Interesting article about magic in RPGs

[Alex319]

Magic in Games

The overall thesis of this article is that magic in RPGs doesn't "feel magical" usually, but that's not because the magic is too common; rather it's because they way the magic is presented is, in the author's terminology, "scientific magic" - i.e. it is based on a known system, with effects that are easily reproducible, and is treated as a standard, professional skill - more like modern science and technology than anything resembling how magic actually works in myth and folklore.

 

[Mark]

Where does that come from and who wrote it?

 

[Saeviomagy]

i.e. it is based on a known system, with effects that are easily reproducible, and is treated as a standard, professional skill - more like modern science and technology than anything resembling how magic actually works in myth and folklore.

Except magic always IS represented as scientific in myth and folklore: it's only mysterious because it's a science and not everyone understands it.

Users of magic almost always DO know it, so it's not going to be mysterious unless you focus your game on what happens beyond the edge of that knowledge.

Mystery is produced from not knowing. If you write a ruleset, then your players know, and the mystery goes away. The solution should be pretty obvious from that.

 

[Jack7]

The overall thesis of this article is that magic in RPGs doesn't "feel magical" usually, but that's not because the magic is too common; rather it's because they way the magic is presented is, in the author's terminology, "scientific magic" - i.e. it is based on a known system, with effects that are easily reproducible, and is treated as a standard, professional skill - more like modern science and technology than anything resembling how magic actually works in myth and folklore.

Now how would anybody get that kind of a silly notion?

 

[pawsplay]

Magic in Games

The overall thesis of this article is that magic in RPGs doesn't "feel magical" usually, but that's not because the magic is too common; rather it's because they way the magic is presented is, in the author's terminology, "scientific magic" - i.e. it is based on a known system, with effects that are easily reproducible, and is treated as a standard, professional skill - more like modern science and technology than anything resembling how magic actually works in myth and folklore.

Basically, that's wrong. Magic throughout time has been about knowing some secret technique or lore that would allow you to reliably perform the miraculous. The problem with magic in RPGs is that it is not too common, but that it is too banal. Magic is supposed to be dangerous, but all too often it's treated like harp-playing instead of nuclear physics or (literally) bargaining with the devil.

 

[Jack7]

Magic throughout time has been about knowing some secret technique or lore that would allow you to reliably perform the miraculous. The problem with magic in RPGs is that it is not too common, but that it is too banal. Magic is supposed to be dangerous, but all too often it's treated like harp-playing instead of nuclear physics or (literally) bargaining with the devil.

I don't know PP, can ya harp-play by accident? I mean I've seen Harpo make it look easy and all, but then again he's a professional accident. Most people have to practice at that kinda thing.

Speaking of that, ya reckon the devil bargains by happenstance, or programmed algorithm? I tried to get him to buy my fiddle once and he was a pretty shrewd negotiator. Had to really work to get him to meet my price. But then he went bankrupt through profligate living and over-leveraged debt and I still can't get a dime out of him, so who's laughing now? I guess it's true what they say, you can't trust hell to pay unless you're willing to give em hell to pay.

But I'm all for Three Mile Island nuclear-physics-magic. Of course nowadays I think they call that Chernobyl Sorcery.
Price of progress I reckon. Still, count me in on that because when the math works out, that's when the magic really happens.

I also like your point by the way about danger. About magic being dangerous. If it wasn't then you wouldn't need all the carbon rods of absorbly mite and the wands of entropic quarkiness. (You think I'm joking, but I'm being serious here, just with a bit of legerdemain as a side-order. STUPEFY! I just re-read the Half-Blood Prince, so don't blame me for that, blame pop-culture. It's made a real mess of magic-science if you ask me.)

You've got a point too about being able to reliably perform the miraculous. But if you can reliably perform the miraculous then where's the danger in that? I guess you're right back to Chernobyl sorcery in that case. Reliable is as your half-life zone of contamination propagates. Or at least as far as your state-controlled media can obscure the video coverage. And who wants to live with that in your neighborhood?

By the way PP, don't take anything I've just said seriously or suspiciously. Must be all the eggnog and candy canes. And John Keats. I read way too much Keats when waxing noetic.

Thats' the trouble with trying to make a science out of the mind. Just when you think you're starting to sound logical someone else is of a mind ob-verse.

Mystery is produced from not knowing.

I wouldn't argue that. Anymore than I'd argue that secrets are what you keep away from undesirables.

But do ya think it's possible for a science to make observations about a thing without really understanding exactly how it operates? For instance do you reckon that someone had noticed gravity before Newton or electrical current before Franklin, they just never conceptualized it formally?

And is a thing a science as soon as it's publicly observed and commented upon, or only after it's been properly formulated, and/or controlled?

I'd be interested if folks might define and differentiate exactly what is magic, miracle, proto-science, and formal science?

That way people can know precisely why magic is magic, and not rocket-science.
I'm not sure exactly just how that's gonna work out, but it should be a trick and a treat to watch.

 

[WayneLigon]

The reason magic in old tales and myths seems 'mysterious' is that our viewpoint character is never the person with magic. They may be affected by magic or use a magical device (usually following a set of instructions), or pal around with magical people, but I cannot think of one single myth or tale where our hero is a non-apprentice actually capable of doing magic.

You tell someone about the intricacies of your job and it'll seem pretty mysterious to them, but to you, the insider, you're following a set of step-by-step procedures or guidelines that get you from point a to point b. The more complex your job, the more mysterious.

'Real' magic in myths is probably no more 'mysterious' than being a medical doctor. You have a huge body of lore that no one person understands the whole of, based on incomplete information. Things work like they should 95% of the time: drug a has effect b, but sometimes stuff just happens because of variables beyond your control. ("Well, I have no idea why this guy isn't dead, but he isn't").

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Jack7]

"Well, I have no idea why this guy isn't dead, but he isn't"

Yeah, I know fellas like that too.

The reason magic in old tales and myths seems 'mysterious' is that our viewpoint character is never the person with magic.

Well, at least very rarely the source of the magic.
If you can figure out where the magic comes from then maybe you can figure out why you can't figure out why it works like it does. But that's only a guess. It's not like science where you always know why things work like they do. Except for all the times you don't...

 

[Alex319]

Where does that come from and who wrote it?

I don't know who wrote it. I found it from a link on TvTropes.