It's kind of hard to compare raw magical energy to anything since in reality there is nothing to compare it to...
I like the idea that it is everything and anything, mutable and unknowable. Perhaps it is never the same twice, or perhaps each spell effect is unique. Perhaps a magic missile feels completely different from an eldritch blast.
Right. It is unknowable..My thought that it was a "colored light" was simply because the spell effects using "force damage" are generally considered visible effects. (Does Disintegrate still involve a green beam?)
But what my thought was, more accurately, regarding using "light" as the description, is that "force" can be analogous to WHITE (full/pure) light, as opposed to/not the prismatic segments one gets when harnessing/directing the energy (i.e. casting a different spell with a different/specific damage type). That and that you can say it acts as a particle and a wave.
SO the x-ray/microwave damage angle still works...the "it's its own unique thing" stills works...and the "it's like a force field" still works since, we don't have those either, so why not. But it's not, specific and only, that, it's magic...it's "raw arcane energy" that hasn't been put through the prisms and gels and filters [that are the spells] that take that raw/pure/"white" energy to MAKE it a specific size/shape of "fire" or "lightning" or "necrotic."
One thing that bothers me is I see no reason for thunder to be a damage type...it's the same as bludgeoning, but with air. Pointless IMHO.
I think they were just going for a non-scientific term for "sonic" damage. They've used "Lightning" instead of "electricity" practically since the beginning of the game. Makes sense they'd take "sonic" and also make it simple/non-sciencey...and "thunder" is actually a really good phrase for that/thinking of it that way.
What's always bothered me is that, again since the beginning, it has been "Fire" damage and "Cold" damage...Not "heat" and "cold" and not "fire" and "ice"...yes, cold damage is caused by ice-based attacks...but it's just not...,technically, correct.
Edit: I like Jester Canuck's take that force whould be folded into the non-magical damages bludeoning/piercing/slashing depending on the form the magical attack takes. I suppose it is separate just to keep it easy to track what things have resistance/vulnerability/immunity to magical attacks.
I concur it would/could "make sense" to do it that weay. I think more, however, that it be important to maintain the more magical/fantasy stuff as much as possible...and forcefields, telekinetic bolts, energy bolts of nonspecific immeasurable energies are definitely a fantasy magical thing that we expect. Thinking of it as straight kinetic energy works...well, let's be honest, thinking of it in any way you want works. It's sorcery in a fantasy world. But then, if all it is is a "magic punch" like several have proposed, then why isn't it "thunder" damage?
As I recall an explanation in some Marvel product (might have been the FASERIP RPG, actually) in describing telekinetic powers to explain forcefields and telkinetic bolts and such, they called it "a hardening of the air"...like solidifying the gaseous atoms...which also explained why it was generally invisible. That could work for one's interpretation I suppose..."Force is a hardening of the air" (but then isn't that just creating sound waves a.k.a. thunder damage?).
