Magic and Technology

[Abstruse]

I've always seen it more like that magical fields screw up technology, no matter the level of understanding.  In SF, Harry talks about how a revolver isn't 100% reliable around him, and that's a very simple machine that I'm sure he understands completely.  Understanding has little to do with it IMO.  I think Butters is closer with the EMP field, though it's not strictly EMP as it can affect non-electronic machines as well.  It's just the stronger the magic + the stronger the magician = the more interference produced, and the level of interference needed depends on the complexity of the machine in question.  I think maybe you guys are overthinking this whole thing...

The Abstruse One
Darryl Mott Jr.

[Samldanach]

And, no offense, but I think you're underthinking it.  Your argument is very circular.  Why does magic screw with technology?  Because magic creates a field that creates interference with technology.  That's not really an answer.  And, more importantly, it does absolutely nothing to help the GM who is struggling with a smart-ass player trying to manipulate the rules.

Suppose the player wants to play someone like Ramirez(?), the younger wizard who can actually use a gun.  Why can he use a gun?  Is it because he's younger, and more used to guns?  Is it because he's weaker, and produces less interference?  Is it because he's learned to rein in his interference?  If so, how hard/common is that?

Suppose the player wants to deliberately use his interference to jam a gun that's being held to his temple.  Harry can do it to a degree, in that he can deliberately short out cameras.  How hard is it to focus your interference field?  How hard is it to jam the gun?

Suppose the player wants to create the magical equivalent of a computer.  Is it possible, or will the inherent chaos of magic prevent even magical "technology" from working?

The answer of "just because" works well in novels, where the author controls not only what happens, but what questions get asked.  You need something a little more developed for an RPG, where the players are sure to focus with unerring precision on whatever question you don't want them to ask.

[Abstruse]

That's a problem for the game designers and the holder of the original intellectual property to figure out, not for us.  Jim hasn't said other than giving Butters' theory as to why magic screws up tech.  So anything we have to say on the matter is simply speculation.

However, my theory has a big more genre backing in it.  For one thing, the idea was more or less directly lifted for the Returner series or whatever it's called...some semi-readable urban fantasy put out by Harlequin's new imprint for supernatural and fantasy stories.  Think back to Highlander.  What caused all the sparks from everything?  Was it an effect of the two immortals fighting?  Their inherent powers clashing?

How can the kid use a gun and Harry not?  Either he's not as strong or he has more fine control over his raw power and is able to rein it in.  Remember, even Harry himself says that he has a lot of power but not a lot of fine control.

And honestly, why would the other theory even work?  Harry's not trying to use the camera or high tech lights on the set of the TV show.  Why would he need to "understand" it?  It goes haywire just because he's nearby.  He can short out stuff he doesn't even know is there.  The residual magical energy field or strong aura theory seems a lot more sound IMO.

The Abstruse One
Darryl Mott Jr.

[waywardclam]

If your problem is that you're trying to block a rules lawyer with a rule, you're approaching it wrong.

Keep killing his character until he smartens up.  Problem solved. 

[The Last Bean]

Or even better. Just say "no, that's unbalancing, and it's against the spirit of the rules." If he's the kind of player than can't handle that kind of answer, then perhaps he should find a more black-and-white universe to play in. Keep in mind that the FATE handbook says, perhaps hundreds of times, that it is the job of the DM to control the game to an extent, keep it functional, and most of all, keep it fun. If that means using a stick instead of a carrot sometimes, then so be it.

Remember, DMs, Just say "no" to powergamers.

[Samldanach]

I find a blanket "it's up to the GM" statement to be, frankly, useless.  Yes, the GM has the final say, and should freely exercise his ability to say "no."  But, that's a lot easier to do when there are rules and explanations to back him up.

It's also a lot easier on the players to have the rules.  That's how you know what the boundaries of the world are.  Both in terms of stopping you from doing goofy, over-powered stuff, and in terms of acting appropriately.  If I want to reproduce an effect from the books, I want to have some idea what sort of things I should have on my character sheet to do that.  High willpower?  High skill?  Do I have to give up magical power?  What?

Similarly, when the GM has rules (not just game rules, but rules about how the universe works), the GM can break them in relatively realistic ways.  When Kincaid pulls out a trick that shouldn't work, the players can go, "um, wait a minute, how'd he do that?"  They can be impressed, and curious.  And, ultimately, the GM can later point out the loophole he used (or made up).  By using the rules, he can both maintain a sense of verisimilitude (i.e., the world makes sense and holds together), and a sense of fair play (the PCs and NPCs are playing from the same deck).

Given that, I feel that I need this discussion.  I don't want to hand-wave it.  I want to know why wizards and technology don't get along.  I want to know why some wizards are better with technology than others.  I want to know if I can play a techno-pagan, like Jenny Calendar from Buffy.  Is the very concept thoroughly alien and unworkable, or do I just have to tread a thin line, and give up power for cool factor?

[LogosInvictus]

I'm not sure how welcome Thread Necromancy is ("Thou Shalt Not Bump Beyond the Veil of Death"?) around here but I was actually thinking about this very topic the other day, and I thought that a list of what we do know about magic vs. technology from the various books might help those that were looking for one come up with a rule regarding that.

We do know that the more wizards there are, the less likely technology is to hold out. (SK)
We do know that technology shorts out in the presence of just about ANY supernatural occurance, even if wizard's aren't involved (FM, SK, I think it's mentioned in GP)
We do know that the emotional state of the wizard seems to have some effect on whether the technology will work (Several books, the best reference is DM).
We do know that if lots of magic is flying around, it's more likely that technology will fail, and that mages can focus their hex to some degree.
We do know that magic's effect on technology can be warded against and spells can be used to mitigate it. (DM, DB)

This indicates to me that the effect of magic on technology is a direct result of magic itself rather than the magician. This may seem circular, but what I'm essentially saying is that magic is, itself, a force. This seems to be borne out by some of Harry's musings on magic in the books. Being a force, magic may be similar in some ways to electromagnetic energy - not the same, certainly, but similar. This would explain why ghouls and things like that that aren't wizards still mess with cameras - they possess a natural "magical field", a sort of radiation generated by their magical natures and exacerbated by their emotional state (because magic is generated from emotion, after all). This holds true for wizards as well, and Harry himself has mentioned that wizards, especially emotional wizards, can generate a lot of excess energy - otherwise why would Mac's be built as it is?

Since the effect is generated by magic itself rather than some sort of electro-magical field or the subconscious whims of mages, we can then begin to extrapolate that manipulating the hex effect is as simple as affecting a change in the magic of an area. The key is to be very, very specific in how you affect the magic - so you don't get an impressive pyrotechnic display when you knock out a camera. This likely requires a great deal of subtlety - hence why Harry has a hard time with it. Another wizard with a little bit more finesse might actually be able to direct his field away from certain objects (much as Harry directs his field TOWARD certain objects - such as cameras), allowing him to carry weapons and gear of a more sensitive nature than would be expected for a wizard. I doubt that this is terribly common, not because it's difficult, but because wizards tend to think in terms of spells. The White Council, and its enemies, seem to have developed "Everything's a Nail" syndrome, so only the younger wizards take the time to develop the magical skills necessary to channel magic in such a way as to allow them to use grenades effectively.

In short (too late, right?), its the magic itself that's doing it. As to why? Well, magic is a naturally intuitive force - yes, it has rules, but those rules are always changing, and a magician can get by just fine on a bit of wisdom, a lot of instinct and a little luck. Technology, on the other hand, is based around science. Yes, there's room for inspiration, but it's mostly based on trial and error, logical progression and static understanding - which is to say that there's a finite amount of science and, once we've come to completely understand it all, there's no more to learn (not to say that understanding is even possible). Magic on the other hand is chaotic and ever-changing. Much as in the game Arcanum, magic could affect technology because the two are counter-intuitive - a sort of conflict between the left and right halves of the Universal Brain, so to speak.

Also, yay first post.

[cybrgrl]

We do know that the more wizards there are, the less likely technology is to hold out. (SK)
We do know that technology shorts out in the presence of just about ANY supernatural occurance, even if wizard's aren't involved (FM, SK, I think it's mentioned in GP)
We do know that the emotional state of the wizard seems to have some effect on whether the technology will work (Several books, the best reference is DM).
We do know that if lots of magic is flying around, it's more likely that technology will fail, and that mages can focus their hex to some degree.
We do know that magic's effect on technology can be warded against and spells can be used to mitigate it. (DM, DB)

This indicates to me that the effect of magic on technology is a direct result of magic itself rather than the magician.

Bravo, LogosInvictus.  Your post sums up my understanding of Dresdenverse magic, right up until the "As to why" paragraph.  I don't know why magic interferes with technology.  The books give examples but no explanations for magic's effect on technology.  Therefor, I suggest leaving the matter open - not publishing one reason in the RPG that might conflict with future Dresden File books.  To address the issue, you could include a sampling of theories presented *as theories*.  GMs and players could use one or more of the theories as they see fit.

My favorite theory is that magic messes with probabilities.  Fits all the facts in the books so far.

cybrgrl

[Ebenezar McCoy]

We have seen Harry use magical means to stop from shorting out the cameras and all the studios technology when he appears with Mort and is then challenged by Ortega. It is obviously possible to lessen the effect and the range of it, but by how much and for how long? It is a wizard by wizard situation and circumstantial type deal. Only my opinion, though.

[Soulless Mystic5523]

This is a bumpy issue.  very curious.  i would like to see butter's quantify the particle of magic though.  That would be amusing.  I have faith Butcher will do the issue justice in the books, as he's a sci-fi nerd as well as fantasy.  good luck with the rules ironing.

BUt didn't you know? The particle of magic has been quantified as the Thaum.

Thaum
see also: Discworld magic, Fictional particles, and Thaumaturgy.

The Thaum is a measuring unit used in quantifying magic. It equals the amount of mystical energy required to conjure up one small white pigeon, or three normal-sized billiard balls. It can, of course, be measured with a thaumometer, and regular SI-modifiers apply (e.g. millithaum, kilothaum).

A thaumometer looks like a black cube with a dial on one side. A standard one is good for up to a million thaums - if there is more magic than that around, measuring it is not going to do any good.

An alternate measurement is the "Prime." It measures the amount of mystical energy required to move one pound of lead one foot. An attempt to put magic measurement into a logical framework, it never really caught on, as wizards are natural traditionalists.

Confusingly, the thaum also appears to be a particle; the magical equivalent of the atom. "Splitting the thaum" revealed that it was in fact composed of numerous sub-particles, called resons ("thingies") which came in five "flavours", up, down, sideways, sex appeal, and peppermint (see quarks). Note that since even before this discovery magical fields of less than one thaum were reported (The Light Fantastic), the particle known as the thaum must represent less magic than one thaum on the measuring scale.

The term thaum is based on the Greek term thauma (marvel), which is often used as a prefix meaning "magical" on the Discworld. It also suggests the non-SI unit of energy therm.



And as for the magic/tech interferance, I agree that understanding has some say in the matter, but its mostly emotional. Harry tends to be a very emotional person, whereas Carlos, is calmer and has better emptional control. Maybe that's why he can get away with using an automatic rather than a revolver.

[iago]

Here's my brief understanding of Magic and Technology based on my conversations with Jim on the matter.

Magic is a powerful force and gets directed like a laser in the hands of an unconflicted being.  Creatures from the Nevernever usually fit this bill.  Their nature and their will are in unity -- they don't have a "free will" that's separate from their nature, in other words.  Look at Mab: she is who she is, through and through.  If Mab turns you into a toad, she's doing that because her nature is one of something that turns you into a toad, and she has no doubts about it.

On the other hand, look at a mortal spellcaster.  A mortal spellcaster has his nature as a human being, and he also has free will.  These things are sometimes at odds.  He has emotional states, and doubts, and so forth.  When he throws magic around, he's probably got to have 99.9% of his mind in line with what he's doing -- he has to BELIEVE that he can do it, through and through -- but it's not perfect.  Unlike the unconflicted beings of the Nevernever, a mortal spellcaster has pesky things like self-doubt, a mortgage, emotions, a twitch in that hand that got burned by a flamethrower -- you know, the usual stuff that plagues normal folks.   So that leaves us with 00.1% of his mind not entirely on the task at hand.  Which means we've got a smidge of magic that's not being guided by his will.

It's that smidge of magic that "leaks" out of the spell -- or even just gets shot off by a flare of emotion and intense thinking -- that gets inside of technology and screws it up.  So regardless of your perspective on what magic as a *force* is and does, that's *why* the "hexing" effect happens for mortal spellcasters.  They aren't perfectly unconflicted, so stuff shorts out.

You can theorize all day as to why "stray magic" causes technology to fry.  Maybe it is probability-bending.  That's certainly supported by what we've seen; after all it's very improbable that if I point at you that fire will leap from my hand and burn your face off.  But magic does seem to change the odds of that happening...

[Samldanach]

Wow.  That's a really cool explanation for the leak.

So, stronger mages tend to short things out more than weaker mages, because .1% of the kilothaum (to borrow the above Discworld reference) McCoy tosses around is a lot more than 1% of the single thaum Molly is handling (despite the fact that, because of his training, McCoy is leaking, proportionately, ten times less energy from his "pool").

And, it tends to reinforce the theory that different mages affect different levels of technology based on their core understanding.  The magic that is used in the spell is guided by belief.  The magic that runs stray is also guided by belief, but in a sort of inverted way.  The spell is defined by what you believe will happen, and the side effect is by you don't believe will happen.  So, if you don't trust cars, phones, or elevators, your stray magic tends to reinforce that mistrust, and they break down.  A computer would be really hosed, because even the most devout techie does believe that it will break, and generally at the worst possible moment.

Thanks, Fred!

[iago]

Excellent elaboration, man. I think I may borrow some of that idea for the writeup of hexing in the RPG!

[Rel Fexive]

Both together make for an (unsurprisingly) excellent explanation, it's true

[Mario Di Giacomo]

Here's the thing.  I'm a computer programmer.  Have been for over a decade.  That means that I not only am familiar with computers, but that I often have to "think like" a computer.

Wouldn't that suggest that I might think "Gee... I should be able to enchant my computer to protect it from magic, no matter what my teacher says."?