Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.8 $; site uiucdcs
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ekblaw
From: ekblaw@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: Re: Invisibility and scrolls
Message-ID: <9300058@uiucdcs>
Date: Wed, 30-Oct-85 13:23:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.9300058
Posted: Wed Oct 30 13:23:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Nov-85 04:21:29 EST
References: <892@plus5>
Lines: 23
Nf-ID: #R:plus5:-89200:uiucdcs:9300058:000:1392
Nf-From: uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU!ekblaw    Oct 30 12:23:00 1985


I disagree with Paul Guthrie.  Magic has been defined as undiscovered science.
Therefore, saying that we shouldn't try to define it in scientific terms is
absurd!  Furthhermore (and I hate to bring this up.  This kind of talk finally
disappeared from the net), saying that magic is undefinable and can do anything
(therefore making it omnipotent) is blasphemy, and probably one of the reasons
the religious people are so down on AD&D.  

I like peace.  If the way to make peace is to compromise, fine.  Define magic
in scientific terms.  It makes most people happy.  Too, Paul, I think you have
forgotten the theory behind AD&D.  It is a game which is a little looser than
other games, allowing changes and interpretions by individuals.  Some people
obviously interpret the game as they wish.  If that interpretation includes
scientifically defining the magic that occurs, fine!  If a person can define
all of the spells in that manner, they certainly have a great grasp and under-
standing of science, and I respect them for that.  Your vehement degrading
of that person's PERSONAL interpretation can be defined as egotism and bigotry.
Those qualities have no business existing in FRPing, so I would suggest that
you either change your ways or quit the game.  Quit the net, too, while you
are at it.  I don't want to listen to pig-headed bigots and swell-headed
egotists.

Robert A. Ekblaw