiction it tends
>to be either the subject of an earnest political tub-thumping session by
>the author, or a prop.
With a little luck for the novelist, the utopia gets attacked or somesuch.
>
>Another problem is that when we start speculating about advanced,
>far-future civilizations with capabilities beyond our own we are, in a
>very real way, invoking magic: Clarke's law applies ('any sufficiently
>advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'). For reasons of
>plausibility writers wanting to play with such settings tend to justify
>them in terms of science rather than magic, so there are relatively few
>high-tech magical settings out there.
I started a thread a while ago about magical singularities. IIRC,
the conclusion was that they typically appear in fiction as that
desolated plain where the wizards fought each other.
--
--
Nancy Lebovitz http://www.nancybuttons.com
"We've tamed the lightning and taught sand to give error messages."
http://livejournal.com/users/nancylebov
Nancy Lebovitz
Konrad Gaertner <gae...@aol.com> wrote:
>Bill Westfield wrote:
>
>Except most people don't consider *this* world to be a utopia. And
>would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
>have fireballs?
That depends on what fireball cost.
Larry Caldwell
(Bill Westfield) says...
That is pretty much what we have now. Our modern technology has just
replicated the effects of magic. Cell phones mimic telepathy, where you
can send private messages to other people no matter where they are.
Plastic surgery is a glamor that will make you beautiful. Modern
medicine duplicates powerful healing spells, and so on. It is all
magic. The average cell phone user has no idea how it works, and
doesn't care.
Any magical universe like you describe would still have actual magic
restricted to the individuals who could do it, just like actually doing
technology is restricted to a few well educated experts. If you can
figure out how to mass produce spells, you would have something
approaching the consumer electronics industry. After all, a computer
program is just a series of very long, very complex incantations.
Konrad Gaertner
>
> _Stealing the Elf-king's Roses_ by Diane Duane (This has a higher
> magic/tech-level than any of the above, and seems to have a rather
> higher level than OTL circa 2004).
I'd forgotten this one. (Maybe I should mention it over on the
thread about books no one talks about.) This book is probably also
the most utopian setting mentioned so far.
--KG
Dean White
news:1104160740.2...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Five-Twelfths of Heaven and sequels by Melissa Scott
--
www.DeanWhite.net
has contact information
Michael Grosberg
Bill Westfield wrote:
> Niven's model of
> magic would presumably work OK if the wizards discover the renewable
> mana sources, or the mana equivilent of fossil fuels and/or nuclear
> power...
>
> Thanks
> Bill W
But, but... Manna IS he equivalent of fossil fuel. What they needed to
discover is the equivalent of none other than, surprise surprise, space
travel, which is a known cure for every ailment of society. In other
words, gurl fubhyq unir tbar gb gur zbba, abg gel gb oevat vg qbja.
That said, Niven's magical world comes pretty close to modern day
standard of living, at least as long as there's manna.
P.S.
Firefox's ROT13 extension is brilliant.
carmen....@gmail.com
Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> Harry Turtledove, _Case of the Toxic Spell Dump_
> I threw it against the wall at the comment about how a world
> without magic where mechanical devices worked reliably would be
> perfect, with no pollution or war. Yes, he's poking fun at what
> you mention above, but it's done so crudely, and from a character
> who *has* to know better.
I don't think that's quite fair--the character *does* know better, and
immediately says so. He isn't serious, he's just having a moment of
brief and unrealistic desire for what he imagines to be a
less-complicated world. It *is* an obvious joke, but then the book is
filled with obvious jokes.
Carmen W.
David Johnston
wrote:
>People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
>
>Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
>a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
>to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
>
>Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
>is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology,
Toxic Spell Dump.
Bill Westfield
Well, yeah. But most worlds with magic are noticably worse (at least
compared to middle class USians.)
Another candidate is Simon Hawke's "Wizard of 4th St" (etc) where the Merlin
wakes up and starts the second age of magic to rescue the world from the
"great collapse." Thaumaturgical batteries and such, for instance. But
also great evil beings that I can live without, and the magic isn't all that
well applied, IMO...
BillW
Bill Westfield
discover is the equivalent of none other than, surprise surprise, space
travel, which is a known cure for every ailment of society.
I disagree. Given the size of the societies involved, Mana in Niven's Magic
worlds was barely equivilent to some rare form for burnable wood. (Or, what
I meant by "fossil fuel" was something that was around in sufficient
quantity to power a century or so of exponential growth and development.)
BillW
David Goldfarb
Dean White <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>"David E. Siegel" <sie...@acm.org> wrote in message
>news:1104160740.2...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> _Operation Chaos_ and _Operation Luna_ by Poul Anderson
>> The "Lord Darcy" stories by Randall Garrett
>> _The Case of the Toxic Spell Dump_ by Harry Turtledove
>> _The Iron Dragon's Daughter_ (This has a more victorian and grim
>> feeling than any of the previous books).
>> _Stealing the Elf-king's Roses_ by Diane Duane (This has a higher
>> magic/tech-level than any of the above, and seems to have a rather
>> higher level than OTL circa 2004).
>>
>> Is this the sort of think you are looking for? Would anyone else care
>> to add to the above list of works in which magic, more or less
>> industiilaized, either replaces or mixes with non-magical tech to
>> create a society (possibly non-utopian) of an industirial or
>> post-industiral level?
>>
>> -DES
>
>Five-Twelfths of Heaven and sequels by Melissa Scott
_The Lives of Christopher Chant_, _Charmed Life_, _The Merlin Conspiracy_,
and probably others by Diana Wynne Jones. Most of these are at a
semi-Victorian level of tech, but if Lord Darcy qualifies then so do these.
_The Demons of Harry's Landing_ by Mary K. Kuhner. (Unpublished, alas.
Although there is a novella in series with it [same setting and characters]
on the web at <http://www-shgc.stanford.edu/~flowers/radiant/>.)
--
David Goldfarb |"Special agents have been employed to slow the
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | film down and grind it to a screeching halt."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Mystery Science Theater 3000,
| "Rocket Attack USA"
John H
"Bill Westfield" <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> wrote in message
news:54mzw0n...@cypher.cisco.com...
The society in Margaret Weis' Darksword books is kinda like this.
Everything runs on magic provided by human batteries(?) or something like
this. Forgive my poor memory, but its been years. Everything is fine
except for the few who either couldn't control magic or just didn't have
access to it.
I remember vaguely that there were sci fi invaders later too...
john
W. Citoan
>
> And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
> have fireballs?
I can think of at least two series that have combined firearms and magic
in a feudal setting: Joel Rosenberg's _Guardians of the Flame_ and some
of the short stories within the _Forgotten Realms_ series.
In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a select
set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can be used by
anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating force in a land
ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories present firearms as
a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're showing both sides of the
same coin.
Neither of these are great writing, IMO. There's got to more authors
have done it, isn't there? I'm thinking of those in a feudal / medieval
setting. Those set in a Victorian / Modern setting have already passed
the introduction of firearms behind.
- W. Citoan
--
He who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare, and he who has one
enemy will meet him everywhere.
-- Ali Ben Abu Talib
David T Bilek
<wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Konrad Gaertner wrote:
>>
>> And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
>> have fireballs?
>
>I can think of at least two series that have combined firearms and magic
>in a feudal setting: Joel Rosenberg's _Guardians of the Flame_ and some
>of the short stories within the _Forgotten Realms_ series.
>
>In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a select
>set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can be used by
>anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating force in a land
>ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories present firearms as
>a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're showing both sides of the
>same coin.
>
>Neither of these are great writing, IMO. There's got to more authors
>have done it, isn't there? I'm thinking of those in a feudal / medieval
>setting. Those set in a Victorian / Modern setting have already passed
>the introduction of firearms behind.
>
Tad Williams _Shadowmarch_, which I recently reviewed, shows the Xian
empire making use of muskets. They are apparently a new invention and
not very widespread.
-David
Konrad Gaertner
>
> Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> >
> > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
> > have fireballs?
>
> set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can be used by
> anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating force in a land
> ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories present firearms as
> a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're showing both sides of the
> same coin.
Ture, but would the folks who have the resources to develop firearms
*want* to give more power to individuals? In our world, there just
wasn't anything equivalent to firearms.
> Neither of these are great writing, IMO. There's got to more authors
> have done it, isn't there? I'm thinking of those in a feudal / medieval
> setting. Those set in a Victorian / Modern setting have already passed
> the introduction of firearms behind.
Martha Wells' _The Element of Fire_ has a setting based on 17th
century France, with magic and faeries.
Liavek shared world fits too, with pistols and not-quite-Victorian
tech.
Pratchett's _Men at Arms_ and _Interesting Times_ have very
limited firearms.
ISTR some experimenting with gunpowder in Feist's Midkemia, but
that may have been in the computer game rather than the books.
In Wurts' Light and Shadow series, gunpowder is so evil it
justifies mindwiping everyone who re-discovers it.
The Wheel of Time has fireworks, and rather blatant hints of
firearms coming soon.
Hughart's _Bridge of Birds_ had gunpowder, but I can't remember
if it was ever used in a weapon.
--KG
rja.ca...@excite.com
Bill Westfield wrote:
> Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of
magic'
> is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
> result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
> population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
> space travel, education, etc, etc.)
Harry Potter, up to a point. A small minority of humans
are magic-users, and across the world they have removed
themselves to hidden parallel societies, mostly, as well as
hiding various magical animals and non-human sapient species
- not entirely with their free consent. In fact, many of
the human magicians despise non magic-users, treat other
species like uncultured racial inferiors, give them
low-status employment or use them, in effect, as slaves.
The world as a whole doesn't prosper from magic - only the
wizards and witches do - and there's still malice, stupidity,
ignorance, greed, and crime.
The author has two books to go to put right as much of this
as she can, but one can't realistically expect her to fix
everything - after all, we haven't fixed everything in /our/
world. Her magical community is also recovering from a
civil war a decade ago with a secret terrorist immortality
cult, reports of whose leader's death actually do seem to
be exaggerated, and some of whose unwilling, enchanted, or
simply undiscovered members may also be resuming former
activities.
On the plus side, in these stories, billions of human beings
are protected from all sorts of magical hazards by magical
public servants. They just don't ever know about it.
(Wearing a "Voldo Lives" badge)
(Not really, before anyone asks where you get those)
W. Citoan
> "W. Citoan" wrote:
> >
> > Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> > >
> > > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you
> > > already have fireballs?
> >
> > In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a
> > select set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can
> > be used by anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating
> > force in a land ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories
> > present firearms as a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're
> > showing both sides of the same coin.
>
> Ture, but would the folks who have the resources to develop firearms
> *want* to give more power to individuals?
No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the driving
force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the State. I can
imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge over his neighbors
and being willing to invest in it. And for a ruler who wasn't a magic
user, it would decrease his dependence on magic users which he might see
as a very good thing.
Those who had the resources to develop firearms in our world certainly
didn't want to give more power to individuals (or at least individuals
who weren't themselves).
> In our world, there just wasn't anything equivalent to firearms.
Do you mean "fireballs"? Otherwise, I'm not sure what you're getting at
since our world does have firearms. Our world has always been
fascinated with researching new weapon types. If magic had been a real
alternative, I'm sure we would have exploited it as well.
[selective snipping of book list]
> Martha Wells' _The Element of Fire_ has a setting based on 17th
> century France, with magic and faeries.
I've read her other books and liked them. How does this compare?
> Liavek shared world fits too, with pistols and not-quite-Victorian
> tech.
I've never even seen these.
> In Wurts' Light and Shadow series, gunpowder is so evil it justifies
> mindwiping everyone who re-discovers it.
Any original reason as to why?
- W. Citoan
--
Claiming that your operating system is the best in the world because more
people use it is like saying McDonalds makes the best food in the world.
-- Anonymous
Robert Shaw
It inevitably leads to a ultra-high tech civilisation, which
is plausible enough, and thus to piles of skulls, which
isn't.
The evidence the mindwipers give to support this is
slim. There's only their original star-spanning civilisation,
the ultimate fate of which is unknown, and the creators
of the mistwraith. Since that's a magical creature, blaming
it on excesses of technology seems a little unreasonable.
The planet appears to have been settled by refugees
from some interstellar war, who rejected technology
and promised the natives their children would too,
until the end of time. The natives made some of the
refugee leaders immortal, and gave them magic
powers to enforce this agreement.
--
Matter is fundamentally lazy:- It always takes the path of least effort
Matter is fundamentally stupid:- It tries every other path first.
That is the heart of physics - The rest is details.- Robert Shaw
Robert A. Woodward
"Robert Shaw" <Rob...@shavian.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> W. Citoan wrote:
> > Konrad Gaertner wrote:
>
> >> In Wurts' Light and Shadow series, gunpowder is so evil it justifies
> >> mindwiping everyone who re-discovers it.
> >
> > Any original reason as to why?
> >
>
> It inevitably leads to a ultra-high tech civilisation, which
> is plausible enough, and thus to piles of skulls, which
> isn't.
>
As it was, the low tech civilization in place wasn't doing that
poorly in the skull pile department. I could issue an indictment of
those do-nothing Sorcerers on this matter, but I will spare 'rasfw'
the rant (and myself the time it would take to write it).
> The evidence the mindwipers give to support this is
> slim. There's only their original star-spanning civilisation,
> the ultimate fate of which is unknown, and the creators
> of the mistwraith. Since that's a magical creature, blaming
> it on excesses of technology seems a little unreasonable.
>
> The planet appears to have been settled by refugees
> from some interstellar war, who rejected technology
> and promised the natives their children would too,
> until the end of time. The natives made some of the
> refugee leaders immortal, and gave them magic
> powers to enforce this agreement.
I am under the impression that there were several waves of
settlement and the Sorcerers were already immortal and had magical
powers when they arrived.
--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw
Nancy Lebovitz
W. Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Konrad Gaertner wrote:
>> "W. Citoan" wrote:
>> >
>> > Konrad Gaertner wrote:
>> > >
>> > > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you
>> > > already have fireballs?
>> >
>> > In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a
>> > select set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can
>> > be used by anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating
>> > force in a land ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories
>> > present firearms as a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're
>> > showing both sides of the same coin.
>>
>> Ture, but would the folks who have the resources to develop firearms
>> *want* to give more power to individuals?
>
>No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the driving
>force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the State. I can
>imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge over his neighbors
>and being willing to invest in it. And for a ruler who wasn't a magic
>user, it would decrease his dependence on magic users which he might see
>as a very good thing.
>
magic involved in the manufacture and possibly the use of firearms.
Alexey Romanov
<wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Konrad Gaertner wrote:
>>
>> And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
>> have fireballs?
>
>I can think of at least two series that have combined firearms and magic
>in a feudal setting: Joel Rosenberg's _Guardians of the Flame_ and some
>of the short stories within the _Forgotten Realms_ series.
>
>In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a select
>set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can be used by
>anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating force in a land
>ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories present firearms as
>a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're showing both sides of the
>same coin.
>
>Neither of these are great writing, IMO. There's got to more authors
>have done it, isn't there? I'm thinking of those in a feudal / medieval
>setting. Those set in a Victorian / Modern setting have already passed
>the introduction of firearms behind.
>
>- W. Citoan
Spoilers for a Russian book unlikely to be translated to English :(
but worth reading if you can.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
In the epilogue to H.L.Oldie's _Way of the Sword_ we find out that
while the heroes were dealing with the root of their problems, the
Emir was fighting the symptoms. An alchemist and a blacksmith
developed gunpowder and handguns. Since the heroes are mostly swords
(and maces, quarterstaves, etc.) they don't like the idea. In the
second book set in the same universe, _Let Them Die_, we find out they
were right (what a surprise!) The guns are also sentient. They are
also insane and trying to commit mass suicide. Since the tech level is
about 1980s but without nuclear weapons, this is likely to kill a lot
of humans as well.
Joe Jefferson
>
> On 27-Dec-2004, Bill Westfield <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
> >
> > Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
> > a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
> > to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
>
> Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
That used to be true. These days authors are more likely to call it "nanotech".
--
Joe of Castle Jefferson
http://www.mindspring.com/~jjstrshp
Site Updated November 25th, 2001
"Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the
poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the
hand of the wicked." - Psalm 82:3-4
Konrad Gaertner
>
> Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> > "W. Citoan" wrote:
> > >
> > > Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you
> > > > already have fireballs?
> > >
> > > In both cases, magic (at least heavy duty stuff) is limited to a
> > > select set (those with the ability and training) while firearms can
> > > be used by anyone. Rosenberg presents firearms as a liberating
> > > force in a land ruled by magic. The Forgotten Realms short stories
> > > present firearms as a destabilizing force. In a sense, they're
> > > showing both sides of the same coin.
> >
> > Ture, but would the folks who have the resources to develop firearms
> > *want* to give more power to individuals?
>
> No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the driving
> force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the State. I can
> imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge over his neighbors
> and being willing to invest in it. And for a ruler who wasn't a magic
> user, it would decrease his dependence on magic users which he might see
> as a very good thing.
But the magicians are the ones most likely to discover gunpowder,
and even if it is discovered by a non-magician, they'll probably
think it's magic.
> Those who had the resources to develop firearms in our world certainly
> didn't want to give more power to individuals (or at least individuals
> who weren't themselves).
True, but they didn't have a choice; you either give your soldiers
firearms, or your neighbor conquers you.
> [selective snipping of book list]
>
> > Martha Wells' _The Element of Fire_ has a setting based on 17th
> > century France, with magic and faeries.
>
> I've read her other books and liked them. How does this compare?
It's set about 200 years before _Death of the Necromancer_, and
involves an evil sorceror and the faerie (one main character is
half faerie). Not my favorite of her books, but not my least
favorite either. Includes a map showing Ile-Rien, Bisra, Aderra,
and Parscia.
> > Liavek shared world fits too, with pistols and not-quite-Victorian
> > tech.
>
> I've never even seen these.
Editted by Wil Shetterly and Emma Bull and likely hard to find.
Titles are: _Liavek_, _Players of Luck_, _Wizard's Row_, _Spells of
Binding_, and _Festival Week_. John M. Ford wrote a Liavek novella
named "The Illusionist" which was too long to be included, so he got
it published (along with two of his Livaek shorts from the
anthologies) as _Casting Fortune_. Pamela Dean was working on a
Liavek novel, but that's on hold now while she writes a sequel to
her Secret Country trilogy.
> > In Wurts' Light and Shadow series, gunpowder is so evil it justifies
> > mindwiping everyone who re-discovers it.
>
> Any original reason as to why?
The original human civilization messed up a couple planets,
therefore All Technology is EVUL.
--KG
how...@brazee.net
On 29-Dec-2004, Joe Jefferson <jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
>
> That used to be true. These days authors are more likely to call it
> "nanotech".
It is interesting that we don't see many SF works where technology is able
to do what PSI does. When the scientists created Flinx, they created a
person instead of a machine to do what he does.
But if it makes sense for a brain to have all this power, why not
technology?
I think the reason is that we still have fantasies about the super powerful
individual who is not corrupted the way a state is. This it the reader
who's powerful - similar to the long lost prince of the blood.
Nanotech doesn't duplicate this feeling. We can have _The Girl, The Gold
Watch, and Everything_ as long as we make sure that the magic watch will
never be owned by Big Brother.
Damien Neil
<how...@brazee.net> wrote:
> It is interesting that we don't see many SF works where technology is able
> to do what PSI does. When the scientists created Flinx, they created a
> person instead of a machine to do what he does.
ObFavorite: _The Atrocity Archives_, where video cameras can be
programmed to <SPOILER>.
- Damien
Gerry Quinn
wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com says...
> Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> >
> > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you already
> > have fireballs?
>
> I can think of at least two series that have combined firearms and magic
> in a feudal setting: Joel Rosenberg's _Guardians of the Flame_ and some
> of the short stories within the _Forgotten Realms_ series.
To veer off topic, it's common enough to mix magic and technology in
computer 'role-playing' games. Generally they are balanced so that
technology becomes equivalent in gameplay terms to another branch of
magic. Skill at using guns will give you slightly different tactical
options compared to skill at zapping with fire bolts, but both will be
equally powerful on average.
Of course the main purpose is to create some variety in gameplay.
However it does lead to 'worlds' in which magic and technology are
mixed. The recent 'Wizardry 8' is a good example - it's set in a high
tech world where spaceships and computers are commonplace. But any of
your wandering party of heroes might be equipped with a sword, a
blunderbuss, a bow and arrows, a magical talent, or a magical musical
instrument - each of which has roughly equivalent effects as regards
killing the various monsters that abound.
Anyway, the above will look merely silly to anyone who has not yet given
in to the pleasure of a good monster bash. Still, game environments are
progressing fast, and it seems likely that the 'magic + technology'
trope will remain popular. At some point there will be overspill into
the literary world.
- Gerry Quinn
David Johnston
>
>On 29-Dec-2004, Joe Jefferson <jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> > Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
>>
>> That used to be true. These days authors are more likely to call it
>> "nanotech".
>
>It is interesting that we don't see many SF works where technology is able
>to do what PSI does. When the scientists created Flinx, they created a
>person instead of a machine to do what he does.
Well, that's primarily because they were trying to create supermen.
The precise superpowers he had mattered less to them than the idea of
creating a human with superpowers.
Sea Wasp
>
> Anyway, the above will look merely silly to anyone who has not yet given
> in to the pleasure of a good monster bash. Still, game environments are
> progressing fast, and it seems likely that the 'magic + technology'
> trope will remain popular. At some point there will be overspill into
> the literary world.
It's an old trope in REGULAR RPG communities, and in fiction.
Atlantaea, mentioned in Digital Knight, used magic and tech in an
intertwined fashion. The Arduin Grimoires, old RPG supplements,
offered magic and technology evenhandedly. Amber is magic with
technology weaving in and out of the picture. And there'll be both in
several of the later books I have in my queue.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
how...@brazee.net
about creating a weapon so terrible that war would be obsolete. I know
I've read this, but don't remember where.
how...@brazee.net
On 30-Dec-2004, rgo...@telusplanet.net (David Johnston) wrote:
> >It is interesting that we don't see many SF works where technology is
> >able
> >to do what PSI does. When the scientists created Flinx, they created a
> >person instead of a machine to do what he does.
>
> Well, that's primarily because they were trying to create supermen.
> The precise superpowers he had mattered less to them than the idea of
> creating a human with superpowers.
But with machines - they could have *become* the supermen.
W. Citoan
> In article <slrnct5huo....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>, W.
> Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the
> >driving force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the
> >State. I can imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge
> >over his neighbors and being willing to invest in it. And for a
> >ruler who wasn't a magic user, it would decrease his dependence on
> >magic users which he might see as a very good thing.
>
> I'd be willing to bet that in a magic-rich world, there'd be a lot of
> magic involved in the manufacture and possibly the use of firearms.
I would tend to agree, but it all depends upon the scenario you care to
weave. Even if magic was involved in the manufacture, there is no
reason it would be required in order to use the firearms. After all,
they work in our world. And one magic user manufacturing your firearms
could provide more firepower to your army than a bunch of magic users
that actually accompany your army into battle. Of course, that wouldn't
apply to D&D settings where magic scrolls and devices litter the
landscape.
- W. Citoan
--
I thought I had a great idea today, but it never really took off. In fact,
it didn't even get on the runway. I guess you could say it exploded in the
hangar.
-- Bill Watterson from Calvin & Hobbes
W. Citoan
>
> Spoilers for a Russian book unlikely to be translated to English :(
> but worth reading if you can.
Sounds interesting. Thanks for the recommendation even if I'll probably
never get to read it...
W. Citoan
> "W. Citoan" wrote:
> >
> > No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the
> > driving force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the
> > State. I can imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge
> > over his neighbors and being willing to invest in it. And for a
> > ruler who wasn't a magic user, it would decrease his dependence on
> > magic users which he might see as a very good thing.
>
> But the magicians are the ones most likely to discover gunpowder, and
> even if it is discovered by a non-magician, they'll probably think
> it's magic.
Does it matter? As long as they figure it out and can consistently
repeat it, they should be able to make use of it. I doubt the early
users of gunpowder in our world really understood the chemistry.
> > Those who had the resources to develop firearms in our world
> > certainly didn't want to give more power to individuals (or at least
> > individuals who weren't themselves).
>
> True, but they didn't have a choice; you either give your soldiers
> firearms, or your neighbor conquers you.
That was my point. I think it's very easy to develop scenarios where
the same would apply under a fantasy setting.
> > [selective snipping of book list]
Thanks for the recommendations. I'll keep an eye out for them.
Nancy Lebovitz
W. Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
>> In article <slrnct5huo....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>, W.
>> Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >No, but that's Rosenberg's presentation; not mine. I think the
>> >driving force in such a world would be the same as in ours - the
>> >State. I can imagine a ruler seeing firearms as giving him an edge
>> >over his neighbors and being willing to invest in it. And for a
>> >ruler who wasn't a magic user, it would decrease his dependence on
>> >magic users which he might see as a very good thing.
>>
>> I'd be willing to bet that in a magic-rich world, there'd be a lot of
>> magic involved in the manufacture and possibly the use of firearms.
>
>I would tend to agree, but it all depends upon the scenario you care to
>weave. Even if magic was involved in the manufacture, there is no
>reason it would be required in order to use the firearms. After all,
>they work in our world. And one magic user manufacturing your firearms
>could provide more firepower to your army than a bunch of magic users
>that actually accompany your army into battle. Of course, that wouldn't
>apply to D&D settings where magic scrolls and devices litter the
>landscape.
That's decreasing your dependence on magic users by increasing your
dependence on one magic user. Probably not a win unless magic users
are especially allergic to being on battlefields.
W. Citoan
> In article <slrnct2ri7....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>,
> wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com says...
> > Konrad Gaertner wrote:
> > >
> > > And would there be any incentive to develop firearms when you
> > > already have fireballs?
> >
> > I can think of at least two series that have combined firearms and
> > magic in a feudal setting: Joel Rosenberg's _Guardians of the
> > Flame_ and some of the short stories within the _Forgotten Realms_
> > series.
>
> To veer off topic, it's common enough to mix magic and technology in
> computer 'role-playing' games.
>
>
> At some point there will be overspill into the literary world.
I think that has already happened. I can think of plenty of books that
mix magic and technology. Any fantasy book set in the modern world (and
there's plenty of those) combines magic and technology in some way.
There are also a large number of books set in Victorian like (or even
earlier) settings.
I was specifically looking at books that address the introduction of
firearms and the impact that causes. Most books I've seen that combine
magic and technology usually have the technology as an existing element
in the society. I was thinking that there had to be more authors out
there that have played around with actual introduction of technology
into a fantasy world and the subsequent impacts.
Konrad Gaertner
Possibly in Brust's _Dragon_, discussing Morganti weapons:
"I wonder why the Serioli invented them in the first place."
"You don't know, Vlad?"
"No. Do you?"
"Sure. Well, I know what they say, at least."
"What do they say?"
"Back before the beginning of Empire they were invented by a Serioli
smith in order to make war so horrible no one would fight any more."
I snorted. "You're kidding. Do you believe they could be that stupid?"
"Oh, but it worked."
"Huh?"
"Among the Serioli."
--KG
William George Ferguson
>
>On 29-Dec-2004, Joe Jefferson <jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> > Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
>>
>> That used to be true. These days authors are more likely to call it
>> "nanotech".
>
>It is interesting that we don't see many SF works where technology is able
>to do what PSI does. When the scientists created Flinx, they created a
>person instead of a machine to do what he does.
>
>But if it makes sense for a brain to have all this power, why not
>technology?
What immediately leaped to mind was two books I read in my yoot, Jack of
Eagles by James Blish and The Universe Against Her (specifically the 2nd
half of the fixup) by James Schmitz. Thare are actually many examples of
psi machines, they just likely don't stick in the mind as strongly as the
'superman' trope (which is why it's a trope, I guess).
--
"Who needs the big picture? Not me! Hints are fine."
-Joan Girardi
(after God showed her just a little of his omnipresent brain)
David E. Siegel
IIRC Niven's "What Good is a Glass dagger" used this, as did Clarke's
"Second Dawn" (Not fantasy, but mental powers as superweapon).
-DES
Robert Sneddon
<na...@unix5.netaxs.com> writes
>>
>I'd be willing to bet that in a magic-rich world, there'd be a lot of
>magic involved in the manufacture and possibly the use of firearms.
In Mary Gentle's "Grunts!" the orcs of the Dark who discover the
dragon's hoard of our-world weapons think that at last they've got a
chance against the forces of Light (they've read the script, they know
what's going to happen to them even if they do outnumber the Light a
hundred to one...) For a time they do quite well, until the magicians of
the Light develop spells that stop their weapons from functioning.
Bummer.
--
Email me via nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
This address no longer accepts HTML posts.
Robert Sneddon
Scott Robinson
<jjst...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>how...@brazee.net wrote:
>>
>> On 27-Dec-2004, Bill Westfield <bi...@cypher.cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>> > People tend to think it would be great if "magic worked."
>> >
>> > Yet most of the SF written with working magic as a premise seems to have
>> > a society frozen back in the middle ages with (usually) magic restricted
>> > to a few, battles between good and bad, and such.
>>
>> Most Science Fiction with working magic calls that magic "psi".
>
>That used to be true. These days authors are more likely to call it "nanotech".
Someone mentioned a story in which the reason that you could cast
spells by giving commands in the "one true language" was that the
designers (and customers) of the nanotech dust spoke high atlantean
(or whatever was appropriate for the story). It might be a wimp out,
but it works well the first time.
Scott
Aaron Davies
Reminds me of the _Trillium_ series, in which the magic incantations
turn out to be instructions to the computer that used to run the colony,
which has a really crappy parser, thus necessitating very precise
language.
--
Aaron Davies
Opinions expressed are solely those of a random number generator.
"I don't know if it's real or not but it is a myth."
-Jami JoAnne of alt.folklore.urban, showing her grasp on reality.
Brad Sims
> However it does lead to 'worlds' in which magic and technology are
> mixed. The recent 'Wizardry 8' is a good example - it's set in a high
> tech world where spaceships and computers are commonplace. But any of
> your wandering party of heroes might be equipped with a sword, a
> blunderbuss, a bow and arrows, a magical talent, or a magical musical
> instrument - each of which has roughly equivalent effects as regards
> killing the various monsters that abound.
>
> Anyway, the above will look merely silly to anyone who has not yet given
> in to the pleasure of a good monster bash. Still, game environments are
> progressing fast, and it seems likely that the 'magic + technology'
> trope will remain popular. At some point there will be overspill into
> the literary world.
Sounds like Shadowrun <g>
--
"Does my .sig look big in this?"
David Johnston
I've seen gunpowder eliminated as a viable military option in a
magical world just because it's so volatile that a simple spell can
detonate it from a long way away.
Udhay Shankar N
<wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>I was specifically looking at books that address the introduction of
>firearms and the impact that causes.
_The Guns Of Avalon_?
Udhay
--
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
W. Citoan
> In article <slrnct88fi....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>, W.
> Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >I would tend to agree, but it all depends upon the scenario you care
> >to weave. Even if magic was involved in the manufacture, there is no
> >reason it would be required in order to use the firearms. After all,
> >they work in our world. And one magic user manufacturing your
> >firearms could provide more firepower to your army than a bunch of
> >magic users that actually accompany your army into battle. Of
> >course, that wouldn't apply to D&D settings where magic scrolls and
> >devices litter the landscape.
>
> That's decreasing your dependence on magic users by increasing your
> dependence on one magic user. Probably not a win unless magic users
> are especially allergic to being on battlefields.
There's nothing requiring magic to make gunpowder. In a magic based
world, I see it being used in manufacturing as a convenience. Which
means that it could still be made without it, it would just require more
work.
Paying one magic user is cheaper than paying a bunch to join your army.
And since it's safer to remain at "home" than on the battlefield, you
probably don't have to pay him/her as much.
- W. Citoan
--
...the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is
before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet
it.
-- Thucydides
how...@brazee.net
On 1-Jan-2005, "W. Citoan" <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
> There's nothing requiring magic to make gunpowder. In a magic based
> world, I see it being used in manufacturing as a convenience. Which
> means that it could still be made without it, it would just require more
> work.
Depending on how the magic worked, it might have a tremendous advantage in
the manufacturing process - especially if you didn't want enemies to learn
of its formula.
W. Citoan
Since cannons were in regular use within Europe by the 14th century
(earlier in China) and firearms not long after that, I don't see their
manufacturing being that far outside the non-magical capabilities of
many fantasy world settings. The biggest advantage of using magic might
be in improving the quality of the gunpowder which didn't happen until
the 17th and 18th centuries (IIRC).
I like the "magic makes gunpowder go boom" argument for no firearms much
better than the "magic makes people ignore science" approach many
authors seem to use. I find Lord Darcy's world much more believable
than the D&D style of no technological progress over millennium.
- W. Citoan
--
An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less.
-- Nicholas Murray Butler
bebop
wrote:
>Where can I read about a magic-powered utopia, where 'the cost of magic'
>is vaguely comparable to the cost of technology, and the world as a
>result has prospered to levels similar to those that exist now (world
>population of a couple billion, 'wealth' relatively well-dispersed,
>space travel, education, etc, etc.)
Zelazny's Amber model allows for this.
Saberhagen's Swords' books do, too.
J.
Nancy Lebovitz
W. Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
>> In article <slrnct88fi....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>, W.
>> Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >I would tend to agree, but it all depends upon the scenario you care
>> >to weave. Even if magic was involved in the manufacture, there is no
>> >reason it would be required in order to use the firearms. After all,
>> >they work in our world. And one magic user manufacturing your
>> >firearms could provide more firepower to your army than a bunch of
>> >magic users that actually accompany your army into battle. Of
>> >course, that wouldn't apply to D&D settings where magic scrolls and
>> >devices litter the landscape.
>>
>> That's decreasing your dependence on magic users by increasing your
>> dependence on one magic user. Probably not a win unless magic users
>> are especially allergic to being on battlefields.
>
>There's nothing requiring magic to make gunpowder. In a magic based
>world, I see it being used in manufacturing as a convenience. Which
>means that it could still be made without it, it would just require more
>work.
I agree that you don't need magic to make gunpowder, but you could use
magic to make gunpowder more cheaply, and it's better to have more
gunpowder (and butter and horses, and all the other things that make
for a prosperous and militarily effective state) than less.
Unless magic users are *really* problematic (likely to be taken over
by demons, much more loyal to other magic users than to you and yours,
apt to become chaotic gods.....), I think you're better off using
magic to increase your military capability than avoiding magic.
It would certainly be possible to rig a story so that one side had
enough advantages that it could get away with a taboo on magic. Ideally,
that story will not be about a genius magic user who has the misfortune
to be born there.
>
>Paying one magic user is cheaper than paying a bunch to join your army.
>And since it's safer to remain at "home" than on the battlefield, you
>probably don't have to pay him/her as much.
>
After rereading, I find that I haven't exactly answered your point, but
I like my riff about magic and war that I haven't the heart to delete
it.
As for the idea of reserving magic users for arms manufacture, I don't
think it's a point which can be evaluated. It depends on how common
magic users are, and what they're capable of.
W. Citoan
>
> I agree that you don't need magic to make gunpowder, but you could
> use magic to make gunpowder more cheaply, and it's better to have
> more gunpowder (and butter and horses, and all the other things that
> make for a prosperous and militarily effective state) than less.
That's an interesting thought. I was actually looking at it from the
perspective of using magic to make the gunpowder better quality.
> Unless magic users are *really* problematic (likely to be taken over
> by demons, much more loyal to other magic users than to you and
> yours, apt to become chaotic gods.....), I think you're better off
> using magic to increase your military capability than avoiding magic.
Isn't that a common caricature of magic users, at least in the swords
and sorcery genre? Power hungry, untrustworthy, etc.
[snip]
> After rereading, I find that I haven't exactly answered your point,
> but I like my riff about magic and war that I haven't the heart to
> delete it.
>
> As for the idea of reserving magic users for arms manufacture, I
> don't think it's a point which can be evaluated. It depends on how
> common magic users are, and what they're capable of.
Well, to clarify, I'm not arguing for a particular idea. My primary
point was that I think you can spin a scenario to make it[1] believable.
The corollary of that is you can always spin scenarios where it doesn't
fit.
[1] Where "it" can be magic & gunpowder coexisting; magic used in the
manufacturing only; magic making gunpowder impractical; or any of the
other ideas we've batted around...
- W. Citoan
--
Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.
-- Dante
Kris Kennaway
> The society in Margaret Weis' Darksword books is kinda like this.
> Everything runs on magic provided by human batteries(?) or something like
> this. Forgive my poor memory, but its been years. Everything is fine
> except for the few who either couldn't control magic or just didn't have
> access to it.
>
> I remember vaguely that there were sci fi invaders later too...
I read at least one of these books as a child, but I think it was a
middle book in the series and the library didn't have the earlier
ones. Actually, I might be conflating two books; the things I
associate are that some people ("The Dead") (including someone who
might be the viewpoint character) can't do magic; and also that there
was a futuristic earth army unit who turned up in this world (the
natives migrated there from earth by mystical means, "walking amongst
the pillars of the worlds" or somesuch). It sounds like this fits
with your memory.
The book obviously left an impression on me, but are they worth
rereading? The only review I can find online is by Orson Scott Card,
who seemed to enjoy them, which, by transitivity, disinclines me to
think so :-)
Kris
Steve Coltrin
> I've seen gunpowder eliminated as a viable military option in a
> magical world just because it's so volatile that a simple spell can
> detonate it from a long way away.
C.S. Friedman's Coldfire trilogy is even worse, given the pervasive and
destructive nature of natural magic. The good guy is *amazed* when he
encounters a society so stabilized that fireworks aren't suicide.
--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org FTSOJ
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press
Nancy Lebovitz
W. Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
>Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
>>
>> I agree that you don't need magic to make gunpowder, but you could
>> use magic to make gunpowder more cheaply, and it's better to have
>> more gunpowder (and butter and horses, and all the other things that
>> make for a prosperous and militarily effective state) than less.
>
>That's an interesting thought. I was actually looking at it from the
>perspective of using magic to make the gunpowder better quality.
What can I say? I'm from the modern, industrialized world. Having
magic used to make gunpowder cheaper in a pre-modern fantasy might
well feel a little anachronistic.
As for improving gunpowder, magically giving it more of a kick would
be fun, but waterproofing it might be at least as useful.
>> Unless magic users are *really* problematic (likely to be taken over
>> by demons, much more loyal to other magic users than to you and
>> yours, apt to become chaotic gods.....), I think you're better off
>> using magic to increase your military capability than avoiding magic.
>
>Isn't that a common caricature of magic users, at least in the swords
>and sorcery genre? Power hungry, untrustworthy, etc.
I don't think so, but I haven't read a lot of average fantasy. Gandalf
is my default idea of a magic user. Gandalf can look untrustworthy,
but Tolkien has perhaps a little too much of the idea that good guys
can recognize each other's goodness.
Are you distinguishing between sword and sorcery and epic fantasy?
Imho, the magic users are much less trustworthy in s&s, but you're
much more likely to worry about gunpowder manufacture in epic
fantasy.
(Imho, s&s is about wandering through a fantasy landscape having
adventures. Epic fantasy is about fighting a serious menace and
is more likely to have politics and economics.)
>[snip]
>
>> After rereading, I find that I haven't exactly answered your point,
>> but I like my riff about magic and war that I haven't the heart to
>> delete it.
>>
>> As for the idea of reserving magic users for arms manufacture, I
>> don't think it's a point which can be evaluated. It depends on how
>> common magic users are, and what they're capable of.
>
>Well, to clarify, I'm not arguing for a particular idea. My primary
>point was that I think you can spin a scenario to make it[1] believable.
>The corollary of that is you can always spin scenarios where it doesn't
>fit.
>
> [1] Where "it" can be magic & gunpowder coexisting; magic used in the
> manufacturing only; magic making gunpowder impractical; or any of the
> other ideas we've batted around...
>
Agreed.
rja.ca...@excite.com
Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
> In article <slrnctk1be....@wcitoan-via.supernews.com>,
> W. Citoan <wci...@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Nancy Lebovitz wrote:
> >>
> >> Unless magic users are *really* problematic (likely to be taken
over
> >> by demons, much more loyal to other magic users than to you and
> >> yours, apt to become chaotic gods.....), I think you're better
off
> >> using magic to increase your military capability than avoiding
magic.
> >
> >Isn't that a common caricature of magic users, at least in the
swords
> >and sorcery genre? Power hungry, untrustworthy, etc.
>
> I don't think so, but I haven't read a lot of average fantasy.
Gandalf
> is my default idea of a magic user. Gandalf can look untrustworthy,
> but Tolkien has perhaps a little too much of the idea that good guys
> can recognize each other's goodness.
Gandalf? A lot of people around Middle-Earth are
pissed at him. He doesn't return borrowed books -
bad - or horses - worse - though, come to think...
Um, is it relevant that he gives out kickass
fireworks? Military use of incendiary techniques
in M-E... hmm. Maybe they actually do get to
use gunpowder only if their own magic-user is
guarding it.
Hey, would there be a way to make binary-weapon
type gunpowder, which can't be set off by magic?
Allowing that wizards can set fire to clouds,
if that's what the author wants...
W. Citoan
>
> >Isn't that a common caricature of magic users, at least in the swords
> >and sorcery genre? Power hungry, untrustworthy, etc.
>
> I don't think so, but I haven't read a lot of average fantasy.
> Gandalf is my default idea of a magic user. Gandalf can look
> untrustworthy, but Tolkien has perhaps a little too much of the idea
> that good guys can recognize each other's goodness.
>
> Are you distinguishing between sword and sorcery and epic fantasy?
Yes, I was specifically referring to the subset of fantasy that includes
Conan, Fritz Leiber, some (but not all) of the D&D-related books, etc.
> Imho, the magic users are much less trustworthy in s&s, but you're
> much more likely to worry about gunpowder manufacture in epic
> fantasy.
That's probably true, but even in epic fantasy, the bad guys almost
invariably are magic users (or magic beings) of some type.
> (Imho, s&s is about wandering through a fantasy landscape having
> adventures. Epic fantasy is about fighting a serious menace and is
> more likely to have politics and economics.)
In my view, I think swords and sorcery is more specialized that that.
Searching the web, I found the following definition at wikipedia:
... is a fantasy sub-genre featuring muscular heroes in violent
conflict with a variety of villains, chiefly wizards, witches, evil
spirits, and other creatures whose powers are - unlike the heroĆs -
supernatural in origin. The term was suggested by Fritz Leiber to
Michael Moorcock in 1961.
I'm not in full agreement with it (especially about the hero's powers
not being supernatural), but I think that is a pretty decent definition
(at least of what I think when I hear the term swords and sorcery).
- W. Citoan
--
If a man can write a better book, preach a better sermon, or make a better
mouse-trap than his neighbor, though he builds his house in the woods, the
world will make a beaten path to his door.
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Chuk Goodin
>I'm trying to think of a reference where fantasy used the A-bomb analogy
>about creating a weapon so terrible that war would be obsolete. I know
>I've read this, but don't remember where.
You're not thinking of Turtledove's Darkness books, are you? (The fantasy
analogue to WWII.) I don't remember that specific analogy being drawn in
them, anyway.
--
chuk