Quote from: Phillip;862928He was responding to me, and I was talking about D&D. I was also talking about every other handbook of my experience in which in what he complained about -- focus on military spells -- is in fact the case. It is the case because the originators made up a game about military matters. They did not make up a game about Jane Austen marriage intrigues and then stupidly write tons of irrelevant material while neglecting stuff they would actually use, as Ravenswing accuses.

Maybe Ravenswing could clue us in by giving actual examples of the rules sets he has in mind? Helpful advice on products to avoid is better than sweeping accusations that just make for bewilderment without his apparently eccentric experience.

Quote from: Omega;862700Depends on the culture and mythology.

In many magic is a fairly reliable and even repeatable process. In others it is reliable, but one shot, or limited in potency. In yet others magic has specific limitations that allow it to be countered.

Occultism on the other hand deals more oft in unreliable, fickle power sources that can on a whim turn on the user. But there are also repeatable spells and formula. Often the greater the effect the more the risk. But note that also often these occult sources tend to be more man-made or pact born than purely supernatural. That  is a differene to keep in mind. Citing occultism is like citing UFO sightings. Too much variance.