Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-27-2016, 12:21 PM   #21
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

The Romans left jewelry with octahedral diamonds (what we'd call a "point cut", I think). They were probably ground to shape rather than cut (cleaved, that is), and might have taken advantage of natural cleavage, but we don't really know for sure whether or not they intentionally cut their diamonds.
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2016, 06:47 PM   #22
Berdryn
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Is it just me or has no one realized that Shape Earth's cost reads as:

Cost: 1 per cubic yard of earth
shaped (minimum 2). Half that to
maintain (round up).

Meaning you would need at least 2 cubic yards of Diamonds to be able to effect the material? Taking levels in jeweler would likely be a better route. Plus as far as I know, Create Earth only makes earth or clay, not diamonds.
Berdryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2016, 07:12 PM   #23
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Minimum cost doesn't mean minimum amount of material that must be present. It just costs 2 to affect even one single little carat. Or two cubic yards of them, whichever you happen to have handy.
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2016, 08:04 PM   #24
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berdryn View Post
Plus as far as I know, Create Earth only makes earth or clay, not diamonds.
It's Earth to Stone that'd you'd need and it has a very explicit clause that it does not work on gemstones.

Shape Earth also specifies 6x cost for worked stone. So it's take 12 energy even if you have carats and not tons.

You also need a Physics Skill of sufficient TL to model refraction. Even if you reject science you'd probably need to see clear glass to get even a basic idea. Clear glass takes you back to TL.:)

Low TL lapidaries would probably use Shape earth on gemstones to make cameos or scarabs or similar carved stones.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2016, 10:07 PM   #25
SionEwig
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaraxes View Post
The Romans left jewelry with octahedral diamonds (what we'd call a "point cut", I think). They were probably ground to shape rather than cut (cleaved, that is), and might have taken advantage of natural cleavage, but we don't really know for sure whether or not they intentionally cut their diamonds.
That is more probably the natural crystal shape.
SionEwig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2016, 02:08 AM   #26
Tallor
 
Join Date: May 2016
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Brackin View Post
It's Earth to Stone that'd you'd need and it has a very explicit clause that it does not work on gemstones.

Shape Earth also specifies 6x cost for worked stone. So it's take 12 energy even if you have carats and not tons.

You also need a Physics Skill of sufficient TL to model refraction. Even if you reject science you'd probably need to see clear glass to get even a basic idea. Clear glass takes you back to TL.:)

Low TL lapidaries would probably use Shape earth on gemstones to make cameos or scarabs or similar carved stones.
Shape Earth with a Jeweler roll, with a bonus with High Manual Dexterity? :P
Tallor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2016, 05:39 AM   #27
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SionEwig View Post
That is more probably the natural crystal shape.
It's certainly the natural crystal shape; even modern diamond cutting takes advantage of the natural cleavage lines. But natural diamonds rarely conveniently form octahedrons. So, the Roman jewelers likely had to put work into those stones one way or another to get them even as symmetrical as they are. We don't have solid evidence of diamond cutting in Europe before the 14th century, and not even much in the way of faceted gems, but that doesn't mean that's because of a technological limitation making it impossible without advanced metals (or magic).
Anaraxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2016, 10:34 PM   #28
Johnny1A.2
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default Re: Magic: Harder than diamonds?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas View Post
Its probably worth spelling out, for gentle readers who don't write articles on the history of technology, that the idea that gems should be cut into facets, let alone that they should always be cut into facets, is young. It only became commonly applied to rubies and emeralds and things like that sometime in the last thousand years, and there are plenty of polished (not faceted) emeralds sparkling in treasuries around the world.
I think I might have mentioned this before, but several years ago I had occasion to visit an exhibition of artifacts that once belonged to the Ottoman emperors, including the legendary Topkapi Dagger. Anyway, many of the items were bedecked in jewels, but only the newest ones, made during the declining years of the empire, were faceted/clear in the sense we tend to associate with 'jewels' in the modern West. Most of the older gems were smoothly polished but unfaceted stones.

The huge emeralds on the Dagger, for their part, are faceted, but the Dagger is relatively young, too.
Johnny1A.2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diamond, hardened, penetrating weapon


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.