How do we WANT magic to work (Forked Thread: ... medieval war...)

[FireLance]

Exactly the kind of stuff my buddies say, even though:

1) "Psi" is a modern (approx. 1942) shortening of "Psychic", a word that shows up no later than the 1600s.

2) "ics" is a suffix that forms nouns referring to fields of knowledge or practice.

Yes. Imagine the uproar if they had decided to call the arcane power source "magic" instead.

 

[Starfox]

1) Vancian Wizards (PHB)

2) Vancian Sorcerers (PHB)

3) Warlocks (CompMage)

4) Binders (ToM)

5) Shadowmages (ToM)

6) Truenamers (ToM)

7) Artificers (Eb)

8) Vitality point system Wizards (UA)

9) Vitality point system Sorcerers (UA)

10) Meldshapers (MoI)

This list, and the fact that each of these classes had rules unique to them, is part of the reason I prefer 4E. Of course, 4E will also get burdened down with exceptions and special cases in the end.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

This list, and the fact that each of these classes had rules unique to them, is part of the reason I prefer 4E. Of course, 4E will also get burdened down with exceptions and special cases in the end.

To each his own.

That list is but a start down a road that had many stopping points. Despite the mechanics of those classes being of variable quality, they were only a few of the various magic systems that could have popped up.

(In fact, there are so many different magic systems in legend and fiction that it would be impossible to model them in anything but a "toolkit system" like HERO, M&M or GURPS, but that's no excuse not to try...)

For instance, D&D- in any incarnation- does a poor job of mimicking animism- a very popular theory of magic that shows up in Finnish, Asian and Caribbean beliefs. Then there is Rune magic...which, given the way Dwarves are depicted should have been a natural. Ditto Gem magic.

Others are put into the system piecemeal, like Tattoo magic.

Personally, I say "the more the merrier"- as long as the designers take pains to make sure the various magic subsystems work well enough within the same overarching ruleset as to be considered at least nominally balanced...or at least, not having impenetrable language and awkward mechanics.

All it is is describing the various ways in which people have found to tap into the same power source (kind of like how you could trace all RW sources of energy back to nuclear fusion).

And for the spellshaper, well...he sees all of the various theories of arcane magic as but crutches. To him, the rules of a given theory of magic are actually an unnecessary hinderance to the caster- all casters should seek to channel the energy of magic directly because that is the way its supposed to be done.

(In a sense, this is kind of like the idea of the Veil of Maya- that the distinction between consciousness and physical matter, between mind and body, and ultimately, distinction between the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy that is the result of an unenlightened perspective- which shows up in several Indian religions.)

 

[Starfox]

Oh, I don't mind separate magic traditions - what I do mind is having separate and disparate rules for each. Especially as a DM, I find this to be too much to chew. All the traditions you mention can be used in a more unified system, like 4E, where they all use the same basic rules yet have some flavorful components added.

Of course, "flavorful components added" might not be enough for you. We much each try and find a balance between simplicity and verisimilitude.

 

[Doug McCrae]

1) Dislike of the terminology. Despite discussions of the actual Greek or Latinate meanings and origins of the words, they feel that many of the terms are too modern/futuristic, thus disrupting their suspension of disbelief.

The term 'psionics' was invented by the editor of Astounding Science Fiction, John W Campbell. He was trying to make abilities that are basically magical seem more scientific by the use of modern terminology. D&D uses many terms from 19th century spiritualism or 20th century SF - the astral plane, telekinesis, teleportation. It's really not very medieval.

The default world in D&D isn't Middle-Earth, it's Dying Earth. It's the far future. Magic and science mix. Gamers who want to turn D&D into Middle-Earth, with its much tighter set of sources and use of language, have some work to do.

 

[lutecius]

Exactly the kind of stuff my buddies say, even though:

1) "Psi" is a modern (approx. 1942) shortening of "Psychic", a word that shows up no later than the 1600s. [...]

Which is fairly recent. This is also why I'll take "psychic" over "psionic" any time. The former appeared in the pre-industrial era and comes directly from the Greek psychikos "of the soul"; the latter was coined in a modern pseudoscientific context.

Also, an abreviation + a suffix that makes the word sound like a field of knowledge but, unlike -logy or -sophy, only indicates it is derived from a Greek adjective rather than a noun (eg physics comes from physike episteme "natural science") still is a made-up word.

IOW, but for the abbreviation, the name & concept of mentalists of some kind goes back far enough into the RW timeline that would mesh nicely with D&D's "tech level."

I don't have a problem with psionic effects themselves. Reading hearts, shapechanging or having things flying around all fit quite well in a medieval fantasy setting. It's called magic. But specifically lumping telepathy, telekinesis or psychometabolism together and trying to make it sound like science is a recent invention.

Psi disciplines could as well be magic schools and even then some would be redundant (clairvoyance/divination, telepathy/charm...)

The concept isn't different enough from magic to justify a separate system. Only the modern flavour is (magic stripped of its quirky elements, down to basic effects with pseudo-scientific names). I think this is why people find psionics both too different and too much like magic.

This list, and the fact that each of these classes had rules unique to them, is part of the reason I prefer 4E. Of course, 4E will also get burdened down with exceptions and special cases in the end.

I'm not sure about that. I'm confident 4e psionics will use the same system as every other class. The problem is not everyone will like the chosen system. I, for example, like the unified approach but hate 4e's vancian-ish powers so I'm better off with 3e's eclecticism.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Exactly the kind of stuff my buddies say, even though:

1) "Psi" is a modern (approx. 1942) shortening of "Psychic", a word that shows up no later than the 1600s.

2) "ics" is a suffix that forms nouns referring to fields of knowledge or practice.

IOW, but for the abbreviation, the name & concept of mentalists of some kind goes back far enough into the RW timeline that would mesh nicely with D&D's "tech level."

And the suffix that makes it into a study or field of knowledge is just as old, and the word could have easily had "-(o)logy" or "(o)sophy" instead.

Basically, it boils down to people having "psionophobia."

By this argument, 95% of the dictionary is acceptable in a fantasy world. For example 'television', 'microscope' and 'photograph' have Greek/Latin roots.

 

[Jack7]

I personally like it when magic is a transgression of moral values held by the society in which it is performed.

I'm with you. I also personally like it when magic is a transgression of the technical and scientific values held by the society in which it is performed.

Why can't it be both? Admittedly you might want to reserve the word magic for the mysterious stuff. But both types of power can certainly co-exist in one world. They do in the real world after all, which contains both the mysterious and the known.

I think you have a point here. I think the situation would be better served with a newer (though not necessarily modern) and more accurate vocabulary. For instance it is very hard for me to imagine a group of wizards, who study "magic intently" not developing a very specific vocabulary to explain the predictable results they generate by executing "magical formulae of actions." Alchemists developed their own very complex vocabulary. The term "magic" would not suffice at all, because what you are doing is not magic at all, it is science. Predictable actions yielding predictable and repeatable results.

With what Wizards do, studying magic from tomes and texts, that is far more like hybridized techno-magic, or a proto-science, or nascent science, than it is "magic." It is in truth a chimera between magic (seemingly magical force) and formulated methods of studying, employing, and controlling that force (science).

So a new and far more accurate term (or set of terms) for what Wizards (and those like them) do should be developed. Because they would develop such terms for themselves over time in any case. You cannot instruct others in the predictability of your system (of force manipulation) without an accurate and logical method of education, classification, experimentation, and predictability.

"Magic" on the other hand is perfectly acceptable term for the unpredictable and the mysterious. When things are unpredictable you need vague or generalized language precisely because you cannot truly specify materials, forces, and events, or cannot calculate the exact results of their intermixing.

Magic to me would be a very good term for unpredictable, unrepeatable (in the scientific and technical sense), mysterious, impulsive types of force and power normally associated with magic throughout most of history, myth, literature, etc.

Some other term, perhaps something like Wizardry or Craft or Work (trying to avoid the actual use of the term science) would far better describe technologically oriented magic."

Anyways I hope that I haven't just repeated something somebody else has said. I wish I had the time to read the entire thread or even to respond to some other threads. But for the past week or more I've only had intermittent time to use the internet for anything other than work and analysis. Especially with what is going on in Iran.

But I like the idea for this thread.
It's a subject I like thinking about.

 

[Herobizkit]

Magic in my game works how people think magic in the real world works: in TONS of different ways.

[...]

To accomplish this, though, you either needs tons of classes, one for each culture or mindset on magic; or you need a more flexible magic system, with templates that you can apply to represent how your Nordic rune magic is different from that kid's magic which he just made up because he watched lots of anime and thought it looked cool.

Like, say, Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth? If only we could speak with the author and get his take on things.

 

[Herobizkit]

And for the spellshaper, well...he sees all of the various theories of arcane magic as but crutches. To him, the rules of a given theory of magic are actually an unnecessary hinderance to the caster- all casters should seek to channel the energy of magic directly because that is the way its supposed to be done.

It worked for Bruce Lee and his philosophies regarding Jeet Kune Do.