Magic vs Technology thread, which do you prefer?
Magic takes a long time to master though, while any person can wield tech. Also, with tech you can combine efforts and build fuckhuge weapons while magic is more of a solo deal.
Many games don't allow both though, often you have to choose one to avoid any electrical infetterence
Tech, because "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
What is magic and what is technology?
Is Numidium magic or tech?
Depends on the context.
I'm generally more drawn to cyberpunk and technology based settings and love to be in the know about and speculate on future technology, but given the choice between an I-Pod or the ability to shoot lighting out of my hands, Magic all the way.
>Technology v Magic
>Tech side chooses gun, Magic side chooses barrier and bolt spells
>Tech shoots magic user before they can finish their incantation
There's way too many variances of magic. Like, some are instant while others require tomes, some don't yadda yadda yadda. Tech wins from sheer efficiency, a larger population could not be sustained by just pure magic. You'd have ot make slaves of all magic users to keep things moving.
Actually, that kinda seems like a good premise for a fantasy setting
numidium is pure tech
it works on tonal architecture
it would be like a giant gundam working by bending our laws of physics
it uses tonal resonator as it's core
and even by tes deffinition it doesn't use any aether so it's not magical
TES universe being magical universe in itself is whole another thing
What the fuck is tech? Magic in said universes is part of the universe and it's laws of physics, dividing magic from tech is like creating some arbitrary division of
>This is Tech but this is fire, fire is it's own thing because...well it's fire
>Flamethrowers are techifire
Yes, magitech sounds as stupid as techifire
Never thought someone other than me would post a Magic Vs Tech thread makes me happy.
Also magic, something a lot fail to realize is magic is just as good for taking over a galaxy as tech.
Instead of spaceships we can open direct portal. some portals temporary some permanent.
Dunno. What about a spell that enables you to summon a pocket plane whore house?
For being a crappy game, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Crystal Bearers had a nice setting. Magic and Technology mingled pretty nicely. I mean, you start out on an airship powered by magic that's more like a flying cruise ship than a wooden boat with a propeller.
Magic tends to far less efficient than technology and the knowledge is far too easy to lose and the wielders hardly even know the nature and exactly how it works.
Technology is all about getting the most bang for your buck. You might have an all powerful spell, but it means fuck-all when the technological army can annihilate you from the other side of the galaxy before you can even think of any harm.
Magic does not exist in our universe
You're acting like fiction from our universe is not from our universe
It isn't real anon
You're like one of those faggots that complains that humans are always the base for which other races are built off of when the games are made for humans by humans
I....I don't know what you want me to say anon, magic of the past is the science of today. When I hear technology versus magic I imagine man made devices that anyone can use against someone who has trained their body to harness the elements and blast people with hellfire.
>Instead of spaceships we can open direct portal. some portals temporary some permanent.
You say that like it is exclusive to magic.
Magic far more volatile and inefficient. Technology would be able to do the same far more efficiently and effectively.
It would be like the equivalent of a newbie rts player going up against the best RTS player ever, you'll be outmacroed to hell and back.
You don't know shit about TES universe.
Aurbis is built like music with tonality and vibrations in mind, Dwemer used Tonal Architecture to alter laws of universe, no magic there, it's like us creating warp engine that warp space or something.
Magic is Aether and there is little to no Aether in any Dwemer machinatron.
>oh but you don't get it they use the whicky-whacky made up clickety clacker to do the thing
too bad the real world isn't built with music, and technology is realistically based.
Fine, space wizard godheads did it, you happy?
Technology=Man made, engineered for a certain purpose, made of moving parts in most cases
Magic=natural, a force that can only be manipulated
Gundams are considered tech because they are built of moving parts, not conjured with a fairy wand. Are you high anon?
How often does media portray technological super advancement to be Utopian?
How often does media portray magically supreme societies to be Utopian?
In that case in some settings everything is magical
Lets say in Glorantha or TES even fucking horses are magical because particles work differently
Fuck even light itself is not like out universe
Is it all magic now?
I heavily disagree
They don't explain how it works and make it mysterious because they're too lazy to make the game complex enough to support it
If you could do actual fucking magic instead of waving a staff you found in a cave or using an ability you got for killing enough rats to level up it would be the most interesting shit
demons are unorganized as hell and run around like headless chicken. They'll be wiped out with utter precision by a random starship from the other end of the universe without even moving.
I actually found it "Magic is a branch of applied mathematics", what I love in the series is that they go in deep descriptions on how most of the magic works,
speaking of which I have to see the new book
If thats the whole crux of the mage's plan, summoning a strong being they would hardly win unless it was a horrifically strong being and that by itself would backfire unless its immune to our weapons
My post is >>253852692 and I think there might be some confusion. I agree that it's interesting to have magic explained, but how is it explained though? Even if it's described how you wield it and get better at it there is still often some mysterious element to it because otherwise it wouldn't really be magic anymore. Feel free to give examples where it have been explained and what that explanation was.
You can't build non-Euclidian hell temples with technology
>there is still often some mysterious element to it because otherwise it wouldn't really be magic
The difference between magic and not-magic is only ever mostly semantic
Like the difference between genetics and chemistry
Anon, have you got your autismbux yet?
For real though, what the hell are you talking about? The difference between magic and technology is pretty obvious, what point are you trying to argue here?
You can actually
I don't have to really search for examples, again grand majority of fantasy RPG settings have magic explained fully to the point of what magic itself is because usually it ties into world creation myth or laws of said universe. Like it be it Fade in Dragon Age, or control of the weave in Planescape or any Forgotten realm setting really, or Aether in TES or even vaguely described Chaos in Witcher.
I mean we usually know that there is this matter or some code of universe, sometimes it's described to the point where you know exactly every detail of how it works with rest of universal laws.
Not him, but I kinda get what he's saying
Usually we have a very broad, general idea of how magic works, but when someone does research or experiments or something , you rarely ever really know exactly what it is they're doing and just see the end result
I understand that and often times it's true but again a lot of times especially in table top based settings or WRPGs magic is basically fully explained
It also helps that a lot of older cRPGs are based on Forgotten realms, where again, magic is fully explained
Can technology be traced down as far as an animals start learning how to use tools? Because imagine a species born with magical organs but never learned how to develop a spear to hunt, a cloth to protect against the weather or a book to pass down knowledge they only exist as those sea slugs in bioshock, let alone evolving into fairies or goblins.
It's not obvious; sci-fi and magic are frequently based on materials and phenomena that don't exist or haven't been proven. They are only distinguishable in many cases by what people are used to seeing, but most sci-fi goes just as wild with a concept that it establishes as part of the setting's ruleset as magic.
Saying otherwise suggests poor critical thinking skills.
Did someone say MagiTech!?
>tfw the Bryyonians could've just combined their science and magic instead of just going to war
What about technology that is so ridiculously advanced it's like magic? Being space and time to warp, using implants to manipulate nanocomputers embedded in nanomaterials for levitation, manipulating them combust into fire or a special kind of nanoparticle that's superconductive for lightning? Animation of inanimate objects, reanimation of corpses for pseudo-necromancy, braindancing for psychic powers, localized light bending fields for invisibility, etc.
I should have stayed in /int/, s-sorry
And that species wouldn't evolve further than your average fantasy dungeon boss or a hivemind.
What a lot of the people in this thread is arguing about is how much of a stretch we could advance if we were magic-based beings and nobody mentioned the notion that prying open a clam with a rock is considered the more primitive form technology.
>Tincan Man tries to press me
>brb turning this shit into a goddamn disco
Advancement is irrelevant because magic and technology are fundamentally different.
The difference is technology is dependent on a lot of parts to work like magic.
Where has magic only has "mana".
>b-but technology so advanced we create artificial mana
Then it'd just be technology.
Super-advanced technology is just sci-fi stuff, and usually has a radically different feel
Though if you specifically try to make it feel like magic, but still have it based on tech, then there's really no difference
But it's still impossible, so it's kinda dumb to talk about, plus any fictional universe that has that without just being a sci-fi game with powers would be a clusterfuck
lets say Dr Manhattan
he is so strong that he is fucking magical
he was born from bullshit science
is he magic? because if they would call him energy elemental king or something and would use the same powers he would be considered magical
>any person can wield tech.
You imply this is a good thing.
Imagine you were in a universe where magic and futuristic technology exists. Considering you're on 4chan right now, do you really think that you would be disciplined enough to study years and years to be able to become a novice magic user? Or would you like to have the option to just pick up a device and wreck some niggas instead?
There will be cases where that is a negative point yes but there are many positives as well.
Gandalf has no stable power
because Tolkienverse magic is absolutely unexplained and is basically blessing of one God who is Tolkiens version of Christian God and mages are basically Angels
If the world operates fully in magic, like what if people fed their kids with instead of plastic bottles they use some magical nob milk mushroom or that instead of a hardron collider we had an actual black hole being contained by some bullshit force field. This plus if our technology never evolved past Rube Goldberg machine phase, would you still stick with technology?
The idea is what you would choose between in a fantasy universe
Not a version of the one we already live in
In most fantasy universes, the extent of technology is complex clockwork robots instead of a computer
>hard ron collider
>All these votes for technology
You guys own your own pair of steampunk goggles and tophats?
Technology is the more rational choice given the entry-level is everyone because we assume retard-friendly standard.
Where as magic is skill/patience/practice etc.
And depending on the hypothetical, stability is also a factor.
Tech when it's fun abstract shit like quantum theory fuckers that manipulate probability.
Magic when it's able to do really mundane stuff like being able to see in the dark or make small flames and anyone can use it but most prefer to not use it or use it sparringly because it's tough to do and beyond fucking dangerous.
Mushishi is still too advanced because people knew how to make boats and grow crops, but yea the implication is that a universe that operates fully in mumbo jumbo down to a single speck would choose magic over tech because their tech only exists in their manga written in bug ink and magical papyrus.
Actually I was going to write physics/chemistry, but then some faggot would argue (rightly so) that it could be part of biology as well, and decided to remove everything after the slash.
Anti-matter like dark matter is just one of those things that exist because they make the math that we're using to figure out the universe work.
These things have to exist to make a lot of stuff fit, cause if they don't huge swaths of science as we know it will have to be thrown out or redone from scratch.
I wish the higgs was dis-proved because then it would mean that most of the shit we knew was just plain fucking wrong.
With it's discovery we've just confirmed what we've assumed for like a century or something.
Should you explain technology when writing sci-fi /v/?
Would that ruin the
They could rename and reorganize all the fields for all I care. In a universe where magic works the "magic" would be part of the laws of the universe and would be studied by the appropriate fields. As I have never visited such universe, as far as I can recall, I do not know what fields they they use.
Tech is anything you can build with physical materials that has no supernatural component.
Magic involves breaking Newton's Laws, specifically the conservation of matter and energy.
If you're creating or destroying matter or energy, you're doing magic. If you're merely converting one to the other via physical processes, you're doing tech.
No, I love it
I mean, obviously you can't explain it in intricate detail using only shit that exists in the real world, because if you could do that then it's not fictional, but yeah, explain the bullshit terms with more science combined with bullshit turms to your heart's content
Depends on your knowledge of the subject and how far you want to go.
Basic pieces that common-sense the rest is fine for most people.
If you have the dedication and knowledge to thoroughly explain everything down to the 1&0's, then sure.
Wormholes are still fucking magic and beautiful to me, even if Science has already explained how they would work in theory.
It depends on the story and if it's ultimately worth it. Something with more hard scifi like Star Trek should explain it. Space opera or soft scifi like Star Wars doesn't need to, though Mass Effect's explanations were really interesting since they tied into many of the common themes in the games and were ultimately good world building in a game centered on world building.
In a universe where "magic" exists, it would be its own field of science
Why do you think we have divided fields of science in the first place, and not just one unified "Science"
Was interesting in FFXII, where magic and technology were almost the same thing
>all this tech
It is truly the worst of times.
>tech adheres to physical laws
>magic defies physical laws
a good example would be like... a light spell that makes a room bright without using photons. so you can see perfectly as if a bright light was in the middle of the room, but to everybody else in the room it's still dark because only your eyes can see the "magic photons"
Magic and technology need to work together. Why master a flight spell over years of training when a simple fire spell can power a hotair balloon? Power-armor mechs are unrealistic? Not with magic power sources they aren't. Use magic to become the video game you love playing. Space travel could be a thing if we could create fresh air, food, and water from nothing.
>wanting technology in a game when you can have magic
There's plenty of games based on our world and its level of technology you know. Most FPSs are just that. The most recent one I can think of is Watch Dogs.
Isn't magic just unexplaned science?
if magic can be studied does it become science?
either way Gun>>>>gay magic
>urbis is built like music with tonality and vibrations in mind, Dwemer used Tonal Architecture to alter laws of universe, no magic there,
Ok, so if it's purely tech and not magic, why don't you build one in real life then? You know, with your 'Tonal Architecture'.
In the real world, yes.
In a fictional world, magic is something that cannot be explained by science. It may have rules, but those rules fly in the face of mundane experimentation.
>Ok, so if it's purely tech and not magic, why don't you build one in real life then? You know, with your 'Tonal Architecture'.
1000 years ago
Ok, so if it's purely tech and not magic, why don't you build a computer in real life then? You know, with your "circuitry".
>Telekinesis at 8:00 am and Necromancy at 3:00 pm
>Animal linguastic for summer class
I want to echo the point about Mass Effect. What they did with that game was start with one bit of fictitious bullshit, Element Zero. But once they established its properties, they could extrapolate that to explain how all the eezo-based technology worked. The weapons, the force fields, the propulsion systems. That was why it was so interesting to read about, I think. It all made sense once they established what Element Zero was.
Damn shame about the last two games.
>Experiment 1: Drop some sodium into a canister of chlorine gas.
>Result: Light, Heat, Salt
>Experiment 2: Drop sodium into magic gas
>Result: Living talking mouse that remembers when it was sodium.
>All the people that think Numidion isnt magic
The heart of Lorkhan is PURE magic. Without it Numidion wont have any power.
Yes the shell of Numidion is made of technology but the core itself is Magic
Naw man, I read plenty of it but I stopped since I just can't handle that sort of shit. I generally dislike any sort of patriotic media, but when it happens so blatantly with Japan, it pushes me over
Now here's a work I enjoy and an author I can actually respect.
If you could actually observe such a thing, that'd be neat. But while the physics of the very small is indeed mysterious, there's little to be gained by attributing "magical" behavior to them.
You say magic needs no explanation, but isn't it great when authors do add reasoning to magic in their universes?
For example, I could say the source of magic is souls within people and with age, experience, strength etc your soul increases in power. and the more people you kill to absorb their souls, the more powerful your magic manifests and stuff
Or you could just do a Harry potter and be all like, you have wizard blood randomly you can do magic
So you're trying to say that in the future people are going to discover 'Tonal Architecture' and be able to manipulate reality?
The Numidian was meant to use the heart of Lorkhan to work anyway wasn't it?
that is why I find the whole tech vs magic argument funny
in pretty much any sci-fi universe there reaches a point where tech can end up doing pretty anything magic can do plus more
The very nature of magic would make it run COUNTER to science.
It has not explainable laws or understandable reasons for doing anything. It just does it.
Any science that is built around it will just be a shitload of black boxed information being glued together dumbfuck style.
in my opinion..the closest science will ever get to magic and understanding it or creating a system around it is...theory. .At best.
It'll probably even be so antiethical to science that it'll be relegated to arts philosophy and theology.
I LOVE it when magic is explained, or when it has clearly defined rules and limits. Settings where you can just "abracadabra" and whatever you want happens are boring as fuck.
Though in a game it had better be backed up by gameplay
I fucking hate when a game explains how magic works, but I just learn how to summon meteors by killing enough people to get to level 30
>reading tid bits of lore from books scattered around
>it actually bothers explaining that undead uses mana to create air vibrations to communicate
Yeah I do like the idea that its very taxing on the body.
I liked it in mass effect how using their blue magic bullshit powers used loads of calories and needed to be replenished, just like pushing your mind to the limits does
>Think that's really neat
>Find out you can't actually do anything with that information
I liked how they explained it in the Fionavar Tapestry.
A mage doesn't use his own energy to cast spells. Instead, he forms a permanent bond with another person, known as his source. The mage's spells use his source as a battery. A source's energy can be replenished over time just by having them eat and drink, same as the more mundane energy their body needs to operate, but if the mage withdraws too much power from his source in a short time he may fry the connection between them (permanently rendering him powerless) or even kill the source.
Star Wars was also both, until Episode I fucked it with that stupid midichlorian stuff.
From an artistic point of view, have any games succeeded in making magic-tech designs that aren't retarded looking?
I cant think of any. imo its either magic or tech costume design, not both
>A magic setting where technology is mistaken for ancient magical weaponry or monsters
BEHOLD, YE SAVAGE BARBARIANS, WITNESS OUR BIRD OF METAL IN ALL IT'S MAJESTY
That works for the Stalker universe. The Zone and its artifacts behave in ways they should not, according to that universe's known science. That means that the science got it wrong, just like Newton got it "wrong" despite Newtonian physics working in a human-sized scale.
But in what way could you combine them other than power sources? A gun that spouts incantations and mimics hand signs to cast at faster than humanly possible speeds? Actually, that's kinda how demon summoning works in SMT, computers perform summoning rituals at the speed of blast processing.
You could do weapons with magic runes on them, and such. Like, instead of blue LEDs you could use an ice rune to keep your laser gun chilled so you can fire it more without overheating.
I liked them because they had the primitive feel and actually felt in place when I came upon spooky abandoned ruins.
But if you're talking pure aesthetics then I really don't know since that shit is highly subjective and few games really concentrate that much on explaining shit, let alone executing it.
>Not posting technology so ancient, arcane, advanced, and abstract that it is perceived as magic.
What scum ITT
>seriously thinking of combining them
No, it is clearly based on bullshit and not magic
Bullshit is a clearly understood field of "whatever I want it to mean I'm the author I can do anything", a subset of particle physics
cyberpunk isn't about the technology though, since it's purely sci-fi with an added dystopian setting, shouldn't be allowed to be called punk.
>Implying the distinction is not a total bullshit.
There never was any difference in methodology between magic and science as we commonly understand it in our world, when people seriously tried to practice magic, as opposed to running long cons. The former just failed to work.
If magic does work, it will inevitably be incorporated into technology.
Magic. The problem with tech is that you have to try to explain it, and eventually the more you peel away the pseudoscience the more obvious it becomes that it's bullshit.
So with tech;
"This works along a loose interpretation of this scientific principle, which kinda works if you don't really understand these scientific principles, as long as we bend the rules of these scientific principles, but ultimately it's bullshit."
And with magic;
"It's bullshit, who cares."
No you fucking idiot. You would know how to inact it or have a basic understanding of how it works. But if you know exactly what went itnto it and how it works then it wouldn't be fucking magic. It would just be an arm of science.
You fucking idiot.
I drove my magitech vehicle to work today. The primary apparatus for it's function is the burning of magic fuel.
When I got home I opened up my Magic Codex, by activating its magic circuits and powering it with mana (transmitted to my Codex through wires from a Mana Generation facility running on Magic Fuel) I executed several spells on top of each-other so I could connect to this forum and, using a Magic Interface Device, I am now transmitting this message to you.
Humans also have some traces of Magic Energy flowing through them, but it's rarely more than enough to activate a rudimentary light spell when connected to a proper Magic Interface Device. Top Magicians have even discovered that our brains operate using Magical Energy, firing off minuscule bursts of magic in order to transmit information!
>It has not explainable laws
In at least 90% of setting magic works predictably, thuse having explainable laws by definition.
>or understandable reasons for doing anything. It just does it.
No difference whatsoever from the four main interactions that bind our universe together. If you think that there is a grander explanation behind electricity flowing through your PC beyond "It just does it", you don't understand how the world works. Science just studied in real depth what exactly the electromagnetic ineraction does, to the point where it can predict what it will do in applicable situations.
But the same apply to any magic that work in a predictable way and allows for repetition of results. Which is, again, the case in 90% of settings.
Holy fucking shit
Magic is not a synonym for supernatural
And if supernatural shit was real, it would be called supernatural shit even though it is explainable by science
This is why we call genetics genetics, and not "science", even though it falls under science
>it would be called supernatural shit even though it is explainable by science
Okay I kind of got caught up in being mad so I didn't think about this before I said it, but I was just using it as an example, the idea still applies
That's exactly what it means you stupid bastard. If it was as explainable as steam technology or electronics then what we see as magic would simply be another arm of science.
Magic in a universe has to be utterly unexplainable and ephemeral to stay magic.
>earliest edition of steampunk before the term was coined
>"The Aerial Burglar" (1844)
>earliest edition of cyberpunk before the term was coined
>"The Stars My Destination" (1956)
sure m8, steampunk was named after cyberpunk yes, but it was mainly coined in order to give a proper name to a genre that didn't exist
Clarke's Third Law, you motherfuckers.
>post about this in a thread the other day
>some anon replies two hours later with a shitpost saying I could have explained what I meant instead of trying to "sound smart"
REFERENCING A RULE FROM A POPULAR AUTHOR MEANS I AM TRYING TO SOUND SMART
BOY, I NEVER KNEW THAT!
What is explainable by science depends very much on the state of the science.
Say you went back to middle ages and took your mobile phone with you. Would it not seem like magic to them? And yet it's not magic and we can explain it.
We come back to the Clarke's Third Law:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
You're mistaking magic and religion. Magic is just a way to control natural forces that does not work in our world, but can work in fantasy worlds. It is generally based on the exact same assumptions as science: repeatabilty of results and harnessing forces of nature for your own benefit. Even in settings where a magician must suck dicks of higher being to accomplish anything, repeatability of results generally is still true.
>Magic is not a synonym for supernatural
No, but all magic is inherently supernatural.
>And if supernatural shit was real, it would be called supernatural shit even though it is explainable by science
No. If it's explainable by science, it's not supernatural. Only the natural world can be explained by science.
>This is why we call genetics genetics, and not "science", even though it falls under science
That doesn't make any sense and is dumb, considering genetics is a science. You could call genetics science and not be wrong, you'd just be vague.
>If it was explainable that doesn't mean it wouldn't be called magic
In every single sci-fi in existence, phenomenon that we consider supernatural is not called magic. Unless it's magitech stuff.
Magic has to be unknowable to the rules of what we know as science to stay magic, else it's just a fucking sci-fi cosplaying in a wizard hat and coat.
IT JUST WERKS is how magic works.
THIS IS HOW IT WORKS AND IT'S REAL WORLD PARALLELS TO ACTUAL SCIENCE is how sci-fi works.
But many universes do explain their magic, some to a ridiculous degree
That doesn't make it sci-fi
You sound like someone who has never been exposed to fantasy outside of Tolkien
Don't give me that fucking sufficiently advanced science bullshit.
In this fucking argument the phenomenon of magic does not have a super science explanation. it just is.
Magic has to stay unknowable. The moment that it is 100% explainable with pseudo science it becomes sci-fi masquerading as fantasy.
>No, but all magic is inherently supernatural.
Unless it was real
Then it wouldn't be supernatural
It would just be natural
>That doesn't make any sense and is dumb, considering genetics is a science. You could call genetics science and not be wrong, you'd just be vague.
That doesn't make any sense and is dumb, considering magic is a science. You could call magic science and not be wrong, you'd just be vague.
I stay away from that bullshit now.
Not that guy but it is not explained with "psuedo" science. Highly advanced technology would explain "magic" and it would not be "pseudo".
There is explaining the phenomenon and being very anal about how it works then there is explaining how it works at a fundamental natural level like any other naturally occuring phenomenon that can be exploited are harnessed.
You read like someone who thumbreads through a handful of genres on the best sellers list
Magic =/= science or vice versa.
Are you people retarded?
>Loose rules =/= unbreakable laws of physics.
Again, if you think that science never plays fast and loose with the rules or makes gigantic assumptions to make the results of observation fit with theories, you simply don't know enough about it.
But from a practical standpoint there is still no difference between rocks falling down and certain combination of gestures and words producing fireballs. As long as both happen repeatably. The fact that no one knows from where the power for fireball is drawn won't harm magic any more than inability of newtonian physics (or current relativistic physics, for that matter) to explain the results of observing the universe.
all i can think off while reading your posts is this
In a universe where magic exists, it is science
Science explains how the universe works
If magic exists in a universe, that makes it science
It is only not science to you because magic does not exist in our universe and you're an idiot who doesn't think we're talking in hypotheticals
I have only made one other post regarding Clarke's Third Law.
If you wish to discuss this concept civilly, by all means, we can.
If you wish to dredge up unrelated post screencaps for whichever fallacious argument you intend to produce, do not waste our time.
In the world of magic, there is a telepathy forum named \?\.
The greatest legen of said forum is that, if you were to live to the age of 30 without ever having sex, you would become a scientist, a mythical being able to understand the fundamentals of existence and use them to create so called "technology".
It is also said, if you were to reach the age of 50, you could even become a professor.
Magic is bullshit
Tech in most fiction is just bullshit in a metal casing
>the use of paranormal methods to control the elements
>you will never have your bones infused with bullshitium
>There is explaining the phenomenon and being very anal about how it works then there is explaining how it works at a fundamental natural level like any other naturally occuring phenomenon that can be exploited are harnessed.
But there is no actual difference between the two.
Or, depending on what you mean by "fundamental natural level", science gives practical results just fine without getting that deep. Because our science certainly has no explanation why the four fundamental interactions or subatomic particles, work as they do, why their strength is as it is, etc. It just accumulated a really huge body of observations on their properties, that allows to exploit them.
Science FICTION uses applicable science to create a FICTIONAL setting. In this way they can be explained as something that, in theory, COULD exist but doesn't for a number of reasons.
Science FICTION takes theoretical applications of technology to a level of improbability, but not complete impossibility, save for some cases.
Magic is a completely fictional force that operates entirely independent of anything in our reality. It is pure fantasy that operates within the confines of a fictional world, using fictional laws, operations, and executions and will never exist in the way it is described.
Trying to say that they're the same because there's a few mediums out there then take Science Fiction to a level of near impossibility is just stupid.
Travelling through a black hole into another universe is a theoretical improbability, but it could still happen due to the way we understand physics.
Waving your hands around and blabbering words in some forgotten language will never manifest a ball of flames from nothing. Ever.
>There is a universe where chemistry isn't real
>There are autists arguing about a similar topic on an alternate version of /v/ RIGHT NOW where they say chemistry wouldn't be called chemistry if it was real, it would just be "science"
>Not that guy but it is not explained with "psuedo" science. Highly advanced technology would explain "magic" and it would not be "pseudo".
We're talking about the definitions of genres here stupid. Sci-fi that isn't hard is oft nothing but pseudo scientific gobbledy gook. The only thing that seperated ST-TNG from being pure fucking fantasy is a few scientific terms, artificially FUTURISTIC looking technology that looks like and is portrayed as working right and half arsed explanations of how patently supernatural shit worked.
That's literally what we've been arguing this entire time.
We have no idea how talking works.
Go look it up if you don't believe me.
Do you stop talking or believing in talking because no one has any real clue as to how or what that shit works?
Magic is a phenomenon that exists because of the child like but very human belief in something that defies explanation.
You articulate things way better than I can in my present state but I also do not have the tolerance to reply to shitposting or shitposters who shitpost for the sake of contrarianism.
And there is a difference between science fiction -- which loosely explains things or does not at all -- and HARD science fiction -- which does try to explain things in a realistic sense.
How do you know
What if your body radiated flammable gas and there was an ancient language that contained sounds that made the human tongue move fast enough to produce sparks
I mean that's an incredibly stupid example, but stil
If chemistry existed, and I'm not saying it does, it would be studied by science. If it would be studied by physicists or alchemists we can't know since everything could be different in that universe.
>If we ever discover that our bodies contain natural energy that we can use for "magic", it would be called something fucking stupid because of all the autists that insist that magic must be defined as being a synonym for "not real"
>But from a practical standpoint there is still no difference between rocks falling down and certain combination of gestures and words producing fireballs
That's the thing.
Magic doesn't work like that. The phenomenon can be shut off not work change are alter and no one would have any clue as to what is wrong.
Hell it could be shut off by some other thing entity or reality itself could have been altered by a box of matches falling onto some weird crystal thing that held some form of magical thing in place.
That's not comparrable to science. Even your attempt to compare them is just mindboggling.
>In a universe where magic exists, it is science
In a universe where magic exists if it is explainable by science then it is no longer magic. it is just another natural phenomenon that can be explained by science that is mis or ironically labeled magic.
Magic by it's very nature is not knowable and ephemeral. AT best you'll have some rudimentary laws that govern it. Even then those laws are always being rewritten and something that worked last week is now broken and will blow up on the user the next.
>And there is a difference between science fiction -- which loosely explains things or does not at all -- and HARD science fiction -- which does try to explain things in a realistic sense.
But those two things are still entirely separate from Fantasy. Something like "The Force" in Star Wars is not based on Technology. It's practical magic. A all-binding element of the universe that does not exist in our reality.
However in contrast space travel, particle/lazer weapons, rockets, explosives, and huge fleets are all practical and could be achieved through science.
Again, that's the difference between the two. One COULD exist. One will never exist so long as our universe operates in the way it does now.
No. That would be a chemical reaction triggered by a certain wavelength of sound, not magic. What you're describing is only slightly different than when a cellphone signal can set off gasoline fumes.
You insignificant neonate, I am merely hypothesizing that in a world where chemistry existed, it would still be called chemistry. I swear if I ever hear the term "liquid magick" again I will vaporize you.
Not possibru. In the Shadowrun universe, cybernetic implants fuck up your essence, which makes it so it's much more difficult to channel magical energy. Diving beings
>But those two things are still entirely separate from Fantasy
Right. I fully agree with you but I was only trying to explain that hard sci-fi at least explains things, or tries to explain theoretical concepts.
Take the Hyperion Cantos, for example, which literally ends in NANOMACHINES, SON where everyone on the "rebellion" side willingly consumes nanomachines which allow them to breathe in space, travel in space, and literally teleport through space.
Take Revelation Space, for example, which explains how a neutron star somehow uses ridiculous amounts of gravitational pull to keep it from crushing itself and feeding a black hole (I cannot explain this fully as I have no astrophysics education) to create a computer with such insane computational speed that this matrix is able to communicate with its past AND future selves.
The only difference between sci-fi and magic is that sci-fi pretends it's magic is science and obsessively fags on about explanations and pseudo science that's vaguely related to real world science.
Its the difference between someone who goes to their religious whatever bullshit and just believes in stuff and someone who needs concrete proof and explanations to fully believe and will dive head first into whatever sounds the most plausible at the moment.
Do you honestly have any fucking concept of how fucking pathetic you would look to everyone on the earth if you called that natural energy that was discovered magic?
You'd be laughed out of the fucking building.
The definitions of words in those universes mean fuck all compared to what they mean in ours.
Just because they call murders happy fun cheese eating time doesn't change the fact that it's murder.
That's not hard sci-fi. That's magic.
Hard sci-fi does not delve into SCIENCE!!! category. It sticks to being as close to real world science as possible and makes cool stuff with that.
actually the difference between hard sci-fi and soft sci-fi is that soft sci-fi empathize on social sciences (anthropology, sociology, psychology, political science, and so on), while hard sci-fi empathize on the hard sciences (e.g. physics, astronomy, or chemistry)
both focus on stuff that is actually possible
Can't rememner but I think you are not into the Sanctuary arc, get there is by far the highlight of the entire franchise, so much that every sequel/prequel and spinoof has it's own sanctuary arc
Omega was such shit.
The entire goddamend series of omega saint seiya is about one dyke goddess destroying the planet because another dyke goddess stop slipping her the tounge and fist. And it was mediocre as shit for 99% of the eps.
No wonder it got shat on.
It is hard sci-fi. Hell, it's one of the most currently popular hard sci-fi series published in the present time. Of course it is theoretical futuristic science and plays off that but that is how it works. Maybe not every single technology involved would be feasible but it explains it using theoretical as-yet-to-be-discovered-but-possible explanations. Completely different from generic "magic".
I am. They're past Gemini's Temple.
Meh I actually enjoyed it for what it was
Nostalgiaputos just woulnd't shut up about hating it, up to this day they just bring it up for no reason in any conversation
Heck I know at least 2 guys that watched the entire 98 episodes and complained EVERY SINGLE WEEK for fucks sake
In perspective with the series universe
>Light Speed lol
>NO I AM BEYONG LIGHT SPEED
>Dude that can hit you with a fucking Galaxy explosion in your face
>Gods=beyond broken only killed because they geninuely think they can't be beaten until the last second
>Apollo can just lol reset the universe if he is losing
>Ultimate Cosmos= Big Bang energy
>Libra Weapons can rip and tear entire planets
>Virgo is Budha's bro
>Leo and Sagitarius fucking punch so fast they go plasma
>Cancer can control death
>Pisces is so fabulous you become gay before diying
>Cygnus can go beyond absolute zero stopping atoms on their tracks
Right. I have stated this in an earlier post. We do not have every bit of theoretical technology discovered or craftable therefore we can only explain how it would work in a way that would make physical sense.
Depends, if it's magic that tries to be explained then I'd prefer the Technology. Magic that feels like magic is always better, bonus points if it's something beyond MAGIC MISSLES and Healing Charms
Hard sci-fi can use unproven theories or maybe even guesses based on what is known, but it can't reverse polarity to solve all problems. Nor can it simply ignore reality save a few exceptions (e.g. pretend inertia isn't real).
Imagine a universe where the world exists in an entirely empty space(and is flat), and therefore astronomy doesn't exist
Now imagine someone in that universe having this entire argument, but replace all instances of "magic", with "astronomy"
In that universe, astronomy is present in fiction, and the word has become synonymous with shit that isn't real
That doesn't mean we don't use the word astronomy for the study of planets
I'm not following your discussion, but scientific fields could very well be organized differently. Maybe if the 2d beings came to our universe they'd put astronomy under geography.
No, my post is that OUR perception of other universes is what we are discussing and and that we should stick to that. .
Going all...relativistic will muddy things and give fucktards free reign to say any fool thing and claim it makes sense or is logical.
Dude, fuck off.
Well, technically speaking, if we're just going by our perception, in a universe where magic was real it would be called magic
Because there are countless fictional universes where magic exists that humans in our universe have made, and magic is still called magic in most of those universes
Specialize in one, dabble in the other.
A techie can benefit a lot from 1-3 active castings of Agility of Fire and a pair of Charged Rings... Especially if he can also make a Pyrotechnic Axe.