Poll of the Day > Would you exchange technology for magic?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

*points to North Korea*

They prove my point.

Only if we had a magical internet, magical computers, and magical video games. Plus if I could make Horocruxes.
---

jamieyello3 posted...

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

*points to North Korea*

They prove my point.

We must have different definitions of "abuse" then. Or "smart."
.
---

Zeus posted...

Only if we had a magical internet, magical computers, and magical video games. Plus if I could make Horocruxes.

...Why the hell would you want to make a Horcrux?
.
---

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

jamieyello3 posted...

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

*points to North Korea*

They prove my point.

We must have different definitions of "abuse" then. Or "smart."
.

I think he means that their "technology" amounts to being able to throw missiles into the water.
---

Which is all they need if they can land one with a nuke within a couple miles of that fleet we are sending over there.

Most leaders would not do that. Mutually Assured Destruction is a poor deterrent, but it is at least enough of one that people of reasonable intelligence are afraid to break the taboo on such weapons. But there are some problems.

1. MAD doesn't work on someone who is either an idiot, an insane psychopath, or suffering from sufficient levels of delusion. Most governments today that actually have these weapons avoid this by not having one single person given full absolute power.

2. We have already failed the MAD test at least once. We did not have nukes yet, but in the weeks before WW1, the leaders of the nations knew that if they went to war, it would be a disaster and it was all but guarenteed that all their governments would be destroyed in the aftermath (and indeed, almost all the true monarchies were effectively destroyed as a result of the war). There were many points which the war MIGHT have potentially been stopped but sadly wasn't, but some of the final points ones in the last weeks amounted to "if this country were to not mobilize, the war would not happen." The leaders of these countries of course were well aware of the dangers. Mobilization happened anyway.

We have failed the test once, and its aftermath is the reason for not just WW2, but for the major middle east situation as well (and that region has really been getting screwed over ever since).

MAD is not as good a deterrent as people think.
.
---

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

Which is all they need if they can land one with a nuke within a couple miles of that fleet we are sending over there.

They need a lot more then that.

If (and it is a big IF) they manage to send one of their missiles to somewhere of note, they are going to get royally fucked by just about every country in the UN. And unlike something like WW1 or 2 it is not even going to be a huge war, do you honestly think China is going to support them when they attack someone unprovoked?

North Korea is a joke, and their threats are a joke. Anyone who takes them seriously is giving them far more credit then they are worth.
---

North Korea specifically is probably not too much of an actual threat to the world as a whole, true.

Even China seems to be getting tired of their nonsense, and is mostly playing friendly because they don't want a US-occupied nation right next to them. Frankly, if Korea DOES nuke something, I could actually see China or Russia just taking the initiative and invading North Korea themselves. At which point the danger is just if the USA decides to also invade anyway. The real issue is whether any of those parties decide that its now ok to use tactical nukes or something because "they started it" (especially if North Korea starts using them against invading forces without regard for contamination of its own land).

Regardless, the North Korea situation probably won't destroy the world. But that doesn't change the fact that Mutually Assured Destruction does not protect the world from the use of weapons of mass destruction as much as people like to believe.
.
---

Can i bring a bro, or two?
---

BlazeAndBlade posted...

so things will be like the game Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYqahxqhBzg

God I love that game, but I don't think I ever beat it.
---

Honestly, Harry Potter might be one of the more interesting magic settings to go with. And if the world doesn't have technology, then you also get rid of the REALLY awkward disconnect between the magic world and the, well, non-magic/muggle world.

Don't get me wrong, it works well enough to keep us in the magical world during the books, without needing to worry about the muggles much. But if you think about it that much (i.e. as much as you probably would during breaks between reading clusters of chapters), it reveals itself to be really contrived and forced after a couple of books, with wizards essentially keeping themselves forcibly separated from just about EVERYTHING muggle for over a hundred years.

It makes little sense that almost none of them even know what a gun is past "some metal wand muggles use to kill each other," when simply due to the number of wizards with muggle relatives, a fair number of them should be quite aware of muggle weaponry as the two great world wars had their epicenter right in Europe and they or their parents/grandparents more than likely lost muggle relatives during the wars.
.
---

Sephiroth C Ryu posted...

Honestly, Harry Potter might be one of the more interesting magic settings to go with. And if the world doesn't have technology, then you also get rid of the REALLY awkward disconnect between the magic world and the, well, non-magic/muggle world.

Don't get me wrong, it works well enough to keep us in the magical world during the books, without needing to worry about the muggles much. But if you think about it that much (i.e. as much as you probably would during breaks between reading clusters of chapters), it reveals itself to be really contrived and forced after a couple of books, with wizards essentially keeping themselves forcibly separated from just about EVERYTHING muggle for over a hundred years.

It makes little sense that almost none of them even know what a gun is past "some metal wand muggles use to kill each other," when simply due to the number of wizards with muggle relatives, a fair number of them should be quite aware of muggle weaponry as the two great world wars had their epicenter right in Europe and they or their parents/grandparents more than likely lost muggle relatives during the wars.
.

...the only Harry worth mentioning as a wizard is Harry Blackstone Copperfield Dresden dammit!
---

I'd have one question, and that would be "would I be able to use it with great skill and be feared for my power?". If I'm going to some medieval shit-hole, I want to make sure I can survive bandits and the plague and stuff.
---

You sadly would not know what your potential/power level would be in advance:(
---

gguirao posted...

No. As cool as it sounds, technology already causes enough problems in the hands of the wrong people. Magic would be even worse.

---