Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AoshimaMichio]

Spacemagic is pretty well understood. Mostly for NPC's. I don't think any PC really understands or knows how it works.

[Devastator]

I don't think the in-universe understanding would change much at all, for instance, we already have anti-magic rods.

What is their difference from the current artefact?

Anti-magic rods block unknown and unpredictable effects.

It also strikes me as odd to expect an effect that exists for entirely unknown reasons to be wholly reliable.  I mean really, if you don't know why it works in the first place, how could you say that it must always work under all conditions?

I do not understand what you're talking about. Too vague.

If you don't know why it works, it isn't strange if it should fail.

[Parisbre56]

I don't think the in-universe understanding would change much at all, for instance, we already have anti-magic rods.

What is their difference from the current artefact?

Anti-magic rods block unknown and unpredictable effects.

They don't block them. They merely use space magic to shift them and distort them into something not as harmful. Perhaps in a manner similar to the current artifacts, since they too produce light and heat. We'll need to get piecewise's to respond to further tests on them.

It also strikes me as odd to expect an effect that exists for entirely unknown reasons to be wholly reliable.  I mean really, if you don't know why it works in the first place, how could you say that it must always work under all conditions?

I do not understand what you're talking about. Too vague.

If you don't know why it works, it isn't strange if it should fail.

I still fail to understand how the above relates to our previous conversation.

Besides, consider this: I don't know why gravity works. Does that mean that if suddenly everything starts floating away from each other, I should not be surprised?

[Radio Controlled]

But, is induction even possible?

[Devastator]

It also strikes me as odd to expect an effect that exists for entirely unknown reasons to be wholly reliable.  I mean really, if you don't know why it works in the first place, how could you say that it must always work under all conditions?

I do not understand what you're talking about. Too vague.

If you don't know why it works, it isn't strange if it should fail.

I still fail to understand how the above relates to our previous conversation.

Besides, consider this: I don't know why gravity works. Does that mean that if suddenly everything starts floating away from each other, I should not be surprised?

If you use an applied gravity gun that negates and shifts the effects of gravity around, based on some strange, highly particular, and exceptional arrangement of matter, it failing in the presence of some other arrangement should not be very suprising.

[Parisbre56]

It also strikes me as odd to expect an effect that exists for entirely unknown reasons to be wholly reliable.  I mean really, if you don't know why it works in the first place, how could you say that it must always work under all conditions?

I do not understand what you're talking about. Too vague.

If you don't know why it works, it isn't strange if it should fail.

I still fail to understand how the above relates to our previous conversation.

Besides, consider this: I don't know why gravity works. Does that mean that if suddenly everything starts floating away from each other, I should not be surprised?

If you use an applied gravity gun that negates and shifts the effects of gravity around, based on some strange, highly particular, and exceptional arrangement of matter, it failing in the presence of some other arrangement should not be very suprising.

True. The same could be said for any complex system, like a computer. Sometimes unexpected errors are to be expected, if you'll forgive my little joke. And sometimes you can use magic to negate other kinds of magic, same as you can use a radio transmitter to jam comms, something I had already said. I don't understand what that has to do with what we were discussing before.

[Devastator]

Now I'm not sure.  All I'm saying is that the artifacts that are being called anti space magic are space-magic artifacts that produce an effect that can be parsed as protecting from a specific kind of space magic.

I'm suggesting that an artifact that would be called a real anti space-magic artifact wouldn't be restricted to one effect, and would not be effective against non-magical attacks, even if they are similar to space-magic ones.

[Nikitian]

I'm suggesting that an artifact that would be called a real anti space-magic artifact wouldn't be restricted to one effect, and would not be effective against non-magical attacks, even if they are similar to space-magic ones.

Eeeh, and isn't the new material exactly following that description? It doesn't appear to be restricted to one effect, and isn't very useful against mundane effects.

Still, I think it's a proper space-magical effect in its own right, rather than something opposite - it merely repurposes that 'energy', as Piecewise put it. Now, those anti-magic rods, however... (I don't know, but I would suspect them being radically different, if only because of their massive side-effects.)

Also, sorry, I couldn't quite grasp the flow of your conversation either, so count me as a supporter for whichever side you think appropriate. 

[Parisbre56]

Also, sorry, I couldn't quite grasp the flow of your conversation either, so count me as a supporter for whichever side you think appropriate. 

I think it was about semantics. I am not interested in semantics that much, so no reason to continue.

[Devastator]

Nik's got the general idea, but is still a bit off..

oh, and Paris, it might look like semantics, but at some point you might figure out what the new artifact actually is, and you'll probably go 'oh damn, that's so much more useful than if it was an anti-space-magic artifact.'

[Parisbre56]

If I have a spray that can kill some bugs, I'm gonna call it a anti-bug spray, even if it doesn't kill all bugs, even if I can use it to make a flamethrower. I'm not going to call it "spray that has the potential to kill some bugs when sprayed, is flammable, evaporates quickly thus cooling surfaces, is less dense than water, etc", I'm going to use whatever name is most convenient, even if it doesn't accurately describe it. The names of things are meaningless, it's what they are that matters. You can call everything "the thingy" and they'll still be the same thing. So I find arguments about those sorts of things useless. Especially since I've already said that we need more research to find out exactly what it does and how useful it is. Maybe, for example, we can put it in bullets to bypass space magic armour. Maybe we can put it in an anomaly and use it to generate unlimited power. Maybe we can use it as a parachute or cheap reactionless drive. Maybe we can use it as a fire extinguisher or a catapult. Maybe we can ground it up, sniff it and use it to heal mindfuck. Maybe ampers can use it as lightsticks in rave parties. Until we have more info and/or a better name for it, anti-space-magic artifact is as good a name as any, since that's more or less how piecewise described it.

[Devastator]

The word you aren't looking for is 'heat-sink', Paris.

[Nikitian]

I think we just invented star-eater tech. 


(Who needs scary eldritch beings when technology can achieve the same for you? Scientific Progress Fuck Yeah!)

[Devastator]

I think we just invented were just granted star-eater tech. 

FTFY.

[Nikitian]

Wait, you see a difference? In a universe governed by a Random Numbers God and Piecewise the Lizard GM?