Would it be redundant to have robots and golems in the same setting?

As far as I know ones are constructed with science and the others with magic.

>>50776040
only as redundant as having both bows and guns in the same setting.

but really it'd be interesting if you were going for a magic vs science or magitek setting or just a setting where both science and magic exist without either stifling the progress of the other.

>>50776040
Techno people vs. Magic people.

The tech group have advanced weapons, robots, etc.

The magic group have spells, golems, etc.

>>50776040
>Would it be redundant to have robots and golems in the same setting?

Not at all.

If anything you'd get mileage out of explaining what makes them different and juxtaposing "Magical Technology" vs "Technological Magic" sort of dealie.

>>50776040
No.
In fact, there should be a robot store next to a golem store, each with signs saying how awful, unreliable, and dangerous their competitors wares are.

Just go with magitech so they are one in the same.

>>50776040
Yes, robots are for the simpletons.
Golems dont have the problem of wiring, overheating or repowering. Also made entirely out of their material.

Only if they're the same thing, and are they? Even if you conflate mechanical-scientific construction with mechanical-magical construction, are they even the same thing then?

A robot can be highly specialized for a particular task with lots of minute moving parts. It can be refitted. It needs a continual power source and it can look like pretty much anything. It can do pretty much anything if it's built right.

A golem can just be a lot of sand shaped like a man. Once it's made it's made and it doesn't run down, but you can't easily reshape it. You need a lot of a particular material and each golem is built to a particular static pattern. It can do pretty much anything with the right orders and enough time.

Golems are endurance, robots are flexibility.

A golem would be defined as a robot, assuming it can function without direct control, and magic would most certainly be a branch of technology

File: liberty_prime_is_online_by_esuerc-d6lrtj6.jpg (190KB, 784x1019px)

190KB, 784x1019px

>>50776719
>those clay things that go insane if you hurt their poor widdle feeling are superior to circuitry and hydraulics given tactical battle analysis and patriotic nuclear power
I smell magic communism shills.

Regardless of what the golem is made from it needs a core of sorts from which the thing powering it is formed around right? That said, it wouldn't matter if it looked like a beep boop robot or a giant humaniod pile of tombstones if they function similarly enough.

>>50776773
>Comparing super science that is magic to the retard science that is normie science.

>>50776773
>Implying the red factories and shitty pumps of red menace have anything against the FREEDOM of magical, free men.
Liberty prime was a communist plot to tread on our freedom snakes!

File: Yes, Johnny is crying a lot.jpg (1MB, 2000x1331px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1331px

>>50776040
From what I gather, Golems are easily fashioned from common materials and programming them is even easier.

Meanwhile robots only exist to be bullied and mocked.

>>50776773
Clay golems and flesh golems are third-world knockoffs. Put your killbot up against some good high-quality stone or iron if you're going to make a comparison.

>>50776040
could you use golems as the basic unit and pimp it with tech? add 360degree cameras/sensors for feedback for a start so you can see whats going on and give instructions.

>>50776063
It is redundant to have science and magic in your setting.
They don't necessarily need one-to-one overlap, but
unless you're running low-magic horror they should be essentially the same thing.

>>50776183
Except bows and guns have significant overlap in their usage.

>>50780265
Only if you use "scientific" magic. If magic comes from spirits, or divine intelligence, or something else, why should it be as consistent as physics?

>>50780835
>Except bows and guns have significant overlap in their usage.
And magic and tech don't have any overlap?
Magic sending is nothing like a radio and a magic broom/carpet is nothing like a plane?

Magic is obviously more fantastical but it's ultimately a tool to accomplish needs much like technology.

>If magic comes from spirits, or divine intelligence, or something else, why should it be as consistent as physics?
If you take a picture with a camera or a little imp painter in a box what is the practical difference?

>>50781340
>If you take a picture with a camera or a little imp painter in a box what is the practical difference?

not him but the difference is the camera won't give you sass when you use it.

>>50781817
People that have trouble with their cameras(even if it's their own fault) might disagree with you.

Heck, an imp could be more reliable.

>>50781340
Can everyone use magic? Does magic produce uniform effects? Are they similarly cost effective? What about social conceptions?

Just because something might have overlap in utility doesn't mean that said things can't coexist to some degree. A car and a motorbike both get you places fast, and we still have both.

File: Golem, Robot.png (590KB, 659x920px)

590KB, 659x920px

>>50776040
No. A golem is a mass of material animated by magic (huge number of varying power sources, all magical in origin), while a robot is a highly intricate and complex machine that functions off normal means. Sometimes you can even get robot golems when a broken robot is animated by magic to function as a golem.

File: Cétautomatix_for_ants.gif (13KB, 193x258px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 193x258px

>>50776719
Too bad your flesh golems aren't fresh.