There is absolutely nothing wrong with magic as a technology.

He never said there was a problem, just that if it is easier to use fireballs than arrows, people will be using those. Most fantasy settings try to have it both ways, with the medievalesque weapons and magical artillery, even when it doesn’t make sense.

I guess I’ll start with “There is absolutely nothing wrong with magic as a technology. ”

Yes, there is. King ARthur held the mighty Excalibur in his hand, a sword of divine creation that held untold powers and identified him as the the one true king. That makes for an interesting and, dare I say it, “Magical” element to a story. King Arthur held in his hand a +4 Vorpal sword which he had just purchased from Kmart for half off. Maybe, if this next raid went well, he could afford to go down to Nordstrom’s and buy one of the new laser guided “This is the new l3wt of the month” sword. This is somewhat more crass and un-magical.

On to the rest of your points. There is no need for me to number and address them one at a time (except for #3, which I will get to). They all get the same answer – yes, if you tone them down, they become more balanced. That just brings them to alternate explanations for shit you are doing anyway. “Ooh look, you can only throw flasks of burning oil, while I can shoot fireballs that do exactly the same thing.” Let me pause here and answer your counterpoint before you make it: When you proceed to show how the fireball could somehow be different from the flask of oil, you are not addressing the point. The point is that non magical powers give you a variety of straightforward attacks that have varying stats in terms of Speed, targets affected, Range, Damage, etc. If Magic is different only in that those stats are different, why bother? Why can’t magic do something else other that simulate nonmagical attacks (same arguement for healing, travel and training).

On to point number 3. I apologise if I overestimated the power of a giant burst of flame. I was only making a broad assumption based on the fact that area of effect flame weapons have been one of the primary points of research of every army in history and that every flame weapon ever invented, from Greek fire to the Garandes and burning hoops used by the Turks to Flamethrowers and incendiary bombs (to name a few) has proven to be a devestatingly effective weapon and become feared by all who face them. But, now that you mention it, I am certain that a giant ball of magically summoned fire would be now more effective than an arrow which hits only one target and is rarely fatal. (Go ahead, start a thread about Agincourt and how the longbow is the greatest weapon ever invented, I dare ya!)

Finally, I have to speak to your closing statement.
“Asheron’s Call doesn’t invalidate the concept anymore than its hyperinflation invalidates the concept of having an economy.”

WTF??? Asheron’s call doesn’t invalidate anything. I never said it invalidates anything. There is a fundamental problem with peoples thinking. You like the current system of magic – fine. I said there is a problem with it. Alarm bells went off – I just insulted your favorite thing and you must rush forth to do battle with the Heretic. So you, with your obviously limited reading ability, saw my comment about Asheron’s call and assumed it was somehow the key to my whole arguement. To review the point more carefully:

“Asheron’s Call annoys a lot of people, but it is the logical progression of magic as a technology.”

I pointed out that there was a problem with magic as technology. I further went on to say that Asheron’s call is not an example of them implementing that system of magic badly, but rather the natural result of that system. It’s like this: dogshit doesn’t invalidate pet ownership, but if you have a pet, you are going to clean up shit. Similarly Asheron’s call doesn’t invalidate Magic as a technology, but every game that treats magic as technology is going to suffer from the same problems that AC does.

What is that problem? You have a choice of two weapons. They both do the same thing, but one is faster, has a longer range, does more damage and is harder to resist. Which one do you use? Obviously the better one. In this regard, non magical attacks suffer the same problem. Ultimately there is one item/spell/power that is better than all the others and everybody ends up using that same thing. (i.e. Mattekar Robes becoming the only armor) If you develop items/spells/power that have different functions you can avoid this issue because each one has a different role and yet is equally usefull.

Or, if you you prefer, “you are a fucking idiot for disagreeing with me.” Nothing more annoying than an illiterate fanboy.

Can only be a harrying action because the summoned creatures are stupid and weak.

> Or the ability to feed an entire army with magically summoned food?

Bags of holding. So no, not interesting.

> A fireball seems a whole lot more effective to me than an arrow. Why then would you have this older technology around when it was obsolete?

1) because fireballs travel more slowly?
2) because a wizard can cast much fewer fireballs than an archer can shoot arrows?
3) because fireballs only SEEM a whole lot more effective to YOU and really AREN’T.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with magic as a technology. Asheron’s Call doesn’t invalidate the concept anymore than its hyperinflation invalidates the concept of having an economy. Oh and you are a fucking idiot for thinking it does.