tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post8065103493596031530..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: A Separate MindsetAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-8300040687609099742017-06-01T19:15:34.864-06:002017-06-01T19:15:34.864-06:00Charles: Glad to see that I am not the only one wh...Charles: Glad to see that I am not the only one who had that thought. And that is basically what I though would happen. <br /><br />I still would like to see a solution, but I don't think I am going to come up with one around a D&D table.Archonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17718160700690722856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-35136616851874513992017-06-01T09:14:06.055-06:002017-06-01T09:14:06.055-06:00True enough, Charles. But I'd let the player ...True enough, Charles. But I'd let the player try, if they wanted.<br /><br />So long as we're getting the idea that there is a dividing line between one tech and another that isn't just geographical or the context of whimsy.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-44124874809178183682017-06-01T07:39:45.442-06:002017-06-01T07:39:45.442-06:00Archon:
This was tried in late 19th and early 20t...Archon:<br /><br />This was tried in late 19th and early 20th century Russia. Landowners wanted peasants to use new, improved farming methods from Europe, and the peasants were having none of it. If the landlord wasn't right there watching them, they'd just do it the old way. "Why change what works?"Charles Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00941603544547428940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-51610793591573211782017-06-01T01:43:51.762-06:002017-06-01T01:43:51.762-06:00The optimiser in my brain responds to this with a ...The optimiser in my brain responds to this with a simple question:<br /><br />How do we fix that? <br /><br />Or, to be more specific, how would we, with all our modern tech, drag that Icelandic farmer kicking and screaming into the best approximation of the modern age that our characters can get away with. Its a hard question - if we knew the answer, and it was easy, the third world would not be half so bad. But I don't think its intractable. Its an interesting thought. <br /><br />Cause he wouldn't want to read - that serves no use. What would he want? Better tools or cultivars or something, maybe, maybe not. Depends very much what the tools do, and how much work they take to learn and use. You would definitely need a in, either way, some reason he would listen to you.<br /><br />I wonder if the peasants of a fiefdom would agree to those experiments if you payed for the food for them(I think it would be feasible to buy the food for a few hundred, if not more). Not feasible on a large scale, but a adventurer with money to throw at the problem might be able to create a island of higher tech, in his personal domain. I'm not sure if it would be worth it. But we sure love to try and change the world. <br /><br />I suppose this is all quite bad role playing of my character. But quite frankly, adventuring is about asymmetric advantage, about getting every edge of money, goodwill, magic, manpower that you can, to try and come out of your ambitions alive and whole. Its okay to look to the future sometimes. If you didn't have dreams, you wouldn't be out here, fighting and nearly dying with the rest of us. <br /><br />Archonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17718160700690722856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-58215470049666074422017-05-29T02:58:31.682-06:002017-05-29T02:58:31.682-06:00This is a fascinating post. Thanks Alexis!
One th...This is a fascinating post. Thanks Alexis!<br /><br />One thing I believe is generally absent in discussions on world-building and technology is the inherent 'embeddedness' of technological progress in particular social and political structures. <br /><br />A whole field of research in economic history tries to explain why the industrial revolution occurred in Europe in the XVIII and XIX centuries, rather than, say, in China. Periods of tremendous technical innovation did not always produce socially useful technology, and often some forms of technical solutions were simply inferior -- in a political or social sense -- to traditional patterns of production. Sure, perhaps a machine or tool can make an individual laborer more productive, but it might be that there is no interest in increasing the individual laborer's productivity beyond a specific point; it might be that to introduce such an innovation would disrupt other social practices, or hierarchies. It is enough just to consider what the entry of women into the modern labor force unleashed in terms of social and cultural transformation, to drive the point home. If large-scale agricultural slave labor is doing the trick, perhaps you don't need to be particularly innovative. Perhaps there is no competition for that model of agriculture given that we cannot really transport foodstuff in bulk over long distances in a way that would put different agricultural production models in meaningful competition. <br /><br />So yes, not only must the individual have an interest in employing a technical innovation, as well as the means to procure whatever tools are necessary for the use of said innovation, but in world-building one needs to also look at what the introduction of this innovation does to social and political structures, and how the powerful in society might react to the introduction of such changes. We presume that 'market-driven exchange' has always been the predominant means of exchange in all fields of activity when, in reality, it is a very recent mode of exchange, that gradually generalized from an originally very narrow set of economic practices. <br />Matthiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09466641291398176421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-55445575183760738152017-05-28T04:49:41.952-06:002017-05-28T04:49:41.952-06:00Good point, Charles.Good point, Charles.Maxwell Joslynhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02309867478186083339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-39593841143907361652017-05-27T16:11:00.577-06:002017-05-27T16:11:00.577-06:00Well said, Alexis.
And I don't think the mode...Well said, Alexis.<br /><br />And I don't think the modern reader need even imagine themselves in a different age.<br /><br />There's any number of technical marvels available today that people don't own and will probably never encounter simply because they're useless in their life. You can buy a pretty dangerous laser for a few hundred bucks. That's pretty amazing technology, but how many people own one? Nobody, because, as you say, it does nothing to improve their life. It's just going to sit on a shelf, like that stack of swords.<br />Charles Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00941603544547428940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-49800789059423102592017-05-27T15:41:02.830-06:002017-05-27T15:41:02.830-06:00All of which reminds me of this post, Drain.All of which reminds me of <a href="http://tao-dnd.blogspot.ca/2010/10/calm-cool-gentle-presentation.html" rel="nofollow">this post</a>, Drain.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-67064711159558400822017-05-27T15:03:01.878-06:002017-05-27T15:03:01.878-06:00Riveting stuff, Alexis.
Nowadays, it is understoo...Riveting stuff, Alexis.<br /><br />Nowadays, it is understood as a given that change blankets the whole world ranging from a matter of months (for dematerialized fads) to short years for the more concrete cases.<br /><br />It so happens that such a modern push for global change usually has an enormous comercial impetus behind it. By now, we want others to change because there's money in it.<br /><br />To the point that, today, change can be more or less forced upon us, not always limited to a strict matter of market acceptance, it conquers instead a restricted group of experts and decision-makers, usually (hopefully) through demonstrable superiority, sometimes through lobbying/deceit and is then pushed through law and economic incentive unto the shoulders of the lot of us. The alternate vs. continuous electrical current battles come to mind.<br /><br />Ideally in today's world we'll want our trading partners lagging ever so slightly behind us that they'll come to us hat-in-hand for innovation but not so much that they won't have a use for all the consumer goods that we're pumping out. Facebook's (or was it Google's?) efforts to "bring the internet to remote areas of the world" by way of balloon-borne signal stations are a good representative of this askance generosity.<br /><br />What is backward we exploit for resources, what is developed we engage in commercial terms. Occupying is yesterday's wastrel gameplan, the grand difference is we just learned to utter a polite "please".Drainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09724863160300686402noreply@blogger.com