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