Quote from: TristramEvans;832390Who they are, yes (angels). Of magic? Nope. That the Wizards are angels so they can cast magic is not a pseudo-scientific rationale for magic. Quite the opposite, really.

How is that different than some scifi race that is 'psionic'... such as Vulcans/Zhodani? It's just swapping one bit of nonsense for another... but one is fantasy and the other isn't? I guess I'm saying I see pseudo-science as fantasy... we don't believe in fairies any more but we have all sorts of superstitions and beliefs in scientific sounding nonsense... UFO/aliens are just the fairies in modern dress.

QuoteYou're mistaking how it works for why it works. There's no attempt in D&D to provide a scientific rationale for the existence of magic. Psionics, OTOH< are based on latent abilities accessed through parts of the mind that normally people don't have access to, with the implication being that as a species as a whole evolves further, everyone will begin to exhibit psychic abilities. OTOH, the rationale for magic is pretty much the same as following a cooking recipe. To go back to what I originally said, the why of magic is recursive: magic works because magic exists.

No, plenty of trad-fantasy settings go beyond the 'magic works because magic exists'... either because of echoes to RL magical practices relating to the secret formula workings of the universe or some special energy at large in nature or maybe some spiritual/philisophical pursuit that puts the user in touch with magic energies.
On the other hand, as I said, plenty of stories with psionics in them make no attempt to explain the how or why... it just is. Even if they do mention some 'latent abilities of the mind'... that's just as imaginary/made up/fairy dust as 'mana' or 'chakras' or 'ley lines'.

Quote from: Simlasa;832416How is that different than some scifi race that is 'psionic'... such as Vulcans/Zhodani? It's just swapping one bit of nonsense for another... but one is fantasy and the other isn't?

Of course its both nonsense. Its just two different flavours of nonsense. There are people who call all scifi books fantasy, and people who call all fantasy science fiction. I find the distnction useful, so I make the distinction.

QuoteOn the other hand, as I said, plenty of stories with psionics in them make no attempt to explain the how or why... it just is. Even if they do mention some 'latent abilities of the mind'... that's just as imaginary/made up/fairy dust as 'mana' or 'chakras' or 'ley lines'.

First off, people already know what psionics/psychic abilities are. You can walk into any new age bookstore on the planet an find a library of rationalizations for everything from ESP to pyrokinesis (I love how nobody in that community realizes that one was invented by Stephen King). Its entered the common parlance of pop culture decaes ago, and is taken for granted. No one rents the X-men and thinks Patrick Stewart is playing a wizard.

Likewise you can read hundreds of Superman comics that dont bother to mention where his powers come from or why. Because its assumed the reaer already knows.

And if a story involves magic, it doesn't need to explain that either because everyone knows magic because magic. You either clap your hands and believe or you get the hell outta town.

But if you want to see the opposite taken to the most extreme, watch Ang Lee's Hulk. That entire boring film is basically Lee desperately trying to justify the Hulk's existence to an audience that really didnt care, they just wanted to see him hitting stuff. He uses radiation, genetic manipulation, pysychology - basically a litany of every excuse under the sun for it not to be "magic".

Yes, its all imaginary and made up, but one offers a rationale based on pseudo-scientific reasoning, and the other is a conceit. For example, take "magical energy". Mana, or, The Force. "Its an invisible energy emitted by all things that certain "enlightened" folk can manipulate to produce supernatural effects". What is that energy? Magic. Magic in an energy state. Pure magic. Solid magic. With magic, its always a game of Russian Dolls. The end argument is always magic because magic. Thus anything that attempts to explain itself by any means that don't ultimately add up to magic is not magic, hence scifi. Remove Midichlorians from the equation and the Force is the Force which exists because it does. There's a reason Obi-Wan is referred to in the original film as a "crazy old wizard" and Vader is referenced as a religious figure.

That doesnt make Psionics and super powers make more sense. It just means theres an explanation provided that isn't self-recursive. Spider-man gets bitten by a radioactive spider and this alters his genetics, transfering some of theabilities of the spider to him. Yes its silly. No its not legitimate science. But its an explanation that doesnt rely on magic. Hence science fiction.

Science Fiction is just as absurd as fantasy. Always was.

Here's my simple version of the difference between fantasy and science fiction or between magic and psionics.

In a fantasy story the in universe or in fiction explanation for the stuff that seems weird to the audience, e.g. magic, demons, angels, is supernatural.

Science Fiction - the in universe or in fiction explanation for stuff that seems weird to the audience, e.g. psionics, Vulcan mind melds, FTL drives, is natural.

Quote from: rway218;832011How important is magic to a world setting in your opinion?

Specifically when it is not a fantasy setting.  Such as post apocalyptic, space opera, steam punk, ect...

If it's not 'fantasy' there is no 'magic'.

Soft-sf may have handwavium mutant/psychic powers that resemble magic.

Quote from: TristramEvans;832419First off, people already know what psionics/psychic abilities are.

The same goes for magic. If you say something is 'magic' you don't have to explain further if you don't want to.

QuoteNo one rents the X-men and thinks Patrick Stewart is playing a wizard.

Except that's pretty much what Xavier and Magneto are... but with chrome widgets in place of musty books.

QuoteLikewise you can read hundreds of Superman comics that dont bother to mention where his powers come from or why. Because its assumed the reaer already knows.

Same goes for any mention of a guy in a pointy hat throwing fireballs or turning people into sheep.

QuoteAnd if a story involves magic, it doesn't need to explain that either because everyone knows magic because magic. You either clap your hands and believe or you get the hell outta town.

Same for if a guy in tights and a cape picks up a car... he's got 'superpowers' (magic).

QuoteBut if you want to see the opposite taken to the most extreme, watch Ang Lee's Hulk. That entire boring film is basically Lee desperately trying to justify the Hulk's existence to an audience that really didnt care, they just wanted to see him hitting stuff. He uses radiation, genetic manipulation, pysychology - basically a litany of every excuse under the sun for it not to be "magic".

But in the end it's still psuedoscience/magic. You could do the same with a story about a wizard... detail his researches and formula and explain the mumbo jumbo sources for the magical energy... probably be just as dull.

QuoteYes, its all imaginary and made up, but one offers a rationale based on pseudo-scientific reasoning, and the other is a conceit. For example, take "magical energy". Mana, or, The Force. "Its an invisible energy emitted by all things that certain "enlightened" folk can manipulate to produce supernatural effects". What is that energy? Magic. Magic in an energy state. Pure magic. Solid magic. With magic, its always a game of Russian Dolls. The end argument is always magic because magic. Thus anything that attempts to explain itself by any means that don't ultimately add up to magic is not magic, hence scifi.

But the same goes for the psuedoscience nonsense once you start asking questions... go a few questions deep into Spiderman's powers and you end up with 'magic' as well.

QuoteSpider-man gets bitten by a radioactive spider and this alters his genetics, transfering some of theabilities of the spider to him. Yes its silly. No its not legitimate science. But its an explanation that doesnt rely on magic. Hence science fiction.

It's using 'genetics' as magic just the same as Star Wars is using 'energy' as magic. There's no real genetics or energy at play in either one.
You can't ask questions beyond 'genetics' because that's the last turtle.
 

QuoteScience Fiction is just as absurd as fantasy. Always was.

I suppose I just see most science fiction as a flavor of fantasy. Which is fine. This has been useful for me to sort out how I see the flavors of imaginary fiction.

(shrug) well, I cant explain it further than that. I can tell the difference between Dr. Strange and Professor X and I think most people can to. One is free not to distinguish them, but the ability to distinguish the genres makes my geeky discussions easier.

I distinguish them by how they look and the sorts of stories they're in much more than whatever blather writers concocted to justify their powers.

Quote from: Simlasa;832559I distinguish them by how they look and the sorts of stories they're in much more than whatever blather writers concocted to justify their powers.

How do they look?

Quote from: TristramEvans;832609How do they look?

Well... one guy is bald and in a wheelchair... and the other guy isn't... at least that's how it was last time I looked.

What about the sorts of stories? That's more important IMO.

Quote from: rway218;832011How important is magic to a world setting in your opinion?

Specifically when it is not a fantasy setting.  Such as post apocalyptic, space opera, steam punk, ect...

I don't need magic, however you define it, but I do need an ability that bends or breaks the rules on limited occasions. This can be magic spells, psychic abilities, or mad science. I really like playing characters who are the magicians, adepts, or gadgeteers.

I can play the fighter if it's my only option, but I like the "tool bag" characters.