Quote from: Tantavalist on February 23, 2022, 09:04:07 PM
Something else that affects the perception of magic and magicians in RPG vs. Literature is POV characters. In much of classic fantasy the Wizard was someone other than the main character, which meant that magic never had to be explained in detail. The POV character(s) see the Wizard do magic things and that's just them being a Wizard. One of the reasons A Wizard of Earthsea was so influential was that it was one of the first novels to successfully reverse this trend and show how magic worked from the point of view of someone who lived and breathed it.

With RPGs the magic is generally in the hands of players who have to understand the mechanics. More than that, unless you're playing a Storygame rather than traditional D&D then the magic needs to be codified into systems in the way that many feel robs it of the sense of mystery it has in fantasy literature. Add to this the fact that the magic system needs to be nerfed so that Wizard PCs won't overshadow non-spellcaster classes and that's why D&D Magic and the many RPGs it inspired don't feel as "Magical" as versions from novels.

Well.....sort of. Jack Vance depicted wizards from their POV really getting their hands dirty "doing" magic and did it a couple decades before A Wizard of Earthsea. One result was so-called Vancian magic (fire and forget), which did remove some mystery because you could see how it worked, and also imposed limits that nerfed (or at least put limits on) it, making it ideal as the basis for D&D "game" magic. The rest, as they say, is history.

I say one result, because so-called Vancian magic is only one of the methods he depicted. Others involve IOUN stones and the control of sandestins. That is high level stuff. In a way more "magical" because the powers are almost limitless, but in a way less so because it really boils down to commanding sandestins. They can do anything and will make a show of obeying commands, but they resent your power over them and will try to screw you over. Magic really becomes transactional at that point. You don't need to know spells, just how to cajole, threaten, bargain, and negotiate with sandestins. It's fun, but not quite what we think of as "magic."

EDITED TO add: on the other hand, once you get to that level, you can't complain that magic is overly routine or systematized. There is no system, you're winging it, trying to control unbelievably powerful entities with just bribes, threats, and the force of your personality

Quote from: Zirunel on February 23, 2022, 11:02:00 PM
I say one result, because so-called Vancian magic is only one of the methods he depicted. Others involve IOUN stones and the control of sandestins. That is high level stuff. In a way more "magical" because the powers are almost limitless, but in a way less so because it really boils down to commanding sandestins. They can do anything and will make a show of obeying commands, but they resent your power over them and will try to screw you over. Magic really becomes transactional at that point. You don't need to know spells, just how to cajole, threaten, bargain, and negotiate with sandestins. It's fun, but not quite what we think of as "magic."

That is generally my preference for magic. It's not hard to replace spellbooks with spirits or familiars, with different personalities or powers. Or to create a system where you evoke power from entities, who again have different personalities and powers. (Realms of Magic from MSH is one of the more interesting examples.)

Quote from: Pat on February 23, 2022, 11:48:09 PM

Quote from: Zirunel on February 23, 2022, 11:02:00 PM
I say one result, because so-called Vancian magic is only one of the methods he depicted. Others involve IOUN stones and the control of sandestins. That is high level stuff. In a way more "magical" because the powers are almost limitless, but in a way less so because it really boils down to commanding sandestins. They can do anything and will make a show of obeying commands, but they resent your power over them and will try to screw you over. Magic really becomes transactional at that point. You don't need to know spells, just how to cajole, threaten, bargain, and negotiate with sandestins. It's fun, but not quite what we think of as "magic."

That is generally my preference for magic. It's not hard to replace spellbooks with spirits or familiars, with different personalities or powers. Or to create a system where you evoke power from entities, who again have different personalities and powers. (Realms of Magic from MSH is one of the more interesting examples.)

As you may know, DCC is releasing a bunch of Dying Earth stuff later this year and they've indicated that their magic system, which can already be a bit wonky, will be further altered to better fit Vance, specifically noting that Ioun Stones will reflect the books and not AD&D versions of them.  So stay tuned.

Quote from: Persimmon on February 26, 2022, 07:23:36 AM
As you may know, DCC is releasing a bunch of Dying Earth stuff later this year and they've indicated that their magic system, which can already be a bit wonky, will be further altered to better fit Vance, specifically noting that Ioun Stones will reflect the books and not AD&D versions of them.  So stay tuned.

Sounds like a lot of bluster to me, because the IOUN stones in the original source didn't explicitly do much of anything. The wizards who didn't have them guessed that the stones would provide "protection" from their spells, but as far as I recall this was never tested.

The actual purpose or function of the IOUN stones was entirely ambiguous, so anyone claiming that their game will better reflect the source material is probably overblowing their horn.

EDIT: The one obvious difference they could address is cosmetic: In the source material the stones follow you about in a cloud, not orbiting around your head.

The reason magic is reliable is because magic is just a weird kind of science.

You want to concoct something in a chemistry lab you do this, add this, heat that, measuring whatever and there you go. Works every time.

With dnd magic you say this, move your arms like that, pull out wing of bat, and there you go. Some dms allow something else but change the results- you need a diamond to get a spell working but pull out a bigger chunk of quartz the spell works but only half well and if there's some kind of a saving throw its boosted. But still weird science.


If you want magic-magic to be different than tech then you got to come up with something to make it more crazy. Maybe ALL magic comes from gods with a twisted sense of humor so any spell you do might fail- say 5%- and maybe there's a 5% chance of it doing something like backfiring so you toss a fireball at orcs (gah a hate crime evil orcs?) it may explode on YOU and you take 1/4 damage- got to tone it down some. Maybe a 10% chance it works but only does half damage or the orcs get a +4 to save.

Maybe humans or mortal critters ain't quite geared to use magic so it's like using a radio with a loose wire- it'll work most of the time but sometimes all you get is static.

Quote from: Zalman on February 26, 2022, 10:30:42 AM

Quote from: Persimmon on February 26, 2022, 07:23:36 AM
As you may know, DCC is releasing a bunch of Dying Earth stuff later this year and they've indicated that their magic system, which can already be a bit wonky, will be further altered to better fit Vance, specifically noting that Ioun Stones will reflect the books and not AD&D versions of them.  So stay tuned.

Sounds like a lot of bluster to me, because the IOUN stones in the original source didn't explicitly do much of anything. The wizards who didn't have them guessed that the stones would provide "protection" from their spells, but as far as I recall this was never tested.

The actual purpose or function of the IOUN stones was entirely ambiguous, so anyone claiming that their game will better reflect the source material is probably overblowing their horn.

EDIT: The one obvious difference they could address is cosmetic: In the source material the stones follow you about in a cloud, not orbiting around your head.

My copy's stashed away, but IIRC while the IOUN stones in "Morreion" weren't concretely defined, they also weren't this vague ambiguous maybe-not-anythings. The mightiest wizards in the cosmos traveled to the furthest reaches of the universe to gather them from stars that were cleaved in half. They protected against other spells, and were powerful almost beyond imagining.

Another thing that game (and most fiction) magic systems tend to do is treat magic as something apart from nature. A pool of reality-warping energy that may be arbitrarily severed by certain effects. Why would the fantasy reality function this way? That makes about as much sense as cancelling out electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force. While hypothetically possible, that would disintegrate all matter.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 01, 2022, 04:10:41 PM
Another thing that game (and most fiction) magic systems tend to do is treat magic as something apart from nature. A pool of reality-warping energy that may be arbitrarily severed by certain effects. Why would the fantasy reality function this way? That makes about as much sense as cancelling out electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force. While hypothetically possible, that would disintegrate all matter.

Because they see magic as supernatural, an idea they get from the Christian and Enlightenment view on magic, unlike cultures that view magic as mysterious but natural.

Quote from: Cat the Bounty Smuggler on March 01, 2022, 05:04:06 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 01, 2022, 04:10:41 PM
Another thing that game (and most fiction) magic systems tend to do is treat magic as something apart from nature. A pool of reality-warping energy that may be arbitrarily severed by certain effects. Why would the fantasy reality function this way? That makes about as much sense as cancelling out electromagnetism or the strong nuclear force. While hypothetically possible, that would disintegrate all matter.

Because they see magic as supernatural, an idea they get from the Christian and Enlightenment view on magic, unlike cultures that view magic as mysterious but natural.

Well, to be even more specific its more Enlightenment's view of Christian views with a bit Protestant fire and brimstone theology that takes the King James translation as the actual words that came out of Jesus' mouth (as opposed to being an English translation of a Latin translation of a Greek translation of, most likely, Aramaic).

Because the actual Catholic (i.e. the only flavor available in Medieval Europe) views were quite a bit more complex. Supernatural meant God's sovereignty over nature... He made the rules so He can change them whenever He wishes (angels only have power in this world because God gives them the power to do so).

Interestingly enough, supernatural gifts were not seen as being tied to particular virtue... Samson was no saint, but God gave him superhuman strength anyway, notorious sinners were still able to heal by laying on hands after they sinned... but because those gifts served God's plan. God does not work against Himself and is supreme so the concept of any magic or supernatural force countering God is, frankly, silly.

Beyond that were the "natural magics" (which today we call science; the study and use of the gifts God granted us) and various forms of bargaining with evil spirits. Only the latter was prohibited by the Church and seen as dangerous (demons for obvious reasons and the dead because any soul you'd need magic to contact versus prayer would be those in Hell) and therefore prohibited... the former were encouraged and practiced by Catholic bishops and priests (heck, the Big Bang Theory was first presented by a faithful Catholic priest).

Natural magics being literally just pre-scientific method science also make "antimagic" ridiculous... you might be able to counter specific instances of it with more science (ex. pouring baking soda on a chemical fire), but the sort of physics you'd need to cancel physics would probably result in existence failure... of everything.

So basically you're down to anti-magic for the spirit bargaining... and that we actually do see throughout fiction; the notion of crucifixes repelling vampires, salt or holy ground holding back evil spirits.

There's your basis for antimagic in fiction... the presumption that all magic = evil spirits which is right out of Jack Chick Young Flat Earther theology.

Magic is something that serves a purpose in folklore and literature. A plot device, a convenience, or sometimes the centre of the plot. Reliability is entirely the concern of the story. In general, low level magic is easy, convenient, and nuisance value - often the spellcasters require some cunning to use magic to best effect. Some low level magic is derived from natural or ordinary things with a touch of spice to make them seem unusual.

Higher level magic is another matter entirely. Some things, like powerful curses, require that power is 'bought on credit' and the interest rates are very high. Powerful magic items are often borrowed from gods or spirits, on loan until the quest or mission is complete, and must be returned (try telling that to a player). That way power exits stage left before the end of the story and the world is no longer troubled by it.

Tolkien has the most powerful magic item in his story emerge as a very dangerous thing to own, never mind use. Stories of the 'Holy Grail' (I use the term loosely) are typical of things that serve a plot device - that's been true since Chretien Des Troyes first mentions it in the twelfth century (before it was christianised soon afterward, originally an unknown pagan item)

So, as a game master, magic should serve your purpose too. If you plan to have players borrow important and very powerful items, they must understand that huge consequences will be felt if they attempt to keep it. Such an item will open to detection, the equally powerful villains and monsters that want it are going to know someone has it. Referring to Vancian/D&D magic, remember that spell descriptions have been written to even things out though over the years players have gotten canny.

Spells cast in the heat of combat may not work as predicted if the caster has something else to worry about, or has their ability to gesture constrained, especially with iron shackles (a folklore remedy to prevent evil dudes from casting spells and also has the side effect of making their escape more difficult). Is the player underwater and unable to speak? Is the player ill, or suffering from thirst/hunger/wounds/or opposing magic? Has the scroll been damaged by fire or immersion? Has the vessel containing a vital potion been smashed accidentially? Personally I wouldn't just drop such a bombshell on the players. Listen to them planning and if necessary, remind them of some pertinent facts. In any event, if the payer has fallen backward from a height, his belongings might be damaged too. He can be healed of course, but repairing the damage to a valuable and fragile item is not such an easy task.

Your world, your story.