tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post2798785530735363041..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: Big Enough To FailAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-45338481742032762042012-12-23T11:31:03.199-07:002012-12-23T11:31:03.199-07:00I don't know how big your conception of a gian...I don't know how big your conception of a giant wasp is, but in the Carboniferous era, there were dragonflies about two feet across. A wasp two feet long, therefore, seems totally plausible, and - to my mind - pretty terrifying.<br /><br />10ft centipedes, maybe not so much.<br /><br />But the existence of elephants (7-ton quadruped vertebrates), and tyrannosaurs (7-ton biped vertebrate) would indicate to me that you can have some pretty darn sizable humanoid giants, in the neighbourhood of 30ft without going beyond normal, our-world biology.<br /><br />Their body shape would probably be somewhat different from ours, but recognizably humanoid.Charles Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00941603544547428940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-71635024997367074812012-12-21T15:46:10.789-07:002012-12-21T15:46:10.789-07:00Sorry to resurrect and rehash an old post, but I t...Sorry to resurrect and rehash an old post, but I think this is just one prong on the ... many pronged fork. Whatever mechanism for how you enable some impossible creature to exist, you should consider why that mechanism isn't more frequent. If giants have magical structural integrity, why don't more creatures have similar reinforcement for other reasons, say for armor. Wouldn't this decimate the ecology and lead to an evolutionary arms race? If the predominant predators are supported by magic that can be dispelled, how come the predominant prey animals couldn't dispel? Too many of the classic monsters have no ecology and exist solely to torment players. What do giant wasps eat, and where do they lay their eggs? Maybe there are giant caterpillars and moths too. Remember, insects collectively outweigh all other (land) animals and make up 95% of the species <b>In the real world!</b> And what about the plant-life?<br /><br />Now, these statements are not meant to chastise, but to make you squirm with delight, because that's what your post did to me. How <i>are</i> your giants fashioned? <i>Why</i> are things the way they are? What lurks on the darkest jungles???Maximillian Boiihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09712157905126165888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-77184607375056930302011-11-09T12:02:41.774-07:002011-11-09T12:02:41.774-07:00"The game works better if we don't put it..."The game works better if we don't put it under the microsope of modern science."<br /><br />I disagree, ETOB. I find that magic works better when it has rational underpinnings. Thus the game is better, since magic is such a large part of it. The foundations can be flexible (Aristotlean vs Newtonian physics), but once that is fixed extrapolating from there adds a certain realism and fosters trust. When the DM says "no", the players understand that there is a reason beyond that of whim.Baron Opalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00197583506475860457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-15250437238766324632011-11-09T11:44:03.402-07:002011-11-09T11:44:03.402-07:00Actually, Peter Dickinson pursued that question in...Actually, Peter Dickinson pursued that question in The Flight of Dragons (1979). It comes down to digestive acids producing hydrogen gas. This produces lift and a fiery breath, as well as describing a means for the corpse to disintegrate quickly after death. <br /><br />It was a fun read and thought experiment.Baron Opalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00197583506475860457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-33779726492933451492011-11-09T06:35:15.994-07:002011-11-09T06:35:15.994-07:00And let's not even get into how dragons fly, o...And let's not even get into how dragons fly, or the mechanism of firebreathing...Butchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00470617214750867482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-2680095806435896832011-11-08T08:01:22.640-07:002011-11-08T08:01:22.640-07:00Just to bring you up to date, EOTB, science itself...Just to bring you up to date, EOTB, science itself is a rabbit hole without a bottom. Doesn't dissuade scientists. Science is interesting.<br /><br />I don't see why I should eschew something that's interesting. But point in fact, I'm not "making the rules consistent" with anything. I'm proposing NEW WAYS to think about old stuff.<br /><br />Ah, I should have just not published this comment as unnecessary flat-earth thinking and technically off-topic.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-599284959925542152011-11-07T23:32:37.855-07:002011-11-07T23:32:37.855-07:00The game works better if we don't put it under...The game works better if we don't put it under the microsope of modern science. A giant wasp is able to fly because the game needs it to, and it's a more visceral encounter than with 50 real-world-sized wasps. <br /><br />Making the rules consistent with modern science is a rabbit hole without bottom.EOTBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17514955150414369244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-76881862847531450252011-11-07T22:34:16.611-07:002011-11-07T22:34:16.611-07:00You could simply go with the idea that, since fant...You could simply go with the idea that, since fantasy characters don't have the basic understandings of math and science that we do, they wouldn't think anything of the fact that these monsters have magical supports, and thus, wouldn't bother to study the new type of magic because they don't know it exists.CrapEDM(Carpe Diem)https://www.blogger.com/profile/16912411359661870454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-21616104216825458052011-11-07T17:17:34.120-07:002011-11-07T17:17:34.120-07:00Best argument yet, JD. Not only does it defeat the...Best argument yet, JD. Not only does it defeat the dispel magic, it defeats the detect magic as well. That centipede isn't actually 'giant' ... the reflection and the damage it does is the result of a bi-planar juxtaposition.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-89598421410139954862011-11-07T15:14:48.164-07:002011-11-07T15:14:48.164-07:00the enlarge spell and bag of holding both look lik...the enlarge spell and bag of holding both look like likely results of exploring the magical field theory of giant creatures to me. <br /><br />The giant creature could be just the hunk of the organism folks can see and interact with in regular space.JDJarvishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07691101939920824546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-18620150237898960732011-11-07T15:07:35.549-07:002011-11-07T15:07:35.549-07:00Remember in Clash of the Titans (the original with...Remember in Clash of the Titans (the original with Harryhousen's work) how the blood of the Medusa was spilled upon ground and the giant scorpions sprouted? That's an example of a magic creature that can't be unmagicked. The Gorgon was cursed by the gods! No mere mortal spell-caster can undo such powerful magic! Use your sword!<br /><br />I handwaved the giant creatures as whims of the gods. Yes, they are technically magical. Can you "dispel" them? No. Unless you can dispel a god.<br /><br />How I saw it was over the millenia, the gods and the nymphs and what-have-you get into little tiffs, disagreements and so forth. Sometimes things get cursed. Sometimes creatures are the result of a dare. Sometimes, as in the case of Hercules, a god fancies a mortal.<br /><br />It's all handwavium, of course. Giant insects can't exist because they have sphericles and not lungs. They can't assimilate enough oxygen to support anything much larger than they are. They'd sufficate.<br /><br />Cheers!Original_Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03521777462227997158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-90662845124962245652011-11-07T13:08:02.491-07:002011-11-07T13:08:02.491-07:00Asimov is certainly more knowledgable than garden-...Asimov is certainly more knowledgable than garden-variety scientists -- but if Asimov has more degrees and honors, he cannot be wrong? With life and things like economics (a higher order of the activity of life) and other topics that are the product of evolving and moving parts, even the best-and-brightests' imaginations tend to fall short of what is possible. To me, this is why such subjects are eterenally facinating, and why many find fantasy/RPGs and science fiction so captivating because it unlocks the mind. Just think of how many of our everyday devices/gadgets/inventions are themselves inspired by writers who think of ideas and concepts that "will be", and they are because someone plucks the idea from their writings. For example, Steve Jobs had even said several of his product ideas came from Star Trek, whatever you think of him or the TV series.<br /><br />There is a lot of speculation about the types of species and lifeforms out in the universe, how they live, their shapes, sizes, forms, and other morphology, and even what is here on the earth surpasses the best scientists' imaginations. <br /><br />The reality is that science fiction is probably closer to the truth of what is possible than what conventional science provides as possible.<br /><br />Thanks for helping us with the opportunity to think about these topics! Fun!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-40049548839021729562011-11-07T11:18:32.045-07:002011-11-07T11:18:32.045-07:00Interestingly, I can quote my source for the biolo...Interestingly, I can quote my source for the biology above. It's a favorite argument of Isaac Asimov, whose biochemistry doctorate, honors and general genius trumps anyone here on the subject.<br /><br />Asimov is also, by the way, the reason I call my readers 'gentle.'Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-32458422287411613152011-11-07T10:51:29.086-07:002011-11-07T10:51:29.086-07:00Yes, I remember sitting though a similar physics l...Yes, I remember sitting though a similar physics lecture about why giants coldn't exist: because the bobdy weight would grow cubically, but the body structure's strength would only grow in a squared fashion. The point they were trying to make was more of a numeric or mathematical truth, but like many math models, they can fail in the real (or fantastic) worlds.<br /><br />What I beleive is being forgetten here is about changes in bone density, ligament, and muscle itself. Larger animals not only had larger bones, but the densities of the bones were enough to handle the load. <br /><br />And for (the usually long-necked) dinosaurs that actually did exist that well exceeded anything in the classic Monster Manual...they have surmised that they keep their blood pressure properly balanced by keeping their heads low and only lifted them for short durations if grabbing food off a high bough.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-90892145238830246182011-11-07T10:20:53.554-07:002011-11-07T10:20:53.554-07:00The first step as mentioned above is physiological...The first step as mentioned above is physiological adaptation (such as better circulatory systems).<br /><br />The next step I think is more advanced materials or what amounts to magical genetic manipulation. Tendons do not begin to approach the strength of spider silk, yet both are made of simple proteins. This could extend to exotic materials such as carbon nanotube exoskeletons or adamantite-reinforced bones. This also could include materials that are magically altered but are not themselves magical.<br /><br /> After that, active magical effects come into play.<br /> The simplest is an enlargement spell. The spell itself does not mention the possibility of damage from overstressing the body, so one could assume that it functions as a scale factor on more than just size. The result is a giant creature that is stable only because physics is scaled in its vicinity (with the increased size as a byproduct). Dispelling this would result in a normal-sized creature.<br /> More complex is active strengthening, where the physical structure of the creature is augmented to withstand the forces involved or a web of force holds some of the internal stress. Dispelling this would result in a mess. For creatures constrained by the vascular system, a network of short-range teleportation gates could distribute fluids and even act as filters.<br /><br /> Beyond exotic materials and active magic, deities would have the power to create whatever they want within the limits of their spheres of influence. This is what I get from Greek legends of the Titans; a time when enormous creatures were created and set against each other, eventually falling from favor as the gods became more focused on humanity and less tolerant of disastrous collateral damage.<br /><br /> This has a lot in common with an arms race, as I see it. If your world is relatively close to real timelines, then monstrosities created by the gods should be extremely rare or extinct. Actively-maintained monsters induce others with sufficient power to create their own juggernauts, but these creations seem too flashy to be justified in the long run. Passively maintained monsters are much easier to hide, much more likely to escape and much simpler to investigate as a wizard. These should be quite common. Anti-monster magic at the lowest level is simply damage output. As I see it, the point where dispel magic would be useful is also the point where either the effect to be dispelled is temporary or someone powerful has a personal interest in the monster's success (and may be able to counter or resist a simple dispelling).<br /><br /> Deciding which category should apply to which creature depends on the creature. Compare it to the largest of its type (insect, mammal, etc.) and use that as a guide. For instance, a dog-sized rat is no problem; a car-sized rat is conceivable (see bison); a house-sized rat is not reasonable without magic. A spider on the other hand probably needs magic at less than a foot of abdominal length while a crab might reach two or three feet.Chris Wolfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11247630943891521469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-13395696126867668432011-11-07T10:04:56.066-07:002011-11-07T10:04:56.066-07:00Or they could have evolved for a reason that is qu...Or they could have evolved for a reason that is quite imaginative.<br /><br />Why exactly is magic "interesting" and science "boring"...?<br /><br />Closet theology?Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-68563445776840765562011-11-07T09:59:37.484-07:002011-11-07T09:59:37.484-07:00I'd go with Eric's approach, but with less...I'd go with Eric's approach, but with less insanity. All creatures were created by a god in theory. A god of magic would probably create or experiment with larger creatures. As guardians, as something to manage the higher creatures in the food chain or just because. I mean the platypus what more do you need?<br /><br />You could follow the idea of science and logic down a very long train, but then you would end up with your world being very much like earth, as orcs and elves obviously would have never evolved for such and such reason.Oddbithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12091924105175846386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-33509168059789538292011-11-07T09:43:50.936-07:002011-11-07T09:43:50.936-07:00You don't really need magic to justify giant t...You don't really need magic to justify giant terrestrial monsters. What about dinosaurs like Argentinosaurus (~100 tons) or Amphiocelius (~120 tons if it actually existed)? Big carnivores like Spinosaurus even made it to 7-8 tons.<br /><br />I think the main physiological bottleneck for giant animals is blood circulation. Paleontologists don't really know how the dinosaurs solved the problem, but giraffes (up to six meters tall) adapted through sky high blood pressure and various other mechanisms like a string of back flow-preventing valves in the major neck vein and super-tight leg skin(!).<br /><br />Terrestrial arthropods are most likely limited physiologically by the structure of their diffusion-based gas exchange system. Also, huge insects or spiders would be crushed by their own weight while molting. Still, it's easy to imagine mundane adaptations to get around these challenges, like evolving true lungs, molting underwater, or partial molting.<br /><br />What's my point? I'm just saying you probably don't necessarily need to invoke magic unless you get well over 100 tons. And that's assuming the physical characteristics of your game world are the same as for the real world. Assume changes to the atmosphere, gravity, animal gas exchange systems, etc. and your monsters could be really huge! <br /><br />I think most biologists agree that the range of animals sizes we see today largely reflect ecological constraints as opposed to physiological constraints.Bob Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12073807225519106277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-82378833678228578212011-11-07T09:31:51.265-07:002011-11-07T09:31:51.265-07:00A mad god did it! She loves improbably large thing...A mad god did it! She loves improbably large things, and transports their excess mass and inertia to her spot in the heavens, where she can admire them or dump them into a micro black hole or somesuch.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07649420272387984400noreply@blogger.com