Why Not Magic?

[doctorbadwolf]

I don’t really understand a thing, and I’d like to.

In every game that isn’t specifically about doing magic, folks expect to be able to play a wholly non-magical character. I’m building a game of my own, and I am having trouble seeing reasons that anyone who has magic as an option would choose not to use it?

This relates to the non-magical Ranger thread, but it’s more about the thematic notion of fully mundane heroes in a world with fairly common magic.

In my game’s setting, anyone who is exposed to magic and chooses to practice and study it can learn magic. This means all PCs have magic skills available to them, and all archetypes have magic skills on their skill list, though some only have 1 or 2.

I guess the question is; why would someone choose to be a hero/adventurer/etc and not want to learn any magic?

 

[J.Quondam]

I like the option of low-/non-magical PCs because I don't automatically assume that the world is one with fairly common (or safe) magic. Personally, I like to be able to twist that "magical setting" dial down, and still have plenty of options for PCs. Yes, that's not "default" gonzo-style D&D, but low-magic is a common fantasy trope, so it'd be nice to do it out of the box.

But... Your question assumes a magical setting. In that case, I think you're probably right: It probably is strange to prefer a character with no magic. I mean, I can think of a few RP rationales (eg, some philosophical order that eschews magic use). But aside from stuff like that, if magic really is the most effective tool in a setting, it does seem strange not to use that tool.

 

[Arilyn]

I think it's just a flavour thing. 5e has magic everywhere by default, but some prefer to think of magic as rare, with arcane wielders being few and far between. Having fewer classes with magical access supports this vision. I'd rather far fewer spell casters myself.

 

[Leatherhead]

Because players (not necessarily the PCS) have a strong bias against magic.

Magic isn't real. Even in a setting where it ostensibly replaces the laws of physics, magic breaks the rules somehow. Even in stories where Muscles let you do physically impossible things, it isn't magic.

Magic isn't true. It doesn't match up with what they perceive magic "should be." This could mean anything from how much magic should cost to the systems used, to how much magic even exists.

Magic is problematic. Traditionally speaking, magic comes from evil sources: Demons, corrupt rituals, outsider gods, "The Others" etc. Contemporarily speaking, magic comes from evil sources: Bloodlines or genetics, power-consolidating institutions, selling yourself to powerful beings, etc. Just having power and using it can seem evil because years of human experience telling you to not rock the boat or years of seeing people with power abuse it casually.

Magic is guilty by association. In other games, there was that one guy who completely went off the rails with magic, people just hate that guy, enabling that guy, and anything that reminds them of that guy.

 

[Argyle King]

I don’t really understand a thing, and I’d like to.

In every game that isn’t specifically about doing magic, folks expect to be able to play a wholly non-magical character. I’m building a game of my own...

I guess the question is; why would someone choose to be a hero/adventurer/etc and not want to learn any magic?

In the game you're building, what would be answer to that question?

Is it possible for non-magic options to contribute in some way that's not easily replicated by magic?

If magic is the best option, what reasons would there be for someone not learning to use it as much as possible?

 

[prabe]

I can think of three reasons off the top of my head, and they're all player reasons, not character reasons--a distinction I trust is clear.

The player may feel as though the game's rules for magic use are more complicated than the rules for not, and more complicated than they want to deal with.

The player may have a strong preference for not playing magician characters, or at least may have a mostly non-magical idea that's next up in their mental rolodex of characters.

The player may have a specific interest in answering the same character questions you're wondering about: What is it like to be a non-magical hero in a world with common magic? Why would one choose (if it's a choice) to be such?

 

[payn]

I was just thinking of some popular tropes from stories and television on this. One is from Ghost in the Shell. This crack squad of transhuman special agents hunt hackers and criminals. One member of the group has no augments and is just a regular Joe. It gives some friendly banter and plot elements where being tricked out in cyberware can be a detriment in certain circumstances.

In Lord of the Rings, magic is rare and simply augments awesome heroes but they don't need it to save the day.

In some settings, magic can have a cost that moves a person from their humanity. Sometimes having a mundane around can help center and bring users back from the brink. The moral compass keeps the good guys from becoming bad guys.

Really its going to come down to the setting. If everyone uses magic and it aint no thang, it might be a bit snowflake to want a mundane. Depends on how folks want to play it.

 

[Umbran]

I guess the question is; why would someone choose to be a hero/adventurer/etc and not want to learn any magic?

Well one reason is: Batman.

Imagine how badass you are if you can keep up with, or indeed beat, someone with magic/superpowers when you don't have any?

(Yes, Bruce Wayne has a superpower of "more money than god to pay for all this stuff" - but people ignore that, because it is off screen).

 

[Greg K]

Perhaps, because there are stories where magic exists and the heroes (or most of the heroes) do not wield magic

• Conan: magic is typically in the hands of villains.
• Robin Hood: some versions have villains with magic, but Robin does not.
• Phillipe, Navarre, Isabeau in Ladyhawk don't have magic (okay, the only magic seen is the curse the bishop placed and Navarre and Isabeau and because of that they spend tim opposite of each other in an animal form. However, we know magic exists in the word, but probably not common)
• Toran and Slant, whom were two of the three protagonists from the failed early 1980s tv pilot, Archer: Fugitive From the Empire (a.k.a Archer and the Sorceress). The third protagonist,Estra, has some magical powers, but it is summoning animals from the charm she wears, control winds, talking to the spirit of her mother mother, and some for of see through an animals eyes and communicating through dreams (iirc). We also are toldthat there are other spellcasters in addition to Estra
• Arthur, Guinevere, Lancelot, Gawaine in the modern Merlin TV series don't have magic
• Of the top of my head, I don't recall the BBC Sinbad protagonists having magic, but I might be wrong since i have not seen it for a while.
• Edit: also cannot forget Thundarr: the Barbarian. Neither Thundarr nor Ookla have magic powers (unless we are counting magic items as magic).

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I guess the question is; why would someone choose to be a hero/adventurer/etc and not want to learn any magic?

The more magic an adventurer uses, the less interesting he becomes.