If you were around /tg/ in the last weeks, you probably came across a very neuroatypical post about how "mana" and "scientific magic" are ruining everything. I claim authorship of that post. Someone made a post against the Eberron setting apparently using very similar arguments; that wasn't me, but chances are we can probably agree on many points. As you'd expect, it was quite divisive since most people at /tg/, although they tend to dislike wokeism, can't think outside of their modernist, rationalist, naturalist 21st century worldview.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Here are my main points:
Magic should not a physical phenomenonMost modern settings simply assume that magic is a force of nature; some sort of energy that works in a mechanistic, physical way that can be harnessed by humans and even machines. Compare it electricity, if you will. It is simply magic because it is not known. But what is real life, "authentic" magic like? To illustrate my point, let's analyze a few examples, starting with an actual spell from the Picatrix, the medieval grimoire of astrological
magick.
QuoteFor example, the book advises one to create a ring for Saturn using turquoise and lead, and to inscribe into it an image of a man riding a dragon, wielding a sickle or a scythe. If you wear the ring, then:
The spirits that dwell in the dark and obscure places will be well-disposed to the wearer; bulls will assist the wearer. Even profound secrets, humans, scorpions, serpents, mice, all the reptiles upon the earth, and all the operations of Saturn will be revealed to the wearer.
Source: https://www.medievalists.net/2019/06/how-to-become-an-evil-wizard-medieval-magic-from-picatrix/
Here is another example:
Quote'Curse tablets' are small sheets of lead, inscribed with messages from individuals seeking to make gods and spirits act on their behalf and influence the behaviour of others against their will. The motives are usually malign and their expression violent, for example to wreck an opponent's chariot in the circus, to compel a person to submit to sex or to take revenge on a thief. Letters and lines written back to front, magical 'gibberish' and arcane words and symbols often lend the texts additional power to persuade. In places where supernatural agents could be contacted, thrown into sacred pools at temples, interred with the dead or hidden by the turning post at the circus, these tablets have survived to be found by archaeologists.
Source: curses.csad.ox.ac.uk/beginners/
Or how about superstitions in general?
QuoteOpinion is divided as to which way up the horseshoe ought to be nailed. Some say the ends should point up, so that the horseshoe catches the luck, and that the ends pointing down allow the good luck to be lost; others say they should point down, so that the luck is poured upon those entering the home. Superstitious sailors believe that nailing a horseshoe to the mast will help their vessel avoid storms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe#Superstition
QuoteIn the ritual of today, Bloody Mary allegedly appears to individuals or groups who ritualistically invoke her name in an act of catoptromancy. This is done by repeatedly chanting her name into a mirror placed in a dimly-lit or candle-lit room. The name must be uttered thirteen times (or some other specified number of times). The Bloody Mary apparition allegedly appears as a corpse, witch, or ghost that can be friendly or evil, and is sometimes seen covered in blood (hence the name). The lore surrounding the ritual states that participants may endure the apparition screaming at them, cursing them, strangling them, stealing their soul, drinking their blood, or scratching their eyes out.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Mary_(folklore)
And finally observations from the Lemegeton or Lesser Key of Solomon, arguably the most famous grimoire
QuoteFIRST, thou shalt know and observe the Moon's Age for thy working. The best days be when the Moon Luna is 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, or 14 days old, as Solomon saith; and no other days be profitable. The Seals of the 72 Kings are to be made in Metals.
The Chief Kings' in Sol (Gold); Marquises' in Luna (Silver); Dukes' in Venus (Copper); Prelacies' in Jupiter (Tin); Knights' in Saturn (Lead); Presidents' in Mercury (Mercury); Earls' in Venus (Copper), and Luna (Silver), alike equal, etc. THESE 72 Kings be under the Power of AMAYMON, CORSON, ZIMIMAY or ZIMINAIR, and GAAP, who are the Four Great Kings ruling in the Four Quarters, or Cardinal Points,27 viz.: East, West, North, and South, and are not to be called forth except it be upon Great Occasions; but are to be Invocated and Commanded to send such or such a Spirit that is under their Power and Rule, as is shown in the following Invocations or Conjurations. And the Chief Kings may be bound from 9 till 12 o'clock at Noon, and from 3 till Sunset; Marquises may be bound from 3 in the afternoon till 9 at Night, and from 9 at Night till Sunrise; Dukes may be bound from Sunrise till Noonday in Clear Weather; Prelates may be bound any hour of the Day; Knights may from Dawning of Day till Sunrise, or from 4 o'clock till Sunset;
Presidents may be bound any time, excepting Twilight, at Night, unless the King whom they are under be Invocated; and Counties or Earls any hour of the Day, so itbe in Woods, or in any other places whither men resort not, or where no noise is, etc.
So, my questions are:
What kind of impersonal force of nature cares about how many times you say a word in a particular language, what direction you're facing, the phase of the moon, what day of the week it is, how you hang a fucking horseshoe on your door and requires you to draw a man holding a scythe riding a dragon?
How can the people who believe magic is a natural force explain how "sports rituals" work?
How does a fucking planet, a star (a literal ball of plasma million lightyears away, possibly already gone), a number, a plant, a metal, a rock, etc. have a personality or meaning of its own?
What sort of natural phenomenon cares about arbitrary and subjective steps to follow?
Evidently, magic as a practice can only be explained in terms of anthropology, semiotics, culture and society. It reveals more about us than about magic itself; the value we give to numbers, the meaning we give to natural phenomena, the superstitious, irrational and ritualistic behaviors we resort to to control the world in which we live, how we relate to others, etc.
"
But how does magic work, then?" you might ask.
And my answer would be: "
Who cares?! Leave some things to the imagination. Whatever explanation people (players, readers, audience) come up with will satisfy them more than any particular explanation. Let them fill the gaps. Not knowing is part of the fun."
-------------------------------------------------------------
How "scientific magic" actually destroys fantasy.If magic is a "force of nature", there can be no fantasy. Everything (LOTR, D&D, Harry Potter, etc.) is a sci fi setting in which people aren't informed enough. With this 21st century mindset, fantasy can only be understood in terms of scientific knowledge. There can be no supernatural, only natural.
With this mindset, all magical beings become mere species. Dwarves, Elves, Goblins, Hobbits, Orcs; you name it. You end up having them together at an inn because why not? Why can't different species crowd the cities and live just like any person? Their only differences are physiological; there is nothing supernatural about any of them. The next step is adding furryfolk, elementals, genasi, aasimar, etc. because why not? After all, all magical creatures are allowed. Freakshitting is the result of this.
This is supply and demand all over again. If elves can sit next to you at the pub and drink ale alongside orcs, dwarves, and have normal lives, if there are hundreds of wizards per city with floating books and shiny crystals, schools of magic, priests casting divine spells (i.e. miracles), magic bards playing at courts, angelfolk flying around... then magic loses its appeal. It just becomes commonplace. There is no mystery and the special becomes mundane.
If there is only one magic sword, one big evil wizard, one fairy pond, an occassional miracle, etc. every instance becomes special.
From one of my games:
Witches (call them wizards or whatever) are born, for some unknown reason they can do magic, white magic harnesses the leftover preternatural radiation from the creation and other huge supernatural events (War in heaven between the angels where Lucifer and his minions are expelled?).
Black magic comes from pacts with demons who grant some power to the caster if certain rituals are done, it includes blood, torture and human sacrifice in it's rituals.
Priests don't cast spells nor do they need to prepare shit. They pray to God on the spot and depending on their virtue a miracle occurs (or not, God works in misterious ways after all).
Magic can't be detected by technology and it disrupts the more advanced tech, the more powerful the spell the strongest/far reaching the disruption.
Miracles have been recorded in real time, but no energy can be detected and no scientific explanation has been provided.
As an addendum: I totally agree with you, if it wasn't obvious.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 05:07:26 PM
"But how does magic work, then?" you might ask.
And my answer would be: "Who cares?! Leave some things to the imagination.
Well I guess that cuts out a third of the book detailing magic spells.
Yeah, nope, not really.
The point is - fantasy is MODERN phenomenon. It's written for people with MODERN mindsets, may they vary terribly.
And it was like that from beginning. Howard made his Cimmerians people lacking any real sense of mysiticsm as it fitted his utterly modern Nietzcheanic sentiments.
Tolkien re-written very Edda-like early setting to fit it more tightly with very rationalist and strict Catholic theology, and while from LOTR perspective various fenomena is often weakly explained, we know there was solid I'd even dare to say hard magic behind it, even if base on quite simple scheme. Lovecraft.. oh you know it.
And as various ideas were exchanged, rewamped and so on multiple times, you get many kinds of magic. Mostly as it's written by Murcians it's some sort of superpowers, but if you look around you gonna find all kind of shit.
And even in real life, in history magic was often aspiring to organised, quasi-scientific worldview, not some random superstitions. Books your quoting would be by contemporary occultists probably considered quite hard science. Animist magic was often strict procedures by dealing with spirits, half-engineering, half-diplomatic protocol. South and East Asia was all about harnessing and using life energy in very specific way and very specific techniques, that were not taken out of their asses to be mystical and shit, no they were chosen precisely because they seemed rational and well explained for those inventing them (though based on false principles). And then you have all symbolic/hermetic magic where symbols were treaten very seriously, and so on, and so on. So magic that is sort of like pulp science superpowers is perfectly within spirit of epoch.
In the end fantasy literature was very rarely used with genuine intention to show people some archaics way of thinking. Not even by unwoke authors.
And it also very rarely was used as a method of teaching about real magick, because well not many fantasy authors are fans of this. They want zany fantasy powers to power their settings that it.
And Gary Gygax made spells part of combat mechanic basically to get certain results and so on.
QuoteHow can the people who believe magic is a natural force explain how "sports rituals" work?
Well I'd guess people practicing let's say chi magic do not do sport rituals, unless we call gymnastics to open chakras in specific way "sport ritual".
Quote"But how does magic work, then?" you might ask.
And my answer would be: "Who cares?! Leave some things to the imagination. Whatever explanation people (players, readers, audience) come up with will satisfy them more than any particular explanation. Let them fill the gaps. Not knowing is part of the fun."
Well fine but problem is - that's precisely non-authentic stance. Real life practioners had usually quite fine theories and hypothesies about magic and how it works.
So sure if you write from perspective of peasants you can go all-superstition route (but then you can do it also with modern superhero magic - because folk won't get it anyway). But if you write about mages, or play them - well then better explain how it works dammit.
QuoteQuote
If magic is a "force of nature", there can be no fantasy. Everything (LOTR, D&D, Harry Potter, etc.) is a sci fi setting in which people aren't informed enough. With this 21st century mindset, fantasy can only be understood in terms of scientific knowledge. There can be no supernatural, only natural.
With this mindset, all magical beings become mere species. Dwarves, Elves, Goblins, Hobbits, Orcs; you name it.
Well of those HP definitely works in your favour - magic there works without any reason, rules and consistency it's unholy, unscientific brothel of a conception. Good pick.
LOTR... that's way more problematic. I mean Ainur spirits can be consider supernatural sure.. but all other elements. More like high-level-natural. Like hobbits are totally natural race within this setting - they are pygmy offshot of mankind, sharing the same fate, same basic metaphysics as big Men they came from. Give one a ring, and you could get very small Nazgul with time.
Also Elves... like they are Eden Humans, pre-Fall in general conception, so better, stronger, less corrupt, but their magic is in many ways super-science, they just get how Arda works much more intimately - but their deeds are perfectly within ruleset of this world. Even Ainur powers are explained in systematic way, and we know for instance why Melkor ended why he ended, and what consequences it brought to world. And so on, and so on. (Also by word of Tolkien - elves are basically the same species as humans).
[double to delete]
Sometimes the way people around here use tenses confounds me. Is destroying?
(https://s26162.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/post-apocalyptic-1920x1080-284864-media.jpg)
Is this in the same way that in the picture above the proliferation of nuclear weapons are destroying the earth?
When has it ever been different? There were articles about how to apply the logical consequences of Magic in Dragon in the 80s. Continual Light spells for streetlamps and the like.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 05:07:26 PMMagic should not a physical phenomenon
Magic is described the way it is in the real world because, in the real world magic doesn't actually work. Magic on our Earth cannot be a physical phenomenon because it doesn't exists.
As soon as any form of "magic" becomes demonstrable, it becomes a science. Regardless of how it's described. If magic worked in an RPG the same way it works in our world then no one would bother being a magic-user. Magic has to be repeatable and predictable or it won't be used.
QuoteIf there is only one magic sword, one big evil wizard, one fairy pond, an occassional miracle, etc. every instance becomes special.
No. I've heard this argument a thousand times wrt D&D and it just isn't true. It doesn't matter of there are only 4 elves in the entire universe, if all four of those elves are PCs, then elves are mundane. If the only magic sword in the game world is a +1 sword, it still only affects combat 5% of the time which is statistically insignificant.
For magic to be special it must have an affect on the game world that is significantly powerful and not replicate-able by mundane methods.
QuoteAs soon as any form of "magic" becomes demonstrable, it becomes a science. Regardless of how it's described.
No. Not really. I mean SCIENCE demands methodology and if magickal phenomena will be not possible to scrutinize under such methodology - because spirits of underworlds hate scientists, and it's their call what will happen, then you can have merely history of magickal occurences, but never science of magick - because you cannot experiment on that, not really. Maybe only to get conclusion it's not possible to examine it's scientificaly :P
QuoteIf magic worked in an RPG the same way it works in our world then no one would bother being a magic-user. Magic has to be repeatable and predictable or it won't be used.
Shitload of people using magick in history, despite very dubious and unreliable results beg to differ.
And in a world without modern ways of communication. Oh boy.
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 02, 2021, 06:44:35 PMNo. Not really. I mean SCIENCE demands methodology and if magickal phenomena will be not possible to scrutinize under such methodology - because spirits of underworlds hate scientists, and it's their call what will happen, then you can have merely history of magickal occurences, but never science of magick - because you cannot experiment on that, not really. Maybe only to get conclusion it's not possible to examine it's scientificaly
Shitload of people using magick in history, despite very dubious and unreliable results beg to differ.
People only used magic in history because they were either desperate or deluded. They couldn't apply scientific methods to it because nothing actually happened.
But you can't make an RPG where magic-users have a magic system that does nothing. Because games have rules and the rules would clearly show that spells had no actual effect.
While it is possible to design a magic system where the players seek to influence "spirits of the underworld", the actual powers and abilities of such spirits could themselves be studied through scientific methods. All you've done is added another layer between the user and the "forces of nature".
Fantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained. They may have followed certain rituals or patterns, but that does not make it science. You gave the example of hermetic magic; why is writting symbols important? What sort of natural force would care about how we drew a few symbols? How did the spell work before that language was developed? At what point exactly did it become valid? Why does a ball of hydrogen (in the case of Jupiter being a gas giant), minerals or ice have any effect on your personality?
None of the books I quoted were considered reliable, hard science at all. If it were, then you'd expect they had been taken seriously, to the point of casting massive spells to destroy enemy armies (which probably happened, though, but would have disproven them). Not all people believed in those things. Don't underestimate the people of the past; Greek philosophers already scoffed at what they called "superstition", and Romans openly questioned the existence of their gods.
You also mentioned chi as an example of how Easterners approached magic as a natural, flowing substance (something which does have its parallels in western esotericism; aether, orgon, astral fire, pneuma, animal magnetism, etc.), but take a look at feng shui. They literally believed that if the shape of a place resembled a particular animal, it could be auspicious; for example, if a group of mountains reminded them of a dragon, it was better to build a village on its tail so that the dragon would lead. This is far from naturalistic; it's sympathetic magic. Why would a substance care about how a group of people perceive a range of mountains to look? And how would an impersonal force shape the world in a way that those people deem "auspicious"? It's all really subjective, personal experience rather than an objective phenomenon that's outside of their own heads.
Anyway, don't tell me this animist is anything close to an engineer or a scientist:
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRr457z6O3xAEQRIBrAAYLwbHIRlSzdcskn5gMrMomq0saegCdBgpvn7x21_fVG8Bbcp8U&usqp=CAU)
Racists may see an animistic shaman, but I see an engineer, a philosopher and a doctor...
Just because it makes sense to them doesn't mean it is rationalistic. You see things through the eyes of a 21st century, educated Western man. Don't expect other cultures to follow your same notions of what's reasonable.
Apart from that, why did you put "[double to delete]"? What do you want to delete?
Here's another quote, this time from a tv show, that expresses how we should approach magic in fiction:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes, and other science facts (la la la), Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show, I should really just relax!!!!!!!
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 06:31:09 PM
Sometimes the way people around here use tenses confounds me. Is destroying?
(https://s26162.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/post-apocalyptic-1920x1080-284864-media.jpg)
Is this in the same way that in the picture above the proliferation of nuclear weapons are destroying the earth?
When has it ever been different? There were articles about how to apply the logical consequences of Magic in Dragon in the 80s. Continual Light spells for streetlamps and the like.
Continual light, at least in 3e, only becomes practical if you ignore the 100 gp ruby dust material component cost.
With the component cost you could run an oil lamp for 4000 hours (500 nights) for the same price and, if someone steals the lam, you can replace it for a few silver pieces and all the thief has is a few silver pieces of tin and oil to show for it instead of an easily portable item you could sell to an adventurer for enough gold to feed your family for a year.
The main reason magic items don't replace common technology, even in 3e/4E when you can build them yourself is they're so damnably expensive that leaving them anyplace unsecured is an invitation for someone to steal it and guards to guard esch continual light lamp are way more expensive than a commoner who goes around just before dusk filling and lighting ALL the town's lamps.
A noble or adventurer with a continual light lamp they have for personal use? Sure. They've already got guards protecting their person or are skilled at putting pointy things into places would-be thieves would find unpleasant so the risk their light will be taken is minimal. For everyone else, oil lamps are going to be much more economical to maintain.
3e wasn't around in the 80s.
And I don't remember if 1e or 2e had components costs. I don't care, and neither obviously did the writers in Dragon.
FFS. What is it with endless anal quibbling with examples?
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 02, 2021, 06:39:54 PM
Magic is described the way it is in the real world because, in the real world magic doesn't actually work. Magic on our Earth cannot be a physical phenomenon because it doesn't exists.
As soon as any form of "magic" becomes demonstrable, it becomes a science. Regardless of how it's described. If magic worked in an RPG the same way it works in our world then no one would bother being a magic-user. Magic has to be repeatable and predictable or it won't be used.
There are literally thousands of people who go to local healers or cunning folk for "bindings". It doesn't work anyway. People go because they believe in it. The rational, scientific view of testing things objectively is not universal. That's why you have so many girls who are totaly into astrology and call you "negative" if you don't buy it.
However, it would only take one successful spell to have someone hooked forever. Just once. Even if they failed time after time, only one spell would keep them coming back to keep trying and discover magic.
Quote
If the only magic sword in the game world is a +1 sword, it still only affects combat 5% of the time which is statistically insignificant.
For magic to be special it must have an affect on the game world that is significantly powerful and not replicate-able by mundane methods.
Stop thinking in terms of D&D mechanics. "A magical sword" doesn't mean "+1", whatever that may be. It means Excalibur. A sword that, for some reason, makes you invincible.
This is part of the same devaluation of magic and fantasy; whenever people hear "magic sword" they think of a mechanical benefit; +1, +fire, +ice, +50% poisoning, +20% critical hit, etc. rather than a mythical artifact or a relic.
I know it's a game, but think outside of mechanics. Mechanics come and go, but the essence is something else
Hi, SonTodoGato. I wrote an old essay on this a while ago that digs into a bunch of points. It's here.
https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained. They may have followed certain rituals or patterns, but that does not make it science.
A
mystery means that there is something to be investigated and explained. If there is nothing there - or if it's impossible to investigate, then it isn't a mystery -- it's just arbitrariness. For magic to be mysterious, then players need to be able to make progress in figuring it out. Here's how I put it in the essay:
QuoteRPG magic systems can roughly be divided up into "fixed spell" and "freeform" mechanics. Fixed spell systems are often highly mechanistic, where the operation of each spell is exactly calculable. Freeform mechanics, on the other hand, call for the GM to judge the difficulty of a spell based on little information as well as a large degree of randomness.
Neither of these, however, is "mysterious". A mystery means that no pattern is obviously visible -- but there is a hidden pattern. For a magic system to be mysterious, there must be hidden patterns which the magician character does not know at first, but which can with effort be discovered. In a game, this means that there must be either hidden variables or even hidden rules. An extreme of this would be that the GM secretly designs the magic system and only lets the player learn it a bit at a time (i.e. completely hidden rules). However, mystery can be injected by having hidden variables. i.e. How a PC's magic works depends on factors which are defined by GM, but which the player must deduce from other clues.
More generally, as to what magic "should" be, that's purely a matter of taste. Even though I wrote that essay, I'm not saying that all magic should be anti-scientific. I'm just presenting it as one option.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
None of the books I quoted were considered reliable, hard science at all. If it were, then you'd expect they had been taken seriously, to the point of casting massive spells to destroy enemy armies (which probably happened, though, but would have disproven them). Not all people believed in those things. Don't underestimate the people of the past; Greek philosophers already scoffed at what they called "superstition", and Romans openly questioned the existence of their gods.
There's a huge difference between historical magic like soothsaying and spirit quests; and the flashy spells of 20th century fantasy fiction. Either can work fine in a game, but they're mutually exclusive. I've had some fun games with historical-like magic, but I've also had many fun games emulating modern fantasy fiction.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PMFar from being scientific, magic was never really explained. They may have followed certain rituals or patterns, but that does not make it science.
I don't understand why you say that historical magic "was never really explained". Explained by whom? To whom? By your own example, putting a horseshoe a certain way caused luck to pour out. That's an explanation.
But the main issue is with how we use the world "science". The Mayan's studied the movement of the stars and planets with incredible scientific precision, because they were studying their world trying to noticed patterns in seemingly random events. But people today know what they were actually looking at and what those patterns actually represented. We all know that a trebuchet firing a flaming ball of pitch is a scientific event that can be accurately explained mathematically. A wizard firing a fireball, OTOH, is clearly magic because it can't happen in reality.
So the question is, how does an RPG, whose players all know the clear distinction between science and magic, create a magical system where the players don't really understand why events happen? I don't think it's actually possible.
I have a whole bunch of Brandon Sanderson novels on my shelf and in my Audible library that the OP would hate. Part of the fun of the whole Cosmere is having the overarching secrets that manifest themselves in the various magic systems revealed bit by bit over time. You read the earlier stuff, and you don't know the inner workings at all. There's not much, if anything, to even suggest that Elantris, Warbreaker, and the Mistborn trilogy are even connected at all. Then through subsequent writings you begin to see the connections, the common language used for certain terms, and how each magic system ties into his overarching "realmatic theory" that doesn't really begin to get explored in full until The Stormlight Archive. Q&As, if you keep up with them, also have bits and pieces that fill in some of the blanks. And the Arcanum Unbound collection of short stories did a good bit of tying everything together prior to The Stormlight Archive.
I think a lot of the OP would be fixed if the dude recognized that his preferences aren't(nor should they be) everyone's preferences. A "to me" or "for me" here or there would have gone a long way towards having me take them seriously. But no, having an underlying explanation that character can(and maybe do) understand to some degree doesn't ruin the magic or the fantasy . . . for me. (see how easy that was?)
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 07:07:04 PMStop thinking in terms of D&D mechanics. "A magical sword" doesn't mean "+1", whatever that may be. It means Excalibur. A sword that, for some reason, makes you invincible.
This is part of the same devaluation of magic and fantasy; whenever people hear "magic sword" they think of a mechanical benefit; +1, +fire, +ice, +50% poisoning, +20% critical hit, etc. rather than a mythical artifact or a relic.
I'm thinking in terms of RPG mechanics because it is a post in an RPG forum. A magical sword that makes the bearer invincible would be special. A +1 sword is not that special. However, if you are playing a game, you know whether the magical sword makes you invincible or not. There is no mystery or ambiguity. It either does or it doesn't. And the player will also know the first time the bearer of the sword gets hit in combat.
So, I'm not sure how your suggestions about magical can be reflected in an RPG setting the way you describe.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 05:07:26 PM
If magic is a "force of nature", there can be no fantasy. Everything (LOTR, D&D, Harry Potter, etc.) is a sci fi setting in which people aren't informed enough. With this 21st century mindset, fantasy can only be understood in terms of scientific knowledge. There can be no supernatural, only natural.
"Magic as a science" is nothing new. In "The Dreams in the Witch House" Lovecraft presents the "magic" of the Witch in the title as a form of "mathematics". Generally speaking, a lot (not all) of "horrifying creatures and insane spells" in Lovecraft tales are explained as the inadequate human mind "touching areas of the cosmos where the natural rules are different from those that we know. Lovecraft himself said a couple of times that many of his tales were to be considered sci-fi, or horror/sci-fi.
What "The Color Out of Space" does, for example, is totally unexplained, even by science.
"Scientific" magic can also mean what J.R.R.Tolkein referred to as "subcreation." The great Larry Niven also favored a logical approach to magic.
If magic must itself follow certain rules then it becomes more fun. In AD&D we see this: a magic user must spend a certain amount of time memorizing a spell, back in 1977 usually 15 minutes/spell level (so a level eight spell would take two hours). Once used the "ammunition" stored was forgotten. Spells had duration, firing time, range, area of effect, and could even be affected by environmental conditions (try casting a fireball underwater).
This was in part to balance out the level of power between magic and physical force. If a wizard could just wave his hand and wipe out an entire army, never running out of magic, then who would want to be a fighter? In my worlds where magic does exist there are places where it is much weaker or almost nullified so both magicians and magical creatures must be careful- a magical creature might have to bring in "stored" magic the way you would bring water in a canteen if in a desert.
But if magic was too clumsy and weak then what was the point? Unless only used for healing, purifying water, etc. it would have little use in battle.
What the real problem today is is the obsession over science, the new religion. NOTHING can be free of it, and its biggest proponents will conveniently go along with transexualism or the idea that men and women are essentially the same except for social constructs.
If one wants to go by that then "Star Trek" is fantasy: converting Captain Kirk to energy to beam him aboard would mean more energy than you'd need to blow half of America into orbit; how does a starship move so quickly without its crew being splattered all over the walls (pesky inertia); what about the doppler effect; how does a starship moving at warp speed fire its weapons without hitting itself (is this why "photon" torpedoes became glorified submarine torpedoes?); if evolution is true how is it that so many planets are so compatible with so many alien species- and how do all those amazingly humanish species manage to cross-breed- the chances of that happening aren't even worth considering unless everyone did have a common alien ancestor (which would be closer to Genesis than random evolution); oh yes and consider what an approaching faster-than-light vessel would seem to be doing; etc.
First consider that the magic in rpgs tends to be like technology because it is systematised.
To a large degree it needs to in order to be reliable and thus something that can be leveraged.
To try and make it feel less like technology you would need a kind of magic that works along some kind of poetic rules. Basically you want it's effectiveness to be based less of system mastery and more on the players creativity with the basic tools of magic.
Something like Ars Magica and Mage goes a little way in this direction by removing programmable spells but it's still very systematised.
Basically you need to work by metaphor.
Perhaps you could do something with elements and the four humours. In this case however you would not be using 'fire' to create fireballs, but instead to manipulate things that are metaphorically associated with fire ie you use your fire magic to inflame someone's passions.
The difficulty here though is that it's impossible to do without an awful lot of GM adjudication* and that removes a lot of the fun of traditional magic systems which are usually about giving explicit permission for certain things to happen.
*because if what you can do with magic is solidly and systematically defined than it just becomes technology again.
I disagree with SonTodoGato on a bunch of points, but I think it is possible for magic to be mysterious.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 02, 2021, 07:17:57 PM
I'm thinking in terms of RPG mechanics because it is a post in an RPG forum. A magical sword that makes the bearer invincible would be special. A +1 sword is not that special. However, if you are playing a game, you know whether the magical sword makes you invincible or not. There is no mystery or ambiguity. It either does or it doesn't. And the player will also know the first time the bearer of the sword gets hit in combat.
So, I'm not sure how your suggestions about magical can be reflected in an RPG setting the way you describe.
I think the simplest way to imagine this is by animism. For example, in my Vinland game, one of the most important functions of the prophetess was to speak to the spirits. Spirits could have significant effects on all the events that were happening, but only the prophetess (gydja) was skilled in contacting them. Even then, there could be things that she missed. So it's possible that a powerful spirit might grant invincibility to a warrior. But if so, then a lot of questions remain. What spirit granted it? Even if this is found out, then there are other questions - how long will it continue to grant it? What does it want in return?
If the spirits have patterns and act in semi-predictable ways, then this can be fun to play with, and connects play to the mystic background. (Much like having an unknown benefactor who gives them gold might be a non-magical mystery for the PCs.)
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 02, 2021, 06:44:35 PM
QuoteAs soon as any form of "magic" becomes demonstrable, it becomes a science. Regardless of how it's described.
No. Not really. I mean SCIENCE demands methodology and if magickal phenomena will be not possible to scrutinize under such methodology - because spirits of underworlds hate scientists, and it's their call what will happen, then you can have merely history of magickal occurences, but never science of magick - because you cannot experiment on that, not really. Maybe only to get conclusion it's not possible to examine it's scientificaly :P
QuoteIf magic worked in an RPG the same way it works in our world then no one would bother being a magic-user. Magic has to be repeatable and predictable or it won't be used.
Shitload of people using magick in history, despite very dubious and unreliable results beg to differ.
And in a world without modern ways of communication. Oh boy.
Is there any reason why the scientific method can not by applied to "magick"?
Terry Pratchet covered this quite nicely in his many Witches novels.
I like Eberron. I like a world where bound elementals pulling magical vehicles and magic guilds affect the world are facts of life. I also like that in Eberron one of those magical guilds has basically
made souls and nobody knows how. I like that there are things crawling beneath the surface and bubbles of demi-planes make the underground world way weirder than it has a right to be and that the regular tides might be bound to the slow breathing of an actual world wyrm more than any moons.
I also like the Warhammer Old World where humans are the default race, elves are purposefully and willfully mysterious, dwarves are insular and have mysterious runes, and magic is known, but even the people who know how it works know that it is dangerous as (literal) hell and should be watched carefully.
I like Lord of the Rings with elves that are just a step down from angels and can do ridiculous things like see over the horizon because they were around when the world was flat and they know how that should work, or who make camouflaging cloaks and when asked if they are magic shrug and say "I don't know what you mean by that."
I like GURPS Cabal (though running it is a different thing) and Ars Magica where magic is codified and understood, but there is still plenty of room for mystery and wonder and raw "WHAT THE FUCK" levels of pants shitting surprise.
Anyway, I don't necessarily disagree with what SonTodoGato is saying, but I don't think it is always true either. There are some good points there and those points highlight pitfalls that anybody should be aware of when they are putting together the lore for their setting. However, there is a certain degree of goalpost shifting that is possible to make all sorts of fantasy work.
QuoteWhat kind of impersonal force of nature cares about how many times you say a word in a particular language, what direction you're facing, the phase of the moon, what day of the week it is, how you hang a fucking horseshoe on your door and requires you to draw a man holding a scythe riding a dragon?
Impersonal forces of nature cannot care about anything, but they do respond to certain actions. Focusing sunlight can start a fire, electromagnetic fields can contain plasma and an ash wand with a fire opal set into it can direct flame magic. A setting can have a language that developed closer to the dawn of time vibrate more clearly with the music of the spheres. English won't get you far, Latin is a bit easier, but you really want something like Enochian or Adamic (or whatever is setting appropriate.)
However, even if magic itself is an impersonal force of nature, that doesn't mean there aren't impersonal magical forces running about getting their fingers in things. Spirits, demons, faeries, hell, other wizards can all be meddling in forces and contaminating your laboratory. Maybe necromancy was basically fine for a long long time, but suddenly Orcus rises in power and nobody can work necromancy without the demon prince of undeath poisoning that particular well water.
QuoteHow does a fucking planet, a star (a literal ball of plasma million lightyears away, possibly already gone), a number, a plant, a metal, a rock, etc. have a personality or meaning of its own?
Another quote I'm fond of is "Even in your world, that is only what stars are made of, not what they are." CS Lewis, Voyage of the Dawn Treader. The easy answer is likewise "They aren't like that here." But even if they don't have some sort of spirit or intelligence attached to them, it may be as simple as the energies connected with these things are a part of the physics of the world.
QuoteWhat sort of natural phenomenon cares about arbitrary and subjective steps to follow?
Those steps steps don't have to be either arbitrary or subjective. It can be as natural and objective as using chemistry and thermodynamics for advanced baking. Hedge wizards can only manage thaumaturgical bread and toast, but high mages can do crazy things with molecular gastronomancy.
QuoteIf magic is a "force of nature", there can be no fantasy.
This is where I categorically disagree. All it means is that one fantasy is different than another and tastes will vary. After all, even in our world wizards were trying to be scientists. They were wrong (arguably completely and utterly wrong) about a lot of things, but they WANTED it to be science. If it was as real as they were acting like it was, it could have easily behaved in laboratory conditions. Unless interference from entities from beyond the world was in play back then... /spooky tension chord.
QuoteThis is supply and demand all over again. If elves can sit next to you at the pub and drink ale alongside orcs, dwarves, and have normal lives, if there are hundreds of wizards per city with floating books and shiny crystals, schools of magic, priests casting divine spells (i.e. miracles), magic bards playing at courts, angelfolk flying around... then magic loses its appeal. It just becomes commonplace. There is no mystery and the special becomes mundane.
You can make the same argument about advanced technology and the existence of aliens making sci-fi boring. I won't ask if you do or not, because that is a matter of taste and if you don't like it, no amount of sugar sprinkled on the top is going to make you want to choke it down. Some people only want a hard sci-fi setting in the solar system at most and some people aren't happy without FTL.
It just means that the wonder, mystery, and the special are coming from different places is all.
"The world, as we know it, can be considered a hologram constructed from 36 component images. These images represent mystical energies of various natures, frequencies, and indexes of perceptibility. The Cabal has named these images, and hence their energies, the decans. Each decan governs (or
creates, or energizes, or empowers) a certain type of experience or existence. Everything mortal humans can sense about the world derives from the interplay of these magical, decanic forces, their relative proportions determining the type of matter or energy perceived. Magical fields (which is to say, all energies) emanate from the Prime Mover, the Source of All Energy and Being within the Realm of Atziluth, what religious people term the Godhead. As the energies flow out from this Realm, they attenuate and mix, becoming more difficult to isolate, detect, or use by any but specialists or those specifically attuned to the decans. At their farthest extension, the magical energies have blended and damped down so completely that they actually become common matter. By first seeing, and then drawing upon, the powers of the decans, sorcerers can alter reality, redesign portions of the mundane hologram, transfer energies and concepts without crossing the intervening space or time – in short, they can do magic." - Hite, GURPS Cabal
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science." Foglio, Girl Genius
"It's still magic even if you know how it's done." -Pratchett, Hat Full of Sky
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
QuotePeople only used magic in history because they were either desperate or deluded. They couldn't apply scientific methods to it because nothing actually happened.
Yeah, keep being historically deluded yourself.
QuoteBut you can't make an RPG where magic-users have a magic system that does nothing. Because games have rules and the rules would clearly show that spells had no actual effect.
But you can make RPG where magic-users have no easily discernable effects and stance over them will be still simmilar to modern world. Like all subtle probabilty warping.
Players will know it works, because character sheets. World they play in... not so much.
QuoteWhile it is possible to design a magic system where the players seek to influence "spirits of the underworld", the actual powers and abilities of such spirits could themselves be studied through scientific methods. All you've done is added another layer between the user and the "forces of nature".
No it wouldn't if spirits would actively shun such students. Like hard-wired magic won't work if you try scrutinize it.
Only enlightened shaman will see.
QuoteFantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Those are all inspirations for fantasy. It does not change simple fact that fantasy is young genre made in modern times, by people with mostly somehow modern perspectives (always moderns compared those truly ancient times). And with rare exceptions those good old times were used as cool scenery and plot devices and that's it.
QuoteDon't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Well occultists would disagree. They have clear notions HOW IT WORKS. Either by spirit world, manipulation of chi, or creating some combinations of symbols reflecting Higher Reality. They at least thought they knew, not just recipe but inner works.
QuoteFar from being scientific, magic was never really explained. They may have followed certain rituals or patterns, but that does not make it science. You gave the example of hermetic magic; why is writting symbols important? What sort of natural force would care about how we drew a few symbols? How did the spell work before that language was developed? At what point exactly did it become valid? Why does a ball of hydrogen (in the case of Jupiter being a gas giant), minerals or ice have any effect on your personality?
Because for them NATURAL world was something way bigger than for modern scientists.
Of course it's not science as science is merely 200 years old. But in many ways it's one of protosciences.
What sort of natural force would care - well spirits of underworld for instance :P
QuoteDon't underestimate the people of the past; Greek philosophers already scoffed at what they called "superstition", and Romans openly questioned the existence of their gods.
Sure but people scoffing superstitions could very well dabble in occult.
Chinese philosopher could treat belief in wood spirits as bollocks, why hold belief in chakras in high regard.
QuoteAnyway, don't tell me this animist is anything close to an engineer or a scientist:
For it's time... sure it is.
Also TBH this modern "scientific" energy magic also is usually not something scientific but some random superpower, accessible only to talented chosen ones, which also makes any scientific research of it extremely hard.
QuoteThis is far from naturalistic; it's sympathetic magic. Why would a substance care about how a group of people perceive a range of mountains to look? And how would an impersonal force shape the world in a way that those people deem "auspicious"? It's all really subjective, personal experience rather than an objective phenomenon that's outside of their own heads.
You asume for some reason natural have to be impersonal.
QuoteApart from that, why did you put "[double to delete]"? What do you want to delete?
I doubled post while editing it.
QuoteHere's another quote, this time from a tv show, that expresses how we should approach magic in fiction:
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes, and other science facts (la la la), Just repeat to yourself "It's just a show, I should really just relax!!!!!!!
Now that's terribly boring, MCU level crap :P
Give me zany occult theories about how mathematical interactions with platonic realms via geometric and sympathetic symbols can re-write reality and create Immortal Peanut Liches, dammit :P
QuoteThis is part of the same devaluation of magic and fantasy; whenever people hear "magic sword" they think of a mechanical benefit; +1, +fire, +ice, +50% poisoning, +20% critical hit, etc. rather than a mythical artifact or a relic.
I know it's a game, but think outside of mechanics. Mechanics come and go, but the essence is something else
The essence of D&D fantasy is - this sword is objectively burning and oozing delicious tetradoxine at once.
QuoteThere's a huge difference between historical magic like soothsaying and spirit quests; and the flashy spells of 20th century fantasy fiction. Either can work fine in a game, but they're mutually exclusive. I've had some fun games with historical-like magic, but I've also had many fun games emulating modern fantasy fiction.
I'd say they are not mutually exclusive.
Quoteif evolution is true how is it that so many planets are so compatible with so many alien species
For ST sake I would say - lore implies humanoid races are result of some Elder Race actions and they are designed to be compatible.
Quotehow does a starship moving at warp speed fire its weapons without hitting itself (is this why "photon" torpedoes became glorified submarine torpedoes?)
Isn't warp sort of twisted space-time mass that would influence relative speed of light by twisting space itself?
That's nice. What if I want to play a game where magic is commonplace, like Eberon? Am I shit out of luck? I don't want to risk a visit from the Fun Police.
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 07:53:24 PM
I disagree with SonTodoGato on a bunch of points, but I think it is possible for magic to be mysterious.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 02, 2021, 07:17:57 PM
I'm thinking in terms of RPG mechanics because it is a post in an RPG forum. A magical sword that makes the bearer invincible would be special. A +1 sword is not that special. However, if you are playing a game, you know whether the magical sword makes you invincible or not. There is no mystery or ambiguity. It either does or it doesn't. And the player will also know the first time the bearer of the sword gets hit in combat.
So, I'm not sure how your suggestions about magical can be reflected in an RPG setting the way you describe.
I think the simplest way to imagine this is by animism. For example, in my Vinland game, one of the most important functions of the prophetess was to speak to the spirits. Spirits could have significant effects on all the events that were happening, but only the prophetess (gydja) was skilled in contacting them. Even then, there could be things that she missed. So it's possible that a powerful spirit might grant invincibility to a warrior. But if so, then a lot of questions remain. What spirit granted it? Even if this is found out, then there are other questions - how long will it continue to grant it? What does it want in return?
If the spirits have patterns and act in semi-predictable ways, then this can be fun to play with, and connects play to the mystic background. (Much like having an unknown benefactor who gives them gold might be a non-magical mystery for the PCs.)
This is a good approach. Magic here is still being negotiated with the GM, rather than defined by strict rules, but it's negotiated in a way that is already a part of the game and is negotiated in character rather than the player and the GM wrangling about whether a certain effect can happen.
Quote
I think the simplest way to imagine this is by animism. For example, in my Vinland game, one of the most important functions of the prophetess was to speak to the spirits. Spirits could have significant effects on all the events that were happening, but only the prophetess (gydja) was skilled in contacting them. Even then, there could be things that she missed. So it's possible that a powerful spirit might grant invincibility to a warrior. But if so, then a lot of questions remain. What spirit granted it? Even if this is found out, then there are other questions - how long will it continue to grant it? What does it want in return?
AWESOME.
QuoteIs there any reason why the scientific method can not by applied to "magick"?
Terry Pratchet covered this quite nicely in his many Witches novels.
Nah, Witches of Pratchett were sometimes using proto-science instead magick. But when they did real magick it was in no way scientific in a common sense.
But overall why not... well that depends of magick type - I guess all vitalist theories can be easily falsified. But it's hard to falsify existence of spirits from different dimension only shamans can reach through astral travel - and spirits that may not look fondly upon being experimented on.
Sort of in a way why humane sciences are often half-assed methodically - because to do it as hard science you'd need a lot of experiments on human that are considered immoral and illegal.
But with North Korea like state you could try - with spirits from spirit world you cannot influence in rigid manner - no sorry. Won't work. Simple limits of methodology - only things you can experiment on are really under power of scientific method.
QuoteI like Lord of the Rings with elves that are just a step down from angels
Not really. They are step up from humans. The metaphysical chasm between Children of Eru and Ainurs is vast, while Children of Eru are basically one species.
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 08:09:21 PM
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
This is assuming that a rain dance works the same way as chemistry. But what if a rain dance instead works like how dancing works to attract a date? In that case, it's not something where the identical moves always have the identical results. A powerful magician might be like Brad Pitt and always be able to get a date, but it's still the case that it's not like laboratory chemistry - but instead like personal chemistry.
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 08:37:11 PM
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 08:09:21 PM
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
This is assuming that a rain dance works the same way as chemistry. But what if a rain dance instead works like how dancing works to attract a date? In that case, it's not something where the identical moves always have the identical results. A powerful magician might be like Brad Pitt and always be able to get a date, but it's still the case that it's not like laboratory chemistry - but instead like personal chemistry.
Greetings!
Very true, Jhkim. And in addition, yeah, some men don't need to have dance skills at all. They can just *stand there* and look at a woman, or pass by her and simply say "Hi there".
The variables involved with the individual man, and the particular woman--yeah. Limitless. Of course, some particular combinations get magical relationship going *fast*--while with a different woman, inspires merely a shrug of indifference. It can be interesting to view Magic in some similar ways. There are general principles that are time-tested and very helpful, and work most of the time, with lots of different people--and yet, there is always a significant degree of uncertainty and unpredictability.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 08:37:11 PM
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 08:09:21 PM
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
This is assuming that a rain dance works the same way as chemistry. But what if a rain dance instead works like how dancing works to attract a date? In that case, it's not something where the identical moves always have the identical results. A powerful magician might be like Brad Pitt and always be able to get a date, but it's still the case that it's not like laboratory chemistry - but instead like personal chemistry.
Sort of like the "science" of predicting the weather?
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 02, 2021, 08:20:17 PM
QuoteIs there any reason why the scientific method can not by applied to "magick"?
Terry Pratchet covered this quite nicely in his many Witches novels.
Nah, Witches of Pratchett were sometimes using proto-science instead magick. But when they did real magick it was in no way scientific in a common sense.
Thats not true at all. How do their broomsticks fly using "proto-science"?
How do they possess a swarm of bees using "proto-science"?
QuoteBut overall why not... well that depends of magick type - I guess all vitalist theories can be easily falsified. But it's hard to falsify existence of spirits from different dimension only shamans can reach through astral travel - and spirits that may not look fondly upon being experimented on.
Wizards certainly applied scientific method to magic, for example The Rite of AshkEnte.
QuoteSort of in a way why humane sciences are often half-assed methodically - because to do it as hard science you'd need a lot of experiments on human that are considered immoral and illegal.
But with North Korea like state you could try - with spirits from spirit world you cannot influence in rigid manner - no sorry. Won't work. Simple limits of methodology - only things you can experiment on are really under power of scientific method.
Is it that science can not be applied to human sciences, or that a certain group of people dont like it when science gets applied to human science?
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 08:37:11 PM
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 08:09:21 PM
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
This is assuming that a rain dance works the same way as chemistry. But what if a rain dance instead works like how dancing works to attract a date? In that case, it's not something where the identical moves always have the identical results. A powerful magician might be like Brad Pitt and always be able to get a date, but it's still the case that it's not like laboratory chemistry - but instead like personal chemistry.
Its funny how money works like magic.
Quote from: Shasarak on August 02, 2021, 08:59:32 PM
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 08:37:11 PM
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 08:09:21 PM
The thing is, magic itself is expected to have certain desired results. A rain dance is expected to bring rain, for example. This means you have to do certain things in a certain way to achieve the desired results- same as chemistry or such. In AD&D it's the same thing: certain moves, words, materials...to cast that fireball.
What would be "mysterious" about magic is WHY doing these things would work. That could remain unknown. A cleric may be able to do things because of spells given by deities, but what if one cannot understand deities or their alien motives?
This is assuming that a rain dance works the same way as chemistry. But what if a rain dance instead works like how dancing works to attract a date? In that case, it's not something where the identical moves always have the identical results. A powerful magician might be like Brad Pitt and always be able to get a date, but it's still the case that it's not like laboratory chemistry - but instead like personal chemistry.
Its funny how money works like magic.
Money is magic. So is music.
And Time.
I think you need some kind of way of differentiating technology from not technology.
One method might be can you apply the scientific method to it.
In the case of D&D magic this is plainly the case.
If I have a Wall of Iron spell I can test it out using the scientific principles. Does it weigh anything? Can I conjure it mid-air or only on a solid surface? Is it phyiscal or can you make a save to walk through it? Some of these things may require a GM ruling, but the expectation is that the GM ruling should be consistent. If the GM ruled last session that I can make a Wall or Iron appear in the air and fall to the ground I should be able to take advantage of that this session.
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 09:11:56 PM
I think you need some kind of way of differentiating technology from not technology.
One method might be can you apply the scientific method to it.
In the case of D&D magic this is plainly the case.
If I have a Wall of Iron spell I can test it out using the scientific principles. Does it weigh anything? Can I conjure it mid-air or only on a solid surface? Is it phyiscal or can you make a save to walk through it? Some of these things may require a GM ruling, but the expectation is that the GM ruling should be consistent. If the GM ruled last session that I can make a Wall or Iron appear in the air and fall to the ground I should be able to take advantage of that this session.
But can you explain it using naturalistic explanations only?
I mean we can explain how and why a new species appears, why this hummingbird has a long curved beak while that other hummingbird has a shorter straight one by looking at the plants they extract nectar from.
Darwin famously predicted a moth/butterfly would be found with a proboscis with a certain lenght based on a flower.
So now take a piece of fur and a piece of quartz and explain naturalistically how those produce a Lightning bolt X Feet away of Y feet width and Z feet length.
What is the inherent mechanic that makes the wizard be able to throw lightning bolts from his finger tips?
Quote from: GeekyBugle on August 02, 2021, 09:19:19 PM
So now take a piece of fur and a piece of quartz and explain naturalistically how those produce a Lightning bolt X Feet away of Y feet width and Z feet length.
What is the inherent mechanic that makes the wizard be able to throw lightning bolts from his finger tips?
Being able to answer this is probably why wizards are an extra 1d6 years older than fighters at level one*. ;)
Quote from: GeekyBugle on August 02, 2021, 09:19:19 PM
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 09:11:56 PM
I think you need some kind of way of differentiating technology from not technology.
One method might be can you apply the scientific method to it.
In the case of D&D magic this is plainly the case.
If I have a Wall of Iron spell I can test it out using the scientific principles. Does it weigh anything? Can I conjure it mid-air or only on a solid surface? Is it phyiscal or can you make a save to walk through it? Some of these things may require a GM ruling, but the expectation is that the GM ruling should be consistent. If the GM ruled last session that I can make a Wall or Iron appear in the air and fall to the ground I should be able to take advantage of that this session.
But can you explain it using naturalistic explanations only?
I mean we can explain how and why a new species appears, why this hummingbird has a long curved beak while that other hummingbird has a shorter straight one by looking at the plants they extract nectar from.
Darwin famously predicted a moth/butterfly would be found with a proboscis with a certain lenght based on a flower.
So now take a piece of fur and a piece of quartz and explain naturalistically how those produce a Lightning bolt X Feet away of Y feet width and Z feet length.
What is the inherent mechanic that makes the wizard be able to throw lightning bolts from his finger tips?
I don't think that's the distinction that matters, and least for the purpose of discussing whether something feels magical.
Otherwise there's nothing to discuss here at all. If it's outside the laws of science it's magic and that's all there is to it.
But it's worth stopping and considering how much magic in game systems and novels tends to piggyback on modern scientific understanding. D&D is actually not even close to being the worst here. Think of all those systems with 'mana' ie you need an energy system to perform feats of magic (because that seems like common sense in the scientific age).
But conversely, what's a better design for making a flying ship? Is aerodynamics the prime consideration or should it be kitted out like a sailing ship because magical flight works via sympathetic magic and therefore you need to treat sailing through the sky as metaphorically linked to sailing through the sea, so you need a ship. A house would sink in the ocean, so it's a lot harder to make it fly with magic - the metaphor doesn't work.
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 09:48:27 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle on August 02, 2021, 09:19:19 PM
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 09:11:56 PM
I think you need some kind of way of differentiating technology from not technology.
One method might be can you apply the scientific method to it.
In the case of D&D magic this is plainly the case.
If I have a Wall of Iron spell I can test it out using the scientific principles. Does it weigh anything? Can I conjure it mid-air or only on a solid surface? Is it phyiscal or can you make a save to walk through it? Some of these things may require a GM ruling, but the expectation is that the GM ruling should be consistent. If the GM ruled last session that I can make a Wall or Iron appear in the air and fall to the ground I should be able to take advantage of that this session.
But can you explain it using naturalistic explanations only?
I mean we can explain how and why a new species appears, why this hummingbird has a long curved beak while that other hummingbird has a shorter straight one by looking at the plants they extract nectar from.
Darwin famously predicted a moth/butterfly would be found with a proboscis with a certain lenght based on a flower.
So now take a piece of fur and a piece of quartz and explain naturalistically how those produce a Lightning bolt X Feet away of Y feet width and Z feet length.
What is the inherent mechanic that makes the wizard be able to throw lightning bolts from his finger tips?
I don't think that's the distinction that matters, and least for the purpose of discussing whether something feels magical.
Otherwise there's nothing to discuss here at all. If it's outside the laws of science it's magic and that's all there is to it.
But it's worth stopping and considering how much magic in game systems and novels tends to piggyback on modern scientific understanding. D&D is actually not even close to being the worst here. Think of all those systems with 'mana' ie you need an energy system to perform feats of magic (because that seems like common sense in the scientific age).
But conversely, what's a better design for making a flying ship? Is aerodynamics the prime consideration or should it be kitted out like a sailing ship because magical flight works via sympathetic magic and therefore you need to treat sailing through the sky as metaphorically linked to sailing through the sea, so you need a ship. A house would sink in the ocean, so it's a lot harder to make it fly with magic - the metaphor doesn't work.
If you ask me the less explanation the better, the weirdest the better too.
So I'm all for flying ships a la Flying Dutchman.
Conversely some spells on D&D seem superfluos IMHO, and should be collapsed into a single spell that the caster can make more powerful as he grows in power.
Then again I don't use vancian magic but my own points based magic system.
Why does magic demand details but not real life?
How many people know how a plasma-screen television works?
Quote from: GriswaldTerrastone on August 02, 2021, 10:35:24 PM
Why does magic demand details but not real life?
How many people know how a plasma-screen television works?
Thats silly, you cant know how a plasma-screen television works, you can only say the magic words, do the magic dance and plug it into the magic wall socket before you can watch your magic programs.
I think the point is taken - not knowing how something works doesn't make it magic. Nor does it really make something feel like magic.
Hell, if someone doesn't know that being bitten by a radioactive spider can't give you spider powers, then I guess it's possible they might think Spiderman is halfway scientifically plausible.
It's because we know it's not that we recognise that it's magic. And if we know something about magic we may even recognise there's an element of sympathetic magic there.
Magic is rooted in the concept of secret, hidden knowledge.
If I dropped a small piece of a certain mineral into a container of water, and you witnessed a violent chemical reaction in the water; you might very well assume that it was sorcery.
If you had never seen a cell phone before, and I took your photo and showed it to you; you might very well assume that it was sorcery.
"Magic" is just a placeholder word for anything someone else knows how to do that you don't.
Quote from: Jam The MF on August 02, 2021, 11:42:43 PM
Magic is rooted in the concept of secret, hidden knowledge.
If I dropped a small piece of a certain mineral into a container of water, and you witnessed a violent chemical reaction in the water; you might very well assume that it was sorcery.
If you had never seen a cell phone before, and I took your photo and showed it to you; you might very well assume that it was sorcery.
Well I wouldn't obviously. As I live under a scientific paradigm, I would assume it fit within my existing frame of knowledge just in some way I am not currently aware of.
And a medieval person would fit it into their existing frame of knowledge and perhaps assume it was magic
and bring with them certain assumptions of what magic is.Magic is not a word that means "anything outside of my current experience".
If you're mobile phone gets you tried for witchcraft it's not because the witness doesn't know what you are doing but because they think they do.
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 11:40:41 PM
I think the point is taken - not knowing how something works doesn't make it magic. Nor does it really make something feel like magic.
Feels like magic seems like such a millennial conceit.
Maybe this type of magic would work better in a story game which does not use mechanics, just the player or gm describing the cool things that their magic does.
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 11:40:41 PM
I think the point is taken - not knowing how something works doesn't make it magic. Nor does it really make something feel like magic.
Feels like magic seems like such a millennial conceit.
Oh how boring!
I'm not sure why this topic is confusing to anyone.
"Magic" as a phenomenon is precisely just that: a phenomenon. In secondary worlds (and I suppose in reality if you believe in it) that phenomenon is whatever that exists outside of what is explainable relative to the capacity of the witness to it.
The capacity to explain it, and more to the point - to harness it and use it with predictable results - is the "methodology" where cultures will interact with those phenomenon.
The rules of the "what" and the "how" is precisely up to the designer to emphasize in gameplay (or in reality - one would assume its based on the efficacy of the effect you're trying to pull... or at least convince people of the effect).
If the phenomenon of magic exists - and it can be perceived, manipulated, and expanded upon, then the method could be literally anything that the game requires to be meaningful in play. It could be Witchdoctors that have learned they can talk to spirits after imbibing certain herbs via specific methods that allow them to coax the spirits to produce effects in the real world. It could be that their perceptions of their own practices are colored only by their cognitive biases about how the world works, and it might be something else. But for the purposes of their culture, it need never go further.
Meanwhile a magician that practices a more Hermetic and systemic approach, might take those same herbs and tidbit of a method, and process the experience that it opens their mind to the ephemera of a parallel reality where the forces the Witchdoctor perceives as "spirits" are non-sentient coalescent energies that a psychically active, and it's the intent of the Witchdoctor that moves those energies into action, whose byproducts produce those effects. The Hermetic magician might identify those energies as byproducts of higher-powers (beings) that are ambient in this parallel dimension, and they know their Divine Formulae that can harness that energy to produce similar, or more refined effects?
Take it to the next level. A rogue scientist produces a helmet that produces via some standard process used in a non-standard way - electromagnets that force the brain to go into a state where the psychoactive nature of these energies becomes available to him via his Mad Science. There might be *specifics* denied to each and any of these other three methods, but the underlying phenomenon remains the same.
The KEY here is what is the nested higher-truth . It *MAY* not matter. Just like savages living in the jungle don't give a flying shit about Cryptocurrency prices, they do care about whether their ailing cousin has bad spirits around around him for doing some dastardly shit. And thus he uses his methodology to interact with these spirits to give his fuck-up cousin some good luck. The Hermetic Mage might believe these energies come from higher/lower beings and through the use of their more systemic approach of Divine Mathematics and force of will, focus those energies to/away from the bad cousin with possibly other options because of their mere belief/understanding of the larger picture (which MAY not be true), but because they believe it that much more, it may open up other possibilities the Witchdoctor may not even *care* to know because other concerns (taboos, etc. that could have developed as a cultural artifact in their practices). The Scientist with a Psychohelmet may not believe in *any* of the spiritual side of the phenomenon, and simply treat it as a brute-force wholesale manipulation of "strange energies" that create distortions in probability fields with increasing/decreasing predictable results.
The largest point being that you as a designer might know that ALL of these things are true. Because "REALITY" is Objective only to Lesser Entities. The implication being that Greater Entities literally define "REALITY", *Subjectively*. The nested truth about Magic becomes that Gods are so powerful their subjectivity is our OBJECTIVE reality. This means everyone gets a piece of it wrong. Their methodologies - be it shamanism, animism, Hermetic Magic, Ancestor Worship, Weird Science - are all flawed. But they work to the degree that you as the designer allow them.
This means your systems for the game should reflect that in play. Now this was just a simple example. The point being that if you understand the metaphysics of what "magic" is relative to whatever you want to say is "not magic", then it's a simple matter of defining the "hows" and "ways" people have access to it. Then you have to delineate the cultural repercussions of those dynamics both as a practitioner and how it impacts the world.
D&D has for a long time done a shitty job of this. Now it's worse than ever, mainly because as its presented there is little depth to it, and the assumptions are the system = the game. They don't care much for setting-depth at least as much as in older editions. I highly recommend people give the 1e Greybox Forgotten Realms a good read. It still is head and shoulders over most modern fantasy settings - even those doing the D&D fantasy schtick.
In terms of ruining "fantasy" - ehh... Very few authors were ever "great" at wheedling out the metaphysics of magic to my tastes. For gaming purposes "magic" needs to be fun and should be measured by the conceits of what the setting demands. Nothing more.
If you make a serious setting where Magic is a big deal, then your setting should reflect that along with the reality of what it means to wield that knowledge. And it has to be fun, cool and/or scary/awe inspiring if it's a big deal. I always thought Eberron made magic feel like a Wal-Mart sale *because* of the system mechanics. I never believed in the world they presented because the mechanics of 3.x D&D were atrocious for supporting those conceits.
Just my coppers.
Gygax based D&D on Modernist fantasy - Vance, Moorcock, Howard, Lovecraft et al - so I'd say 'scientific' 'inauthentic' magic is very Old School. :P
Greg Stafford was about the first RPG author to get away from this trope with Runequest's more authentic-feeling approach.
Quote from: S'mon on August 03, 2021, 07:05:40 AMGreg Stafford was about the first RPG author to get away from this trope with Runequest's more authentic-feeling approach.
Greg Stafford also made his game world entirely unrealistic. It was a flat earth model, literally a lozenge-shaped landmass floating in an endless sea. Most fantasy campaigns are set on planets orbiting suns with their own moons. The same details you'd find in a sci-fi setting. By making the world not a realistic planet, it allowed Glorantha to feel more magical and strange (at least at first).
Quote from: tenbones on August 03, 2021, 01:48:21 AM
I'm not sure why this topic is confusing to anyone.
.....
Just my coppers.
Good post, and I agree for the most part. What I will add that is at this point there is not shortage of mechanics to realize how one view how magic ought to be. Random spell effect, mana fuels spells, spells are memorized, spells have no theoretical upper limit. Spell take a long time to cast. Spells are subtle in their effects. Spells are loud, noisy and spectaculars.
Lots of dials and lots of way to twist them. And lots of way to represent these ideas using the mechanics of a game.
The foundation in my mind is to visualize what you want and describe it as if you were there witnessing magic happen.
Then take that and decide how that influences how the inhabitants behave. Which will form the culture that surrounds the use and knowledge of magic. And that will give you what you need in order to roleplay what happens when your magic is involved.
Unlike combat which often have to grounded in something specific (life or a work/genre of fiction) magic can be completely made up. The main failure being if how you roleplay the NPCs and present the setting doesn't make sense given what you describe about magic. Note this is not the same as logical. Also it may vary between individuals and groups.
So that my silver penny (1d) worth.
From a practical perspective, I think that the mix of magic, role playing, and game mechanics has a lot of compromises. In that context, the key to me is that if you want magic to seem as magical as it can within those limits, then it needs multiple factors underlying it--some of which will always be unknowable to the characters.
This allows the characters to have somewhat reproducible magic based on the factors they do understand or partially understand. Then there are other aspects that the players may get eventually (applying science, or more accurately logic) but are outside the purview of the characters. Ideally, there are a handful of setting factors or twists to factors that the players are never told by the GM and are extremely difficult to discover from the limited interaction that the players have with the world. Or barring that, some random rolls in the equation for how it sometimes doesn't work no matter how well you do it.
Even in Vancian magic, there is this division. The Dying Earth is in a decline in multiple ways, with the wizards' reliable magic happening by following standard formulas that are a meager shell of what was in the far past. It's almost a cargo cult, as the wizards have indulged themselves so much and squabbled so much that they've gotten lazy about learning the theories. That is, in D&D it is not so much that spells are reliable that is the problem as it is that nearly all the magic is done with spells.
Brandon Sanderson has done a lot of thinking and writing on this topic that is worth reading. Here's a link to the best-known essay on the topic: https://www.brandonsanderson.com/sandersons-first-law/
I'll adopt his terms of "hard" (scientific) magic and "soft" (unscientific) magic for my comments. I'll say first off that I enjoy both, though they provide different types of experiences. Hard magic definitely has a lot to recommend for it in an RPG. To make sound tactical decisions in a game one needs to have rules to understand how abilities work, and rules ==> hard magic. Soft magic has awe, wonder, mystery, and historical authenticity going for it, which are all good. Soft magic is great in books but much harder to pull off in games. I made a run at it my current game, where one of the several methods of magic is shamanism. The ability to find, summon, and communicate with spirits is defined in the hard magic method, and spirits each have a lot of well defined abilities, which is also hard. But the spirits are NPCs, and anything the shaman wants to do must be negotiated, which moves it to the softer side. Yes, Grizzt the fires spirit is able to burn down that door for you, but you forgot to bring incense and he's irritated that you summoned him in a rainstorm and are wearing blue, so he might refuse entirely or he might demand a lot of mana to get the job done. As you learn about the spirits you have access to, things get easier.
I think Sanderson Essay amounts to two things
1) Think about what you are doing with magic and be consistent with that idea.
2) Don't rely on Deus ex Machina. Which just good all around good advice.
His distinction on Hard and Soft magic reflect his personal bias. It also up, down, strange, charmed, because it about the subjective experience of what fun and interesting.
Fantasy Magic is made up. Have fun and don't sweat the details. Your enemy is tedium and boredom. Focus on what fun and interesting for you and your group.
Unless you are doing a historical or contemporary setting. In those cases you have references that you can use as a starting point.
What more useful are answer to questions like "If I want my system of magic to be X, what are my option both descriptively and for mechanics." For example one wants an unpredictable system of magic I recommend getting a copy of the DCC RPG. I would also look to how open ended die rolls are implemented in different system. Also come up with a list of what likely to work with magic, what somewhat likely, and was is down right rare but known to happen. Then see which system of open ended rolls work best that reflect the feel of unpredictability, you want to go for.
Or what can I do an existing well established system of magic like D&D magic that doesn't utterly break compatibility, forces you to rewrite every spell, or spins off into its own thing.
And so on.
Quote from: tenbones on August 03, 2021, 01:48:21 AM
I'm not sure why this topic is confusing to anyone.
If they were not confused before....
I like to use historical conceptions of magic as reference points since they just feel more magical compared to modern magic systems that people just made up to seem cool rather than because they believed it to be real.
That is, I take inspiration from people who believe(d) magic was real as opposed to those who knowingly wrote fiction.
Alchemy, for example, is just as much spirituality and philosophy as it is proto-chemistry. The goal of alchemy isn't just to purify lead into gold, but to purify the soul.
This is difficult to make exciting in modern, which is why fantasy writers treat magic as superpowers.
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 07:07:17 PM
Hi, SonTodoGato. I wrote an old essay on this a while ago that digs into a bunch of points. It's here.
https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html
There's a huge difference between historical magic like soothsaying and spirit quests; and the flashy spells of 20th century fantasy fiction. Either can work fine in a game, but they're mutually exclusive. I've had some fun games with historical-like magic, but I've also had many fun games emulating modern fantasy fiction.
I loved your article. Nice to know the person who wrote it. I agree with many points of it, and think people would learn a lot from it
My point of view is; some mysteries are better left unsolved. And that includes the master as well. Don't bother finding a rationale or a system that's fair; magic may follow a series of patters or rules, yes, but allow an occasional exception if you feel like. How do genies fulfill wishes? Who knows. How do lucky charms give you good fortune? They just do. Don't bother explaining it to your players, they don't care. And don't bother explaining it to yourself; you don't need to. Let their imaginations fill the gaps and draw the lines.
Also: Why can't you just have both? A wizard can read the runes but also cast a fireball, levitate or hurl lightning bolts around. Why not? Just different types of spells. If you keep it rare and mysterious, I don't see how that would break immersion.
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 05:14:17 PM
Quote from: tenbones on August 03, 2021, 01:48:21 AM
I'm not sure why this topic is confusing to anyone.
If they were not confused before....
There's a reason everyone doesn't run around casting spells.
My own system's arcane magic falls very much under the "sufficiently advanced technology" paradigm.
There is "something" called the Arcane Web that permeates the world and arcane magic is produced from it (i.e. the energy/matter comes from the Web) by a combination of what is basically a programming language (called Arcanos) and specially created inputs (called implements). Wizard spell books are similarly written using special materials that link them to the Arcane Web and each spell having a "password" that, if used, will cast the spell in the book (regardless of where the book itself is located in the world) with the wizard only needing to supply certain variables (ex. Vector, distance and intensity for a fireball spell) to complete it.
Gadgeteering builds specific formulas into specific devices so it's more press button and aim, but the fundamental process of triggering an action from the Arcane Web is otherwise the same.
Arcane in this case means "poorly understood" as the Arcane Web has existed in the world for thousands of years and through the utter collapse of at least three near-global empires and subsequent dark ages during that time (including the current dark age of the main setting).
There's also Astral magic where an individual makes a pact with an astral entity (typically a god) after which the entity (or one of its servitors) will perform the supernatural effect stipulated in the pact.
Then you have Primal magic, which seems to granted to individuals at random (except in hindsight when it is clear that only someone with their gifts in the place happened to be could have acted to bring about a good end) and provides each one specific supernatural gifts (more akin to powers than spells) they end up needing to accomplish some good end.
The last two types of magic in my setting are Diabolism and Necromancy; both of which are essentially possession by a supernatural entity (initially being able to tap into the entity's power but ultimately becoming just a vessel for the entity... which is why those two paths are NPC-only by default).
Five pages of this and nobody used this meme?!
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/870/345/a47.jpg)
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 04, 2021, 10:27:11 AM
Five pages of this and nobody used this meme?!
Interesting that you brought that up. As I find the issues isn't what you can do with magic or why you can do it. But rather how the larger setting and its characters are roleplayed in response to how magic is described.
To take an extreme example, a 1st level spells that can create copious amount of gold. Yet the setting is still presented as a fantasy pseudo-medieval culture with a economy based on traditional gold & silver coins.
Something less clear cut, the fact that in Runequest 2nd edition everybody has a decent shot at learning a spell or two. Which is fine for Glorantha but if used another setting that will have to be accounted for in how things are roleplayed or the result will be "off".
Note accounting for the effects of magic doesn't mean that it full potential comes into play for the setting. A campaign can be set in the time period where folks have progressed with magic but haven't figure out all of its implication as obvious they are to a 21st century mindset.
Technological progress often involves ideas as well as materials, tools, and machines. For example one has to have an idea of how to organize a factory in order to have a factory.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 04, 2021, 12:28:36 AM
Quote from: jhkim on August 02, 2021, 07:07:17 PM
Hi, SonTodoGato. I wrote an old essay on this a while ago that digs into a bunch of points. It's here.
https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html
There's a huge difference between historical magic like soothsaying and spirit quests; and the flashy spells of 20th century fantasy fiction. Either can work fine in a game, but they're mutually exclusive. I've had some fun games with historical-like magic, but I've also had many fun games emulating modern fantasy fiction.
I loved your article. Nice to know the person who wrote it. I agree with many points of it, and think people would learn a lot from it
My point of view is; some mysteries are better left unsolved. And that includes the master as well. Don't bother finding a rationale or a system that's fair; magic may follow a series of patters or rules, yes, but allow an occasional exception if you feel like. How do genies fulfill wishes? Who knows. How do lucky charms give you good fortune? They just do. Don't bother explaining it to your players, they don't care. And don't bother explaining it to yourself; you don't need to. Let their imaginations fill the gaps and draw the lines.
Also: Why can't you just have both? A wizard can read the runes but also cast a fireball, levitate or hurl lightning bolts around. Why not? Just different types of spells. If you keep it rare and mysterious, I don't see how that would break immersion.
OK, fair enough. On the last point, one can have both historical-style magic and modern-fantasy-style magic in a game -- but they're still distinct. It's a bit like having both laser guns and fireballs in the same game. It can be cool to mix scifi and fantasy - I know groups have had a lot of fun with Expedition to Barrier Peaks. But putting everything isn't necessarily the best of both worlds. It's still fun to play just fantasy or just scifi. I personally haven't mixed the two, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
As for not coming up with any rationale or background for magic... That's fine as a preference, but what I'll argue is that it doesn't lead to magic feeling mysterious. Like the cartoon meme shows... if a genie shows up to give Bugs Bunny wishes, that's unexplained - but it doesn't feel mysterious. The feeling of mystery comes from when it seems like there is a hidden pattern that isn't yet seen.
Quote from: tenbones on August 04, 2021, 08:50:27 AM
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 05:14:17 PM
Quote from: tenbones on August 03, 2021, 01:48:21 AM
I'm not sure why this topic is confusing to anyone.
If they were not confused before....
There's a reason everyone doesn't run around casting spells.
And we will never be able to find out why that is.
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 11:40:41 PM
I think the point is taken - not knowing how something works doesn't make it magic. Nor does it really make something feel like magic.
Feels like magic seems like such a millennial conceit.
Maybe this type of magic would work better in a story game which does not use mechanics, just the player or gm describing the cool things that their magic does.
Feelings are millennial bullshit am i rite xDDD
Keep it simple. That's my point. Don't bother making up a whole rationale as to how magic works, or a complex, well-thought-out system. Keep it balanced, of course; nothing too exaggerated. Maybe throw a few rules here and there, but keep it mind that magic works in mysterious ways.
I've been prisoner of this mindset for quite some time; I couldn't believe any system that didn't have mana work like a physical force and follow certain rules. I ended up enjoying folk magic a lot more.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 04, 2021, 06:30:03 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on August 03, 2021, 12:08:05 AM
Quote from: TJS on August 02, 2021, 11:40:41 PM
I think the point is taken - not knowing how something works doesn't make it magic. Nor does it really make something feel like magic.
Feels like magic seems like such a millennial conceit.
Maybe this type of magic would work better in a story game which does not use mechanics, just the player or gm describing the cool things that their magic does.
Feelings are millennial bullshit am i rite xDDD
Keep it simple. That's my point. Don't bother making up a whole rationale as to how magic works, or a complex, well-thought-out system. Keep it balanced, of course; nothing too exaggerated. Maybe throw a few rules here and there, but keep it mind that magic works in mysterious ways.
I've been prisoner of this mindset for quite some time; I couldn't believe any system that didn't have mana work like a physical force and follow certain rules. I ended up enjoying folk magic a lot more.
Thinking feelings trump reason or can change the nature of reality is LEFTIST bullshit (I know plenty of millennials who are hard workers just trying to raise their families, its just a tiny, but very vocal, minority of Leftist retards who've been indulged by their Leftist Boomer parents and never had to endure an ounce of responsibility in their empty lives who are the problem).
In terms of magic, I think the main issue is you're trying to weld elements of magic that work in stories onto roleplaying games when the two are entirely different media and as anyone who's studied media and storytelling knows, what works in one medium can fall flat in another (ex. the internal monologue that works fantastically in written stories often falls flat when trying to use the device in film or television because show don't tell is such a huge part of effective storytelling in a visual medium and derailing/pausing scenes so the action doesn't outrun having to speak the protagonist's thoughts out loud).
What you're describing is basically what's known in writing as a "soft" magic system. They are great at evoking wonder, but also can't be effectively used to resolve the central problem of a story without destroying all tension. In stories where the hero gains what is effectively soft magic (ex. Neo at the end of the Matrix), the key conflict is generally the hero proving themselves worthy of the power... the climax is them proving worthy and every bit of awesome they pull off after that is basically just catharsis; the bad guy is now fucked, everyone in the audience knows the bad guy is now fucked, and the fun is watching the villain get his well deserved ass kicking.
The rule in fiction is that the degree to which magic can can be used to solve the plot is directly proportional to how well understood and causal the magic is. Disney's Aladdin is allowed to use trickery and the near limitless soft magic of the genie to defeat Jafar precisely because he uses one of the few actually defined rules of genie magic in the film. Systems with very hard magic (ex. Avatar the Last Airbender) can use their magic to directly solve problems in the plot precisely because the audience understands its limits so clever exploitation of the rules doesn't feel like a cheat.
So what does this have to do with RPGs? Because the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems and so the only satisfying way you can use magic in that medium is in accord with knowable/defined rules. Otherwise you're not actually playing a game, you're just telling a cooperative story and probably a pretty lousy one because soft undefined magic solving your problem just isn't narratively satisfying.
The closest I've seen to a functional soft magic system in an RPG is Mage the Ascension. It requires a LOT of GM adjudication to make the magic system function and is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic as "a man who believes they're a woman hard enough becomes a woman."
TL;DR the medium that is RPGs requires hard magic systems because RPGs are first and foremost collections of rules used to take action within a fictional setting. Anything truly soft magic isn't defined by rules and so can only exist as a story element not a game element.
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
Its not that I problem too widely, its that I'm using it in terms of the definition "a question to be considered, solved, or answered."
That's what 99% of RPGs are. The GM describes the situation and then asks "what do you do?" and your answer to that is based on the system mechanics/tools available to them. A normal human can't say in answer to "there's a chasm between you and where you want to go. What do you do?" "I flap my wings and fly" because the rules say normal humans don't have wings and can't fly.
In a fictional story how the protagonist achieves their goal is a problem to be solved (if it weren't there wouldn't be much of a story; "I was hungry so I got food out of the fridge" isn't a very compelling narrative). Everything in an RPG is centered around problems; either setting them up, what you're doing to overcome them, or what happens after you do solve them. A maze is a problem, a trap is a problem, a hostile encounter is a problem, persuading the king is a problem.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 04, 2021, 08:40:48 PM
So what does this have to do with RPGs? Because the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems and so the only satisfying way you can use magic in that medium is in accord with knowable/defined rules. Otherwise you're not actually playing a game, you're just telling a cooperative story and probably a pretty lousy one because soft undefined magic solving your problem just isn't narratively satisfying.
The closest I've seen to a functional soft magic system in an RPG is Mage the Ascension. It requires a LOT of GM adjudication to make the magic system function and is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic as "a man who believes they're a woman hard enough becomes a woman."
TL;DR the medium that is RPGs requires hard magic systems because RPGs are first and foremost collections of rules used to take action within a fictional setting. Anything truly soft magic isn't defined by rules and so can only exist as a story element not a game element.
According to this logic, Free Kriegspiel is just storytelling, which I think is a flawed definition. When I played in old-school D&D convention tournaments back in the 1980s, most of the decisions were *not* rules-manipulation. Much of it was things like puzzle-solving, and other non-rules-based decisions - more like Choose Your Own Adventure than a tactical board game. Traditional RPGs have a lot of room for non-rule-based challenges like role-played negotiation, riddles and puzzles, solving mysteries, and creative solutions to traps.
I agree that Mage: The Ascension is poorly defined and prioritizes storytelling -- but that vs D&D aren't the only choices.
The simplest example of non-scientific magic is spirit magic, where magic is handled as role-played interaction and negotiation with NPC spirits. A lot of old-school, non-storytelling games handle interaction with NPCs as pure role-play rather than by dice-rolling rules. There are other possibilities as well. In my Water-uphill World campaign, I represented magic as a dungeon the PCs would go to in their minds. Based on where they went and challenges passed, they gained various magical abilities. It was pretty clearly defined in exactly the same way that a tricks-and-traps dungeons is (as opposed to a tactical combat board game dungeon).
In terms of published rules, I think GURPS Voodoo is one of the best examples of less scientific RPG magic, especially because it highlights interaction with spirits as one of the key points.
Well... not sure.
First, how is this "new school'? How is O&D's vancian magic - you've got two first level spell and one second level spell and they always work similarly etc. - any better?
Second, I LIKE random magic (on the veio of DCC RPG etc.)... but I think it is mostly a matter of taste. And it is not common in most literature - except Lieber and occasionally Vance (but rare in D&D). Gandalf would never cast a fireballs and see it occasionally explode in his own face. Magic does not "fail" often; when it does, there is a rational reason (maybe Arioch just doesn't want to answer at this time).
Third, there are concrete rules to hitting someone with your sword... because we are playing this game. Magic-users need rules too.
Fourth, eh, there is plenty of sci-fi (or sci-fi looking) stuff in OD&D.
I think the easiest way to make magic "magical" when you NEED rules is making these rules somewhat ARBITRARY (when you resurrect someone, he might reincarnate in a duck).
Same thing works for deities, BTW. 5e has a spell where two married people get a +2 bonus to AC for a while after marriage. I'd prefer something like - your marriage is official in your deities' eyes. So you might gain entrance to Hades to rescue her soul, etc. No mechanic bonuses, just a narrative tool.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 05, 2021, 04:29:29 PM
Well... not sure.
First, how is this "new school'? How is O&D's vancian magic - you've got two first level spell and one second level spell and they always work similarly etc. - any better?
Second, I LIKE random magic (on the veio of DCC RPG etc.)... but I think it is mostly a matter of taste. And it is not common in most literature - except Lieber and occasionally Vance (but rare in D&D). Gandalf would never cast a fireballs and see it occasionally explode in his own face. Magic does not "fail" often; when it does, there is a rational reason (maybe Arioch just doesn't want to answer at this time).
Third, there are concrete rules to hitting someone with your sword... because we are playing this game. Magic-users need rules too.
Fourth, eh, there is plenty of sci-fi (or sci-fi looking) stuff in OD&D.
I think the easiest way to make magic "magical" when you NEED rules is making these rules somewhat ARBITRARY (when you resurrect someone, he might reincarnate in a duck).
My point is not just about mechanics; that's addition. We can work the mechanics out just fine.
People just have different paradigms as to how we imagine magic. One group treats it as a superstition, whose means and inner workings are beyond our reach or appear to work on a more symbolic aspect rather than physical. In this worldview magic is rare and obscure and only a few study it. This does not mean random and non-sensical, it just simply means it works in mysterious ways which we have not (and probably will never) decipher.
The other one treats magic as an energy or force of nature which can be understood, measured and even harnessed by machines, thus turning it into a science rather than something supernatural. It can be openly learned at colleges of wizards, it can power machines, it's simply shooting beams of energy or having levitating books.
My point is that the first view keeps magic more special than the second one. If magic is so ubiquitous, people get used to it and take it for granted. If magic is rare and non-physical, players are dealing with forces outside of their comprehension.
Examples of "natural" magicA magic-powered machine, magic weapons, lighting up a city with "magic", shooting beams, "storing" magic inside a glowing pink crystal, teleporters, a healing spell which is bright green light; basically, magic is the fantasy equivalent of electricity. It is an energy that can be converted into other forms of energy under a certain kind of replicable conditions (see Eberron, Magitek, etc.). Having different "schools" of magic (thaumaturgy, conjuration, change, control, entropy, etc.) is part of this as well
Examples of superstitious magicSeeing the face of your soulmate in a mirror while backwards walking up a staircase, a magical sword which makes you invincible, a good luck charm, getting lost in the woods makes you end up in the realm of the fairies, a voodoo doll, a cup that shatters upon "hearing" a lie, a statue that kills all the virgins who touch it, a man turning into a wolf on Fridays, etc.In these cases, there is no physical, natural means through which magic works; it's simply a ritual or objects which causes an effect through means unknown. It works more on a subjective and symbolic field rather than a physical, natural, observable phenomenon.
For natural magic, vampires are killed by UV light. For superstitious magic, it is never explained but it is implied that they hate the brightness of the sun because it is the light of good and they are evil creatures of the night.
QuoteSame thing works for deities, BTW. 5e has a spell where two married people get a +2 bonus to AC for a while after marriage. I'd prefer something like - your marriage is official in your deities' eyes. So you might gain entrance to Hades to rescue her soul, etc. No mechanic bonuses, just a narrative tool.
You idea is far better. Instead of being a mechanic, it has meaning. I guess we coincide on this; making magic part of the "story" rather then a mechanic.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 04, 2021, 08:40:48 PM
Thinking feelings trump reason or can change the nature of reality is LEFTIST bullshit (I know plenty of millennials who are hard workers just trying to raise their families, its just a tiny, but very vocal, minority of Leftist retards who've been indulged by their Leftist Boomer parents and never had to endure an ounce of responsibility in their empty lives who are the problem).
In terms of magic, I think the main issue is you're trying to weld elements of magic that work in stories onto roleplaying games when the two are entirely different media and as anyone who's studied media and storytelling knows, what works in one medium can fall flat in another (ex. the internal monologue that works fantastically in written stories often falls flat when trying to use the device in film or television because show don't tell is such a huge part of effective storytelling in a visual medium and derailing/pausing scenes so the action doesn't outrun having to speak the protagonist's thoughts out loud).
What you're describing is basically what's known in writing as a "soft" magic system. They are great at evoking wonder, but also can't be effectively used to resolve the central problem of a story without destroying all tension. In stories where the hero gains what is effectively soft magic (ex. Neo at the end of the Matrix), the key conflict is generally the hero proving themselves worthy of the power... the climax is them proving worthy and every bit of awesome they pull off after that is basically just catharsis; the bad guy is now fucked, everyone in the audience knows the bad guy is now fucked, and the fun is watching the villain get his well deserved ass kicking.
The rule in fiction is that the degree to which magic can can be used to solve the plot is directly proportional to how well understood and causal the magic is. Disney's Aladdin is allowed to use trickery and the near limitless soft magic of the genie to defeat Jafar precisely because he uses one of the few actually defined rules of genie magic in the film. Systems with very hard magic (ex. Avatar the Last Airbender) can use their magic to directly solve problems in the plot precisely because the audience understands its limits so clever exploitation of the rules doesn't feel like a cheat.
So what does this have to do with RPGs? Because the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems and so the only satisfying way you can use magic in that medium is in accord with knowable/defined rules. Otherwise you're not actually playing a game, you're just telling a cooperative story and probably a pretty lousy one because soft undefined magic solving your problem just isn't narratively satisfying.
The closest I've seen to a functional soft magic system in an RPG is Mage the Ascension. It requires a LOT of GM adjudication to make the magic system function and is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic as "a man who believes they're a woman hard enough becomes a woman."
TL;DR the medium that is RPGs requires hard magic systems because RPGs are first and foremost collections of rules used to take action within a fictional setting. Anything truly soft magic isn't defined by rules and so can only exist as a story element not a game element.
Don't make this about politics. The idea of feelings over reason is old as fuck; at least from the 19th century in the form of romanticism.
Soft magic doesn't imply that there are no rules and anything goes. Here's my point as explained by myself:
QuotePeople just have different paradigms as to how we imagine magic. One group treats it as a superstition, whose means and inner workings are beyond our reach or appear to work on a more symbolic aspect rather than physical. In this worldview magic is rare and obscure and only a few study it. This does not mean random and non-sensical, it just simply means it works in mysterious ways which we have not (and probably will never) decipher.
The other one treats magic as an energy or force of nature which can be understood, measured and even harnessed by machines, thus turning it into a science rather than something supernatural. It can be openly learned at colleges of wizards, it can power machines, it's simply shooting beams of energy or having levitating books.
My point is that the first view keeps magic more special than the second one. If magic is so ubiquitous, people get used to it and take it for granted. If magic is rare and non-physical, players are dealing with forces outside of their comprehension.
Examples of "natural" magic
A magic-powered machine, magic weapons, lighting up a city with "magic", shooting beams, "storing" magic inside a glowing pink crystal, teleporters, a healing spell which is bright green light; basically, magic is the fantasy equivalent of electricity. It is an energy that can be converted into other forms of energy under a certain kind of replicable conditions (see Eberron, Magitek, etc.). Having different "schools" of magic (thaumaturgy, conjuration, change, control, entropy, etc.) is part of this as well
Examples of superstitious magic
Seeing the face of your soulmate in a mirror while backwards walking up a staircase, a magical sword which makes you invincible, a good luck charm, getting lost in the woods makes you end up in the realm of the fairies, a voodoo doll, a cup that shatters upon "hearing" a lie, a statue that kills all the virgins who touch it, a man turning into a wolf on Fridays, etc.
In these cases, there is no physical, natural means through which magic works; it's simply a ritual or objects which causes an effect through means unknown. It works more on a subjective and symbolic field rather than a physical, natural, observable phenomenon.
For natural magic, vampires are killed by UV light. For superstitious magic, it is never explained but it is implied that they hate the brightness of the sun because it is the light of good and they are evil creatures of the night.
And if you think mechanics are a problem, there are plenty of games who pulled it off just fine; Call of Cthulhu and Aquelarre come to mind. You need the materials, components and ingredients to perform the ritual. Magic isn't a systematized, well understood, almost physical kind of thing, but a mysterious art, with rules, laws and requisites, yes, but the workings of which are beyond our knowledge. Not unlike how people thought of magic in real life. You don't expect practitioners to go around believing they go around shooting fireballs, but they spend time performing rituals while working with "energies", beings and "forces" which science cannot detect.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws."
Except there's more than just that at play.
Belief != Arete, which is the cap on your power. And Marauders point to the idea that there needs to be some sort of Consensus, or else everything is chaos (with the Ascension War being over what Consensus will look like).
Done right, Mage was an interesting look at what mundane reality was like, and how we shape and define (and lie to ourselves about) the world we share with others and the Truth this shared reality overlays.
But really it was all trenchcoats and fireballs and steampunk over Jupiter in practice.
(Okay, I admit I haven't looked at the latest edition of Mage past realizing it didn't really fix any of the mechanical problems it had, and I'd already gutted and rebuilt the fluff. It all just amounted to a reprint as far as I was concerned ("now with 90% new filler material!" Yay?).)
Quote from: jhkim on August 04, 2021, 11:06:20 AM
OK, fair enough. On the last point, one can have both historical-style magic and modern-fantasy-style magic in a game -- but they're still distinct. It's a bit like having both laser guns and fireballs in the same game. It can be cool to mix scifi and fantasy - I know groups have had a lot of fun with Expedition to Barrier Peaks. But putting everything isn't necessarily the best of both worlds. It's still fun to play just fantasy or just scifi. I personally haven't mixed the two, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
As for not coming up with any rationale or background for magic... That's fine as a preference, but what I'll argue is that it doesn't lead to magic feeling mysterious. Like the cartoon meme shows... if a genie shows up to give Bugs Bunny wishes, that's unexplained - but it doesn't feel mysterious. The feeling of mystery comes from when it seems like there is a hidden pattern that isn't yet seen.
I think the feeling of mystery comes from the answers not being known. That's how horror works. Fear of the unknown. Apart from that, things are special according to supply and demand. If the genie pops out a bottle and gives you a sportscar, you're right; it's not mysterious. If it's been trapped inside a sealed lamp, and when it comes out it in a cloud of puprle smoke grants you a wish that comes true at a price, then yes. It's all about flavour and how you manage supply, demand and information.
Here is the same situation, but according to two different worldviews: Going to a druid's hideout to steal a magical bowl
In one scenario, you end up having a stealth/action scene, in which one of the characters can shoot raybeams, the other can cast a spell to know how many hitpoints he has, and they all fight on pretty much equal terms, swinging +1 swords that have a 10% freezing effect, discharging magical crystals to get the necessary magic points and casting summoning spells straight out of Naruto. Once they get the magical bowl, the use it as some sort of technological artifact or mechanical boost and go on.
On the other hand, you have a party of people who are not flashy casters. Maybe there's one wizard, who has to concoct a potion to get visions in the fumes about the location or use tarot cards to get hints, and can spend a turn chanting the incantations to shoot a whirlwind of fire or summon a fire elemental to cast it for him. The warriors of the party can wield weapons that have been blessed by a local priest, but these weapons don't have a "+1" mechanical effect; they carry a blessing, which may prove useful against the undead. The druid may turn into a beast, wield a magical staff that paralyizes those who touch it or summon gusts of wind and thunder against them. They don't fight on equal terms; it's a war. There's an element of horror (because you don't know what you're up to) apart from stealth and action, and you can't count on magic spells as though they were ammunition. Magic works indirectly, through effects, and it requires a ritual or components, as opposed to just simply spending mana points for superpowers.
When they finally defeat him, he can cast a spell on his last breath, an old druidic curse, which causes one of the characters to get progressively older. When they get the magical bowl, they realize that it allows a person with a pure heart to get visions from the future. Rather than being a mechanical aid, it become more of a plot device.
As you can see there are no mechanics, no physical energy, no clear laws; just magic. We all know it has some implicit rules and limitations, but we don't find a physical explanation as to how it works its magic. We don't think in terms of mechanics. It's a legend.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 01:07:54 PMOn the other hand, you have a party of people who are not flashy casters. Maybe there's one wizard, who has to concoct a potion to get visions in the fumes about the location or use tarot cards to get hints, and can spend a turn chanting the incantations to shoot a whirlwind of fire or summon a fire elemental to cast it for him. The warriors of the party can wield weapons that have been blessed by a local priest, but these weapons don't have a "+1" mechanical effect; they carry a blessing, which may prove useful against the undead. The druid may turn into a beast, wield a magical staff that paralyizes those who touch it or summon gusts of wind and thunder against them. They don't fight on equal terms; it's a war. There's an element of horror (because you don't know what you're up to) apart from stealth and action, and you can't count on magic spells as though they were ammunition. Magic works indirectly, through effects, and it requires a ritual or components, as opposed to just simply spending mana points for superpowers.
When they finally defeat him, he can cast a spell on his last breath, an old druidic curse, which causes one of the characters to get progressively older. When they get the magical bowl, they realize that it allows a person with a pure heart to get visions from the future. Rather than being a mechanical aid, it become more of a plot device.
As you can see there are no mechanics, no physical energy, no clear laws; just magic. We all know it has some implicit rules and limitations, but we don't find a physical explanation as to how it works its magic. We don't think in terms of mechanics. It's a legend.
I highlighted what I think is the key landmine in this otherwise very-cool-sounding approach: in the context of a
game, it doesn't matter how much roleplaying atmosphere and how much thinking-in-terms-of-legends you create in or attribute to the
characters. The
players are going to think in terms of mechanics, if not all the time, then inevitably at some critical point.
To take one example, consider the weapon which doesn't have a fixed +1 bonus, but "carr(ies) a blessing, which may be useful against the undead". Well, if it's useful against the undead,
how is it useful? Does it keep them from approaching the wielder? If so, what's the radius of the protected area? And if the blessing "
may" be useful, under what conditions would it not be? Against certain kinds of undead? On certain places of cursed ground? If the wielder's committed an action his religion deems sinful? Either the answers to these questions are consistent, in which case I think they effectively amount to mechanical rules, or they are inconsistent, in which case they're heading straight for the inevitable clash of players disliking a GM-fiat ruling, especially if it disadvantages them or the GM contradicts himself about how the magic works because he's forgotten how it was applied last time.
In principle you can get the best of both worlds by making sure there
are game-applicable mechanical rules and the GM knows and consistently applies them, as long as the PCs aren't allowed to start out knowing those rules. But there, again, I think one ultimately winds up with only one of two alternatives: either it's feasible (i.e. doesn't require excessive PC time, cost, or risk) for players to figure out those rules by experiment and analysis, or it isn't. If it is feasible, then the mage-PC players are
going to turn the game into a Rise of Sufficiently Analyzed Magic campaign (because again, players
will expend effort on figuring out how to maximize their characters' effectiveness), which may not be to everyone's taste or interest; if it isn't feasible, then we have the GM-fiat problem again, compounded by the frustration of people who thought it was possible to figure out a solution and found out the hard way it wasn't.
Unexplained magic that's under no obligation to be consistent or quantified works much better in games where the PCs aren't allowed to wield it. But an available player action that can be mechanically effective in the game
has to be consistent and quantified, at least to some degree, or it will either disrupt the game (if it's too powerful) or be abandoned (if it's too ineffective).
In a way the entire problem here has to do with the question itself- does "scientific/new school/inauthentic magic" ruin fantasy?
First, what is meant by "fantasy?" In the "Conan" stories magic was weird and didn't seem to follow any logical reasoning- floating fruit in a globe, gold lines through killer mist- maybe this was meant to be totally apart from the swordsman-physical so it HAD to be weird, or maybe because magic went by an entirely different set of rules from anything normal- but no explanation for any of this was ever given. You just accepted it.
But in GAMING magic some sort of inner logic and scientific method must be followed, or you have chaos. By saying a magic-user MUST do X then Y with Z using THIS and moving like THAT so the result will be SUCH- the players know what move to make. You can think of it as an ultra-complex version of chess with some random elements tossed in.
I don't know and I don't care how Gandalf's magic works, only that it does. But in a game I need to know something about what it is and what it WILL do or why bother? I also don't know exactly how phasers, force shields, artificial gravity, and Dr. McCoy's medical gear work, and I don't care.
But if someone wants to make magic more scientific, complete with an "inner physics" about it, then why not? That can make a world more "real," more fun, since knowing these things can open up new possibilities. If magic needs "mana" the way a solar-panel vehicle needs sufficient light to work then you would value a map showing various areas and their mana levels- that concept alone can make for excellent world-building: in an area where mana is almost non-existent physical weapons and fighters are the way to go, but maybe things magic can supply are a problem- such as a disease only magic can cure. Is it possible to bring "mana supplies" into such areas? What about anti-mana, where physical things work even better (e.g. alchemy) but magic is out, period?
Another problem is that fans of one tend to oppose fans of the other, when in fact there is no conflict- fantasy and fiction are just that. Could an AD&D dragon weighing thousands of pounds and is a six-limbed vertebrate no less possibly fly on a non-magic world? No. But who cares?
Strictly speaking, one way out is that every single magical effect is inconsistent compared to each other, but is fixed in the instance. To piggyback on the "sword with a blessing" example, every sword that has a blessing against undead operates in a different way, but this specific sword with a blessing operates as mechanic X in situation Y against opponents Z.
As much as I like that from a fantastical setting perspective, there is no way as a GM I'm going to be careful enough in my notes to make that work for any game with a sizable chunk of magic items. If the game doesn't have a sizable chunk of magic items, then in practice it isn't likely to make much difference anyway. (If Joe's sword has a blessing against undead and Felipe's axe has a charm that lets him fly 1/day and Mary's staff has an enchantment that lets her cast fireball 1/week--and that's pretty much it--then there's not anything to compare how other blessed swords and charmed axes and enchanted staves would operate.)
Of course, with spells, that same problem gets magnified immensely. You certainly can't do it as every time you prepare the spell it operates a little differently, at least not without a chart of finite possibilities. You might do it with a more involved version of the DCC approach where Spell X for Wizard A can be somewhat different than the same spell for Wizard B. I can see that working in a play by forum, but not at a live table.
What I'm trying in my own game (with degree of success still very much an open question) is a hybrid approach where there is some core magic that is systematic and the rest is more adjudicated as above. That is, there's the core spells and items that everyone knows about, that the correct practitioners can use reliably and teach predictably. Then there's the other stuff that operates in any kind of wacky way the GM wants, but isn't repeatable. When that staff of animate mushroom people runs out of charges, that's probably the end of that effect.
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on August 06, 2021, 02:55:16 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 01:07:54 PMOn the other hand, you have a party of people who are not flashy casters. Maybe there's one wizard, who has to concoct a potion to get visions in the fumes about the location or use tarot cards to get hints, and can spend a turn chanting the incantations to shoot a whirlwind of fire or summon a fire elemental to cast it for him. The warriors of the party can wield weapons that have been blessed by a local priest, but these weapons don't have a "+1" mechanical effect; they carry a blessing, which may prove useful against the undead. The druid may turn into a beast, wield a magical staff that paralyizes those who touch it or summon gusts of wind and thunder against them. They don't fight on equal terms; it's a war. There's an element of horror (because you don't know what you're up to) apart from stealth and action, and you can't count on magic spells as though they were ammunition. Magic works indirectly, through effects, and it requires a ritual or components, as opposed to just simply spending mana points for superpowers.
When they finally defeat him, he can cast a spell on his last breath, an old druidic curse, which causes one of the characters to get progressively older. When they get the magical bowl, they realize that it allows a person with a pure heart to get visions from the future. Rather than being a mechanical aid, it become more of a plot device.
As you can see there are no mechanics, no physical energy, no clear laws; just magic. We all know it has some implicit rules and limitations, but we don't find a physical explanation as to how it works its magic. We don't think in terms of mechanics. It's a legend.
I highlighted what I think is the key landmine in this otherwise very-cool-sounding approach: in the context of a game, it doesn't matter how much roleplaying atmosphere and how much thinking-in-terms-of-legends you create in or attribute to the characters. The players are going to think in terms of mechanics, if not all the time, then inevitably at some critical point.
To take one example, consider the weapon which doesn't have a fixed +1 bonus, but "carr(ies) a blessing, which may be useful against the undead". Well, if it's useful against the undead, how is it useful? Does it keep them from approaching the wielder? If so, what's the radius of the protected area? And if the blessing "may" be useful, under what conditions would it not be? Against certain kinds of undead? On certain places of cursed ground? If the wielder's committed an action his religion deems sinful? Either the answers to these questions are consistent, in which case I think they effectively amount to mechanical rules, or they are inconsistent, in which case they're heading straight for the inevitable clash of players disliking a GM-fiat ruling, especially if it disadvantages them or the GM contradicts himself about how the magic works because he's forgotten how it was applied last time.
In principle you can get the best of both worlds by making sure there are game-applicable mechanical rules and the GM knows and consistently applies them, as long as the PCs aren't allowed to start out knowing those rules. But there, again, I think one ultimately winds up with only one of two alternatives: either it's feasible (i.e. doesn't require excessive PC time, cost, or risk) for players to figure out those rules by experiment and analysis, or it isn't. If it is feasible, then the mage-PC players are going to turn the game into a Rise of Sufficiently Analyzed Magic campaign (because again, players will expend effort on figuring out how to maximize their characters' effectiveness), which may not be to everyone's taste or interest; if it isn't feasible, then we have the GM-fiat problem again, compounded by the frustration of people who thought it was possible to figure out a solution and found out the hard way it wasn't.
Unexplained magic that's under no obligation to be consistent or quantified works much better in games where the PCs aren't allowed to wield it. But an available player action that can be mechanically effective in the game has to be consistent and quantified, at least to some degree, or it will either disrupt the game (if it's too powerful) or be abandoned (if it's too ineffective).
I don't care about mechanics. I'll make something up on the spot. If it's blessed, it may be useful. How? That will depend. Some players find it hard to think outside of the book; particularly Spaniards, in my experience. Others understand it right from the get-go and see it coming a mile ahead. We're here to tell and play stories, situations and adventures, and I won't let the rules get in the way. That being said, this is not at all like the wokes who are here to "tell a story together" in which nothing bad can happen. It's just a rules-light approach highly consistent with the old school mindset.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 12:30:13 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 05, 2021, 04:29:29 PM
Well... not sure.
First, how is this "new school'? How is O&D's vancian magic - you've got two first level spell and one second level spell and they always work similarly etc. - any better?
Second, I LIKE random magic (on the veio of DCC RPG etc.)... but I think it is mostly a matter of taste. And it is not common in most literature - except Lieber and occasionally Vance (but rare in D&D). Gandalf would never cast a fireballs and see it occasionally explode in his own face. Magic does not "fail" often; when it does, there is a rational reason (maybe Arioch just doesn't want to answer at this time).
Third, there are concrete rules to hitting someone with your sword... because we are playing this game. Magic-users need rules too.
Fourth, eh, there is plenty of sci-fi (or sci-fi looking) stuff in OD&D.
I think the easiest way to make magic "magical" when you NEED rules is making these rules somewhat ARBITRARY (when you resurrect someone, he might reincarnate in a duck).
My point is not just about mechanics; that's addition. We can work the mechanics out just fine.
People just have different paradigms as to how we imagine magic. One group treats it as a superstition, whose means and inner workings are beyond our reach or appear to work on a more symbolic aspect rather than physical. In this worldview magic is rare and obscure and only a few study it. This does not mean random and non-sensical, it just simply means it works in mysterious ways which we have not (and probably will never) decipher.
The other one treats magic as an energy or force of nature which can be understood, measured and even harnessed by machines, thus turning it into a science rather than something supernatural. It can be openly learned at colleges of wizards, it can power machines, it's simply shooting beams of energy or having levitating books.
My point is that the first view keeps magic more special than the second one. If magic is so ubiquitous, people get used to it and take it for granted. If magic is rare and non-physical, players are dealing with forces outside of their comprehension.
Examples of "natural" magic
A magic-powered machine, magic weapons, lighting up a city with "magic", shooting beams, "storing" magic inside a glowing pink crystal, teleporters, a healing spell which is bright green light; basically, magic is the fantasy equivalent of electricity. It is an energy that can be converted into other forms of energy under a certain kind of replicable conditions (see Eberron, Magitek, etc.). Having different "schools" of magic (thaumaturgy, conjuration, change, control, entropy, etc.) is part of this as well
Examples of superstitious magic
Seeing the face of your soulmate in a mirror while backwards walking up a staircase, a magical sword which makes you invincible, a good luck charm, getting lost in the woods makes you end up in the realm of the fairies, a voodoo doll, a cup that shatters upon "hearing" a lie, a statue that kills all the virgins who touch it, a man turning into a wolf on Fridays, etc.
In these cases, there is no physical, natural means through which magic works; it's simply a ritual or objects which causes an effect through means unknown. It works more on a subjective and symbolic field rather than a physical, natural, observable phenomenon.
For natural magic, vampires are killed by UV light. For superstitious magic, it is never explained but it is implied that they hate the brightness of the sun because it is the light of good and they are evil creatures of the night.
QuoteSame thing works for deities, BTW. 5e has a spell where two married people get a +2 bonus to AC for a while after marriage. I'd prefer something like - your marriage is official in your deities' eyes. So you might gain entrance to Hades to rescue her soul, etc. No mechanic bonuses, just a narrative tool.
You idea is far better. Instead of being a mechanic, it has meaning. I guess we coincide on this; making magic part of the "story" rather then a mechanic.
Ah, okay, I see your point here. Yes, I agree. Magic is much more flavorful when mysterious and unexplainable.
It's somewhat hard to do, mechanically speaking, but I like it. I always try to make things a bit dubious (sometimes combining what you call "natural" and "superstitious" magic) so the PCs do not know exactly what they're dealing with...
Here is a bit I am particularly proud of (if I may say so), might be relevant:
Addendum: Living spells
Even if your magic system is completely different from the ones presented above, the idea of "spells as living entities" is worth considering. My main inspiration for this concept are the works of Jack Vance. Terry Pratchett uses it very effectively for comic effect. Our goal, however, is somewhat different from these authors, as we are trying to make magic a bit more grim and scary.
This idea can explain various parts of a spell system. For example, spells mishaps are just strong spells that the wizard was unable to control for a moment. Spells occupy a place in the wizard's mind. They can reproduce and be extinguished, like viruses or bacteria, and they can make the wizard sick in the brain. They can lie dormant in old grimoires and scrolls, or be trapped in talismans and wands. They can mutate with time, or generate funny interactions with one another. Magic items lose power after all spells store within are spent – leaving a single spell unused might prevent this in some cases, probably because some spells can reproduce through parthenogenesis.
These things would ordinarily inhabit another planet, parallel to our own, where they roam free, only to be randomly picked by random wizards to fuel their actions. The most powerful ones could even take a physical form if they wish. Every wizard should have some grasp of this concept, even if only in a subconscious manner.
What kind of beings are spells, exactly? Well, that is up to you. They might be spirits, demons, angels, elementals, or beings of pure energy. Their minds are probably extremely simple or completely alien. They might be servants or parts of powerful beings (the god of fire, etc.). One would assume they do not mind being used by wizards, perhaps because they follow a higher order, or do not grasp the concept enough to organize a rebellion. They probably do not enjoy staying for too long in our plane, since most magic is temporary.
The truth, however, could be darker than the characters things. Maybe these beings can feel, and consider every casting a small torture, and repeated summoning a form of slavery. The screaming faces that appear every time you hurl an energy spell at your enemies are more than illusions. Magic artifacts may require the binding of a sentient spirit in a piece of metal or wood. Like trapping fireflies to make a lantern... or imprisoning Beethoven in a music box for your own amusement. The demon that lives in your sword is always willing to help you in your fights in exchange for some blood... but for how long? Maybe all wizards know this and keep it secret, or maybe they refuse to see it. Maybe it is only a theory, a legend, a hunch... an uneasy feeling in the back of their heads.
And maybe one day the wizards might find that these things want revenge.
(source: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/284302/Dark-Fantasy-Magic)
Quote from: jhkim on August 05, 2021, 12:53:45 PM
The simplest example of non-scientific magic is spirit magic, where magic is handled as role-played interaction and negotiation with NPC spirits. A lot of old-school, non-storytelling games handle interaction with NPCs as pure role-play rather than by dice-rolling rules. There are other possibilities as well. In my Water-uphill World campaign, I represented magic as a dungeon the PCs would go to in their minds. Based on where they went and challenges passed, they gained various magical abilities. It was pretty clearly defined in exactly the same way that a tricks-and-traps dungeons is (as opposed to a tactical combat board game dungeon.
This is a good approach. There would need to be some things the DM established in his own mind first, I think. If the DM is just making it up as they go there's always the chance that he could warp the outcome to be too easy or too hard (or too weak or too strong, you get the idea). If the DM has set what will work and how, or even just what the spirits want and are willing to give, then it becomes like a puzzle. This would create a unique flavor, I think.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 07:40:10 PMI don't care about mechanics. I'll make something up on the spot.
Then why have rules at all? Isn't this just as good an answer if somebody says, "Okay, I'm going to roll to hit; what number do I need vs. this Armour Class?" as it is if somebody says, "Okay, I draw the blessed sword; what effect does that have on the vampire?"
I don't ask that to be obstreperous, but in my experience the one thing guaranteed to annoy, infuriate and eventually drive away players is inconsistency in how effective their actions are allowed to be, especially when enforced to their disadvantage by GM fiat. This approach really does sound like a roadmap straight to that point.
As Brandon Sanderson wrote, it's much more important in story terms what your magicians
can't do than what they can, and anything that forms a limit on a PC magician's capacities amounts to a mechanical rule.
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on August 07, 2021, 07:51:29 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 07:40:10 PMI don't care about mechanics. I'll make something up on the spot.
Then why have rules at all? Isn't this just as good an answer if somebody says, "Okay, I'm going to roll to hit; what number do I need vs. this Armour Class?" as it is if somebody says, "Okay, I draw the blessed sword; what effect does that have on the vampire?"
I don't ask that to be obstreperous, but in my experience the one thing guaranteed to annoy, infuriate and eventually drive away players is inconsistency in how effective their actions are allowed to be, especially when enforced to their disadvantage by GM fiat. This approach really does sound like a roadmap straight to that point.
As Brandon Sanderson wrote, it's much more important in story terms what your magicians can't do than what they can, and anything that forms a limit on a PC magician's capacities amounts to a mechanical rule.
It's a good question. I don't really have a set of rules apart from a few mechanics which are "necessary" to add a level of unpredictability, challenge and fairness, particularly to combat. I don't keep much track of points, I do zero math and same goes for my players. We role a few dice when we need to. I don't do armor class, challenge rating, or stuff like that. You either pass or you don't. I do advantage occasionally.
I don't play by any system because I find them unnecessary and I don't want to learn when I can play just as well on our own rules. Few people get it, but most players appreciate the simplicity and how straight to the point and flexible the "rules" are. I try to be fair and I am very lenient with my players. So far, I haven't gotten complaints, but it's not for everyone and I'm aware of that.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 07, 2021, 11:13:04 PM
Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on August 07, 2021, 07:51:29 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 06, 2021, 07:40:10 PMI don't care about mechanics. I'll make something up on the spot.
Then why have rules at all? Isn't this just as good an answer if somebody says, "Okay, I'm going to roll to hit; what number do I need vs. this Armour Class?" as it is if somebody says, "Okay, I draw the blessed sword; what effect does that have on the vampire?"
I don't ask that to be obstreperous, but in my experience the one thing guaranteed to annoy, infuriate and eventually drive away players is inconsistency in how effective their actions are allowed to be, especially when enforced to their disadvantage by GM fiat. This approach really does sound like a roadmap straight to that point.
As Brandon Sanderson wrote, it's much more important in story terms what your magicians can't do than what they can, and anything that forms a limit on a PC magician's capacities amounts to a mechanical rule.
It's a good question. I don't really have a set of rules apart from a few mechanics which are "necessary" to add a level of unpredictability, challenge and fairness, particularly to combat. I don't keep much track of points, I do zero math and same goes for my players. We role a few dice when we need to. I don't do armor class, challenge rating, or stuff like that. You either pass or you don't. I do advantage occasionally.
I don't play by any system because I find them unnecessary and I don't want to learn when I can play just as well on our own rules. Few people get it, but most players appreciate the simplicity and how straight to the point and flexible the "rules" are. I try to be fair and I am very lenient with my players. So far, I haven't gotten complaints, but it's not for everyone and I'm aware of that.
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 11:23:05 AM
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
Call it whatever you want. I'm not sure if its meant to be disparaging but I prefer this kind of gaming over learning complex rules to arrive at the same results.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 08, 2021, 01:44:37 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 11:23:05 AM
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
Call it whatever you want. I'm not sure if its meant to be disparaging but I prefer this kind of gaming over learning complex rules to arrive at the same results.
But they're most likely NOT the same results. In a game you have rules so that unexpected results can happen because there are rules that mean sometimes a PC fails when all evidence says their success was all but assured, where ones who look certain to lose pull off amazing wins anyway and where players use their understanding of the rules as the setting's "physics" to concoct plans that work even if the GM doesn't actually think they should.
Without the rules it's just the GM's whims and limitations on what's possible with a random dice toss here and there to make it seem like things are random. The PCs only succeed if you want them to succeed, they fail no matter what if you want them to fail. And the system turns into a metagame of "how do we best butter up the GM or play to the GM's biases to ensure success?" rather than one where Players can judge actions based on objective rules.
You're not playing a game, you're engaged in a cooperative story building session.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 02:51:34 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 08, 2021, 01:44:37 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 11:23:05 AM
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
Call it whatever you want. I'm not sure if its meant to be disparaging but I prefer this kind of gaming over learning complex rules to arrive at the same results.
But they're most likely NOT the same results. In a game you have rules so that unexpected results can happen because there are rules that mean sometimes a PC fails when all evidence says their success was all but assured, where ones who look certain to lose pull off amazing wins anyway and where players use their understanding of the rules as the setting's "physics" to concoct plans that work even if the GM doesn't actually think they should.
Without the rules it's just the GM's whims and limitations on what's possible with a random dice toss here and there to make it seem like things are random. The PCs only succeed if you want them to succeed, they fail no matter what if you want them to fail. And the system turns into a metagame of "how do we best butter up the GM or play to the GM's biases to ensure success?" rather than one where Players can judge actions based on objective rules.
You're not playing a game, you're engaged in a cooperative story building session.
You just need to play with people you trust and whose goal is to have fun. If you have to keep them in check so that they won't "cheat", you're not doing it right.
I don't know what gave you the impression that they'll succeed fail if I want. There are die rolls and character scores, they're just limited to whenever we need them. I allow my players to "negotiate" with me and they have opportunities to make suggestions as to how to handle a situation. If it sounds fair, reasonable and fun, we can have it.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 08, 2021, 03:16:48 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 02:51:34 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 08, 2021, 01:44:37 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 11:23:05 AM
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
Call it whatever you want. I'm not sure if its meant to be disparaging but I prefer this kind of gaming over learning complex rules to arrive at the same results.
But they're most likely NOT the same results. In a game you have rules so that unexpected results can happen because there are rules that mean sometimes a PC fails when all evidence says their success was all but assured, where ones who look certain to lose pull off amazing wins anyway and where players use their understanding of the rules as the setting's "physics" to concoct plans that work even if the GM doesn't actually think they should.
Without the rules it's just the GM's whims and limitations on what's possible with a random dice toss here and there to make it seem like things are random. The PCs only succeed if you want them to succeed, they fail no matter what if you want them to fail. And the system turns into a metagame of "how do we best butter up the GM or play to the GM's biases to ensure success?" rather than one where Players can judge actions based on objective rules.
You're not playing a game, you're engaged in a cooperative story building session.
You just need to play with people you trust and whose goal is to have fun. If you have to keep them in check so that they won't "cheat", you're not doing it right.
I don't know what gave you the impression that they'll succeed fail if I want. There are die rolls and character scores, they're just limited to whenever we need them. I allow my players to "negotiate" with me and they have opportunities to make suggestions as to how to handle a situation. If it sounds fair, reasonable and fun, we can have it.
Right. Storygame.
So I'll just direct you to the header for this section of the forum (emphasis added);
"For discussion of traditional pen-and-paper roleplaying games and anything related to their game mechanics and settings, as well as industry events and gossip. See "Other Games" forum below for story-games."So maybe a discussion of the sort of mechanics you and your players negotiate out for how magic works and which stats/roll you do use and track (i.e. if you decide someone has a carry capacity of 200 lb. then I presume it remains in place as a stat rather than something that goes away and you just re-negotiate it the next time it comes up) would pull this thread back more on topic for this forum.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 12:45:22 PM
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
This is pretty much my experience with what happened in m20. They made it impossible to ignore the politics in it. The only thing good I can say about ascension now is creative thaumaturgy. I need to also take a look at ars magicka, but I saw some good rulesets for GURPS. It's a shame the basic premise of mage was good originally. A war for control of reality, mysterious organization that believes mages are are a threat to humanity and view them as a force of chaos. Every story I told with mage was usually from the perspective of a hermetic order or some kind of group. Avoiding the sillier shit
Quote from: Ocule on August 09, 2021, 11:42:39 AM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 12:45:22 PM
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
This is pretty much my experience with what happened in m20. They made it impossible to ignore the politics in it. The only thing good I can say about ascension now is creative thaumaturgy. I need to also take a look at ars magicka, but I saw some good rulesets for GURPS. It's a shame the basic premise of mage was good originally. A war for control of reality, mysterious organization that believes mages are are a threat to humanity and view them as a force of chaos. Every story I told with mage was usually from the perspective of a hermetic order or some kind of group. Avoiding the sillier shit
LOL could you give some more examples of politics getting into Mage? I'm only slighlitly familiar with the setting; I know there are different "schools" and thar magic is "mind over matter". What were the major changes apart from this blatant propaganda?
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 09, 2021, 12:41:58 PM
Quote from: Ocule on August 09, 2021, 11:42:39 AM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 12:45:22 PM
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
This is pretty much my experience with what happened in m20. They made it impossible to ignore the politics in it. The only thing good I can say about ascension now is creative thaumaturgy. I need to also take a look at ars magicka, but I saw some good rulesets for GURPS. It's a shame the basic premise of mage was good originally. A war for control of reality, mysterious organization that believes mages are are a threat to humanity and view them as a force of chaos. Every story I told with mage was usually from the perspective of a hermetic order or some kind of group. Avoiding the sillier shit
LOL could you give some more examples of politics getting into Mage? I'm only slighlitly familiar with the setting; I know there are different "schools" and thar magic is "mind over matter". What were the major changes apart from this blatant propaganda?
I don't have the book in front of me right now I'll have to do it later if you want specific examples. Their official pages and channels would witch hunt anyone they believed was conservative or "alt right" and ban you. They'd also screech that the game isn't for you if you didn't follow their politics.
Their devs are activists and would make frequent posts about their activism. In the actual book it got worse the more they published but you could see similar examples in their core book such as x cards, to downright telling "fascists" not to play this game. We know who they mean by that, they've been calling everyone fascist since forever now.
In there QuickStart all the characters are some kind of minority and all the bad guys are white dudes. They've renamed every faction to be more pc, and this theme is pretty consistent.
Anyway if you're curious I recommend borrowing a copy or something don't give em money.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 09, 2021, 12:41:58 PM
LOL could you give some more examples of politics getting into Mage? I'm only slighlitly familiar with the setting; I know there are different "schools" and thar magic is "mind over matter". What were the major changes apart from this blatant propaganda?
Here's just two... First from the back cover for Technocracy Reloaded;
"As science and technology draw humanity closer than ever before, certain factions within the masses display gross negligence, undermining the union's work and endangering the world for short-sighted gains. Despite global telecommunications, new frontiers in virtually every field of study, and an understanding of the universe only dreamed of by earlier generations, humanity faces threats on all sides.
"Can you save it?
"Climate change threatens to destroy life as we know it. Religious fundamentalism breeds terror around the globe. Diseases, once eradicated from the developed world through vaccination, have returned due to anti-vaxxer movements. Totalitarian nationalist governments rise, as the masses succumb to fear of the other." [Note: this blurb was written when the Bad Orange Man was still President]
From Book of the Fallen... this one line shows just how far up their own ass they are on their "belief makes it real" SJW bullshit... in reference to why its necessary to stop the messages of those who spread wrong think...
"
Mage's "battle for reality" is fictional, yet also real."
That's just two easy to find examples... every book of theirs is now chock full of them and once you see the strings, you can never unsee them.
Frankly, the thread on Woke RPG companies needs another level... call it "Code Black"... especially for Onyx Path/NuWhiteWolf so great is their Woke Fuckery.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 09, 2021, 12:41:58 PM
LOL could you give some more examples of politics getting into Mage? I'm only slighlitly familiar with the setting; I know there are different "schools" and thar magic is "mind over matter". What were the major changes apart from this blatant propaganda?
Okay, so there's two main groups: the Traditions (who practice ancient magics) and the Technocracy (who practice Science with a capital S, because they know they're not practicing real science but willworking but they call it Science so it doesn't count as willworking or some such BS). The Traditions have all made peace with each other, because otherwise the Technocracy will steamroll them over. Meanwhile, you also have Nephandi (who want to use willworking to destroy everything for reasons) and the Marauders (who basically are so detached from reality that they're immune to the forces that try to keep some semblance of baseline existence). And all these Willworkers are fighting so that their view of reality is accepted by the majority of people, and becomes Consensual reality (the reality that says wands of fireballs aren't real, but microwave ovens are). Get enough people to agree on something and Consensus changes (and has changed before!).
That's a dirty quick summation. Now for the problems with mage....
* The Traditions all get along. The Hermetics who say women can't work magic, the Verbena who say men are detached from the Goddess, the Celestial Chorister who says all these other mother fuckers need to find Jesus or go to Hell. And a good chunk of the real world groups these Traditions are based on don't like the LGBTQ+ crowd. They all toss aside the "problematic" aspects of their belief systems in the name of teamwork. Never mind that the problematic aspects are as much a part of their belief as anything else, and the more powerful members of the Traditions by definition have -very- strongly held beliefs. (It's handwaved away as "real willworkers don't buy the nonsense the mundanes sell each other", but... that doesn't really hold up)
* The Technocracy are evil Western intellectuals, businessmen, bureaucrats, doctors, engineers, explorers, and so forth. And keep in mind, the good scientists, doctors, etc. are really just dupes and patsies for the "true" Technocrats. They're the black hats, and painted about as one-dimensionally as you'd expect. And yes, they're predominantly White (although Asians have a strong representation too, but less villainous natch). Efforts have been made over the editions to mellow this out, but in the end you still have black hats with Science running around because the (canonical) game is about fighting The System and The Man and all that.
* Every Tradition mage talks in character about magic in terms of 10 Spheres because the writers wanted a theme of Tradition cooperation over players actually exploring cultural differences and disagreements. And while the 10 Spheres are fine as an out of character mechanic, it's really frigging stupid to have Native American shamans deconstructing their worldview into a Hermetic Quabbalistic system so they can "talk shop" with a mad scientist (the only good Technocrat is a Technocrat who got kicked out for political reasons) who also reframed their world view to accommodate somebody else. Technocrats use a different naming system for the same 10 Spheres because in a game about reality being subjective, some things are universal.
* Speaking of some things being universal, some things are also localized. What does that mean? It means when enough people from Tribe A can outnumber the people of Tribe B, the Tribe A's belief that B are a bunch of cannibals becomes true. Except that kind of "racism = belief = reality" thinking isn't part of the game (even if it -is- part of the belief systems of a lot of people). So really some things are always true, some things are localized, and you have to figure out which is which and what is what because the game doesn't know.
* The Nephandi are an excellent source of Black Hats. But the Technocracy are already the black hats for just about any decent story, so the Nephandi are the -Extra- Black Hats, with connections to the Wyrm or Demons or Oblivion or Umbrood or whatever. But basically their sole motivation is they're the angsty White Wolf fans who hate everything because everything doesn't kiss their ass and want to see it all burn. But now with magic powers and less motivation (or brains). The idea that some Nephandi are really less "destroy everything" and more "what if the others in my Tradition are wrong" with Nephandism being a political label rather than a state of being also isn't properly explored. Arguably because it would run counter to the whole "shiny happy Traddies holding hands" theme the game is a slave to. And with the Technocracy already providing all sorts of Black Hat themes, all that's left for the Nephandi are two-dimensional stories.
* Marauders exist because it's a Monday, and Mage is part of the greater World of Darkness crossover metaplot, and there needs to be a Wyld faction that fits within Werewolf's Triat. So we have a group of chaotic, unique, breaks-all-the-rules mages... and the systems to classify and categorize them. Blech. Also, they exist as basically a warning call to show how far a willworker can fall. But they're totally super powered and cool, so can only exist as GM plot devices (and I say this as a GM). It probably helps that they're all crazy and basically falling so far up their own assholes that eventually nobody can relate to them.
* When the systems make sense, they tend to get ignored by the authors. Sometimes it's because it's a Monday and done for the sake of cross-game balance (you literally need a fuckton of Sphere to do stuff to a Vampire or Werewolf for "reasons"), sometimes it's because the person writing forgot whose rules they were using. Seriously. And then there's all the times when the system -don't- make any fucking sense ("Mages can't count as Awakened witnesses of their own magic" "then why have a separate category for doing magick without any witnesses?!?!").
* EDIT: Oh yeah, you have a group devoted to goth mages who don't have a paradigm or some shit, but then they do, but whatever. Ultimately though you have a "totally not organized group" organized group of Goth Mages, because it's 1993 and Goths are the people who butter White Wolf's bread. That White Wolf never released Goth the Gothening ("it's a joke! For $9.95 we laugh our way to the bank!") was clearly an effort of willpower on their part.
tl;dr - Trads are idealized Lefties based on real world groups that weren't so great, who sublimate their cultures in the name of protecting their cultures. Technos are villainized people with advanced degrees in something other than the Humanities. And the whole system and setting is a bit of shit show beyond that.
Edit edit: I loved me some mage back in the day. But damn it, eventually you grow up and play Ars Magica instead.
Quote from: Habitual Gamer on August 09, 2021, 03:42:47 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 09, 2021, 12:41:58 PM
LOL could you give some more examples of politics getting into Mage? I'm only slighlitly familiar with the setting; I know there are different "schools" and thar magic is "mind over matter". What were the major changes apart from this blatant propaganda?
Okay, so there's two main groups: the Traditions (who practice ancient magics) and the Technocracy (who practice Science with a capital S, because they know they're not practicing real science but willworking but they call it Science so it doesn't count as willworking or some such BS). The Traditions have all made peace with each other, because otherwise the Technocracy will steamroll them over. Meanwhile, you also have Nephandi (who want to use willworking to destroy everything for reasons) and the Marauders (who basically are so detached from reality that they're immune to the forces that try to keep some semblance of baseline existence). And all these Willworkers are fighting so that their view of reality is accepted by the majority of people, and becomes Consensual reality (the reality that says wands of fireballs aren't real, but microwave ovens are). Get enough people to agree on something and Consensus changes (and has changed before!).
That's a dirty quick summation. Now for the problems with mage....
* The Traditions all get along. The Hermetics who say women can't work magic, the Verbena who say men are detached from the Goddess, the Celestial Chorister who says all these other mother fuckers need to find Jesus or go to Hell. And a good chunk of the real world groups these Traditions are based on don't like the LGBTQ+ crowd. They all toss aside the "problematic" aspects of their belief systems in the name of teamwork. Never mind that the problematic aspects are as much a part of their belief as anything else, and the more powerful members of the Traditions by definition have -very- strongly held beliefs. (It's handwaved away as "real willworkers don't buy the nonsense the mundanes sell each other", but... that doesn't really hold up)
* The Technocracy are evil Western intellectuals, businessmen, bureaucrats, doctors, engineers, explorers, and so forth. And keep in mind, the good scientists, doctors, etc. are really just dupes and patsies for the "true" Technocrats. They're the black hats, and painted about as one-dimensionally as you'd expect. And yes, they're predominantly White (although Asians have a strong representation too, but less villainous natch). Efforts have been made over the editions to mellow this out, but in the end you still have black hats with Science running around because the (canonical) game is about fighting The System and The Man and all that.
* Every Tradition mage talks in character about magic in terms of 10 Spheres because the writers wanted a theme of Tradition cooperation over players actually exploring cultural differences and disagreements. And while the 10 Spheres are fine as an out of character mechanic, it's really frigging stupid to have Native American shamans deconstructing their worldview into a Hermetic Quabbalistic system so they can "talk shop" with a mad scientist (the only good Technocrat is a Technocrat who got kicked out for political reasons) who also reframed their world view to accommodate somebody else. Technocrats use a different naming system for the same 10 Spheres because in a game about reality being subjective, some things are universal.
* Speaking of some things being universal, some things are also localized. What does that mean? It means when enough people from Tribe A can outnumber the people of Tribe B, the Tribe A's belief that B are a bunch of cannibals becomes true. Except that kind of "racism = belief = reality" thinking isn't part of the game (even if it -is- part of the belief systems of a lot of people). So really some things are always true, some things are localized, and you have to figure out which is which and what is what because the game doesn't know.
* The Nephandi are an excellent source of Black Hats. But the Technocracy are already the black hats for just about any decent story, so the Nephandi are the -Extra- Black Hats, with connections to the Wyrm or Demons or Oblivion or Umbrood or whatever. But basically their sole motivation is they're the angsty White Wolf fans who hate everything because everything doesn't kiss their ass and want to see it all burn. But now with magic powers and less motivation (or brains). The idea that some Nephandi are really less "destroy everything" and more "what if the others in my Tradition are wrong" with Nephandism being a political label rather than a state of being also isn't properly explored. Arguably because it would run counter to the whole "shiny happy Traddies holding hands" theme the game is a slave to. And with the Technocracy already providing all sorts of Black Hat themes, all that's left for the Nephandi are two-dimensional stories.
* Marauders exist because it's a Monday, and Mage is part of the greater World of Darkness crossover metaplot, and there needs to be a Wyld faction that fits within Werewolf's Triat. So we have a group of chaotic, unique, breaks-all-the-rules mages... and the systems to classify and categorize them. Blech. Also, they exist as basically a warning call to show how far a willworker can fall. But they're totally super powered and cool, so can only exist as GM plot devices (and I say this as a GM). It probably helps that they're all crazy and basically falling so far up their own assholes that eventually nobody can relate to them.
* When the systems make sense, they tend to get ignored by the authors. Sometimes it's because it's a Monday and done for the sake of cross-game balance (you literally need a fuckton of Sphere to do stuff to a Vampire or Werewolf for "reasons"), sometimes it's because the person writing forgot whose rules they were using. Seriously. And then there's all the times when the system -don't- make any fucking sense ("Mages can't count as Awakened witnesses of their own magic" "then why have a separate category for doing magick without any witnesses?!?!").
* EDIT: Oh yeah, you have a group devoted to goth mages who don't have a paradigm or some shit, but then they do, but whatever. Ultimately though you have a "totally not organized group" organized group of Goth Mages, because it's 1993 and Goths are the people who butter White Wolf's bread. That White Wolf never released Goth the Gothening ("it's a joke! For $9.95 we laugh our way to the bank!") was clearly an effort of willpower on their part.
tl;dr - Trads are idealized Lefties based on real world groups that weren't so great, who sublimate their cultures in the name of protecting their cultures. Technos are villainized people with advanced degrees in something other than the Humanities. And the whole system and setting is a bit of shit show beyond that.
Edit edit: I loved me some mage back in the day. But damn it, eventually you grow up and play Ars Magica instead.
I'd chalk it up to the prevailing trends of the time. In the 90's, perhaps it was goths, industrial rock & punk and gritty stories that look 2edgy4me for us nowadays, so it makes sense that it be urban tribes vs. corporations in a grimdark, pre-cyberpunk world. That was kind of the spirit behind Vampire: The Masquerade.
Rather than mere propaganda, it sounds like they ran out of ideas and hired some uncreative woketards
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 09, 2021, 03:27:22 PM
"Climate change threatens to destroy life as we know it. Religious fundamentalism breeds terror around the globe. Diseases, once eradicated from the developed world through vaccination, have returned due to anti-vaxxer movements. Totalitarian nationalist governments rise, as the masses succumb to fear of the other."[/i] [Note: this blurb was written when the Bad Orange Man was still President]
From Book of the Fallen... this one line shows just how far up their own ass they are on their "belief makes it real" SJW bullshit... in reference to why its necessary to stop the messages of those who spread wrong think...
"Mage's "battle for reality" is fictional, yet also real."
That's just two easy to find examples... every book of theirs is now chock full of them and once you see the strings, you can never unsee them.
Frankly, the thread on Woke RPG companies needs another level... call it "Code Black"... especially for Onyx Path/NuWhiteWolf so great is their Woke Fuckery.
Rolling my eyes here. Funny how they never complain about left-wing regimes. Nope, they just hate the ones their parents like. You'll never hear something alongthe lines of this:
Welcome to a grim world in which governments and mass media cooperate to control the masses and brainwash them into giving away their freedoms, while censoring and persecuting those who disagree in the name of "safety", "science", "diversity" and "tolerance".Nope, that would be a breeding ground for terrorists.
Anyway, the idea of the setting is that collective belief changes the world. Why not promote the idea that global warming is not real?
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 11, 2021, 12:47:50 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 09, 2021, 03:27:22 PM
"Climate change threatens to destroy life as we know it. Religious fundamentalism breeds terror around the globe. Diseases, once eradicated from the developed world through vaccination, have returned due to anti-vaxxer movements. Totalitarian nationalist governments rise, as the masses succumb to fear of the other."[/i] [Note: this blurb was written when the Bad Orange Man was still President]
From Book of the Fallen... this one line shows just how far up their own ass they are on their "belief makes it real" SJW bullshit... in reference to why its necessary to stop the messages of those who spread wrong think...
"Mage's "battle for reality" is fictional, yet also real."
That's just two easy to find examples... every book of theirs is now chock full of them and once you see the strings, you can never unsee them.
Frankly, the thread on Woke RPG companies needs another level... call it "Code Black"... especially for Onyx Path/NuWhiteWolf so great is their Woke Fuckery.
Rolling my eyes here. Funny how they never complain about left-wing regimes. Nope, they just hate the ones their parents like. You'll never hear something alongthe lines of this:
Welcome to a grim world in which governments and mass media cooperate to control the masses and brainwash them into giving away their freedoms, while censoring and persecuting those who disagree in the name of "safety", "science", "diversity" and "tolerance".
Nope, that would be a breeding ground for terrorists.
Anyway, the idea of the setting is that collective belief changes the world. Why not promote the idea that global warming is not real?
I like how they say religious fundamentalism breeds terror around the globe...pretending that current day there is only one flavor of fundamentalism that does that. I also notice they completely leave out the religion of marxism that has probably killed more people than Islam, Christianity, and Judaism combined.
I'm all for mysterious "sense of wonder" stuff and unique magic, as opposed to cookie- utter magic as tech and so on. But many people aren't. And the reason cookie-cutter stuff works is that it's reproducible and acceptable to the largest pool of people. That's why we have so many cheap factory cookies and so few artisan bakeries where the pastry chef gets up at 2am to make his heirloom recipe and sell his stuff for 8x the price per carb hit compared to the supermarket stuff.
Tangentially related, but I fucking love weird magic items that are useful but strange and maybe even a little uncontrollable.
Things like the wand of wonder, the bag of beans, the immovable rod... all great fun and even if the party is careful enough to identify stuff, it's still just a little... strange.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 08:49:06 AM
Tangentially related, but I fucking love weird magic items that are useful but strange and maybe even a little uncontrollable.
Things like the wand of wonder, the bag of beans, the immovable rod... all great fun and even if the party is careful enough to identify stuff, it's still just a little... strange.
I like to turn that up a notch or two, with items that useful but slightly cursed. You can drop it anytime you want, but players don't. Plus, once you get a group of players used to that, you can slip in an item that is more 50/50. They may go quite some time using it before they decide it isn't worth it.
I may be overly fond of such things because of the over the top reactions some of my regulars have when it comes to finally getting rid of such things. They tend to be quite imaginative with it, almost to the point of holding a grudge. It's not enough to simply drop the item. They feel the need to hide it, bury it, even spend some effort locking it away. Especially fun with an intelligent item that tries to play the sympathy card when it realizes it is about to be locked up in a vault in a deep dungeon. I had one sword pleading, whimpering, etc. When the players were resolute, the sword said something like, "Just like last time" and sighed. That's when the players remembered they had found it in a locked, deep vault. :D
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 11, 2021, 12:38:03 PM
I'd chalk it up to the prevailing trends of the time. In the 90's, perhaps it was goths, industrial rock & punk and gritty stories that look 2edgy4me for us nowadays, so it makes sense that it be urban tribes vs. corporations in a grimdark, pre-cyberpunk world. That was kind of the spirit behind Vampire: The Masquerade.
The whole "World of Darkness" shtick was very much bandied about as justification for a lot of the nonsense in regards to the Technocracy. Problem was, Mage was supposed to be a game about changing the world for "The Better", and a lot of the fanbase didn't buy the idea that the Technocracy were Black Hats and Trads were White Hats. They wanted a middle-road Gray Hat setting for both (with Nephandi as Black Hats and Marauders as Blorgotz Berets).
But Mage wasn't meant to be a crossover game (because it's Thursday*) and so making it compatible with the rest of the WoD titles' cosmology/setting rings hollow...
(*I know I keep harping on this, but every time I saw a freelancer who wrote for the lines try to argue that point on TBP and say the games were not meant to crossover, I remembered two things: all the materials designed specifically to support or expand crossover stories (e.g. the death of Ravnos, Abominations, Midnight Circus, Vampire/Faeries, Wraith and Giovanni, etc.), and questioning a White Wolf freelancer usually meant you were questioning a mod or a mod's friend or a company a mod wanted to work for... so... (unspoken rules of TBP: "White Wolf/Onyx Path are good guys, do not say mean things about White Wolf/Onyx Path or your thread will be locked at least")
QuoteKeep it simple. That's my point. Don't bother making up a whole rationale as to how magic works, or a complex, well-thought-out system. Keep it balanced, of course; nothing too exaggerated. Maybe throw a few rules here and there, but keep it mind that magic works in mysterious ways.
Meanwhile me: crafting elaborate metaphysical system to explain both natural and supernatural phenomena in my setting to minute details.
How about NO.
QuoteMage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
Yeah I've seen latest edition wen't more WOKE, but in original game you had loose coalition of various freaks including many religious fanatics against Ultimate Technocratic Zentrism. Technocracy was not Right Wing in first editions in any sane way. Nor left either. Authoritarian Center on compass. Power for power sake. Also - all Traditions are fighting to REPLACE Technos. They want to enforce own paradigm on reality not make it wishy washy - because that's how you get Marauders.
Also still... there is objective reality under... our macro-world in Mage. In a way you could say mechanics of game itself it is, and even with change of paradigm... your character sheet would still work. Mages cannot reshape everything - Spheres will remains, and with them all elements they constitute. In different configurations by essentialy the same.
And this is way different from woke stance which is not "you need to work hard and hone your will to reshape reality" which is something more from this subconcioussness coaching bullshit books, woke stance is "you are what you feel you are without any demands from you and everyone have to respect you and treat you your imagined way or we'll cancel you"
QuoteI don't care about mechanics. I'll make something up on the spot. If it's blessed, it may be useful. How? That will depend. Some players find it hard to think outside of the book; particularly Spaniards, in my experience. Others understand it right from the get-go and see it coming a mile ahead. We're here to tell and play stories, situations and adventures, and I won't let the rules get in the way. That being said, this is not at all like the wokes who are here to "tell a story together" in which nothing bad can happen. It's just a rules-light approach highly consistent with the old school mindset.
Old School was light on many things but treating magic (and fighting) in narrative space was never one of them. Those were two elements who were universally well mechanised.
Narrative magic is way closer to some PBTA/FITD options where everything is solved as narrative puzzle, not in-verse practical problem solving.
Point is simply - most OSR and high-crunch players does not want whatever-narrative magic, simply as that. They want to think outside of box by using well defined and ruled abilities and spells in unconventional way, and not think outside freaking tesseract by having vaguely descripted GM-whim depended magic, which effectiveness will be mostly depending of famous "how good for a story it is". Wanna play Narrative RPGs or even Storygames, sure. But reallly stop preaching.
Quote
So, basically, you aren't talking about RPG's at all... you're talking about Storygames.
No not really. Storygames are games where gaming structure enforces Story to happen. For instance Fiasco. Games that push players more into Authorial than Actor role, ergo push them from RP-ying.
Very lite RPG where most of things is based on divine fiat of GM is still RPG. As long as it pushes players in Actors seats... it's RP, no matter whether you have mechanics to solve problems or not.
Old D&D had social challenges basically runned on GM's fiat and it does not made it Storygame.
Quoteit Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author"
Improv Theatre and Storygame are two very opposed things. Storygames often even lacks GM because rules of games replaces him.
This is more style derived from frustrated GM's dealing with rule lawyers or own dislike for learning mechanics, than from ambitions to make game that enforce stories.
QuoteCall it whatever you want. I'm not sure if its meant to be disparaging but I prefer this kind of gaming over learning complex rules to arrive at the same results.
Yeah, nope.
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 17, 2021, 06:42:52 AM
Meanwhile me: crafting elaborate metaphysical system to explain both natural and supernatural phenomena in my setting to minute details.
How about NO.
No one is going to stop you
QuoteOld School was light on many things but treating magic (and fighting) in narrative space was never one of them. Those were two elements who were universally well mechanised.
Narrative magic is way closer to some PBTA/FITD options where everything is solved as narrative puzzle, not in-verse practical problem solving.
Well, I guess I'm just playing games the wrong way then. Either way, never said it was all narrative. And nobody said magic had to work in terms of mechanics; that's just one view for some games.
QuotePoint is simply - most OSR and high-crunch players does not want whatever-narrative magic, simply as that. They want to think outside of box by using well defined and ruled abilities and spells in unconventional way, and not think outside freaking tesseract by having vaguely descripted GM-whim depended magic, which effectiveness will be mostly depending of famous "how good for a story it is". Wanna play Narrative RPGs or even Storygames, sure. But reallly stop preaching.
I'm not going to force them either. Let them play as they wish. In my opinion, it's wasting a good opportunity. You still miss the point; it's either strict rules or "anything goes as long as it makes for a good story". It's either crunch or you're woke (if anything, it is the wokes the ones that are interested in buying every book or bring up the players handbook or GM guide whenever there's a problem). If you like thinking outside the box, apply it to this case. I'm not talking about mechanics; I'm talking about how magic is like in your setting.
In a world full of this:
(https://i.redd.it/n0fzf120xz841.jpg)
(https://external-preview.redd.it/af-rSGjVEQ9S_urh9G3dlpAGsngobkWaFCB5OlGCIcA.jpg?auto=webp&s=704ab124ece708863d4dee89dc0244816cd0b575)
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a5/af/cc/a5afccea2ebb48a730cd42bdf089519e.png)
I want more ghost stories, rituals, incantations, secret gatherings in the forest, charms, curses, fairies and nymphs, potions, shamans, etc. I want elves, centaurs, cyclops, orcs, dwarves and goblins to be real but rare, mythical creatures who do not live in the same city, out in the open.
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 17, 2021, 06:42:52 AM
Old School was light on many things but treating magic (and fighting) in narrative space was never one of them. Those were two elements who were universally well mechanised.
Narrative magic is way closer to some PBTA/FITD options where everything is solved as narrative puzzle, not in-verse practical problem solving.
Point is simply - most OSR and high-crunch players does not want whatever-narrative magic, simply as that. They want to think outside of box by using well defined and ruled abilities and spells in unconventional way, and not think outside freaking tesseract by having vaguely descripted GM-whim depended magic, which effectiveness will be mostly depending of famous "how good for a story it is".
You're lumping "old school" and "high-crunch" together here, which I think doesn't fit. Old School covers a wide range - but especially, a lot of Old School embraced GM arbitration and rulings as integral to the game, rather than having everything be handled mechanically. I cited before about how many old D&D tournament modules focused on riddles, traps, and other interactions that were handled without any mechanics.
Much of Old School was not about crunch and system mastery -- it was about imagination and creative solutions that required GM arbitration.
Based on this, I think there's room for an intersection of unscientific magic and old school -- it's just something that hasn't been explored much previously.
Something I've been pondering lately is what separates magic from just, super powers? Way a lot of games and stuff are these days x-men and wizards are pretty much the same thing.
Magic in games is reliable, instant, repeatable, poses little to no risk the user and hell even having to study it is mostly out the window considering most wizard ages these days are super young. What makes magic magical?
Quote from: Ocule on August 18, 2021, 03:44:15 PM
Something I've been pondering lately is what separates magic from just, super powers? Way a lot of games and stuff are these days x-men and wizards are pretty much the same thing.
Magic in games is reliable, instant, repeatable, poses little to no risk the user and hell even having to study it is mostly out the window considering most wizard ages these days are super young. What makes magic magical?
You got that right. Magic is simply shooting beams or fireballs. Elves are simply another species, and so are dwarves and orcs. Goblins are just green humanoids. This is what "scientifc magic" does. It devalues everything. It's the result of 21st century scientism
Keep in mind that you're straddling 'theme' and 'mechanics' here.
Don't expect players to be very interested in using magic if they run a good chance of their characters turning inside out when they do. So yeah, any magic system is gonna have to be worth the risk.
This is one of the problems with later D&D editions. Yeah, magic wasn't hugely risky in 1E or 2E, but a magic-user paid for it with an anemic hit die and general incompetence in combat beyond tossing darts or daggers.
Quote from: Ocule on August 18, 2021, 03:44:15 PM
Magic in games is reliable, instant, repeatable, poses little to no risk the user and hell even having to study it is mostly out the window considering most wizard ages these days are super young. What makes magic magical?
Key words [Arcane] [Divine]
Quote from: Ocule on August 18, 2021, 03:44:15 PM
Something I've been pondering lately is what separates magic from just, super powers? Way a lot of games and stuff are these days x-men and wizards are pretty much the same thing.
Magic in games is reliable, instant, repeatable, poses little to no risk the user and hell even having to study it is mostly out the window considering most wizard ages these days are super young. What makes magic magical?
In a word... ignorance.
Take the principles of 21st Century medicine and chemistry back to Medieval Europe and try to tell them you're not a wizard. That's what a LOT of real life historical "wizardry" was... early chemistry and and medicine before there was a scientific method and the mindset to share your discoveries instead of keeping them as trade secrets. That and attempts to call upon supernatural entities for aid which may or may not actually be answered (and sometimes if they were answered at all is subject to interpretation; did he recover from his Illness because God intervened or was his immune system just strong enough to handle it... or was his immune system strong enough to handle it because God intervened).
That's basically stage magic today too... its only "magic" until you understand the principles of what's actually happening.
The same with fantasy creatures; there's some pretty solid evidence that stories about griffins originated from people finding the fossils of protoceratops (which are found in the region where the legends began) and their beaks resembled a bird, the bones of their crest without knowing the musculature looked a lot like wings and its general shape was more like a great cat... so they used what they were familiar with to describe what they found and since all they could find were bones it was clearly a creature that lived back in the days of myths and legends, the same with the cyclops (elephant/mammoth skulls) and other critters. Others were just misinterpretations of stories people told about creatures from far off lands (there's a good chance unicorns are just misapplied stories about rhinos).
Many instances of "spirit" activity was just the misunderstanding of various natural processes. We get the word Cobalt from the Kobolds; mischievous mining spirits that could make people sick while mining for cobalt; what we know now is that arsenic is commonly found in cobalt deposits and can poison those who mine it... and if you don't know what arsenic is... well, evil spirits is at least an attempt at an explanation.
So yeah, a lot of fantasy magic is basically super-powers; people with secret knowledge that use it produce effects the common man can't explain (plus laws of physics that are NOT those of the real world) or which have the right bloodline to channel various forces in ways normal humans can't or which have an alliance with noncorporeal or extraplanar entity with the ability to perform various acts that normal humans cannot.
Final thought on that... the word Arcane, in its normal non-gaming definition, means "poorly understood." I think its a fantastic term for a lot of fantasy magic because most of it could be described via Clarke's Law (any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic) and its inverse (any sufficiently studied magic is indistinguishable from technology)... i.e. D&D wizards are just people with some knowledge of 24th century science living in a world where the general level of knowledge is that of 8th Century Europe.
The Net Wizard's Handbook from the AD&D days had some discussion on different kinds of magic systems.
https://www.enworld.org/attachments/64586487-net-wizard-s-handbook-third-edition-pdf.107598/
It rates magic on two axes: controllability and quantity.
Controllability has three broad ranges: magic as chaos, magic as art, and magic as science. Typical D&D worlds (i.e Faerun, Krynn) fall into the middle "art".
Quantity has three ranges: abundant, "normal", scarce. Typical D&D settings fall into the middle "normal."
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 18, 2021, 06:30:47 PM
Quote from: Ocule on August 18, 2021, 03:44:15 PM
Something I've been pondering lately is what separates magic from just, super powers? Way a lot of games and stuff are these days x-men and wizards are pretty much the same thing.
Magic in games is reliable, instant, repeatable, poses little to no risk the user and hell even having to study it is mostly out the window considering most wizard ages these days are super young. What makes magic magical?
In a word... ignorance.
Take the principles of 21st Century medicine and chemistry back to Medieval Europe and try to tell them you're not a wizard. That's what a LOT of real life historical "wizardry" was... early chemistry and and medicine before there was a scientific method and the mindset to share your discoveries instead of keeping them as trade secrets. That and attempts to call upon supernatural entities for aid which may or may not actually be answered (and sometimes if they were answered at all is subject to interpretation; did he recover from his Illness because God intervened or was his immune system just strong enough to handle it... or was his immune system strong enough to handle it because God intervened).
That's basically stage magic today too... its only "magic" until you understand the principles of what's actually happening.
The same with fantasy creatures; there's some pretty solid evidence that stories about griffins originated from people finding the fossils of protoceratops (which are found in the region where the legends began) and their beaks resembled a bird, the bones of their crest without knowing the musculature looked a lot like wings and its general shape was more like a great cat... so they used what they were familiar with to describe what they found and since all they could find were bones it was clearly a creature that lived back in the days of myths and legends, the same with the cyclops (elephant/mammoth skulls) and other critters. Others were just misinterpretations of stories people told about creatures from far off lands (there's a good chance unicorns are just misapplied stories about rhinos).
Many instances of "spirit" activity was just the misunderstanding of various natural processes. We get the word Cobalt from the Kobolds; mischievous mining spirits that could make people sick while mining for cobalt; what we know now is that arsenic is commonly found in cobalt deposits and can poison those who mine it... and if you don't know what arsenic is... well, evil spirits is at least an attempt at an explanation.
So yeah, a lot of fantasy magic is basically super-powers; people with secret knowledge that use it produce effects the common man can't explain (plus laws of physics that are NOT those of the real world) or which have the right bloodline to channel various forces in ways normal humans can't or which have an alliance with noncorporeal or extraplanar entity with the ability to perform various acts that normal humans cannot.
Final thought on that... the word Arcane, in its normal non-gaming definition, means "poorly understood." I think its a fantastic term for a lot of fantasy magic because most of it could be described via Clarke's Law (any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic) and its inverse (any sufficiently studied magic is indistinguishable from technology)... i.e. D&D wizards are just people with some knowledge of 24th century science living in a world where the general level of knowledge is that of 8th Century Europe.
Congratulations, you just ruined fantasy! You just turned magic into a fictional version of electricity. And there's nothing more to that.
If magic is just science, you end up having spell factories, magitek powered by crystals, mass produced charms and... basically Eberron or any other freakshitting setting in which all races (or species) coexist since there is nothing that would keep them all from living in the same city, hanging out at the same inn and studying at the same college of wizards; since now magic is probably out there in the open, like the science it is. Eventually, you just end up having sci fi with pointy ears.
Magic is simply reduced to "energy" instead of rituals, summonings, charms, components, symbols and unexplained phenomena. You can't have Cinderella, King Arthur, Roland and the Paladins, or ghost stories with that sort of magic, because it follows a certain set of rules. There is no reason why a form of natural energy would stop working after midnight, or how that energy would consciously give you good luck, or require that you recite a certain incantation to make someone fall in love.
Here's a golem powered by "magic"; proving how it simply turns magic into fantasy electricity
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjLZ23nWkAEiRp2.jpg)
I'd rather stay with mystical 90's internet gif wizards straight from a DIO or power metal song who don't go around counting mana points
(https://animated.name/uploads/posts/2016-08/1472041207_1362.gif)
QuoteCongratulations, you just ruined fantasy!
No one ruined fantasy. There's just as much weird folklore fantasy as there is superpower magic fantasy or occult-tech fantasy. Something nice for everyone. It's just you onetruwaying in a bullshit way.
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 18, 2021, 07:14:17 PM
QuoteCongratulations, you just ruined fantasy!
No one ruined fantasy. There's just as much weird folklore fantasy as there is superpower magic fantasy or occult-tech fantasy. Something nice for everyone. It's just you onetruwaying in a bullshit way.
I'm being sarcastic; you did not ruin fantasy. If anything I think you're doing yourself a disservice, but it's a matter of taste.
There's bits and pieces from various systems I quite like.
Runequest's spirit magic where disease is caused by spirits and shamans stalk the etherial plane while their familiar spirit guards their body is very flavorful. I'm never really thrilled with the rest of their magic rules but I do really like the Magic World rules from Worlds of Wonder. Limiting how many spells a wizard can have studied up on and ready to go is a nice balance between D&D's vancian magic and Runequest's spells as character features approach.
I've always liked Sword Bearer's magic system with its containment of nodes of elemental and spiritual energy in items. But making steel is a fairly powerful spell in the system and one of the best attack spells is creating water in the target's throat to make them choke.
Galloway's Fantasy Wargaming is interesting for what it tries to do by focusing more on how much a wizard can do rather than exactly what. I've always thought it was in many ways a response or reaction to Chivalry and Sorcery's approach. More modern games like Ars Magica and Mage the Accension follow this tradition.
Tunnels and Trolls implements a lot of things like spell points and flexible spells with improved effects but the list always feels a bit too limited. Very much a magic as super powers system.
GURPS Magic is pretty dry but very functional. Sometimes the prerequisite trees are a bit weird. But I've always liked it a lot. Lots of people like Ritual Path Magic from Grimoire. Fantasy HERO went with a straight up spells as powers approach.
The Fantasy Trip does a pretty good job of the same things T&T does in a more structured and tactical form.
Rolemaster (yeah, I was gonna go there) is very nice and has a lot of flavorful professions and a really neat structure to the whole thing but it's pretty rigid and there's really not that many actual effects, just lots of variations on them. Very much a mechanical system but magic is pretty weak compared to D&D with turning into an animal and having its abilities being about a 15th level spell.
I tried to put more process into my The Arcane Confabulation magic system. So, effects are pretty cut and dried mechanically but you've got to look up spells you haven't learned as skills and casting generates miasma that accumulates in the aether which can be mitigated with ritual purification. I very much wanted to avoid magic as superpowers or special attack abilities. The only problem is that at present it doesn't really do alternate methods. I've got notes on what stuff like ki and such but it's a slow accumulation. http://www.uncouthsavage.com/uploads/1/3/3/2/133279619/thearccon.pdf
I wouldn't say that any of the systems I've listed really manage to escape the mechanical nature or simply oozes flavor but in the end, a roleplaying game needs rules. In many ways I feel AD&D does about the best job of feeling arcane. It's messy, inconsistent, the spells are obscure and have odd uses and really feel like they're not following a structure or rules that we can see. Of course, it get worse as editions go by with fifth edition making Fantasy Hero look all mystical and immersive.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 08:49:06 AM
Tangentially related, but I fucking love weird magic items that are useful but strange and maybe even a little uncontrollable.
Things like the wand of wonder, the bag of beans, the immovable rod... all great fun and even if the party is careful enough to identify stuff, it's still just a little... strange.
The immovable rod is an awesome example of something that looks both technological and magical. There is no "fairy logic" or curse; it looks and works like a tool. But HOW it works is entirely unexplainable. So it MUST be magic, or "sufficiently advanced" tech.
I love this stuff.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 19, 2021, 12:09:16 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 08:49:06 AM
Tangentially related, but I fucking love weird magic items that are useful but strange and maybe even a little uncontrollable.
Things like the wand of wonder, the bag of beans, the immovable rod... all great fun and even if the party is careful enough to identify stuff, it's still just a little... strange.
The immovable rod is an awesome example of something that looks both technological and magical. There is no "fairy logic" or curse; it looks and works like a tool. But HOW it works is entirely unexplainable. So it MUST be magic, or "sufficiently advanced" tech.
I love this stuff.
Exactly.
You can have your cake and eat it too. Magicians can harness magic reliably. But when they try to break it down to logical consistency, it should always go a bit off the rails. They should know 'OK, this works', but they might not necessarily know why -- or how.
There was a neat article years back in Dragon about using alternate material components and the effects they could have. I love that stuff too. 'OK, I don't have a piece of normal leather for my armor spell... but I do have a chunk of displacer beast hide. Let me try it and hopefully it works...'.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 19, 2021, 12:17:19 PM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 19, 2021, 12:09:16 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 08:49:06 AM
Tangentially related, but I fucking love weird magic items that are useful but strange and maybe even a little uncontrollable.
Things like the wand of wonder, the bag of beans, the immovable rod... all great fun and even if the party is careful enough to identify stuff, it's still just a little... strange.
The immovable rod is an awesome example of something that looks both technological and magical. There is no "fairy logic" or curse; it looks and works like a tool. But HOW it works is entirely unexplainable. So it MUST be magic, or "sufficiently advanced" tech.
I love this stuff.
Exactly.
You can have your cake and eat it too. Magicians can harness magic reliably. But when they try to break it down to logical consistency, it should always go a bit off the rails. They should know 'OK, this works', but they might not necessarily know why -- or how.
There was a neat article years back in Dragon about using alternate material components and the effects they could have. I love that stuff too. 'OK, I don't have a piece of normal leather for my armor spell... but I do have a chunk of displacer beast hide. Let me try it and hopefully it works...'.
This is what
Net Wizard's Handbook labels "magic as art."
QuoteMagic Is An Art. In most AD&D campaigns, magic falls into a middle ground between predictability and randomness. Spells and magical effects are fairly constant but suffer from inexplicable chaos on a more detailed level. For instance, a Fireball's damage or color may vary from casting to casting, but it will never suddenly summon a giant butterfly by mistake. Furthermore, many mages cast spells that are outwardly the same using totally different words and gestures. In other words, one wizard's fireball spell may require the speaking of "abracadabra" and the use of a pinch of sulfur, while another mage may speak "ala kazam" and hold a live glow worm. Why two seemingly different actions produce nearly the same results is a mystery, but it explains why mere warriors cannot simply pick up a spellbook and start casting things willy nilly.
Wizards are generally considered to be practitioners of a complicated art or craft. As such, they belong to guilds, possess trade secrets, and educate prospective entrants to the field by apprenticeship or technical education (e.g. magic colleges). Spells tend to be learned like recipes, and research is usually carried out using a heavy dose of trial and error -- because not everything can be just told to the prospective wizard. By and large, though, magic is no more dangerous for the mage than a mechanical loom is for the spinster -- it is merely a powerful tool that must be respected.
Mages are probably the most common single wizard type in these worlds, although all of the specialist types are possible. Metamagicians can exist in such a campaign, but would probably be very rare.
Virtually every kit is represented in such a world.
In fact, the NWH scheme is extremely useful for this sort of discussion. Here are the axes illustrated using examples of published fiction:
Magic is...
Chaos/Abundant: The world of Michael Moorcock's "Elric" Saga.
Chaos/Normal: The world of Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd & Grey Mouser series.
Chaos/Scarce: Best exemplified by the short stories of H. P. Lovecraft.
Art/Abundant: The lands of Glantri and Alphatia from the D&D Known World.
Art/Normal: The normal worlds of the AD&D Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance accessories.
Art/Scarce: Each of the various worlds in DeCamp and Pratt's The Compleat Enchanter.
Science/Abundant: The land of Kelewan from Raymond Feist's "Riftwar" Saga.
Science/Normal: The land of Earthsea from the series of books by Ursula K. LeGuin.
Science/Scarce: Probably the land of Midkemia from Raymond Feist's "Riftwar" Saga.
Two things came to mind when I read this. And they're both somewhat antithetical to this post as they're both themed around a scientific understanding, but still retain their special feeling. These two systems are thaumaturgy and sympathy.
Let's start with thaumaturgy because it's what I'm most familiar with and it's most relevant to Eberron. Thaumaturgy is a system of magic that often intersects with technology, alchemy, metallurgy, and other protoscientific practices. Since many pieces of media use the term in such a wide variety of meanings, I'll mainly be focusing on two main media: Amnesia, and Thaumcraft (a minecraft mod for those who don't already know); both works, I believe, excellently depict the wonders and horrors of this magic system. Thaumcraft depicts thaumaturgy as a system of humble beginnings and dangerous advancement. I will be mainly focusing on thaumcraft 4 for mechanics. The two building blocks of this system are vis: the primordial energy that seeps into the primaterial, and essentia: the condensed essence of all physical matter. These two things are kept largely separate from each other as they are not meant to reliably mix or be converted into one another without dire consequences. Thaumcraft has you starting out creating, and procedurally writing a book, known as the thaumonomicon, with information you gather by exploring the world and studying everything from the basic stone and water, to complex portals and tools. As you write this book, you gain access to recipes for advanced wands and other devices that make use of either vis or essentia. With these devices, you can create small, yet consistent effects that mostly include transmutation, conjuration, and evocation. The larger effects, however, may lead to long lasting consequences. There is a third building block that is made as a byproduct of essentia called Flux. The best way I can explain it is that essentially isn't supposed to be congealed into a pure physical form. And the first way a thaumaturge generates this, is by throwing items into a special cauldron of boiling water. Since the essentia is exposed to open air, it often flows out as an unidentifiable energy that, if not taken care of, can hinder your ability to channel energy, and even warp reality. Vis, on the other hand, is energy that steadily flows out from small holes in the overworld called nodes. A thaumaturge can tap these nodes and extract traces of elemental energy from them to fuel his studies. However, if he takes too much from these nodes, he can run the risk of damaging it or even corrupting it. Some of these corruptions include sinister nodes: a type of node that functions normally, but darkens its surroundings with a strange, eldritch energy that sometimes conjures undead, a hungry node, which devours all solid matter around it, growing larger and larger as it does. This can be compared to a portal with a reversed polarity. And then there's a tainted node: a type of node that slowly changes its surrounding area into a vile space of warped reality. Prolonged exposure to this warping can lead to poisoning, which, if you succumb to it, will turn you into a mindless infected thrall that wanders around, further spreading the taint. The other effect can result in a permanent form of insanity called warp, which can create various effects that can even physically manifest if it's severe enough. So yes. While you can harness magic in this system to create automation, it still poses very dangerous threats that will never completely go away. Every new advancement in this practice will always be special because it means that you avoided a crisis that would require a full evacuation.
The Amnesia series is very similar, though it's magic system is a lot more hidden. Amnesia uses a lot of the same concepts as thaumcraft with some minor differences. Instead of taint, there is an entity/substance called shadow, which functions exactly as taint. Essentia, I believe is still largely there, except that the game largely focuses on a single substance called vitae, which draws parallels to the vitus essentia in thaumcraft, based on the same Latin word, meaning life. This substance is derived from living creatures, which usually requires some unethical practices to get large quantities. Exposure to this substance often leads to wounds healing, accelerated fetal development, and, if continually infused throughout the body, extended life, as it acts as a supplement to one's own vitality. Thaumaturgy in this game is depicted as having been advanced far beyond what one man can achieve in one lifetime, which naturally means that the dangers posed by this science are far more commonplace, and far more violent. Shadow covers entire expenses of land, undead thralls litter the labs of once foolish thaumaturges who met their untimely ends and extradimensional gateways have been opened that connect the material with an unknown eldritch world saturated with vitae, that thaumaturges still decided to build more labs in. Performing the most basic magical procedures to survive in this setting feels like a massive achievement as those who came before you have shown well enough that even their genius was not enough to prevent catastrophic events that you stand in the fallout of.
Sympathy, or much better known as sympathetic magic, is the closest there is to physics, as it attempts to explain objects acting on each other long after they are separated. This is split into three laws: correspondence, which states that the two objects must be similar to act on each other, consanguinity, which states that two pieces of an object can represent the whole, and conservation, which essentially represents the law of thermal dynamics. The way this law is used states that the force acting on both objects can't be nothing. So if you were to use one coin to pick up another coin from a distance, the coin you are manipulating would be twice as heavy, as you are applying force to two coins. This practice uses a science to create effects on a perfectly reliable basis, but the difficulty in achieving these effects is very high, causing the practice to retain its special nature.
For the love of God, man, break that into paragraphs. Ain't nobody got time for that.
Sorry about that. I was on my phone and forum posting is a new animal to me.
Quote from: hedgehobbit on August 02, 2021, 06:49:33 PM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 02, 2021, 06:44:35 PMNo. Not really. I mean SCIENCE demands methodology and if magickal phenomena will be not possible to scrutinize under such methodology - because spirits of underworlds hate scientists, and it's their call what will happen, then you can have merely history of magickal occurences, but never science of magick - because you cannot experiment on that, not really. Maybe only to get conclusion it's not possible to examine it's scientificaly
Shitload of people using magick in history, despite very dubious and unreliable results beg to differ.
People only used magic in history because they were either desperate or deluded. They couldn't apply scientific methods to it because nothing actually happened.
Or have you considered that the enduring appeal of magic is that things DO happen, just not the things you wish would happen? This is like claiming "no one would engage in physics if you can't use it to make yourself spontaneously grow wings!" or "why would people go to a psychologist if the psychologist can't give them a 14 inch penis?? Psychology doesn't work1111!!!!"
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
Fantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained.
Also wrong. The boundary between superstition and magick is that the latter is explained, via cosmology. And that line gets drawn really really early. Like, its there in some shamanic semi-nomadic cultures.
Would the OP consider alchemy to be magic or science?
I mean, if one wanted a truly realistic, scientific magic system:
1d6
1. nothing happens
2. nothing happens
3. nothing happens
4. nothing happens but you convince people something did happen
5. nothing happens but you convince yourself something did happen
6. nothing happens but you convince yourself that you convinced people something did happen but you didn't.
Quote from: David Johansen on August 21, 2021, 11:47:38 PM
I mean, if one wanted a truly realistic, scientific magic system:
1d6
1. nothing happens
2. nothing happens
3. nothing happens
4. nothing happens but you convince people something did happen
5. nothing happens but you convince yourself something did happen
6. nothing happens but you convince yourself that you convinced people something did happen but you didn't.
That's not quite it, because you're skipping out on well-documented phenomena like placebo effect, psychosomatic sympoms and resolution thereof, and cultural expectations with respect to physical and psychological effects, which are resistant to any kind of randomization. There's also the problem that we're talking about a "realistic," "scientific" magic system for roleplaying games, not a laboratory.
Quote from: David Johansen on August 21, 2021, 11:47:38 PM
I mean, if one wanted a truly realistic, scientific magic system:
1d6
1. nothing happens
2. nothing happens
3. nothing happens
4. nothing happens but you convince people something did happen
5. nothing happens but you convince yourself something did happen
6. nothing happens but you convince yourself that you convinced people something did happen but you didn't.
Alternately it's an Intelligence check to design/build the trick and a Dex/Cha check to see if you baffle people as to how you accomplished it.
I bring THAT type of magic up because when you read between the lines on arcane magic that's much closer to what's going on with a wizard's spells. The wizard understands the principles of what's happening when he casts a spell (and those principles are in line with the "physics" of the setting, but just like modern magicians and just about every trade in the medieval period, you keep the trade secrets to yourself.
There's a reason the medieval fields of the "natural magics" (the one type NOT forbidden to be studied by the Catholic Church; ex. alchemy, herbology, astronomy) was eventually renamed the "natural sciences" (i.e. chemistry, botony, astronomy) as the use of the scientific method replaced guesswork and individual methods of studying with a normalized testing procedure.
A wizard may not know exactly WHY it works any more than modern physicists are able to get a working "theory of everything" that won't fall apart in a week when some new discovery disproves some aspects of it. But he can use it the same way an engineer can design an engine in line with the principles they do understand.
Which is another important point; hyperspace, anti-gravity, matter transporters and hand-held directed energy weapons are every bit the fantasy that incantations and gestures using sulfur and bat guano will produce a massive fireball; we can't really explain how they work either but we can make it sound plausible in the scientific paradigm of the day by extrapolation from known principles.
That's fantasy magic too... only instead of "element X" making the hyperdrive physics work its knowledge of how to tap into The Weave or The Arcane Web or the Elemental Plane that supplies the energy needed to boost the tiny flame of burning sulfur with bat guano into a titanic fireball.
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 21, 2021, 07:32:58 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
Fantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained.
Also wrong. The boundary between superstition and magick is that the latter is explained, via cosmology. And that line gets drawn really really early. Like, its there in some shamanic semi-nomadic cultures.
According to whom, exactly? Who wrote the ultimate, official definition of magic? Nobody can prove it exists, and fantasy is fiction. Nobody has the last word. My point is simple; don't waste your time with rules or complex systems for magic; laws of equivalence, "X beats Y", conservation of magic, etc. Just leave it as a mystery, even for yourself. Only a kiss can wake the sleeping beauty, crystal shoes last until midnight, you have to get lost in the forest to end up in the fairy realm, genies grant wishes, if you repeat a certain word in front of a mirror a ghost will show up, etc. What are the rules for that magic? How does it work? Who knows! It doesn't follow physical rules or a well-defined system. I don't see how that makes it non-sensical or random.
Quote from: David Johansen on August 21, 2021, 11:47:38 PM
I mean, if one wanted a truly realistic, scientific magic system:
1d6
1. nothing happens
2. nothing happens
3. nothing happens
4. nothing happens but you convince people something did happen
5. nothing happens but you convince yourself something did happen
6. nothing happens but you convince yourself that you convinced people something did happen but you didn't.
If I could tweak your chart a little:
1d6
1. nothing happens
2. nothing happens
3. nothing happens but you convince people something did happen
4. nothing happens but you convince yourself something did happen
5. nothing happens but you convince yourself that you convinced people something did happen but you didn't.
6. roll twice and take both results.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 22, 2021, 08:42:28 AM
Alternately it's an Intelligence check to design/build the trick and a Dex/Cha check to see if you baffle people as to how you accomplished it.
I bring THAT type of magic up because when you read between the lines on arcane magic that's much closer to what's going on with a wizard's spells. The wizard understands the principles of what's happening when he casts a spell (and those principles are in line with the "physics" of the setting, but just like modern magicians and just about every trade in the medieval period, you keep the trade secrets to yourself.
There's a reason the medieval fields of the "natural magics" (the one type NOT forbidden to be studied by the Catholic Church; ex. alchemy, herbology, astronomy) was eventually renamed the "natural sciences" (i.e. chemistry, botony, astronomy) as the use of the scientific method replaced guesswork and individual methods of studying with a normalized testing procedure.
A wizard may not know exactly WHY it works any more than modern physicists are able to get a working "theory of everything" that won't fall apart in a week when some new discovery disproves some aspects of it. But he can use it the same way an engineer can design an engine in line with the principles they do understand.
"natural magic" and "hermetic magic" were both categories of what was called "Natural Philosophy". That is to say, magic was always at its core about the study and understanding of reality, the objective universe and the universe of human consciousness.
Note that "natural magic" was not just an old-timey word for science, though. In the middle ages, the term "science" already existed and referred to the study of things we would readily identify as "science" (or STEM, if you like) today: mathematics, geometry, early physics, astronomy (as opposed to astrology) and geography/cartography, medicine, botany and zoology.
"Natural magic", on the other hand, described magic that was performed without the invocation or evocation of spirits, gods, or demons. And often through the use of correspondences and manipulation with natural laws, or natural substances. It also included techniques of mind-training, like the art of memory.
Of course, most of the genuine and capable medieval and renaissance magicians were also serious experts on the sciences of the times. And a great many scientists of the late renaissance and early age of enlightenment were also magicians (including perhaps most famously Isaac Newton).
The separation between the disciplines of understanding the world around you, and understanding your self, has not been a particularly positive one. It's created scientists who are extremely expert in their fields but philosophically stunted human beings, and magicians who are disconnected fantasists.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 22, 2021, 05:44:20 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 21, 2021, 07:32:58 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
Fantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained.
Also wrong. The boundary between superstition and magick is that the latter is explained, via cosmology. And that line gets drawn really really early. Like, its there in some shamanic semi-nomadic cultures.
According to whom, exactly? Who wrote the ultimate, official definition of magic? Nobody can prove it exists, and fantasy is fiction. Nobody has the last word. My point is simple; don't waste your time with rules or complex systems for magic; laws of equivalence, "X beats Y", conservation of magic, etc. Just leave it as a mystery, even for yourself. Only a kiss can wake the sleeping beauty, crystal shoes last until midnight, you have to get lost in the forest to end up in the fairy realm, genies grant wishes, if you repeat a certain word in front of a mirror a ghost will show up, etc. What are the rules for that magic? How does it work? Who knows! It doesn't follow physical rules or a well-defined system. I don't see how that makes it non-sensical or random.
According to sources we have dating all the way back to the dawn of civilization. Incredibly early cultures clearly had magic that worked on the basis of cosmology and the manipulation of symbolic language. And you see this in the entire world
Quote from: Cave Bear on August 21, 2021, 07:41:21 PM
Would the OP consider alchemy to be magic or science?
Alchemy is the science of turning gold into less gold.
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 23, 2021, 07:21:11 AM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 22, 2021, 05:44:20 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 21, 2021, 07:32:58 PM
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 02, 2021, 06:50:12 PM
Fantasy is not modern by any means. I don't know what you'd qualify as fantasy, but bear in mind that its origins can be traced to Greek and Roman myths, the Homeric works, the Nordic sagas, Arthurian and medieval chivalry romances, the Quixote, fairy tales, folklore, and many others which I'm probably forgetting right now. Fantasy is far from being modern.
Don't get me wrong; I never advocated for a "random" or nonsensical approach to magic. My point is, don't bother explaining how it works. Magic may follow a few rules or arbitrary steps, but we do not know its inner workings. If we approach it as a natural phenomenon, it doesn't make sense. It's better to just leave it as a mystery for the sake of the lore and the fun of the story/setting.
Far from being scientific, magic was never really explained.
Also wrong. The boundary between superstition and magick is that the latter is explained, via cosmology. And that line gets drawn really really early. Like, its there in some shamanic semi-nomadic cultures.
According to whom, exactly? Who wrote the ultimate, official definition of magic? Nobody can prove it exists, and fantasy is fiction. Nobody has the last word. My point is simple; don't waste your time with rules or complex systems for magic; laws of equivalence, "X beats Y", conservation of magic, etc. Just leave it as a mystery, even for yourself. Only a kiss can wake the sleeping beauty, crystal shoes last until midnight, you have to get lost in the forest to end up in the fairy realm, genies grant wishes, if you repeat a certain word in front of a mirror a ghost will show up, etc. What are the rules for that magic? How does it work? Who knows! It doesn't follow physical rules or a well-defined system. I don't see how that makes it non-sensical or random.
According to sources we have dating all the way back to the dawn of civilization. Incredibly early cultures clearly had magic that worked on the basis of cosmology and the manipulation of symbolic language. And you see this in the entire world
There is no cosmology typical folk healer, the children who say names of ghosts in front of mirrors, love spells, good luck charms, Cinderella, Furious Orland, King Arthur, wishing wells, etc. I think you just give them too much credit. There may have been in the more philosophical hermetists, medieval goetia or arabian "alchemists", but I wouldn't assume all people think of a rationale behind how magic works.
BTW, you mentioned you believe in "magic" in the sense of working reality on more than one level. Care to recommend a few books?
Quote from: Shasarak on August 23, 2021, 06:06:11 PM
Quote from: Cave Bear on August 21, 2021, 07:41:21 PM
Would the OP consider alchemy to be magic or science?
Alchemy is the science of turning gold into less gold.
lol.
I wouldn't consider them either because in reality alchemy is more akin to yoga, buddhism and taoism than to an actual pseudochemistry. What's turning golden is you! The great work is nothing but regaining your own perfection. Granted, some alchemists did believe in physical prodigies, healing, etc. I read some people calling it a hard science (Manly P. Hall or Paul Foster Case) and other did delve into proto-chemistry (Paracelsus, arabians, etc.), but it's ultimately a spiritual belief.
That being said, you can't add this to a game because it's too boring. Maybe if you want some "enlightened" masters, sure.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 24, 2021, 09:58:47 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 23, 2021, 07:21:11 AM
According to sources we have dating all the way back to the dawn of civilization. Incredibly early cultures clearly had magic that worked on the basis of cosmology and the manipulation of symbolic language. And you see this in the entire world
There is no cosmology typical folk healer, the children who say names of ghosts in front of mirrors, love spells, good luck charms, Cinderella, Furious Orland, King Arthur, wishing wells, etc. I think you just give them too much credit. There may have been in the more philosophical hermetists, medieval goetia or arabian "alchemists", but I wouldn't assume all people think of a rationale behind how magic works.
Children doing rote superstitions might not have a cosmology, but a folk healer or shaman will generally have a cosmology. Cultures have a cosmology even if they don't have writing or formal logic. There are patterns of thinking to how things work - often animist principles, treating natural forces as living things. When a love spell says take hair from your target's head and put it in a bag with rose petals that you have chewed, there in a thinking that someone's hair still has a mystic connection back to them (known as contagion). The rose petals have power of love, and chewing them connects the love to you.
As a game-master, one can just go by feel rather than having a formal logic to how the cosmology works. But it's also possible to put more thinking into it without it being scientific.
The point is that other beliefs like pre-literate animist isn't dumb or senseless. They can and do think long and hard about how the world works, but they're just coming from different principles and assumptions as a modern scientific view.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 24, 2021, 09:58:47 PM
I wouldn't consider them either because in reality alchemy is more akin to yoga, buddhism and taoism than to an actual pseudochemistry. What's turning golden is you! The great work is nothing but regaining your own perfection. Granted, some alchemists did believe in physical prodigies, healing, etc. I read some people calling it a hard science (Manly P. Hall or Paul Foster Case) and other did delve into proto-chemistry (Paracelsus, arabians, etc.), but it's ultimately a spiritual belief.
That being said, you can't add this to a game because it's too boring. Maybe if you want some "enlightened" masters, sure.
Chivalry & Sorcery had some semi-authentic adaptations of alchemy into playable rules, though at least original C&S did have a lot of bookkeeping - so "playable" is debatable. Their idea was that successive purifications accumulates magical power, which can be used for some more useful offshoots.
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 24, 2021, 09:58:47 PM
There is no cosmology typical folk healer, the children who say names of ghosts in front of mirrors, love spells, good luck charms, Cinderella, Furious Orland, King Arthur, wishing wells, etc. I think you just give them too much credit. There may have been in the more philosophical hermetists, medieval goetia or arabian "alchemists", but I wouldn't assume all people think of a rationale behind how magic works.
Everything you said after "good luck charms" is mythology, not legend. And children's superstitions don't count either.
Both love spells and luck charms are absolutely based on a cosmology. Otherwise it would just be any random thing. In the middle ages, love spells were either folk practices based on sympathy or they were complex high-magic talismanic or binding spells for example. Charms are always based either on religious iconography, or some kind of cosmology. Maybe the people who typically used some of these thing did not know how they work (even as the typical computer user has no idea how to make a computer), but the people who created them certainly did.
As for ancient folk healers, read Mircea Eliade. Folk shamans and other types of magical/spiritual healers were absolutely using, invoking and (the serious ones) initiating themselves into alignment with a cosmology.
Quote
BTW, you mentioned you believe in "magic" in the sense of working reality on more than one level. Care to recommend a few books?
Sure, start with The Chicken Qabalah of Rabbi Lamed Ben Clifford
Quote from: SonTodoGato on August 24, 2021, 09:58:47 PM
I wouldn't consider them either because in reality alchemy is more akin to yoga, buddhism and taoism than to an actual pseudochemistry. What's turning golden is you! The great work is nothing but regaining your own perfection. Granted, some alchemists did believe in physical prodigies, healing, etc. I read some people calling it a hard science (Manly P. Hall or Paul Foster Case) and other did delve into proto-chemistry (Paracelsus, arabians, etc.), but it's ultimately a spiritual belief.
That being said, you can't add this to a game because it's too boring. Maybe if you want some "enlightened" masters, sure.
My Invisible College campaign players certainly don't think it's too boring.
There are a whole bunch of things in this thread that may or may not be magic, scientific, authentic or inauthentic, but one thing about fantasy role-playing is that you pretty much have to have "magic" or else it isn't fantasy any more. And if you want magic in your game to be anything other than "the GM says so!" (which isn't necessarily a *bad* thing), you need to have mechanics or a system for that magic. And as soon as you apply a system to magic, you have given it a "science" in-game. D&D's "Vancian" magic system and the associated mechanics *are* a science of magic. Fantasy Wargaming's pages and pages of astrological, elemental, and divine influence tables are a different science of magic, and much more arcane. Heck, you can go through every single fantasy role playing game out there -- I can't think of a single one that doesn't have *some* kind of system for magic that gives the players a chance to apply scientific reasoning to it.
But then there's spirit magic, where the spirits being called upon are full-fledged NPC's who need to be negotiated with in order for any effect to occur. This one form of "the GM says so!" that actually can work well to give the players both a sense of wonder, the characters a needed boost, and yet keep the results from being "push button "a" to get result "A". I've played in Glorantha with this system, I've played in and run Werewolf: the Apocalypse this way, and I've used this for Shamantic magic in Shadowrun. Sure, it's more work than the more common "I know this spell, and it always has this effect," but I found it rewarding to know that the spirit of the river that bound itself to the shaman shared a love of shiny things with her "master", and the shinier the thing, the more water she was willing to produce, and a constant negotiation was going to happen between the player and I over just how shiny the offered gift was.
Quote from: ScytheSong on August 26, 2021, 02:03:45 PM
But then there's spirit magic, where the spirits being called upon are full-fledged NPC's who need to be negotiated with in order for any effect to occur. This one form of "the GM says so!" that actually can work well to give the players both a sense of wonder, the characters a needed boost, and yet keep the results from being "push button "a" to get result "A". I've played in Glorantha with this system, I've played in and run Werewolf: the Apocalypse this way, and I've used this for Shamantic magic in Shadowrun. Sure, it's more work than the more common "I know this spell, and it always has this effect," but I found it rewarding to know that the spirit of the river that bound itself to the shaman shared a love of shiny things with her "master", and the shinier the thing, the more water she was willing to produce, and a constant negotiation was going to happen between the player and I over just how shiny the offered gift was.
But even there, there is a system and "science" to the magic... any good magician in that system is going to learn the names and preferences of various useful spirits in the same way I learn the names and numbers of the sales reps for my business suppiers and the names and idiosyncrasies of my most prolific repeat customers (like the one who insists you send him a fresh proof even on duplicate/repeat orders where nothing is being changed).
Sure, it's a softer science like sociology and marketing, but to say there's no rhyme or reason to it isn't accurate.
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 26, 2021, 02:14:06 PM
Quote from: ScytheSong on August 26, 2021, 02:03:45 PM
But then there's spirit magic, where the spirits being called upon are full-fledged NPC's who need to be negotiated with in order for any effect to occur. This one form of "the GM says so!" that actually can work well to give the players both a sense of wonder, the characters a needed boost, and yet keep the results from being "push button "a" to get result "A". I've played in Glorantha with this system, I've played in and run Werewolf: the Apocalypse this way, and I've used this for Shamantic magic in Shadowrun. Sure, it's more work than the more common "I know this spell, and it always has this effect," but I found it rewarding to know that the spirit of the river that bound itself to the shaman shared a love of shiny things with her "master", and the shinier the thing, the more water she was willing to produce, and a constant negotiation was going to happen between the player and I over just how shiny the offered gift was.
But even there, there is a system and "science" to the magic... any good magician in that system is going to learn the names and preferences of various useful spirits in the same way I learn the names and numbers of the sales reps for my business suppiers and the names and idiosyncrasies of my most prolific repeat customers (like the one who insists you send him a fresh proof even on duplicate/repeat orders where nothing is being changed).
Sure, it's a softer science like sociology and marketing, but to say there's no rhyme or reason to it isn't accurate.
That's very true. One of my long-time Storytellers is a union organizer-turned-social worker, and her ability to make W:tA spirits "realistic" in their needs gets freaky at times *because* she has that background.
It seems that my earlier point of "as soon as you have a system, the players can turn it into a science" expands even to spirit magic. It's just a softer science. :P
Quote from: ScytheSong on August 26, 2021, 03:13:28 PM
That's very true. One of my long-time Storytellers is a union organizer-turned-social worker, and her ability to make W:tA spirits "realistic" in their needs gets freaky at times *because* she has that background.
It seems that my earlier point of "as soon as you have a system, the players can turn it into a science" expands even to spirit magic. It's just a softer science. :P
Accept that those things aren't any more science than, say, woodworking is science. Maybe even less. Yes, there are some scientific principles in play, and some aspects that can be measured and discussed from a scientific view, but as any good woodworker can tell you, there is more to it than mechanical and materials engineering, mathematics, and so on. There's also an element of art to it, such as appreciation for how the grain of this piece of wood will look in that particular cabinet when done, the proportions of the whole things, etc. And yes, you can account for rule of thirds and other typical tricks to get proportions that most people will appreciate and use particular stains with particular woods for the same reason, but then the individual buyer is an individual, not an average.
So to me, one key is that magic is semi-reproducable but also somewhat personal. Can be as simple as, "Do X, Y, Z then you get effect A 75% of the time, perhaps with slight variations." Why the inconsistency, because no magician ever does the exact same thing every time, and we don't really understand what it is about the personal side that skews it in every case.
Or if you like a more real-world example, "Money ball" works in baseball, to some extent, but it isn't fool proof. It's statistically accurate enough to be useful in aggregate, but not in any one do or die case. Same with Vegas setting betting odds on sporting events. They always make money, and they always get some games wrong.
Giving something a percentage chance of success doesn't make something not scientific.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 26, 2021, 03:48:13 PM
Quote from: ScytheSong on August 26, 2021, 03:13:28 PM
That's very true. One of my long-time Storytellers is a union organizer-turned-social worker, and her ability to make W:tA spirits "realistic" in their needs gets freaky at times *because* she has that background.
It seems that my earlier point of "as soon as you have a system, the players can turn it into a science" expands even to spirit magic. It's just a softer science. :P
Accept that those things aren't any more science than, say, woodworking is science.
IKEA: Hold my beer
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 12:45:22 PM
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
Yeah, as I've gotten older I've gotten more "right" in my politics, but I haven't purchased M20, because... "what's the point?". They were going to update something that I already had a perfectly good system to? I would've been super annoyed if read a bunch of stuff about gender politics in it. Ugh. Money well saved!
If I wanted to do "wizards in the modern world" again, I'd probably either adapt Mutants and Masterminds, or perhaps just adapt Ars Magica, throw out the Latin terms, maybe create an Aura of Reason in high urban centers that diminishes Magic (the same way that Faith diminishes magic in the 13th century) and say Vis/Quintessence is very scarce, throw in some rules ad hoc for guns, and boom, done. It's a better system than "Mage" anyway.
Ars Magica, 20th century.
Quote from: zagreus on August 29, 2021, 06:17:55 PM
If I wanted to do "wizards in the modern world" again, I'd probably either adapt Mutants and Masterminds, or perhaps just adapt Ars Magica, throw out the Latin terms, maybe create an Aura of Reason in high urban centers that diminishes Magic (the same way that Faith diminishes magic in the 13th century) and say Vis/Quintessence is very scarce, throw in some rules ad hoc for guns, and boom, done. It's a better system than "Mage" anyway.
Ars Magica, 20th century.
That idea just kind of blew my mind. Ars Magica in the present day with solid setting details would utterly rock.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell on August 26, 2021, 03:48:13 PM
Quote from: ScytheSong on August 26, 2021, 03:13:28 PM
That's very true. One of my long-time Storytellers is a union organizer-turned-social worker, and her ability to make W:tA spirits "realistic" in their needs gets freaky at times *because* she has that background.
It seems that my earlier point of "as soon as you have a system, the players can turn it into a science" expands even to spirit magic. It's just a softer science. :P
Accept that those things aren't any more science than, say, woodworking is science. Maybe even less. Yes, there are some scientific principles in play, and some aspects that can be measured and discussed from a scientific view, but as any good woodworker can tell you, there is more to it than mechanical and materials engineering, mathematics, and so on. There's also an element of art to it, such as appreciation for how the grain of this piece of wood will look in that particular cabinet when done, the proportions of the whole things, etc. And yes, you can account for rule of thirds and other typical tricks to get proportions that most people will appreciate and use particular stains with particular woods for the same reason, but then the individual buyer is an individual, not an average.
That reminds me of a conversation I had on the phone with my baby sister, who has a masters in high school counseling. She said she had to do some science courses to keep up some certificate, and I didn't see the connection, then:
Me: Wait, did you mean social science or real science?
Her: *CLICK* BZZzzzzzzz (hangup, in case that wasn't clear)
Me: Oops! LOLLOLLLOL
Quote from: Arnwolf666 on August 29, 2021, 04:55:17 PM
Giving something a percentage chance of success doesn't make something not scientific.
I didn't say that it did. Since you didn't elaborate ... to answer the obvious thought, giving something a percentage change of success doesn't make it science, either. It depends on what causes the variation.
Quote from: Mishihari on August 30, 2021, 12:31:28 AM
Quote from: zagreus on August 29, 2021, 06:17:55 PM
If I wanted to do "wizards in the modern world" again, I'd probably either adapt Mutants and Masterminds, or perhaps just adapt Ars Magica, throw out the Latin terms, maybe create an Aura of Reason in high urban centers that diminishes Magic (the same way that Faith diminishes magic in the 13th century) and say Vis/Quintessence is very scarce, throw in some rules ad hoc for guns, and boom, done. It's a better system than "Mage" anyway.
Ars Magica, 20th century.
That idea just kind of blew my mind. Ars Magica in the present day with solid setting details would utterly rock.
You can steal the idea it if you want. I've no time to develop it! It could honestly be a 50 page source book for Ars Magica if someone were to do it. Give it a different history than "Mage", maybe more "the fading of Magic" rather than "the reality Wars" and some tidbits about modern magic and spells that interact with technology (Auram for electricity and Terram for metal most likely), a few new virtues and flaws for modern magi and it could easily be done.
The 5th edition Ars Magica system in particular is solid. More solid than White Wolf's clunky "fist full of d10's" system.
Quote from: zagreus on August 29, 2021, 06:17:55 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 08, 2021, 12:45:22 PM
Quote from: zagreus on August 07, 2021, 05:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on August 05, 2021, 10:32:44 AM
Quote from: Wrath of God on August 04, 2021, 09:23:59 PM
Quoteand is also basically woke garbage because "believing hard enough changes reality" is basically the same logic
Not really - because Believing Hard in Ascencion is quantifiable skill that allows you to change reality :P
QuoteBecause the medium of RPGs is all about using defined rules and tools to solve problems
That's quite narrow definition - unless you define problem extremely widely.
Mage the Ascension is literally, "if you believe it hard enough you can make it real in defiance of all natural laws." That is precise mindset pushed by the lunatics who say Men can be Women if they believe they are. Mage is Woke wish fulfilment where they can change reality to meet whatever their whims of the day happen to be and the villains are caricatures of the Right Wing; oppressors who wish to impose an objective reality that will keep them from being able to be woman or a sea turtle or whatever. The latest Mage book literally paints it as conservatives are trying to oppress and ruin the world for their own gain and good Mages must be good transgendered woke Leftards and oppose them by believing really hard; because Utopia WILL come if you just kill enough of the unbelievers in it.
I ran Mage the Ascension. Not because I wanted to tell some story about the left vs the right. I could have given two shits about politics then (and now I'm pretty centrist in my politics): I ran a Mage game so I could tell a story about modern wizards throwing lightning bolts at vampires, werewolves, "Terminator" and "Mr. Smith" ripoffs in Philadelphia - with a side dish of dimension hopping. Not "everything" is politics.
And actually, you could play a pretty decent Technocracy game if you'd wanted (I had considered doing that- kind of like Paranoia in Mage, but you'd be blasting foes with technomagic) but my enthusiasm for White Wolf waned by the time I had gotten that far.
Now, because I've, done that (probably 15 years ago now), I'm running Ars Magica which is a bit more of a grounded Magic system than Mage- requires less GM interpretation, though is still very flexible. Magic is simply of the natural order, and a magus of the 13th century understand how that natural order works better than most.
Oh, I have run Mage as well; until relatively recently, I had an ongoing campaign that spanned two and a half decades (2e was the new hotness just as I took the reigns when the prior ST burned out after 6 sessions). When WW killed the line in 2002 to try and launch their NWoD (now with even more gnostic heresies) I kept right on going and ultimately wrote my "White Book Mage" because the old books weren't all that available and purchasable pdfs for them weren't yet a thing.
But over time I came to a realization that the game's metaphysics were garbage and you can see in my WBM (I've shared links to it here several times so search my post history if you care to look) I'd already started houseruling much more defined mechanics into the system and the fluff I included had a generally much more concrete cosmology than the traditional "belief makes it real" of the official books and my actual campaign even more so with the struggle over the Anchorheads of Reality (and eventually their source) becoming THE metaphysics of the campaign.
Hard mechanics because the soft stuff wasn't a game; it Storygame style improv theatre and really indulged the idea of the "GM as frustrated author" which is not what I've ever enjoyed my games being. My Mage setting had always been a sandbox and so I had always had house rules (even before I codified them in WBM) to make magick less of a constant improv theatre asspull.
And then I ran headlong into the politics shoved into Mage20. At first I ignored it, but the authors have grown ever more shrill and with the some of the specifics wherein they linked "not letting men be women because they believe it" to the various evil forces trying to keep magick from letting people change sexes like they're clothing and basically "objective reality is evil because it won't obey me" it finally clicked that the whole construct of Mage is just one big Leftard wankfest where their Utopia is being kept from them by the evil bourgeoisie (i.e. the collective belief of working class Americans and their Christian morality that wouldn't indulge the depraved whims of adult children who were so pampered they had to invent struggles just to feel like they'd accomplished something).
That's when I stopped running Mage and started adapting my White Book Mage rules towards my own urban fantasy setting where monsters are again monsters and morality and reality are objective and the supernatural works according to those laws of reality.
Yeah, as I've gotten older I've gotten more "right" in my politics, but I haven't purchased M20, because... "what's the point?". They were going to update something that I already had a perfectly good system to? I would've been super annoyed if read a bunch of stuff about gender politics in it. Ugh. Money well saved!
If I wanted to do "wizards in the modern world" again, I'd probably either adapt Mutants and Masterminds, or perhaps just adapt Ars Magica, throw out the Latin terms, maybe create an Aura of Reason in high urban centers that diminishes Magic (the same way that Faith diminishes magic in the 13th century) and say Vis/Quintessence is very scarce, throw in some rules ad hoc for guns, and boom, done. It's a better system than "Mage" anyway.
Ars Magica, 20th century.
Or you could check out The Invisible College!
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/359585/The-Invisible-College (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/359585/The-Invisible-College)
I eventually caved and will be picking this up on dtrpg next paycheck. I want a hardcover but i'll see if i can make enough room for it.
Quote from: Ocule on August 30, 2021, 11:50:38 AM
I eventually caved and will be picking this up on dtrpg next paycheck. I want a hardcover but i'll see if i can make enough room for it.
Good, I trust you'll like it!
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 30, 2021, 09:23:38 PM
Quote from: Ocule on August 30, 2021, 11:50:38 AM
I eventually caved and will be picking this up on dtrpg next paycheck. I want a hardcover but i'll see if i can make enough room for it.
Good, I trust you'll like it!
Any books you'd recommend on the "occult war"?
The Occult War is just a myth. At least, the way it's presented in the book.
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 31, 2021, 10:40:17 AM
The Occult War is just a myth. At least, the way it's presented in the book.
What about the "real occult war"? Or the history of the actual invisible college and other secret societies?
I'm answering someone banned for being a promoter of anti-semitic and anti-masonic conspiracy theories, but I make it clear in the Invisible College, and this IS true: NONE of the supposed "secret societies" that conspiracy theorists obsess about are either particularly occult or in any way significant in running the world
-The Bohemian Grove is a (probably decadent, likely degenerate) playground retreat for people in San Francisco's upper class. They frequently invite and make "honorary members" of presidents and important people in politics or industry who go to their retreat and give talks. Their "ritual" is basically a bonfire.
-The Illuminati WERE a group that really existed, for about 8 years (1776-1784), and were a secret plot to attempt to take over German Masonry among certain political radicals who were fervently anti-monarchist, anti-papist, and also anti-democratic (that last one very contrary to the norm for Masonry, which practically birthed democracy in the every democratic nation in the modern world). They never amounted to much, and were almost completely forgotten from history after 1784, until the late 1960s. At that time, a libertarian movement called Discordianism was invented by a couple of hippies, with the goal of making fun of religion, faith, dogmas, and the entire idea of secret-groups by highlighting how absurd most of them are. One of these hippies became friends with Robert Anton Wilson, at that time editor at Playboy magazine, and convinced Wilson to print a fake "letter to the editor" in Playboy where he claimed to have uncovered a centuries-long secret plot to rule the world run by the sinister Bavarian Illuminati. He chose the Illuminati on purpose because at that time almost no one had ever heard of them, they were totally anachronistic (hadn't existed in centuries), not connected to any modern political movement, and literally the most ridiculous secret society he could imagine being in secret control of the world. His letter was meant to be so completely outrageous and nonsensical that it would cause people to realize the idiocy of Conspiracy-Theory thinking (in particular, he was concerned about the furor of JFK-assassination conspiracies that had been at a fever-pitch at the time).
Unfortunately for him, his plan backfired catastrophically. Playboy went on to receive hundreds of letters from kooks all claiming that they too had uncovered "evidence" of the Illuminati, some claiming that they were members, etc etc, and the Illuminati went on to become the household name of conspiracy theory groups.
-Opus Dei: a real life ultrafundamentalist catholic cult. Sick fucks, long history of abuses, utterly dogmatic, but quite small, and the only area of influence they really have in any significant measure is over the Catholic Church, and given everything we currently see of the Church's politics, its pretty clear their influence there isn't strong enough for them to get their way on almost anything either.
-P2: A real conspiracy that emerged out of an incredibly irregular Italian masonic body. It was a plan by a group of very right-wing nationalist power brokers to take over Italian government and society. It operated in mafia-like ways, probably killed people, certainly generated a huge percentage of the (immense) corruption in the Italian state, and had some pretty famous people among its membership (including Silvio Berlusconi). It was mainly the work of one dude, Licio Gelli, and he's dead now, though remnants of the vast patronage network (which is what P2 ultimately consisted of) may still continue to operate to some degree in Italy.
P2 used a masonic lodge as a facade. They did no rituals of any kind, not even masonic rituals. Their supposed mission statement was ideological, in practice it was for criminal self-benefit.
-Rosicrucians: There was never a real "rosicrucian order". There was a Rosicrucian MOVEMENT, that started from some books written in the early 17th century. It led to a philosophical and esoteric mass awakening in Europe, a successor to the Renaissance and a precursor to the Enlightenment (Frances Yates refers to it as the "Rosicrucian Enlightenment"), that was highly interested in the ideas of Universalism (one brotherhood of man, one fatherhood of God), mysticism/occultism, the pursuit of knowledge and reason, and the concept of universal "Freedom of Conscience" (essentially, personal liberty and free speech). The movement was repressed in most of Europe, but less so in England, where it evolved in a generation to a successor movement called the Invisible College, and members of the Invisible College were the founders of both Freemasonry and of the Royal Society, among many other things.
During and after the Rosicrucian period, many people (some stupidly, not understanding the allegorical nature of the Rosicrucian writings, and others self-servingly seeking power or money) claimed to be members or leaders of the "True Rosicrucian Order". There have been dozens and dozens of Rosicrucian Orders throughout history. Most of them are scams, and none of them are legitimate. A handful have some more or less basic teaching in hermeticism or philosophy. None of them have ever had any political influence.
-Skull & Bones: An elite fraternity in Yale, that has a stupid ritual like many fraternities do (a bit more sophisticated because its Ivy League and very Upper Class), and that has long been a source of Networking for the children of the Political Class in America. Both Presidents Bush were "bonesmen" and so was John Kerry. Like all Frats, there's a rule (unwritten or not) of showing some favoritism to your fellow frat members. Of course, given the strata of society most bonesmen are from, whereas in other frats favoritism might mean a discount on a flat screen tv or a an entry level job in an office supply company, in the bonesmen it can mean a prize internship for a US Senator or a Supreme Court Judge, or a ticket into the CIA.
-The Freemasons really DID start out as an occult order, but by the early 18th century they were already mainly a dining club, though unlike all the others I listed that still exist they do still have occult elements to their practices, but 95% of Freemasons are not occultists at all. They also were enormously influential in the Nationalist revolutions in the United States, other countries in the Americas, France, Italy, Germany, and other parts of Europe, as well as becoming very deeply ingrained into the liberal reforms that took place in the British Empire in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
Today, Freemasonry has almost no political power or influence.
If you want to know more about Freemasons, and P2 also, I strongly recommend John Dickie's book The Craft: How Freemasons Made the Modern World (note: Dickie is not a Mason, but he is one hell of an historian).
If you want to know more about the origins of western hermeticism, the Rosicrucian movement, and the early modern Freemasons, I strongly recommend Tobias Churton's The Golden Builders: Alchemists, Rosicrucians, and the First Freemasons
Quote from: RPGPundit on August 31, 2021, 10:40:17 AM
The Occult War is just a myth. At least, the way it's presented in the book.
Sounds like you've been running into what I'd like to call "Diana Tregarde Syndrome".
Back in the late '80s / early '90s Mercedes Lackey wrote three urban fantasy novels and a few short stories about the character Diana Tregarde, a practicing witch and paranormal investigator with a vampire boyfriend who solved occult mysteries and protected the world from arcane menaces -- a kind of proto-version of a cross between Anita Blake and Harry Dresden. The books were praised for being far more Wicca- and neopagan-friendly than a lot of SF was at the time, but there was a small but significant segment of fans who became irrationally convinced that Mercedes Lackey
was an occultly powerful figure of the same type as Diana Tregarde and that the books were "fictionalized" revelations of What's Really Going On Out There. While Lackey's official position is that she gave up writing the character because the books simply didn't sell all that well compared to her Valdemar stuff, I have always suspected that wanting to get away from the crazy fans was another significant motivation.
I also suspect this is the same reason the World of Darkness, Old or New, has always avoided drawing too heavily or directly on historical real-world occultism tropes, especially those from belief systems like Kabbalah which are actually practiced today; for legal purposes, they want to make it absolutely clear that nobody who deludes themselves into believing the games are literally true can have any rational grounds for such a conclusion.
I remember people who thought they were goths (they did not pull tail at OHMs the big local goth haunted nightclub, so no, not really Goths kids, sorry about that reality is cruel sometimes, have some X from the bowl though...you are Anne Rice fan BTW. That's you actual group) playing dress up and talking funny at IHOP at 3AM and I am not sure they were formally part of a LARPING group but were sort of accidentally doing it on their own. I have no doubt that some of theme thought there were real vampires and that Peter Murphy was on the phone with White Wolf twice a week. People can be awfully impressionable if you only know what about. I thought we'd have rowbuts and powered armor and flying cars at one point not understand why those are difficult things to own and operate and may not work at ALL like you've been lead to believe by fiction that was operating on rule of cool.
Then I found out that there is a legged logging machine created to deal with environmental regulations to log in sensitive places without tearing the ground up with treads and it is slow, not that robust, they flip over sometimes, are expensive, and they are so much less efficient and more difficult and dangerous to operate than the conventional alternative that loggers only use them because of laws that made the awful thing the only option apart from hand work on foot. Flying cars are just private aircraft automated to the point that they won't kill someone who should not be operating an aircraft and doing it in rough weather in such a way that running out of fuel won't be possible in the air. Powered armor is...probably more dangerous and expensive and less useful in combat than a truck with a gun mount on the back and some small arms protective panels on it but a powered frame is okay for loading trucks with heavy crap and carrying stuff around. Still more expensive in most cases than a pump hydraulic truck and a ramp and hiring some more stevedores. But the army actually uses them for shifting freight though not on anything like a mass scale. Battery life isn't impressive.
But I bought into most of it.
So I think people would be prone to conspiracy and mental powers, and secrecy things man was not meant to know or something that could pass for vampires or whatever.
I read a novel once where there were werewolves who sometimes kidnapped and brainwashed people into being their friends and family, only changed into wolves to screw and hunt animals, but were paranoid, xenophobic, homicidal, insular, and love their meth but when they wanted to kill someone they did it from a distance with a deer rifle or a can of gas and a lit rag because that made it easy and convenient and the movie idea of blood hungry beasts ripping out throats was way off base. The protagonist got away from their negative attention by promising to move out of town and never come back and not to snitch on them and giving them $4000 cash to buy meth with. He got on to them because a body was found ripped apart and it turned out that was done by stray dogs.
Quote from: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 10:54:16 AM
-Rosicrucians: There was never a real "rosicrucian order". There was a Rosicrucian MOVEMENT, that started from some books written in the early 17th century. It led to a philosophical and esoteric mass awakening in Europe, a successor to the Renaissance and a precursor to the Enlightenment (Frances Yates refers to it as the "Rosicrucian Enlightenment"), that was highly interested in the ideas of Universalism (one brotherhood of man, one fatherhood of God), mysticism/occultism, the pursuit of knowledge and reason, and the concept of universal "Freedom of Conscience" (essentially, personal liberty and free speech). The movement was repressed in most of Europe, but less so in England, where it evolved in a generation to a successor movement called the Invisible College, and members of the Invisible College were the founders of both Freemasonry and of the Royal Society, among many other things.
During and after the Rosicrucian period, many people (some stupidly, not understanding the allegorical nature of the Rosicrucian writings, and others self-servingly seeking power or money) claimed to be members or leaders of the "True Rosicrucian Order". There have been dozens and dozens of Rosicrucian Orders throughout history. Most of them are scams, and none of them are legitimate. A handful have some more or less basic teaching in hermeticism or philosophy. None of them have ever had any political influence.
There's a modern Rosicrucian group in the US that seems to have some size - AMORC - and be into mysticism. I know them mostly from the decent Egyptian museum they run across the street to my childhood school.
Quote from: Naburimannu on September 03, 2021, 05:57:48 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 10:54:16 AM
-Rosicrucians: There was never a real "rosicrucian order". There was a Rosicrucian MOVEMENT, that started from some books written in the early 17th century. It led to a philosophical and esoteric mass awakening in Europe, a successor to the Renaissance and a precursor to the Enlightenment (Frances Yates refers to it as the "Rosicrucian Enlightenment"), that was highly interested in the ideas of Universalism (one brotherhood of man, one fatherhood of God), mysticism/occultism, the pursuit of knowledge and reason, and the concept of universal "Freedom of Conscience" (essentially, personal liberty and free speech). The movement was repressed in most of Europe, but less so in England, where it evolved in a generation to a successor movement called the Invisible College, and members of the Invisible College were the founders of both Freemasonry and of the Royal Society, among many other things.
During and after the Rosicrucian period, many people (some stupidly, not understanding the allegorical nature of the Rosicrucian writings, and others self-servingly seeking power or money) claimed to be members or leaders of the "True Rosicrucian Order". There have been dozens and dozens of Rosicrucian Orders throughout history. Most of them are scams, and none of them are legitimate. A handful have some more or less basic teaching in hermeticism or philosophy. None of them have ever had any political influence.
There's a modern Rosicrucian group in the US that seems to have some size - AMORC - and be into mysticism. I know them mostly from the decent Egyptian museum they run across the street to my childhood school.
Yes, they're a 20th century invention.
I prefer Invisible College over Mage because it's actually about helping the muggles help themselves rather than imposing your religion on everyone else. There is no argument that the Invisible College are good guys: they do not seek power but seek knowledge so that they can share it with everyone else. With Mage, in any iteration, there have been so many flame wars about which side is right or wrong.
The Unarius Academy of Science is real. But what it teaches is very fake. Many have trouble distinguishing these two things. Every town has its own "college" of some sort. And people can get wound up about them. People will believe in anything. So it must be real if there's a lot of people filling the parking lots.