Can words have power without gods?

[Umbran]

This was something else we considered. It does have an internal logic, but unfortunately it gives rise to poems, or personal phrases like "Flickum Bicus," not incantations like Omnes conspecti, omnes auditi, in nocte usque, ad saxum commutate, dum caelum ardeat!

Um, dude - when you read it right, that is poetry. There's a solid rhythm to it, a certain fluidity of sound - so, poetry. What's wrong with poetry? It is like singing the alphabet to yourself when you're alphabetizing files - poetry is an excellent mnemonic.

And, look at the translation (from google): "All in sight, all you heard, and in the night all the way, you alter to a rock, while the skies burn!" That's oh-so-sensible! While the Latin may be "classic", that really means "old", rather than "meaningful". As if we are sure that the first to utter that Latin chant was being so much different than Harry with his "Flickum bikus!"? (Which, by the way, is a fast and loose invocation for the absolute smallest of magics, not a full ritual in Harry's world. Before you worry about the language, make sure you're comparing apples to apples. No stuff, if your wizard is doing something on a six-second timescale, he can't say all that much, 'cause if he needs to talk too long, the dragon eats him.)

While I can understand the desire to have a bit of consistency and meaning, you can only go so far - if you go too far with logic, you're talking science, not magic. Magic must, at some point, be impervious to logic, or it becomes technology, which is not mysterious at all!

So, why do you have those classic word forms? Because the ancients figured it out, and they found the words that do it, and they get passed from teacher to student through the ages. Tradition. Done!

Will some other set of words do it? Maybe. But, since magic is impervious to logic, trying to find other words that do it is time consuming and hazardous - most other sets of words will, of course, produce absolutely nothing. But when they produce something, it may not be what you expect, and you go up in flames. Or maybe another set of words wont' do it. Magical energies shaped the formation of Latin (or the makers of Latin shaped it so that it is easier to invoke magic with it), so it is the language of magic, and no other language will do, now.

 

[WayneLigon]

But what if we require that the incantations of wizards derive power without relying on a God or gods? How can words or symbols have any magic in them without supernatural powers? Can classical wizards - dusty books, magic circles, spells and all - exist independently of clerics? And if so, then how would their magic work?

Well, you can easily have a 'super-nature' without gods - it's just another aspect of nature that people don't fully understand, yet.

Yes, all magic can be said to start out as priest magic, but it really goes back much further than that. All magic is actually science, because it wants to accomplish the same goal - answering questions about the universe, and later taking the form of manipulating the environment. All Earthly magic takes this exact form, whether it's in the form of miracles or incantations. The main difference is the priest says 'thy will be done' and the wizard says 'my will be done'.

Me, I'd go with the Deryni-like idea that all magic is psionics - the human mind transforming matter and transferring energy - and all the books and symbols and incantations are crutches, props for the concentration that most wizards are convinced they need for some various reasons, or simply because it makes visualizing the fantastically-complex thought-patterns needed much easier.

 

[Fairman Rogers]

I misunderstood. I thought you were looking for ideas, not a debate. I have no interest in trying to convince you of the validity of one fictional system over another. (Because magic tied to gods is ALSO FICTIONAL.) That way lies madness, and I will not join you in it.

 

[delericho]

Not entirely, no. But in this case, the denizens of Atlantis are simply "gods."

Not quite. It's a matter of tenses - in the standard model, the game has gods; in the model I put forward it had gods.

The other thing, though, was that I was responding specifically to the case where the setting has no supernatural element at all, so whatever 'magic' is, it has to be based on something natural. Hence the nanotech devices and programming interface - you need something to hang 'magic' on.

(FWIW, Numenera is basically the same - the various devices that the characters use are, in theory at least, just "sufficiently advanced technology".)

 

[evilbob]

Then wouldn't people eventually figure out that there was no need for the ritual of magic and simply snap their fingers with conviction?

Definitely not, because that would mean that they were wrong. (Never underestimate the power of someone's belief in the fact that they are not wrong.) The entire point is that their conviction is what keeps it working; admitting they were wrong, and that they don't actually need whatever they think they need in order to make it work would completely upend their belief, thus destroying their conviction. (Or would it? Again: interesting questions.)

 

[Morrus]

I disagree. The nature of magic can still be arcane, but I see no plausible way that uttering words in Latin, Babylonian, or LaVey's Enochian would have power without some external intelligence hearing these words and interpreting them (or else some external intelligence changing the universe to recognize them).

You misunderstand me.

Magic is not plausible. If it's plausible, it's science. Magic is magic; it's supernatural. It's the impossible; it breaks the laws of physics.

Gods aren't an any more plausible explanation.

Now, if you want magic to resemble science in some way - to follow logical physical rules - that's fine. There's fiction out there that addresses is like that. That's what alchemy is, essentially - scientific magic. Still implausible, but you can layer a thin veneer of pseudo-plausibility over the top.

 

[Umbran]

That's what alchemy is, essentially - scientific magic.

That's our current view of it - but that's because today we mistake "alchemy" for "early chemistry". But, if you look back at traditional alchemy, it isn't scientific. Sure, ti had thngs bubbling in decanters so that it looked like chemistry, but the process and thinking was not scientific. It was filled with the same old mystical trappings - the laws of sympathy, contagion, and correspondence, for example, have their place in alchemy, where they have no place in science. The transformation of lead into gold was seen by hermetic alchemists as a spiritual transformation, which is then reflected in the physical form of the metal. This includes the very idea that materials posses spiritual aspects, which is a very magical thought.

Ultimately, when considering magic, some of your rules come down to a thing working, "because that's the way it *should* work". Language has magical power because it *should* have magical power. It is so central to human existence, how could it not have power? That would be inconceivable!

 

[Morrus]

That's our current view of it - but that's because today we mistake "alchemy" for "early chemistry". But, if you look back at traditional alchemy, it isn't scientific. Sure, ti had thngs bubbling in decanters so that it looked like chemistry, but the process and thinking was not scientific.

In a fantasy RPG with magic, I meant, not in real life.

 

[Mallus]

One of my friends suggested this. But in that case wouldn't magic be more like songs or strange ululations which everyone had to match specifically and exactly with whatever vocal apparatus they possessed, rather than words per se? This is plausible, but it isn't the magic that most of us recognize, not least because it would be dependent on physical characteristics more than intelligence, willpower, or spirituality.

See, you're doing this thing that gaming nerds like to do all too often: you're expending time, energy, intelligent thought, and creativity to make something *not* work. It's the equivalent of hitting yourself in the head with a hammer. Trust me, it'll feel wonderful when you stop.

Making a magic system is a exercise in fiction writing. Start there. You want all trappings of magical practice popular in literature, folklore, and film. Great. Decree they exist using your friend, authorial fiat.

What did you say? You want some quasi-logical reason for them? Fine. They're mnemonics and concentrations aids. They vary greatly but aren't actually involved in the spell-casting process, outside of helping the magician focus. Easy-peasy!

What undergirds magic, if not gods/conscious spiritual beings? An elementary particle responsible for the "reality field" -- perhaps the "Ontological Boson"? Or little fae or sprites? (C. S. Friedman's Coldfire trilogy has a great sci-fi take on this). Something. Anything.

Really, just decide on some sort of fiction which satisfies your basic outline and build on from there. But for heaven's sake, stop wasting your time devising clever arguments for why nothing satisfies.

What you're doing now isn't creative writing. It's finding creative reasons not to write.

 

[Umbran]

In a fantasy RPG with magic, I meant, not in real life.

Sorry. I was just noting that there's all sorts of magical flavor to be found in alchemy, so I find reducing it to, "this is scientific magic" to be missing much of the meat available. Kind of like figuring all Jim Carrey can do as an actor is "Dumb and Dumber", and skipping over stuff like "The Truman Show" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind".