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 03-14-2019, 10:15 PM   #1
Gef
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yucca Valley, CA
Default Skepticism versus magic

My Magic Vegas thread hasn't generated a single reply. It's long, so fair enough. But there's one element that can stand alone for its own conversation, a mechanic for Skepticism making magic fail, which in turn convinces the skeptics that they're right, so my urban fantasy isn't one where magic is secret, just doubted. There's no paradox backlash, no weird retro-action that makes photos blurry or memories hazy, just a big chance to fail when people see it with their own eyes. My question is, is that enough: Does the mechanic plausibly support the premise that reasonable people think magic is rubbish, even in a campaign world where it actually works?

Details here: http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...70&postcount=4

Thanks,

GEF
Gef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 11:29 PM   #2
Refplace
 
Refplace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Yukon, OK
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Static and Neutralize (Probably with Reflexive) sound like good starting points.
Magic Resistance and Mana Damper are also possible but I think les applicable to your goal.
__________________
My GURPS publications GURPS Powers: Totem and Nature Spirits; GURPS Template Toolkit 4: Spirits; Pyramid articles. Buying them lets us know you want more!
My GURPS fan contribution and blog:
REFPLace GURPS Landing Page
My List of GURPS You Tube videos (plus a few other useful items)
My GURPS Wiki entries
Refplace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 12:25 AM   #3
RyanW
 
RyanW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southeast NC
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

There would need to be some thought given to exactly what is going on. If it literally is just "when in line of sight of a muggle or a camera" there are still plenty of ways to prove it. Unless you say that everyone with the ability universally agrees to keep it a secret, which I find not substantially more believable than magic.

It might lead to an inverse of most magic conspiracy settings, where instead of believers being dismissed for claiming "but it doesn't work when anyone is looking," the skeptics are dismissed for saying "but why is not able to summon a bear inside the sealed room when we are looking through the secret peephole?"
__________________
RyanW
- Actually one normal sized guy in three tiny trenchcoats.
RyanW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 03:35 AM   #4
Gef
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yucca Valley, CA
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
There would need to be some thought given to exactly what is going on. If it literally is just "when in line of sight of a muggle or a camera" there are still plenty of ways to prove it.
Thanks Ryan.

It literally just when in line of sight of a "muggle" - where the muggle can in fact be a Believer, but just a Believer in a different tradition - he's still Skeptical of every other tradition.

By my initial conception, a camera is not Skeptical. My thinking is that even if you have video, it could have been faked, or the camera fooled. So a scientist wants reproducible results, and when he's watching, you can't reproduce them. When he tries himself, he can't reproduce them either.

You stated that there are plenty of ways to prove magic happened (i.e., that the laws of physics as presently understood have been violated). Could I trouble you further to describe a couple, please?
Gef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 03:39 AM   #5
Gef
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yucca Valley, CA
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Refplace View Post
Static and Neutralize (Probably with Reflexive) sound like good starting points.
Magic Resistance and Mana Damper are also possible but I think les applicable to your goal.
Refplace, I don't quite get it. Are you suggesting that normal people (i.e., Skeptics) all have these advantages? That a Believer has the Accessibility limitation "Not Versus the Tradition I Believe" on these same advantages?

I hadn't thought about a mana mechanic, so yeah, less applicable.
Gef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 05:16 AM   #6
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Skepticism should be a limitation of magical abilities, similar to Glamour, where the disbelief of the crowd prevents the use of magic. It works out a lot better than giving every mundane antimagic abilities.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 05:54 AM   #7
Culture20
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gef View Post
You stated that there are plenty of ways to prove magic happened (i.e., that the laws of physics as presently understood have been violated). Could I trouble you further to describe a couple, please?
I think that depends on how you define “being watched” and skepticism.
Imagine a wizard says to a skeptic “we’re here at this enclosed natatorium to prove I can fly and lift objects with my mind, but not directly in front of skeptics (that’s just how magic works, you see).”

“You can back out at any time; once you believe you’ll be susceptible to charms and all sorts of vile sorcery. Not yet? Good. Now stay outside the room for exactly five seconds. I think you’ll agree that it would take even the most fit individual twenty seconds to climb to the highest diving board at breakneak speed. The cameras will record me at all times for your future review, but we can’t allow cctv due to the aforementioned skeptic clause. When five seconds in the hallway have passed, enter the room. you will find that I and all of the pool safety floatation devices will be suspended in the air as if at the top of a jump from a trampoline and will begin a normal Earth-gravity fall. I will be in a location impossible to have reached from the diving board. let’s say over here.”

The wizard confirms that the skeptic agrees it would be impossible to be suspended or at the top of a straight-up jump at this position in the air. Once the skeptic leaves the room, the wizard casts a flight spells and telekinesis and suspends himself and the objects over the pool in three or four seconds. The camera records everything. Less than a few minutes of tape review later, the skeptic will be a believer and the procedure can be redone with him looking.

He’d have to be particularly hard headed to go against evidence. “You say you have a fire elemental trapped in that hot steel box which clearly has the density of a mere steel box. But it’s really filled with heavy hydrogen which is undergoing a self-sustained slow cold fusion. Can’t fool me!”

Now rubes and contrarian believers would be a tougher sell. Scientists (usually think they) know the limits of reality, so they can know when something is violating physical laws, and this are easier to convince that magic is real. Jimmy-know-it-all, the fourth grade skeptic believes in pseudo science, so he’ll spout nonsense explanations or believe there’s a hidden trick that real scientists would figure out. If you’re trying to prove to a magic-rune-scriber that mumbly finger twiddling works, you may have a hard sell: “I know you did magic, because you were over the pool, but you must have inscribed runes on rice paper that dissolved in the water. Mumbly finger twiddling indeed!”

Last edited by Culture20; 03-15-2019 at 06:07 AM.
Culture20 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 08:34 AM   #8
Flyndaran
Untagged
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

A major problem would be convincing the non-arrogant skeptics. They'll know that they can be fooled. Sure, they can't see how you could have done what you did without magic. But that's not proof there was no other way.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check.
Flyndaran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 08:39 AM   #9
ravenfish
 
Join Date: May 2007
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

The mention of Vegas brings to mind a point. Your ability to win consistently at games of pure chance will show that there is something going on. (Indeed, in the real world, the fact that gambling establishments haven't all been run into bankruptcy can be viewed as moderately strong evidence that probability-altering magic and future-viewing magic don't exist.)
__________________
I predicted GURPS:Dungeon Fantasy several hours before it came out and all I got was this lousy sig.

Last edited by ravenfish; 03-15-2019 at 08:42 AM.
ravenfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2019, 08:48 AM   #10
Fred Brackin
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Default Re: Skepticism versus magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gef View Post
T. My thinking is that even if you have video, it could have been faked, ?
This would make filmable magic a relatively recent development.

For example, take the Zapruder film. That was viewed by independant witnesses about than 24 hours after it was made. The only way to fake that in 1963 would have been magic. The timeframe would be a stretch even for 2019 CGI.

You've also got a problem in faking film that even if you're after the development of CGI you need to be before the age of live streaming.
__________________
Fred Brackin
Fred Brackin is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 10:34 AM.


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