Re: [dq-rules] Idiot-Savant Assembly Line Wizardry

["Deven Atkinson" <deven@bright.net>]

What the original poster described was more of an Idiot-Savant Sweat Shop
Wizardry idea.  Even with this different work enviroment definition, the
comments of Steven Wiles and William Hough are valid.  This was an
outstanding question!


----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Wiles" <mortdemuerte@yahoo.com>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [dq-rules] Idiot-Savant Assembly Line Wizardry


>
> Most of William Hough's comments on the "Magic Shop
> situation" I thought were very good ones, and can be
> summarized as follows: don't forget that your Shaper
> isn't operating in a vacuum.
>
> I thought I might add a few comments of my own.
> First, the "magic shop principle" wouldn't work for
> the type of campaigns my group runs, which are
> definitely magic low.  I think that the nature of the
> DQ system encourages and functions best when the
> amount of magic items are reined in.  Having said
> that, I don't necessarily think that you couldn't have
> a DQ world that was magic item intensive.  However, it
> would be a very different world that the usual fantasy
> world.
>
> To us, the idea of an assembly line is very natural.
> We live in a post-industrial world.  However, it was a
> -highly- revolutionary concept when first introduced.
> I see two possibilities here.  One, your campaign
> world has included the idea of an assembly line for
> making magic items for several generation.  However,
> the logical extension of that idea is a game world
> currently undergoing its Industrial Revolution with a
> technology based on mana.  Two, you have a character
> who "invents" the assembly line process.  The
> consequences of that for the character I think were
> nicely explored by Mr. Hough.  Most societies react
> badly to revolutionaries of any sort.  People fear
> change.  Recall the Luddites.  Fuedal societies, the
> stock society of the fantasy RPGs, REALLY hate change
> and react VERY badly.  Of course, if your Shaper
> survives, he becomes a towering historical figure who
> changed his world forever. :)
>
> This question also got me thinking about the assembly
> line grunts.  Let's assume this guy (or gal) has just
> been hired and trained to cast a spell.  He probably
> has a low MA (10 would be human average, and judging
> by the non-mages in adventuring parties, more like 5).
>  People genetically gifted with high MA's, I feel,
> would either be actively recruited or tend to
> naturally gravitate to become Collegiate Adepts.  In
> feudal societies, becoming a wizard is one of the few
> means of upward mobility.  Anyway, this already put
> our workman at a severe casting disadvantage Base
> Change-wise.  And since he only knows the spell at low
> Rank, he probably has an abyssmal cast chance.  This
> means that said workman is going to be backfiring
> relatively frequently.  So, I would have to add to the
> cost to train this fellow the continuing cost of
> "medical care" for when he and the rest of the staff
> inevitably curses themselves, backfire results on each
> other, etc.  I may be midjudging the magnitude of this
> as a problem, I'd have to really study the magic item
> creation rules again.  But it seems to me another
> legitimate issue.
>
> Small point:  large population centers are low mana
> areas, and are very bad for crafting items.  This
> implies the assembly shop needs to be located quite
> some ways from town.  Isolation=vulnerability, and
> shipping expenses just increased.
>
> As a final point, some comments regarding an Adept
> training people in the use of only a couple of spells.
>  Whether a GM should allow this depends a lot on his
> interpretation of what it means to belong to a
> College.  Adepts loose all knowledge of spells from
> one College when they learn another, and part of being
> an Adept is a mindset that is very particular to that
> College and mutually contradictory to others. I
> -think- that's stated in the books.  Having that
> mindset is necessary to casting the spells of the
> College.  Any spells.  My interpretation then, is that
> the time necessary to become an Adept involves not
> just learning the spells, like you'd memorize an act
> of Hamlet or something, but also learning to think as
> an Adept, becoming thoroughly indoctrinated to the
> philsophy.  So, in other words, you can't cast spells
> 'til you learn the mindset, and you learn the mindset
> by learning to cast the GK spells.  Thus, my
> interpretation is that learning the General Knowledge
> of a College is an all or nothing proposition.  That's
> purely a GM interpretation, however.
>
> Gosh, this was a good question!  It really got me
> thinking about what my idea of an Adept and a College
> really is.
>
> Another thought.  I would also say that even if I
> allowed non-Adepts to know one or two General Knowlege
> spells, they couldn't learn any Special Knowledge
> spells.  That would require knowing all General
> Knowledge first.  Flooding the world with items that
> -only- invested GK spells would, I think, definitely
> be less dangerous than if SK items were being mass
> produced.
>
> Damn.  That was quite a thought provoker.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> http://news.yahoo.com
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>