Peter Metcalfe, though, is unconvinced. He objects to my Roman analogy because the Romans had better technology, a larger population base, better organisation and so on. This was exactly _my_ point. The Lunars are also better in these areas, and it has nothing to do with the _quality_ of their magic. These are the reasons the Romans beat the Celts, and the reason the Lunars beat the Orlanthi. Their culture gives them a better military, it doesn't give them better magic.
Or not in the sense I mean, anyway. I think the problem is that Peter is talking about something completely different from me. Peter is, I think, talking about the ability to use magic in a military context. I have never denied that the Lunars are better at this. Yes, the Lunars do have a more powerful military, and this is partly due to their ability to coordinate magic use with their actions. But this has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
The point I was making was that the magic of all cultures is inherently equal. No matter who you are, one point of magic is one point of magic. The only exception I can think of is the Lunars inside the Glowline, and this is cancelled out by the detrimental effect on their magic outside the line. Yes, some cultures make better use of magic for military purposes, just as others will make better use of it for, say, wilderness survival. This doesn't make the magic itself any better, just the way it is used.
My original point was that because all magic is equally potent in principle, regardless of what culture the caster comes from, you can't use the 'power' of magic to determine who is 'right' about mythic history. An analogy: In the RW we use science to guage the nature of the world. I'm a scientist, of sorts, but this doesn't mean I'd last very long if someone went rampaging through my lab with a machine-gun. Does this mean that a machine-gun is a more technologically advanced piece of equipment than any of the stuff in the lab?
The ability to kill other people or conquer other lands has nothing to do with your relative understanding of the universe. It has everything to do with your cultural background and your ability to utilise that understanding for military purposes.
_That_ was the point I was making. Judging from your post, I suspect it is also your own opinion. So why are we arguing?
All hail the Reaching Moon
Trotsky
Powered by hypermail