Speaking of the “king’s power” as a power that only redistributes: what about emergent systems? It seems that we have kings who organize society in the same way that wizards organize matter.
I play the role of the king’s lawyer, but there is a difference between a group of wizards organized into a conclave by the king’s power bearer and the two of them separately. Therefore, we must attribute the increase in their power to the one who moderated the process… If we consider the criterion of “creating an increase in value”, which works in this case, but causes me doubts. ( I think it is not quite correct because it is vulnerable to fake value gain, it turns out that a wizard programmer who created a useful program (entity) in the laboratory or an author who wrote a book is equal to a market sorcerer who picked up a manipulative script to inflate the value of papers that are only empty promises. Is there any way to separate the fake value?)
I was also amused by the fact that at some point we touched the magic pills. In my culture, there is a distrust of psychotropic drugs and the means of gross moderation of one’s mind, which are normalized in other countries, for well-known reasons related to the risks of using potions. On the other hand, it is logical that we should use magical means to win, if we have not been able to prevent magical diseases associated with the ability to create and the defeat of the Will, Power or… ability to implement them? Other aspects of the Gift.
Speaking of other ideas, isn’t there a limit to human ability? I don’t approve of my pessimistic tone, it’s disgusting to me, but… It seems that these things require understanding a complex system of secrets? Not everything, and it’s worth the effort, but how good is it to put experiments on diseases in your basement?
Speaking of the “king’s power” as a power that only redistributes: what about emergent systems? It seems that we have kings who organize society in the same way that wizards organize matter.
I play the role of the king’s lawyer, but there is a difference between a group of wizards organized into a conclave by the king’s power bearer and the two of them separately. Therefore, we must attribute the increase in their power to the one who moderated the process… If we consider the criterion of “creating an increase in value”, which works in this case, but causes me doubts. ( I think it is not quite correct because it is vulnerable to fake value gain, it turns out that a wizard programmer who created a useful program (entity) in the laboratory or an author who wrote a book is equal to a market sorcerer who picked up a manipulative script to inflate the value of papers that are only empty promises. Is there any way to separate the fake value?)
I was also amused by the fact that at some point we touched the magic pills. In my culture, there is a distrust of psychotropic drugs and the means of gross moderation of one’s mind, which are normalized in other countries, for well-known reasons related to the risks of using potions. On the other hand, it is logical that we should use magical means to win, if we have not been able to prevent magical diseases associated with the ability to create and the defeat of the Will, Power or… ability to implement them? Other aspects of the Gift.
Speaking of other ideas, isn’t there a limit to human ability? I don’t approve of my pessimistic tone, it’s disgusting to me, but… It seems that these things require understanding a complex system of secrets?
Not everything, and it’s worth the effort, but how good is it to put experiments on diseases in your basement?